By Gus Saltonstall
A City Hall spokesperson confirmed to West Side Rag on Tuesday morning that Mayor Eric Adams’ office is “reinstating 70 parking spots on the Upper West Side, where as West Side Rag recently reported, the city Department of Transportation instituted three-hour metered parking earlier this month, transforming many meter-free stretches between Central Park West and Columbus Avenue into pay-to-park territory.”
The Adams administration is choosing to roll back the changes made to parking earlier this month as part of the Smart Curbs Pilot Program from West 73rd to 86th streets adjacent to Columbus Avenue, where spots were metered for the first time and payments now had to be made using the ParkNYC app.
The announcement from the city comes after a “tsunami of complaints, concerns and questions” besieged Community Board 7, Brewer’s office, and comments to news stories from Upper West Side residents about the lack of notice related to the changes regarding the 70 parking spots. Local City Councilmember Gale Brewer also sent a letter voicing her concerns.
“I want to thank City Hall,” Brewer told the Rag in a phone call on Tuesday morning.
Here is what First Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro wrote in a letter to Brewer on Tuesday morning, as shared with the Rag.
“While I hope you agree that DOT was well-intentioned in advancing a new UWS parking program announced generally by press release in October 2024 and reviewed by the local community board, we agree that the agency could have done more to inform and include the public in the specifics and timing of the program’s implementation,” Mastro wrote. “This is especially so since so many use cars in this UWS neighborhood and affordability is a concern for all New Yorkers. We have therefore decided, as you request, that we will have DOT roll back this parking plan and restore the status quo ante until such time as DOT has had the opportunity to solicit more public input on the specifics of the plan to be implemented and to give more public notice before implementation of whatever specific plan is ultimately adopted.”
“I am told that it should take approximately 48 hours to repost the signs to restore the parking in the area to its status prior to DOT’s changes last week,” he added. “I am also told that there has been a grace period in effect since last week’s changes went into effect to allow residents to adjust to these new regulations without facing enforcement, so please know that no one should have received any fines for non-compliance. We thank you for contacting us and look forward to working with you to effectuate a plan whose rationale is understood and appreciated by all.”
The Rag will follow up on how the DOT will solicit more public input and “give more public notice before implementation.”
Subscribe to West Side Rag’s FREE email newsletter here. And you can Support the Rag here.
Fast action! Kudos.
The rollout was the issue. It was so poorly done that no coverage was accurate. The West Side Spirit and this blog’s competitor both made it look like hundreds of spaces on entire streets were metered. Streetsblog got it wrong. The Post said 200 spaces.
Why? DOT loused up.
The fact is they took at most 80 spaces on 23 750 foot long blocks holding at least 1,200 alternate side spaces (each block holds about 80, deduction for other uses like the PD, FDNY, driveways and schools.).
I park on the street and I would want to talk over taking 80 spaces and try to negotiate it down (and make the meters expire at 7, not 10.
But DOT clearly got what it asked for.
Insufficient response. There should be multiple firings at DOT.
Neighborhood parking permits should be implemented now! Stop this war on residents. If you belive in mass transit then you dont implement a program that encourages people to drive into the neighborhood.
Agree. Do what every other major city is doing—residential parking. Pay a fee for the sticker and direct commuters and out-of-state registrations to garages. It’s a win-win for the NYC taxpayer, NYC business owners, and the city’s revenues (which they get through the permit fees and the garage taxes).
Very few residents have cars. Shouldn’t the neighborhood people be able to walk everywhere or use public transportation that drivers are already subsidizing. through tolls and congestion pricing. People who live farther away need to park, as well as disabled, delivery, repair, visitors.
I had to have a car for many years to drive to work that was not accessible by public transport. Thereafter, I needed a car to take care of a family member also not accessible by public transport. Nobody has a car in New York unless they need it.
Would you want the community where your family member is to have resident only permits where you wouldn’t be eligible for one?
After the cost of building, maintaining, repairing, policing and clearing snow from roads, drivers get back way more in services than they pay for. They don’t subsidize anything.
We build, maintain, repair, police, and clear snow from roads because we like to be able to eat the food and wear the clothes that magically appear in stores, and want police, fire, and EMTs to get to us when needed.
These aren’t done so that car owners can drive. They’d be done if private cars were banned.
How in the world do you know how many residents have cars. Do you just make something up and state it as fact? No wonder we’re in such trouble.
Here you go! The data set will let you know how many vehicle registrations there are in the neighborhood. The data will agree with OP’s first statement. https://data.ny.gov/Transportation/Vehicle-Snowmobile-and-Boat-Registrations/w4pv-hbkt/about_data
Could you just tell us the data for the 3-4 UWS zip codes? This database is not loading properly for me. And what is the definition of “very few.”
There is a lot of data on car ownership in New York. While I have never seen it broken down into neighborhoods, it is true that the vast majority of people in Manhattan have no car. I believe it is something like only 20 percent of Manhattanites who own a car.
I wonder what percentage of UWS residents own cars. I’d imagine it’s quite small. We live in one of the best neighborhoods for transit access in the city, perhaps, the country, perhaps the world. Aside from the tiny number of people who need to drive due to disability, most of these people are just huge babies who want free storage for their personal property.
Plenty of Upper West Siders own cars, but not for getting around within the city. They use them to leave the city. I, for one, have elderly parents whom I visit weekly. They are a two hour drive from Manhattan, and there are no public transportation options (other than a 4-hour commute on a series of buses that don’t run very frequently). We also have a weekend home upstate. If you ‘ve ever owned or rented a weekend home, you know there’s always a trunk full of stuff to haul back and forth, especially if you have kids. Public transportation is not a viable option, and the nearest train station is at least 40 minutes from our destination in any event. In 30 years of car ownership I have never — not once — used to the car to get from A to B in Manhattan. Now, I’m not concerned about street parking because I am very lucky and can afford to park in a garage, but plenty of car owners who need to leave the city for various reasons can’t manage that extra expense.
I would mention that I have indeed, on occasion, had to drive within the city, often to pick up or drop off large items that would not fit in a cab or public transport, or get to areas of other boroughs that have poor access to public transport, and very often to take large dogs to the vet or training classes. And yes, to take my elderly parents within the city, and in and out of the city. The hubris that non-car owners have toward car owners never fails to amaze me. The idea that you can’t even “imagine” why some people would need or want cars is unbelievable.
Many UWS non car owners do not care about the “war on cars” urbanists are pushing. It is a fringe group of bullies that get satisfaction on fundamentally changing the way people live and controlling people that are the issue.
none of this is anyone problem but yours and no one should be subsidizing your lifestyle.
No one should be subsidizing your lifestyle, yet the same urbanists hating on free parking want Mamdani to reduce the rent on their gentrified neighborhood apartments and for them not to pay any broker fees.
try and stay on topic
It is very much on topic. This war on cars is very much a culture war.
Yet, I subsidize kids going to school. firefighters putting out fires, police working to cut crime, etc. You don’t know why some people need cars. Like the other writer wrote, I don’t use my car to go joy riding around Manhattan.
you should look up what subsidized means
Read the post – they park in a garage. No one is subsidizing their lifestyle. Furthermore, no one is subsidizing the lifestyles of those who park on the street. Building owners are responsible for the sidewalks and curbs in front of them, the city is responsible for the streets. Yes, cars park on the streets, but the streets have various other uses besides parking.
Every car owner would face higher costs and more inconvenience with a major reduction of street parking, because garage costs would skyrocket. Time and effort to find garages, retrieve a car, etc, would also increase.
And? Two of the most ardent opponents of the anti-car movement I know are not car owners. They and every other non owner whose life enjoyment is enhanced by visits from friends and family who live outside the City would see a loss as people stop coming in because of inconvenience and cost in both time and money.
Many of our neighbors who don’t own a car don’t like them or want them around. They’re pretty vocal. But the notion that everyone who doesn’t own a car agrees with that is just plain false.
Urbanists are good at projection. They want a neighborhood where no residents own or drive a car or use ubers and the whole neighborhood consists of a college campus like atmosphere where no one ventures outside gentrified NYC.
Most streets in the UWS and the city have three lanes, two of which are for car owners to park for free. That’s an incredible subsidy in the city with the highest land prices in the country. For all the complaints car owners make about bike lanes taking up space and causing congestion, they sure are silent about all the space taken up by privately-owned cars, many of which get used only a couple times per week. The easiest way to ease congestion on our streets would be to eliminate half of the free parking spaces and give every street a second driving lane.
The streets are 36′ wide. Enough for parking, one double parked cab, and traffic can squeezing by.
On our side streets? A second lane would invite more traffic, and be a disaster for safety.
We are far better off for people driving slowly out of caution.
If we did that, then you will complain about traffic going too fast and then take away those lanes too. Until you have a car free utopia where only folks like Mark Gorton use cars.
I would never complain about traffic moving too fast.
That is what most urbanists do. Complain about speeding vehicles and push speed cameras and traffic calming, then flood the streets with ubers and lyfts once traffic is calmed and then cry about congestion.
you really like to make up nonsense. what you said has no basis in reality
That is actually what has happened. Look at the push for congestion pricing.
27% of UWS residents but many of the people driving on the UWS do not live here but have interests in this community and have needs that urbanists do not care to think of.
there needs should not beg the free give aways of public space.
I checked this against census data a few years ago when the parking wars began. It’s about 25% of households but since most are in households with multiple residents it’s over 35% of the population.
Not a small minority.
You have to be assuming that households with cars are larger on average than households without. I don’t think there is any data on that either way,
Like I said, I did the work some years ago when the parking wars began.
So it’s not an assumption. IN FACT the census bureau does break down car ownership by household size.
Plenty of UWS residents own cars and those who are wealthy enough, pay for the convenince of a garage. The people who park on the street are the middle class residents of the UWS. All the car haters who complain about parking on the street are a bunch of elitist, mostly from out of town, who are out of touch with the needs of real UWSers.
this is completely false. the 75% of us who live here without cars despise the entitlement of those that do thinking they have a right to free public space for their private property.,
The notion that people who don’t have cars hate them and want them gone is nonsense.
There are plenty of non car owners who like the fact that their friends and family can visit without shelling out money. And there are plenty of other non car owners who don’t care one way or another.
And most who uses a garage is happy that there aren’t another 10,000 cars competing for that space and driving up costs even further.
No one is also building new parking garages on the UWS.
Yes, but you’re forgetting that many of us have been asking for neighborhood parking permits for years, but the city won’t institute it. We don’t necessarilly want *free* parking;” we want to know that if we live in the neighborhood and need a car for whatever reason, that we will be able to park near where we live. and not have to pay a separate whole rent for a parking garage that may or may not be near our homes. Permits would solve a lot. And….it’s a revenue stream for the city, it limits *who* can park where, and keeps outsiders who can just as easily use public transport from parking in our neighborhoods.
The problem is that most of the “outsiders” on the UWS are people who work, visit family here, own businesses and otherwise have ties to the UWS. Support for resident permits, especially on the UWS, which is in a county that is the center of a four state metropolitan area, is not something that will win allies. Let UWS residents get resident only permits and then have no allies when even more parking spaces end up getting taken away.
I’m at a complete loss as to why the city doesn’t want to make more money.
Resident permits require state approval and for good reason.
“…the 75% of us who live here without cars despise the entitlement of those that do thinking they have a right to free public space for their private property.,”
Let’s see you document that silly statement.
There’s no documentation to it, it is all projection.
You had free public schools, free hospitals, free medical facilities, free everything! Your kids got free educaiton for which all of us seniors paid via our taxes and yet you begrudge others to not be able to park? Now you are getting free curb space to charge your fancy Teslas, etc., etc.,
Please direct me to the free medical facilities and free hospitals. I would love to use their services. You may be a senior, but you sound very childish.
Actually, I think most of the car haters are those who have lived here forever, can’t afford a car (I’m not saying that as an insult, just a fact) and have no friends/family outside the neighborhood so don’t see why anyone else needs a car. It is a very selfish perspective. They likely don’t realize that many of the store owners, building workers, nurses, etc. who they interact with daily are people who count on free/cheap parking to go to their jobs (because not everyone lives in a place with adequate public transit).
Ironically, I’m also guessing that many car haters live in rent regulated apartments. So the same people who don’t want parking subsidized (as noted above, I am OK with reasonably priced permits – they won’t even stand for this – they want zero cars), are having their homes subsidized by others. Hypocrisy anyone?
Leon,
Actually I think just the opposite – the people I know who are strongly “anti-car” have not lived here forever.
The “anti car” people I know grew up in the suburbs and then moved to NYC as adults. And actually they are pretty big Uber users and ecommerce users LOL.
My family and friends who’ve lived in NYC are not especially anti-car. Most don’t have cars but a few do.
Some of the anti-car people are fine with their cars on the road but not yours.
Most of the car haters live in luxury apartments. One UWS “community leader” who protests the “autocracy” of the streetscape, Jason Haber, is a real estate broker has apartments for sale worth millions of dollars and $35,000 a month rental apartments for rent on Streeteasy and regularly sells apartments worth millions and rentals worth tens of thousands of dollars. It is clear where the car hate is coming from, a group of people that want the streets all to themselves.
https://streeteasy.com/jasonhaber?tab_profile=active_listings
Hi there. Wow. So…I actually have a car and park it on the street all the time. In fact, I’ve made several videos online about the need to move to a residential permit parking system that gives parking spaces to residents and not to those commuting in here. I don’t hate cars. I actually kinda like mine. I do think Central Park West should be a one way street with a dedicated bus lane. Our streets are at their best when they are multi-modal and efficient. Lastly, and I would invite those interested to check out my lectures on this, I do think post WW2 planning was far too focused on the car as a Madisonian tool (see Federalist #10) to spread people out beyond the city. The truth is that in a functioning city there is a role for cars to play. I just feel that the car is one actor on the streetscape and should be treated as such. For too long, it got special treatment, and other forms of transpo, particularly mass transit, suffered greatly as a result. Today, we see the consequences of all that.
Is the role for cars to play only for those who can afford to buy multi million dollar apartments or $35,000 a month rental apartments?
Resident permits so that only those who can afford the UWS can park on the street here. That is a non starter. The bottom line is, you want the UWS to be only for those who have a certain mindset and can drop a ton of money on housing.
And regarding housing…actually, it’s the inverse. I’m probably one of the few people who have put forth real policy proposals to reduce housing costs and open up housing stock in ways that would really help New Yorkers. Yes, while I do service many ultra-high-net-worth clients, I’m very vocal about the need to create much more affordable housing. For example, I have a white paper on expanding the Section 8 voucher program to allow rent-stabilized apartments to be rented at the Section 8 voucher cap, not the RS cap. As you probably know, many people have the voucher but have trouble using it. This would put federal tax dollars to work. I’d rather see that money invested here than spent to build a bridge to nowhere in Kentucky. If landlord’s could rent out RS apts at the voucher cap but retain the apartments RS status (for future tenants), it would spur substantial rehabs and open up thousands of 100% affordable units. In addition, thanks to the recently adopted City of Yes legislation, there is a great opportunity to build for 100% affordable on city-owned lots (now over 1,000 of them). The new zoning would allow more density on these narrow lots. There’s more too. But the idea is there are lots of ways to spur more affordablity and that’s sometihng I very much believe in.
You can build all the affordable housing in the world, but that doesn’t mean that the UWS as a community values the people who cannot afford to live here. I have seen this from my lived experience in this neighborhood.
No, residential permit parking is free for NYC residents. That’s the whole point of the program. Allow local taxpayers the benefit of parking on the roadway. Those who wish to park in a residential permit zone but aren’t residents either pay for it (or in some cases can’t park there at all). I think parking priority should go to those who live here. The amount they pay in rent, or the size of their apt is completely meaningless, and it would be aburd for that to be a factor.
“In some cases can’t park there at all”. It is mask off, you want to exclude people who aren’t able to live on the UWS but otherwise have ties to this community.
In a neighborhood like the UWS, the amount one pays in rent is very much relevant. People who work in the area and drive are generally not people who can afford a $3600 1 bedroom Brusco apartment, and Brusco is lower end for the UWS.
I was handed the keys of an old BMW from a well off cousin. Don’t assume those of us who have a car are filthy rich. And no, I don’t go joy riding, but, gladly drive my friends to appts or shopping outside the city.
Can you introduce me to this well off cousin?
cool, and that car should be no ones problem but yours
Does UWS Mom have any relation to UWS Dad? If so, I must imagine the dinner table arguments about cars will drive many people nuts.
No relation obviously, car free household over here.
I see plenty of $50k+ cars parked on the street, hardly ‘middle class’ vehicles. Very funny to me that the opponents of paid parking are can’t decide if people in favor of this are rich/from out of town or too poor and lived here forever.
It’s not some mystery, cars are expensive and therefore the relatively rich own them and people who don’t live here (like Eugene) don’t want to pay to store their personal property on our streets.
Cars are way more affordable than $50k. In fact, many purchase or lease them with financing. This whole discussion isn’t about who is or isn’t willing to pay to store “personal property on our streets”. Actually when you frame it this way, it reeks of the same NIMBYism that urbanists like to accuse their opponents of. Street parking that is free is a very important safety valve because the transit system is not perfect and is not going to be perfect. Resources are always limited with the MTA and from the MTA’s perspective it is better for people unhappy with the MTA or cannot comfortably rely on the MTA to park their car on the street for free as opposed to being a thorn on the MTA’s side.
You can finance a $50k car so that you are making payments instead of all up front, but its still not a ‘middle class’ vehicle.
Drivers can still park and use their car if they are unhappy with the public transportation options, just need to pay for their parking, this is extremely common in other US cities and an obvious change to make in big city like NYC.
Running parking is very difficult for city employees, wait until they try to run city owned grocery stores.
Wait till the Federal Government starts running Nvidia!
Or Big City Policing for that matter.
Let’s use this as motivation to revisit parking spots.
Create parking permits at a reasonable fee. Allow those who can show a W2 that they work in the neighborhood to also purchase one – many doormen, shop owners, etc. should not be forced to pay for lots. There are many parts of the region that do not have easy access to public transit, particularly if not commuting at rush hour.
A slight increase in 3 hour spots is OK. Just be strategic about it.
Car haters need to stop whining. It is insufferable. Your hatred of cars is ridiculous. Should the whole world stop for car owners? No. But cars are very important for many people and are not going away. This xenophobic view of the world outside Manhattan is truly scary and sad. Make some friends and get off the island occasionally.
absolutely not. there is no reason anyone should be encouraged to drive here. doormen> no. just no way.
The reality is that resident permits will not be the silver bullet you think it is. Car drivers should hold the line and push to preserve as many spaces while not turning on other drivers. No one is spending $6 per person to avoid a $9 per vehicle congestion fee.
Eugene doesn’t live here but would really like for us to let him park his car for free on UWS streets. That’s all there is to it.
If someone parks their car for free on the streets, so what? That is one less person that the MTA will have to spend a lot of money subsidizing and worrying about.
UWS Dad is not someone thrilled about subsidizing public transit in my community either. That’s not all there is to it as well.
Exactly, Eugene. You got it. Thank you!
Not sure why you have to invent positions I hold. We should (and do!) subsidize public transportation to encourage drivers to use public transportation and I’m all for those.
Look at how urbanists (maybe you, maybe not you) complain about how transit services in the outer boroughs and suburbs are “luxury services”. That is literally what the spokesperson of Riders Alliance, Danny Pearlstein, called the LIRR on twitter.
you say urbanists like it should be an insult. we live in the city. if you are against urbanism, leave. though its not like you live on the UWS anyway.
Look at the amount of urbanists from outside of NYC and even NY state who regularly chime in on projects affecting residents of the NYC metro on Twitter when displeasure is voiced. This comment shows that urbanists can be very exclusionary and NIMBYs in their own way even if they say they’re aligned with YIMBY. You only want a certain kind of person to access this neighborhood and the above comment shows it. It’s also why liberals tend to have an arrogance and smugness problem that does them no favors outside Manhattan. My congressional district was one that was responsible for the GOP taking back the house in 2022.
Log off Twitter my man, join us in real life.
Anyone can access the city, just be prepared to pay for the subway or for parking for your vehicle.
While UWSers get to use their cars to leave Manhattan and park for free. You can’t complain about Trump’s tariff wars and then do the same thing to people urbanists deem “undesirable”. Also urbanists should log off Twitter and Bluesky too.
“Residential permits will not be the silver bullet you think it is” — Eugene, don’t let the perfect be the enemy of a big improvement.
But you are not going to get a big improvement. All you are going to get is a bigger problem with people trying to game the system for permits and you are going to have a situation where less street parking spaces are occupied and TransAlt and Open Plans say that the curb is underutilized and more parking should be taken from “privileged” UWSers. Oh and the price will be $10 the first year and 5 years from now will be $500.
You have no idea what’s going to happen. If all these scare stories came true, wouldn’t Boston/DC/SF/Chicago know about it since they’ve had a permitting system for decades? Not one of these cities has backed off an inch from their parking programs.
DC dealt with abuse of parking permits.
You know what DC didn’t do? Cancel their permitting system because of abuse.
Game the system how? To get a permit, you need plenty of documentation – you can’t just use your Grandma’s address!
People have ways. NYC will be ground zero for fraud and abuse. There’s already abuse of placards. There are people with FDNY placards on the UWS with NJ or CT license plates even though we all know you cannot live in NJ and CT and work for FDNY.
Isn’t proper enforcement the answer to placard/permit fraud and abuse ? And isn’t the reason said enforcement is not happening the fact that those abusing the system are policemen and other public servants?
Also people who know public servants.
Nicole Paynter from the Columbus Avenue BID must not be too happy about this!
Frustrating these sorts of good governance changes get veto’d by the noisy minority of car owners. At least we can take solace that the corrupt Adams administration and Randy Mastro will be sent packing in November.
Maybe Comrade Mamdani will provide FREE People’s cars that anyone can use for no cost and then park in for the next New Yorker to use. It’s will be a utopian.
this will actually be the future once cars self drive. no more personal ownership or parking, and much safer. sucks that the companies running it are vultures.
Sucks but something you clearly are okay with.
why would that suck?
Why would we need any of that when we could just build a public transportation utopia instead?
I agree that public transit is essential.
That means complete access to bus transit – not street closures like “open streets” (for brunch and bicycles) that deny riders necessary bus service
The bike bros do not care about buses. They see buses as the side onion rings to the main course of hamburgers. They don’t even see them as fries, just as onion rings.
The public transportation “utopia” will be one where urbanists decide where and when people get to go places and what is best for them.
sounds wonderful
its no real consolation. their damage will last much longer than they did.
Good news for my 94 year old mother in law who lives in a nursing home on long island. I can keep my car and visit her and bring her things weekly. Yay.
The loss of a few free parking spaces would not make you get rid of your car. There are still a whole heck of a lot of free spaces. And besides, if you did there is always the LIRR.
Not all, in fact very few facilities like that are within throwing distance from an LIRR stop, in my experience? And where are those “wholeheck of a lot of free spaces” when they are taken away?
I do not think that the LIRR is a wise suggestion. In reality, if you have a ton of things, trains aren’t practicable and also getting to the train station is not the easiest thing. You’d probably have to pay an arm and a leg for a taxi or Uber or rely on public transit that no UWS resident would dare step foot on. Look at how many UWS residents who go to concerts at Jones Beach prefer using Ubers rather than the N88 bus from the LIRR, that is, if they take the LIRR in the first place.
If the jam-packed M7 bus I rode on earlier this week is any indication, plenty of people “dare step foot on” public transportation.
Did you step on the jam packed N4 bus or the jam packed N20 bus?
You’re right; I misread your comment. Sorry about that. But yes, I have ridden buses on Long Island (Nassau, not Suffolk) and lived to tell the tale.
Of course you are going to say that on West Side Rag. I doubt it.
“…public transit that no UWS resident would dare step foot on.”
Are you serious?
How many UWS residents would dare step foot on NICE bus, Suffolk County Transit or Westchester Bee Line?
thats some serious entitlement. what makes them special.
Urbanists should ask that of themselves.
lived up here with 2 kids since 2010 and visit family long island all the time and have not owned a car since 2001.
Have you ever taken NICE bus or Suffolk County Transit?
yes, of course. im not an elitist.
While certainly glad about this rollback let’s not forget Adams is running for re-election. And this is something UWS voters care a lot about. Adams should have fired Ydanis a long time ago for his bike-centric, car hating obsession that has unnecessarily burdened so many New Yorkers. The Mayor had many opportunities to deal with the outsized influence of lobbyists working for Lyft, DoorDash and others but he didn’t til an upcoming election where he is polling so poorly. Had he reined in the DOT long ago I suspect he’d be doing a lot better.
Eric Adams is the one that put him there because Ydanis is a loyalist and because a lot of his donors support the bike lobby. He doesn’t expect any votes, but gets support from pro gentrification monied interests. Also even Mark Gorton donated to Andrew Cuomo’s PAC even though many bike activists will never vote for him. A lot of the anti-car mindset in NYCDOT started when Bloomberg appointed Janette Sadik Khan as NYCDOT commissioner
more victims of motornormativity.
More public input???
The Smart Curbs program (of which this is a part) had extensive discussions at the Community Board and at least two well attended meetings where the public actively participated in its development. (The public meetings broke community residents into groups, provided oversized maps of the area, and asked participants to mark up the maps so as to develop plans desired by the community.)
Whether you agree with this program or not, the issue is not lack of public input. The issue is the city ignoring to the wishes of many, as evidenced the extensive public outreach, and catering to the wishes of a small particularly vocal group.
“ and catering to the wishes of a small particularly vocal group.”
Oh, the irony.
One of the issues here was the way the rollout of this was handled. While, as I understand it, people were aware of the general concept the actual implementation wasn’t well communicated.
Providing advance notice of actual changes is actually a pretty important part of good governance.
what would have been different if people knew more beforehand?
So you are saying the urbanists who run NYCDOT would do whatever they wanted anyways? Public input is meaningless?
there was public input
whats wrong with urbanism? this is a city.
and i thought you were complaining about not enough notice?
Urbanists are not morally superior to everyone else in this city.
Here comes a guy who parks in a $1000/month garage and has been advocating for every TA policy as a CB7 member for years! He is not being kept from owning a car and driving every weekend to his country house upstate but he wants to make sure that YOU cant afford a car and do the same.
Let’s also be clear the smart curb meetings were packed with non residents and there was no proof of residency or business ownership required to participate in person or online. At a table I sat at with over a dozen people only 2 of us worked or lived in the area. These input meetings are a sham.
I don’t know Howard but if true, I’m glad Howard is paying the market price to store his personal property instead of dumping it front of our doorsteps. If you can afford a second home, then you can certainly afford to pay for parking.
So basically while car ownership is affordable to the working and middle class and even working poor people, you want car ownership to only be accessible to the rich? Got it.
no, car ownership should not be subsidized by those of us who do not want cars. they should be your problem and yours alone.
and the working and ,middle class already use mass transit, not private cars.
It’s not subsidized.
And most car owners also use mass transit, and walk, and many of us bike as well.
thats great, but your car should not ever be my problem.
It’s not.
Not even close.
Hey Paul, I’m going to buy a new RV, its way too expensive to keep in my garage, so I’m going to store it in front of your building 24/7. Not your problem though.
It wouldn’t affect me in the least.
It would, however, be illegal.
When you found your apartment on the upper west side was it legal for people to park on your street? And you moved in anyway?
Why?
Many urbanists out there want the DINK urban chic lifestyle and to have no kids, so should we not subsidize schools? What’s next, you don’t like the neighborhood I live in so you don’t think transit to and from Manhattan should be subsidized from there?
this is hyperbolic nonsense
Come on, you know Howard, you just pretend that you don’t know.
Howard Yaruss is on Transportation Alternatives’ advisory council. That should be fully disclosed here.
why would that matter? oh you must want us to thank him for his service and dedication to safe streets?
It matters because Transportation Alternatives is a group that walks into a community like aliens that think they are above everyone. I have spoke to these people in person, I see them. Their people also threaten politicians with primary challenges who don’t agree with them, I have seen them do this. Look at what they did to “safe streets champion” Deborah Glick in 2022 when she opposed outdoor dining. They ran Ryder Kessler against her and he lost spectacularly. He also had to make his Twitter private after bashing cars.
still does not explain why that matters, just that you think there is some ulterior motive.
Hallelujah !
Never heard so many whiners before. If you don’t have a car, why do you even care about the parking issue? Seriously?! Why would you waste time letting it bother you? Oh, you want the street used for what you believe. My bad. I get it now. Here’s what I believe. I’m upset NYC built bike lanes and we’re not monetizing bikers. They are using a free service that the city spent millions creating. This removed all parking spots along CPW on the east side. The city expected that yearly revenue from those spots getting parking tickets. Now it gets zero. So, there is both a loss of revenue and millions spent creating the lanes and these bikers pay what? I can’t believe they accommodate roads for bikers and the city gets no revenue in return. That’s so unfair to us non-bikers. It’s just not fair I tell you. I don’t bike. I don’t have a bike and I can’t sleep at night because I know NYC lets bikers use the road with no monetization.
And can we please stop using the same old rebuttal that every city elsewhere uses neighborhood permits or this or that. Apples and oranges. NYC is not like any other city, anywhere. Period. What works in other cities doesn’t mean it translates to NYC. Nor should it. NYC is a beast unto itself. Feel free to move to any one of the cities referenced. Even though you still won’t have a car, you will feel and sleep better knowing your new city is making money off your neighbor’s cars from neighborhood permits.
They only want resident permits because they want the UWS all to themselves.
You’re confusing personal inconvenience with public policy. Streets are not designed primarily for car storage; they’re public land that the city can allocate for whatever best serves the most people—bus lanes, loading zones, bike lanes, you name it. Cyclists already “pay” for the streets through the same income, sales, and property taxes as everyone else, while drivers actually receive a net subsidy once you account for the cost of road maintenance, enforcement, and the massive public health impacts of traffic and pollution.
And no, New York isn’t some mythical Camelot exempt from global best practices; other cities like London, Paris, and Tokyo manage curb space with permits, pricing, and bike infrastructure without collapsing into chaos. Finally, it’s worth remembering that the majority of New Yorkers don’t even own cars so why should the minority who do get free curb storage while everyone else pays the price? If anything, the real “whining” is coming from those demanding to keep their subsidized parking spot at the expense of safer, fairer, and more efficient streets.
New York does not have to adhere global “best practices”, it can set them as well. If you come to think of it, people who ride citibike get a subsidy as well as citibike owned by lyft takes up parking spaces below the “market value” you want to charge cars for that space. Not only that, the people who stand to gain the most from bike infrastructure are pro gentrification businesses who stand to profit either through delivery services. The MTA is also heavily subsidized.
Eugene,
Citibike pays the city for stations, but let’s make it fair. If they’re paying for the spaces, then all cars can pay the equivalent. Deal?
The difference between an individual car driver and citibike is that citibike is part of Lyft which is a multi billion dollar corporation. Most individual car drivers, even those who own businesses on the UWS are not multi billion dollar corporations. Lyft has said it themselves, they want to convert citibike riders into rideshare car riders.
Breaking: people who got public space for free are mad they have to pay.
It’s really that simple!
To the urbanists, it is a zero sum game of dominance. The urbanists want everything for free and to fundamentally change the culture and the way people live for the worse.
Disgusting. These metered spaces are necessary so we can get the double parked vehicles out of the moving traffic lane. We all will move slower because of this.
Terrible.
The people spoke, City Hall listened. Must be an election year.
To all complaining of car-owners’ free-ridership, a reminder that the MTA is being subsidized to a tune of “44% of its total operating revenue or $8.49 billion (in 2023), stemming from dedicated taxes,” not a small portion of which comes from the tolls drivers pay. No one is 100% self-sufficient, and if that’s your goal and gripe, there’s off-grid living.
its not proportional, and your comment is disingenuous.
Urbanists then complain about how the outer boroughs and suburbs get more transit subsidies.
Great news. UWS didn’t need more short-term metered parking. Most people aren’t driving to the UWS to eat, shop, etc. – most take the train. 3-hour parking doesn’t help doormen or people who work in the neighborhood and need to drive in.
this was for the workers to not have to double park. the plbumbers and electricians and others who come work. drivers take everything they possibly can for themselves.
Yes and they need more than 3 hours metered parking in many cases and they still have to double park as the job sites are often not where the meters are.
There seem to be certain agencies within city government that operate without regards to residents. DOT is one of them. It’s hard to believe that DOT’s need to act swiftly and skirt the usual protocols , specifically community input was an emergency situation .
Glad it’s an election year and the mayor is already operating on thin ice or it likely wouldn’t have been rolled back. DOT has shoved too many things down our throats for too long. Even if Trans Alt is your daddy, you still need to follow the laws and rules of our city. Consider this your traffic light that you are forced to obey.
Once upon a time NYCDOT oversaw the bureau of transit operations and supervised seven private bus companies that got city subsidies. The lack of a sincere attitude towards the private companies, who were run by very good people, and the lack of a desire to oversee transit on streets NYCDOT controls, shows the true colors of NYCDOT. Especially now with people wanting Citibike to get city subsidies. If there was a sincere attitude at NYCDOT towards the private companies MTA took over in 2005 and 2006, we might have had a world class bus system in NYC today. You see the NYCDOT system and the MTA system used to be yardsticks for each other’s performance, Bloomberg took that away.
Approximately 45% of New York City households own at least one car, meaning slightly less than half of households in the city have a personal vehicle. This is significantly lower than the national average of 92% of U.S. households with at least one vehicle available for use
Enough with the free car storage nonsense. I don’t go to the free Shakespeare in the park, but I don’t complain that others are getting free entertainment. I have no kids but I don’t complain about free schools. New Yorkers can pay whatever they want to go to city museums – I don’t complain about that. Restaurants have tables all over the sidewalks.. If they pay anything, it is a nominal amount. Grow up kids. Just because you don’t use a feature of our wonderful city, doesn’t mean it is wrong that other people do.
Dear Councilwoman Brewer,
I am writing to express my strong disappointment regarding your request to the mayor to reinstate 70 parking spots, as reported here in the West Side Rag
The Smart Curbs Pilot Program is an excellent initiative that effectively addresses the critical need to reduce congestion on our streets. This is a far more important benefit for the greater UWS community than providing free parking on public streets to a select group of 70 residents!!
I urge you to reconsider and reverse this request.
If only there had been this much support behind residential parking permits, only taxpayers would be permitted to park on our side streets! It’s unfortunate that it takes draconian measures to get the attention of the car owning public.
Renee is why car drivers on the UWS cannot unite against bad transportation policy. Car drivers must hold the line and not turn on each other.
Yes make sure we think of NJ and Long Island residents who just don’t want to pay for parking
NJ, Long Island and other areas are integral parts of our metropolitan area. Many former UWS residents live in NJ and Westchester and have ties to the UWS. The whole discussion about resident permits isn’t about paying for parking or not. It is that there are people with the privilege of being able to afford the UWS wanting to pay for the privilege of excluding others who can’t afford or aren’t able to have the same lifestyle that they do for whatever reason.
WELL DONE with the reversal. Some of us *do* need our cars — and plenty of us cannot afford a garage. We need residential permit stickers, period. All these Florida / Connecticut / New Jersey / Texas / etc tags — some of us actually live here, and we’d like to continue to do so in peace. The new metered zones weren’t even being used — they simply generated ill will among those of us who actually live here and already must circle endlessly, just trying to get home. Some of us car owners are actually responsible, hardworking citizens who play by the rules and do right by our neighborhood and our city. It wasn’t just the “rollout” that was the problem; it was the very imposition of even more restrictions on *top* of everything else.
In a place like the UWS, resident permit stickers will foster ill will.
“…we will have DOT roll back this parking plan and restore the status quo ante until such time as DOT has had the opportunity to solicit more public input …”. This translates to UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION!
More accurately. Mayor Adams gets to look good in front of votes that he wants and Mayor Mamdani will get to look good in front of voters he wants.
Yes hopefully Mamdani tosses out all the corruption of the Adams administration and we can start making progress on street safety again
A 34th Street busway and City of Yes wasn’t enough for you?
Many (most?) of us on the UWS do not have cars. Why should those who do get any special privileges? Charge them! Make some money for mass transit!
If Mayor Adams wanted a real bump in his poll numbers he’d immediately fire Ydanis Rodrigues-the absolute worst DOT commissioner in history. Three years ago my building and individuals within made a rigorous effort to have the potholes in front of our building fixed so that our residents didn’t injure themselves coming into the building from the bus. Three years later the potholes are still there. But miles and miles of bike lanes and Citibike kiosks have been built instead. Ydanis is a city paid employee who appears to be on the payroll of the lobby Trans Alt-hence all the policies created that the vast majority of tax-paying residents are hurt by. Patronage is the worst way to make a city better or fairer. That’s why the Mayor is so disliked in NYC.
Janette Sadik Khan was a curse word to many people who lived in my area. Every NYCDOT commissioner is the same since Bloomberg appointed her. Heck, they have even been rumored to hire urbanists who are not NYC residents to work at NYCDOT.
I don’t care as long as you have my state registration if this is your primary residence.
Ever since the pandemic, I moved my Jeep out of the city because rats were attacking it when I would park it on the street and if you remember back then…. you didn’t have to move your car for weeks and months at a time… so once the rats started getting into the engine, I said to my family…. “I’m going to leave my Jeep at our home up in Westchester.
Now…I’m so happy I did…in more ways than one, use your imagination,💲💲💲
Did anybody notice that these “Smart Curbs” can only be used by people with a smart phone?? And how discriminatory this is especially to those over 65 of which 25% do NOT have a smartphone? Shockingly unfair and an example of thoughtless government.