New Haven Independent

posted by: Atwater on May 20, 2011  8:03am

A small cost of business increase. And I am sure anyone driving all the way from Fairfield or New York will not be too concerned about the small charge of parking. Like the reporter said, it’s either this or a possible increase in property taxes, most probably prefer the latter.
As for employees of the businesses. The city should offer discounted bundles of permits to downtown business owners so that their employees could park without charge.
Also, if New Yorkers, or folks from Fairfield. want to come to New Haven they can always take the train. That’s how most Connecticuters get to New York. The train does run both ways.

posted by: think it through on May 20, 2011  8:36am

By City Ordinance one is not permitted to be a “meter repeater” - Is that law being repealed?

posted by: robn on May 20, 2011  8:51am

I’m ambivalent about this because we don’t want to constrict evening activity in the city however, we’re only talking about a $4-5 increase for someone who is about to spend $50-100 anyway. For certain, if the plan is implemented, it should only be done with Credit Card meters…feeding change is the untenable hassle.

posted by: Resident on May 20, 2011  8:54am

The meters would have to be changed to allow more than two hours of parking.  If you are attending a show at the Shubert or going to dinner and a movie, you need a longer parking period.

posted by: Cedarhillresident on May 20, 2011  8:55am

I to agree with robns comment… make it on credit card meters. It is only a few bucks and I do not think it will effect people coming into the city in the evening.

posted by: wondering... on May 20, 2011  9:02am

So, again New Haven is proposing something that would deter people and potentially hurt business.

Does this mean the City will be paying for employees to monitor/ticket people whose meters have run out?  Seems counterintuitive to me.

posted by: Steve B on May 20, 2011  9:03am

“So there was never a guarantee that you were going to come downtown and park for free anyway. The likelihood was against you.”

This is a key fact that is really glossed over for the first half of this article. The reality is that most people who come down in the evening can’t find a space on the street, precisely because street parking is free while garage parking is not. This makes no sense. Keeping meters running until midnight will encourage turnover, making it easier to find a spot on the street. People staying for several hours will be more likely to head straight for a garage instead of circling around looking for a free spot on the street, which will also reduce traffic congestion. Keeping the meters running is good public policy. The actual cost to parkers will be a few dollars, and still well below the true cost to the city for providing parking spaces.

Or you could ride the bus, which runs until after midnight. Or a cab. Perhaps those who come downtown to drink in the evenings shouldn’t be driving home anyway.

posted by: Pedro Soto on May 20, 2011  9:19am

I’m ambivalent about this proposal. While I think that demand pricing needs to be instituted, It needs to be done gradually, so that there is not a knee-jerk reaction on the matter.

For whatever reason, people REALLY get worked up about having to pay for parking. I’ve heard people say that if Elm City Coop didn’t have free parking (it will, 1hr free validated!), they would just go to Whole Foods in Milford, never mind the fact that it would cost more in gas alone than the cost of the meter to get there and back.

This is not a level playing field.A ll of our ring suburbs are attracting restaurants competitive to New Haven, and they are blessed -well cursed, I would say, but not in this case- with acres of blacktop.

Perhaps this could be instituted on Fridays and Saturdays to begin and not during the rest of the week? Or perhaps a “teaser” rate of 50 cents an hour to start, might work.

While the revenue might be slow to come in, for this to work, perceptions need to change. For perceptions to change, this has to be done carefully, deliberately and with all local constituencies on board. Otherwise, the irrational fear of paying for parking will have a very real damaging effect on downtown’s resurgence.

posted by: streever on May 20, 2011  9:19am

I think people really need to learn how to manage their expectations.

Does the owner of Union League honestly think that people who are about to spend 30 dollars on an entree and 15 dollars on a glass of wine are going to stop showing up because of a FOUR DOLLAR FEE FOR PARKING?

The reality is that now that the restaurant employees all along Chapel don’t have such an easy time parking there (just hang out around 7:30 and watch the young people in black pants & white shirts feeding 5 meters in a row) you may actually see more of your well-heeled clientele, who can now get an easy parking spot.

People who are going to drop 100-150 on a dinner for two don’t mind paying 4 bucks to park.

I (occasionally) visit friends in Stamford with my girlfriend. It costs us 5+ dollars to park to eat dinner, and we never even think about that as a factor.

What world do these objectors live in?

posted by: anon on May 20, 2011  9:33am

What about city commissioners, officials and volunteers, and citizens, who frequently show up at City Hall at 6 or 7pm and have to stay until 9, 10, 11PM (and not knowing when they will have to leave)? 

Maybe the increased parking fee should only be implemented in the “core” restaurant/theater district around Yale, where the new meters are, and not in the areas such as Orange, State, Grove Street, etc.

That would incentivize visitors to park a little farther afield, and maybe get to know our city better—as well as free up the “primo” spaces for the pampered suburban set.

posted by: Bill Saunders on May 20, 2011  9:42am

While an extra few bucks might not be unappetizing to would-be, out-of-town diners, one bogus tow job will set the menu straight.

posted by: john on May 20, 2011  9:42am

bad idea. some of us who park downtown don’t come from wealthy suburbs. we like to support the local restaurants (some at which one will spend far less than $50-100).

there are enough regressive taxes/fees in this city already and, while i’m one for reduced automobile traffic, the end does not justify the means for me in this instance.

posted by: Pedro Soto on May 20, 2011  9:43am

Streever,
I know it sounds ridiculous, but that’s actually a problem. You wouldn’t believe how many people I know see a 75 cent parking fee as this massive imposition on their god given right to parking.

It’s predominantly a generational thing, but it’s amazing how worked up people get about this. Yes, there are people who would not go to a restaurant they were prepared to pay $100 at, if they had to feed a meter. It’s completely illogical, but it’s out there. They live in a world where free parking and the ability to park outside the door to wherever you are going is required for patronage.

That’s why I think that this can’t be rushed into. Expectations can and will change, especially because the meters will be card ready.

Overall I think this would be a positive for downtown, since it will increase parking turnover, but the clamor for cheap parking needs to be won over.

There needs to be some more carrots (e.g. lowering meter rates in outlying areas to encourage people to park there and walk) for this to win. I can be a success, but it has to be done right.

posted by: Steve B on May 20, 2011  9:44am

I constantly hear the same complaint that “How am I supposed to go to a show at the Shubert, or stay for dessert, if I have to worry about the meter running out?”

This argument really doesn’t hold up. Downtown is full of garages, and I think it’s a very logical policy that street spaces should be reserved for quicker stops (hence the 2 hour limit) while garages are ideal for longer visits. It makes perfect sense for the most convenient spots (the ones on the street) to be reserved for people who aren’t planning to spend the entire evening downtown.

posted by: Be Fair on May 20, 2011  9:48am

If you have to pay at meters now to visit sick people at St Raphaels then why shouldn’t you pay to eat in a swanky restaurant. Meters on Upper State Street and Wooster Street would also be a good thing. As Wooster Street is all pizza joints I wonder why it has never had meters.

posted by: downtown d on May 20, 2011  9:49am

Currently, a large portion of on street parking is taken up by employees and residents in the downtown parking at 5pm and never moving. on street parking is intended to be churned and is there for visitors to downtown.

our downtown is lively and vibrant through the night. it doesn’t end at 5pm. if a customer is intending on being here for more than 3 hours, then we (as a community) need to find a way to nudge that person into the garages. as a community, we need our garages to be cleaner, safer, more attractive, and well signed for availability and pricing.

additionally, our service sector needs a solution. one solution would be for employers to subsidize bus passes, but the problem with buses is that they don’t run past the time when people are getting out of work. there has to be some way to handle our employee parking better so that the on street parking remains available for CUSTOMERS.

could there be a way for Town Green to create a service sector or nightlife employee “card” that permits a different after-hours only monthly parking rate at the garages? additionally, it would be great for town green to get into the business of handling all parking lots downtown - so that we could have uniformity and collaboration (as well as a downtown new haven parking app on mobile phones that shows where parking is available and best places to park).

i would potentially argue that 12am may be a little late, and that 11pm may be better. but i’m all for moving in this direction. as pedro said, it’s a little fast moving for our city, but drastic times calls for expediency?

posted by: Morris Cove Mom on May 20, 2011  9:59am

It’s the employees already being underpaid who are going to hurt the most.  It will do little to affect the rest of us.  But we will complain and be annoyed.  I still don’t understand how the parking card things work.  I carry a pouch of quarters for parking downtown, or park in the Temple Street Garage, the cheapest one I’ve found.

Most Connecticut cities and towns only have meters running until 5pm, by the way, not 7pm, and not on Saturdays.  So if this isn’t a sign of the times in New Haven, I don’t know what is.

posted by: Steve B on May 20, 2011  9:59am

downtown d wrote: “one solution would be for employers to subsidize bus passes, but the problem with buses is that they don’t run past the time when people are getting out of work.”

I actually sympathize with this. Transit does not work well for people who have unusual work schedules, especially late nights. Although I would point out that unless you’re working until closing time, CT Transit does run quite late. I frequently ride the bus home after having a few drinks at a downtown bar. For late night workers, perhaps carpooling could work?

I’d also like to see the city encourage people who drive downtown and then drink to be able to leave their cars overnight and get them in the morning. For instance, have a special evening rate at the garage that allows you to get your car the next morning without paying for all those overnight hours.

posted by: Brian M. on May 20, 2011  10:03am

@ Atwater

Do you really think people are going to come from New York or Fairfield to New Haven for dinner? And that they’re going to take a 2 hour train ride that runs only every hour or so?

It’s far more likely that you have people more locally coming in. And to the extent that you make it a pain for people to do things that should be fairly simple, you do increase the marginal costs. Who going to get up twice in the middle of dinner to feed a meter with quarters?

New York’s meters go off at 6, 7, or 8.

I know the car is evil in this comment section, but face it: New Haven’s bus system is terrible, the rail schedule militates against casual off-hours travel, and this is fairly awful city to drive in. The garages don’t feel safe (and probably aren’t) and while there are some really great restaurants in town, there are alot of really great restaurants elsewhere.

You can imagine that making it harder to eat at those restaurants won’t have any impact, but streever’s right: it’s not the money.

But it is a convenience issue. Nobody’s going to want to leave a meal to feed a meter. What city keeps its meters going till midnight?

The only benefit would be that you’d have more parking authority police out writing tickets, but based on break-ins I’ve heard about, you could be murdered in the front seat of your car and the person writing the ticket would stick it on your forehead.

posted by: streever on May 20, 2011  10:05am

Pedro:
Yea, I think you have a good point—and I feel like ultimately we would both agree that while there will be growing pains, in the end this isn’t going to be the “end of New Haven” as the doomsayers seem to be saying. I know a lot of people who feel rage over 75 cent parking, but I honestly think it is misplaced, and if they could just swipe a card, they wouldn’t get so angry.

I honestly have been really annoyed at paying for parking in New Haven, but never felt annoyed paying when it was easy and convenient. I think if we have credit card swipe meters we will see rage decrease.

Anon:
Another good point. I’d encourage those people to find alternate ways to get to city hall—and I’d encourage the city to improve the bus system to the level where you can safely attend a city meeting & take a bus ride home.

I know Carl Goldfield and Tom Lehtonen (alders) typically ride their bikes in from Westville. I think that is a good model for other aldermen and people conducting business at City Hall. Many of them do live within city limits, so it isn’t that hard to get there without a car.

posted by: cba on May 20, 2011  10:07am

John DeStefano’s proposals of a special tax assessment and higher parking fees are two ingredients for stimulating downtown.  Does anyone see that the Mayor’s logic is flawed and that it is time for him to go into retirement ?

posted by: Bob on May 20, 2011  10:12am

“Who going to get up twice in the middle of dinner to feed a meter with quarters?”
Not me. That’s why if I drive downtown for lunch, I park in a garage.

The whole complaint about the inconvenience of having to get up and feed the meter is completely fabricated. The only people who have to do that are cheapskates who are unwilling to drop one or two extra quarters, or park in a garage.

posted by: Steve B on May 20, 2011  10:17am

A lot of bashing of the transit system from people who I’m guessing rarely if ever actually use it. I’d encourage you to give it another look, it’s a lot more pleasant than driving downtown in my experience.

I ride the bus several times a week. For the most part I find the buses to be reliable, clean, safe, and convenient. Frequencies are generally good, and much higher than comparable cities the same size as New Haven. On most of the major routes, there are departures at least every 30 minutes into the late night. Most neighborhoods in the city are within a short walk of a bus line. My house in Fair Haven is walking distance to two different lines. When I’m waiting for a bus home, it’s rarely more than 10 minutes wait.

posted by: Atwater on May 20, 2011  10:19am

Brian M: I was only going by what the restauranteur in the article said, that he knows people that come from New York and Fairfield to eat at some of New Haven’s restaurants. But, I think train travel is perfectly reasonable, it might also prove to be a boost to retail, since people taking a 2 hour train ride from NYC might have time to kill between trains. And, a lot of people from Connecticut take a 2 hour train ride just to eat in New York City. Anyway, the point is that it is a small cost of doing business, one that probably will not affect businesses downtown. Also, back on the train issue. If we pushed for an expansion to the Shoreline East train line to include post 9pm service, this might entice people to leave their cars at home and take the train. 
Personally I could care less about the people who come into New Haven to eat, drink and spend. They should pay for parking and residents should be allowed to park for free. Tourist based economies always fail and this city should stop putting such an emphasis on it. I’d rather have practical businesses downtown than a Union League Cafe, Claires, etc. But, that’s another issue.

posted by: n on May 20, 2011  10:22am

The suggestion to raise housing taxes instead is a telling one from the Shoreline-living downtown restaurateur.

Effectively ‘taxing’ people who live outside a walkable/bikeable area for the privilege of nighttime downtown street parking is not a bad thing. I’d hope that it is very clear which meters are on which time schedule though. If business owners are concerned with their employees being about to pay for meters, perhaps they could subsidize some parking—-or pay them a couple cents more an hour.

As for me, I live in East Rock. When I go downtown, I walk or bike. If it is really bad weather, I’ll drive to street parking or a Yale lot (free after 4pm!). Not a big deal if you live in New Haven.

posted by: MRM on May 20, 2011  10:40am

The fact that Union League (and others) have 45 employees parking on the street meters would seem to problematize the argument that others will balk at paying for parking.  If you think about the number of restaurants just in the area bounded by College, Chapel, Crown and York - if each of these places even have an average of 15 employees parking for free, I would guess that there are precious few meters actually available for the suburban diners to come and park at.  I think some kind of group parking pass, to be paid by restaurant owners for their employees might be a good idea.

posted by: Threefifths on May 20, 2011  10:48am

posted by: Atwater on May 20, 2011 8:03am

A small cost of business increase. And I am sure anyone driving all the way from Fairfield or New York will not be too concerned about the small charge of parking. Like the reporter said, it’s either this or a possible increase in property taxes, most probably prefer the latter.

Don’t bet on this.Read this.

Parking Meters Will Only Drive Away the Loyal Theatergoers

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/13/opinion/l-parking-meters-will-only-drive-away-the-loyal-theatergoers-820391.html?src=pm

I was living in New york when this happen and I bet this is going on here.

35 Held in $1 Million Parking-Meter ‘Rip-Off’

http://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/16/nyregion/35-held-in-1-million-parking-meter-rip-off.html?src=pm

posted by: Westville Mom on May 20, 2011  10:52am

This discussion reveals how elitist New Haven really is.  My family clips coupons (not only for food, but for restaurants.)  We buy only discounted gas (either at Stop & Shop or Sam’s Club.) We almost always buy clothing on sale and USED TO try to keep it under $50 because of the FORMERLY tax-free status of that.

I rarely shop downtown (mostly at Christmas) because of the unbelievable price tags.  When I DO go downtown, it is for things like the Yale bookstore, or Tyco’s, or a CHEAP meal or movie.  I NEVER park in garages (except at the hospital.) I have rarely been in the pricey restaurants.  I don’t even know what the rest of you all are talking about.  Who are these people who spend all this money there?  Not me, I’ll have you know.  This is the middle-class CULTURAL reality that most of you have no concept of ... and Mayor DeStefano has something approaching contempt for.  Four or five bucks actually MEANS SOMETHING to middle-class families.  I’m really quite surprised at some of these comments—where else in this country would you see such casual disregard for money in what is really a Depression-like economy?

So .... bottom line is, if I have to pay more for parking, I just won’t go downtown and I mean that.  Frankly, with the crime situation, I’d rather drive out to Orange or Milford where the access is better and the salespeople are friendly—Apple Store or no.

Downtown New Haven is surviving because of affluent, cultural “elites” but with this economy, their number is dwindling fast.  I have said this before and will say it again—- this is an unsustainable and unhealthy attitude for a city.  Ignore the middle class at your peril.

Frankly, for the amount of property tax I pay, I should have a FREE parking pass in this town.  How about THAT for a suggestion.

posted by: Yair on May 20, 2011  10:53am

I’m very sympathetic to the idea that parking shouldn’t be free, but this seems like a bad idea. It takes probably the most successful sector of New Haven downtown business, namely restaurants, and hobbles it in a serious way. Some thoughts:
1. While rationally the cost of parking is not high compared to the cost of a restaurant dinner or a play, it has an outsize psychological effect that several people have mentioned, and can’t be ignored.

2. The convenience part is huge. We often go downtown with the kids for dinner and find street parking. It’s great not to have to worry about feeding the meters, and is a LOT more pleasant than garages. If we had to use a garage we’d do this a lot less.

3. Has anyone done a careful study of what other cities do and how it works? I don’t know of ANYPLACE that charges for street parking in the evening. Not a good area to be a pioneer.

4. Maybe downtown restaurants should be charged a parking tax, since they benefit from the free parking.  They should be eager to cooperate on this, because while diners are affected disproportionately by psychological effects (see 1), businesses can just make the numerical cost-benefit analysis. Paying a modest tax is preferable to the business loss.

posted by: streever on May 20, 2011  10:56am

MRM:
exactly! As long as restaurant employees get free parking in front of the restaurants they work at, I don’t understand how the restaurant owners think it will be WORSE when the meters cost more for such long-term parking.

When restaurant employees have to pay for 6 hours of parking instead of 2, I think they will become “incentivized” to seek out parking which is slightly less convenient for them to get to their place of employment, but which will enable diners & others visiting to park more easily.

(and I made a typo in my earlier comment, I meant “6:30”, not “7:30”, which is when I typically see a few employees from different restaurants running around filling their co-workers meters)

posted by: nfjanette on May 20, 2011  11:29am

A lot of bashing of the transit system from people who I’m guessing rarely if ever actually use it. I’d encourage you to give it another look, it’s a lot more pleasant than driving downtown in my experience.

Even with the small injection of new equipment, the bus service in New Haven is barely acceptable.  Buses frequently run with significant variance from the scheduled time - and then show up in packs of multiple buses with the trailing units empty.  GPS units in the buses are apparently still years away, even though Yale has already deployed this technology with success so customers can track the buses.  In addition, the night routes, which would be relevant to this discussion, change and don’t cover some areas because of the combined routes.  CT Transit has been unresponsive to customer complaints in general.

posted by: Wiggy on May 20, 2011  11:29am

Parking at CT Post mall movie theater: Free
Parking at the New Haven movie theaters: $7 for the garage, or meter parking.

Parking at the Black Bear in Milford: Free
Parking at the Black Bear in New Haven: garage, meter parking…

etc etc.

posted by: anon on May 20, 2011  11:35am

There is plenty of room downtown for more on-street, metered parking.  I’m not so sure about the garage idea. I’d rather see the garages converted back into productive uses such as offices or apartments. 

As one of many possible examples to create on street parking, we could convert George Street into a narrow, two-way street and install diagonal parking down the length of it.  That would give the city hundreds of new spaces.

Right now, George is a sea of wasted asphalt, home to little more than tumbleweeds, broken glass, and vehicles speeding downtown at 50 miles per hour.  Like many other streets downtown, it is a deterrent to residents and business. 

By making George into a complete street, it could become a beautiful boulevard lined with trees, cafes, plentiful parking, bike lanes that are actually usable (rather than sharrows, which are unusable as vehicles pass you at 50 miles per hour), inset bus or shuttle stops, and many more apartments and stores. 

Doing this would also allow room on the street to install pedestrian mini-plazas and narrow crosswalks, exactly like the city did with Temple Street about 10 years ago.  Temple Street went from a no-mans land into one of the most valuable streets in the entire State of Connecticut.

This could all be done for the price of about 10 or 20 new parking garage spaces.  And the increased tax revenue would be a much bigger benefit than the city will get by extending its meter hours.

posted by: Scott on May 20, 2011  11:36am

It’s now going to be almost as cheap to park in the garages for the $8 flat night rate as to park in the meters for 5 hours @$1.50 per hour.  And don’t they plan on raising the meter rates too?

And you don’t have to feed the meter every hour or two in the garages.  Hope your dinner and drinks go speedily!

posted by: Scott on May 20, 2011  11:44am

Oops, I missed the paragraph about how these new meters wouldn’t require feeding every hour.  It will be interesting to see the effects of having only a small number of meters have late parking fees.  I bet there will be a lot of tickets on those, or people will avoid them like the plague.

OTOH, I would guess the meters they are replacing are the ones that are always full that I never get to park at anyways.  So really all this will do is be a bummer when you find that great parking spot right in front of the restaurant, and then realize it’s a pay spot.

posted by: streever on May 20, 2011  11:47am

@Anon:
GREAT thoughts on George Street. I would love to see that happen.

posted by: Westville Mom on May 20, 2011  11:53am

Anon—I really, really like your idea, which would dramatically improve that side of the city.  (Plus, more meters should equal lower fees per meter—theoretically, at least.)

posted by: john on May 20, 2011  11:55am

@n : easily said for an east rocker. But what if you live in a neighborhood outside that corridor that accessible only through is less safe at night, eg, chapel/Edgewood/ferry/grant.

Perhaps the solution is a new haven resident sticker that would allow free pm parking. Besides—have you ever paid real estate tax in new haven? Ain’t exactly fred to live here.

posted by: anon on May 20, 2011  11:57am

Streever, glad you like the George Street idea. It’s just one example out of many streets that could be improved for relatively little cost (especially if our State DOT and Federal STP program actually cared about promoting economic development instead of spending hundreds of millions on new parking garages - as it is now, they still aren’t paying for sidewalks in some of their road programs!). 

For George, I’m not sure what the city is thinking with the Route 34 project. Starting this summer, it looks like a good part of that Route 34 money is actually going to go into George Street, keeping it wide and uninviting, and adding vehicle turn lanes (also known as speed lanes for the elite) instead of usable walking, biking or transit improvements.

posted by: Threefifths on May 20, 2011  11:58am

posted by: Brian M. on May 20, 2011 10:03am
@ Atwater

Do you really think people are going to come from New York or Fairfield to New Haven for dinner? And that they’re going to take a 2 hour train ride that runs only every hour or so?

I agree.In fact people here told me that New york has better cafe and restaurants.

Carmine’s

http://www.carminesnyc.com/

Junior’s Cheesecake.

http://www.juniorscheesecake.com/

RAO’S RESTAURANT

http://www.raos.com/raos-restaurant-new-york.aspx

You have seafood RESTAURANTS on city island.

My neighbour is Italian from the bronx.He said the pizza taste like the box,He goes every friday to Arthur Avenue in the bronx to get his food.

http://www.arthuravenuebronx.com/

Plus New York has a 24hrs transit system.this state doesn’t.

P.S. can not for get Greenwich Village restaurants.

posted by: streever on May 20, 2011  12:03pm

@john:
In my opinion, the root problem is always where we find the solution. By that line of thinking, if the problem is that the corridor is dangerous, then the solution isn’t free parking for residents, but to make the corridor safer.

If we just treat the symptom (free parking) then we still have a bigger and more troubling problem (dangerous neighborhood and dangerous street).

I’m not a fan of stop gap treatments, because I think it encourages the city to ignore real problems after applying a band-aid fix.

I totally hear you—it is pretty easy to say “walk downtown” (15-20 minutes, free and easy) when you live in East Rock. I just would prefer to see a solution that makes it easy and safe to get downtown from EVERY neighborhood, then a solution that does not address those problems.

posted by: john on May 20, 2011  12:26pm

@n: i do appreciate what you’re saying. i just feel that with no suitable, late-night public transport options from, say fair haven or westville (e.g.) this proposal would place an undue burden on city residents that are already paying all sorts of regressive fees (with more to come, of course: rainwater disposal? bulk trash pickup? etc.) on top of their not-low taxes. this kind of propsal would make the efficient, urban living that many of us cherish far less attractive from a financial point of view than seems fair.

i suspect that you and i would agree that it’s naive to hope that these corridors—which have been unsafe for decades—are likely to get better soon, failing the velvet-fisted intervention of a large ivy-league university… whose interests, btw, have no doubt helped to make getting from East Rock to downtown at any time of day far safer than it once was.

i know cars are bad, but i think that this plan should carry some perks for in-town residents—just like the hybrid-drivers who get free pkg.

posted by: anon on May 20, 2011  12:28pm

Streever, I agree that we need safer networks for all neighborhoods.  Creating more parking without addressing the root problem just makes the problem worse by creating safety for a few (drivers), and decreasing safety for everyone else (the vast majority of residents, including kids, who do not drive alone each day).

A simple solution to improving safety would be a pedestrian lighting program, and a two-way cycle track, on streets such as Whalley, Howard, Chapel or Grand.  This could dramatically increase personal safety for people walking out to neighborhoods other than East Rock. 

Creating a “safe corridor” for pedestrian travel, and providing a progressively-designed bike facility that people of any age could feel comfortable using at any time, would immediately improve the sense of safety by providing a constant presence of pedestrian-level traffic, even very late at night.  Having a single, two-way dedicated route is also far easier to patrol than current setups like Chapel and Edgewood where inbound and outbound traffic is segregated.

As a side benefit, promoting travel on retail-intensive streets supports the existing businesses and jobs on those streets - studies have proven that walkable streets have far fewer vacant storefronts, and 40% higher retail rents.  Pedestrian and cycle traffic also has a traffic calming impact, which would make those streets more valuable and hence create a market for even more businesses, apartments to be built on those streets.  Again, this means much more tax revenue than any program to build a parking garage.

Back in the 1990s, Yale created a system of “safe routes” through its campus - they didn’t do much for the side streets initially, but they were a start at getting people to walk and bike around the campus at night, and eventually led to greater safety overall to the point where an enormous proportion of staff now bike or walk to work.

No amount of police can create the kind of security that is provided when you have usable urban places for all people.

posted by: streever on May 20, 2011  12:35pm

@john
I definitely see your point—I just worry that it is those fixes which encourage the city to not deal with the real problems. I also appreciate your POV—a more realist one than my own, absolutely.

I just think it isn’t that hard to actually improve the situation without subsidizing parking. Personally I would eliminate the hybrids park free—I think it sends the wrong message (that somehow we can buy our ways out of environmental and civic responsibility)

It isn’t even that cars are innately bad—it is just that the parking & transportation system is ungodly awful, we all pay for it even if we are too poor to own a car, and ultimately I don’t think it helps our society to be so focused on the car.

I would never want to CREATE roadblocks to driving. I just want to equalize the playing field and see government allocate money and time on improving conditions for marginalized minority groups (walkers, bikers, transit takers) and actually invest in these systems.

It really isn’t an anti-car thing, but just an appreciation that where we spend the money is where we go as a society—if we give away free parking (because it is an expensive resource we are literally just giving away—we give away more spaces to parking then we give to Yale as tax free)—then we are actually subsidizing and spending money on driving.

I think that type of subsidy helps create dangerous corridors and ultimately costs us far more money than it would to just fix the problems.

I believe that Anon made a great proposal on George street, and would like to see more of that type of thinking come out of our city. That combined with “dynamic” or market-priced meters would reduce parking costs for many people.

posted by: robn on May 20, 2011  12:38pm

ANON,

YES!!!

posted by: Atwater on May 20, 2011  12:54pm

@threefifths: An extension of rail service between Old Saybrook and New Haven and Stamford and New Haven could provoke more people to come to New Haven to eat, go to plays, etc. But, you’re right, no matter how inexpensive the parking/transportation is people are not going to be drawn here by mid-quality restaurants, theaters, etc.
As I stated before, the meters should go until midnight, city residents should be exempt from paying them, and the rates should increase after 10pm.

posted by: Noteworthy on May 20, 2011  1:01pm

The BOA and mayor’s inability to control costs, reign in the number of employees (5,000) on our payroll and end the double dipping, the endless parade of consultants, trim fat and reduce unnecessary “services” to core requirement NEEDS not wants, means they will forever be in the hunt for more revenue.

From $5K for a freedom walk consultant to outrageous labor contracts; from a BOE with unchecked expenditures and a rich payroll at the top tier of the system, to a general lack of accountability - we are reduced to spending inordinate amounts of time and energy coming up with financial schemes to pay for it all.

The same alders that are embracing this are the same ones who can’t cut anything. They fret over losing one suburban living employee.

In and of itself, this is not so bad. However, combined with everything else going on in New Haven - the gun fights, the heavy police presence handing out seat belt tickets, to crime, one has to really want to come eat at these restaurants because it is so much easier to dine elsewhere and pay no parking nor have the fears of facing all the rest of it. Think about it.

posted by: Brian M. on May 20, 2011  1:12pm

Why would you *increase* parking rates after 10 p.m.?

This conversation reminds me of people who live in communities supported by tourism but start whining every May when the first tourists show up and think it’s fun to do weird things that inconvenience them.

If you’re going to increase meter rates and times, why exempt locals? Shouldn’t locals know how inane the policies are? I mean the locals who don’t walk from East Rock.

And the trains. Yes, once you forget about the cost of a train ticket, the wait, the lack of things to do while you’re waiting, the cost of a cab to/from the station, the public housing project welcome wagon when you exit the station, and the irregularity of a bus schedule, yeah - I don’t know why more people from Fairfield don’t come up here for dinner.

Baffling. I mean, you could drive a half hour, or you could spend 2 hours and $30 getting the same result.

Once you do this redesign of George Street, who’s going to volunteer to be the first one to complain about how much it costs or to demand that Yale pay for it?

Probably worth it to sort that out now before you, you know, do anything.

posted by: john on May 20, 2011  1:14pm

@streever: fair enough; overall i’m sure you and i would agree. i’m just not persuaded that this is a good idea. this, to me, is cutting off the nose to spite the face, but opinions (clearly) differ.

—-
@Noteworthy re: “...the heavy police presence handing out seat belt tickets…”

Have you seen this article? “Click it or ticket” is ok by me.

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/cops_grab_guns/

posted by: streever on May 20, 2011  1:25pm

@Anon:
I think you should apply for a job at the City.

“Proactive future planning by a person who is considering serious problems and how we can address them both in the short-term and the long-term”

I know that job description doesn’t currently exist, but hey, you’d do a great job if they created it—and it is their failure of imagination and planning that they have not yet done so.

posted by: robn on May 20, 2011  1:46pm

ANON,

I articulated much the same for Elm street after last weeks crash. Its about time NH moved to a two-way street system that reduces congestion and optimizes our super wide streets with diagonal parking. I’d consider voting for you as Proactive-Czar…but you’d still have to beat JHOPKINS.

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/downtown_crash_sends_1_to_hospital/

posted by: Jonathan Hopkins on May 20, 2011  3:09pm

New Haven has several 19th century “centers” like the Westville Village, Fair Haven village center at Quinnipiac and E. Grand, the West Village (Chapel West), and the city also has many great 20th century “Main Street” neighborhoods like Dixwell, Whalley, Upper State Street, and Howard Avenue. Developing these nodes and thoroughfares with mixed use development such as restaurants, clothing and shoe stores, hardware stores, grocery stores, cafes and other neighborly commercial businesses, the parking burden can be dispersed throughout the city more evenly, thus rejuvenating neighborhoods and decreasing demand for parking downtown while strengthening the city as a whole. The neighborhood should provide for the needs of the residents, a downtown is merely a supplemental high-end shopping and working destination. Our neighborhoods are not living up to their potential for provided basic needs.

posted by: Atwater on May 20, 2011  3:39pm

@Brian: It does not take 2 hours to get from Fairfield to New Haven via train. 2 hours to/from New York City, not Fairfield. Also, with gas prices as they are I’m sure the price of an off-peak ticket is comparable, if not less expensive, than filling a gas tank. Also, there is a free shuttle from Union Station to downtown, all it needs is longer service hours, which is an easy fix. Or the State Street station could be used more often. The walk to downtown from the State Street station is quite nice.
I would increase the cost of parking meters after 10pm to deter drive-in tourists and visitors. Especially drive-in tourists who drink and then drive out. Maybe paying more at a meter will make them think twice before driving to the Elm City.
Residents should be given a permit to allow for free parking in public parking spaces. 
New Haven is not supported by tourism, and we need to stay away from that economic model

posted by: bpm on May 20, 2011  4:29pm

“I would increase the cost of parking meters after 10pm to deter drive-in tourists and visitors.”

Why would someone who holds a view like this make himself miserable by living in a mid-size city?

If local restaurant owners think this is a bad idea, maybe you should listen to them. Or else you won’t have local restaurant owners. Then we can all take streetcars to nowhere.

posted by: J Wilson on May 20, 2011  4:44pm

A) Not everyone who frequents and supports the downtown night life pay $100+ for an evening out. For those people that spend $25-50, adding $10 parking is not a trivial extra cost. It’s the difference between staying home, or going elsewhere.

B) Those who say that it makes evening street parking on par with garages, and encourages them to choose the more appropriate choice, how long do you expect garages to continue charging $8-10 once this goes into effect? As garage parking becomes more attractive I wouldn’t be surprised to see lot fees double. They will undoubtedly go up by some factor.

C) The real inconvenience isn’t the meter fees, it’s the almost inevitable tickets and tows that go hand in hand with this. You punish people often enough for coming to New Haven, and they simply stop coming.

posted by: john jessen on May 20, 2011  4:49pm

Everyone’s missing the whole point of this story! That’s THE Alice McGill there!

posted by: Ellis Copeland on May 20, 2011  6:34pm

Atwater—who is coming here from New York or Fairfield???? No one in their right mind would come here if they already live in a real city—or within its greater metro area.  New Haven is a dive that should just be bulldozed over.  Then there would be plenty of parking.

posted by: Bill Saunders on May 20, 2011  8:41pm

J Wilson,

Thank you for your reasonable assessment of the situation.  The ticketing/towing situation is already a system out of control, and this measure feeds right into it.  I wouldn’t be at all surprised if city towing contractors wind up making out better than the city with this proposal.

I have proffered it before, and I honestly believe that the only true systemic, revenue generating policy change would be to expand the Office of Traffic & Parking to include towing—then there would be accountability for bogus towing.  We certainly have enough city surface lots to provide short term storage. Truly unaccountable scofflaws could be towed to the big lot in the sky, and put their gold in the collection plate.

posted by: Limited Life on May 20, 2011  9:02pm

I am shocked at the postings here. Nobody seems to get it. You all go off on your own favorite gripes. The city wants to inrease meter revenue cos its BROKE BROKE BROKE. DeStefano has spent everything on his own pet projects. Taxpayers are cranky in an election year so property taxes won’t go up till next year. It’s the usual game for now. It’s okay as long as some other sucker pays. Well, we’re all going to be suckered next year.

posted by: Cinderella on May 21, 2011  12:06pm

The meters have to be credit card meters; otherwise, people will be leaving theaters, shows and restaurants to feed the meters and who carries enough quarters around with them to feed the meters for 6-7 hours?
I don’t know about all this. Parking garages are cheaper but sometimes are not safe. New Haven can be sketchy at times and I’m a long-time NH resident so I’m not writing this to be bashing NH.

posted by: TCS on May 21, 2011  3:34pm

Speaking as someone who works frequently in New Haven and already makes little doing so, this has got to be one of the most counterproductive and annoying ideas I’ve heard in ages.

posted by: J Wilson on May 21, 2011  8:50pm

If New Haven is broke and needs more money, it’s because of some serious waste. Take my street for example. I have no idea who lives on this street, but it has gotten more attention that it could possibly deserve in the last 12 months. New sidewalks and new trees. For traffic calming they added one of those little hitches in the road so it wouldn’t be a straight away. I’m guessing that didn’t work, because only a few months later they added in 2 speed bumps and new signage. There were complaints they couldn’t be seen well enough, and within days they were also painted.

If we were talking about serious projects that needed to be funded, I’d be more understanding that something needs to be done (although I’d still disagree with THIS solution). When I see that kind of money wasted on a relatively well to do street, I seriously question why there is a sudden “need” to raise more money.

posted by: bill Saunders on May 21, 2011  9:31pm

If anyone has been follow Rahm Emmanuel as the new mayor of Chicago, his first act upon taking office was to mandate a ten-percent, across the board cuts, leaving management to make the best decisions for their departments. 

Every public office can sacrifice 10%.
There is a difference between leadership and pandering.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/05/17/mayor-emanuel-already-busy-on-first-full-day/

posted by: Alex on May 22, 2011  5:07am

The City continues to not get it! Their poor parking policies have damaged downtown retail and restaurant businesses for 30 years. Shocking - parking fees till midnight! This is not a way to raise revenue. Really, the mayor should take a pay cut to start. How much are they spending to upgrade the downtown garages? I agree with Jean Pierre! He’s a veteran of downtown and he knows the score!

posted by: Mister Jones on May 25, 2011  11:14am

J Wilson your comments are right on target, except that parking tickets for an expired meter are $20 not $10.  It’s not the quarters in the meters but the inevitable tickets.  If you park on a meter you will eventually get a ticket.  So I’ve got tickets for lingering too long over a $6 dollar sandwich at lunch, or a $3 beer at happy hour.

posted by: robn on May 25, 2011  12:18pm

As I see it, parking meters can generate revenue from valuable resource (downtown space) and can spur economic development by making businesses more accessible. However, like other legal instruments, meters are intended to prevent bad behavior, and aren’t intended to force people into specific good behaviors. So the question I ask is, what are the bad behaviors we’re trying to prevent? During the daytime I see hogging a meter during a busy business day as a bad behavior, but in the evening, we do want to afford people the opportunity to enjoy themselves downtown at a leisurely pace…time limits seems to be counter to the goal.

posted by: Mister Jones on May 25, 2011  12:31pm

The dilemma with meters is that unlike a parking lot where you pay on the way out for the time you use [or a flat fee up front], on a meter if you misjudge your time or don’t have correct change you are penalized with a $20 fine.  You can also usually avoid the one and two hour day time limits by feeding the meter, so the system has some basic flaws. 

In terms of hardship, the actual night-time meter expense won’t hurt most of the downtown patrons, but for low-paid restaurant workers, and extra $6 or $9 in quarters every night is a big hit, even without the inevitable parking tickets.

posted by: robn on May 25, 2011  12:50pm

MISTERJONES,

CT Transit should be required to run shuttle busses from 12-4 to a relatively close shuttle lot (maybe a school lot that isn’t used at night.) It wouldn’t cost much and the payoff is more available parking for restaurant patrons.

posted by: DealwithDevil on June 9, 2011  11:22am

@ Wondering
Yes, Mr. Travers will be paying “meter maids” to walk the streets between 7pm-12pm (as they do all day) looking for expired meters and cars to ticket. What prompted me to respond is your assertion that it seemed “counter-intuitive” to hire these “grunts” to work until midnight. It’s not. Mr. Travers can employ these people at VERY little per hour and implore them with “WRITE AS MANY TICKETS AS POSSIBLE TO KEEP YOUR JOB!” And trust me, the kind of revenue the city gets by expired meter tickets, Mr. Travers could hire 25 more meter maids and still make a profit on parking tickets.

posted by: Jay on June 14, 2011  11:29am

I live a few towns over but dine in New Haven frequently.  If they want to do this, change the 2 hour parking to 12 hour parking like most other cities who have implemented similar policies.  I usually have a much easier time finding parking on the street than I do in the overpriced garages and it is much easier to just get in my car and leave when I want to.  I probably won’t bother eating in New Haven if I have to worry about feeding a meter all night or moving every 2 hours.

posted by: Doug Hausladen on June 14, 2011  2:54pm

@Jay

The meters will not have limits after 5pm, which means that when you’re enjoying dinner, you can feed the meter until midnight (7 hours at $1.50/hour = $10.50 if you’re there all night).

Not many people have heard this - the focus has been on the time extension, not on the great work the department of TT&P have done to make our city ready to extend hours - surveying retailers, restaurateurs, data collection, best practices research, and an open RFP process last year on single and multi space meter hardware replacement.

The midnight extension will only be at locations that have the new meters (which accept credit cards), and will effectively be the entire downtown.

Hopefully now that the meters are extended you’ll see more turnover on the on-street parking and actually be able to find a spot near your restaurant.

posted by: flaxie on June 14, 2011  10:24pm

Sadly, Mr. Hausladen just lost my vote!
He is already “towing” the administration line, talking the same junk Jim Travers is talking. Very sad that such young people are already caught up in politics as usual here in sick New Haven. They Repeat what they hear from other “Repeaters” who in turn are repeating information from some repetitive sociopath above them in government. Classic!

posted by: Jay on June 15, 2011  8:19am

@Doug Hausladen

I’ve never had any problem finding street parking in New Haven.  I’m not sure why others are, but I usually find a space within a block of where I am going and it’s never taken me more than 5 minutes to find a space.  Anyone who knows downtown New Haven knows where to find parking if they need to.

As a person who does not own a smart phone and has no desire to get one, I can say that I will definitely be seeking out restaurants that are not in downtown New Haven if I have to feed the meters which it sounds like I would have to do.  Even someone who owns a smart phone is likely to miss a text if they are in a loud or crowded bar orrestaurant.  Does New Haven, who has people already staying away because of it’s top 5 worst per capita muder rate really want to steer even more people away from downtown businesses?

posted by: J Wilson on June 15, 2011  9:53am

Doug Hausladen, explain to me a scenario where the meters open up a parking space more often, if they don’t have time limits?

Also, if you would, did this wonderful job the city did include analyzing how much of the street parking is taken up by residents living downtown who may now face a substantial new expense? How many of those spots are taken by employees working in the local bars and restaurants, who likely cannot afford $50+ a week for parking? How much of it are patrons to the down town establishments, who now are either run off early (sacrificing the dollars they would have spent for that time period), or who stay and make zero difference to the parking “problem”? What IS the makeup of those parking downtown in the evenings?

posted by: doug hausladen on June 15, 2011  10:06am

@jay -

you won’t need to look at your phone for anything; you can preload at 5pm for up to 7 hours of parking.

@flaxie -

i would appreciate an opportunity to explain why i believe in this policy and why it is good for downtown. i am not repeating what someone else told me, in fact, i am trying to solve larger problems in downtown which is that retailers don’t have sufficient on street parking available to them (including restaurants at night). additionally, the tendency to circle and hunt for a parking space on the street leads to (as jay will tell you) 5 minutes of circling which adds to our air quality issues (#1 in asthma rates in Connecticut http://www.environmental-justice.org/issues/asthma.html). circling not only hurts our lungs, it hurts the walkability and vibrance of downtown shopping and eating districts.

again, i would really appreciate an opportunity to meet with you and discuss why i have felt for years that this is the right policy for our densely populated urban center. after talking with countless business owners and shoppers of our district, i am convinced that this is a workable policy that can serve the needs of all users in downtown.

if you have any time in the coming weeks, i will make myself available to discuss this (and other policies you may wish to discuss). i can be reached at 203-309-2737 or .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Best,

Doug Hausladen

posted by: streever on June 15, 2011  10:21am

Jay:
If employees can not afford $50 per week to park literally five feet from their workplace, taking up spots that patrons are looking for, perhaps they should spend as low as $85 per month to park in one of the, what, 5 lots? with very competitive monthly parking prices within 3 blocks of Chapel?

Is it asking too much to ask long-term parking to suck it up and take a 3 block walk to work so that people can use the short-term parking spots which the employees are irresponsibly hogging?

Perhaps downtown business owners should start trying to hire people who live downtown? I had a great conversation with a woman who works at Prime 16 who has never been a bicyclist but has started riding her bike—from East Shore—to Prime 16 because it is better for her health & cheaper. She was excited and optimistic about it.

She wasn’t a cyclist at all—she had just ridden a bike for the first time in years. Is it too much to ask that the people I see driving from East Rock to popular eateries where they work (a 15 minute walk) try to walk there instead of hogging the short-term parking?

I am really perplexed by the sense of entitlement a lot of people display on this issue. Do you have any idea how many tax dollars go toward giving you a spot 5 feet from your job, that you contribute nothing to?

Now the city wants you to pay your fair share and you whine and moan?

posted by: Doug Hausladen on June 15, 2011  10:24am

@ J Wilson:

there was surveying done, i will ask the city for it and post it.

the scenario you ask for: due to the meter enforcement in the evening, more parking spaces will be made available for short term parking as those that want to park all night are being nudged into appropriate places for their cars - garages. therefore, more spaces are made available for visitors at night. so a person comes down after work at 5pm and wants to catch a quick bite to eat before returning to branford. because more on street parking is now available, they drive up to richters, park, feed the meter for two hours, and at 7pm, they decide that they have had enough fun and get in their car and drive. that space would not have been there had it been used by an owner or employee and would have had a car in it all night. now it’s 7:15pm, and another customer drives up and decides to park their car in the space and hop into ricthers to meet with some friends and catch a ball game, feeding the meter until 12am. both of those people would not have been able to park conveniently and would have spent time circling and producing smog for our lungs (for those of us that live here).

if you ask about residents, trust me from experience that trying to rely on on street parking as an option is more expensive than paying for parking. just ask TT&P how many tickets i’ve paid in the last 4 years - it’s quite expensive.

for service sector employees, i think we should be using some of the additional revenues that will be gained from the parking meters to fund an employee shuttle to a not-too-far-away parking lot. we have the downtown electric street cars that used to have a free downtown loop.

i think that the speed and force with which this policy change was enacted has led to a PR problem and unanswered problems like service sector employee parking. in other towns, they have used pay stubs to get reduced parking. perhaps we could find a way to have TGSSD or the businesses themselves offer employees monthly bus passes (though CT Transit would need to offer routes after 12am to solve the problem more fully. currently when bars let out, there are no options for public transit).

If you would like to submit commentary on on street parking and its relation to how we function as a city, please enter your comments here:

http://bit.ly/nhvparking

posted by: J Wilson on June 15, 2011  11:30am

Mr Streever, why shouldn’t there be a sense of entitlement for a town government to consider the impact of all involved? Shouldn’t we ALL be entitled to a local government that responds to our concerns? With the high property taxes of New Haven, I think I and others are paying our “fair share.” Also, how noble of you to volunteer others to walk or bike to work. As someone who actually DID walk to work for years, I can tell you navigating snow, wind, rain, and heat (hurray for arriving to work sweaty and smelling!) is not trivial and no walk in the park as you seem to be imagining.

Whether $50 a week, or $85 a month, this is more than many who work locally can afford. How high paying do you think it is to bus, bartend, or work a kitchen? I don’t do any of those, but I have formed many friendships with people who work downtown, and these aren’t jobs that pay so well that the amount won’t mean serious cuts elsewhere.

Doug, my point is that in your scenario of the patron in at 5 who leaves at 7, he either would have left at 7 anyways, or he’d have stayed and continued spending money, so it’s a wash. The meter didn’t change anything. The meter only changes something if it moves a non paying customer (an employee or a resident), and THOSE issues weren’t sufficiently addressed. Since it sounds like you still don’t have a plan for them (and really that should have been done FIRST, before the meters), it clearly wasn’t the goal. The goal was to take a piece of the pie in a thriving downtown nightlife.

Perhaps lots and shuttles should have been considered FIRST to solve parking issues. You know, solve parking issues by creating more parking. Then if meters in some locations were needed to help pay for that, it would make sense. Instead we get meters passed, and left with “unanswered problems.”

posted by: streever on June 15, 2011  1:35pm

Mr Wilson,
I have commuted by foot/bike for 8 years. It really is not that difficult, and I know many people who manage.

The other alternative is to take a bus—live closer to your job—or any number of other scenarios (Carpool?) which are all viable.

The reality is that parking does cost money. The range, annually, is $135 billion to $386 billion to provide free parking spots.

I’m sorry, but I don’t think that all tax payers need to absorb that cost. Parking is a luxury, not a privilege. It is not a requirement, but a convenience.

I’ve made decisions as to where to live and work based around the cost of driving and parking, and I do not think it is unreasonable to expect others to either pony up the $85 per month to have the convenience of a parking spot or find alternative means of getting to work.

If your job does not pay you enough and yet sets a schedule that makes it impractical to get there any way other than sole occupancy car use, I believe you should take that up with your job, and not with your government.

In what way is your government on the hook for your life choices & your jobs unreasonable expectations of you?

If your job doesn’t care to pay you enough to let you work there, then it sounds like you have a problem with your job.

Do you think that taxpayers will be sympathetic to your plight? You are describing the problems of people who want to use city resources (taxpayer funded resources) to abuse the downtown parking and make it less convenient for people to spend money in New Haven.

You’re describing a system in which employees—who are underpaid by their employers—misuse the parking system, which is funded by taxpayers entirely and which you do not want to have to pay into at all, while you make it more difficult for patrons (who are willing to pay) to patronize the businesses of New Haven.

This isn’t a sympathetic position. New Haven needs to start making rational decisions to make the lives of our citizens easier and less expensive. Allowing people to misuse short-term parking does not accomplish those goals.

But wait, you’re saying, what about people who live in New Haven and work on Chapel street? Well, the rents near Chapel street are the same as the rents two miles away, so I’d suggest they start looking into renting an apartment near Chapel Street.

They’d save about 8k a year that way, before you even factor in parking costs.

Seems like a reasonable idea, versus the idea of asking taxpaying residents to continue to subsidize the free parking of downtown employees.

posted by: Doug Hausladen on June 15, 2011  3:13pm

@J Wilson

My scenario has removed the parker that would have stayed in the space the entire night and has left it available for 2 paying customers (and 1 turnover), which is not a wash. It allows 2 customers parking where one all-night person was (preventing customers from parking at all).

I don’t know why the board of alderman and the administration decided to suggest this alternative; it really took me buy surprise when it was proposed as a solution to the budget gap.

I agree with a lot of what you say other than the solution to our parking problems is to create more parking. I believe the only real solution is to remove demand for parking by providing alternatives. Our downtown (including Broadway) has 13,557 parking spaces amongst garages and surface lots (and that’s not counting the garages directly associated with some residential buildings like New Haven Towers). That’s a lot of parking spaces. Additionally, the thought of adding more would further rip the fabric of downtown into more dead zones of inactivity.

There are hard decisions being made in these horrific economic times. I was not a part of this decision, but I hope to help be a part of making it work better.

posted by: J Wilson on June 15, 2011  3:21pm

$135 billion to $386 billion to provide free parking spots? Since we’re talking about New Haven, I assume you have reliable information that those are NEW HAVEN numbers right?

While we’re worried that no one get something for free, in the interest of absolute fairness, then I suppose really parking should be paid for by the businesses that are the recipient of all the extra patrons that will no doubt result from this. After all, we can’t have the employees and residents “on the hook” for the businesses “life choices” to rely on street parking for their customers. Let’s tax them directly, and if their customers don’t pay them enough to cover the cost, then it sounds like they have a problem with their customers and should find new ones.

Yes, I’m being flip, because I find your comments to be equally flip. The truth is the parking, government, and policies need to work for everyone, not just for the benefit of businesses. The truth is it’s at least as reasonable to ask dining patrons to park in a lot for an evening as it is to expect employees to do it every night. And without giving diners ANY option for free parking, it’s inevitable that some diners choose to go elsewhere where parking is free and doesn’t inflate the cost of an evening out. If you want to talk about “make it more difficult for patrons (who are willing to pay) to patronize the businesses of New Haven,” adding in unavoidable parking charges IS making it more difficult. There is already parking easily available for those willing to pay, and if as you suggest walking is no big deal for employees every day, then certainly it’s no big deal for patrons to walk a block on the occasional night out (as I do).

I stand by the belief that meters will change very little the parking situation down town, is more likely to drive business to the surrounding communities, and will be an undue hardship on the working poor and residents.

I am very interested in how I can easily save $8000 a year by moving to Chapel street though. You throw that number out with absolutely nothing to support it. By my calculations that is likely 97.3% bullshit, along with the hundreds of billions spent on parking spots.

posted by: streever on June 15, 2011  4:46pm

Mr Wilson
Obviously, free parking at that cost level is a national one—New Haven does not have a budget which is large enough for that figure.

I’ll give you the sources and research point by point below.

Saving 8k per year:
If you lived within a few blocks of your job (and for that matter a grocery store) you could pretty safely abandon your car, which, if you are an “average” American, costs nearly 9k per year—according to the AAA: http://www.boston.com/cars/newsandreviews/overdrive/2011/04/average_car_ownership_nearly_9000_per_year.html

Other sources place it at “nearly 8k” by slightly different calculations. I used the low-end.

How much the poor spend on cars:
42% on car ownership per year:
http://www.grist.org/article/2010-10-29-angela-glover-blackwell-talks-about-the-connection-between-trans

Parking costs in the billions:
Here is economist Tyler Cowen relating the cost of free parking:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/business/economy/15view.html?src=twt&twt=nytimesbusiness

You should read the book he refers to—you can even view a powerpoint from the talk the writer gave at Yale recently:
http://www.yale.edu/transportationoptions/parking/documents/Highpriceoffreeparking.ppt

There are thousands upon thousands of pages of research and documentation devoted to these issues—I suggest looking into it on your own & coming to your own conclusions.

posted by: jay on June 16, 2011  8:26am

@streever

I do not work in New Haven ...  I am a frequent after hours customer of downtown businesses in New Haven saying, matter of factly that if I now have to either pay $10.50 or feed a meter all night, I choose to drive an equal distance to South Norwalk (same mileage, good food) , pay a $1.00 flat fee and frequent those establishments instead. Meaning New Haven will be losing a customer.  I am sure that I am not alone on this one.

posted by: Brian M. on June 16, 2011  9:44am

It’s no surprise that this thread got needlessly nasty, since it started nasty as well. Doug is making that is entirely sensible:

Parking spots are valuable real estate, and it makes no sense to give them away for free, whether that’s to residents or visitors.

What’s at stake, it seems, is whether you not only charge for the space, but how you do so. What’s wrong with letting people in a dining district pay for a parking period long enough to allow them to dine?

The naysayers are pretty explicit about how much they want to make it hard for people to go to dinner or a show while parked at a meter. They want coin-only meters that need to be fed every 90 minutes, but their reasoning is beyond childish: too many restaurants, too few of the _right kind_ of restaurants, too many restaurants serving porridge that is too hot to people who are too cold. Or people like Atwater who complain that fine restaurants that are thriving should be shuttered because they aren’t “practical businesses” - whatever that means.

I’m surprised nobody’s proposed making the meters accept only Ugandan shillings, just to turn the screws on those barbarians from Branford who dare to enter the city walls after dark.

posted by: yair on June 16, 2011  10:04am

I contest the point made by several people here that, since parking spots are valuable real estate, paid for by the taxpayer, “it makes no sense to give them away for free”.

Whether or not it makes sense to give something valuable away for free is entirely a business proposition (at least in this setting), and the answer can vary. For example, many coffeeshops give Wi-Fi access away for free, even though it costs them money and is obviously valuable.  The reason of course is that it attracts customers and increases their profits.

While I agree completely that parking is not an inalienable right, and that too much free parking can damage urban fabric (I am a very big fan of walkable neighborhoods and avoid driving when I can), my gut feeling is that in this case charging for parking at night will hurt more than it helps. However I can imagine that my opinion would change with the right kind of carefully gathered data.

At any rate it is not a question of city residents versus suburbanites. The relationship between the two should be mutually beneficial, and it is completely counterproductive to make this into a conflict.

posted by: streever on June 16, 2011  10:08am

Brian M.
Do people explicitly want meters that only accept coins?
I didn’t read that anywhere, but I do think it is a logical extension of the opponents of this plans goal—just not maybe one they have vocalized.

With the “out of town vs in town” issue—
it isn’t (for me) that I want to “punish” out of towners

It is just that taxpayers currently pay the costs of these parking spots
Why shouldn’t out of town people have to contribute?

New Haven provides these spots and at high cost. From maintenance to losing out on taxable real estate to competing with our parking lots & garages, these spots cost taxpayers a real amount of money.

I take a more pragmatic view than maybe other supporters of the plan—I don’t care if people stop coming into New Haven and parking their cars for free because I think we have an incredible restaurant scene that is very crowded and overfull.

As a resident, I often can’t even get into the restaurants I like the most. Why should it be so difficult for a taxpayer who supports the city to enjoy the benefits of living in a city?

If you lived in the city, a lot of your problems would disappear. Why don’t you move here? If you love our city and love coming in here, move here! It won’t be so bad, I promise.

I’m just perplexed at the attitude that out of town people should have this seamless and easy New Haven experience via car.

If anything, we should be prioritizing rail & other connections into town to make your life easier—not forcing you to rely on a car.

The entertainment districts of NYC charge premiums to use them by car. Why should any modern city take a different approach?

New Haven offers things which aren’t easily available elsewhere in the region. Do we really have to make it as cheap as possible for you to enjoy it, or can we instead devote our energy and resources to building transit to improve our city?

We have very limited resources in New Haven, but provide a whole wealth of resources to the entire state in homelessness services and rehab and entertainment. All of that costs us money as taxpayers and a city. Shouldn’t the suburbanites who use them have to pay their fair share?

posted by: J Wilson on June 16, 2011  10:27am

As I suspected, those numbers for parking are not actual costs, so much as an amalgam of property value, opportunity cost, environmental impact etc (the article writer suggests that EVERY parking space should be a paid spot, no matter how much parking is otherwise available). It’s an interesting discussion on social engineering, but we’re not looking to fix the world here (not yet anyways), we’re trying to determine what is best and fair for New Haven and it’s people.

I honestly would love to see more people walking, biking, and using public transportation. All of those things need to be drastically improved in New Haven for them to be better options. They’ll likely never be the right solution for evening traffic, because people drive from too far away, and walking and riding a bike after dark gets quite a bit more dangerous (not even considering weather conditions).

If we want more people using public transportation, then we improve public transportation. Make that alternative more attractive. If we want people who work in New Haven not using street parking, then come up with a solution for them. Give them a better carrot, not just the stick.

In the end, because the solutions that actually address parking and traffic weren’t considered, I and others have to conclude that the stated goal of providing more parking is in fact a sham, and this is nothing but a way to grab yet more money from those in the community, or a way for New Haven to grab a piece of the action on the thriving night life.

At this point, I’ve either made my point, or the reasoning is falling on deaf ears. Either way, I’m done arguing it here. The end result for me, and it seems many more, is when this goes through we stop going to New Haven. Well, I guess that’s a few more parking spaces for someone, even if it means a few less dollars spent downtown. When the people who live in New Haven stop going downtown, you can be guaranteed those who travel in will come to the same conclusion soon enough. And this time, it’s going to take more than a few Restaurant Weeks to bring people back.

posted by: streever on June 16, 2011  11:22am

Yair:
How is it a business proposition when it is entirely funded by taxpayers through a government?

Why should a business dictate how a taxpayers money is spent?

Currently everyone in New Haven—from the poor to the rich—proportionately subsidize sending money out of our town and away from our local economy.

Property taxes affect all of us—even renters—by raising the price of our rents. Property taxes are simply too high because we do not make good use of our taxable land (for instance, the land on which parking is located).

Businesses can make decisions about parking by buying land and paying taxes on it and then weighing the cost against the benefit.

If you and Jay and others are correct—that it is a choice for a business and isn’t a big deal—then I am left wondering why more private businesses do not invest in parking lots & spend the money?

Of course it makes sense right now—tax payers pay for it. The minute that a business can pay for and own the parking, I will agree with you. Until I see that, though, all I see is a tax on city residents which subsidizes the lives of people who can probably afford to pay their own way on parking—or make different life choices.

Poor people in New Haven paying for your parking can only make a choice to move out of town & leech onto the cities tax base—which isn’t a great decision for anyone—I’m just not sure why some people seem so gung ho on this as the future.

posted by: jay on June 16, 2011  11:43am

I do not understand the comparisons to NYC at all.  New Haven does not have anything approaching what you can do in Manhattan and New Haven is considered a suburb of NYC.  What does New Haven have to offer that you can’t find in neighboring towns and CITIES like Milford that offer free parking 24/7?  How do those places manage to maintain all that expensive free parking and why do you think they do it?

posted by: yair on June 16, 2011  11:57am

@streever,

I meant “business proposition” in the general sense of an issue that should be decided on the basis of economic costs and benefits. In particular the city itself acts as a “business” here and not just the restaurants. If you don’t like this terminology I’m happy to abandon it.

My substantive point, however, is that it is a mistake to see free (or cheap) parking (or other city services) as an arrangement where the city taxpayers subsidize the suburbs, hence sending money out of the city. It is a more complex transaction, in which parking and other amenities serve as a lure to bring in out-of-towners, together with their money. So one has to weight costs and benefits—it is not a clear issue of justice versus injustice.

Comparisons with New York are misleading: New York is orders of magnitude bigger, denser, more active and more popular than New Haven. Parking is expensive in New York because that’s the going price. Whether the going price of parking in New Haven is too low or too high is an empirical question, not a question of fairness. I think one should tread carefully here: there is a real chance that increasing evening parking fees will discourage people from going downtown, or at least I don’t see the evidence that it won’t.

What I think is clear, however, is that New Haven NEEDS the business of out-of-towners. Maybe you disagree on this point, but I think it is really true.  If you take away or significantly degrade the things that draw people into the city—including access to restaurants and plays, and including jobs at Yale and Yale New Haven, New Haven would decay very badly. This is why I don’t think it’s healthy to pit city residents agains suburbanites here. They both play a role in the regional economy.

Finally, about prioritizing cars over other transit: I would LOVE for there to be better public transit into the city. It is a question of broader political will and funding, and if I were God I would certainly bring it about right away. It is frustrating that public transit in Connecticut, and in the US in general, is not getting serious support. But charging more money for parking on Chapel street will not solve that problem.

posted by: Mister Jones on June 16, 2011  2:18pm

I go downtown a lot.  I park on the street, by choice and preference.  I put plenty of coins in meters and still end up paying way to many parking tickets.  For those who say that they always find spaces at night downtown, they must be awfully lucky.  It’s been getting harder and harder on weekend nights to find a space in the core of downtown, and even down on State Street the spaces now fill up.  Been that way for a couple of years now.

posted by: Tom Harned on June 16, 2011  6:08pm

To the owner of the Union League who’s opposed to folks being charged a few bucks to park:

Can you remind me what dinner for two typically costs at your restaurant?

posted by: flaxie on June 16, 2011  11:03pm

fyi:  A) I don’t use a credit card at all;  and B) I don’t want Jim Travers to know where I am on a given Thursday night anyway.

posted by: flaxie on June 16, 2011  11:10pm

@Jay: New Haven/Yale is world class, bro. Best recognize! Theater, Music and Galleries. Ya know, culture: We has it.