Overnight on-street parking is a seemingly silly issue to be writing about. I mean, this shouldn’t even be something anyone would need to discuss. Unless, of course, you live in Providence. You see, Providence has this silly ordinance that says you cannot park overnight on the street between the hours of 1:00 am and 6:00 am. I don’t know the history of this silly 5 hour parking ban, but I do know some of the reasons the opposition gives for lifting the ban. I’ll list the reasons for opposition, followed by a constructive rebuttal.
MYTH: The overnight parking ban prevents landlords from packing in too many students into a small apartment and prevents students from bringing their cars.
FACT: Landlords are going to try to get as much money as they can for a unit. Each unit will only feasibly hold a certain number of students comfortably. One of the reasons students move off campus is so they can have their own bedroom and more space than living in a dorm room. No student that I know (working in a college and all) would be willing to live in an apartment that gives them the same amount of space they can get on campus. The parking ban also forces people (landlords and homeowners) to find creative ways of parking their cars in the absence of a driveway or small lot next to the house. Some of these “creative” measures are paving yards (front, back, or sometimes both) to allow for parking. There are serious environmental issues with this that lifting the ban would help alleviate. There is also a law in Rhode Island that says that only a certain number of unrelated people (I think the number is 3) can live in a unit. While this law is not enforced (I know plenty of 5 or 6 bedroom units with 5 or 6 unrelated people), it is still on the books.
MYTH: The overnight parking ban allows for street cleaning during the hours of the ban.
FACT: Many streets are not swept at all. If they are, they are swept on a schedule set by Public Works, which generally gives one or two sweepings per calendar year. While I have only lived in my current place of residence for a few months, I lived in my former apartment for two and a half years. During that time, I witnessed the street cleaning only once. The street cleaning occurred between 10:00 pm and 11:00 pm, a time when street parking is allowed. If this is an issue, the sweeping schedule could be followed verbatim and the residents notified and parking can be banned on certain streets on those days or during the hours of cleaning. Other cities do just this and it works out perfectly fine for them.
MYTH: The overnight parking ban allows for better snow removal during the winter months.
FACT: When it snows (this past winter we had only one major storm), the plows must come through whenever the streets are covered. They cannot simply wait until the parking ban goes in effect to plow. Unfortunately, however, the city of Providence does not do a terribly great job at plowing, making this reason even less valid. Other cities only allow parking on the odd or even side of the street on certain days during the snowy months. These cities do just fine with removing their snow. In fact, they do a better job than Providence.
MYTH: The overnight parking ban allows for easier access for emergency vehicles (fire trucks, ambulances, etc.).
FACT: Emergency vehicles get down narrow Providence streets just fine during the 19 hours that on-street parking is allowed each day. The ban is also in effect during the slowest hours for emergency vehicles.
MYTH: Allowing cars to park on the street overnight makes the street look less attractive.
FACT: The ban is only 5 hours a day. These 5 hours are hours least likely to have tourists wandering around Providence. The cars parked on the side of the road do not make it look unattractive, but trash cans, little, unkempt yards, and peeling paint make the city less attractive. It is expected that cars are parked on the side of the road in cities.
As you can see, there is no really valid reason for this parking ban. The proposed answer to the ban is a resident permit parking program. Each resident would pay a yearly fee for a parking sticker that would allow them to park overnight in their neighborhood. Other major cities in the country have similar programs and get by just fine with none of the issues I listed above. There is no excuse as to why Providence should have such a silly ban on overnight on-street parking. Reasons I have heard against the permit parking program include the startup costs. Unfortunately, anything like this has these costs. However, these costs include signs. Many of our current signs need to be replaced because they are so faded you cannot read them. Another of these costs is enforcement. The current parking laws need to be enforced. That cost should already be covered in our current budget. The program would easily pay for itself in the first year. With the stickers costing less than $1 each and the fee to get a sticker being at least $25 each year, that’s a pretty good deal for the city. I am not even taking into account the revenue from parking tickets, towing, and booting of cars. Strict enforcement can go a long way towards bringing in lots of valid money to the city’s coffers, and I am 100% in favor of using parking tickets as a form of revenue. Laws exist for a reason, if you knowingly violate them, you deserve to pay the consequences (in this case, a fine). The fact remains that Providence is the only major city that has such a ridiculous ban on overnight parking. The time has come to lift this ban if Providence wants to truly move into the 21st century. It’s good for the environment, it’s good for urbanism, and it’s good for Providence.
Greater City: Providence will be hosting their September Greater City: Exchange tomorrow (Tuesday, September 11) at Ada’s Creations, 1137 Broad Street, in Providence. The special guest will be Patrick from the Citizens for Resident Permit Parking. If you are in favor of on-street overnight parking or want to learn more about the issues involved, please come. It starts at 5:30 pm with the speaker at 6:00 pm.
View Larger Map
I agree 100% and currently have a “We support Resident Permit Parking” sign on my front lawn, that I was given by Patrick of http://www.crpp-providence.org . But I would go even further-
The easiest, ZERO cost method of making this happen for Providence would be just to repeal the ticketing of cars for being on the street between the banned hours of 1AM-6AM. Period. Thats it. Problem solved.
Why do you need to be a resident or purchase a sticker? Why only limit the number of stickers to 2 per household like they did in the pilot program in Washington Park? The pilot in Washington Park is also flawed because it makes the resident parking areas resident ONLY after 11PM. What if I have a guest that wants to stay past 11PM?
If a car is parked illegally for any other reason, it should still get a ticket. But not just for being on the street during 1-6AM.
The reasoning behind the permit parking program and not simply free parking at night is for monetary reasons and to keep it more organized. I think Providence should have something similar to Somerville, MA. They have permit parking, but every resident can get a permit (not simply 2 per household) so long as you show a lease (some cities are stricter in that you must have your car registered in the city). They also have visitors permits. I’m not sure if those are limited to 2 per household or 1 per resident, but that’s how that is taken care of. On Sundays, parking is free for anyone, but the other 6 days, it’s for residents only. This keeps the street parking only for residents and their guests. I think it’s also all day that you have to be a resident (or have the visitor pass) and not simply after 11.
I agree that the ban is stupid, but all the residents would have to vote on lifting the ban. The permit parking program would pay for itself and then some and the city needs the money. If it were just a free-for-all at night, there would be problems on certain streets in certain neighborhoods.
I agree that permits should not be limited to 2 per household, but what problems would be created by a free-for-all? The worst that can happen is people park their cars. If the cars are illegally parked, they get ticketed, towed, or booted.
You end up with just that… a free-for-all. The city needs money and many of the residential neighborhoods are too dense for a free-for-all, which is why the permits would be necessary. It would limit those areas to only the residents and their guests. It would give the city the income from the permit fees, plus the income from the tickets of illegally parked cars. Why do other cities not just have a free-for-all? It makes more sense logistically to do it with permits than to do a free-for-all. While I don’t think it’s the best way to make an income, the reality is that it is a source of income.
You’ll also meet with more resistance to just have a free-for-all passed. Like I said before, this isn’t something the city council can just decide to change, it has to be voted on by the residents, and I’m not sure they would all be in favor of it. I think it would be easier to get a city-wide permit program in place rather than a free-for-all.
I agree that a permit program will be easier to get passed. Unfortunately, the currently discussed parking programs are very neighborhood specific, so it does not look like a city-wide program is going anywhere. Which means to me that it will take individual petitioning per neighborhood, which will of course take years. Ridiculous.
And the city council CAN just change this. But they surely won’t.
The city council won’t do this because they represent the people in their specific wards. Every ward does not need overnight street parking (such as most of Elmhurst, and many neighborhoods in the East Side). That’s why it won’t happen city-wide.
At the GC:PVD meeting, Patrick from CRPP explained that the best way to go about this is to get a petition going for the people on your street and surrounding streets to sign and give copies to the city clerk, your city councilman, and the mayor’s office. One thing to be sure of, though, is that the signatures are people registered to vote, or else, unfortunately, they get ignored. This is something that needs to be done on a block-by-block basis rather than an entire neighborhood or ward.
This is something that will take time. The city is kind of split 50-50 on the issue, but I’m sure if the program slowly grows, the opposition will die down. But again, it will take a while for people to get used to it. Patience is a virtue, but the issue has some momentum right now. I would suggest getting a petition going on your block (I’d do it myself, but my street is too narrow for any parking).
Is there any polling data that would indicate a 50/50 split?
The thing about some neighborhoods not needing it- the beauty of that is that if it’s not needed, no one will park there overnight, regardless of if it’s illegal.
If something is good for the city as a whole, to increase growth and density, to reduce pave-over and stop a regressive tax, don’t all citizens need to be involved in making it happen for the city, not just the citizens who need it in their neighborhood or on their block? That is the problem with relying on a block by block method.
I think you’re over-estimating the people of the city. Many don’t want Providence to become more dense, they like it just the way it is. Also, I can guarantee that those neighborhoods that get it, but don’t need it will have cars parked overnight on the street.
There is no specific polling data, just what I’ve heard from people who have discussed it at various meetings around the city. And again, the council has to keep their individual wards happy as that’s who votes for them and who they represent. While it would benefit the city as a whole, the city has residents who don’t see that benefit and that’s the problem. The council would be committing political suicide by forcing it to their wards.
PS… I notice you’re posting a lot of the same stuff on UrbanPlanet. Please keep the discussion there as more people read that than just me.
For those who want to get in on the discussion and may have seen this post… http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/Overnight-Onstreet-Parkin-t9174.html