Notes from LWV Public Forum on Parking in Rye CBD
Held Dec 7, 2004, 7:30-9:30pm at Rye Rec
A group of 30 Rye residents, merchant residents, and non-resident merchants participated along with Mayor Otis and three council representatives (Mssrs. Hennes, Fahey and Seitz) an open forum sponsored by the LWV to discuss the plans for parking meters in Rye’s CBD. The event was moderated by LWV member Clifford Nelson, Esq.
Anne Cochran kicked off the discussion with a presentation originally prepared by Christian Miller, City Planner, that was modified slightly to reflect the most recent terms as outlined in the draft ordnance presented at the December 1 st city council meeting. Councilman Duncan Hennes and Mayor Steve Otis each presented their viewpoints on the initiative in advance of opening the discussion to all attendees. The notes below are an attempt to succinctly share the many views and ideas expressed during the forum, they are in order of discussion.
- There was general acknowledgement from a variety of merchants that the existing merchant permit program is not being fully utilized and further, that current enforcement does not compel them to do so.
- Questions arose on the ability to enforce the 2 hour restriction. Would the current implementation plan prevent “meter feeding” to extend parking time? How is this to be managed to increase turnover.
- Comments concerning the lack of representation by city staff at the forum to help respond to citizen questions.
- Concerns were voiced about the hours of operation extending until 9pm and Saturdays, suggested Rye consider adopting time standards used in surrounding communities such as Mamaroneck, Harrison and Greenwich, CT.
- General consensus that the most pressing issue is the lack of available spaces, especially at mid-day.
- Suggested consideration be given to test providing a lot and/or spaces for extended visits to the CBD (from 2 to 4 hours). There was general consensus from the group that this was a common – though less frequent – timeframe for CBD visitors.
- The existence of a petition signed by more than 1,000 residents. The petition was not in favor of parking meters. There was discussion about whether a petition of this type can be relied upon.
- In general most attendees did not have an issue with instituting meters, however, there were recommendations that adoption of a meter program initiative be conducted as part of a logical progression. For example, instituting a meter program at the point the city is able to provide access to additional parking spaces such as those from a new parking structure.
- It was widely acknowledged that the character of the CBD has changed due to a variety of influences. Questions arose about how the parking initiative might affect the character and vitality of the CBD.
- There was a question on what the success criteria for the parking meter “test”. And that objective criteria be established in advance. Further, it was requested there be full transparancy on the successes and/or problems of the meter program.
- Questions arose on overall enforcement and whether current staff would be sufficient even with the use of wireless technologies.
- A recommendation was made that parking meter revenues received in excess of the $125,000.00 currently earmarked for the general fund be used to replenish the parking fund.
- There were questions about whether turnover will resolve the parking problem and what will the actual number of available spaces be after increase in number of merchant permits.
- It was suggested that they increase enforcement of the postal trucks parked in multiple parking spaces for extended periods of time.
