Rule of Four
After Stephen Rapundalo defeated Michigan student Eugene Kang in last summer’s Second Ward primary, he tried his best to reach out to students. Well, if you were wondering what the former neighborhood association president would have to offer the student/renter constituency, look no further than Tuesday’s City Council meeting, at which a new residential parking permit ordinance was discussed. Rapundalo argued that the proposed number of permits, four, was “a little high — that’s certainly what’s been expressed to me by one of the [neighborhoods].”
And with that, everyone watching at home took a drink.
posted by Dale on February 24th, 2006 at 11:35 amPerhaps it remains nonsensical in context, but for those of us NOT watching/drinking at home it is a little confusing out of context, can you elaborate or add a link to elucidate further.
posted by stella on February 24th, 2006 at 11:52 amDale thought that the City Council Drinking Game should have a rule for when “the neighborhoods” are invoked to argue for or against something.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on February 24th, 2006 at 12:18 pm“And with that, everyone watching at home took a drink…” and reached for the remote. CLICK
posted by cb on February 24th, 2006 at 12:21 pmI feel like a response is needed to set the record straight. As pointed out by “stella” above, one must be sure that what you’re reporting was done with the full context in mind, and with all facts presented.
A quick background…what was before Council was a proposal to allow up to 4 transferrable parking permits per single family home, and up to 8 such permits per group housing (i.e., sorority, fraternity, etc.). This would allow a single family or group housing to have the maximum allowable permits + 1. For example, with two registered drivers, a single family house could either have 1 permanent affixed permit + 4 transferrable permits, or 2 permanent affixed permits = 3 transferrable permits. The math would be similar for group housing. The whole idea was to give more flexibility to users within the current RPD framework.
With regards to my comments on the record…first, I felt obligated to bring to the council’s and public’s attention of concerns raised by a neighborhood association in my Ward. I raised the issue of the proposed 4 transferrable permits being too high because I wanted a) the rationale for why that number was chosen (i.e., that it did not raise or decrease the maximum allowable permits), and b) to raise the possibility that a high number might precipitate program abuse (i.e., the public needed to hear that the system would be easier and less costly to enforce with the transferrable permits). In the end, I did not try to change the number, and indeed voted for the proposal.
What you don’t know is that I took the lead on Council for these changes, and others we passed earlier in the month. They arose out of a number of unanticipated circumstances within the RPDs - e.g., residents with long-term caregivers, group housing that wanted the ability to use permits more flexibly, residents who were originally part of a district but were omitted because there address fronted a non-participating street though their property sided on a street that did, etc.). While Councilmembers Lowenstein, Carlberg and Johnson participated in the discussions, I was the one who worked most with staff to see that the changes could be developed that met most, if not all of these needs, in an equitable manner. In addition, I pushed for a process by which residents could appeal RPD conflicts. All this is now embodied in the RPD regulations.
Lastly, I should point out that the neighborhood association was greatly troubled post-meeting by the approved changes. But I, and I assume the rest of Council, stand by them as being fair and within the parameters established originally.
There have you it…long-winded, but hopefully a more complete picture than was otherwise painted. And by the way…we did take a drink (after the meeting).
Stephen Rapundalo
posted by Stephen Rapundalo on February 24th, 2006 at 3:23 pmThanks for your reply. I guess my main concern was that the eight-permit thing applies just to narrowly defined “group housing,” giving both a family and a group of adult roommates in a house the same number of permits, which I think unfairly penalizes people who can’t afford to own a home.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on February 24th, 2006 at 4:54 pmOK, so probably I’m just naive–but why on earth can’t we just make sure permit prices are set high enough that not all spaces will be sold, and that the cost of the program will be covered, and then let people buy as many as they want? Why the need for per-household limits with a lot of odd exceptions?
posted by Bruce Fields on February 24th, 2006 at 5:16 pmBruce has a point, especially because the RPP as currently set up is a money-losing program, if I remember correctly. Why not just establish a rate high enough to ensure that not all the spaces sell?
(If we’re worried about equity questions, we can say that anybody who presents a reduced fare AATA card to the City can get a similarly reduced price on the parking permit.)
posted by TPM on February 24th, 2006 at 7:49 pmI’m a little confused about Bruce’s proposal. I thought you NEEDED a permit to park in that area. Raising the price of the permits might result in a bunch of open spaces and no permit hoarding but if you still need a permit, wouldn’t all those spots just go unused? It seems like what you ideally want is for there to be some reserved spots for residents and some open spots for everyone else.
posted by Peter on February 24th, 2006 at 8:59 pmIf you want one permit, you pay $X. If you want 2, you pay $2X, etc. The trick is to choose X to be small enough that you as an individual vehicle owner can reasonably afford 1 to 2 permits, but large enough that you wouldn’t want to buy the entire street frontage on your block. If you have off street parking or didn’t have a car, you wouldn’t have to buy any permits at all. My question is whether permits are needed for parking for any amount of time, no matter how short, or only for prolonged periods of time (perhaps over 2 hours).
posted by JCP2 on February 24th, 2006 at 10:56 pmsheesh…everyone can park at my house.
posted by saa on February 25th, 2006 at 1:36 pmIwant to post about the pike bath, but some of what is being said is so evil.
Bruice Fields is saying that people who work in the service industry and can JUST afford a car should not be alowed to park.
TPM is saying that people who can afford full fare on the AATA (i.e the aged and disabled) should get parking at reduced rate (for the cars they can afford and are licensed to drive). This is the Ann Arbor modern equivalent of “let them eat cake” (same level of jerk, not same level of starve)
posted by A Different Jon on February 25th, 2006 at 2:05 pmInstead of “can afford”, it should read “can’t afford”. My bad.
posted by A Differnt Jon on February 25th, 2006 at 2:39 pmThanks to TPM for the link back to the discussion on AU from a while back.
What I couldn’t find there was consideration of Alternate Side Parking schemes (I could have missed it … ). There are no permits involved. Parking is allowed on one side only and that side changes on a 24-hour cycle specified on street signage. The administrative costs associated with permits would be zero. Signage remains as a cost. Inspection of a street for enforcement can be done with a visual scan a block at a time, which should be comparatively more efficient than checking for stickers.
Daily Alternate Side schemes also have the benefit of creating a completely free side of the street for cleaning and snow plowing, and whatnot. This kind of DAS scheme is also claimed by some to slightly amplify the inherent natural advantage of living on the street to play out in the competition for street parking spaces without legislating that advantage through a sticker, because it’s a competition that is relentlessly renewed on a 24-hour cycle. So keeping a car for only occasional use requires a resident to use the car at least once a day, even if only for moving it across the street.
I lived in a city for a while where Daily Alternate Side parking was the order of the day for many of the neighborhoods. I cussed this scheme everytime I had to head outside to just to move the damn car to the other side of the street to avoid getting a ticket. I cheered this scheme every time when I completed the commute to the other side of the street and there was spot available.
DAS does just sound like a nightmare when it’s described (what, for example, to the signs SAY?). But what is the actual book on such schemes? Is is just snowy parts of the country that use them? Does the signage pay for itself through the fines (oh yes, it feels great to get a ticket for parking on the wrong side of YOUR OWN STREET). Is the sacrifice of half the parking a dealbreaking flaw for the Ann Arbor neighborhoods in question?
posted by HD on February 25th, 2006 at 2:41 pmThe “setting prices high” idea wouldn’t bother me so much if the permits lasted for a full year from date of issue. It’s by calendar year, which means those of us who have the September leases have to pay double for the time the permit is actually used, if we aren’t sticking around the neighborhood.
On a related note, I am immensely happy I kept putting off getting a 2006 pass long enough for my car to get totalled.
… and it would bother me for other reasons, but A Different Jon covered ‘em already.
Besides, I don’t understand this business about raising the prices high enough to deter pass hoarding. The residential passes are very much good for your own car only, and very much won’t come off the window once you stick ‘em on. It’s expensive to have a car in Ann Arbor, period - those who would need a pass are probably those who need a car no matter what. I don’t think the amount of passes will fall, although the program might break even, I suppose.
The parking for 2 hours or less except with a pass scheme works pretty well, I think. Permit-only at all hours and you’re going to have plenty of unnecessarily empty spaces, with cars taking up spaces in other areas that aren’t permit. That doesn’t really benefit anyone.
posted by Jen on February 27th, 2006 at 12:09 pmThe real issue here is allowing a maximum of 8 permits for group housing. It is my understanding that some of the greek houses, particularly the sororities, have upwards of 60 residents. I am unsure how many fall within the permit-required area, but this seems to me like a policy that very clearly unfairly burdens a particular group of students.
A better plan would be, if housing permits are really something certain neighborhoods are intent on having, would be to allow permits for all signed residents of group housing. If it is absolutely necessary to have permits, another option could be to give permits to houses with over a certain number of residents based on a PERCENTAGE of their residents.
Also, I think that home owners who don’t want anything to do with students and their vehicles should reconsider their decision to live within walking distance of a university campus. Furthermore, to encourage students to spend money at local businesses to support the city of ann arbor, student parking passes should allow for free short-term parking in one of the downtown lots.
posted by Lisa on March 8th, 2006 at 7:34 pmFrom the ArborUpdates thread TPM links to, it is important to note that a residential parking permit (RPP) program does not require anyone to purchase parking permits. In fact, I argue in that thread that RPPs best serve the “neighborhood” when the program is implemented and no permits are purchased.
While certain details of the RPP policy may work unfairly against students (Jen’s complaint about timing, specifically), the whole concept of an RPP program is slanted against group living in that such residences usually do not provide for the full parking demand of residents. While I am not writing off their usefullness completely, RPP programs do restrict the available parking supply in a city, possibly requiring the construction of expensive alternatives to free street parking that many may not be able to afford.
That said, I think the effort by the city to specifically accomodate students parking needs should be limited. As residents of the city, students have all the same parking rights as other residents. The city should not take on the administrative burden of calculating and confirming the number of bedrooms in each residence. And they certainly should not be setting policies, as suggested by Lisa, to encourage any one -student or otherwise- to drive the short distance from university lots to downtown parking by offering free parking.
As an alternative, students and faculty can ride the AATA buses, including the Link, for free. The city is also beginning to focus more on pedestrian and cycling facilities. I hope and pray they will maintain this direction as opposed to promoting crosstown auto use to get around a very small and walkable downtown.
In support of HD’s DAS recommendation, the OWS RPP program is considered to be the most successful. It provides open parking on one side of the street and permit parking on the other. I believe it switches sides every day.
Also, it would be interesting to know how many residences within the designated RPP areas do not provide any parking or provide insufficient parking. I think that most of the RPP areas do not overlap with a large amount of student or cooperative housing. Anyone have any estimates? Anyone have a link to the actual proposal?
posted by Scott TenBrink on March 8th, 2006 at 11:13 pmDifferent Jon: I don’t understand your objection. Are you saying that you _oppose_ any consideration of a person’s ability to pay in running a transportation system?
I suppose you could be operating under the assumption that parking is and should be free and that charging anybody for it is petty and money-grubbing, but since that’s clearly a false assumption, as has been discussed ad nauseum in the past, I doubt that’s what you’re saying.
posted by TPM on March 9th, 2006 at 9:27 amfalcon games limited the retreat for the gay guy karaoke portland me cable and columbus ohio highland towers apartment
posted by Albina-ny on January 15th, 2009 at 6:33 pmsuper8hotel in waverly iowa the pink panther and beyonce salt lake county human resource how to clean a portable cd player willies place carl corner
posted by ellaela-ym on January 15th, 2009 at 6:42 pmislamic playboy yellow pages north macomb sea ray srv225 daiinty june dark moon song
posted by Albina-ub on January 16th, 2009 at 1:13 amthe windjammer and sc communityfirstcreditunion beverly kirk and wjla karen dorfman morton bildings
posted by Albina-my on January 16th, 2009 at 8:08 amezekiel bread company connecticut law enforcement jobs s-10 wheels free forclosre listings violence blink 182
posted by ellaela-ow on January 16th, 2009 at 10:23 amezekiel bread company connecticut law enforcement jobs s-10 wheels free forclosre listings violence blink 182
posted by ellaela-ow on January 16th, 2009 at 10:23 amknoteom mr2 turbo vacume lines nypd officer exam fas fixed assets automax dealership killeen
posted by Albina-eu on January 16th, 2009 at 3:28 pmis it possible to get pregnant after a tubal cauterization house of the bride broomall fire carnival hours sunset property management oregon fas fixed assets
posted by ellaela-qi on January 16th, 2009 at 6:57 pmlearn criss angel style tricks i reached back like a pimp and punk ass tripped basketball teams in taylor school district large dildos personality disorder domestic violence
posted by ellaela-uj on January 17th, 2009 at 2:12 amlineage2 с4 la2 jk триггер тактируемый mp3 файлы соединить 4 ком квартира в подольске lcd настенное крепление
posted by Albina-zm on January 19th, 2009 at 9:59 pmfergie on black eyed peas work at home leads love tag is it ok to have sex when your on your period safarilandstore
posted by Albina-rw on January 21st, 2009 at 1:18 pmall tails are waggin event planning planner philadelphia larry audas shawn jackson what are the signs od clamahmida
posted by ellaela-nn on January 21st, 2009 at 2:13 pms & e r construction buildings inc. balance bar grants jamie rebecca drama desk cloudy fish tank i love toy train videos
posted by Albina-dm on January 21st, 2009 at 7:28 pmWhat is this garbage? Spamming?
posted by Colorado Sun on January 21st, 2009 at 7:32 pmI hope not
posted by Colorado Sun on January 21st, 2009 at 7:33 pmamoa channel 5 nashville caramel popcorn recipe for kids marine reserve units orlando singing carolina
posted by ellaela-tm on January 22nd, 2009 at 3:28 ammy creit center vista chevy dealer wenburg sauce send the best chocolate cake schoolbags
posted by Albina-nv on January 22nd, 2009 at 7:53 amp&b bus line virgen drinks grit casserole clan nwa maytag performa gas dryer
posted by ellaela-vm on January 22nd, 2009 at 10:38 amofficial cite for southwest arline pin up files top r&b hits wilson high school robert sexton
posted by Albina-lf on January 22nd, 2009 at 2:28 pmrose rosette disease lotus boats uab marching band travel adolescents lyrics free tickling pictures
posted by ellaela-jn on January 22nd, 2009 at 6:23 pmbeeswax sheets cockrell foundation in houston texas blue enerprice grammatica google boxing for beginners
posted by ellaela-dv on January 27th, 2009 at 7:53 pmdutch classic milk chocolate queen bohemian rapsody lost posters house guys sabrina usher
posted by ellaela-lg on January 28th, 2009 at 1:45 amthe tennis cannel avis rhoda hallock bahia grass control wooden picnic table children bryn mawr jacqueline littzi
posted by Albina-ce on January 28th, 2009 at 6:48 amtaking everything in in stride texas motorcycle helmet law how to do david blaine magic tricks finnish language for teens two sheds
posted by ellaela-he on January 28th, 2009 at 7:54 amdora the explorer psp tubes degreesa in speech therapy lesbian song laguardia co-signer needed cedar crim
posted by Albina-gq on January 28th, 2009 at 12:54 pmchlorestral normal aol.games high stakes pool oklahoma city hornets body rock turbocharged 350 chevy
posted by ellaela-zi on January 28th, 2009 at 2:39 pmjar скачать мобильные игры бесплатно мобильные игры бесплатно скачать бесплатно темы для сотовых игры для мобильных телефонов бесплатные
posted by ellaela-ka on January 31st, 2009 at 4:44 amjava игры бесплатно самолет боулинг мультисим карты motofun корпус для сотового телефона
posted by ellaela-jd on February 1st, 2009 at 3:14 amseal-tight cast protector apartments uab autentic dr. doom costume jamie looks like cbs outdoor
posted by Albina-wl on February 2nd, 2009 at 2:08 pm