In response to regarding possible parking meters in Patchogue Village, Patchogue Patch readers voted and commented on their thoughts regarding the exploration of the idea.
In the unscientific poll, 37 percent of votes were for despite living in Patchogue Village, they are not ok with the possibility. In second place were votes for those not being ok with the possibility, and living outside the Village.
Below are the comments from this discussion. Feel free to add on in the Comments section below:
I think that when a village is still in the process of revitalization, the community leaders have to be very careful about instituting policies which will tend to deter, to any degree, visitors or locals from patronizing businesses in the downtown. I hope that the village can develop a successful comprehensive downtown parking plan, especially considering the Tritec development. Pay-parking should absolutely be a part of that plan, but only after the revitalization is farther along, with the Four Corners completed and fewer vacancies downtown in general.
I live in the village and agree 100%, we should not institute any policies that would deter visitors. I found it refreshing when visiting Port Jefferson this winter to find there pay parking was suspended. We need a comprehensive parking plan period !
Pay parking is punishing the people that we need to make our village successful, shoppers.
Parking in Patchogue is horrendous. Village wants more people to come in to shop and dine, when you can not find a decent parking spot , you leave. Something has to be done to elevate the limited parking spots to patrons. Workers and residents in the area need to have designated parking to allow easier access to patrons. Street parking should have meters to eliminate workers and residents of walk ups from parking in front of the shops.
Im okay with the meters, but i live in the village and feel i shouldnt have to pay. I already contribute enough money to the village. The article says they think people would pay $3-4 to park for entertainment? Thats insane!
The problem is nothing is cost less and the money spent on parking meters, whether from non residents or current residents, has to come from some where. What we are dealing with in this case is opportunity cost. When we are at such a critical point in Patchogue development where we are building more housing then business I think it is very important for one to consider the opportunity cost such a proposal could involve. The money spent on the parking meters is money that now will not be spent in town, period. Whereas the business owners and entrepreneurs trying to revitalize this town should be compensated for their efforts this is a round about way of funding more local government at the expense of possible sales or revenues to these business. It can also be viewed as an unofficial 'tax' if you would.
At a time where the economy is having such problems and each dollars purchasing power is diminishing I think it is very important that government tread softly on the wallets of would be consumers regardless of their origin. We want to compete with other towns and villages by providing attractive business at less of a hassle and cost, we want people to come here and pay for goods and services, not parking. Maybe this should have been considered before New Village where were assured by the administration that it was not a concern. In his example he says it raised 300-400,000 for other towns. That could be revenue for business rather than government spending!
Also don't forget there is cost to the installation of such meters - labor, materials, maintenance, enforcement etc. all which WILL be paid for by the village residents. Why not provide some incentive for some one to develop some more parking space? Don't you all think that you could spend this money better for yourselves than Paul Pontieri, or any mayor for that matter, could?
As somebody who lives in medford and visits patchogue village every weekend if i have to pay to park i will never come again. It will harm the village. I can see puttingthem on the street but not in the lots.
I live in the village and I am not opposed to metered parking as long as residents don't have to feed the meters.
I have some ideas:
On-Street: I feel on-street parking should facilitate quick in/out traffic (e.g. drop-off/pick-up laundry, coffee, return library books, pick-up food, etc). I hate driving around to the back of buildings after I drive all the way through Main St. to find parking when all I want is to grab a coffee. Limiting the parking time to 15-30 minutes max without a meter would support the business get more customers by limiting employees and residents from parking on the street for extended periods.
Off-Street: Don’t go all out metered parking everywhere. Have some free parking for locals who frequent during non-peak hours. Paid lots will get used during peak times (such as a show) and I think people who come during the busy hours will be more incline to pay for parking. Village residents/employees should be able to purchase passes (to offset admin costs) to park for free.
The Village must come up with a solution to prevent people from parking on proximity streets just to avoid the meters such as S. Ocean/Jayne/Maple/etc. Residents will suffer as a result if proper measures aren’t taken to prevent this.
Residents will ultimately suffer the cost of all of this, as will local business owners, as I have stated above. Think about it.
I think that Tritec's plan for 491 apartments is a terrible idea for the village and now THIS IS ANOTHER TERRIBLE IDEA.
This is a direct result of plans such as the 491 apartments. If anyone thinks this is the end they have some waking up to do. It is easy for the governing to spend when the cost is saddled in the future by and cloaked in such indirect measures. Look what has already happened, which I asked about and the question was dodged by Mayor Pontieri, in regards to the 600,000 devaluation that caused an increase in taxes. Parking meters are another form of tax, namely a consumption tax, and the only thing that it will lead to is less aggregate consumption. Again that money doesn't come from anywhere and in this economy some of the 'cheap skates', as I imagine those opposed to such 'progress' will be termed, will be warded off. Maybe they only wanted to come in for a quick sandwich, beer, or coffee. Is that $5-$10 dollar treat worth an additional $3-$4 dollars as the mayor put it for parking?
Lee: Just clearing up that it's 291 apartments, not 491, since multiple users wrote the typo. Continue discussion. Earlier article here:
Bad for Retail!
Patchogue needs the money. Pontieri talks now like it is something brand new to Patchogue and needs to be studied,investigated,compared to Babylon Village,Port Jefferson,etc. Patchogue ripped out the Parking Meters years ago in order that the Merchants could have brick pavers installed. Just for everyone's info Babylon Village has had Parking Meters for Decades and they generate enough money or
revenue to have the latest style meters that have a flashing light built in them that comes on if the meter expires.That way they can issue tickets for expired meters.=
more money from parking tickets. Every day with no meters is another day of lost revenue for Patchogue.
not a good idea,what the village needs is more free parking,what about satellite parking with shuttle bus.there has to be a better alternative than to meter
Patchogue Village has allready tried using a bus decorated to look like a trolley car which apparently did not work out. Where do you think this satellite should be located at ,just curious? This Trolley car concept aparently was started at Tanger Mall in Riverhead ,which is still in use,although they gave up the Trolley Car look.
Patchogue installs meters, We no longer shop, eat, drink there.
So we need money to create more parking after giving a third of our parking to Tritec? Patchogue does not need the money, Mr. Kemp! Patchogue needs to stop peeing away it's money. But that's another discussion.
So how much do I have to pay for parking to buy a 40 cent postal stamp?
This is typical tax and spend democrat bull, and everyone knows it. The money will go to political croniism as usual at the expense of the residents.
Truth is it will hurt the businesses by discouraging visitors. If you turn off the meters at 5pm you are giving up the majority of the income, so why bother? Are the meters just an additional tax for the already overburdened residents?
Pontiere can rob the sewer fund for his cronies instead ( which he will do anyway).
Is there no end to these shenanigans?
Face it, no matter what anyone thinks Pontiere will do whatever he wants to do, and we have no say in it.
Kudos for your brevity. I agree with you.
Cheapskate is one word. Cheap Skates are best found on e-bay.
A first class postage stamp now costs 45 cents.
do a study? what did the village yield when they had them up to 1997
PS...They got a surplus! why do they need the money???
Bad idea. In a competative world we don't need to give anybody a reason not to come to Patchogue. Especially if people are here for entertainment. Nothing is more annoying than losing track of time and finding a parking ticket on your car.
I see several posts which say village residents should be exempt from paying since they pay village taxes. Following this logic what do we say to the entire residents of the greater Patchogue-Medford Community? Isn't the Library on the heart of Main Street paid through that tax base? Should they be exempt since they pay taxes. How far down Main Street should that exemption go. If we don't exempt those tax payers, should we consider moving the library to make it fair for those who pay, or should we leave it where it is and let the users stop coming and create a spiral downward for the entire community?
Patchogue often compares itself to Sayville in its downtown area. I go to Sayville where they have no meters and plenty of parking, and busy stores and restaurants. I also go to Patchogue Village and never seem to have trouble finding a parking space; maybe I just have to walk a little further, but hey, that's good for you.
I find myself in agreement with Mr. Kemp on this issue. The village needs parking, parking meters will motivate people to keep track of their cars and add money to the village treasury perhaps enough to buy land from private owners on Church street. The Village BID estimates nearly two hundred spaces could be created by buying up three boarding homes on Church street and all that parking would be walking distance to main street.
And just to add this fact into the mix in a few months the former Patchogue Manor is going to re-open as the "Emporium". It will be a resturant, bowling alley (small), dance space, bar, catering hall. It's occupancy is going to be a little bit more than 1000 persons. One thouand persons yes indeed. Parking for those customers will be coming mostly from existing parking in and around this Railroad avenue just off main street located business.
And of course to come over the next few years: New Village, a new medical arts complex off South Street and the filling up of the Riverwalk housing development that is just getting off the ground. Hundreds more, maybe thousands more people are going to be pouring into the west side of the village main street.
Parking: we need it, lots of it and I don't see anyway out of paying for it , unless as someone has already suggested, somebody does come along and decides that they should privately invest in parking and manage a parking tower, garage, field, whatever because they could make money from doing so.
Hi John, I'm referring back to the Carnegie Library comment and would like to ask if you know who owns the old Brookhaven Town Hall building now? ...And John, I don't like the idea of parking meters, so now there are two things that I beg to differ with you about. I want you to be my favorite Patch commentator, but we can't keep disagreeing about "stuff". Only kidding, if in a few years time, it turns out that the apartments and the parking meters are a huge success, and I hope that they are, I will take you out to dinner to celebrate your "I told you so" victory!!
In reference to your statement that more people would be coming from Riverwalk and New Village to downtown Patchogue, I thought the whole purpose of these developments would be that they are part of a walkable village plan. I know Riverwalk is providing parking for its residents, and I assume that New Village would be required by Patchogue Village to do the same. So they already have a place to park.
Lee, don't know if anyone yet has bought the old townhall building all I know is that was there was a business group interested in buying the site and that they were going to tour the building with Trustee Crean. I think it is too early to know anything.
And otherwise, it's OK to disagee.
Joan: yes those developments are going to have their own parking but I doubt it will be enough. And with parking now at a premium the tipping point for congestion will be reached pretty quickly I think.
No one really like the idea of meters but I am not sure that there is an effective alternative and time is running out. I saw in today's LI Advance that Tritec will be taking the parking lot for construction needs that the brick house brewery now uses for a lot of their customers who drive there with cars. Again more cars are going to be dispersed into an area with limited parking. I suspect hiking shoes are going to be pretty popular club wear this summer if this keeps up.