Monday, November 21, 2011

Roosevelt Island Motorgate Parking Garage Gets Some Improvements - Waterproofing, Straight Parking Line Stripes, More Motorcycle Spaces and Greater Safety

Image of Confusing Motorgate Garage Parking Stripes

 A previous post from August 24 reported:
There are a lot of cars at Motorgate that park outside the parking lines and as a result take up more than one space. Some cars park in the small car areas that are very big and this makes it difficult to get around the turns. Most of the parking lot lines are old, not clear or bright so a solution might be to paint these with a bright reflective paint. Also the rules should be enforced or penalty system agreed to make sure people parking follow the rules.
Starting today, the parking line stripe problem at the Motorgate Garage should be significantly better, at least on the Third Level.

The Roosevelt Island Operating Corp (RIOC) has been conducting a project to waterproof the Motorgate Garage. With surplus funds available from the waterproofing project, RIOC was able to remove the diagonal, crisscrossing and overlapping parking lines and replace them with, for the most part, uniform and straight parking lines on the third parking level. The process involves shotblasting the concrete floors to clean the oils and dirt, applying a sealant to create a clean waterproof surface and then painting the straight parking lines.

RIOC intends to make the parking spaces on other levels straight as well but they do not yet have the funds allocated for the work.

RIOC also increased the number of motorcycle spaces available on the third level as well as made certain safety improvements to the third floor.

Last Friday, RIOC Vice President of Operations Fernando Martinez took me on a tour of the Motorgate Garage and explains the changes made.

You Tube Video of Motorgate Parking Garage Improvements


bartonfinck said...

maximize the parking spaces in the Motorgate so that RIOC can maximize it's revenue coming in from the monthly parking as the population of RI grows..tell, do residents that live here on RI pay the same as off island folks that just use RI as a storage facility for their cars? RI residents should pay less...something tells me that a lot of UES people park their cars in Motorgate because it is cheaper than in the city.

PeaceandPlenty said...

Why should RI residents pay less for our cars than off-Island people?  It's a public garage.  If people from RI use services on the UES, should we pay more?  Are you advocating a "them" vs. "us" mentality?

If people from the UES park their cars in Motorgate because it is cheaper, is that a problem?  Or if they use it as a storage facility?  They sound like ideal tenants to me, both for Motorgate and the people that park there...they pay their rent, which contributes to the running of the garage, and rarely move their cars, which creates less congestion entering and exiting, as well as fewer opportunities to get dings in your door panels from people getting in and out of cars.

Do you have a car in Motorgate and are being inconvenienced by people from the UES in ways that our family (who has had a car there for years) is not?

bartonfinck said...

Storage fees should apply to those getting a great deal parking there cars here yet do not live on the island...the money from off island people parking their cars should go to the upkeep of the garage and also for repairs and upkeep of island facilities such as the school, playgrounds, repairing the roads, sidewalks

PeaceandPlenty said...

Our family has a car parked in Motorgate and personally, once we pay our monthly parking fee, we don't want Motorgate telling us how we can and can't use our car.  If they pay their monthly fee like the rest of us, it is no one else's business in what capacity they use the garage.  If my family decides not to drive our car for a month, would you advocate raising our rates?  What's the cutoff?  What about for someone on the UES:  if they use their car 2x a week do they pay more or less?  And who decides?  You?

Motorgate is a private business and is free to use their profits as they like.  Are you advocating that part of their profits are taken to care for public facilities, beyond what they pay to be here?  Do you realize that items on your list of things Motorgate contribute to are public entities that are funded via other sources and Motorgate could not contribute even if they wanted to?  Some of those items are under city control and have nothing to do with RI or Motorgate.

Some of your posts complain about how you don't want anyone anyone taking away your freedoms and forcing you to do anything or shop anywhere, and yet you are advocating imposing the same types of restrictions on other entities.  Behind every entity are people and if I were a business owner, I surely would not want anyone forcing me to contribute to anything I did not want to.  That's called extortion. 

Trevre Andrews said...

+1 and motorgate should simply raise the price until filled to capacity using supply and demand to maximize profit.  They could also do this by reducing the price of motorcycle parking to 1/5 that of parking a car since motorcycles take 1/5 the space, yet they are way off equilibrium, creating a surplus due to high prices.  In the space that 6 cars park which services maybe 12 people you can service 30 motorcycles and 30 people, yet we have the status quo.  Apparently RIOC didn't get the message which wasn't that we need more motorcycle parking in the garage, we need more fairly priced (relative to the spaced used by cars) motorcycle parking in the garage.  They just created more motorcycle spots at the same price, further exaggerating the surplus.  Central Parking is a terrible tenant (underutilized spaces, dirty, poor security, poorly maintained, poor service, and unintelligently priced). RIOC should put the screws to them to get them to maximize the usability and profitability of the garage.  Also unless you want to walk a mile+ Motorgate has a monopoly on parking over night, RIOC should provide them with competition.

PeaceandPlenty said...

Agreed.  The price for parking motorcycles should be adjusted downward as they use less space and the space should be better utilized.  That adjustment would apply to everyone, though, and not just people who live in certain areas, as the previous poster suggests should happen.

Trevre Andrews said...

Agreed, one price for all based on space occupied.  

residential said...

As it is now, at peak times there are often few available parking spots for those who do not want to pay extra for a reserved space. I think there's a total of only around 1,110 or so parking spaces. we now have over 12,000 residents plus the people who work here, so no...we shouldn't let upper east side or other off islanders pay less to use the spaces we need.

CheshireKitty said...

Let's remember the red bus was initially free of charge - that, the free utilities, and the moderate prices charged to RI residents who park at Motorgate, were all inducements to get people to move in and create a community, to counter-balance the inherent hardship of living on a small island in the middle of the East River, without the amenities other neighborhoods have such as the ability to take a walk for several blocks, etc.  Much of what it means to live in a city or even town is given up once one makes the decision to live on RI; thus something, even a token compensation like the free red bus, had to be given back.  

Also, because it is an island, to get off the island, you either have to pay a fare to ride the train, bus, or tram, or walk over the bridge to a rather isolated part of W. Queens and then walk quite a way to get to the train/neighborhood.  So it is quite a hardship to live on RI and because of that, the State, to get people to accept the losses as described above, at least threw in some "benefits" or positives to balance out the negatives.  If anything, the red bus should revert to being free - as originally intended.  As far as raising the price of parking, I think the price should in fact be lowered for those traveling to RI by car to visit RI residents.  The price is already considered quite high - similar to high parking prices in Manhattan, and because there are no alternatives other than Motorgate, for those visiting residents for a few hours reduced-price parking should be available. The discussion of maximizing profits at Motorgate is unrealistic because of the severe disadvantage of the business due to the isolated, out-of-the-way location - even taking into account  that it is the only large parking structure on RI.  No-one but RI residents park there.  If there are people from other parts of the City also parking/storing their vehicles there, they should not have to pay more - to do so would be discriminatory.  

bartonfinck said...

agreed, there is almost 14,000 people living here now, why should the rich UES blue bloods park over in our backyard for next to nothing, while single moms and single parent families cannot afford to buy a space at Motorgate? Spaces should be reserved for residents, and off islanders SHOULD have to pay extrafor storing their cars to help with taxes, upkeep etc...they sure are not paying rent or maintenance fees here that help the school, PSD, or our day to day needs here.  

bartonfinck said...

resident, family & friends parking cards as well as employee parking cards should be issued at affordable prices..others using Motorgate to STORE their car, truck etc... should have to pay a STORAGE FEE to do so. All residents, family, friends of family and employees on the island should be able to afford to park their cars. Period. 

PeaceandPlenty said...

I'm in agreement with you that visitor parking fees should be lowered.  Free Sunday street parking was a help, but those spots are often full.

Most businesses here are at a disadvantage, especially Motorgate, so you are correct that maximizing profit is a mute point.  I believe you are also correct that off Island people do not park there.  If they do so on a regular basis, charging them more would be discriminatory.

PeaceandPlenty said...

Employees do get parking discounts and have for years.  People using Motorgate to store their car DO pay a storage fee - it's called the monthly rate.  They should not pay more to use the garage less and the above poster is correct in that that would be discriminatory. 

As for your contention that UES people are warehousing their cars there:  Do you have factual information or were you making an assumption?  You must have some type of information on that, so can you provide it to us so we can better understand the issue?

When we were looking for places to put our car, we looked as several possibilities.  Because some of the UES garages have low monthly rates, we looked there.  But the ones with low rates tack on entrance and exit charges.  Since we use our car, it would have cost us more, but if we were just storing our car, we could have come very close to RI prices.  Did you realize that?

If someone on the UES is storing their car on RI (at great inconvenience because of the location), it's possible they wouldn't save anything at all.  Our comparison shopping was last done 3 years ago in an effort to cut costs.

If you have information to the contrary regarding UES storage prices and the amount of UES people parking in Motorgate, could you please share it?  Many people here would be interested in having the facts and you must have them since you have asserted UES are using Motorgate as a warehouse because it's cheaper.

bartonfinck said...

so a single mother struggling to raise her 3 kids in Rivercross by herself should pay the same to park her car in Motorgate as say the rich and promenent attorney that lives in Yorkville and parks his Porche here in storage? 

Also should she have to wait for a space to open up while other off islanders are parking their expensive sports cars here because it is cheaper here than over the river? I still think that residents should have first dibs on anything on the island, maybe that sounds wrong, but living here on land surrounded by water should afford all residents certian perks. I would think most islanders would think that.

living her for the past 10 years, I know have heard it all. 

PeaceandPlenty said...

If someone is a "rich UES blue blood", why would they care about the cost of parking and saving a few bucks?

What is the reason for thinking parking on RI is cheaper than storage parking in Manhattan?  It isn't necessarily.  For people not using their cars, "storage parking" is available in many garages and it is cheaper than regular parking.  Not more expensive, but cheaper.  Just do a google search and see for yourself. 

Again, can you please provide the source of your information that people from the UES are storing their cars here? 

kmany said...

"living her for the past 10 years, I now have heard it all."

you haven't been here 10 years.  2 or 3 tops because you seem to be unaware of a lot of information and past history. and some of your comments place u in one of the newer buildings.  new people, new life, new blood = welcome and great.  fibbers = not so great.

and it's a pretty good bet u don't even have a car.  the other poster is right:  not necessarily cheaper here.  ticket books - tax exemptions employee rules - no waiting for a space to open up.  definitely no car in your life.

bartonfinck said...

here is a central parking pricing list so one can compare parking 

Tram_Rider said...

The specious argument of storage parking by UES residents only matters if Island residents cannot get a space. I moved here almost four years ago and my request for a space was granted immediately. There was NO WAITING LIST. Since then, there are more buildings in Southtown whose residents may have increased demand for spaces. But did they?

I drive my car almost every weekend; I always find an unreserved space when I return to the garage. Hence, there is no shortage caused by newcomers and phantom UES-ers storing cars here. End of discussion.

No one has addressed the issue raised several months ago about the "reduced rate" for seniors. The "scandal" broke open at the Town Hall Transportation Meeting when Raye Schwartz wanted to be retroactively reimbursed for the "overcharge". Afterwards, a resident suggested in a letter to The Wire on 8/27/11 that, if seniors who have the luxury of owning a car are unable to pay the standard parking fee, they should make adjustments in their expenses or give up their cars. No one HAS to own a car and when they do, they pay for all the costs of ownership, including garage fees. A subsidy for seniors means that others will pay more, as the garage will not willingly lose money.

My question is, will there be an assessment or increase in fee to cover the cost of the waterproofing, sealant and re-striping? And if so, will it be assessed of all who use Motorgate or are the seniors going to be treated differently?

YetAnotherRIer said...

Ok, you better start coming up with some data now because you do come across like a troll at the moment. Plenty of stories here that disprove every single point you are making.

And yes, a "single mother struggling to raise her 3 kids in Rivercross by herself" does pay the same as "the rich and prominent attorney that lives in Yorkville." Imagine every business would charge for goods and services on a sliding scale... And, could you give us some license plate numbers of those rich folks that store their cars at Motorgate and take away parking spots for us residents? Just one or two would suffice for now.

westviewgirl said...

And yes, a "single mother struggling to raise her 3 kids in Rivercross by herself" does pay the same as "the rich and prominent attorney that lives in Yorkville." Imagine if every business would charge for goods and services on a sliding scale

you mean like the housing on RI? seems a lot of peeps here pride themselves on working the system with their cheap govt subsidized housing = lazy looking for govt handouts = very sad 

yet a mother raising her kids alone who needs a space at the parking deck cannot apply to get it cheaper than someone who is in a higher tax bracket, something is very wrong here. 

westviewgirl said...

I have a feeling when they get finished with the Motorgate parking map, RIOC will see just how many parked cars belong to residents and how many are off island people. I agree with the barton guy, off islander should pay a higher fee as we are providing a safe place to keep their car as the crim rate here is much lower than in the city. 

westviewgirl said...

remember this article from 2008? Rates going up to 190.00 a month to park for islanders and off islanders to park at Mortorgate

According to the below e-mail the monthly rates at Motorgate Parking Garage are going up this July equalizing the rates between residents and nonresidents. My prior email certainly did not cause this so don't blame me. Heck at these rates I just might buy a car.

-----Original Message-----
From: "Stephen Shane" Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:15:57To:,"Erica Wilder" ,"Fernando Martinez" Subject: Re: Motorgate Parking RatesAfter review, we have decided to increase the Motorgate rates, effective July 1, untouched for more than 6 years, by $10/month for residents (and employees of on island businesses) and $30/month for off island patrons, in both cases to $190/month, less than 1/2 of the rates available in Manhattan. We have under 200 off Island monthly parkers and just under 1000 resident parkers, with a total capacity of over 1300. The extra income will be ploughed back into Island operations to offset some of the relentlessly escalating expenses.


Stephen H. ShanePresident & CEORoosevelt

CheshireKitty said...

You can't pick and chose who you will sell your product/services to if you are a business, which is what you are saying the garage should do. If there is a set price for parking, it has to apply for all. Maybe some of the off-island parkers aren't necessarily rich folk from the UES - maybe it's convenient for workers at the Con Ed to park there and walk over the bridge to work. They aren't millionaires.  And what about faculty of the proposed college campus who may very well become monthly parkers but who do not reside on RI.  Would they be charged more because they are not RI residents?  It's possible hospital employees are parking there - most of them aren't so rich.  I can't see a business antagonizing possible customers by adding a non-resident surcharge.  Imagine if the tennis bubble began doing this - most of its customers are from Manhattan to begin with.  Why alienate them by charging more?  It's just plain foolish to do so.  

Also, I do not think Motorgate is running out of spots.  There are always spots available - the north extension seems mostly empty even.  

However, having said that, I do think RI should be connected to Queens with an additional bridge at the proposed college campus along with additional parking.  In addition to the traffic that will be generated by the campus, the 4 Freedoms Park will attract visitors and a link to Queens and parking at the S. end of the island would be very helpful in terms of easing congestion and making it easier for people to visit the memorial.  I know there is probably no money for a project such as this, but if the university that will eventually occupy the Goldwater site is going to raise money to build the campus,then they might consider also funding an additional bridge to Queens along with a parking structure (similar to the arrangement at Motorgate).  This would make it very convenient for the campus community to park and get on and off the island without having to either wend their way through the 20+ stop/yield signs that stretch from Motorgate to Goldwater, or wait for a bus, or walk the distance to the area of Goldwater.  Instead they could simply drive onto and park at the campus.  

westviewgirl said...

a bridge connecting Queens with the south end of RI is a very good idea! Really, it is

westviewgirl said...

I agree with Peaceandplenty, yes can you provide that people from UES are storing cars her? How do you know this? Why do you say this?

westviewgirl said...

if off islanders do not have children going to school here why should they help pay for their education, they just want to park their cars here.

westviewgirl said...

Central parking on RI is public parking, and everyone should pay the same price I agree, even if you have 5 cars and live in the Eest Village where there is not parking, and you and your whole building want to park your cars here, you should be able to park your car anywhere you want!! 

westviewgirl said...

how old are you? some of your suggestions do not make sense. People parking on RI should help pay for our school and playgrounds? Why?

PeaceandPlenty said...

The difference is that housing is a necessity.  Food is a necessity.  Medical care is a necessity.  That's why there are government/city programs for all of those things and assistance available, from free to sliding scale.

But in NYC, unlike many other places, having a car is not a necessity.  It is a luxury and a big one at that.

PeaceandPlenty said...

Didn't your previous post above state the opposite...that people from off-Island should pay more because of the lower crime rate here?

PeaceandPlenty said...

You have to compare apples with apples.  Regular monthly parking is not the same as storage parking and that's what the discussion is about.  You've provided a link to rates for regular monthly parking with one company.  Regular parking is not storage parking.

There are quite a few garage companies in NYC, all competing with each other, so providing a link to Central Parking doesn't necessarily mean it's the cheapest around.  And again, regular monthly parking is not storage parking.

Incidentally, there are on your list of regular monthly garage rates for Central Parking, some that are in fact, less or very close to, the rates on RI.

Please provide information on storage parking that costs more than RI.  While you're at it, please provide information regarding you having to wait to become a parker at Motorgate because it's full.  Or just call Motorgate and ask'll be offered a spot immediately.  And of the off-Island parkers, please provide the information as to how many of them are rich and how many of them are from the UES, which is your complaint.  And how about some info for some of the other assertions you've made.  Surely you didn't just make those things up...oh, wait, you don't actually have a car parked in Motorgate, you don't actually even own a perhaps you did just make up that info!


riradu said...

Concerning the straight parking lines: please admit that straightening the lines has ONLY to do with increasing the number of parking spaces. Parking between them will be more challenging, time consuming and dangerous.
It will be a lot more difficult to get in or out of ANY given space, considering that there are many large cars and the "isle" is by no means wide enough for many cars to make safe 90 degrees turns, especially in reverse, without touching any other car or wall.
Try to put it on paper and you will know what I am talking about.
I wonder who was the consultant who came up with this idea, because that was not an engineer by any means.
As an exercise, pleasee take a look at the open-air parking lot at Costco, which has straight lines, and observe how much space cars need to get in and out of those spots. And, if you didn't notice yet, those parking spots are noticeable wider than the ones in our Motorgate garage.

I suggest that the idea for the 3rd floor be tested first and validated by Mr. Martinez parking his car between other Motorgate and RIOC's employee cars, tightly parked in adjacent spaces.

Other than this, the parking on the rooftop, which is significantly cheaper, is limited only to the residents of former Eastwood buildings, and it is not income based. WHY, when those buildings are now market rate, can we have a decent reason for that? This ammounts to discrimination toward the rest of the islanders.

CheshireKitty said...

Rooftop parking is less protected than the regular parking.  Car interiors will age faster in the broiling sun on the roof.  So the management figured, as an inducement or break to get people to park on the roof,  to offer it at a cheaper rate to the residents of Eastwood - which was originally the less expensive Mitchell-Lama on the island.  Even though Eastwood has now been privatized, it still contains hundreds of apartments that are Federally subsidized i.e. the residents meet certain income guidelines to qualify for Federal subsidies i.e. the residents aren't rich.  Thus it still makes sense to offer the rooftop parking at a cheaper price to the still mostly poor people residing in Roosevelt Landings.  It's not really discriminatory since (1) the rooftop is not the desirable place to park since cars there are exposed to the elements etc and thus should probably be offered at a reduced price no matter what (2) Eastwood is no paradise to begin with, and being poor in Eastwood less so; thus, an additional slight inducement from RIOC to keep tenants of any income level in Eastwood by offering this break still makes sense.  

PeaceandPlenty said...

"we shouldn't let upper east side or other off islanders pay less to use the spaces we need. "

We don't let them pay less.

mogensjp said...

MOTORGATE was initially designed for the WIRE buildings
and expanded to handle the increased demand from MANHATTAN PARK residents but RIOC did not provide for any further off street parking when they negotiated with the builders of SOUTHTOWN.

The island needs more parking space, and rather coming up with small "band-aids"  it is becoming essential to build another garage
 and provide expanded bus service in smaller buses with greater frequency to service the entire island.

When that is done, we can revert to the original short time parking on the streets without special parking privileges for
teachers, Island employees, visiting tennis players and "friends" - and also create a promenade all around the island for pedestrians and bicyclists (which would probably attract as many, if not more, visitors as the FDR memorial)


riradu said...

Well, this is just one point of view, I am not arguing over it. Most of New Yorkers keep their cars in the street, under those "less than desirable" conditions, and more, like alternate parking and crime worries. Some people from Roosevelt Landings, and not only from there, still park their cars in the streets surrounding the island, because the parking fee is still too much for their budgets. Nobody in those buildings is asked now to go through income re-certification, so it looks like this "perk" is just a slip, since it it not advertised to prospective tenants. My main concern is still the re-re-re-striping of the garage, or the study which led to the new layout, and I am specifically seeking an intelligent answer if and how it was real-life tested with the real-life variety of cars found now in the garage. Perhaps not too may people understand what may be coming to their cars.Simply speaking, I see an issue in safely getting in and out of a parking space if one has a larger car or is adjacent to larger cars - or there are longer/larger cars parked in the opposite parking spaces, even if they are all parked correctly.A car must enter/exit a parking space pretty parallel to its edges, and that - since the spaces will be perpendicular to the curb - means that one will need more space in the isle to position correctly for entry. If the isle width is limited by large SUV's or vans, then you can figure out the physical consequences to your and your neighbor's vehicled. This is my main concern. I don't want to be part of the problem, I want to be part of the solution, this is why I try to raise this issue before it costs too much to fix. Of course, every layout has its own engineering challenges, but that's why good engineers exist.  I salute the initiative of repairing and renovating the garage, I see them testing new LED lighting fixtures, and may also be great things that I dind't see yet.  I am concerned about the striping issue and I wish I am wrong... I only need someone to come up with real, rational arguments (other than immeasurable talk) that my worries are not warranted.

CheshireKitty said...

They should have built at least one underground garage (like at Octagon) for Southtown - if not an entire parking structure.  More parking at Southtown is definitely needed - maybe a public parking structure will be built at the new campus.  

CheshireKitty said...

I agree - lines perpendicular to the aisles are very difficult to maneuver into and out of; they do have rectangular parking stalls at the Costco lot but the aisles are much wider there as are the stalls themselves (if I'm not mistaken).  

I'm surprised RIOC decided to do away with the angled parking scheme, which, if I am not mistaken, is common in indoor or underground garages and makes it much easier to pull in and out of spots.  

If people start having minor accidents on 3 because of the new perpendicular lines, they should definitely sue RIOC - any judge will see that the perpendicular lines and narrowness of the aisles make it very difficult to park in such a tight space.  If enough parkers sue RIOC, maybe they'll get the message and change the lines on 3 back to the more sensible angled scheme.  

riradu said...

That's not so simple. Not  too many people take the trouble to sue each other and Motorgate/RIOC for a bent bumper or door. Besides, all garages have a standard disclaimer concerning damage, among other things, and one needs a lawyer to beat that.
However, today I surveyed several parking garages and concluded that Motorgate is about 6' short of the minimum space needed to implement safe parking slots perpendicular to the curb in most areas.
There is also supporting engineering documentation on the Web, with clear design standards, quite different than what is proposed at Motorgate. I attached an example to this post. 
Every project must be approved and signed by at least a PE licensed in NY State, so I am really curious who  risked his/her reputation signing that layout.

riradu said...

"RIOC was able to remove the diagonal, crisscrossing and overlapping parking lines and replace them with, for the most part, uniform and straight parking lines on the third parking level."
This violates NY City codes, because the minimum isle width can not be achieved. 
Please see: Parking   Plans should show stalls that are a minimum 8’-6” wide and 18’-0” deep, with aisle widths corresponding to the angle of parking stalls as required by recognized national standards for parking lots/garages, (for example, the standard minimum aisle width for 90º parking stalls is 24’-0”). End stalls parallel to walls or fences shall be a minimum 10’-0” wide. Parallel parking shall have a minimum aisle width of 10’-0” and parking space dimensions of 8-6” x 24’-0”. Plans shall note: “All exits shall be as approved by DOB”. 

Frank Farance said...

I ran into Mr. Martinez on Friday and asked if the new parking spaces
were wide enough: the perpendicular lines mean deeper stalls (from the
curb), narrower aisles to drive through, and (thus) less space to make a
90-degree turn (more turning room is needed for a 90-degree turn than a
45-degree turn).  I hadn't measured this myself, but my hunch was that
larger cars (e.g., SUVs) might not have enough room.  I asked him to try
this out with a bunch of large cars parked on both sides with a large car trying to enter a middle space.  He said he would try it out.

Today I tried it with my tiny Neon.  I was able to get into the spot,
but getting out seems to be the harder part (you'll see when you try
it).  I'm not sure if I could do this in a car will a longer wheelbase. 
Regardless, even the tiny Neon is difficult getting in/out the doors
because the spaces are tight.

Motorgate is underutilized, there are lots of empty spaces.  Someone had
suggested adjusting pricing, which would mean *lower* pricing to
completely fill Motorgate.  I'm not suggesting reducing the prices
because the maintenance seems to be a fixed cost and a lower cost, while
possibly increasing utilization, doesn't necessarily increase
profitability or availability of funds to do these kinds of line/floor
improvements.  Note: Motorgate is operated as a partnership between RIOC
and Manhattan Park, I believe the ownership is 60-40.

Regarding the discounts, I recall that employees of Island businesses
get a discount on parking (to discourage street parking).  I believe
people in subsidized housing are able to get discounts for rooftop
parking, but not other roofed parking (reserved and non-reserved).  As
for a resident discount, an 8% exemption on parking tax (18.375% ->
10.375%) is available.  The eligibility is: (1) individually owned by
the applicant; (2) registered to the owner's primary residence in
Manhattan; (3) parked in a long-term rented space for a month or more;
and (4) driven for personal use only.  See:

Regarding off-Islanders parking here, there's no shortage of spaces, and
it helps the profitability of the operation, which we should be happy

YetAnotherRIer said...

Sue somebody because you refuse to learn how to get in and out of those spaces safely?

Westviewer said...

If the new configuration encourages anyone to get rid of their pointless SUV, it will have been a worthwhile exercise. 

PeaceandPlenty said...

Since bartonfinck has declined to provide any factual information for storage parking, I decided to do a quick search.  First place I found to offer storage parking offers it for $186.48 per month, including tax.  Regular monthly is $350, so storage parking signiicantly less.  That was the first and only garage I checked.  It's Hudson View Garage, 51st Street & 10th Avenue in Manhattan, 212-873-8220.

Besides being more convenient than Motorgate, It's also valet parking, so significantly more secure than RI, where anyone can access your car.  And fewer chance of dings and dents as no one will be pulling in and out next to you.  Of course, if you're really going to store your car, you'd probably want one of the mini storage places that takes cars and trucks so you can put your car up on blocks, which is the proper way to store a car. 

As for all the alleged sports cars stored in in Motorgate, I've only seen a few, but I couldn't tell if they were being stored or used and I definitely couldn't tell where the owners live.  Perhaps bartonfinck has that ability, but I'm afraid I don't.

CheshireKitty said...

Some have SUVs for trips to second residences in the country.  Having an SUV is not necessarily pointless given some of the roads/tracks and lack of comprehensive snow removal in some rural areas.   

Because of its size, an SUV is more likely to accidentally ding a car in getting into or pulling out of a tight parking spot.  But since these vehicles may already be regularly receiving pings and dings from debris/gravel found on country roads, the SUV owners may care less, or even be somewhat inured to, or "philosophical about" additional scrapes.  

Having narrower/tighter parking spots in Motorgate will probably not discourage SUV ownership but it may make it more likely cars of all types are dented in the process of negotiating the less roomy parking spots.  

CheshireKitty said...

I'm certain a judge would see the injustice of forcing drivers - many with absolutely clean (i.e. no accidents whatsoever) driving records -- to negotiate tight spots and thus risk denting their own or others' cars.

It's a shame that RIOC is spending taxpayer money on an "improvement" that will just make it even more of a headache to live on RI.  

Angled parking always beats  perpendicular parking - especially if there is not really enough room for perpendicular parking, as is the case in Motorgate.  Angled parking at Motorgate was put in for a reason - because the aisles are not that wide to begin with.   

What has changed in Motorgate that would cause RIOC to do away with angled parking? The aisles aren't any wider.  We aren't all driving subcompacts.  RIOC should drop the Motorgate perpendicular parking scheme - since it's both pointless and unsafe.  

Westviewer said...

A non-gas-guzzling four-wheel drive car would be a much more sensible choice for that purpose than one of these trucks. 

YetAnotherRIer said...

Anything that makes the life of car owners more difficult is a good thing. Makes them think twice if they should drive to Costco or just have a nice healthy walk.

CheshireKitty said...

Hahahahah - very funny!  Try telling that to folks stocking up at Costco and of necessity having to drive there to convey their purchases; they'll have a side-splitting, uproarious laugh!  

YetAnotherRIer said...

Very few of us actually have to drive to Costco out of "necessity". You can bring your purchases home in a one of those shopping carts just fine. Go every weekend if one trip is not enough.

CheshireKitty said...

Depends on what and how much you purchase.  Obviously, bringing back a large volume of purchases is not possible in a shopping cart.  The same applies for  shopping at Pathmark or the other Queens discount supermarket chains, incidentally.  There are people who may spend quite a bit of money all at once when shopping at Costco or at a Queens supermarket. 

Tram_Rider said...

Over the weekend we got a note on the windshield of our car saying it was not properly parked. When we asked in the office, we were told the car was "outside the lines."

What lines? On the fifth floor, the lines are so faded you cannot tell if they are yellow or white. Plus, at night, there is no way to see the lines because of poor lighting.

When will the rest of Motorgate 's floors be painted?