The ProJo ran an editorial this week asking the new Mayor to lift the ban on overnight parking in Providence.  How do you feel about this?

Comment here on our SNA blog if you care.


LuAnn C. · June 9, 2012 at 3:33 pm

However, belated, I agree with Dean W. I moved here from an area that allowed overnight parking. I like this better. What about permitting parking overnight in commercial, but not residential, zones. Adds some additional parking, doesn’t blight residential neighborhoods.

W. Grant Willis · March 21, 2011 at 11:25 am

I am in favor of repealing this ban. However, in the meantime, does anyone know of any alternative parking places that they could recommend for a person living in the Summit Hill neighborhood? Are there any rental parking places available?

Dean W · January 27, 2011 at 6:47 pm

Anyone care to have that parking ban discussion now? I would but my arms are tired from shoveling.

Tavares Supporter · January 13, 2011 at 11:41 am

YES!!!! Lift the ban!

Amee · November 14, 2010 at 7:43 am

As a new mom in the neighborhood, I’ve found the sidewalks almost impassible for strollers, and often have to walk on the street. If the street were lined with parked cars, I would no longer be able to walk with my baby in the neighborhood, and I am therefore against street parking.

Mrs Bresler · November 13, 2010 at 9:02 pm

No I hope that over night parking is always banned. It guarantees that all housing, both rental & owner occupied will have to have off street parking available. I lived in Boston with on street parking and it was a constant annoyance at best- and next to a nightmare in bad weather. In one place the streets were so narrow with the parking that I could not stop in front of my own house to unload groceries. However many blocks away I parked, I had to drag stuff, rain or whatever. And in the snow!!! Argh!!! You dig out your car in the morning, and come home to the place is occupied and you have to dig yourself in somewhere else. Day after day. Misery. Public transportation can not solve all this.

Tony Pereira · November 13, 2010 at 9:32 am

remove that ban !

Coryndon Luxmoore · November 13, 2010 at 7:34 am

I am in favor as well as I would love to unpave more of my triple decker lot. Currently I cannot afford to lose the parking.

It would also have a secondary effect of actually having signs that inform folks of the rules. The poor state of signage has caused guest of mine to get tickets because they don’t know the rules but the meter maids do.

I would also propose one other restriction on the on street parking. The city should not allow it where they have failed to install sidewalks. Walking on uneven ground especially with snow and ice is unsafe.

Becky Ellis · November 13, 2010 at 6:53 am

I own a 2 family house with a narrow driveway so tandem parking is a must and is a hassle. It limits who I can rent to. I always advertise that we are steps from thew bus line. I would gladly buy a permit for tenant to use street parking overnight. The street is parked to the max on both sides during the day when kids do play and trucks and emergency vehicles manage to get through, so they should be able to get through at night.
We don’t need unlimited night parking. People will abuse and more students will bring cars to the city.

Karen McAninch · November 12, 2010 at 8:38 pm

Seems like a good idea to me – the current system favors those with means – it’s sad to see people in court who can’t afford a parking space having to pay up.

Tony Pereira · November 12, 2010 at 4:48 pm

Resident parking should be allowed. Eliminate the ban ! Charge a fee, and allow a limited number of permits per household.

Carol Cancro · November 12, 2010 at 3:45 pm

The overnight parking ban has been justified to protect neighbors from illegal numbers of unrelated tenants in multifamily homes. However, enforcement of landlord-tenant law against nuisance houses must be addressed separate from the parking ban.

Not being able to leave cars on the street at night inconveniences the vast majority of law-abiding residents of Providence, who often lack adequate parking to accommodate guests. Many maintain that all hosts need to do in such situations is inform the police. However, this seems a poor use of time and resources for both Providence citizens and local law enforcement.

A limited number of parking stickers could be sold to each household, not to exceed the legal occupancy of any residence. In this way, parking could be preserved for the many residents who need it, as our neighborhoods were built before most people had cars.

The argument that emergency vehicles cannot navigate narrow streets between parked cars suggests that all emergencies happen at night, which is absurd. As a native New Yorker, I have always supported repeal of the overnight parking ban.

I would gladly support residential parking stickers. Other options could allowing parking on one side or alternate sides of the street.

Potentially, different options could be piloted in different neighborhoods. Washington Park piloted resident stickers a few years back, and I believe is still working with this system.

Here’s a link, if you’re interested:

Dean W · November 12, 2010 at 3:34 pm

Reposting my comments from the ProJo website:

Overnight parking will lead to cars being parked on all streets, all the time. I’ve lived in areas where this is the case, and I like Providence much better.

There is something very nice about stepping off the curb and not being between the bumpers of two parked cars. There is something nice about looking out the window and not seeing a sea of parked vehicles. Children can play safer when parked cars are not obstructing them from drivers’ views. Nighttime walkers are safer when there are less parked cars for muggers to hide behind.

Overnight parking will lead to more vehicles parked in this city. We need less vehicles, not more. Citing how well it works in other cities is not valid for me, because I moved back to Providence because of what it is. Part of that is that we have an urban area with a suburban feel, which is part of the charm visitors to Providence talk about after they leave.

What about residents? If a Providence resident has a visitor, chances are that visitor finds parking right in front. In parts of the city that is true because there is no overnight parking allowed. With permitted parking, cars are parked for days at a time in the same spot. Also, property values will decrease when the neighborhood feel of the street disappears.

Just because it exists in other cities does not mean it’s a good idea for us. Look at a street photo of a small city which allows overnight parking. Concrete jungle. We are better than that.

My opinion only, of course.

Andrew · November 12, 2010 at 3:31 pm

It is long past time to end this relic of the Sundown Town days.

Aaron Masri · November 12, 2010 at 3:11 pm

I prefer land usage that favors compact buildings that are built closer together and thus requires shorter distances for people to travel and more dwelling units to be built in a smaller urban footprint. However, right now, Providence’s zoning ordinance does not allow this type of development because residential buildings are required to have a minimum lot size, minimum dwelling size, and minimum off-street parking requirements. This increases the footprint of buildings and this spreads out the development of neighborhoods. So, I am in favor of overnight on-street parking as well as the elimination of dwelling, lot, and off-street parking minimums. Less lot space needed for off-street parking means more lot space for housing units. I am not suggesting in turning Summit into the North End of Boston, but a return to the development principles of “streetcar suburbs” would be nice.

howie · November 12, 2010 at 2:31 pm

Yes one one side of the street—or to alternate sides…..

Greg Gerritt · November 12, 2010 at 2:28 pm

I am totally in favor.

Comments are closed.