PROVIDENCE — The debate on resident permit overnight parking in the city continues to roil, with Valley area residents learning recently that their long-planned pilot program is being put on hold, while last night College Hill residents came out divided on the issue of whether it’s right for parts of their neighborhood.

A permit parking program allowing residents to park overnight in a small area of the Valley Neighborhood was announced earlier this fall, and was expected to begin after the new year.

But at a sparsely attended meeting two weeks ago, the local police district commander announced his vocal opposition to overnight parking, and later that night Councilman Terrence M. Hassett disclosed that the program would be put on indefinite hold while city officials try to determine whether there is adequate demand.

“We want to do what’s in the interest of everyone,” Hassett said. “It’s slowed down a little bit. I still see the value of this.”

Hassett said that the program could be on again if adequate support is shown from specific streets.

“I did want to see a petition,” he said.

Parking has long festered as an issue in Providence, with different neighborhoods taking different stances depending on factors like their demographics, the size of their streets, and the presence of college students in the area. Providence has had a parking ban since the 1920s.

The city in 2006 introduced a pilot overnight parking program in the Washington Park neighborhood that allowed residents to buy stickers that would let them park on certain streets for $25 annually. But while 125 residents took advantage of it in the first year, just over 35 have purchased permits this year.

Mayor David N. Cicilline said he was surprised to learn that the Valley program was being put on hold. He said that his policy has been to support parking programs in specific neighborhoods if the residents support it, and that has not changed.

“In different neighborhoods of the city, the views are very different,” Cicilline said. “When particular neighborhoods have come forward and expressed interest in piloting a neighborhood parking program, I have supported that.” Cicilline said that the pilot program in Washington Park has worked “reasonably well,” but recognized that the Public Safety and Public Works Departments may have a problem with the idea of overnight parking.

“For the departments, it’s an added amount of work,” Cicilline said, for public works with plowing and street sweeping, and for the police because the patchwork nature of the programs makes it difficult to determine which streets allow parking and which do not.

That said, he reiterated that if a neighborhood shows its support for the program, it has his, as well.

Last night at a meeting of the College Hill Neighborhood Association, more than 100 residents came out to debate the pros and cons of introducing an overnight parking program in the East Side neighborhood. There are currently no plans to introduce overnight parking in specific areas on College Hill, though several petitions have been circulated in support, most notably on Pratt Street.

College Hill has traditionally been considered a bastion of anti-overnight parking sentiment, but last night a straw poll of those in the audience at the end of the meeting came out with roughly equal numbers for and against

Residents in some areas, like Pratt Street and North Benefit Street, spoke out in favor, while others feared that cars belonging to the student population in the area would clog the streets and lead to packed and unsightly roadways.

Some residents worried that the permits, which could be given to two vehicles per household for cars registered in the neighborhood, would lead to a proliferation of cars on the streets as students and others who did not have cars before rush to get permits.

Some feared that this would lead to little-used cars sitting outside all day and all night.

“My concern with overnight parking is that it would be 24-hour parking,” said Phoebe Salten of Brown Street.

And other residents were concerned that there were not enough details worked out for something that could have such a broad impact on a neighborhood.

“We’re here to talk about something, and we don’t know what the guidelines of the city are,” said Antoinette Breed, of West Cushing Street, a board member of the College Hill Neighborhood Association. “It’s a little too freewheeling.”

But others said that residents associated with the colleges bring the kind of life that makes the area vibrant, and they deserve parking as well.

“We don’t live in Barrington. We live on College Hill. We’re here because of the variety of living in this area. We need places for people who don’t have parking to park their cars,” said Laura Bell, of Pratt Street.

The Police Department appears not to have taken a firm stand on the parking issue.

At the Valley meeting, Lt. Michael Jackvony, the district commander, made clear his opposition to overnight parking, listing concerns that it could make plowing and street-sweeping difficult, and might also bring down property values, according to Hassett and Patrick Ward, who has led the push for permit parking in Valley and in other parts of the city.

Police Chief Col. Dean M. Esserman could not be reached for comment yesterday regarding the department’s stance on individual districts.

At the College Hill meeting last night, Lt. Paul Campbell, the district commander for the area, said that he personally found the parking ban to be helpful to police work — a car illegally on the street several nights in a row can tip a police officer off to something improper, he said — but said that he would work with whatever the neighborhood wanted.

“It’s a good thing from a policing standpoint to have the overnight parking [ban], but I’m not against it — whatever you folks want,” Campbell said.

At the same time, city officials stressed that the city will not impose overnight parking on an area that does not demonstrate at least majority support for it. And, if after it is adopted on a pilot basis, it proves unworkable, it can be removed, according to city revenue management agent John Murphy.

“If it has a negative impact, we can turn it off,” Murphy said.

dbarbari@projo.com