At St. George, EDC Wants Suburban-Style Parking for Its “Vibrant Downtown”

Two surface parking lots are set to be developed into a new downtown for Staten Island. But even in this transit-rich location -- the ferry, bus terminal and railroad are all visible in the lower right of this satellite image -- NYCEDC is making parking a priority. Image: ##

St. George Staten Island could become the region’s next great downtown. That’s the plan over at the New York City Economic Development Corporation, which is about to redevelop two waterfront sites immediately adjacent to the ferry terminal.

Yet even though EDC touts the unparalleled transit access at the sites, which are currently surface parking lots, and its desire to make this a pedestrian-friendly development, the agency is requiring that any development include a huge amount of parking. Not only would every surface space have to be replaced, but EDC intends to accommodate anyone who wants to drive to the developments and find a parking spot.

EDC makes the case for a vibrant urban development at St. George as well as anyone could in its request for expressions of interest, released yesterday:

The adjacent Ferry Terminal is Staten Island’s transit hub linking 70,000 daily commuters with the Staten Island Railroad, 20 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“MTA”) bus lines, and the Bay Street and Richmond Terrace bikeway…

It is widely recognized that the neighborhood represents a great opportunity for Staten Island to accommodate significant population growth (Staten Island is expected to grow by +65,000 people in the next twenty years, including 35,000 seniors and 17,000 young adults) and establish the kind of vital downtown that has long eluded Staten Island but emerged in municipalities stretching from Jersey City to Long Branch.

Indeed, this is an ideal location for dense, downtown-style development. New Urbanist leader Jeff Speck even identified the site as crying out for construction in a presentation to the City Planning Commission in January of last year.

Yet EDC wants the island’s transit center and would-be downtown to make room for a sea of parking, which will draw more traffic to the neighborhood streets, eat up space that could be used for housing or offices, and degrade the pedestrian environment. At this stage in the development process, it’s not clear exactly how many spaces the new development might contain. But all the spaces in the enormous surface parking lots would have to replaced one for one, ensuring at least a full floor of parking almost by definition. On top of that, EDC expects that additional parking be provided for all “the expected demand produced by the proposed development.” With 14 acres up for development, that could be quite a lot of spaces indeed.

In the past, EDC has used the formulas embedded in the environmental review process to predict demand for parking; those formulas have contributed to thousand-space lots at the New Domino development in Williamsburg and Riverside Center on Manhattan’s West Side, among others.

That level of parking isn’t necessary. Only 63 percent of Staten Islanders drive to work. If the borough were to secede from New York City, it would have fewer car commuters, as a percent, than Portland or Los Angeles, and just a hair more than Chicago. Moreover, St. George is on track to become even more transit-rich than it is today; the city is currently studying the creation of a bus or rail rapid transit line along Staten Island’s north shore.

The prioritization of parking comes from the very top. In a press release announcing the development plans, the only official to mention parking was Mayor Michael Bloomberg himself. “The potential to develop these sites while maintaining the availability of parking – combined with projects at the Homeport, Howland Hook, and at the Ferry Terminal – will be a catalyst for the further revitalization of the North Shore, as well as the entire island.” EDC would not comment for this story beyond pointing us to the official press release.

The city’s belief that a “vital downtown” is compatible with parking requirements flies in the face of experience. Downtown Manhattan was largely developed prior to the enactment of any parking regulations; today a strict parking maximum is in place. Downtown Brooklyn is largely zoned so that commercial development does not require off-street parking; developers and elected officials in the area have been pushing hard for the residential requirements to be eliminated as well.

Jersey City, ostensibly one of the city’s models for St. George, took the opposite approach to parking in revitalizing its downtown. “Jersey City’s an interesting model for the area around the ferry terminal, since both places are transit-rich, with access to ferries, buses, and rail,” explained Steven Higashide of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign. “In most downtown developments in Jersey City, developers aren’t required to provide any parking and there’s instead a parking maximum. That makes it less costly to build and makes it easier to create a lively streetscape that isn’t interrupted by parking lots and overrun with traffic.”

EDC isn’t the only guilty party in St. George. The St. George special zoning district, proposed by the Department of City Planning in 2008 and passed later that year, increased residential parking minimums to 100 percent and forbid developers from subdividing properties to waive the requirements. Keeping Staten Island suburban, even in its downtown, is official city policy.

  • Calling the Almighty

    Please, God, replace Seth Pinsky and Amanda Burden before they can do any more damage to our urban fabric.

    And if God’s not in, Mike Bloomberg will do.

  • Anonymous

    What a travesty and gross misallocation of resources! 
    That is prime waterfront property that will be wasted as surface parking. Either the entire area should be parkland or at the very least they should develop it as commercial and residential property with a ribbon park along the shore. If at least they weren’t so brain dead when it came to planning these development corporations would have at least one redeeming feature. They do nothing for the city or for the state except to siphon tax dollars to private developers (i.e. campaign contributors). They are New York’s version of Corporate Welfare. New York’s money would be better spent funding MTA expansion and letting ready access to transit drive development in New York’s Housing & Business market.

  • AlexB

    It is odd and obviously counterproductive.  When you look at the new shopping centers at Gateway at Yankee Stadium and the new Costco/Target complex at 116th and the FDR, fewer people than expected are driving to those developments, and they both require annoying bus rides or long walks.  This is right next to the biggest transit hub in the borough!  You just have to wonder what they think the positive effects of so much parking will be, or perhaps they just underestimate all the negative consequences.  Maybe there is an underlying notion that everyone “should” be able to drive, instead of “forcing” people to take transit or walk/bike.  It’s just confusing they don’t understand the contradiction between parking and dense development and pleasant city environments.  This is supposed to be one of the main aspects of doing their job correctly.

  • Bolwerk

    What is the size of the EDC’s budget? I’m smelling a huge pot of money that could go to pay for another phase of the SAS instead of reducing property tax receipts with more automobile subsidies.

  • Cgsahar66

    I agree wholeheartedly. There a several examples of how their proposal could go wrong.

    I see St George more of NYC’s answer to a more maritime, compact and prettier version of San Francisco’s Sunset Park area.

     If you want an example of what not to do and how the city has finally come to its senses decades later – look at the additional parking spaces added to Queens Plaza decades ago which covered walkways and greenery with ugly asphalt adding to the nightmare car jam and terrible crosswalks that made Queens Plaza a dump for so long.

    When Metlife moved their office there, the city made a half-baked attempt at beautifying it with these narrow zigzag walkways that could barely hold any greenery or people .  Metlife eventually is going to leave because the city has done too little too late.  Hopefully the removal of much of the ugly parking lots will redeem Queens Plaza back to its early 20th century beauty and grandeur and encourage tenants to the vastly nicer office buildings and condos built around Queens Plaza recently.

    I wish they would stop getting higher officials from the suburbs addicted to a car centric society – the funny thing is many of them complain of increasing car traffic but still believe in adding and expanding roadways which just encourage more traffic.

    A final example of where they try more pedestrian centric methods but are still trapped in their car centric thinking is  Union Square Park – they still allow car traffic thru some of these ridiculouslky narrow lanes and heavy trucks in the area when all it has done is increase congestion in the southern portion of Union Square. 

  • Bribery

    The parking is a bribe to shut up the morons who will oppose any plan that increases density. The press and politicians on Staten Island drive everywhere. So does everyone they know.

  • The Truth

    I’m inclined to agree with Bribery… and wonder if it isn’t really such a bad strategy to deal with political realities on Staten Island.

    They probably couldn’t get anything approved without the parking.  But if they get more density built, and the parking goes unused, they might eventually mount a case to convert underutilized parking to more retail or something.

    Call it a phased approach, a bargain with the devil, whatever.  It sucks, but it still might be a step in the right direction.

  • Danaeo

    Atlantic Yards, an ESD project, is supposed to provided remote parking on Staten Island as part of its demand management program.   One lot is to be located near the Verrazano; the other on the southern end of the island.  Could this be part of ESD’s calculations?


Parking Overkill in Flushing: NYCEDC Made It Happen

It’s not every day that a New York City real estate executive name-checks Donald Shoup, but one developer admiringly referred to the dean of progressive parking policy while explaining his project to Streetsblog. If not for the New York City Economic Development Corporation and mis-directed political pressures, says TDC Development President Michael Meyer, the huge mixed-use […]

Don’t Ask Seth Pinsky About NYCEDC Parking Development

“The worst thing we could do is create projects that create a parking need and then not provide that parking.” That was Seth Pinsky, former head of the New York City Economic Development Corporation, in 2010. True to that philosophy, during his tenure NYCEDC incentivized and financed suburban-style parking in development projects in neighborhoods across the city, […]

At Flushing Commons, NYCEDC’s Fuzzy Math Superceded PlaNYC Goals

Yesterday, Streetsblog looked at Flushing Commons, a mixed-use development in the heart of transit-rich downtown Flushing, where the New York City Economic Development Corporation has mandated suburban levels of parking. We asked the EDC why they required nearly 1,600 spaces in the development, and now we have an answer. It’s a revealing look at how […]

Why the Next Mayor Should Reform the Parking-Obsessed NYC EDC

For an investigation published this weekend, the New York Times calculated that governments in New York state give away at least $4.06 billion in corporate subsidies every year. In New York City, the agency that oversees much of this largesse is the Economic Development Corporation. And when it comes to shaping city fabric, NYC EDC has a […]