Take a Stand Against Affordable Housing By Saving This Parking Garage

A developer wants to build affordable housing on the sites of three parking garages between Amsterdam Avenue and Columbus Avenue on West 108th Street. Photo: Google Maps
An affordable housing developer wants to expand the Valley Lodge transitional homeless shelter and build new apartments on the sites of three parking garages between Amsterdam Avenue and Columbus Avenue on West 108th Street. Photo: Google Maps

In NYC’s current affordable housing shortage, every square foot counts. With that in mind, the city announced plans earlier this year to relinquish three parking garages it owns on West 108th Street to make way for 280 units of new housing, all of which would be reserved for people earning less than the average income in the area. Naturally, hysteria ensued.

Since the plans were announced, a group of residents organized under the banner “Save Manhattan Valley” to fight the development. “This Street Parking Space Will Disappear Soon If You Don’t Act,” its fliers read. “In addition to the toxic noise and air caused by construction, you can expect added pollution from idling cars, double parking, honking, stress and accidents.”

Gasp! Photo: @lpolgreen
Gasp! Photo: @lpolgreen

This is the Upper West Side, served by no fewer than three subway lines (more if you count expresses), several bus routes, Citi Bike, and car-sharing services like Zipcar and Car2Go. All those transit options make owning a car an avoidable expense for Upper West Side households, so nearly 80 percent of them choose not to.

Nevertheless, opponents have predicted doomsday. At a public meeting in March, one neighborhood resident said “fights on the street” would break out because there would be “600 or 700 new cars on the street and nowhere to put them,” according to DNAinfo. Sample letters to electeds on the group’s website talk of “local residents, Columbia professors, merchants, St. Luke’s Hospital workers, and others” being “robbed of their current parking security.”

What about housing security? The developer, West Side Federation for Senior and Supportive Housing (WSFSSH), currently operates a transitional homeless shelter on the block. Their proposal would expand that shelter from 90 to 110 beds and build another 140 affordable units and 45 senior housing units on the garage lots. Another 90 units could be built if the city allows WSFSSH to build 11 stories, a tad higher than the current zoning allows.

In response to opponents’ concerns, WSFSSH said in June that it would hold off on developing the easternmost lot — which will ultimately become senior housing — for five years in order to maintain the 125 parking spots there. But that concession failed to win over opponents, who have since circulated a petition opposing the plan and retained a lawyer, Michael Hiller, to fight it in court.

Opponents have said the ideal outcome would be to build the housing with the same amount of parking that currently exists. A WSFSSH-commissioned study from Nelson/Nygaard found that the lots contain 675 parking spots combined and are around 90 percent occupied during weekdays.

But “having your cake and eating it too” is not possible: The Nelson/Nygaard study estimated that building an underground garage with a capacity of just 118 vehicles would cost $17 million. Simply put, parking is expensive to build, and getting rid of the parking makes it possible to build hundreds of new subsidized housing units.

The good news for neighborhood residents is that there will actually be less traffic on local streets without the garages, not more.

A 2012 report by Rachel Weinberger demonstrated that people with access to off-street parking at home are more likely to commute by car. Subtract off-street parking spaces in the neighborhood, and fewer people will drive to work.

Many people may conclude it no longer makes sense to own a car in one of the most transit-rich places in the nation. For Upper West Siders who truly need a private parking spot, there are 3,500 garage spaces within a 12-block radius, according to the Nelson/Nygaard study. While the study didn’t measure the vacancy rate of those garages, even if they’re 90 percent full, that still leaves room for more than half the vehicles people currently store on sites to be developed by WSFSSH.

Parking mania has played a role in the defeat of other affordable housing projects this year. Phipps Houses withdrew its proposal to build 209 units of affordable housing over a parking lot in Sunnyside, Queens, for instance. Even though the development would include 200 parking spaces, opponents said that wasn’t enough, since it would replace a lot with 230 spaces. Local Council Member Jimmy Van Bramer squelched the project, mainly citing concerns about building height and complaints about Phipps Houses’ management practices.

Parking politics will have big implications for the implementation of the de Blasio administration’s housing plan. While changes to the zoning code eliminated parking requirements for subsidized housing in much of NYC, getting that housing built will require many neighborhood zonings needing City Council approval.

In practice, that means local council members have the final say. Several council members have acknowledged that parking requirements drive up the cost of housing in New York City, but if they’re not willing to stand up to opponents of parking-free or parking-lite housing projects, their enlightenment won’t be good for much.

  • MatthewEH

    At least one of the people promoting the NIMBY pro-status-quo oh-my-god-won’t-somebody-think-of-the-cars argument here packing-taped the group’s flyers to street trees on Broadway, and directly to the exterior painted wall of a (presently shuttered) local bar. That should give you an idea of their actual community-mindedness.

  • Komanoff

    Anyone know the monthly parking rates at the city-owned garages in question? And how they stack up vs. other/private garages in the area? Just curious if they’re lower than “market.”

  • Boris

    If, to some residents, cars are as important as people (if not more so), the city can beat them at their own game by simply taking their concerns seriously. The city (or the developer) should create a “car relocation plan” by providing every car owner who parks in the three garages with a new parking location that is either off-street or on-street in a different neighborhood. The city doesn’t need to subsidize their new parking, but it should show that such alternate parking exists (for example, in the 12 block radius mentioned above). Perhaps those car owners who can prove hardship can also receive a token payment to help them move their car.

    What hurts us the most is the lack of data regarding how much parking the city has in a given area, how much is too much or too little, and how much is “enough”. Therefore, the NIMBYs can invent whatever numbers they want and never get any pushback based on facts.

  • David Meyer

    Overall, they’re significantly cheaper. This chart is from the Nelson/Nygaard report. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7e543b232da38d5e94a5edc80a2c27f5102a24de08689347bf96f205fa1a7f9f.png

  • vnm

    The idea that cars should given priority over people is patently absurd, and was pretty well demolished by the Ginia Bellafante last week.


  • Komanoff

    I see! Thanks. so NYC is undercharging for parking in its owned W 108th St garages, with two consequences: (i) missing out on revenue, (ii) engendering excess attachment to the garages by owners of the cars stored there. As ever, it’s not just “parking,” it’s *underpriced* (bargain) parking!

  • Vooch

    I used to store my car here paying monthly it was the cheapest around, but not as cheap as free parking on RSD across the street from my old building. It was great, I ‘owned’ 2 parking spots due to alternative side parking requirements.

    Very occaisionally some no good nik outsider would park in MY spot and I’d have to find a free spot 2 or even THREE blocks from my building. I’d fume at the inequity.

  • WoeShouldBeYou

    Good luck parking on the street after these parking lots close.

  • WoeShouldBeYou

    These “altruistic developers” have pushed an illegal plan that by design violates R8B zoning which limits new construction to 7 stories (their plan calls for 11 stories). The developers have turned a blind eye to the environmental impact that the demolition project will be across the street from a public school and its athletic fields and pose a hazardous health danger to each of its students. The subsequent building project affects the school’s ability to teach over the year long noise of the construction. The housing project ignores that fact that there is a need to replace the paid parking because those same 800 cars will be forced to join the alternate side of the street parking corps already over 1000 strong who so famously double park so city sanitation trucks can not clean the streets or pick up the garbage.

    Manhattan Valley residents wake up and picture this: One row of 800 cars (that used to be housed in 3 garages on 108th Street) snakes thru the Upper West side taking up 1/4 of Manhattan Valley looking for parking clogging its streets, idling and polluting, double parking, honking and circling and parking in fire zones causing a once peaceful area host to Carmageddon.

    “No one knows a neighborhood better than the people who live there, and so residents should always play a major role in deciding its future.”

  • Beth

    Manhattan Valley is a working class neighborhood, and many garage tenants have used these facilities for 30 years. The price of parking was calibrated to be commensurate with the average income of people in this community. It is privately run and not subsidized. The garages are rented, and the manager has offered to fund underground garages he has raise the millions needed. The developer still wants control. Each car represents a real person, this is not cars against affordable (low-income) housing. This is pitting one deserving population against another. These are real people. Many need their cars for work, for caring for elderly, for their family. The city did a study and has discovered only 140 available monthly spaces for rent in a 12 block radius. It was announced community 7 board meeting in June.. So what happens to people who cannot give up jobs that are not near public transport, or have a usiness that requires a van or truck (which are not allowed to park on city streets overnight). The city needs to evaluate a neighborhood and its needs. Or they will lose their middle class, working class and their tax dollar – they will be forced out.

  • Vooch

    i fully Support charging Market clearing Pricing for Street patking in UWS. The Root cause of a shortage of street Parking on UWS Is this precious Commodity Is given Away for free.

    Charge Market clearing prices and there will Be a abundance of Open soaces

  • RH

    The reporter’s article had no basis and if anything Ginia Bellafante wrote an ill-conceived article, thus having no credibility. Interesting how Ms. Bellafante’s opening paragraph described the physical attributes of the women that she interviewed…..the woman’s hair. This had no basis for her article, thus it gave the impression that she attempted to paint a negative imagine of Ms. Kerstein….this truly is hitting below the belt. Again, Ms. Bellafante should think twice before condemning Manhattan Valley residents for desperately trying to improve their home and to stand up to an on-going system of expanding an already racially segregated community. I find it appalling, yet almost humous that Mr. Bellafante describes how people in the garages drive their cars to Bucks County and to Fairway. What a hateful stereotype she constructed in order to dismiss the efforts of Manhattan Valley citizens. Ms. Bellafante who lives in Brooklyn Heights, walks her dog along the promenade and works so diligently with her building’s neighbors in creating a lovely and pristine courtyard garden lives in her protected and privileged bubble away from the gun shots of Manhattan Valley….a universe away. Manhattan Valley so far from her protected world is an area that consists of a blighted shopping district, poorly maintained affordable housing units and something that Ms. Bellafante has no need to be afraid of….the violent gangs. We don’t have nice private gardens, or a wonderful shopping destination as Ms. Bellafante has, but we do have a poor struggling community and we have the fear that our children and families may get murdered in crossfire on their way home from school. Like so many people that want to paint Manhattan Valley residents as affluent West Siders and bigots that fight against affordable housing; they truly do not know how we struggle with something so fundamental as surviving and trying to have the same opportunities as people such as Ms. Bellafante take for granted. People such as Ms. Bellafante live in solid middle-class communites that are culturally and economically enriching for its’ residents…something that Manhattan Valley children are constantly denied.

  • Vooch

    i guess 800 Cars Zooming through The streets don’t Pose a Danger to the schoolchildren.

    shortage of free street parking ? solution is to charge market clearing prices to park on street; surely you support this.

  • Joe R.

    There’s plenty of parking and garages in the outer boroughs and the suburbs. If these people don’t work near public transit, why not park their car at the stop nearest where they work, and then drive the remainder? It’ll probably be faster taking public transit from Manhattan to that stop, as opposed to driving all the way from Manhattan. And NYC avoids a bunch more cars entering or leaving Manhattan every day.

    The hard fact is NYC needs affordable housing more than it needs private car storage. There really isn’t room for both. People are going to have to get used to the concept that if they live in NYC, they most likely won’t be able to have a car (or they’ll need to store that car outside city limits).

  • Joe R.

    Did you ever consider if parking becomes much more difficult a lot of people who have cars but seldom use them will just get rid of them? Quite a few Manhattan residents who have cars just get in them to move them on alternate side days. The rest of the time they sit there taking up valuable space. These would be the first people who will sell their cars when parking becomes more scarce. I can’t fathom why they own cars they never use in the first place, but at least scarcer parking will make many sell those cars.

  • Joe R.

    Obvious answer is most of those 800 people don’t want to pay more for parking, assuming they pay anything at all now.

  • WoeShouldBeYou

    Vooch, There will be no threat to school children when the average speed is .5 mph. Do you even live in the M Valley? Have you seen what happens every day between 8am and 9:30am and again in the evening? Suggest you learn more about our area.

  • Vooch

    First moved to 10025 in 1978

    So children can play stickball on 108th ?

  • WoeShouldBeYou

    Joe, Are you a Manhattan Valley resident or just butting in because you have nothing better to do. Come to the neighborhood some time. See for yourself.

  • Joe R.

    I’m butting in because lack of affordable housing is a citiwide issue. The obsession of some residents with car parking is a major factor preventing more housing from being built.

    Perhaps you can explain to me exactly what public benefit private car storage serves in a place like NYC? 100% of the benefits accrue to the car owners while everyone else suffers pollution and congestion on account of them. The idea here is do what makes the most sense. If it means losing private car storage in favor of housing for people, that to me seems more beneficial overall to the general public.

    Any good reason those who want to own cars can’t just store them outside city limits? As the article mentioned, over 80% of Manhattan Valley residents don’t own cars. Why are the ones who do “special”? Is it perhaps because they’re wealthier than the rest, so in their mind that makes them entitled to parking?

    Oh, and if cars in Manhattan Valley really move at 0.5 mph as you mentioned below, then that makes them even more pointless from the perspective of practical transportation.

  • Manhattan Valley is my home

    Fascinating to me that

  • ahwr

    If the city is undercharging so much how come the vacancy rate is 10% as mentioned in the article?

  • Manhattan Valley is my home

    Fascinating to me that so many of the commenters just take the facts that were posted on many nyc.gov and similar websites without actually checking what’s going on up here. If this oversized building was planned for just a mile or two south, you can be sure the opposition to it would easily win. Easy for people to take shots at a community that already lacks a voice. Come visit us on 108th and Columbus and ask the merchants how they get their goods to their stores. It’s not on the subway or in an Uber.

  • RH

    Joe come and visit Manhattan Valley and then reply back to the website..make comparisons about the quality of life just west of Broadway and south of West 100 Street : those areas are affluent and they are not part of Manhattan Valley. And then I urge you to walk north of West 100 up Columbus Avenue through the 2,000 plus units of Douglas Housing…a super block public housing site that sadly crams people together and where people have to live with violent gangs. And Joe continue north along Columbus Avenue lets say 12:00 evening up to West 110 Street. It’s dimly lighted, the bus shelter never had safety lighting and thanks to the police they frequently station a car there. And be sure to wait for that wonderful public transportation that you are talking about: take the M10 from that bus shelter without lighting. Why Joe, why do we have a police car…well Joe because just recently the mobile phone store was robbed for the 2nd time and just a year ago the employee was tied up and robbed. Why the police Joe….because we had a series of shoot-outs and people died Joe. The wonderful residents of Manhattan Valley are welcoming Joe and so, I suggest that you take that walk and tell us about the despair, the empty stores, the poor lighting and Joe take a look and perhaps you may see a gang or 2. Ask a parent that has children in the elementary school in this neighborhood what they think of the educational system here. They have no real choice Joe as where to send their children to school. The parents work and they have to pick up their children and go home. And by the way Joe that is no easy task. We have the gangs and we never know when there is a shoot-out.

    Take a good look at the affordable housing Joe….you have lots to chose from…..afterall we house 40% of all the affordable housing for the entire Upper West Side. Look at the condition of the affordable housing. Pretty ominous: for sure the condition of this housing would not be accepted beyond our souther borders or west of Broadway.

    We are waiting for your report.

  • Joe R.

    Easy answer to the gang issue would be to ask the City Council to get rid of NYC’s ludicrous gun control laws. When average citizens are packing, the gangs won’t have an advantage. Someone tries to rob a store, they end up DEAD at the hands of concerned citizens. Hang the body from a lamp post as an example of what happens to those who chose to victimize their fellow citizens. Problem solved. The police aren’t there to protect you. In fact, quite the contrary they’re part of the problem. Little doubt the gangs continue to exist in part because some police are paid off.

    FYI, I live in eastern Queens and grew up in a housing project myself. I’ll grant it wasn’t Trump Plaza but at the time (1960s) it provided decent housing to low income families. The local schools provided decent education. Somehow between then and now NYC forgot how to do this. Maybe we should see what we were doing back then and try it again. Evidently the way the NYCHA and DOE are being run now isn’t working. Part of the problem is the employees forgot they’re working for us, not the other way around.

    Another problem from your description of the area might be that you have large numbers of low income people crowded together. This invariably has bad consequences. I’m not saying the area should be gentrified, but some mix of buildings with lower through upper incomes will start helping to reduce all the issues you mention. People with high incomes pay a lot of taxes. When they don’t get their money’s worth, they tend to be very vocal about it to their representatives. Their representatives tend to listen. I can guarantee you the first time one of these higher income people gets caught in a shoot out the police will be on it. It’s sad it needs to be that way but that’s how it is. Police and governments just give lip service to poor people. The only way to avoid having areas end up like you described is by not having only poor people living in an area.

  • Vooch

    advocate for charging market clearing prices for storing your car on city streets. The shortage of parking would end quickly

  • ahwr

    I’m not saying the area should be gentrified, but some mix of buildings with lower through upper incomes will start helping to reduce all the issues you mention.

    Do you think expanding a homeless shelter and building below market housing on this site is a great idea then? Should it instead be market rate? Or half of the new housing should be market rate? How much of the below market stuff would be better sited a dozen or couple dozen blocks south? How much elsewhere in the city’s well off neighborhoods, including your own? But then you run into this problem:

    When they don’t get their money’s worth, they tend to be very vocal about it to their representatives. Their representatives tend to listen.

  • Isabella

    Don’t know but I think some of the commenters here can’t see the forest for the trees. This city has been overtaken by the massive proliferation of high end luxury condos and rentals. And you nice people are fighting over the crumbs. The problem is not the parking! The problem is you’ve been hoodwinked into believing that you deserve the crumbs. Your city government with few exceptions is controlled by big real estate. And it will remain so as long as the tax-paying citizens of this town don’t fight to preserve their homes, their quality of life, their parking garages, their hospitals, their gas stations, their Mom and Pop stores,their landmarks and their goods and services. When did New Yorkers lose the fight in them? The UWS was once a bastion of activism. Parking IS essential in this city. Period. These folks are paying for it. The group that has organized to protect that should not have to apologize to those who think otherwise or have bought the party line from the city and REBNY that parking and cars are either a luxury or evil. Do people need low income housing? You bet they do! They need it in some of those luxury high rises being built on every square inch of space from Rivington Street to Hudson Yards. The residents of Manhattan Valley and I might add much of the UWS should not be consistently required to lower their standard of living because of policies in this city which have displaced thousands of lower income tenants from places they called home in favor of often predatory developers who harassed them out and built homes for the very richest. Not because it was needed but because it was highly profitable. And they’ve somehow succeeded in convincing you that your needs should not matter-that you’re the bad guys who don’t want to give low income families a home. Please.
    This is simply not the democratic way. And we as New Yorkers should be standing up to those practices which are undermining our communities instead of fighting with each other. And by the way, I understand the parking garages in question house a large number of ambulances as well as cars. If the developer of low income housing and the city want to build housing on that particular lot, then let them do so by incorporating the same amount of parking which is currently available there. Or let them build elsewhere. This is your city! Fight for it.

  • Bernard Finucane

    Your community consists of cars and parking lots?

  • Vooch

    on edge of this map, one can see the number of people hurt by Drivers in Manhattan Valley in just 6 months. Traffic Violence is an epidemic in your neighborhood. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0442e34582153e3bb30a0658a7a6cf32c895a6a985ed3c3e680cb30a5153519a.jpg

  • Larry Littlefield

    For those looking to win on these sort of issues by some means other than waiting around for Generation Greed to die off, the only way is to convince those street parkers that new housing will not affect them.

    And the only way to do that is to have resident-only overnight (11 pm to 7 am) street parking by permit, limited those registered and insured in the area. With enforcement.

    With a nominal, fixed fee of (say $20 per month) for any individual with a registered and insured car in the area on the date of enactment, to buy off the existing parkers. And market rates for anyone new.

    And no additional permits given in areas found to have a “parking shortage,” just new permits issued as existing permits are not renewed. Kind of like the taxi medallions.

    The handing out of feudal privileges to insiders and the expense of everyone else and the future is one of the worst thing about New York politics, particularly when selfish entitlement hides behind egalitarian rhetoric. But it is the reality. As offensive as it is, in this one case I say work with it.

    It is a way to get the buildings now. While still waiting for Generation Greed to die off, with market pricing for those to follow. The generations that are used to be being make worse off by those who came before.

  • MR

    At some point we also need to start to plan for a driverless car future, which makes the suggestion of building more parking on this site even more ridiculous. I do think NYC has a real problem with encouraging new residents who move from places where they own cars to bring their cars since there is available free parking on the street. Many of these folks subsequently use those cars on the weekend to visit family and friends in Pennsylvannia, Conneticut or DC, all while maintaining residency in those places and skirting city income taxes. I would say we should ban street parking from 1am to 6am except for city residents who can be given a parking sticker. All others would either have to purchase a nightly permit for $20 or a yearly pass for $1500. Giving away free parking in this city is ridiculous when I would guess as many 20 percent of those cars don’t belong to someone who is a tax paying resident of NYC.

  • Larry Littlefield

    Speaking as someone who worked may years as a city planner, I can tell you there is almost no such thing as planning for the future, driverless car or otherwise.

    There is only planning to preserve the past, at the behest of those who benefit from it.

    New independent organizations such as businesses are more likely to create the future. Generally overcoming the opposition of existing organizations in business and government.

  • Vooch

    Disagree – city could gradually implement charging for parking in certain core areas. City already charges overnight parking on most Manhatfan Avenues.

    Simply expand the areas with meters first. Then gradually implement variable pricing. It might take 5-7 years.

  • Bernard Finucane

    108th is absurdly overwide. They should put in slanted parking on one side to mollify the residents.

    Parking meters for daytime parking at least should also be in place.

  • Vooch

    disagree – 108th is the perfect width for playing children’s games. 108th should be dedicated to the school’s use during school days from 0600 -1800. No car storage and no driving on roadway during school days

  • Bernard Finucane

    You mean between Amsterdam and Columbus?

  • Vooch

    streets in front of schools should be open for children on school days. 108th has a elementary school

  • JamesR

    NYC, unlike almost every other first tier US city, does not do comprehensive planning. IIRC the last attempted comp plan was in the 1960s and did not pass the city council. The planning (such as it is) that does took place is done in an ad hoc manner with zoning as the primary tool utilized to regulate the built environment, as opposed to proactive planning.

  • walks bikes drives

    I am strongly for the idea of residential parking permits with enforcement. But sorry, the garages are better for housing people. And before any of the parking garagers start trying to challenge me, I’m also a 10025er.

  • walks bikes drives

    Dude, you are showing your age. No one plays stickball anymore. It’s all about Pokimon Go!

  • Vooch

    how much should a residential parking permit cost per month on UWS ?

  • walks bikes drives

    I would say a slightly higher per month fee, say $40 per month or $400 annual. Restrict parking earlier in the evening. Residential parking only from 7pm-6am. I don’t believe Vooch is correct on overnight parking meters, bit meters should be in effect 24 hours a day. On avenues with 1 hour parking, etc., at 7pm it allows overnight parking at the same hourly rate as the daytime meter. A permit can give a driver the privilege of parking with thrwe or four blocks north or south of their home street, river to park on the west side. Not sure about east side. Maybe two zones, 5th to 3rd and 3rd to River. Tow out of state plates during overnight hours.

  • walks bikes drives

    See way above.

  • Joe R.

    I was thinking something similar. Stickball seems to have been a thing for my late father’s generation (those who are in their 80s or close to it now).

  • Joe R.

    What rubs me the wrong way about this idea is you’re giving a special privilege which will never be given out again to those who are already living in an area. We’ve already seen way too much of this in the form of higher Social Security benefits for those born before about 1950, multi-tier pension plans which give new people lower pay and less benefits, retroactive pension increases for long-time municipal workers, and so forth.

    It might be time for the younger generation to start taking a stand. Just implement market rate parking for all. Or better yet ban overnight curbside car storage altogether and see what the free market rate of garages will be. Simple economics will dictate whether we build garages or housing depending upon what people are willing to pay to store their car. My guess on that is not much given how people have been spoiled for decades with free curbside parking. In all likelihood then full implementation of this idea will mean pretty much close to zero available car storage. That’s a good thing on many levels. Either people won’t have cars, or they’ll have to store them in the suburbs. That includes those from Generation Greed. Either way they won’t be using them in the city.

    I say start drawing a line in the sand. This generation has taken enough. The very least they can do at this point is either give up their car habit, or move to places where it causes fewer problems.

  • Vooch

    Residential Parking Permit should cost 10% more than a parking garage

  • walks bikes drives

    That doesn’t actually make sense unless the specific space is reserved for a person. In a parking garage, you have a guaranteed spot, you just pull in and go. For street parking, there is still no absolute guarantee of a spot, or where exactly that spot will be. There are still further requirements to move your car, such as alternate side. You also have to deal with snow, and your car is subjected to the elements. A street spot will always be of a much lower value than an off street, indoor parking spot.

  • Vooch

    proximity might cancel out the reserved spot.

    so then make it cost the same as a off street garage space

  • walks bikes drives

    There is no guarantee of proximity except for sitting in your car during the alternate side shuffle. I know the most opportune times to find a spot right now, and am lucky enough to have the flexibility to find parking during those times, and I am typically parked much further away from my building than the nearest parking garage. Plus, there are still all the other issues of on street parking vs off street, including others I did not mention, such as higher insurance premiums, dents and dings, increased risk of vandalism (my car was keyed by some nice guy last month), and increased risk of break in and/or theft. Offstreet garage parking is a much greater premium than on street parking. Even in places around the country where covered parking is available to reserved spots, the roof overhead of the car comes at a premium. Pricing a street parking space at Market Rate will never come close to the cost of an offstreet garage.


Chin Urges Council Colleagues to Turn Parking Into Affordable Housing

Last month, Manhattan City Council Member Margaret Chin asked the de Blasio administration to prioritize affordable housing over car storage by replacing a city-owned parking garage in her district with new apartments. Acknowledging that the decision might be politically difficult, last week Chin urged her City Council colleagues to follow her lead if they want to tackle […]

De Blasio Housing Plan Meekly Suggests Parking Reform

There’s a deep connection between parking policy and housing affordability. The more space New York devotes to car storage, the less space is available to house people. And yet, 50 year old laws mandating the construction of parking in new residential development persist in most of the city, driving up construction costs and hampering the […]