Comments on: State Opposes City Plan for Hell’s Kitchen Parking

By: Hilary

Hilary — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:35:35 +0000

In the case of an entire area being planned, like Hudson Yards, maybe it would make sense to create off-street parking and severely (severely!) reduce all on-street parking, so people coming into the area and those who live there won't even consider it an option. Just the small possibility of people snagging a spot on the street causes so much of the cruising. It would also end double-parking.

By: Larry Littlefield

Larry Littlefield — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:11:11 +0000

(The idea of relaxing them is ludicrous at a time when we are trying to limit vehicles entering the core.)

Well, we agree on that one, to an extent.

If a charge were really used to keep traffic down, then it might make sense to try to shift parking from the street to off the street for those vehicles that continue to come. As it is the charge is uncertain, and the parking will all be in one area.

On the other hand, why not have people park at Shea Stadium/the Meadowlands and take a train to Hudson Yards from there? In particular, drivers from geographic Long Island to that area would be a disaster, as they would have to crawl across Midtown.

By: Carolyn Konheim

Carolyn Konheim — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:16:31 +0000

I write as the former regional director of NYSDEC who in the mid-70s held City Planning's feet to the fire in writing the Zoning limitations on parking below 60th Street when Brian Ketcham and NRDC succeeded in the US Supreme Court in upholding Brian's comprehensive Clean Air Act plan for NYC and NYS, which included the revolutionary limits on parking. The idea of relaxing them is ludicrous at a time when we are trying to limit vehicles entering the core. Of course, CO was just a surrogate for other pollutants we couldn't measure as well or, like CO2, hadn't thought of. The demand for this scale of parking is precisely why this was a bad site for a stadium and to impose it now without the excuse of a stadium raise questions about the City's commitment to PlanNYC.

By: Carolyn Konheim

Carolyn Konheim — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:11:48 +0000

I write as the former regional director of NYSDEC who in the mid-70s held City Planning's feeet to the fire in writing the Zoning limitations on parking below 60th Street when Brian Ketcam and NRDC succeeded in the US Supreme Court in upholding Brian's comprehensive Clean Air Act plan for NYC and NYS, which included the revolutionary limits on parking. The idea of relaxing them is ludicrous at a time when we are trying to limit vehicles entering rhe core. Of course, CO was just a surrogate for other pollutats we couldn't measure as well or, like CO2, hadn't thought of. The demand for this scle of parking is precisely why this was a bad site for a stadium annd to impose it now wothout the excuse of a stadium raise questions about the City's commitment to PlanNYC.

By: Davis

Davis — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 03:26:58 +0000

Duh! You have no idea what you are talking about. There is no required parking in the rest of the Manhattan CBD which, you may have noticed, has lots of office space, residential towers and plenty of new development happening. If you talk to developers you'll find, for the most part, that they don't want to be required to build parking in high density and high rent parts of Manhattan. The Hudson Yards parking requirements are a complete anomaly, contrary to the Mayor's PlaNYC goals and it is not at all clear who these parking requirements are meant to serve.

By: Angus Grieve-Smith

Angus Grieve-Smith — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 03:04:32 +0000

Duh! to you too. I don't want parking used to "promote" new construction: if it isn't transit friendly, it shouldn't be built in Manhattan.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 02:54:04 +0000

The real mystery is why Tri-State Transportation Campaign is playing dumb (at best) or lying. The zoning is hardly a relic, it had nothing to do with the stadium or the Olympic Bid, and is promoting construction of 24 million SF of office space as well as many residential towers ... and that doesn't even include the Western Rail Yards, what's being planned for Moynihan/MSG or the entire High Line area. That's why they need all those parking spaces. Duh!

By: Dave H.

Dave H. — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:49:13 +0000

It turns out New York does not have to secede after all. Albany is actually good for something.

By: Hilary

Hilary — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:33:43 +0000

It is confounding to me that there seem be no plans to connect either the 7 extension or the new Penn Station with the waterferries. Let NJ come to the circus and games and concerts by water. And let the new residents of the west side park their cars in NJ - or just take the ferry over to shop.