It’s possible, and I suppose it’s actually encouraged. New developments in Williamsburg even seem to have quite a bit of room for parking. Not that it should be outlawed per se, but I think it’s ridiculous for the city to encourage it. There are already traffic jams, and they want to add more cars?

I don’t why alleys are supposed to be a useful design tool. They seem like space that could be utilized to put more housing, though hardly wasteful like large-scale parking complexes are wasteful. Actually, I’d extend that criticism to housing blocks too. Not only are they ugly, but they utilize space terribly, at best, and seem to at worst encourage urban decay.

I personally favor transit-friendly multifamily dwellings like we built at the turn of the century. They tend to foster the most community, and are very comfortable and convenient when located near mass transit. They necessarily aren’t hyper-dense like Manhattan. Sadly, they seem to be discouraged by planners these days – perhaps because they really don’t accommodate cars very well.

I think the worst direction to go in is more superblocks. Sadly, larger-scale development than the kind I favor may be the only way to get a good return on an investment though. If you buy a plot of land and need to spend several hundred thousand dollars tearing down previous construction, you need a pretty big structure to replace it before you start actually profiting. I’m not sure what to do about that.

Yeah, I generalized but if you are building a large block development it could be possible to put parking underneath a larger building only serviced by one driveway ramp. Probably not all that feasible with most single family home lots without destroying the streetscape unless there are alleyways behind.

BTW Alleys are WAY cool and an urban design tool all too often forgotten by NYC folks. They are exceptionally popular in urban places in the Phillysphere (the general Philly Metro area) and are perfect for hiding cars, garbage, etc. (all thing ugly).

The other report Guaranteed Parking – Guaranteed Driving does make a concise measurement showing that “Jackson Heights residents are 45% more likely to drive to work in the CBD than Park Slope residents.” Coupled with the prior report it would seem to be a solid case that off-street residential parking translates into more commuter driving, since transit access is actually poorer and people richer in Park Slope. However there must be another factor and that is guaranteed parking at ones destination. If the Jackson Heights residents are commuting into Manhattan, it is only because they are finding parking. Eliminate the destination parking and you eliminate the possibility of driving to work downtown.

My personal experience in denser European (German) cities has been that most new residential construction has one space per unit (often well hidden underground) but few even bother to drive in the city because the mass transit is cheap, comprehensive, quick and clean while driving is slow, expensive and bothersome and parking impossible to find downtown.

Hmmm… Maybe I answered part of my question.

Still, people will continue to commute to work with a car as long as they can find parking. I think that is where TA’s efforts should be focused at least as much as it is on the residential side.

That report compares Jackson Heights to Park Slope. Despite Park Slope having higher car ownership, Jackson Heights residents are 45% more likely to drive to work in the Manhattan CBD and 28% more likely to commute by car in general. The authors (I was one)concluded that this was because Jackson Heights has far more off-street (guaranteed) residential parking. It is this, free and guaranteed, residential parking which fosters such relatively high rate of car trips.

Also, see this:

http://capntransit.blogspot.com/2009/06/building-constituency-of-car-free.html

I’ve always wondered if providing off-street parking at residential sites is less of an issue then providing parking at the destinations, such as commercial, office, etc.

I could see providing one parking space per unit even in some denser locations in NYC. My thinking is if there isn’t anyplace to park for cheap at the destination within the city then you are not as likely to want to use the car. Instead you would leave the car at home and us transit or maybe even a taxi.

However, the private car would still be there to be used on occasion, to visit places that are not well served by transit and are typically outside the city, such as gradma’s in the suburbs or a ski weekend in Vermont.

Anybody got a good reason why this hypothesis isn’t so?