Skip to content

Posts from the "Department of City Planning" Category

25 Comments

Can Atlantic Ave Become a Great Street? DCP Will Study the Possibilities

The Department of City Planning has launched a study of Atlantic Avenue between Vanderbilt and Ralph Avenues. The study area stretches two blocks in either direction. Image: DCP

The Department of City Planning has launched a study of Atlantic Avenue between Vanderbilt and Ralph Avenues. The study area stretches two blocks in either direction. Image: DCP

Atlantic Avenue is one of the most prominent streets in Brooklyn, but it’s also one of the most dangerous. The major thoroughfare, paralleled by the LIRR and a subway line just two blocks away, remains a barrier between neighborhoods, plagued by speeding traffic and lined with auto body shops. Can it become an urban street that welcomes people instead of repelling them? The Department of City Planning is going to look at the possibilities along 2.4 miles of Atlantic Avenue.

DOT made Atlantic the first arterial slow zone in the city to receive a 25 mph speed limit, and volunteers with Transportation Alternatives have adopted it as one of their advocacy priorities. Borough President Eric Adams imagines a completely revamped Atlantic Avenue with new development and pedestrian-friendly streets. “In ten years’ time we want to see a completely different Atlantic Avenue,” he told Streetsblog in April.

That effort is getting an assist from the Department of City Planning’s transportation division, which launched a study of Atlantic between Vanderbilt Avenue and Ralph Avenue. While it doesn’t cover the entire stretch to East New York and into Queens, these 2.4 miles includes key sections of Clinton Hill, Bedford-Stuyvesant, and Crown Heights.

Read more…

58 Comments

Weisbrod and Kimball Tie Their Own Hands on Parking Reform

Reducing the amount of parking in new development promises to make housing more affordable and curb traffic congestion, but it hasn’t gained much traction in Bill de Blasio’s first months at City Hall, despite the mayor’s ambitious promises to ease the housing crunch. Today, two top city officials explained why, unlike their counterparts in more car-dependent cities, New York’s leaders are suggesting only the meekest changes to off-street parking policy.

City Planning Commission Chair Carl Weisbrod and EDC President Kyle Kimball. Photos: DCP and EDC

City Planning Commission Chair Carl Weisbrod and EDC President Kyle Kimball. Photos: DCP and EDC

The mayor’s housing plan recommends lower parking requirements for affordable housing near transit, senior housing, and commercial development that also includes residential units. At a Municipal Art Society forum this morning, Planning Director Carl Weisbrod highlighted these reforms as one of the ways the mayor’s housing plan aims to reduce the cost of construction — but only in places where car ownership is very low.

“Other areas have to be examined more carefully,” Weisbrod said after the event. “What we’re looking at is how we can appropriately reduce the cost of construction while not having a significant — or any — impact on the quality of life in neighborhoods.”

This outlook matches the philosophy of DCP’s nascent parking plan for “inner ring” neighborhoods, which lists “maintaining an adequate supply of residential parking for people who choose to own a vehicle” among its ”quality of life” goals. The result: DCP tries to tailor the city’s parking regulations to local car ownership rates, rather than using parking policy as a tool to make housing more affordable and reduce traffic.

DCP isn’t the only place where the tail wags the parking policy dog. If anything, things are worse at the Economic Development Corporation.

EDC President Kyle Kimball said he follows Streetsblog and that while he supports our policy angle, he takes issue with how we’ve reported about EDC projects. “[EDC] never had a policy of incentivizing parking as an economic development strategy,” he said. “Actually, at the end of the day it ends up costing the city. Developers don’t want to build parking, either.”

Yet EDC’s projects often include massive amounts of parking. At Yankee Stadium, EDC arranged public financing for 9,000 mostly-empty parking spaces whose operator defaulted on tax-exempt bonds. “The Bronx parking situation was one where they put in the right amount of parking at the time, given what they thought and what the Yankees were willing to pay for,” Kimball said of the subsidized project.

To hear Kimball tell it, the parking was done in by an over-performing train station. “There has turned out to be more commuting from that Metro-North station than the EIS anticipated,” he said. “So do I think it was a mistake to build the parking? No. Do I think the EIS could have been done differently? Yes.”

Read more…

5 Comments

DCP Flubs Research on How Off-Street Parking Affects Traffic

In its latest parking report, the Department of City Planning claimed that residential off-street parking is not linked to increased driving, contradicting previous research. In response, the parking policy experts who produced that research are reprimanding the agency for jumping to conclusions based on insufficient evidence. The flub by DCP could have big consequences, because it undermines part of the rationale for eliminating parking mandates.

A majority of car owners in "inner ring" neighborhoods park for free on the street. Image: DCP

About half of “inner ring” off-street parkers use a space away from their home. Image: DCP

At the end of last year, DCP released a report setting the stage for changes to off-street parking regulations in the “inner ring” — areas of Upper Manhattan, the Bronx, Brooklyn, and Queens that have good subway access.

“The report has many valuable findings,” NYU parking policy expert Zhan Guo said in an email, “but this particular one and the associated policy conclusion does not make any sense.”

Car ownership in the inner ring is below the citywide average: 65 percent of inner ring households are car-free, and 28 percent own one car, compared to citywide levels of 54 and 32 percent, respectively.

People who do own cars in the inner ring are most likely to park them on the street for free: 59 percent said they used on-street parking, mostly near their place of residence, while 39 percent used off-street parking.

On-street and off-street parkers used their cars for similar purposes, with on-street parkers slightly more likely to have used their vehicles in the past seven days for virtually all types of trips, from errands to visiting family and friends. Notably, on- and off-street parkers differed significantly on commuting to work: On-street parkers were 50 percent more likely than off-street parkers to drive to work, with nearly half of people who stored their cars on the street saying they drove to work in the past seven days.

DCP said its data does “not support the hypothesis that Inner Ring households with an off-street parking space use their cars more frequently for journey-to-work trips than households that park on-street.” At first blush, this contrasts with research from NYU’s Guo, published in 2013, and parking policy expert Rachel Weinberger, published in 2008 and 2012, showing that availability of at-home off-street parking in New York City neighborhoods increases the likelihood that a car owner will drive for a range of trips, including journeys to work.

A closer look shows that DCP’s data does not give any reason to question existing research. There are two key reasons why. “The destinations matter,” Weinberger said. “It also makes a difference where your off-street spot is.”

Read more…

3 Comments

De Blasio Appoints Carl Weisbrod to Head Up the Planning Department

Mayor Bill de Blasio has named Carl Weisbrod to lead the Department of City Planning. Weisbrod, who co-chaired de Blasio’s transition team and has deep experience in city government, now commands a post with tremendous power to shape the quality of New York City’s built environment. Of particular interest for the city’s transportation and housing future will be how vigorously Weisbrod pursues reform of NYC’s parking minimums, which Amanda Burden, the previous planning commissioner, barely touched.

Carl Weisbrod

In a statement, the mayor’s office said Weisbrod will be charged with “using all the tools at the city’s disposal to lift up working New Yorkers, keep neighborhoods affordable, and create stronger, more resilient communities.”

Weisbrod is an insider whose resume includes spearheading Times Square revitalization efforts under Ed Koch and starting up the NYC Economic Development Corporation under David Dinkins. More recently, as head of Trinity Church’s downtown real estate arm, he helped create the Hudson Square BID. Weisbrod is currently a partner with real estate consulting firm HR&A Advisors.

While EDC has developed a well-earned reputation for patronage and parking subsidies, especially in parts of town outside the Manhattan core, Weisbrod built his career mainly in places where the walking environment couldn’t be ignored. He seems to have a good feel, at least by association, for what makes city streets work. The Hudson Square BID, for instance, has been a major proponent of pedestrian safety and public space improvements the last few years.

Still, Weisbrod doesn’t bring quite the same clear-cut policy chops as some other contenders. One of the most important reforms the planning department can spearhead is the elimination of parking mandates that drive up the cost of housing and generate traffic. Anna Hayes Levin, a member of the City Planning Commission who early in the transition was rumored to be in the running for the position, fought against the 17,500 parking spaces called for in the city’s initial plan for Hudson Yards when she was a member of Community Board 4. (Advocates successfully sued the city and a cap of 6,100 spaces was implemented instead.) And Vicki Been, the director of NYU’s Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy who was reportedly a finalist for the spot, authored the definitive report about how parking minimums making housing in New York less affordable.

Weisbrod’s insider perspective could be an asset if the administration decides to stop building suburban levels of parking as part of most city-subsidized redevelopment projects. Many of the projects that build parking-saturated development on city land are driven by masters of finance, and Weisbrod speaks their language.

9 Comments

DCP Releases Timid Parking Reform Study for the Boroughs

A report from the Department of City Planning issued during the final days of the Bloomberg administration is a trove of data about parking, but a look behind the pretty maps reveals a department that remains focused on dictating the supply of parking spaces and reluctant to use its power to reduce traffic and improve housing affordability. Mayor de Blasio and his to-be-announced city planning commissioner will have to fix this backwards approach to turn parking reform into an effective tool for the administration’s affordability agenda.

After targeting Downtown Brooklyn and the Manhattan Core, DCP is looking at parking in the “inner ring.” Map: DCP

Under Amanda Burden, the Department of City Planning acknowledged the negative impact of parking mandates on environmental and affordability goals, then ignored many of those concerns when it came time to setting actual parking policy. Instead, the Bloomberg administration preferred to tinker with decades-old parking mandates in a few locations while preserving them across most of the five boroughs, using the promise of off-street parking as a bargaining chip to quell residents skittish about new development.

Absent a course correction from the de Blasio administration, this broken approach to parking could continue on auto-pilot. Timid half-measures that DCP made in the Manhattan core and Downtown Brooklyn appear set to spread to adjacent neighborhoods in the “inner ring” covering much of the Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn and upper Manhattan.

In a report released last month examining parking in those neighborhoods, DCP set the stage for future policy changes by casting itself as the arbiter of parking demand. The report discusses how to adjust parking requirements to match that demand, rather than using policy as a tool to reduce traffic and drive down the cost of housing for all New Yorkers.

There is one bright spot in the report: the recommendations for income-restricted affordable housing. “Parking facilities are often expensive to construct and affect the cost of constructing residential buildings,” says the report, noting that the median cost of structured parking in New York City is the highest in the country at $21,000 per space — sometimes spiking as high as $50,000 per space. “Excessive parking requirements could hinder housing production, making housing less affordable,” it says. But instead of applying this logic to all new housing, the report focuses narrowly on subsidized units.

“Affordable housing is more susceptible than market-rate housing to the cost implications of requiring accessory parking,” the report says, noting that low-income residents are less likely to own cars and less able to pay for parking. “Updating requirements for affordable housing to better match the needs of its residents can reduce construction costs and enable more affordable units to be built.”

This issue plays out constantly in the city. In Harlem right now, a developer is looking to reduce costs by building fewer parking spaces than required, and some community board members want the savings to go toward providing more affordable housing units, according to DNAinfo. But the implications for affordable housing aren’t limited to subsidized units. If the city eliminated all parking requirements, more resources could be devoted to building homes and apartments, not car storage, and housing overall would become more affordable.

Read more…

15 Comments

Queens CB 5 Set to Move Ahead With Bike Lane Planning, Plaza Construction

In Queens, Community Board 2 has garnered attention for its partnership with DOT on bike route planning. Immediately to the southeast, CB 5 has been busy working with the Department of City Planning on a parallel effort to map out routes in Ridgewood, Maspeth, and Middle Village that could receive bike lanes as soon as fall of next year.

Ridgewood, Middle Village, and Maspeth are missing the bike lanes that neighboring areas to the north and west enjoy. CB 5 is looking to change that. Map: NYC DOT

Last year, the community board approached DOT asking for new bike lanes; while DOT will handle implementation in CB 5, it has handed off planning for the area to DCP’s transportation planning division. Community meetings over the spring and summer led DCP to develop a list of routes:

  • Eliot Avenue from Metropolitan Avenue to Woodhaven Boulevard;
  • Juniper Boulevard South from 69th Street to Dry Harbor Road;
  • Woodward Avenue, Onderdonk Avenue, and connecting streets from Metropolitan Avenue to Cypress Hills Cemetery;
  • Central Avenue and Cooper Avenue from Cypress Hills Street to Woodhaven Boulevard;
  • 69th Street from Calamus Avenue to Metropolitan Avenue; and
  • 80th Street from the Long Island Expressway to Myrtle Avenue.

There are four additional routes that could receive further study: Grand Avenue, a north-south route between Ridgewood and Maspeth, a route between Ridgewood and Bushwick, and a loop around Juniper Valley Park. CB 5 transportation committee member John Maier said DCP was also considering a route along Rust Street, connecting to streets near Woodside.

“That’s just what they’re looking at; it doesn’t mean they’re going to get any specific treatment,” Maier said, adding that DCP staff is currently taking measurements of streets and coming up with design treatments for some of the streets. DCP will host another workshop with the community board next month to show its preliminary recommendations. Those projects could be implemented as soon as fall 2014. (DCP and DOT have not responded to questions from Streetsblog.)

Read more…

9 Comments

DC’s Scaled-Back Parking Reforms Still Way More Ambitious Than NYC’s

For five years, Washington, DC, has been preparing a comprehensive rewrite of its zoning code — including the elimination of parking minimums in areas well-served by bus or rail. Under pressure from opponents afraid it would make it harder for them to find on-street parking, DC planning chief Harriet Tregoning announced on Friday that the city will scale back its parking reforms. Now, parking mandates will be eliminated only in downtown and adjacent neighborhoods, and halved along transit-accessible corridors.

Parking requirements make it very common for new buildings in NYC to devote prime ground floor space to car storage. Photo: Travis Eby/Architect's Newspaper

The news is undeniably a setback for parking reform in DC, prompting local urbanists to question whether giving ground on parking minimums is a good strategy, and if it might have been better to aim higher from the beginning.

From New York, though, the perspective is different. Even the scaled-back version of DC’s parking reforms seems like an ambitious, large-scale proposal compared to the timid changes coming from the Department of City Planning under Amanda Burden.

New York’s only significant reform of parking minimums under Burden and Mayor Bloomberg was to halve the requirements in Downtown Brooklyn, one of the nation’s most transit-accessible business districts. A few years ago there was some buzz about reducing parking requirements for “inner ring” neighborhoods – which would have been roughly equivalent to what’s on the table in DC now — but that ultimately went nowhere. Parking mandates remain in effect almost everywhere in the city aside from Manhattan south of 110th Street.

To implement a New York version of what’s currently on the table in DC, the city would eliminate parking minimums in downtown Brooklyn and cut them in half near subway stations and major bus routes throughout the city. But despite New York’s far more extensive transit system, the Bloomberg administration has by and large refused to touch the rules that require developers to build new parking — a system that makes traffic worse and drives up the cost of housing for everyone. Instead, the administration uses the guarantee of new parking to assuage residents worried about the impact of new development.

At a public meeting last month about converting the Sheridan Expressway to a surface street, one resident was worried that the plan, which would open up new land for development, would reduce the amount of available parking and lead to a parking crunch. “There are requirements under the zoning resolution as to how much parking is required,” replied Ted Weinstein, director of Bronx planning at the Department of Housing Preservation and Development. The resident had his question answered, and didn’t raise the issue again.

What if Bloomberg’s sustainability plan, PlaNYC 2030, had included the elimination of parking minimums near transit, like DC originally proposed? Maybe that would have been weakened by politics, the same as in DC. But scaled-back reforms are better than no reforms.

2 Comments

City Releases New Design Recommendations for Sidewalks

The latest update to the city's Active Design Guidelines recommends treatments for the four “planes” framing the sidewalk — the canopy, the ground plane, the building wall, and the roadside. Photo: Center for Active Design

Last month at the the eighth Fit City conference, the same day DOT unveiled a new pedestrian wayfinding initiative, the city released an update to its Active Design Guidelines focusing specifically on sidewalk design. Although the new guidelines are just suggestions, the new document lays out a vision for how the city’s sidewalks can be designed to encourage more walking, and it has the imprimatur of the mayor and the commissioners of transportation, city planning, health, and design and construction.

The two-part document, funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, categorizes its recommendations into four “planes” framing the sidewalk — the canopy, the ground plane, the building wall, and the roadside. The authors visited more than 30 sidewalks in six cities to observe and measure what gets people to walk more, and what doesn’t. The guide recognizes the many types of sidewalks in New York, from busy Midtown to quiet residential streets lined with trees and lawns. It identifies six attributes of a good sidewalk: safety, accessibility, sustainability and resilience, human scale, continuous variety, and connectivity.

Although the report does not propose specific regulatory changes, it does include general suggestions for how zoning, agency design guides, and other rules can be used to improve the sidewalk experience.

The report recommends constant variety in retail stores — also known as “skinny storefronts” – to foster an engaging environment for walking. On the Upper West Side, a rezoning last year restricted storefront width to 40 feet, with the goal of keeping blocks from becoming monotonous and uninviting to pedestrians.

These types of policies can make or break a streetscape. On Fourth Avenue in Brooklyn, a wave of new development following a 2003 rezoning faced the sidewalk with big blank walls and parking lots. Eventually the Department of City Planning updated the zoning, banning garages next to the sidewalk on the avenue and mandating some retail on ground floors.

9 Comments

City Council Passes Changes to Manhattan Core Parking Regulations

This afternoon, the City Council passed the Manhattan Core parking text amendment with a vote of 47-0, with one abstention (Jessica Lappin). The zoning change, which modifies off-street parking rules in the densest parts of Manhattan, is as good as law now, with Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s approval basically a given.

A change to parking regulations in the Manhattan Core could be "a necessary prerequisite for any future parking reform." Image: DCP

The zoning change modifies the city’s 1982 shift from mandatory parking minimums to parking maximums in this part of Manhattan, which was spurred by the Clean Air Act. The regulations apply to Manhattan below West 110th Street and East 96th Street with limited exceptions, including Hudson Yards on the Far West Side. Parking minimums are still in force in almost all of the rest of the city.

The amendment includes a number of positive changes, including:

  • Removing language that could be read as requiring parking for affordable housing units;
  • Allowing buildings built before 1982, which had been required to build parking, to reduce or eliminate parking, though permission must be obtained from the City Planning Commission;
  • Expanding the amount of space allowed in commercial districts for car rental and car-sharing vehicles; and
  • Providing regulations governing the design and operation of automated parking garages.

The amendment would also weaken the distinction between public parking spaces, which can be used by anyone, and accessory parking spaces, which are intended for a building’s tenants and visitors. The new regulations allow accessory spaces to be opened to the public, giving developers a green light to build publicly-accessible parking until they reach the maximums in the zoning code — set at 20 percent of residential units below 60th Street and 35 percent of units on the Upper East Side and Upper West Side.

Many garages that were built for use by building tenants are currently operated and licensed by the Department of Consumer Affairs as public garages — no one enforces the rule against turning accessory parking into public parking. Instead of trying to tweak this laxly enforced system, the new regulations legitimize the existing practice of treating nearly all parking as public parking.

Some experts, including David King of Columbia University, argue that accessory parking should be eliminated entirely and replaced with a “shared parking” model that treats the total parking supply as a pool available to the public. The accessory parking model is fundamentally flawed, King says, because it assumes that certain land uses have an intrinsic need for parking that should be met by the zoning code. Weakening the accessory parking model is “the single best thing the city could do,” King told Streetsblog after DCP released the proposal last November. ”It is a necessary prerequisite for any future parking reform.”

Read more…

No Comments

Planning Commission Approves Manhattan Core Parking Regulation Changes

Yesterday, the City Planning Commission approved modifications to off-street parking regulations in the Manhattan Core, below East 96th Street and West 110th Street. Significant changes to the city’s only parking maximums, which have helped cut down on traffic in the city’s congested core since 1982, are on track for final approval from the City Council. Although the final proposal itself has not been released to the public by the Department of City Planning, the commission gave its unanimous approval.

The changes affect Community Boards 1 through 8, excluding the Hudson Yards district being developed on the Far West Side. Areas in red have stricter parking maximums than areas in orange. Image: DCP

The changes include some positive developments, such as eliminating parking requirements for affordable housing, retroactively applying post-1982 parking maximums to earlier development (thereby allowing parking spots to be repurposed for other uses), and new regulations for automated garages.

Community Boards 1 through 8 have already weighed in [PDF]. While some boards offered single-page letters of support, others produced in-depth critiques of the Department of City Planning’s proposal.

Community Boards 1, 2, 4, and 7, for example, expressed opposition to the more controversial changes, such as formally allowing accessory parking (which is intended to serve only building residents and visitors) to be opened to the public, and loosening the special permit process for building garages that exceed the maximums.

In a presentation on March 4 [PDF], DCP staff said the agency is tweaking the proposal to address some of these concerns. While the plan will continue to open accessory parking to public use, the special permit process for parking garages will be modified. The process will keep requirements for developers to state whether a new parking garage will increase traffic congestion (a requirement the proposal had initially discarded), and will allow the commission to consider vacancy levels in existing parking facilities surrounding a proposed garage. Supposedly, if they find there’s already an ample supply of parking nearby, the commission may use that fact to deny a request.

Special permits would continue to be granted, however, as long as the planning commission deems the garage permit request to be “reasonable.” “We think this description is entirely too vague,” said CB 4 transportation committee co-chair Christine Berthet. “‘Reasonable’ is really not a standard.”

So far, DCP has only shown the presentation about the updated parking proposal — the specifics have yet to be released. “The devil is in the details,” said Berthet. “Between the PowerPoint and the text amendment, it’s a huge space to cross.”

The full amendment could be released as soon as tomorrow. ”The modified text amendment is currently being proofed and approved,” said Michael Shilstone, a department spokesperson.

Borough President Scott Stringer has not yet expressed a public opinion on the proposed parking changes, a major transportation and environmental policy affecting the majority of the borough.

The City Council’s zoning subcommittee may take up the proposal at its next meeting on April 3, followed by the land use committee the next day, though agendas have yet to be released.