Housing or Parking? NYC Council Member’s Twisted Logic

Council member Selvena Brooks-Powers is one of those politicians who would negotiate for more parking as opposed to reduced rents.

She might dispute that characterization, but consider her opinion on the City of Yes proposal now before the City Council.

Brooks-Powers opposes a reform that would let apartment developers decide what their customers want — a parking spot under the building, some other amenity, or just to pay less per square foot for their apartments.

The Queens Council member is a Democrat, but forget the stereotype that Democrats like to tell businesses how to operate even though they have never run a business themselves: The City Council’s Republicans and conservative Democrats also want to preserve parking mandates. The progressives actually favor letting developers choose how much parking to build.

As The Real Deal’s Kathryn Brenzel wrote in an excellent roundup of the first public hearing for the pro-housing plan, Brooks-Powers argued that eliminating parking requirements would put her at a disadvantage in rezoning negotiations.

A quick synopsis of how rezonings work: A developer seeks new zoning to build something New Yorkers want rather than what city planners decades ago thought was needed. The local Council member then presents a list of demands, usually including more affordability and community benefits, such as money for a nearby playground or improving a subway entrance. If they come to terms, the rezoning is granted.

Brooks-Powers believes eliminating parking mandates would cost her leverage in those negotiations because besides pushing for goodies for her district, she would also need to fight for parking.

It’s sad that she would even think about sacrificing housing affordability in favor of parking, but the reality is that she would not have to. Developers whose potential customers need parking would provide it on their own.

What developers will not voluntarily provide is money-losing units, otherwise known as affordable housing. Those are apartments with rents not exceeding 30 percent of the earnings of a tenant making, say, 80 percent or less of the area median income.

The more parking that developers have to build, the less affordable housing they can provide.

Most Council members have come to realize that building apartments in New York City is not so lucrative that developers can hand the local politician a blank check. Developers must show lenders that a project will be profitable enough to justify the risk of financing it. Defaults on project loans are not uncommon.

One problem with parking mandates is that they inevitably yield excess parking in some projects, such as those geared to senior citizens or to young adults who ride subways, bikes, scooters and Ubers. Right now, developers have to negotiate for a reduction in parking when the city requires too much.

Parking mandates also encourage some people to have cars and to drive when they otherwise wouldn’t, because they always have a spot to come back to. That increases congestion.

If Brooks-Powers figures this out and still insists on parking mandates, it would show that housing affordability is not a priority for her. Based on past experience, that’s a possibility.