Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Opinion

Opinion

Proposed East Midtown Transit Measure is ‘Zoning for Dollars’


City Planning Vision

East Midtown (image: City Planning)


As city officials contemplate new zoning regulations for East Midtown, it's important that they avoid “zoning for dollars,” whereby zoning variances are granted to build larger buildings in exchange for cash payments to the city’s coffers.

But that seems to be precisely what is happening with the transit improvements under the East Midtown proposal.

“Incentive zoning,” the term of art city planners use to describe ceding zoning variances in exchange for public amenities, was once aptly described as “sanctioned bribery, abiding a private sector that can ‘buy’ its way out of legal restrictions.”

At first impression, all incentive zoning might seem to be “sanctioned bribery.” But honest governments work to avoid even the appearance of such avarice. In New York, incentive zoning is codified in the city’s current zoning regulations so that buildings are permitted to be built larger than they would otherwise be, provided the developer creates public amenities like public plazas, atriums, or adjacent transit improvements that mollify the larger building that is imposed on the immediate vicinity. This has resulted in some remarkably inviting urban oases, like Greenacre Park in East Midtown, or the atrium at the former IBM building.

The proposed greater East Midtown rezoning, though, is considerably different.  That’s because it allows developers to make a “one-shot” payment for transit improvements that have only a tangential nexus to any specific Midtown development site.  

A history of up-zoning tied to transit public realm improvements shows that similar arrangements in the last 30 years were all directly tied to the immediate vicinity of the up-zoned property. In the past, developments could only be up-zoned with transit improvements if they were built atop or immediately adjoining a transit station, as they were for the Citicorp Building and Zeckendorf Towers.  

But in the East Midtown proposal, city planners offer a menu of transit improvements, unrelated to any particular development site, that developers can fund in order to build a larger building anywhere in the boundaries of East Midtown. There’s virtually no difference between building a transit amenity and making a cash sale of zoning rights, aside from the developer funding the MTA budget instead of the city’s. Developers could simply cut a check to the city coffers and eliminate the middleman.

Exacerbating the tenuous nexus of the up-zoned property and the transit improvement, though, is the very troubling aspect of the proposed zoning regulation that would allow developers to make a “one and done” payment for the transit improvement. Unlike developers who create above-ground amenities like public plazas and atriums, developers who build transit improvements do not have to pay any future costs to maintain, repair, or replace the improvement.

There’s a clear disconnect: on the one hand, city planners assert that transit improvements are necessary to accommodate additional hordes of transit passengers who will occupy new, larger, buildings that will last 50 years or more. But the developers, who created and who will benefit from the additional burden that the transit improvements are needed to ameliorate, pay only at the beginning. The costs to maintain, repair, and replace shorter-lived transit improvements, like escalators and elevators, that were necessitated by the developers’ bigger buildings, will fall upon New York taxpayers and straphangers.  

Payment now; corporate welfare later?

A better solution is to put the future costs of maintenance, repair, and replacement of the new transit improvements on the developers and to enforce collection of those costs for the life of the associated development. Enforcement could take the form of a lien against the up-zoned property or by linking the certificate of occupancy for the up-zoned property to the timely payment of maintenance, repair, and replacement costs of the associated transit improvement. (One official told me that developers do not pay for the maintenance, repair, or replacement of existing adjacent transit improvements because “they just don’t do it.” But in the past, the zoning regulation didn’t require them to and there was no means of enforcement even if it did.)

If transit improvements are required because East Midtown will become more densely occupied with office workers in larger developments, then all the costs of the transit improvements - including maintenance, repair, and replacement - should be coterminous with the life of the development that necessitated them, not just the first few years of the development’s existence. And those costs should be borne by the developer, not taxpayers and straphangers.

Any other arrangement is simply “zoning for dollars.”

***
J.G. Collins runs The Stuyvesant Square Consultancy, a management advisory and consulting firm, and occasionally comments on national and local policy matters. He has also contributed opinion to the NY Post, Forbes, The Hill, and other publications. On Twitter @StuySquare.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Building Political Power for Animals in New York


eshv logo

(image via ESHV)


In one of the most politically divisive times this country has ever seen, there is still one unifying, bipartisan issue that now – more than ever – needs your support: protecting animals from abuse and neglect.

Over 90% of Americans believe that animals deserve protection from abuse and exploitation. Yet today, in contrast to overwhelming public sentiment, basic protections for animals are under attack in this radically altered political landscape. Recent reports are chilling: Congress obliterated restrictions protecting wildlife from cruel and unethical hunting practices in national parks (including shooting wolves from planes and killing hibernating animals in their dens) and the USDA has stripped public access to Animal Welfare Act inspection reports which document cruelty in puppy mills, labs, and circuses.

It is time to push for meaningful change for animals starting with our own communities.

This week’s launch of Empire State Humane Voters (ESHV) is a long-awaited beacon for New York’s animal advocates. As a grassroots advocacy organization, we aim to build political power for animals in New York State — from Buffalo to Long Island. Our mission is to support city and state candidates who will champion protections for animals, lobby for stronger laws to stop animal cruelty, and hold elected officials accountable to humane voters.

What makes ESHV stand out from the pack? Unlike most nonprofits, our 501(c)(4)* status allows us to engage with candidates for elected office. While other animal groups are legally barred from even talking about elections, ESHV can ask candidates tough questions about humane issues and is uniquely positioned to endorse candidates that prioritize animal protection — and vigorously oppose those who don't by mobilizing animal activists and New York’s 3 million pet guardians into a humane voting bloc. ESHV is empowered with the political savvy and animal law expertise to effectuate change for animals in New York.

The battle to achieve legal protections for animals must be fought on the state and local legislative fronts. Unlike a charity with very limited lobbying capabilities, ESHV is empowered to focus on lobbying and political activities in Albany, New York City, and locally throughout the state. From strengthening New York State animal cruelty laws, ending some of the cruelest factory farming practices, protecting pets from being trapped outside in extreme weather, to ending the use of wild animals in circuses, we will ensure that the voices of all animals are heard.

State and local elected officials understand that animal protection is an important issue to constituents and that ESHV is mobilizing public concern for animals through the political process.

“Effective advocacy requires not only educational outreach, but also political organizing,” said City Council Member Helen Rosenthal. “The animal protection movement has done great work educating the public on the plight of animals. Now ESHV is charged with converting that positive public sentiment into law.”

We have a busy year ahead. With seven open City Council seats and active District Attorney races, now is the time to elect candidates that prioritize animal protection. Recruiting, training and building an active volunteer presence in every local district is a top priority. We will focus on teaching animal lovers about grassroots organizing and how to work on electoral campaigns, embedding them into the political fabric of their communities.

“Local government has the power to create a more humane environment for our animals,” said City Council Member Mark Levine, “and we need advocates engaged in the political process to make that a reality.”

Thursday, May 11 marks the official launch of Empire State Humane Voters at the Upper West Side studio of world renowned artist Peter Max. This sold out event brings together a constituency of dedicated animal protection advocates that is more than ready to channel its passion and enthusiasm into an effective political movement.

Join our pack of political animals.

***
Allie Feldman Taylor is the Founder and Executive Director of ESHV. On Twitter @nyvoteshumane. She has three rescued cats: Willa, Waffles, and Feline Dion.
*Status pending May 2017

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Substandard Housing Is Not Affordable Housing, It's Dangerous Housing


lead photo

City Council Member Gentile, the author (photo: William Alatriste/City Council)


Over two years ago I stood with Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams and City Council Member Jumaane Williams on Flatbush Avenue by the ravaged remains of a building consumed by a fatal two-alarm fire. A 23 year-old security guard was killed and 15 others were injured.The cause? Illegal residential conversions.

Partitioning one and two family homes with shoddy construction, faulty wiring, and compromised gas work has become a common practice by predatory landlords. Maximizing profit at the expense of the safety of inhabitants has led to today’s proliferation of illegal home conversions. Just last summer in the Dyker Heights portion of my Brooklyn district, 18 adults and 13 children were vacated from an illegally subdivided home riddled with hazardous conditions such as insufficient egress and extreme overcrowding.

The dominoes of peril continue to fall from there. Our city’s first responders encounter immediate danger and confusion when entering these premises during emergencies. Heightening the already threatening situation, firefighters must navigate their way through a disjointed maze of subdivided units losing people in need of rescue along the way.  

Considering the deterioration to a neighborhood’s quality of life is important to qualify in assessing the effects of illegal conversions. There is direct correlation between 311 complaints of illegal conversions to overcrowded elementary schools as evidence by this cross-section map from Brooklyn Daily. In addition to severely overcrowded schools, public transportation systems are overburdened, sewage systems overflow, and other essential city services are drained thin.  

Very few neighborhoods across the five boroughs are spared from the inhumane predatory scheme of illegally subdividing homes. In 2016, there were 18,049 complaints of illegal residential conversions, an average of almost 50 per day. To put this in perspective, there have been more complaints of illegal conversions than of graffiti, smoking, and illegal fireworks combined!

My “Aggravated Illegal Conversions” bill, Intro. 1218-A, introduced jointly with Borough President Adams, Council Member Williams, and Council Member Grodenchik, will make this unethical practice an unlawful one. We will codify a year’s long rallying cry, “substandard housing is not affordable housing.” Setting this precedent is vitally important as our city rids itself of modern day tenement housing for stable affordable housing.

Focusing on the most egregious purveyors of illegal conversions, my bill establishes a $15,000 penalty strictly on the unscrupulous owner for each illegally partitioned dwelling unit that is three or more units above the Certificate of Occupancy. So if a two family home is found to have been illegally converted to five illegal residences, a $45,000 fine will be imposed on the person or persons responsible for victimizing tenants and endangering human life. To ensure rectification and payment of the violation, the fine constitutes a lien on the property. If unpaid for one year, the lien can be sold by the city.

Let me be clear, penalizing aggravated illegal conversions will not impede the efforts to legalize and standardize basement apartments, grandma’s basement, or granny flats. Instead Intro. 1218-A will root out those profiteering landlords who gut and partition entire buildings for maximum profit with no concern for health or safety.

The conditions inside these Aggravated Illegal Conversions may be life threatening and possibly immediately hazardous. If the circumstances force the Department of Buildings (DOB) to issue  a vacate order, residents can apply for transitional housing services that are facilitated by the city’s Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) and the American Red Cross. My office has been in discussion with the Mayor’s Office to establish a Memorandum of Understanding so these fines would be purposed towards assisting the residents’ relocation from a modern day tenement to safer living arrangements.   

Finally, in the Dyker Heights case, DOB was fortunately able to gain entry to the partitioned home and prevent a catastrophe. However, obtaining access is a tall hurdle to jump over and often an impediment for building inspectors. Intro. 1218-A will institutionalize the process of obtaining an access warrant to an alleged illegal subdivision. After two unsuccessful attempts to gain entry, DOB will request the Law Department apply for an access warrant. Once granted by a judge, inspectors will finally be equipped with the necessary tools to inspect a property and act accordingly based on the violations.    

All in all, this bill will serve as strong deterrents on the front end, and if needed, strong enforcement tools on the back end to combat aggravated illegal residential conversions. Almost half of my colleagues in the City Council have already attached their names to Intro. 1218-A and I look forward to guiding it into law.

***
Vincent Gentile is a New York City Council Member representing the neighborhoods of Bay Ridge, Dyker Heights,  Bensonhurst, and Bath Beach in the 43rd District in Brooklyn.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years