"By virtually every measure, our economy is firing on all cylinders, " Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently told the State Financial Control Board, which has overseen city finances since the 1970s fiscal crisis. Certainly, the city's "fiscal economy" is in peak form, boosting tax revenues by $16 billion, or 75 percent, in the last five years -- most of that the result of economic growth. This has enabled the city’s budget to go from a $5 billion deficit in 2003 to a $5 billion surplus in the fiscal year that ended June 30.

While the city’s fiscal economy roars, what is the state of the “neighborhood economy” -- the factors that determine the well-being and living standards of the average New York family? Strong job, wage and income growth help both the fiscal economy and the neighborhood economy, but in other areas, what bodes well for the fiscal economy can cause hardship in many city neighborhoods.

DRIVING THE FISCAL ECONOMY

The booming real estate market and the resurgence on Wall Street have fueled the surging fiscal economy and the record tax revenues. Very low interest rates from 2003 to 2005 helped spur a robust market in residential real estate and an unprecedented wave of mortgage refinancing. The city’s commercial real estate market rebounded surprisingly quickly after 9/11 and has been hotter than ever in the past two years. Collections from two real estate transaction taxes -- the real property transfer tax and the mortgage recording tax -- have more than tripled since 2003, increasing by a total of more than $2 billion.

Wall Street’s resurgence since 2003 has also contributed to the health of the fiscal economy. Near record profits, record bonuses and payouts to hedge fund operators have contributed to city tax revenues. Realized capital gains, pumped up by rising prices for both stocks and real estate, are projected to be 40 percent higher for the 2004 to 2007 period than they were during the boom years of 1998 through 2000.

Wall Street wages (including bonuses) and capital gains account for 45 percent of the growth in the state’s income tax base since 2003 and an even higher percentage in New York City. At the same time, profits from real estate and Wall Street account for much of the $4.5 billion increase in New York City business income taxes -- a rise of 165 percent.

There is concern, however, that the good times cannot last forever. In looking ahead, city budget makers and monitors all expect some moderation. The mayor's budget office predicts tax revenues will fall slightly in the current fiscal year, the result of fewer real estate transactions, declining home prices, less job growth and declining Wall Street profits.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD ECONOMY

Even as the fiscal economy may begin to recede slightly from its pinnacle, the last few years have been favorable ones. Have conditions been as good in the neighborhood economy?

Certainly, the strong job growth in health, education, social services and tourism-related activities has boosted the employment of city residents and total incomes in the boroughs outside of Manhattan. These developments have contributed to the growth in personal income and sales tax collections, and, in the case of tourism, increased hotel tax payments to the city treasury.

But other aspects of the neighborhood economy have not fared so well. Indicators of a strong neighborhood economy include plentiful middle-income jobs, steady wage gains, affordable housing and a reasonable balance between family incomes and the cost of necessities, such as childcare, healthcare and utilities.

While the number of jobs in the city has increased over the past four years, this increase was needed to re-coup the jobs New York City lost during the 2001 to 2003 downturn. In addition, much of the recent job growth has occurred in relatively low-paying industries, such as home health care, restaurants and educational services. There has been a huge surge since 2000 in the number of people in New York City categorized as “self-employed,” a condition that often means low earnings and no fringe benefits. So, while more city residents may have jobs today, which helps explain the city’s low unemployment rate, there is an increase in the ranks of the working poor. Not enough of the new jobs provide a middle-class standard of living or even a path to the middle class.

News reports frequently tout the high and rising average wages in the city. However, such averages are skewed by the very high wages and sometimes-stratospheric bonuses paid in finance, media and professional services. For example, the state Labor Department reports that the average yearly wage in New York City was $73,259 in 2006, but in Manhattan, the average wage was an eye-popping $91,648 while for the other boroughs average annual wages were roughly $40,000. According to the Census Bureau, half of New York City families have incomes under $50,000.

While the growth in wages for the typical worker started to outpace inflation in 2006, the median hourly wage of $15.40 is still below what it was in 2002 and considerably lower than the wages of the early 1990s. In the late 1990s, productivity and wages rose together. After both slowed early in this decade, productivity began to increase in 2003. Wages, on the other hand, have grown at only a fraction of the pace of productivity. This accounts for the much faster growth in profits than in wages.

Perhaps no area represents the dichotomy between the fiscal and the neighborhood economy more than real estate. The rapid rise in housing prices over the last few years has intensified a crisis for first-time buyers and renters seeking homes they can afford. Exemplifying these contradictory forces, the sale by the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company of the 11,250 unit Stuyvesant Town-Peter Cooper Village housing complex last year was a record-setting $5.4 billion real estate transaction. Although the sale boosted city tax receipts, it also meant a significant reduction in the city's supply of middle-income housing as the new owners sought higher market prices in a climate of rapidly escalating real estate values. One particularly disturbing consequence of the city's hot real estate market may be an increase in homelessness, which is now higher than it has been since the early 1980s.

While the neighborhood economy shows many healthy signs, it is not, to borrow the mayor’s phrase, firing on all cylinders. That would take improvement in the quality of jobs and sustained wage growth that outpaces the rise in the cost of necessities. Some city policies, such as the new childcare tax credit for low- and moderate-income families and the mayor's impressive plan to provide 165,000 additional affordable homes over the next ten years, should improve the neighborhood economy. State policies such as the three-stage increase in the minimum wage have helped, and a newly energized state labor department has pledged to make government again an effective enforcer against irresponsible employment practices.

New York has a dynamic and productive economy. The city and the state need to do more to make sure that the local economy provides benefits from a neighborhood perspective as well as from a fiscal point of view.

 

Joseph Gilmore is what they call a “Point Baby.” He started out at the Point Community Development Corporation in 1996, when he was 10 years old. He participated in the art programs at first and later went on to do photography and community work.

Today, Gilmore, in his early 20s, is an aspiring photographer and credits The Point. “It gave me an opportunity to learn certain things that weren’t available in public school and urban areas of the city. With photography I learned my own business, gaining clientele through networking,” he said. Now, Gilmore volunteers at The Point, having gone from youth participant to adult organizer.

The Point is based in Hunt's Point. Even though that area of the South Bronx is going through a remarkable renewal, there is still ample room for economic and social improvement. In 1994, Maria Torres, Paul Lipson, Mildred Ruiz and Steven Sapp founded The Point and brought a new vision to community development in the Bronx. They wanted to treat program participants not as receivers of "aid" or "charity" but as active agents of change within their community. After 13 years, The Point is an integral part of the Hunt’s Point community and its renewal.

The founders’ vision can be seen in “Activists Coming to Inform Our Neighborhood” (A.C.T.I.O.N.), a teen community leadership program. While many after-school programs keep youths off the streets by occupying them with activities like sports and music, A.C.T.I.O.N. involves them in issues that affect their lives. This helps them deal with the negative influences they may encounter and enables them to be activists, who not only recognize problems but work to find solutions. For example, instead of just grousing about not having enough parks, they find out how they can create new parks.

Recruitment is done by word of mouth. Program participants, about 20 each year, come from all parts of the Bronx and even from Westchester. “Any after-school program is self selecting. Students with the ambition to dedicate extra time to something like this after school are already ahead," said Adam Liebowitz, director of A.C.T.I.O.N. But he said that four of the young people involved did leave high school and are now trying to get their GEDs.

From his time as a participant at ACTION, from 2001 to 2004, Gilmore remembers one project especially. In 2002-2003, the group worked to help clean up South Bronx brownfields, contaminated lots of land that had to be cleaned before it would be fit for further use. A.C.T.I.O.N. participants helped document the location and previous uses of these lots in order to spur their redevelopment. Today, he says, Barretto Point Park and Hunt’s Point Riverside Parks exist partly because of A.C.T.I.O.N.’s efforts. “I actually remember documenting both of those parks,” Gilmore said.

What is now Barretto Point Park, a hidden gem on the Hunt’s Point waterfront, was previously occupied by an asphalt plant, then remained unused for many years before the Department of Parks and Recreation acquired the lot from the Department of Environmental Protection in 2001. Hunt’s Point Riverside Park is the first new Bronx River access point in the South Bronx in over 60 years and one of only four canoe launch points in all of the Bronx. It used to be occupied by a fur-dying plant.

This year, A.C.T.I.O.N. have been fighting to stop the city from building a new 2,000-bed jail at Oak Point. In collaboration with the American Lung Association and City Councilmember Joel Rivera, A.C.T.I.O.N. has also been working to pass a measure that would prohibit the sale of flavored tobaccos in the city. The attorneys general of 38 states, including New York, had reached an agreement with RJ Reynolds in October 2006 in which the company would restrict its sales of flavored tobacco products. Under the agreement, RJ Reynolds could not market cigarettes in flavors such as Twistaberry and Mochalime that were plainly targeted at kids.

But then RJ Reynolds came out with a new line of Camel Signature Blends, a “cool” new breed of Camel cigarettes, with richly colored packaging and suave-sounding flavors like “Frost” and “Infused.” In response, Intro 433 would ban the sale of any flavor cigarettes besides menthol in New York City.

As long as their efforts benefit the community, A.C.T.I.O.N. does not care if they help politicians as well. “If it’s mutually beneficial, if it’s a cause that we’re championing and we both look better then fine,” said Leibowitz.

Generally, the people A.C.T.I.O.N. members encounter – educators, other people in the community, politicians -- react well to the teenagers. “They love it,” Leibowitz said, adding “when you see youth doing it, it gives you pause and makes you really consider something.” And, Leibowitz says, the program can benefit both the young people and the politicians. "If it's mutually beneficial, if it's a cause that we're championing and we both look better then, fine," he said. "We won't just do it for no reason."

 

Unbeknownst to many residents, the basement of the building at 312 Manhattan Avenue in West Harlem was the site of cockfights and a marijuana lab, complete with a secret growing room with dozens of plants. Amid rumors, confusion and innuendo, residents finally learned of the goings on from each other and from the media. Ultimately the building’s superintendent at the time, who allegedly had been connected to the illegal activities, lost his job.

The people who lived at 312 Manhattan Avenue could have acted earlier to curb the fights and drug use. At the next tenants’ association meeting, community affairs officer Victor Peña of the 28th police precinct told the residents of how they can work for improved safety in the buildings.

A variety of programs exist to help New Yorkers keep their apartment buildings safe. Such programs are not, of course, exclusive to Harlem, or only to buildings or neighborhoods with particular kinds of problems. They are available to buildings throughout the five boroughs, to condominiums and co-ops as well as rental buildings, and are in place in all 343 New York City Housing Authority developments. While buildings that have been the site of illegal activity get preference for the programs, other buildings can get help as well.

But like the residents of 312 Manhattan Avenue, many tenants are not aware of the assistance or do not know how to get access to it. There is no centralized place for New Yorkers to get this kind of information. And many buildings do not have enough residents who are willing to put in the time and effort to make things happen. It takes an incredible amount of energy and persistence to clean up some buildings, but, according to observers who have seen buildings once written off, even by their residents, turn around, the effort can certainly pay off. Civil libertarians, though, stress that these anti crime campaigns can infringe on residents’ rights and lead to false arrests – and worse.

Changing a Building

The Manhattan Avenue affair is relatively mild when compared to other area buildings that Officer Peña has seen turn around.

“One particular building that comes to mind,” Peña says, was on West 123 Street. It had only four tenants in a building with 40 apartments. And Peña recalls, “Two of those tenants were legal tenants. The other two were not.” The building was infested not only with rodents, but with crack dens, heroin and prostitution. There were several cases of people dying from overdoses in the building, and the garbage piles in the back of the building, Peña says, were “five or six feet deep.” The owner had been given several warnings to clean up the building but didn’t comply.

In early 2006, a man fell off the roof to his death while trying to get into one of the apartments. This incident and the subsequent investigation allowed the police to put together a MARCH operation: Multiple Agency Response to Community Hotspots. Peña coordinated the three-month effort, which eventually involved seven or eight agencies, including the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, the Department of Sanitation, and the Department of Buildings.

Their efforts got results, Peña says. The tenants were all legally evicted. The owner, who was cited for thousands of dollars in violations, now has new tenants and a building that has been cleaned up both literally and figuratively. The effects extend to the entire block and beyond.

“By turning that particular building around,” Peña says, “we wiped out about 75 percent of crime in that neighborhood.”

What Help Is Available

Government agencies offer a number of programs to improve and protect apartment buildings. These include: --Trespass Affidavit Program: Provides patrols within buildings by uniformed members of New York Police Department. --Graffiti Free NYC Graffiti Removal Program: Run by the mayor’s office, removes graffiti, free of charge, by using solvents, painting over it, or by using high-pressure technology. The owner/managing agent/or custodian of a building must enroll the building in the program. --Narcotics Eviction Program: Targets drugs dealers operating out of private apartments. Upon establishing that an illegal activity is taking place, the District Attorney’s Office can demand the landlord evict all people who knew or should have known of the illegal activity. While the program provides assistance to the landlord, if a landlord fails to act, the District Attorney’s Office will step in. In general, private buildings where an investigation into illegal narcotic activity has lead to an arrest or search warrant are supposed to be enrolled in the program. --Landlord Training: Will provide a series of workshops on how landlords can improve the value of their properties.

Pro and Cons of Police Access

Along with providing needed help to tenants and landlords, building safety programs raise a number of troublesome issues, including the question of police access.

So-called vertical patrols grant local police permission to enter a given building. Typically, the officers have keys to the buildings and can patrol the building from “rooftop to basement” at any time.

“Anyone not authorized to be in the building is arrested,” Pena says. That includes people who are not tenants, workers, or guests of tenants. “You pretty much have a gut feeling for the guys who aren’t where they’re supposed to be.”

Of course, gut feelings can sometimes be wrong. Timothy Stansbury, 19, was fatally shot by an officer on just such a patrol in January 2004. According to published reports, Officer Richard Neri and another officer attempted to open the door to go downstairs at the same time Stansbury and friends, unarmed, were opening the door to get to the roof of their Bedford Stuyvesant building. When Stansbury pushed open the door to the roof just as Neri pulled it, the officer fired without identifying himself of issuing a warning.

Sainsbury’s death was a particularly tragic incident, but the patrols pose other dangers as well. “For many years, we have been concerned that law-abiding building residents and visitors are being falsely arrested in vertical patrols,” says Chris Dunn, associate legal director of the New York Civil Liberties Union. “While having the police in buildings can promote public safety, overly aggressive patrols run the risk of creating unnecessary tension between the police and community.”

Others argue, though, that the police presence can prevent more tragedies than it creates. Take, for example, the building on West 111th Street that Bonita Lloyd Nettles has called home since 1988. In the early years, she recalls, “it was basically kind of Grand Central Station in the building. There were all of those crackheads and crack dealers running up around the block making much ado about nothing. Outsiders had keys to the building.

“We had no intercom, no secure front door, and drug activity from basement to rooftop,” Nettles continues. “Windows needed to be replaced in public hallways and apartments. There was structural damage within the apartments and in the public areas---all of that I was able to address.”

Part of the problem, she said, sprang from people who worked in the building and so a sense of resigned hopelessness prevailed. “When you have people who live and work in the building cooperating with outsiders, it’s extremely difficult to get rid of those people,” she said. The super at the time “ruled by the threat of physical force” and tried to make sure the building did not change.

Finally, Nettles and her husband confronted the problems on multiple fronts. They sent out letters, made phone calls, attended meetings -- and had their tires slashed in apparent reprisal. But they persevered for 15 years. “Whatever program was available, we made sure we were involved in,” says Nettles, who was a member of her local community board in the early 1990s.

Finding the right programs was key. Nettles got the information through community board meetings and the monthly community meetings with the local precinct. .

Today the building is much improved. One visible sign? The graffiti that once defaced the interior and exterior of the building is gone. Before, Nettles says, “The graffiti inside and outside was unbelievable. That helped to make it easier for the drug dealers to remain there because the graffiti is used as a form of communication.”

In taking care of this and other problems, “I never accepted no for an answer,” Nettles says.

If people like Nettles work in tandem with the programs, agencies, and officials, little by little, things can change, the police department’s Peña says. “We have had numerous buildings in Harlem, that, because of these programs—the transition has been phenomenal,” he says.

“If people want to enroll in these programs or more, they should reach out to their local precinct and get in touch with the community affairs officer or ask for the community policing unit,” Peña says. The efforts are clearly worth it. The difference in Nettles’ building, she says “is night and day. You wouldn’t recognize it.”

Brenda Tavakoli is a licensed real estate agent and consultant in Manhattan.  

To strangers unfamiliar with Downtown Brooklyn’s history, the Albee Square Mall at the intersection of Fulton Street and DeKalb Avenue appears unimpressive. But to locals, the mall is a landmark. People remember how early hip-hop artists like Biz Markie hung out there in the 1980s. Biz Markie even had a song about the Albee Square Mall in which he proclaimed, “So when I come in the Mall, and then I start to roam, you wouldn't think it's a store, you would think it's my home.” Older generations reminisce about the ornate Albee Square Theater, which was demolished in 1977 and replaced by the mall.

Brooklyn’s African-American community has a collective memory of this lively slice of downtown. But now this sense of shared past is threatened by a new development proposal for the site that would remake what is now an urban, discount-oriented mall into a sleek new tower with upscale retail and apartments.

The latest vision for the Albee Square site is just one of a slew of new development proposals prompted by the Downtown Brooklyn Plan (in pdf), a major rezoning approved by the city in 2004. Since then, development downtown has proceeded on a site-by-site basis, and so have the struggles to ensure that it happens equitably. When the proposal for the Albee Square site emerged early this year, advocacy groups and locals rushed to obtain information about who owns the land, what policies are shaping its future, and how purported benefits or drawbacks could potentially be distributed among different stakeholders.

The 2004 rezoning sharply raised land values by allowing much higher structures to replace the mostly low-rise buildings typical of Brooklyn’s 19th and early 20th-century past. This has encouraged landlords to begin demolishing swaths of older buildings in order to assemble parcels of land large enough for high-rise towers. To some people, this may appear as simply market forces at work, producing winners and losers. But the city’s decision to rezone in 2004 abetted the process, accelerating developers’ plans to transform Downtown Brooklyn from a “marginal commercial environment” into a 24/7 hub of upscale housing and consumption.

RESHAPING DOWNTOWN BROOKLYN

The principal goal of the rezoning was to encourage office construction to help New York City compete with New Jersey for back office jobs. This was nothing new. In the 1980s, the move to attract investment bank back-office jobs to Downtown Brooklyn led to construction of MetroTech, the controversial suburban-style office complex built by Forest City Ratner.

Companies that made commitments to MetroTech received substantial subsidies. For instance, what was then Chase Manhattan was awarded $51,000 in tax breaks for every employee it moved to Brooklyn. Critics charge the MetroTech did not generate jobs for people in nearby public housing and that the subsidies were excessive or unnecessary.

Twenty years later, the initial fear that the Downtown Brooklyn Plan would repeat the mistakes of MetroTech has shifted. Amid a boom in luxury housing, community leaders are worried because developers are constructing condos instead of offices in the area. Condos, once they are built, do not bring jobs.

For its part, the city points out that the Downtown Brooklyn Plan was designed to encourage both residential and commercial development in a “24/7” community. According to this line of reasoning, more people living downtown in luxury condos will make the area more attractive to business, and, in turn, drive the creation of office buildings.

Undoubtedly eager to deflect attention away from critics’ accusation that the Downtown Brooklyn Plan is failing, the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, a private group that works closely with the city, has begun touting downtown as a new magnet for the “creative class,” including media, publishing, design, and entertainment workers. The partnership’s latest rhetoric also emphasizes “retail diversity.” A recent brochure released by the developer of Albee Square touts the project as the “center of the new, redefined downtown Brooklyn,” promising “a retail experience that will finally attract the affluent surrounding populations of Brooklyn Heights, Fort Greene, Carroll Gardens, Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, DUMBO, Park Slope and others.”

Groups like Families United for Racial and Economic Equality, or FUREE, contend that such a vision ignores the needs of the African-Americans and the Caribbean immigrants who currently patronize the shops and public spaces around Fulton Mall. These communities, FUREE argues, will be priced out of the housing market and are unlikely to be hired by corporate business — even if financial offices do move to the area. The Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, with the city’s blessing, is reshaping Downtown Brooklyn at their expense, FUREE argues, deliberately paving the way for affluent newcomers unlikely to frequent downtown’s bustling crossroads of working-class social and commercial life.

THE FIGHT FOR THE ALBEE SQUARE MALL SITE

In the minds of many community and policy groups, such as FUREE and Good Jobs New York, the Albee Square Mall deal presented a unique opportunity for the city to redress the shortcomings of the rezoning because it rests on a piece of city-owned land.

The framework of the deal was set by the New York City Economic Development Corporation. In 2001, developer Joseph Sitt of Thor Equities purchased the ground lease on the Albee Square property from Forest City Ratner for $25 million. Under the terms of the ground lease, the leaseholder makes regular payments to the city, while the city retains ownership of the land. After the 2004 rezoning inflated the value of the ground lease, Sitt decided to sell. The current buyer, a development consortium consisting of the White Plains-based Acadia Realty Trust, MacFarlane Partners and two smaller entities, agreed to purchase the ground lease from Sitt for $120 million.

Because the deal involved a lease agreement on a piece of city-owned property, a special public hearing was required before the developer could move forward. The poorly publicized hearing was rescheduled three times, finally taking place on May 25. The lack of notice made it difficult for community groups to organize their constituents. At the hearing, stakeholders were presented with a deal that had already been set without them at the table.

One proposed amendment to the lease agreement involved the terms of the purchase option for the land. During his tenure as leaseholder, Sitt had the option to purchase the land from the city at fair market value. Under the new terms of the lease, the current buyer can purchase the land from the city in 25 years for a drastically reduced price of $20 million.

FUREE and other groups argue that the city threw away what remaining bargaining chips it had by failing to demand more concessions from Sitt. For example, the city could have kept the purchase option for the land at fair market value. This could have let the city hold on to precious land or receive the land’s real value. That, in turn, would have generated money to reinvest into the community for more housing, workforce development, a requirement for living wages in all jobs generated by new development, or compensation for the small businesses that have held down the Albee Square Mall and are now facing displacement.

Instead, after first increasing the value of Sitt’s ground lease through the rezoning, the city, with the Albee deal, allowed Sitt to walk away with the capital. Now, Sitt has funds to put toward major development elsewhere, including Coney Island, where he already owns a vast amount of land, and where he plans to build a glitzy resort.

Another proposed amendment to the lease agreement gives the developer an exemption on PILOT payments, which are similar to property taxes, in return for the builder providing that 20 percent of the apartments be priced for moderate-income residents. But under a program to encourage housing construction, now awaiting Governor Eliot Spitzer’s signature, the developer would have been likely to build these comparatively less expensive homes anyway.

The new developers plan to replace the current structure at Albee Square with a 1.6-million-square-foot building, and are receiving $3.2 million in breaks on their city and state sales tax to subsidize the construction of 125,000 square feet of new office space. In addition, the developers plan a mall of about 475,000 square feet, and 650 apartments. At this time there are no further official opportunities for the public to comment on the project, and, barring any future obstacles, it will break ground in 2008.

While not opposed to more office space downtown, Good Jobs New York criticizes the use of subsidies for its construction, arguing that the city could have avoided them through a more creative approach to the rezoning. Instead, the city tied its own hands, forcing itself into a position in which subsidies are necessary in order to accomplish its economic development goals.

If the city was really serious about equitable development on its own land, it could have used a range of tactics at its disposal. For instance, in one of the more dramatic alterative scenarios, the city could have reclaimed the land from Sitt using eminent domain (which is already being used on other properties downtown), initiated a Request for Proposals process to generate ideas for the site and thereby created opportunity for more public input. FUREE was one group fighting for the expanded possibilities that might have arisen from such a scenario.

FUREE continues to press its idea for the Albee Square area, working to retain Brooklyn’s economic and cultural character. In its view, the Albee Square deal represents the city’s role in helping to accelerate the gentrification of Downtown Brooklyn, creating a domino effect that will replace one class of people with another. “It’s fat cats getting fatter, that’s all it is,” says FUREE board member Beverly Corbin.

Allison Lirish Dean is a journalist and urban planner, and is currently producing and co-directing, with Kelly Anderson, a documentary film about the effects of the 2004 rezoning on Fulton Mall.

 

June is always a busy month for housing. The Rent Guidelines Board’s annual deliberations culminate with a final vote on how much rents can increase on the city’s almost one million rent regulated apartments. At the same time, the mayor and City Council negotiate the city budget (although their legislative energy fades as summer vacations beckon). If that weren’t enough, the State Assembly and Senate end their legislative sessions – and bills that were on hold for months, even years, suddenly win attention along with new initiatives.

And this year, as city students got their year-end grades, housing advocates produced an unflattering “report card” for Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The report by such groups as Tenants & Neighbors, Metropolitan Council on Housing and Tenants PAC said, the “student (Bloomberg) has shown disregard for low income, working and middle income renters trying to afford to live in New York City. When challenged about his behavior student acts as if he is not required to be accountable to anyone.”

RISING RENTS

The Rent Guidelines Board voted 5 to 4 to increase rents 3 percent on one-year leases and 5.75 percent on two-year leases. The hikes were not as steep as last year’s increases of 4.25 percent and 7.25 percent, and tenants appeared to win some sympathy from the five public members. (The board’s nine members include two who represent tenants, two who represent landlords and five who represent the public, although the mayor appoints all nine.) But the evening meeting, not nearly as raucous as last year’s, was most remarkable, not for the rent hike, but for an about-face by its chairperson, Marvin Markus, and his call for an overhaul of the board’s approach to setting rent increases.

Acknowledging the city’s affordable housing crisis in unusually blunt language, Markus said city and state legislators should do more about it. “We are cognizant that our decisions do have a significant impact on affordability so we must explore ways to maintain reasonable rents for poor tenants and at the same time switch the undue burden of subsidizing rents from the individual owner to the public purse,” Markus said. “I call on public officials to make significant changes so that next year at this time we can enact guidelines that truly impact the rent stabilization system in a way that allows it to be a system that maintains both the housing stock and tenant affordability.”

“The system at this point calls for a precision well beyond the powers envisioned by the lawmakers who created a very serviceable system for 1969 – [but] not for today,” Markus said. Instead, he said a system that would apply an income test to residents of rent stabilized apartments would “target assistance where it is needed – to both the poorest tenants and owners in New York City.”

The statements were particularly remarkable because last year Markus blocked efforts by tenant representatives on the board to pass a resolution making a similar appeal. At that time, the chair said the board’s role was not to affect public policy.

In comments during and after the hearing, other board members also criticized the one-size-fits-all approach to setting the rents. But they had mixed reactions to Markus’ comments.

Ronald Langueduc, a tenant member, said people could look at Markus’ remarks in two ways, “Either that it’s a cynical approach and simply the board not accepting responsibility for its actions, or that it’s a sincere effort to do something,” Langueduc said. “I think (the public members) did have a considerable discussion. I think there was a lot of behind-the-scenes discussions between the public members, the mayor’s office and corporate counsel.”

Larry Wood, an organizer at Goddard Riverside Community Center, was less charitable. “They’re hypocrites,” Wood said of Markus. He criticized the chair for saying last year that the board could not “do public policy” and this year saying it can.

Whatever the case, neither landlord nor tenant members were happy with the size of the increase. “It’s woefully inadequate,” said landlord representatives Steven Schleider.

Many tenant advocates blamed Bloomberg for the board’s shortcomings because he appoints the members. “We wanted to draw attention to the fact that the Rent Guidelines Board is meant to preserve affordable housing,” said Jenny Laurie of Met Council on Housing. “And it’s a failure of the mayor to protect affordable housing in this city.”

But the mayor will only go as far as larger forces push him, said one advocate who wished to remain anonymous lest his comments lead to repercussions for his organization. “If the Working Families Party and ACORN and the unions were here, we would not be seeing these kinds of results,” the advocate said. “There would be very small increases. They just do not want to make it a priority.”

ACORN, the national lobbying group for people of low income, has worked on housing issues in the city. ACORN's executive director, Bertha Lewis, denied the group was avoiding the board's hearings and said the group was focusing on more effective ways to address the affordable housing problems in the city, particularly repealing the Urstadt Law, which gave control of rent regulation to the state government, rather than city officials. "That's not true - we've mobilized troops for years," Lewis said. "That's why we are pushing for repeal of the Urstadt Law - so the city will have control of its housing laws. We need to go to the source of the problem.".

A spokesman for the Working Families Party said the party had not put a high priority on the rent board’s deliberations because it had not been called on to do so. “It’s important and … we’re willing to step up to the extent that our partners call on us to,” said Ben Healey, a spokesman for the party. But he added, “As far as we’re concerned, the city doesn’t have enough power to actually to create affordable housing. It requires intervention in the market and the rent board is just not enough.”

ALBANY ‘WIPE OUT’

Meanwhile in Albany, the legislature’s actions on housing bills fell short of advocates’ expectations. “It was a wipe out,” said Michael McKee of Tenants PAC

The legislature failed to take action on two bills that would have kept rents on apartments built as part of the Mitchell-Lama program from rising to market levels. One would have let the city require that any apartment leaving Mitchell-Lama be covered by the rent stabilization laws. Another bill would use the rent charged when the apartment was still under the Mitchell Lama program as the basis for its future rent.

Some critics blamed the mayor for the failure of the measures. “He made no effort on Mitchell-Lama even though he had two bills,” McKee said. “He refuses to deal with the loss of rent-regulated housing.

A proposal to expand the Disability Rent Increase Exemption program, which aims to keep people with disabilities from losing their apartments due to rent increases, also failed. McKee said support from the mayor could have made a difference here as well.

Bloomberg’s alleged inaction on the proposals, some advocates say, reflects an apparent contradiction in his position on housing. On the one hand, he has embarked on a major program to build new affordable housing across the city. According to the Department of Housing Preservation and Development, the city has started construction on more than 57,000 affordable homes under his plan. But, at the same time, the mayor has been less interested in preserving reasonably priced homes and in working to ensure that existing apartment stay within the reach of low and middle-income New Yorkers.

“He’s paid attention to building more affordable housing – he’s riding on that as though it’s the solution to New York City’s affordable housing problem,” Laurie said. “But it is not. We’re losing more affordable housing than he can build.”

THE BILLS THAT PASSED

In their typical end-of-session frenzy, the legislature did pass two significant bills.

One reforms the 421-a tax exemption program, a real-estate tax exemption designed to encourage developers to build apartments. Originally 421a applied to virtually all housing, but now, in light of the booming real-estate market, the city government, some state officials and housing advocates have sought to target it for construction of affordable housing and in certain neighborhoods. So, in some areas, dubbed “exclusion zones, developers would get the tax exemption only if they built some moderately priced apartments. The City Council's 421a reform bill expanded these exclusion zones and the State Legislature's bills expand the exclusion zones even further.

But along with that expansion, the 421a bill passed by the legislature in its final hours gave a tax exemption for luxury condominiums that would be a part of the controversial Atlantic Yards development in Brooklyn. That alone could amount to nearly a $100 million giveaway. “There are too many secret deals in it,” said State Senator Liz Krueger of Manhattan. “The bill passed in the dark of night with really very few people going over what was really in it.”

In addition, city lobbyists were not happy that it expanded the exclusion zone for developing affordable housing. Administration officials have said this could hinder development intended for middle class New Yorkers in some areas such as Queens West in Long Island City. Both the housing department and Speaker Christine Quinn have said they hope that Governor Eliot Spitzer will veto the bill unless it is change.

Another bill would allow the New York City Housing Authority to collect higher shelter allowance rates for residents who are on public assistance. Under the measure the authority would now receive the same amount of money private landlords receive. There are about 45,000 recipients of public assistance living the authority’s housing projects so the change could give the financially troubled agency an additional $70 million a year.

But that is still well short of the housing authority’s deficit, estimated at over $200 million.

The bill on the shelter allowance is “a major achievement,” Krueger said. “But NYCHA is really in a fiscal crisis. The city and state have failed them. And I don’t understand why Bloomberg didn’t help them out given the city’s huge budget surplus this year.”

Joe Lamport is the assistant director of the City-Wide Task Force on Housing Court, a coalition of community housing organizations.  

The Rockaway Peninsula: Isolation within the city limits

For close to a quarter of a century Richard George has sat at the kitchen table of his bungalow in the Rockaways and filed reams of lawsuits to attempt to preserve the Queens beachfront community known as “the poor man’s Riviera.”

For years, George’s efforts were geared largely toward the preservation of the bungalow colonies — the 119 remaining wooden cottages built on landfill in the Atlantic Ocean at the turn of the century and used by New Yorkers seeking a quick and affordable getaway for decades afterward. Lately though, the stakes have been raised. As the city offers incentives to developers to build housing on some of the last remaining plots of vacant land in the city, George fears great – and what he sees as catastrophic – change in the community.

About a half dozen developments have just gone up or are planned for the area. One, The Wavecrest II, a seven-story apartment complex, sits directly adjacent to George’s bungalow on Beach 24th Street. George claims such buildings are swallowing the views of the Atlantic and even making it harder for residents simply to go to the beach. The developers have blocked or built over streets, so getting to the sand or boardwalk can require a long, roundabout walk.

In response to these pressures, in late 2003, George, along with John Baxter, the somewhat eccentric owner of the Baxter Hotel in Far Rockaway, filed suit, charging that the city’s actions in the area violated its own Waterfront Revitalization Program. They lost the case but plan to appeal.

“Developers rule the roost….No matter what they do, they win. The city allows developers to build almost anything they want,” Baxter said. “We know we are never going to win, but we are going to keep filing these lawsuits until somebody listens to us.”

A CHANGING COMMUNITY

For his part, George is particularly peeved about one of the largest developments, Arverne by the Sea, located on 117 sandy beachfront acres. A contract for the land was awarded late last year to Benjamin Beechwood LLC in hopes it would include 2,000 apartments and help Mayor Michael Bloomberg meet his goal of providing 165,000 new affordable homes in the city.

“Today we see the future of Rockaway,” said Queens Borough President Helen Marshall, at the ribbon cutting ceremony for the development two years ago. “After a generation of hopes and promises these homes are proof that the renaissance of the Rockaways has finally begun. It will continue to flourish with thousands of new homes, recreational and retail facilities and a great natural resource—the beloved beaches of Rockaway. Arvene by the Sea provides attractive quality housing with the Atlantic Ocean for a front porch.”

But as is so often the case in this rapidly changing city, existing residents see something quite different. “They want to demolish these structures [the bungalows], which are constructed to fit in with the landscape --they are low rise, the materials have lasted almost a century, they are protected from hurricanes—and replace them with these monstrous structures,” George said.

“What’s happening in Rockaway is the same thing that is happening all over to beachfront communities in the city,” said Baxter. He fears the developed will go on to create create private gated communities. “That’s what they are doing,” he said

A resident of the Rockaways for 45 years, Baxter is among the old timers who believe the developments will spoil the character of the Rockaways. But while almost everyone agrees that change is coming, if not already here, some think it is precisely what the area needs.

PEOPLE ON THE EDGE

An isolated peninsula straddling the borders of Queens and Nassau County, the Rockways include communities like Broad Channel, Jamaica Bay, Belle Harbor and Far Rockaway. It was originally developed as a summer vacation resort for luxury and middle class residents to escape from the hotbox of the city. But in the 1960s, the city constructed a number of low-income housing projects in the area. These projects, which include the Edgemere houses and the Beach 41st Houses, were plagued by turf wars and drugs as residents struggled with poor access to good schools, hospitals or social services.

Rockaway's bungalow: Only 119 remain

Now, with record high housing prices throughout the city, a number of New Yorkers are willing to consider the distant community a viable place to live. “I find it kind of funny that they are starting to ship rich people out here because there is nowhere left for them in the rest of the city anymore,” said Lenore Martins, a resident of the Beach 41st Street houses in Far Rockaway.

MIDDLE CLASS MECCA?

Rich may be overstating it. Though Arverne by the Sea includes luxury housing, its 2,300 one and two family homes and mid-rise condominiums largely will offer middle-class housing, giving those lucky enough to win a lottery a chance at ownership. When completed the mixed-use development will include 270,000 square feet of commercial space, retail stores, a supermarket, a YMCA and parkland.

“This new oceanfront community complete with affordable housing, commercial and recreational spaces, will bring jobs and homes for the entire Rockaway peninsula. We will help thousands of teachers, police officers, firefighters, nurses and other moderate and middle-income New Yorkers to realize the American dream of owning their own home,” Mayor Michael Bloomberg said at the groundbreaking of the Arverne YMCA late last year.

Many Rockaway residents believe the YMCA and the other amenities that will accompany projects like Arvene, including possible ferry service, would bring sorely needed economic development and resources to the community 20 miles from Manhattan.

“I would be happy if the ferry service came to the Rockaways,” said Martins. “Of course, you do know they are not bringing the ferry service out here for us, but because of that new little development they are bringing in. … But if that’s what it takes, that’s what it takes.” She added the development could be a “good thing if it helps get us some services all the way out here.”

But other residents resent the luxury housing.

“My problem is basically that they are building all these high-dollar developments when they have never paid one bit of mind to us. They didn’t care that the young people here don’t have any chance at a good education, or about all the drugs run through here or the people dying on the streets,” said Peter, a resident of Beach 41st who preferred not to be further identified.

The Boardwalk: Strolling on the "poor man's Riviera"

There have been rumors of tension between residents of the low income housing projects and those of Arverne by the Sea. “I think there was a scare over some gunfire a while back,” Martin said. “Unfortunately that kind of thing happens out here sometimes. It’s been different out here for a while. The people that moved into the developments either have to be willing to stomach it or have to have a sense of humor about it—look at it as the great Wild West or something.”

 

Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s long-term sustainability plan, (PlaNYC2030), is aimed at stemming global warming and promoting energy efficiency by concentrating new construction near transit hubs and using green building technology. At the same time, the mayor proposes to reduce traffic in densely developed areas with congestion pricing, to encourage bicycling, and to build new public open spaces in every neighborhood.

Forest City Ratner’s Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn claims to do all of these things – along with providing thousands of new apartments and jobs and bringing a major league sports team, the NBA Nets, to Brooklyn. Yet curiously the mayor’s voluminous 2030 plan includes no mention of the megaproject, Brooklyn’s largest-ever. And in many respects, Atlantic Yards, which was driven by the developer and backed by the state with minimal city involvement, would actually undermine green development and be unsustainable in the long run.

Not Transit-Oriented Development

Atlantic Yards is promoted as a prime example of “transit-oriented development” because it is located over the third largest transit hub in the city. Yet Forest City Ratner plans to build a parking garage with 3,670 spaces, and in the first phase, which could last 10 to 20 years, create over 2,000 spaces in open parking lots. These would attract more cars and increase traffic congestion. At the same time, the plans currently provide for no improvements to subway and train stations, which are already over-capacity, and no additional trains. Bus service, under the latest proposals, would not be expanded and could even decline.

This “transit-oriented” development would bring in some 15,000 to 20,000 new residents of mostly luxury housing, a demographic that relies heavily on auto use. It would serve up to 18,000 Nets basketball fans during each game – fans who would come largely from the auto-dependent outer boroughs and suburbs and who will prefer to use their cars in the late evenings when games let out. Located at the far edge of downtown Brooklyn adjacent to the residential neighborhoods of Fort Greene and Prospect Heights, Atlantic Yards would become a park-and-ride hub for suburban commuters, not a walkable, transit-oriented community. If the mayor’s congestion pricing plan gets implemented, through traffic to Manhattan would surely decline, but Atlantic Yards and many other projects like it would quickly fill the void. Even the environmental impact statement prepared for the Empire State Development Corporation, an enthusiastic backer of the project, found that most intersections near it would have significantly more traffic during morning rush hours and after Saturday Nets games.

There is no plan to reduce roadway capacity or introduce congestion pricing in Brooklyn. The small bicycle parking facility proposed for Atlantic Yards, which will probably charge a fee, can hardly substitute for a safe biking environment, something unlikely to exist as traffic gets worse.

If Atlantic Yards becomes a model for transit-oriented development in the city then just about any major project near a transit hub will be able to wear the mantle of sustainability, even if it ends up encouraging more, rather than less, driving. In the U.S. city where mass transit is everywhere, transit-oriented development could well lose its meaning unless there is a clear and direct connection between land use development and mass transit improvements. Transit-oriented development should include transit improvements.

In advancing his plan, the mayor noted the unacceptably high rates of asthma, especially in areas with substantial traffic. According to the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods, the environmental impact statement projects no remedy for the high asthma rates in Prospect Heights.

Not Energy-Efficient

Forest City Ratner claims the new buildings in Atlantic Yards will be “green” because they would meet the requirements for energy efficiency established by the Green Building Council, an industry group. Some storm water would also be held in an on-site pond so it would reduce overflows at the local sewage treatment plant when it rains.

But environmentalists are increasingly aware that individual buildings can meet green building standards but still be part of environmentally damaging and unsustainable projects. To build its project, Forest City Ratner would demolish sound historic buildings like Ward's Bakery. Since new construction consumes enormous amounts of energy compared to sensitive renovation, this would further burden the environment.

The environmental impact statement shows that the project’s 16 towers would place a huge swath of land in the neighborhood in permanent shadows. This would severely reduce access to natural sunlight and increase the need for heating, artificial light and the use of fossil fuels in the area. It will limit the potential for solar power in the future. Given the height of the buildings, all the buildings would use elevators, further increasing energy demands.

An Indoor Environment

Finally, the health and well-being of local residents can be compromised even in “green” buildings. While indoor air at Atlantic Yard might be healthier than in conventional buildings, the developer acknowledges that noise levels in its project will be intolerably high. Their solution is double-paned windows and air conditioning. That will increase energy demand, but the noise outside means adults and kids will be less likely to venture out of doors, adding to the immobility of a population with already epidemic proportions of obesity and heart disease. In sum, buildings may be green and fresh but the vitality of urban life will be drained from them. Brooklyn’s famous stoop life will be a remote fable.

The eight acres of public open space in the 22-acre complex may not help much. When you look closely at the plans, it is apparent that the space is almost entirely private: interior courtyards for the luxury complex, the lobby for the proposed Nets basketball arena and a private green roof. Much of this private space will be built over the public streets that the city will cede to the developer. In perpetual shadows, the open space would be barren and uninviting for most of the year. As for recreational opportunities, the project that brags of its affinity with basketball hoops will have only one hoop that kids in the area can use -- if they can get past the project’s security guards.

The Vanderbilt Rail Yards would be an ideal location for one of the public plazas that the mayor proposes to build in every community district. The three-block-long rail yards are big enough to fit a plaza as well as substantial new housing development. The plaza could be a central focus for vibrant residential neighborhoods, but to be consistent with PlaNYC2030, it should be a truly public open space. If either developers or local residents are allowed to turn public spaces, built and paid for with public funds, into private preserves, they will not encourage the active living and civic engagement foreseen in the long-term plan.

As Atlantic Yards demonstrates, more “green” buildings for downtown offices and new upscale towers may become the norm throughout the city. Will these new structures be part of sustainable neighborhoods, viable public spaces, and diverse communities where everyone can go for the green? Or will they help segregate the clean and green from the rest of the city?

Tom Angotti is Professor of Urban Affairs and Planning at Hunter College, City University of NY, editor of Progressive Planning Magazine, and a member of the Task Force on Community-based Planning. 

Despite a demonstration on the steps of City Hall and apparent racial division among its members, the City Council excluded the revered and rebuked Sonny Carson from a street-naming bill at its stated meeting on May 30, turning a normally routine procedure into a controversy. The council also -- and much less contentiously -- adopted a bill to strengthen the repair process for the city's most dilapidated buildings and a measure requiring building owners to submit up-to-date floor numbering lists to the fire department.

Sonny Carson Avenue Goes No Where

The council rejected an amendment by Councilmember Albert Vann to commemorate Carson, a controversial black activist, on a four-block section of Gates Avenue in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn. The vote was 25 to 15 with 7 abstentions. The bill, some council members said amid boos and hisses from the audience, represented a battle between the desire of one neighborhood to honor an activist versus reluctance by others to commemorate a man who many see as divisive.

"The issue is not just Sonny Carson," said Vann. "It's the community's prerogative."

Last month, the parks committee voted along racial lines to remove Carson's name from a street-naming bill (Intro 556). Throughout the street renaming debate, council members opposed to the designation have cited Carson's criminal record and anti-Semitic comments.

Inside the council chambers, where jeers reverberated from a packed mezzanine, Councilmember Charles Barron accused Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who opposed including Carson's name on the street-naming bill, of hampering a community-driven process. Exceeding his two-minute comment period, Barron said the speaker divided the governing body more than the late activist could ever split the city's communities.

One of many members who defended their votes, Quinn reiterated her stance opposing Carson's inclusion in the street-naming bill, contending any recipient of a city honor should be a uniting figure, not a dividing one.

"I think it is incredibly important that when we rename streets in the City of New York, when we give somebody a higher governmental honor…. that when we do that we make sure those individuals who we honor are people that sought to bring our five boroughs together," Quinn said in a press conference prior to the council vote. "I don't think Sonny Carson embodies those core values."

Normally, the street-naming process is kicked off by a recommendation from a local community board. It is then brought before the council by an individual member, approved by the parks committee and formally endorsed by the council in one of two package street renaming bills submitted every year. Vann's amendment at the stated council meeting was a last-ditch attempt to reincorporate Carson's name on the package bill.

Following the amendment's rejection, the council approved the remaining 51 honorary designations, which included the likes of modern dancer Alvin Ailey and 1920s state Senator Mark W. Allen, by a vote of 40 to 4 with 3 abstentions.

Housing Repairs

In an attempt to rid the city of habitual housing code violators, the City Council unanimously approved the Safe Housing Act -- a bill aimed at New York's most dilapidated buildings.

Currently, improvements to buildings are done primarily on a quick-fix basis through the city's Emergency Repair Program, which often addresses rat and other vermin infestations, a lack of heat and hot water and broken front doors. Although the current program attempts to fix the most hazardous problems as quickly as possible, it leaves many of the more complicated and repetitive improvements simmering.

Going beyond the emergency repairs now conducted by the city, the Safe Housing Act (Intro 561) would single out 200 distressed buildings a year and require the completion of long-term improvements. An owner notified by the Department of Housing Preservation and Development has four months to fix all heat and hot water violations as well as 80 percent of all hazardous and immediately hazardous violations.

Introduced by Quinn and Councilmember Letitia James, the bill requires that the owner of the distressed building fund all of the mandated repairs and pay any outstanding fees from the previous repair program.

The year following a building's inclusion in the safe housing program, the housing department will monitor its compliance -- at least every three months -- and require the building manager or owner to participate in a building management-training course.

Buildings selected for the program -- estimated by the housing department to cost $10.1 million in its first year - must have a history of housing code violations. If owners do not cooperate with the program, the city will conduct top-to-bottom repair work through a contractor and subsequently send the owner a bill. If the owner continues to be uncooperative, the city could eventually take over the building, Quinn said.

"The goal of this bill was to come up with a piece of legislation that could take significant steps forward to preserve affordable housing in our city, and to take the worst buildings in the City of New York and make them highly livable buildings, and to hold bad landlords accountable," Quinn said in the press conference prior to the council meeting. "I hope the message this bill sends is that if you are a slumlord, your days are numbered in the City of New York."

The bill, James said, should target the city's worst offenders and support populations who often suffer from poor housing conditions, including communities of color, immigrants and seniors.

Strengthening Fire Safety: Round Two

In conjunction with legislation signed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg this week, the City Council approved a bill (Intro 496) requiring buildings over 150 feet provide lists of floor numbers lists to the fire department if the floors do not comply with standard numbering

When Yankee pitcher Cory Lidle’s plane crashed into a high-rise last year, first responders were faced with non-standard floor numbering -- when one floor does not correspond with its actual story, such as one level being titled the 25th floor when it is really the 24th . This labeling can affect the fire department's ability to address a disaster or emergency quickly, council members said.

Introduced by Councilmember Gale Brewer, the bill attempts to address a growing trend to give floors a higher number than their actual story in order to increase the apartments’ market appeal and value. The fire commissioner will develop rules outlining the filing procedure, which will be conducted electronically.

Citing "the deplorable lack of information available to New York City's firefighters," Brewer said, "the inability for the fire department to quickly retrieve accurate building information wastes precious initial response time and is life threatening for our first responders and those in need."

The bill follows legislation approved earlier in May (Intro 553) by the council that requires that the building department notify the fire department when it issues permits for substantial renovations --changes that could also affect the fire department's response time.

Brooklyn's Business Improvement District

The City Council also approved a Business Improvement District (Intro 555) for Court-Livingston-Schermerhorn -- a vibrant commercial site in downtown Brooklyn. The area comprises 314 properties and is valued at nearly $357 million.

The district, introduced at the request of the mayor, will make way for the collection of a special tax to improve the area, according to a committee report. The extra funding, set at $765,000 for the first year, will go primarily toward cleanup to retain a strong local business presence, a spokesman for downtown Brooklyn Councilmember David Yassky said.

In March, a fire ripped through a two-family home on Woodycrest Avenue in the Bronx, killing 10 people, including nine children. It was the largest loss of life in a fire since the Happy Land nightclub tragedy in 1990.

Investigators cited a number of factors that contributed to the horrific event: a wooden staircase, the lack of a sprinkler system, and smoke detectors without batteries. Still the house complied with the city’s building code, the regulations meant to ensure the safety of New York’s 950,000 structures.

Recently, Mayor Michael Bloomberg took what many view as a significant step toward preventing future tragedies by proposing a massive overhaul of the city's building code, the first in nearly 40 years.

Under the proposed regulations, for example, all new buildings over 55 feet tall, which would include the Bronx home, would be required to have a more fire-resistant stairway, automatic sprinkler systems, and hardwired smoke alarms that sound in every room. If the house on Woodycrest had been built today under the new code, the city argues, the residents probably would have escaped alive.

However, some question the unintended consequences of the new regulations: specifically, if they will drive up the cost of construction and in turn, increase the cost of housing.

“I have concerns about mandating that two- and three-family houses have sprinklers and how much it will cost,” said City Councilmember Erik Dilan, who chairs the Housing and Building Committee.

In its revised building code, the Bloomberg administration tried to strike a tenuous balance between safety and cost. It sought the help of 400 professionals – architects, union leaders, contractors, developers, and safety advocates – who volunteered more than 300,000 hours to help draft the 1,300 page document.

“Nobody ever wants to deal with the details,” the mayor said, “but these are the things that make this city affordable and livable and safe.”

Even though the city held a press conference to announce the new code, last minute revisions still are being done before it goes to the City Council at the end of May. Then over the next few months, the details will be rehashed again in public hearings. If approved by council, the new code would go into effect in July 2008

Then the biggest challenge, some argue, may be enforcing it.

REWRITING THE CODE

The last major overhaul of the building code occurred in 1968. While lawmakers have made some amendments to it since, the regulations were essentially piled on top of existing mandates, creating loopholes, redundancies, and conflicting rules.

Attempts to revise the code in recent years have been thwarted by the competing interests of various parties – developers, architects, contractors, unions, safety advocates and environmentalists – each with their own agendas.

"When the mayor asked me to write a new building code, I wasn’t sure it was possible," said Department of Buildings Commissioner Patricia Lancaster. "It hadn't been possible in 40 years."

Experts say two factors created the climate that made the current revisions possible. First, the collapse of the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001 gave many of the stakeholders the political will to sit down and work out a new code. And Bloomberg, who keeps a check list of his administration’s accomplishments, promised to do it when he was a first a candidate in 2001 and worked to keep that commitment.

Perhaps the biggest change is that, if approved, the city’s code will for the first time be modeled after the International Building Code, which governs construction in most U.S. states. In adapting the code for New York City, the committee modified it to address the city’s density, small lots, and variety of structures.

“This is a significant development for New York City,” said Carl Galioto, a partner at the architecture firm of Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill. “We will have a building code that is better informed by national standards.”

CREATING SAFER BUILDINGS?

The primary goal of the building code is to ensure safety of New Yorkers by mandating how each new building is constructed.

If approved, the code would require:
- Automatic sprinklers in more residential structures
- Hardwired smoke detectors in most residences
- New pipe systems and secondary water supplies to help firefighters get water to taller buildings.

In response to the World Trade Center collapse, new skyscrapers would include:
- Wider stairways
- Fireproof, pressurized stairways
- Stronger walls around stairs and elevator shafts
- Glow-in-the-dark exits signs
- And construction to withstand high winds and other extreme events.

"There's a lot in this code that's going to make the town a lot safer," said Fire Commissioner Nicholas Scoppetta at the press conference announcing the revisions.

Still, some critics say that there should be additional safety measures.

Last year, the New York Times reported that many of the recommendations from a major federal investigation into the World Trade Center collapse are still being debated.

Glenn Corbett, a professor of fire science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, for example, questions why the steel joists which did not hold fireproofing in the World Trade Center when the fires burned at extreme temperatures would continue to be allowed in tall apartment buildings

"If we aren't allowing them in office buildings, we shouldn't be allowing them in residential buildings, or any high rise for that matter, until we figure out a way to properly fireproof them," Corbett told the Associated Press.

And even though the city learned valuable lessons from the Woodycrest Avenue fire in the Bronx, the proposed changes still fall short of the fire safety standards in some other large cities. For example, in many locations across the country, a two-family house like the one that burned in the Bronx must have two exits; in New York City, many two-family houses are allowed to have only one exit.

“In Chicago there would have to be another way out,” Larry Langford, a spokesperson for that city’s fire department told in the New York Times after the Bronx fire.

PREVENTING CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENTS

In addition to mandating what kinds of safety features each building must contain, the building code also regulates practices on construction sites. And workplace safety is a growing concern.

There were 29 construction related deaths in the year leading up to September 30, 2006, a 60 percent increase from the 18 deaths the year before.

The Bloomberg administration has made some changes to try to address workplace safety. For example, currently a safety manager is required only when a building 14 stories or more is under construction. The new code would extend that requirement to buildings 10 stories and up.

But overall, much of the new code would not substantially change the regulations that govern demolition and construction sites, according to Henry Kita of the Building Trades Employers' Association.

"In many cases the International Building Code was not as specific as the current code," said Kita.

THE COST MORE QUESTION

New York City construction costs have been increasing by 20 percent a year, according to some estimates. The Bloomberg administration syas it worked to contain cost in the future.

Proponents of the new building code say it would be easier to understand and follow, especially for contractors from outside the city. It would reduce the complex process of getting the city to approve new and less expensive materials and equipment. And the buildings department would accept online applications and allow for less frequent license renewal, which will save contractors time.

Some believe this streamlining of the process could help spur the creation of more affordable housing.

“If the administration succeeds in securing its adoption, the impact should become quickly manifest in the increased volume and lower cost of new homes in the outer boroughs, where the cost of construction is a much greater factor than in Manhattan,” wrote Peter Salins of the Manhattan Institute.

However, Marolyn Davenport, the senior vice president the Real Estate Board of New York, is concerned that construction costs could actually go up under the new regulations. And she argues some provisions serve no other purpose than to allow contractors to charge more for their work. For example, the current code and the new code both require that new ceilings must be hung on a metal grid.

“There is no benefit,” argues Davenport. “It just allows someone to make more money.”

Mayor Bloomberg's proposed plan also calls for new environmental measures that he says may cost more in the beginning, but will save money over time. The code would require more efficient heating and cooling systems and that all roofs be painted a reflective color.

But experts say it is difficult to tell if the new rules would affect construction costs until it is put into practice.

"On the question of cost, the jury will be out for a while," said Henry Kita of the Building Trades Employers' Association.

Despite concerns about some of the costs of new regulations, City Councilmember Erik Dilan, who chairs the Housing and Buildings Committee, said he believes that "most of the issues have been hashed out" and that the new code will be approved by the end of the year, if not earlier. In that case, the new code would go into effect in July 1, 2008.

And those who drafted it made sure that it won’t be another 40 years before it is revised again. It includes a provision that requires it to be reviewed and updated every three years.

“This is not the end of a process, it is the beginning of the process,” said Carl Galioto, a partner at the architecture firm of Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill.

WILL THE NEW CODE BE ENFORCED?

Once the code is approved, assuming that it is, its regulations must be translated into reality at worksites throughout the site. The City Council has particular concerns in this area. For one, some members question the policy that allows builders to "self-certify," their projects, meaning architects and engineers can decide if their projects are in compliance with regulations. The policy saves the city time and money, because the buildings department then only audits about 20 percent of the self-certified projects. But critics say some architects and engineers approve construction plans and methods that would not pass muster with inspectors.

In February, the City Council passed two bills on the issue. One would bar those who have previous violations from self-certifying future projects. Another punishes those who falsely claim their projects are in compliance with zoning regulations. Both bills are still sitting on the mayor’s desk awaiting a signature or veto.

However, Queens Councilmember David Weprin wants to eliminate self certification for one-, two-, and three-family homes altogether.

"The Department of Buildings has completely lost control of the honor system that allows builders and architects to sign off on their own work," Weprin said at a news conference last month. "As a result, we have developers acting with complete impunity with the only people that are truly watching being the community members."

AN OVERWORKED AGENCY?

The real challenge, some say, is to ensure that the new regulations are followed.

"The code is only as good as its enforcement," said Kita.

The Department of Buildings already has a full workload. Every year, the city agency reviews over 65,000 construction plans, issues over 158,000 new and renewed permits, and performs over 320,000 inspections. And the number of complaints is rising.

A 2005 City Council investigation found that the Department of Buildings was struggling to keep up with the high volume of complaints and was slow to respond, particularly in Queens.

Complaints about after-hours construction work – builders work at night in an effort to finish the project on time and avoid inspections -- have risen from 635 in 2001 to 6,160 in 2006, according to a recent article in the New York Post. At the same time, the number of violations written by city inspectors increased only from 59 in 2001 to 249 last year.

The Department of Buildings says that it has hired more staff, increased its inspections by 18 percent, and now responds to 93 percent of non-emergency complaints within 40 days, according to the latest data.

Some officials are also troubled by the rash of building collapses in recent months, each connected to renovation projects or new construction.

In March, a five-story building in East Harlem caved-in, closing subway service for hours. In Soho, a dilapidated building fell down before it could be properly demolished. The Greenwich Village bar Chumleys – once a hang-out for literary figures like E.E. Cummings, Allen Ginsberg, and Norman Mailer – closed its doors after its chimney collapsed. And most recently in Brooklyn, a 200-foot-long piece of roof of a building slated to be torn down for the Atlantic Yards project tumbled to the sidewalk below.

These events have become so routine that the real estate blog Curbed has started a building collapse betting pool so readers can leave tips on the next catastrophe.

"In the Bronx, we only have seven or eight inspectors," said Camilla Pinkney-Price, who works in the office of State Senator Ruben Diaz. "Until we get that corrected, buildings are going to continue to collapse."

Related Articles:
NYC’s Construction Boom (2007)
Reforming the Building Code (2004)
The Department of Buildings (2002)
Immigrant Construction Workers (2001)

Related Links:
History of Building Code
Review Proposed New NYC Construction Codes
FAQ about the new Construction Code
Benefits of the Proposed Codes
Learn more about the Model Code Program

Mayor Michael Bloomberg called it “New York City’s next great neighborhood,” the city’s “first green community,” and an “integral part” of his long-range sustainability plan, plaNYC2030. He was talking about Willets Point, a polluted 160-acre industrial area between Shea Stadium and Flushing that the city hopes to redevelop.

But will the “new” Willets Point really be all of those good things? In the pursuit of “jobs and housing,” will anyone check to see if the new development is really sustainable?

Greening the '˜Iron Triangle’

The city’s idea is to put 5,500 housing units, a hotel and convention center, a million square feet of retail and 500,000 square feet of office space in an area that how has 225 businesses and employs some 1,800 workers. The Iron Triangle, as Willets Point is often called, has a large concentration of auto repair and service businesses, the largest distributor of Indian foods in the U.S., and several waste transfer facilities. A section of the area lacks public sewers, which the city has neglected to install despite repeated requests by business owners.

The claim that the Willets Point plan will be green rests on the promise that the existing contaminated land will be cleaned up, the new community will be transit-oriented because it’s on the Number 7 line, and maximum use will be made of energy efficient and other environmentally friendly building technologies. But since this is being sold as a “green and clean” model for New York City, this is the time to ask some hard questions.

The 10 Questions

Green Auto Repair:: Could the city do more to “green” the existing auto repair shops, rather than simply closing them down or pushing them out? If the plan goes through, hundreds of mechanics in Willets Point will be forced to operate in low-tech storefronts and neighborhoods where the most logical location for dumping crank case oil is the city’s sewer system. Instead, the city could create an auto center using the latest pollution-prevention technology. This could sustain the livelihoods of area workers instead of threatening them.

Who Benefits?:: Sustainability and green sound nice, but the question is always what and who gets sustained? The Willets Point proposal seems to do a pretty good job at sustaining real estate development in Queens. The city’s Economic Development Corporation has been negotiating the plan with big developers whose main commitment is to sustain their investors’ returns.

Clean Up or Clean Out?: Why does the whole area have to be cleared before environmental hazards can be eliminated? This sets an unfortunate precedent for cleaning up contaminated areas: You have to wipe everything out and start from scratch. Examples of remediation that don’t require massive relocation are plentiful.

Economic Effects: Sustainability should mean sustaining the economic livelihoods of people as well as preserving the environment. But under this plan, the thriving local economy in some immigrant communities in Queens could be overwhelmed by megaprojects and their corporate tenants.

The Future of Businesses:The city promises to offer job training, counseling, English language classes, legal and other services to workers who would be displaced by the Willets Point development. Business owners will be bought out. But even with such assistance, the many workers and businesses who have been in Willets Point for decades and even for generations, have created networks of clients and other businesses that would be difficult to rebuild if everyone is scattered. And a number of the businesses have already sold their land to speculators, so they won’t really reap the full benefits. One of the canons of sustainability is preservation and strengthening of existing economic and social networks.

Living with the Jets: Is this the right place to put housing? Willets Point is directly in the flight path of LaGuardia airport and bordered by highways. If you think the planes are annoying during Mets games, imagine living there. To minimize the irritation to residents in such cases, developers generally install double-paned windows and construct fully climatized buildings, but this means people are stuck inside with their windows closed to keep out the noise and contamination. This hardly seems consistent with a green community.

Increased Congestion: How much parking will there be in and around this “transit-oriented development?” This phrase “transit-oriented development” can be used to sell just about any project in New York City which, after all, has subways and buses everywhere. But as is the case with Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn, many projects do not call for any additional transit capacity, so the development invariably means more crowded trains and buses – and more people opting to drive. The Number 7 subway line is already over capacity at peak hours and platform crowding is alarming. With climbing ticket prices, more and more Mets fans will be come to the game in with their SUVs. And since Willets Point is planned as a regional “destination,” its economic success will rely on drawing suburbanites who are less likely to use mass transit. At best, the area would be a bigger park-and-ride hub for suburbanites than it already is and the added traffic will further clog Queens' highways.

What about Corona? In his announcement the mayor mentioned the downtown Flushing plan and the city’s commitment to promote development in Flushing. But Willets Point is right next door to Corona, one of the city’s largest and most diverse Latino neighborhoods. It looks like the new residential enclave will be walled off from Corona, its retailers will tap stadium and convention business, and the project will have little spillover effect. Bloomberg may have had tacos in Mexico City, but will anyone check out Corona when they go shopping or to a Mets game in Willets Point?

Whose Parks? The city plan puts a park in the dead center of the new development. This “public” space will effectively be a backyard for the new tenants, walled off and disconnected from Flushing Meadows Corona Park and the Corona neighborhood.

Green and Grand or Blean and Bare: It will probably be another year before Willets Point gets through the city’s land use review process, Cleanup and development will undoubtedly take at least another five to 10 years. Changing economic conditions and future mayoral administrations could leave the project to languish or die, letting a once-active business district lie fallow for many more decades.

The Big Picture:: This all leads to the final question. Are megaprojects, like the one planned for Willets Point, consistent with the vision of sustainable development. Or would more modest efforts, aimed at nurturing existing neighborhoods like Corona, be more sustainable and cost-effective?

Tom Angotti is Professor of Urban Affairs and Planning at Hunter College, City University of NY, editor of Progressive Planning Magazine, and a member of the Task Force on Community-based Planning.