City Council Subcommittee Holds Hearing on Mayor’s Zoning for Quality and Affordability Proposal

Testimony was heard on a wide range of issues spanning from  decreased parking requirements to  increased building height limits.  On February 10, 2016, the City Council Subcommittee on Zoning and Franchises held a public hearing on Mayor Bill de Blasio’s Zoning for Quality and Affordability proposal. The hearing was held in the City Council Chambers in City Hall to accommodate the capacity audience.

At the February 10th hearing, Housing Preservation and Development Commissioner Vicki Been and City Planning Commission Chairman Carl Weisbrod presented the ZQA proposal to the Council Subcommittee.  Former City Council Speaker Gifford Miller spoke in favor of the proposal.  Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer testified to her conditional opposition to the proposal. A representative from State Assembly Member Deborah Glick’s office, Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation Executive Director Andrew Berman testified in opposition to the proposal. The Historic Districts Council submitted written testimony in opposition to the ZQA proposal, as well.

Before testimony began, Land Use Committee Chairman David Greenfield laid out the ZQA proposal as he sees it, which is a three-pronged plan. First, the ZQA proposes to allow for the creation of larger buildings, which will enable the development of more affordable housing. Second, parking requirements imposed upon developers would be removed for construction sites located in transit zones, which is the circumference within a half-mile of public transit. In this same vein, ZQA would reduce the parking requirements for senior affordable housing built even further than a half-mile from public transit. Third, the ZQA proposal would open the door for the creation of new types of affordable senior housing, and Chairman Greenfield stressed that the new senior housing should fit “seamlessly” into the communities throughout the City that are already providing senior housing.

Housing Preservation and Development Commissioner Vicki Been testified to the ZQA proposal’s anticipated effects on affordable housing, both for seniors and for the general population. Commissioner Been testified that while the senior population in New York City is projected to increase an additional 40 percent by 2040, the federal funds that have long subsidized the affordable housing stock for seniors has diminished to a point of almost non-existence. The existing zoning scheme is prohibitive of aesthetically pleasing residential developments that provide seniors with the community living space and accessibility features they need. Additionally, Commissioner Been testified that requiring developers to provide parking spaces in affordable housing developments is wasting space and money because the parking spaces are largely underutilized.

City Planning Commission Chairman Carl Weisbrod testified as a follow-up to Commissioner Been by digging deeper into the weeds of the ZQA proposal. According to Chairman Weisbrod, the triple goals of ZQA aim making it easier for developers to build affordable senior housing and higher quality affordable housing for City residents of all ages, while simultaneously reducing the financial burden placed on the taxpayer. He noted that the effects of ZQA would vary by neighborhood throughout all five boroughs. “In some districts, it permits an additional one or two stories, or in others, changes to parking requirements to make it practical to build the amount of affordable senior housing the zoning already seeks to allow,” explained Chairman Weisbrod. ZQA would permit ground floors to be constructed an additional five feet taller to allow for retail space or community services. This would benefit senior housing developments, as well, because they are restricted under the current zoning text from providing adequate community space on the ground floor and often must resort to building such community space in the basement.

Council Member Vincent Gentile, who represents a low-density contextual district in South Brooklyn, voiced concerns over how contextual zones would be preserved under the ZQA. He would like to see provisions added to the ZQA that require Community Board approval in lieu of full ULURP review prior to rezoning within contextually-zoned districts. Commissioner Been testified that the ZQA proposal was drafted as best as possible to address the issues surrounding contextual zoning, but due to the grossly inadequate amount of affordable housing currently available to seniors, she would not want to build less senior housing because “people are concerned about height.” Commissioner Been expressed her unwillingness to require developers to go through a two-year process, but did note that she is open to discussing the possibility of requiring a very short oversight process for contextually-zoned district. In addition, Chairman Weisbrod noted that the five-foot height increase for ground floors would not apply to low-density districts.

Public Advocate Letitia James reserved her approval of the proposed ZQA in light of several changes she would like to see included. In Public Advocate James’s view, transit zones should be adjusted to reflect the local conditions and availability of public transit options. Additionally, she would like to see each individual rezoning application go to the local, affected community board for review instead of offering these zoning options as-of-right. Public Advocate James noted that the latter idea was rejected by HPD already and she urged them to reconsider.

Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer testified to her conditional opposition to the ZQA proposal. Her main points of contention with the proposal are its across-the-board building height increases for all neighborhoods indiscriminately and the lack of permanently affordable housing for seniors. The proposed ZQA would only provide affordable senior housing for 30 years. After the 30-year period, the housing would be subject to restrictions only permitting the housing to be used for affordable senior housing; however, this does not require that such housing be provided after the 30-year period. Borough President Brewer testified that she would like to see parking requirements disappear for the Manhattan borough, but expressed her understanding that every borough is different. Additionally, she expressed her concern over the ZQA’s implementation having the effect of allowing tall buildings to be built out-of-context.

A representative from the office of State Assembly Member Deborah Glick presented her testimony in opposition to the ZQA. Assembly Member Glick’s points of contention with the ZQA proposal are that it “achieves goals at the expense of existing communities,” and it does so in a one-size-fits-all fashion, which does not address adequately the individual needs of communities.

Former City Council Speaker Gifford Miller spoke in favor of the ZQA proposal, and he provided testimony as a partner at Signature Urban Properties and affordable housing developer. Former Speaker Miller has ten years of experience in the affordable housing arena and is currently developing 2,000 affordable units in the Bronx. According to Former Speaker Miller, the parking and minimum-unit-size requirements create obstacles for developers trying to build a larger quantity of affordable residential units. Additionally, he agreed that the five-foot height increase for the ground floor would really help developers create better buildings. “Five feet at the end of the day is not going to make or break a neighborhood, and it can make a difference,” said Former Speaker Miller.

Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation Executive Director Andrew Berman testified in opposition to the proposal. Like many preservationist organizations, Berman’s primary issue with the ZQA proposal is its potential affect on Citywide building height limits. Berman testified that neighborhoods across the City fought for their zoning regulations, and that there is no need to change such regulations when they already allow for the construction of affordable senior housing. In Berman’s view, irregularly shaped lots and restrictive zoning districts should be rezoned on a piece-by-piece basis. These abnormal zoning lots only make up about 10 percent of the City’s zoning lots, so it would be unnecessary to affect the other 90 percent when the ZQA’s goals can be achieved without doing so.

Also, Berman recommended making ZQA not retroactive, so that it would only affect later rezoning actions, but he noted that the Department of City Planning has already expressed resistance towards this approach. In response, Zoning and Franchises Subcommittee Chair Donovan Richards Jr. said that the “City Council is driving the car now,” and advised Berman to continue to work with the City Council and his local representative, Council Member Corey Johnson. Council Member Johnson asked Berman if ZQA would “be more palatable” if the provisions affecting height limits were removed, and Berman’s answer was that it would “certainly help.”

The Historic Districts Council submitted testimony in opposition to the ZQA proposal. Because ZQA would not provide for any additional affordable residential units, HDC characterized the proposal as “a concession to developers to sweeten Mandatory Inclusionary Housing.” According to HDC, ZQA would raise the height and density limits for new developments Citywide without taking into consideration the contextually-zoned neighborhoods, which “came to fruition after years of effort by community-driven, carefully examined, neighborhood-specific studies.”

According to the Council staff, 29 speakers testified in favor and 44 speakers testified in opposition at the February 10th hearing. Many of those who testified in support of the ZQA proposal found the updated zoning text would allow for better quality buildings that utilize their available space to the full potential, while remaining aesthetically pleasing. Those who testified in opposition to the proposal expressed concerns primarily over the anticipated consequences that could be brought on by the increased height limits, especially in contextually zoned neighborhoods, and the elimination of parking requirements particularly in the outer boroughs where public transit is less reliable and not as frequently available.

The Council Subcommittee is expected to vote on the ZQA proposal, as well as the MIH proposal, in the coming weeks.

City Council: T4069-2016 (Feb. 10, 2016).

By: Jessica Soultanian-Braunstein (Jessica is the CityLaw Fellow and a New York Law School Graduate, Class of 2015)