Land Use Committee Minutes
Monday, January 12,2022 at 7 pm
Meeting held virtually via Zoom
Attendance:
Committee Members: C. Moerdler (Chair), M. Wolpoff, R. Ginty, S. Alexander, B. Bender,
D. Padernacht, D. Gellman, N. Fazio, J.Reyes, C.Tepelus, L.Chong, Laura Spalter (Board
Chair, Ex Officio)
Guests: Paula Caplan, Jodie Colon, Christina Carlson, Assembly Member Dinowitz,
Abbie Nehring( Riverdale Press), Jesse Lehrer ( Assembly Member Dinowitz’s Office),
Camila Thomas (DCP)
C. Moerdler called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
Discussion of SNAD & Enforcement
The Community Board Office has consistently received tree removal complaints in SNAD
zoned areas. C. Moerdler asked residents to continue to call 311 and contact the board
office with complaints and photos. The office is working with DOB and DCP regarding the
complaints.
The Department of City Planning has appointed a new Bronx Liaison, Camila Thomas.
She was in attendance. Moerdler spoke about the need of DCP in this process and asked
Ms. Thomas to take notes back to the DCP office.
C. Moerdler presented the following resolution that was previously sent to the committee.
WHEREAS, in the 1970s and 1980s the Department of City Planning (“DCP”) established
a set of rules through the creation of three special zoning districts, two in Staten Island
and one in the Bronx, designed to “... ensure that neighborhood development and
preservation of environmentally sensitive resources are balanced.” (App. 1); and
WHEREAS, those rules, which were embodied in and authorized by the Special Natural
Area District, Zoning District Amendments and regulatory measures thereunder
(“SNAD”), resulted in the envisioned, according to DCP “... tree-lined streets, the
preservation of local wetlands .. and forested parks that, today exemplify, these last
remaining and extraordinary green New York City communities.” (id); and
WHEREAS, in 2018 and 2019 DCP, then under a different Municipal Administration,
sought to drastically modify and eviscerate SNAD; and
WHEREAS, Bronx Community Board 8, which jurisdictionally embraces the entirety of
the Bronx SNAD, and the Community Boards in Staten Island., supported by the Bronx
and Staten Island Borough Presidents and elected officials, vigorously opposed such
modifications on the ground that they would effectively eliminate the broad natural and
environmental preservation intent of SNAD and permit unacceptable environmental
consequences that would have an adverse impact on the “extraordinary green New York
City communities” that prior Municipal Administrations had carefully fostered and
nurtured; and
WHEREAS, by reason of the foregoing effective opposition of the relevant Community
Boards, elected officials and public-spirited citizens, DCP withdrew the proposed
eviscerating amendments in and about June and October 2019; and
WHEREAS, in September 2021 the previous mayoral Administration, through its
Department of Buildings (“DOB”), promulgated a broadly worded administrative scheme
termed the Homeowner Relief Program which, without any legislative authorization or
mandate, has been and is currently being interpreted as superseding aspects of SNAD
by undermining its effective enforcement (App.2); and
WHEREAS, against the background of a markedly increased number of complaints to
Community Board 8 concerning documented non-permitted tree removals and other
violations of SNAD, the Board most recently received complaints, supported by
photographic evidence, concerning unauthorized tree removals at 5501 Palisades
Avenue, which is in the Special Natural Area District, called it to the attention of the SNAD
enforcement authorities at DOB and was informed by DOB that, while violative of SNAD,
they would not issue violations because the provisions of the non-legislatively authorized
provisions of DOB’s Homeowner Relief Program immunized the homeowner from a
formal violation seeking corrective action for at least 60-days or until such time as DCP
acted thereon (App. 3); and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding the likelihood that during the 60-day immunity period, the
trees or any remaining trees will have been removed or the proscribed devastation of
natural features will have been completed (perhaps irreversibly) and all evidence of
unlawful conduct will have vanished, together with the accurate memories of witnesses,
the impetus to correction would diminish, and DOB (which has long claimed to lack the
ability or manpower to determine and secure appropriate corrective or other action under
SNAD and has repeatedly been charged with failure to effectively enforce SNAD) will
have undermined SNAD, its environmental responsibilities and its legally mandated
mission; and
WHEREAS, the foregoing were expressly called to the attention of the responsible
representative of DOB but to no avail; and
WHEREAS, if the real intent of the legally unauthorized Homeowners Relief Program
insofar as it relates to enforcement of SNAD was to afford a brief grace period for
compliance, such could have been effectuated post-service-of-a-violation by any one or
more recognized vehicles (e.g., the brief adjournment of corrective action proceedings
involving DCP or calendared OATH or other violation proceedings upon a showing by the
property owner that corrective action was demonstrably committed within a reasonable
period of time or is underway);
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, Bronx Community Board No. 8
1. Respectfully demands that the Department of Buildings modify and amend the
Homeowners Relief Program to make clear that its provisions do not apply to its
duty to timely enforce SNAD and, instead, ensure that DOB, its employees and
agents forthwith comply with its lawfully mandated responsibility to rigorously and
vigorously enforce the letter and intent of SNAD;
2. Calls upon the elected representatives from constituencies in Bronx Community
District No. 8 to support the foregoing demands and to introduce and rigorously
and vigorously pursue legislation effectuating such demands; and
3. Authorizing the Land Use Committee to retain pro bono counsel to commence and
prosecute such proceedings as may in law, equity or otherwise compel the
foregoing result;
4. Respectfully request that counsel for DOB work with Bronx Community Board 8 to
create a procedure that permits DOB to commence on behalf of the City of New
York civil cases against SNAD violators with simplified information based upon
information and belief, supported by evidence (including, without limitation, oral,
documentary and/or photographic evidence) submitted by witnesses to the
infraction.
5. Respectfully request that the the maximum penalty amount for SNAD violations be
increased so as to realistically deter violation.
The Committee discussed the resolution at length. B. Bender and D. Gellman
suggested changes to the resolution and will send to C. Moerdler. A vote was
called for the resolution as amended:
Vote:
Approve: C. Moerdler (Chair), M. Wolpoff, R. Ginty, S. Alexander, B. Bender, D.
Padernacht, D. Gellman, N. Fazio, J.Reyes, C.Tepelus, L.Chong,
Oppose:0
Unanimous: 0
DISCUSSION DRAFT -- AFFORDABLE HOUSING RESOLUTION
C. Moerdler shared the following resolution draft finalizing several months of discussion
by the committee.
WHEREAS, the current definitional formula for “Affordable Housing” provides in
substance that prospective tenants may be charged rentals predicated on the “Average
Median Income” in a designated area that incorporates not just the 5 Boroughs of the City
of New York but portions of Westchester and Nassau Counties: and
WHEREAS, what is affordable to residents of Manhattan’s Eastside is not necessarily
affordable to residents of the South Bronx, and that what is affordable to residents of
Riverdale is not necessarily affordable to residents of the South Bronx or portions of
Brooklyn, thus illustrating a core deficiency in the affordable housing programs currently
in effect; and
WHEREAS, there are reports that the New York City Administration proposes to
significantly amend the Zoning Resolution and other municipal ordinances and
regulations to encourage the construction of additional affordable housing but lacks either
the initiative or power to change the formal definition of affordable housing insofar as it
relates to housing in the City of New York as a result of which those truly in need of true
affordability in housing rental are often either priced out of the available options or forced
to spend more than they can possibly afford;
WHEREAS, the Land Use Committee of Community Board 8, Bronx County supports
added construction of affordable housing in and for the City of New York that is truly
affordable and, to that end, requests that, at least insofar as it relates to any measures in
and by which “affordability” is measured in the City of New York, the applicable
definition(s) therefor be officially modified or clarified;
WHEREAS, suggestions for change in the definition of affordable housing have included
proposals that include (a) determining affordability by postal codes or Community Board
Districts or, as a final resort, the Borough in which the proposed tenant resides or the
proposed housing is located, whichever is lower, or (b ) some other more meaningful
basis than currently is employed, and that consideration should be given to further
revising the term to at least creating four affordable categories those with an average
median income at or in proximity to the average median income of or not the exceed (1)
the prospective or entry level tenants in the 2
NYCCHA developments in or adjacent to the relevant Community Board District in which
the new housing is located, (2) residents of Mitchell Lama Housing in or adjacent to the
relevant Community Board District in which the new housing is located, (3) a specified
percentage of tenancies with average median income in each of the aforementioned
categories, which percentage allocations shall be publicly disclosed, and (4) a specified
percentage of tenancies with average median income not to exceed 120%-150% of the
Average Median Income (“AMI”) of residents of the City of New York plus a specified
percentage of tenancies with average median income in each of aforementioned
categories (1) and (2), which percentage allocations shall be publicly disclosed;
WHEREAS, the issue as to what is truly affordable housing has been delayed too long, it
is recommended the City of New York through its appropriate agencies provide a
redefinition applicable to any proposed Affordable Housing as to which a Certificate of
Occupancy or Temporary Certificate is requested to be issued by the City of New York
on or after January 1, 2023 and failing the formal recommendation and/or adoption of
such redefinition by the appropriate legislative body on or before May 1, 2023, the
Corporation Counsel shall be directed to request or, failing such action, any Community
Board may request that the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Department,
appoint a Special Master to frame such a definition within 90 days thereafter, the
reasonable cost thereof to be borne by the City of New York.
AFFORDABILITY and LOCATION
WHEREAS, reasonable people can reasonably disagree on priorities, there is much to
be said for prioritizing public assistance for the construction or renovation of housing in
essentially the tenant occupancy order set forth above, thereby to permit New York City
to survive as an economically sustainable urban center with an adequate work and
executive force as well as a municipality that provides adequate shelter for those in the
greatest need therefore;
WHEREAS, a major cost factor in the construction of truly affordable housing involves
land costs and availabilities; and since, from time to time, properties become available
that are owned or controlled by the City or other governmental or quasi-governmental
entities but no effective centralized program currently exists for such properties to be
identified or allocated, as appropriate, on a prioritized basis for affordable housing on a
materially reduced or no-cost basis, it is recommended that the City create an office,
agency or mayoral entity charged with 3 identifying all such current or potential sites and
recommending to the Mayor their designation as potential affordable housing sites and
that consideration be given to authorizing and directing that such office, agency or
mayoral entity recommend to the Mayor and Corporation Counsel for such action as may
appear appropriate and consistent with other locational factors any other sites in the City
that may reasonably warrant condemnation for the purpose of providing affordable
housing on such terms as may appear reasonable and apt;
WHEREAS, the City of New York in determining whether to approve applications for the
construction or renovation of proposed buildings under its several current assistance
programs currently does so without community input as to location or other relevant
factors, it is recommended that, on an advisory basis only, the appropriate governmental
entities promulgate protocols designed to insure that such input is henceforth sought,
prior to any approvals, from those community entities, including Community Boards, that
are committed to ensuring equal access to affordable housing throughout the relevant
community; and that such input also be sought by the office, agency or mayor entity
referenced above;
WHEREAS, the construction, renovation and maintenance of affordable housing is
largely dependent on the willingness and/or ability of government to finance or otherwise
provide financial assistance therefore, and such determination is, in turn, dependent on
resource availability and allocation, it is recommended that:
That the borrowing capacity of the City of New York be enlarged on a one time basis
for the creation of (a) an agency or entity authorized to, or, (b) the authorization and the
endowment of the requisite powers to the New York City Housing Development
Corporation, to issue State and New York City tax-free bonds not to exceed $500 million,
in such denominations and in accordance with such timetable as may appear appropriate,
solely for the use in connection with the construction and renovation of Affordable
Housing as redefined in accordance with the foregoing;
That the real estate taxing authority of the City of New York be enlarged to permit the
levying of a tax, alongside the annual real estate tax, of a sum not to exceed $500 per
annum for each apartment unit of cooperative or condominium housing and $250 for each
single family residence in the City of New York, such proceeds to be used exclusively to
assist in connection with the construction and renovation of Affordable
Housing as redefined in accordance with the foregoing, the authority herein provided to
sunset without further action three (3) years following enactment;
That the office, agency or mayoral entity proposed to be created as set forth above
(i.e., for site identification and allocation) be further authorized to receive said funds and,
together with the funds generated in accordance with or derived from the use of the funds
generated by or through paragraphs 1 and 2 above, be empowered directly or in
conjunction with the New York City Housing Development Corporation to enter into pari
passu agreements (or public-private partnerships) with private sector developers of
predetermined expertise and financial and other capacity exclusively for the construction
and redevelopment of Affordable Housing, as redefined above:
The New York City Council, together with the Mayor, shall have oversight authority of
the foregoing;
WHEREAS, the partial real estate tax abatement benefits of Section 421-a of the Real
Property Tax Law were allowed to expire in 2022 and many real estate developers
maintain that the lapse of the law will disincentivize construction of Affordable Housing in
New York City, while progressives in the Legislature maintain that, while 421-a had
incentivizing benefits, it did not sufficiently guard against abuse or provide commensurate
long term public benefit, particularly in the areas of real affordability of the housing
constructed thereunder to those in need thereof, was inappropriately and too liberally
construed in favor of applicability and lacked sufficient permanence of affordability
protections; because we agree that both arguments have some merit but recognize that
421-a, in concept, was designed to and is capable of advancing the goal of providing
more Affordable Housing and thus we urge that the concept be re-examined with its
excesses and inadequacies corrected; and
WHEREAS, both State and local legislation may be required to implement some or all of
the foregoing recommendations, a copy of this Resolution shall be forwarded to each
elected official serving any constituent residing in any portion of the Bronx Community
Board 8 district, together with a request for active support thereof.
Update from the 3745 Riverdale Ave Working Group
M. Wolpoff reported that There will be a meeting later this month and the relationship
between CB8 and Stagg is going well.
Old Business/ New Business
Neighbors of the Visitation Site asked for updates on the development. C. Moerdler
explained that School Construction Authority and Tishman Speyer have been invited to
update the committee but have declined. There is an Article 78 against the School
Construction Authority and they have sited the pending litigation as their reason for not
attending. Tishman Speyer has concerns of the pending litigation as well. C. Gannon
reported that Tishman Speyer has erected a fence around the property. Resident question if Tishman Speyer have permits to erect fence. C. Gannon will look into it andreport back. C. Moerdler reported that he will invite both parties to the February 6, 2023
meeting.
Minutes of the December 5, 2022 Land Use Committee Meeting were approved
unanimously.
The next Land Use Committee Meeting will be held on February 6, 2023. A moti
on to
adjourn the meeting was seconded and approved unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 pm.
Minutes submitted by C. Gannon, District Manager
Reviewed by: C. Moerdler, Chair