Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
Q&A
Council Member Marte discusses landmark air rights, district zoning, and parking mandates
5:19:07
·
4 min
Council Member Christopher Marte engages in a Q&A session with Daniel Garodnick about various aspects of the proposed zoning changes. They discuss the expansion of air rights transfers for landmarks, the impact on special districts like Chinatown, and the potential elimination of parking mandates.
- Marte expresses support for expanding air rights transfers for landmarks but raises concerns about overdevelopment in his district.
- They discuss the impact of commercial to residential conversions on Chinatown's economy and workforce.
- Marte questions the fairness of a specific fee imposed on Soho and Noho residents for conversions.
Christopher Marte
5:19:07
I'm supportive of the expansion of transfer of air rights for landmarks.
5:19:11
However, when you have areas like my district that already have been overdeveloped, are there any opportunities within the scope of this text amendment that we can explore other options, whether it's a geographic range to transfer their air rights or another method to some landmarks might have that opportunity to tap into that additional funding.
Daniel Garodnick
5:19:35
Well, we do put a geographic range for the Landmark transfer.
5:19:40
It's just are you talking about even broader?
Christopher Marte
5:19:42
If we can do like, one of the ideas we have was, you know, maybe expand it to a 1 mile range or point 8 mile Yeah.
Daniel Garodnick
5:19:51
Okay.
5:19:51
So that would that would we we should talk about the the opportunities for landmarks and what that might look like.
5:19:59
That would be beyond the scope of what we can do here.
5:20:02
But we understand why you're saying, and you're saying it for the same reason that we are trying to open the door for landmarks too, which is landmarks are trapped.
5:20:09
They don't have the opportunity to transfer their air rights today.
5:20:12
Only 15 special permits in 50 years.
5:20:14
We wanna open the door.
5:20:16
So, yes, we certainly agree in principle.
5:20:18
But let I would suggest, let us approve this, let us see if we can get some relief for landmarks even as we are proposing it here, and then take a look and see whether that actually solves some of the problems that we're looking to solve.
Christopher Marte
5:20:30
Okay.
5:20:31
My district is one of the few districts.
5:20:33
There might be just 2 council districts that have cheat districts, and allowing conversion from commercial space to residential.
5:20:41
You're pretty much eliminating the digit cheat districts, and they're really crucial for the economy of something like Chinatown, right, where you have kind of these light manufacturing warehouses that contribute to the local economy and and workforce.
5:20:54
And so, you know, I think it'll be great to understand what you expect to happen in those areas, like, how do you replace those jobs or you're just making them all transfer or convert to housing?
5:21:06
It'll be better to know the details of what you expect coming out of of this plant for g to districts.
Daniel Garodnick
5:21:12
What I would suggest is that we come back to you with a more specific conversation about potential impacts on g districts.
5:21:18
I know that that is a specific issue to yours, and you say one other district.
5:21:23
Yeah.
5:21:23
We'd like to let let us follow-up with you about potential issues there.
Christopher Marte
5:21:28
Yeah.
5:21:28
And then, you know, City of Venice, in general, when it comes to conversion, you're trying to uniform it throughout the city.
5:21:34
However, in Soho, Noho, many of the residents have to pay a fee, an extra tax, a $100 Square Foot, no other place, in in the city has to pay that fee.
5:21:46
Would it be possible under this tax amendment to eliminate that fee?
5:21:49
Because it does feel like it is discriminatory to people who live in a specific geography.
Daniel Garodnick
5:21:57
Right.
5:21:57
Well, I don't think it's fair to call discriminatory.
5:21:59
That was a very specifically negotiated point in a neighborhood wide rezoning that predates me and and you in our current roles.
5:22:10
But I understand the point that you are making.
5:22:13
And it was designed to create a path for conversion for residents who didn't otherwise qualify.
5:22:22
So the short answer is no.
5:22:23
It is not in scope for us to add to this proposal, but I certainly understand why you make the point.
5:22:28
I don't think it's discriminatory.
5:22:29
I think it was a carefully negotiated term of that neighborhood plan, but I think we should continue to talk about impacts here.
Christopher Marte
5:22:38
Yeah.
5:22:38
And I finally, I just wanna thank you for being here the whole time.
5:22:42
You know?
5:22:43
I'm I think I'm one of the few council members that is supportive of eliminating parking mandates.
5:22:49
And so I do think there are some positive parts of this application.
5:22:53
I just hope we can make some changes before we go over the finish line.
5:22:58
Thank you.
Daniel Garodnick
5:22:59
Thank you, council member.
5:23:00
I will be honest, I do not expect you to accept every line.
5:23:04
So I'm sure that will be I'm sure that will be in in expected.
5:23:09
Thank you.
Kevin C. Riley
5:23:09
Thank you, council member Marte.