REMARKS
Council Member Kevin Riley explains proposed modifications to City of Yes for Housing Opportunity
0:07:27
·
4 min
Council Member Kevin Riley provides a detailed explanation of proposed modifications to four major citywide reforms in the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity initiative. He discusses changes to the Universal Affordability Preference (UAP), landmark building development rights transfers, campus infill development, and building shape and size regulations.
- Modifications aim to increase affordable housing options, preserve community input in development decisions, protect open spaces, and maintain appropriate building scales.
- Specific changes include adjusting AMI requirements, reinstating special permits for certain height increases, and preserving rear and side yard spaces.
- The modifications seek to balance the need for housing development with community concerns and quality of life issues.
Kevin Riley
0:07:27
Starting with the 4 major citywide reforms that the administration is proposing.
0:07:32
1st, I want to discuss the administration's affordable affordability proposal, known as Universal Affordability Preference, UAP.
0:07:42
It will create a citywide program to enable the creation of permanent affordable housing.
0:07:48
It is intended to work with the new property tax exemption known as 485X, which the state passed.
0:07:55
UAP will require new development to set aside 20% of units at 60% AMI, which is a household income of 93,000 for a family of 4.
0:08:06
This will create much needed, new permanent, affordable housing and is a step in the right direction.
0:08:13
Many families do not make this much money, and they need housing too.
0:08:17
The modification here is to require buildings containing more than 10,000 square feet of affordable air affordable floor area that 20% of the affordable units be for families, making 40% AMIs, which is 62,000 for a family of 4.
0:08:33
This is much more aligned with the actual income of families within the Bronx.
0:08:38
The next citywide proposal we are modifying is the reform to allow landmark buildings to transfer their unused development rights.
0:08:46
This reform is also a step in the right direction because landmarks are beloved by everyone and maintain the cultural heritage of our great city.
0:08:56
Density from landmark buildings is a way to preserve these buildings by allowing them to raise the need the needed funds to maintain the buildings.
0:09:05
The reform will facilitate these transform these transfers by requiring less process.
0:09:11
The issue is that this reform will also allow the site receiving the additional density to increase its height without seeking a special permit that requires community board and borough presidents review and a council's vote.
0:09:25
This could lead to development that could be disproportionately higher compared to the zone and district they are in.
0:09:31
More importantly, it will weaken the community's input.
0:09:35
If a development doesn't if a development does not want to file the applicable regulations, it needs to seek the community and council's review.
0:09:44
This is why we are reinstating the special permit for any building receiving a density increase from a landmark building that wants to increase its height more than 25% of what it is allowed.
0:09:58
The 3rd citywide proposal that should be modified relates to its ability to add buildings on a lot that is already developed, also known as campus infill development.
0:10:09
A common type of development throughout the city is 2 or more buildings on a large lot.
0:10:14
Many of these large developments are facing financial difficulties due to the needed facade repairs and electrical retrofits.
0:10:23
Infill developments could provide the additional needed funds and more housing.
0:10:28
There are also community facility buildings such as churches and educational facilities that have vacant land.
0:10:35
In talking with communities who live in and around campus sites, their concern is that the access to existing open space on these campuses is a valuable and needed resource.
0:10:45
If as a city, we're going to facilitate infill development, then we need to protect outdoor space used for recreational purposes.
0:10:53
This is exactly why our excuse me.
0:10:56
This is exactly what our modification does.
0:10:59
It also requires that a minimum percentage of the lot not be developed and that the height of any new infill buildings not exceed the height of existing buildings on the lot.
0:11:11
The 4th citywide proposal district fixes seeks to provide a little more flexibility in how the shape and size of buildings are regulated.
0:11:20
Currently, there are many buildings that do not conform in the existing regulations because of the regulations excuse me, Existing regulation because the regulations were amended after the buildings were constructed.
0:11:32
This has prevented homeowners and building owners from making small changes, reasonable changes to their building.
0:11:38
While broadly speaking, the aim of the additional flexibility makes sense, some of these changes need to be scaled back, specifically to protect people's access to open space.
0:11:50
Rear yards and side yard play play an important role in people's daily lives.
0:11:55
We need to preserve this access to the outdoors.
0:11:59
Our modification recommend that we we do not reduce lot size and lot width as much as proposed.
0:12:06
Scale back the proposed reduction and encroachment into rear and side yards, maintain a 30 foot rear yard requirement for row houses and semi detached houses on smaller lots, and preserve an appropriate step down between larger and smaller buildings.
