Greetings,

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse than City of Yes, the Charter Commission released a report that threatens to upend every neighborhood in NYC, even if we prevail in our lawsuit. Back in December, four days after the City of Yes was passed with modifications by the City Council, the Mayor convened this Charter Revision Commission to craft ballot proposals that includes everything he wanted – and then some. You can read the full report here.

Check out what they are considering putting up for a vote this year:

• BALLOT QUESTION #1: Fast Tracking Affordable Housing
• BALLOT QUESTION #2: Simplify Review of Modest Housing and Infrastructure Projects
• BALLOT QUESTION #3: Establish a Land Use Appeals Board with Council, Borough, and Citywide Voices
• BALLOT QUESTION #4: Modernize the City Map
• BALLOT QUESTION #5: Even Year Elections

Let's focus on the first three proposals, in order of how bad they are for us. (ELURP = Expedited Land Use Review Process)

Language supporting Ballot Question #2: 
"In low-density districts (zoned R1 through R5), ELURP would be available only for zoning map changes to another low- density district, enabling modest multifamily housing with a standard height limit of not more than 45 feet and a maximum residential FAR of not more than 2.0"

In a nutshell, this means apartment buildings will be allowed in current low-density zones - EVERYWHERE. For reference, 45 feet tall apartment buildings at a 2.0 FAR is the equivalent of an R5D zone. This would allow, for example, a four-story apartment building with six units and no parking replacing a typical one-family house on a 40’ x 100’ lot in an R2 zone.

"In medium- and high-density areas (zoned R6 and above), ELURP would enable a type of gentle increase in density that ULURP effectively prohibits. Specifically, zoning map changes that result in an increase in standard residential capacity of 30% or less would be eligible for ELURP."

This means that every current zone in this category would allow the height and density of the next highest zone - EVERYWHERE. Tall and dense buildings will become taller and denser.

Language supporting Ballot Question #3:​

"To strike a better balance between local, boroughwide, and citywide voices in the land use review process, this proposal would replace the mayoral veto with a new three-person body: an Appeals Board with representation from the Borough President of the affected borough, the Speaker, and the Mayor, or their designees. If two-thirds of the Appeals Board agrees, a City Council disapproval of a land use action, or individual modifications made by the Council, could be reversed."

This basically brings back the old Board of Estimate - which was abolished in 1989 for being unconstitutional and brought about our current form of government - in a slightly different version and eliminates Councilmember deference, or the idea that if there’s a project or rezoning in a Councilmember’s district that constituents are opposed to and that Councilmember states opposition, the rest of the Council will respect that and vote against it. This would allow for this new “Appeals Board” to reverse the Council’s decision. In reality, a developer wouldn't have to care as much about pleasing and negotiating with the local Councilmember who reports directly to the affected constituents under this Appeals Board.

Language supporting Ballot Question #1:
 
"The Affordable Housing Fast Track is a targeted effort to promote more equitable development of affordable housing while preserving the ordinary process of land use review in most of the city. Under this proposal, the Affordable Housing Fast Track would only come into play in the 12 community districts that permit the least affordable housing — that is, the bottom fifth of all districts. By design, this proposal would affect only outlier districts: the few that produce the lowest affordable housing.”

This will mean that there will be increased targeted development steered to 20% of Community Boards on top of all of the regular development that we will see over that time. This is an idea that was part of Corey Johnson’s Planning Together abomination that we killed in early 2022. It was a terrible idea then and remains one today.

This directly targets most of the outer boroughs, especially those considered transit deserts.

----​

Folks – this Mayor remains laser-focused on destroying our neighborhoods to help “his developers” as he has called them repeatedly. And, just for your edification, at a Town Hall meeting last week, he was asked directly about the Charter Revision Commission by no other than Chair of Community Board 11, Paul DiBenedetto. You can watch the exchange for yourself here.

Paul DiBenedetto: “Exactly 4 days after the vote for City of Yes, you convened the City Charter Commission to take away the recommendation-only, non-binding power of Community Boards, through their all-important participation in the ULURP process, which stands for Uniform Land Use Review Procedure. If you want to do a zoning change or you want to do the City of Yes, which is a zoning change, it’s got to go Community Board first – so we can all hear it, the public hears it – then it goes to the Borough President, City Planning Commission and then it goes to City Council. And you appointed the head of the City Planning Commission, so City of Yes is yours. But most importantly, the City Charter Commission that you called for also looks to take away Councilmember deference on local land issues – and tell me if I’m wrong: Community Boards are a city agency filled with civic members from the local community who know their neighborhoods better than anyone else. Local Councilmembers are elected by that same community and, again, know their community best. Why would you want to reduce the democratic representation that the people in this room gathered tonight have relied upon to protect our homes, businesses and quality of life since the 1970s?”
 
Eric Adams: “It’s so important that the Charter Commission…I don’t give them their directives. They meet. They hold hearings, like the Community Boards when they do. They hear what comes from the body of the people and their recommendations. Then they put it to a vote. So, it’s not what Eric wants – it goes to a vote, and then the people of this city would vote on the Charter Commission ballot amendments. Based on what the people of this city, the majority votes – it’s not three-fourths, one-fourth – it’s the majority of the people, they will make the determination. If what those experts and other community residents determine to be these changes. That’s going to be solely up to the people of the city if they want them or they don’t want them.
 
Paul DiBenedetto: “But were you involved in putting that together? And, is this something that you believe in too? Do you think that Community Boards should not be involved in ULURP and do you think that Councilmembers should not have deference, local deference?”
 
Eric Adams: “I believe in whatever the people of their community vote on. That’s what I believe. You know, I’m not going to walk into a pre-determined decision if the people of this community and other communities, they’re all on Community Boards. If they believe that Councilmembers should have local deference, they believe that Community Boards should be part of the ULURP process, they’re going to vote and whatever way that vote goes, I’m going to follow the law.”
  
Mayor Adams is acting like an innocent bystander in what may become one of the most egregious power grabs in the history of New York City. Charter Revision Commissions are created and empowered to push the agenda of those that create it, whether it is the Mayor or the City Council. The rogue’s gallery that makes up this particular Charter Revision Commission is stacked with many of the same people and groups that were directly behind the original City of Yes before the City Council modifications (which are still awful and why we are going to court on July 16th). This commission is Eric Adams incarnate. He is not incidental; he is its progenitor.

Make no mistake: Eric Adams has been and continues to be directly responsible for the dismemberment and destruction of our city for the sole benefit of “his developers” – and himself.

If you can attend the hearing tomorrow (Monday, July 7) in person or by Zoom, please sign up here.

If you can’t attend, please write testimony in opposition and email it here before July 15th.

Also, contact your Councilmember. My guess is that they are not amused by this plan to take away a huge amount of their power and influence. Step up your game, Council- members; if you don’t, you only have yourself to blame.

All -
 
This is it.
 
The City of Yes for Housing Opportunity City Council hearing is less than two weeks away.
 
We must stop this disastrous proposal from becoming law in any way shape or form.
 
Our coalition – made up of civic, homeowner, cooperative, tenant associations and umbrella organizations – throughout the city has a new name:
 
S. T. O. P. the City of Yes.
 
STOP THIS OVERDEVELOPMENT PLAN – Say NO to the City of Yes!
 
From October 15th through the 22nd, we will be having a series of meetings, events, rallies & press conferences and ending with testimony at the City Council.
 
Here’s the calendar:
 
Tuesday, October 15th, 2024, 7:30pm:
Queens Civic Congress Zoom meeting/City of Yes strategy session. All civics across the city are invited to attend – link at the bottom of this email:
 
Wednesday, October 16th, 2024, 11am:
WBAI (99.5 FM) show Living For the City with host Michael G. Haskins will interview Paul Graziano on the dangers to our communities of Mayor Adams’s City of Yes for Housing Opportunity if adopted.
 
Wednesday, October 16th, 2024, 4pm:
Brooklyn Rally and Press Conference – 3000 Fillmore Street at Marine Park
 
Thursday, October 17th, 2024, 3pm:
Bronx Rally and Press Conference – 778 Castle Hill Avenue in front of CM Farias’s District Office
 
Thursday, October 17th, 2024, 5pm:
Queens Rally and Press Conference – Southern Field at North Conduit Avenue & 115th Street
 
Saturday, October 19th, 2024, 12pm:
Staten Island Rally and Press Conference – Hylan Blvd & Tysens Lane in front of Bank of America
 
Monday, October 21st, 2024, 1pm:
Rally and Press Conference at the south end of City Hall Park
 
Tuesday, October 22nd, 2024, 9:30am Start Time:
Testify at City Council Hearing on the City of Yes! Those testifying in person will go first; those testifying by Zoom or phone will start testifying at 1pm at the earliest
 
As I’ve said before – let’s kill this thing.
 
Hope to see you all over the next 10 days!
 
Best,
 
Paul
Save1familyny.org
 
Queens Civic Congress Zoom meeting links:
 
Topic: QCC General Meeting
Time: Oct 15, 2024 07:30 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)
 
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84858258357?pwd=H5bLrF7Hu9Ox0BjOFEE8sOlA3Hrcnp.1
 
Meeting ID: 848 5825 8357
Passcode: 771500
 
One tap mobile
+16469313860,,84858258357#,,,,*771500# US
+16468769923,,84858258357#,,,,*771500# US (New York)
 
Dial by your location
• +1 646 931 3860 US
• +1 646 876 9923 US (New York)
 
Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kc1DdaSFEa

City of Yes is a plan BY developers and FOR developers. That sums it up. Let's kill this thing.

Who:          S.A.V.E. 1-Family New York (the Statewide Alliance Vs. Elimination of 1-Family Zoning in New York) and allied organizations
What:            A major press event with our coalition members and allies in opposition to Mayor Adams’ City of Yes package of proposals, currently going through the ULURP process.
Where:          City Hall Park (southern end)
                        New York, NY 10007
 
When:           Friday, May 31st, 2024 at 11am
 
Summary:   Mayor Adams is attempting to radically change the land use and zoning policies in New York City through the adoption of the City of Yes package of proposals. These proposals are going through the ULURP process despite a purposefully misleading and legally deficient Environmental Impact Statement filed by the Department of City Planning.
Mayor Adams would achieve this through an extensive list of proposals, including but not limited to:           

• Elimination of one and two-family zoning, which makes up a total of 25% of NYC

 

• Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) on all one- and two-family lots, including basements, attics, additions, garage conversions and backyard houses up to 800 sf

 

• Staggering increases in density within ½ mile of rail and subway stations in R1 through R5 zones with Transit-Oriented Development (TODs) Overlays

 

• Creation of “Town Center” Zoning on all Commercial Overlays in R1 through R5 zones, allowing for up to four floors of residential above commercial storefronts

 

• “Campus Infill” which will allow for high-density development on green spaces and all religiously owned properties across the city

 

• “District Fixes” which will destroy the basic zoning regulations of NYC

 

• Elimination of all parking requirements for all new residential development in NYC
  
  

Contrary to Mayor Adams’ tagline of “just a little more housing in every neighborhood,” should the City of Yes one-size-fits-all package of proposals become law, the resulting development free-for-all will cannibalize all of our communities, lowering our quality of life and affecting property values, and exacerbating the strain on neighborhoods without any increase in infrastructure or agency staffing. Finally, the City of Yes is a blatant giveaway to Mayor Adams’ donors and developer friends. It will not create more affordable housing; instead, it will replace homeownership, owner-occupied housing and what’s left of the middle class in New York City with market-rate rental units, exponentially increasing the unaffordability of our housing stock.

 All –
The NY State Legislature finalized their negotiations and voted on Governor Hochul’s omnibus budget bill at the end of April. The outcome of the issues that we are concerned about was, to put it mildly, a mixed bag. One thing that I didn’t mention before was the push to get rid of the Statewide FAR (Floor Area Ratio) cap which has long been at a 12.0, meaning that if you have a 10,000 square foot property and are in a zone that allows for a 12.0 FAR, you can have 120,000 square feet of building space. The budget bill included legislation to change that number to a maximum 18.0 FAR which is a massive increase in buildable square footage wherever this would be adopted. This dovetails with the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal, which would introduce to new zones above the current maximum – R10 – and allow a 15.0 FAR at R11 and an 18.0 FAR at R12. These zones would have to be mapped in order to allow this, but clearly this is the intent.
That being said, here are the outcomes for the three other pieces mentioned above:
-ADUs – the State Legislature agreed to create an “opt-in” incentive program to allow all municipalities throughout New York State to have the ability to create local legislation with a small amount of state funding connected to it. While this program was created with the intention of helping smaller communities upstate that are interested in legalizing ADUs, we already have reports from places in Westchester, including the City of Yonkers, that are looking to tap into this program. In addition, New York City, while not interested in the funding stream connected to it, has ADUs as a centerpiece in the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity.
 
-Basement / Cellar Apartments – hand in hand with ADUs, Governor Hochul and her allies in the State Legislature placed great pressure on legislators to support a blanket legalization of basement and cellar apartments in New York City. The basement / cellar apartments, along with ADUs, are a key component of the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity and Mayor Adams and Department of City Planning Chair Dan Garodnick were lobbying hard for citywide adoption. However, numerous Assemblymembers from areas all over the city balked at this, particularly outside of Manhattan. Therefore, a compromise was reached: a pilot program was created and was only mapped in Community Boards where an Assemblymember was in favor. In addition, it could still be overturned if the Community Board itself and/or the representative Councilmember were opposed to it and voted against the pilot program within 90 days. Currently, the Community Boards where it is mapped (but not yet implemented) are: Bronx CBs 9, 10, 11 & 12: Brooklyn CBs 4, 10, 11 & 17; Manhattan CBs 2, 3, 9, 10, 11 & 12; and Queens CB 2. If you are opposed to basements and cellars having the ability to be legalized and are located in any of these boards, we urge you to contact your Community Boards and Councilmembers to vote NO.
 
-High-Density Development for Religiously-Owned Property in Low-Density Areas of NY – this proposed bill was removed from Governor Hochul’s budget bill one week prior to adoption, as (once again) she attempted to violate the New York State Constitution by creating zoning mandates that would allow any property owned by any religious organization to build housing at a higher density than whatever local zoning it was located in throughout the state. While this action was withdrawn at the state level, it has been reintroduced into the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, which will allow all property owned by religious organizations in lower density zones to build at Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) zoning densities and heights, regardless of whether they are located in one. Giving preferential treatment to properties based upon ownership may violate the New York City Charter as well as violate the New York State Constitution.
All of this now-active legislation is specifically geared towards the densification of lower-density neighborhoods in New York City, dovetailing directly with the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity. In order for our communities to survive, we must stop Mayor Adams and his administration from passing and implementing these proposed changes to our existing zoning.

The ‘City of Yes – Housing Opportunity’ citywide zoning and land use proposal will not just create “a little more housing in every neighborhood” as Mayor Adams has stated, or “gentle density” in low-density neighborhoods as the Department of City Planning (DCP) has suggested.
Rather, it will thoroughly gut the entire system of land use that has allowed neighborhoods around the city to grow in logical and predictable ways for over six decades, as per the longstanding goal of the DCP. Apparently, the new leadership at City Hall has had both collective amnesia of past actions and a new agenda that is a direct existential threat to the basic survival of our collective communities.
This proposal does not consider the carefully negotiated rezonings of the past 20 years that have occurred throughout the city – rezonings that encouraged significantly more development in some places while contextualizing new development in others to protect neighborhood character while promoting orderly growth.
The ‘City of Yes – Housing Opportunity’ proposal would throw all of that away in order to:
1) Create massive and unsustainable increases in density across the board in every lower-density (R1 through R5) neighborhood;
2) Utterly ignore transportation needs and trends, particularly in lower-density neighborhoods far from transit linking to Manhattan;
3) Exponentially increase the stress on infrastructure and public resources, of which it makes no mention;
4) Deny actual housing affordability of any kind, despite constant buzz words and meaningless rhetoric sprinkled throughout the document;
5) Purposefully replace communities with high levels of owner-occupied housing in order to “free up” land for developers to build market-rate, high- density rental units for their profit.
6) Severely compromise the democratic process in future land use decisions by communities and their elected officials through the massive expansion of as-of-right development and limiting of ULURP.
While this brief study focused solely on the five main points of the ‘City of Yes – Housing Opportunity’ – Accessory Dwelling Units; Transit-Oriented Development; “Town Center” Zoning; the Rewriting of Basic Zoning Regulations; and elimination of parking requirements – there are dozens of other proposed zoning changes that, collectively, will also cause extensive damage to our communities. The best solution is for ‘City of Yes – Housing Opportunity’ to be withdrawn by DCP prior to certification. 
Final Note:
The ‘City of Yes – Economic Opportunity’ citywide zoning and land use proposal was certified on October 30, 2023. This portion of the “City of Yes” has not been discussed at length in the public realm.
There are deeply concerning changes that are being proposed that will have wide-ranging negative impacts should they be adopted. In addition, much of the framework for “Housing Opportunity” will be put into place if “Economic Opportunity” is made into law.
Here are just a few of the proposed changes to our zoning:
1) Allow (by CPC authorization) retail and office commercial development up to 2500 sf within 100’ of a corner in all residential zones;
2) Allow (by BSA authorization) commercial development to routinely double in size;
3) Change “home offices” from occupying a maximum of 25% or 500 sf (whichever is less) of a primary residence to 49% with no maximum – and up to 3 employees;
4) Reorganizing Use Groups from 18 categories to 10, allowing more noxious uses within our communities;
5) Reorganizing Commercial Zoning to essentially allow much broader uses in all neighborhood commercial strips.
These changes – and many more – will not foster positive change in our neighborhoods. Instead, it will deregulate our entire land use process and allow commercial development everywhere, which is not appropriate or welcome.
For our communities to truly survive and thrive, the ‘City of Yes – Economic Opportunity’ must be voted down in total. 

Dear Friends,
​
URGENT BREAKING NEWS: WE WON!!!!!!

Needless to say, this is a GREAT VICTORY FOR ALL OF US!
THANKS TO ALL OF YOU FOR MAKING THIS HAPPEN. Obviously, we will remain ever vigilant, as we can be sure that – in the long run – there will continue to be those who wish to destroy our communities for the sake of profit, not false promises of affordable housing and equity.
Now is the time for *all of us* to start sitting down with our municipalities, elected officials, stakeholders and other interested parties to discuss a *real* way to both carefully plan growth for our cities, towns and villages when necessary and maintain quality of life and intact communities.
And, let’s all make sure that, if possible, this never, ever happens again.
Best,
Paul Graziano
save1familyny.org