WASHINGTON, D.C. – March 18, 2015 – (RealEstateRama) — Today, Rep. Jerrold Nadler sent the following letter to the New York City Planning Commission and the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development regarding maintaining affordability within Riverside South:
March 17, 2015
Carl Weisbrod
Chairman
New York City Planning Commission
22 Reade Street
New York, NY 10007
Vicki Been
Commissioner
Housing Preservation and Development
100 Gold Street
New York, NY 10038
Dear Chairman Weisbrod and Commissioner Been,
I am writing regarding proposed changes to Application No. P2013M0272, by the Collegiate School and Hudson Waterfront Associates, L.P., to modify the Riverside South Large-Scale General Development (LSGD) Special Permit and 1992 Restrictive Declaration to facilitate construction of a 640-seat private school on Parcel K-2 of the Riverside South LSGD. These proposed changes would seek to, among other actions, waive the existing on-site affordable housing requirement to build 55 affordable units – fought for by the surrounding community in order to ensure their specific neighborhood economic diversity – in exchange for a one-time, $50 million contribution towards a potential relocation and construction of those units some 50 blocks to the north. I am deeply concerned that a deal to waive the on-site affordability requirement would have been made without public consultation, especially given that this original requirement was negotiated with the community as a pre-condition for development to directly benefit that community – setting a very problematic precedent. I am equally troubled that the proposal to relocate the required affordable units off site contains a large degree of uncertainty that could imperil their ultimate construction. I strongly urge the New York City Planning Commission (CPC) to suspend this application while providing a comprehensive review of applicants’ proposed need for the waiver/modification (their cited inability to meet the existing on-site affordability requirement), delay any vote until the full Community Board and its elected officials have time to consider this at a full Board meeting, and make every effort to keep the affordability on the site as currently required.
In July 2014, the applicants presented a proposal to Manhattan Community Board Seven (CB7) to relocate the required 55 units of on-site affordable housing within the Riverside South LSGD permit area through two possible avenues: either through new construction within the development or through the purchase of existing units made subject to the affordability provisions. As an enforcement mechanism, the July 2014 proposal mandated that the affordable units be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the school building, to ensure the developer would be unable to renege on their commitment. This proposal preserved the affordable housing the community demanded as part of the Riverside South LSGD, including most recently during the 2010 Riverside Center approvals, and maintained the goal of economic diversity central to the continued success of our neighborhood and City.
However, as of last week, CB7 was informed that the applicants were no longer pursuing plans to maintain affordability at Riverside South, because they claimed that they could not identify appropriate locations within the development for the units, and instead were seeking create a deal to pay the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development $50 million for the creation of affordable housing elsewhere in Community District Seven, yet far outside the directly affected community, with a city-owned lot on 108th Street highlighted as a likely possibility.
I am alarmed at the precedent set should the city allow a private developer be able to purchase their way out of providing long-planned and hard-fought benefits to the specific community surrounding a LSGD, undermining the economic diversity that these community members have sought for decades. Allowing a deal to eliminate the on-site affordable housing and transfer that community benefit more than 50 blocks to an alternative neighborhood, without public consultation, may significantly undermine public trust in future land use negotiations. I am concerned that neither the Community Board nor its elected officials were provided with the exact details of the applicant’s failed attempts to identify appropriate locations within the development for the units to satisfy the agreed-to affordability requirements, nor were these local leaders consulted at any time to assist in this matter.
Additionally, residential redevelopment at the proposed 108th street site would need to go through a full and lengthy Uniformed Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) with no guarantee of success. Past proposed residential redevelopment efforts on this site, including ones with an affordability component, have been met with profound local opposition, and were ultimately jettisoned. The existing garage on the site necessitates the need for a lengthy Environmental Impact Study (EIS), which may show that the site is not even suitable for residential development. Indeed, costly delays could greatly reduce the impact of the proposed $50 million financial contribution, lessening how far the dollars would stretch to build the units. With these things in mind, I am very concerned that any deal to move the units to an alternative site, without a defined and enforceable plan to ensure their construction, increases the risk that the units will not be built, and/or would significantly delay the construction of affordable housing our community at-large desperately needs.
I applaud the Administration’s serious commitment to building affordable housing, and its real investment of resources already towards that end. It is critical, though, that community consultation and involvement be paramount in these efforts, and that the Administration support communities that have fought for affordability in their midst. I look forward to working together to finding solutions to ensure the affordability that was promised to this particular community, to satisfy the needs of all of the affected stakeholders and to increase the overall number of affordable units throughout the City. Thank you for the kind consideration of my requests.
Sincerely,
JERROLD NADLER
Member of Congress
