By Megan Fitzpatrick
After 15 hours (yes, you heard that right) of public comments, Commissioners’ pushback, and lively debate, the City Planning Commission’s City of Yes for Housing Opportunity (COYHO) public hearing came to a close on July 10th, 2024.
Opponents of the zoning text amendment, which included many of our preservation colleagues, cited the lack of mandated affordable housing in the text proposal, skepticism that market dependability will solve the current housing crisis, and concerns over the removal of the public review process in Landmark Transfer Development Rights decisions, as reasons to oppose COYHO.
On September 25th, the City Planning Commission (CPC) passed a vote on the final installment of the Mayor’s City of Yes zoning text amendments. 3 of the 12 Commissioners voted no, however, and gave lengthy reasons why.
Landmark West! believes in sensible, community-focused land use regulation and zoning that serves the interests of the people, not developers. City of Yes for Housing Opportunity (COYHO) will increase market-rate development in already dense residential blocks, in one of the densest neighborhoods in the City, the UWS, create sub-standard and unsustainable housing, contribute to traffic overflow in the neighborhood, and constrict important businesses and community amenities that currently support our neighbors and our quality of life; thus making our neighborhoods less livable and walkable.
The Commissioners who voted NO shared some of our concerns.
Commissioners Cerullo, Goodridge, and Osorio gave extended comments on why they couldn’t vote in favor of the zoning text amendment. They were largely concerned that COYHO doesn’t adequately address the current need for permanent, affordable, and sustainable housing that is contextual within our individual neighborhoods. Commissioner Goodridge called COYHO the “appetizer”, that skips the main entree. She said people have been complaining about the persistence of “anti-family” housing, expensive studios, and a lack of working affordable housing schemes, and this plan still falls short of addressing these urgent needs. Even some Commissioners who voted YES, expressed “strong reservations” about several areas of the proposal.
Before the vote, the Department of City Planning presented two key changes to the proposed text. The biggest of which involved the infill proposal, which now exempts NYCHA. This is a win in favor of the preservation of not only public land but also ‘tower-in-the park’ form buildings.
Next is the City Council’s turn to review and vote on COYHO, which will begin sometime later this year. We will notify the public when such hearings are calendared. In the meantime, contact your Councilmember and click the link below to be reminded of our main concerns about City of Yes.