Finding ways to add density that won’t cause opposition

Gov. Hochul’s proposal to create 800,000 new units of housing statewide over 10 years by upzoning single family neighborhoods was resoundingly defeated by the Legislature last month for good reason. The proposal reflected no understanding of what would be unleashed or of how it could be achieved with residents’ agreement.

Upzoning single family neighborhoods doesn’t have to seem so outrageous, if it is done right. It just never is. This is true in the suburbs and the far reaches of the city. Anyone would oppose it if they could see what was built in single-family neighborhoods throughout the city before they were downzoned. Overbearing, ugly, cheap materials, excessive scale and in contradiction to everything in the neighborhood, including design.

If design controls were included, parking problems anticipated and density beyond two family was limited to corners, many residents might be willing to embrace the change. Some, of course, will never accept any change but that is rarely the case. Opponents labeled NIMBY are often MAYBE, if their concerns are addressed.

Design controls are already included in many new private subdivisions assuring the residents that nothing will be built that is alien to the existing scale and predominant design. If that were part of an upzoning proposal for some neighborhoods, one could expect less opposition and even some agreement.

Look at the limitations that are true in landmark neighborhoods that assure neighbors the qualities of their community will not be undermined when change occurs. Nowadays, however, under the misconception that height means density, excessively tall towers are being allowed in historic districts destroying the character of the neighborhood. This makes the argument for design controls problematic but not impossible.

Single family residents are aware of this dramatic turn of events. And, although they probably don’t know that height and density are not the same thing, they assume that new heights will accelerate property values, taxes, rent and sale price increases. They fear being pushed out. They are correct in that fear.

In every upzoned city neighborhood, starting under the Bloomberg administration, the upzoned neighborhoods have gotten whiter, more expensive and have lost too many existing low-income units. The new so-called affordable units are never as affordable as the ones torn down. Every official knows this but the rhetoric of upzoning is so effective, reality loses out.

The Daily News Flash

Weekdays

Catch up on the day’s top five stories every weekday afternoon.

The Real Estate Board of New York has worked hard to keep this realization out of public view. In the process, the city has lost thousands of rent stabilized units torn down or upgraded in upzoned neighborhoods. Political campaign donations have reinforced this message.

Upzoning single family neighborhoods would be useful, if done right, but it will not solve the housing crisis as long as landlords are allowed to warehouse empty units as weapons to make law changes in Albany or to force zoning upgrades in city neighborhoods. Even the city is warehousing empty rent stabilized apartments that could be renovated and put back into use.

Across the country, from Blue Hill, Maine to New Orleans to San Francisco, small towns and large cities are losing potential low-income units to short term rentals. This city is no exception. And units are being lost as well and in a big way by the private equity companies buying up large swaths of neighborhoods, raising rents and neglecting maintenance. Single family neighborhoods worry about it for good reason. Their fears could be allayed if the right limitations are put in place but developers and Wall Street would make sure that does not happen.

Communities and cities across the country are having better luck getting approval for secondary units in single family neighborhoods. This could double the number of units in any single-family neighborhood. An additional unit for some homeowners can be the financial help needed to stay in their home. Converting a garage, dividing a large home, or inserting an inexpensive ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit) in the backyard can be done without upsetting the ecology of the community.

A recent Zillow study reported that 70% of residents in 29 metro areas were willing to accept zoning changes that allowed for ADUs. The most difficult challenge is the issue of parking. Creative solutions here are required. This is probably the biggest reason for community opposition. Access to mass transit is often missing in these neighborhoods.

So, instead of assuming the worst of the neighborhood resisters to upzoning of single-family neighborhoods and label all opponents NIMBYs, it is time to look seriously at how it can be done to convert enough of those opponents to advocates.

Gratz is an author of books about cities and is a former member of the Landmarks Preservation Commission.