Towards the end of January, I attended the conference “Developing the 21^st Century: in the Built Environment” at the New York City Bar Association. Despite the chilly weather, the panel drew about 100 people to the oak-paneled hall on 44^th Street. The major points I came away with are:

1. continued investment in mass transit is critical to economic growth and sustainability;
2. climate change will result in rising sea level and potential liability for architects;
3. legislative change on community benefit agreements or State contract procurement will not come anytime soon.

Nordhavnen: City Regenerative

James Parrott, Chief Economist at the Fiscal Policy Institute, predicted that we are gradually emerging from the recession with this year’s GDP anticipated to grow 3%. However, the end of the Federal stimulus package will highlight severe budget problems in New York State. Locally, high business taxes should be seen in a broader context since New York City has the highest value added and profit per worker in the country. It’s not surprising considering that our mass transit system fosters close proximity and high density. Clearly the government should focus on expanding and modernizing this infrastructure. 

Kenneth Fisher, of law firm Cozen O’Connor, and Margaret Stix, of the eponymous Margaret Stix & Associates, discussed the controversial agreements between developers and community organizations known as Public or Community Benefit Agreements (CBAs). Many community groups feel that development imposes burdens without offering benefits, which the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) does not address. In a CBA process, which is done outside ULURP, a developer may gain certainty while a community may gain such benefits as affordable housing, schools, parks, or “living wage.” A task force convened by NYC Comptroller John C. Liu, Public Benefit Agreements, studied NYC and nation-wide precedents before concluding that private agreements are legally unenforceable and the process can be flawed—CBAs  may undermine statutory public review process, they may lack nexus, public objectives may conflict, or they may even be coercive. One could implement private CBAs via restrictive declaration but only in addressing land use actions. Once public officials become involved the process must be explicitly regulated, as with NYC Economic Development Corporation projects, which can include broader social benefits. The task force recommendations of greater accountability, transparency, inclusiveness, consistency, fiscal responsibility, and enforceability have not been implemented. A scandal or a crisis may finally catalyze legislation.

FXFOWLE’s own Mark Strauss discussed the architect’s role in public policy and two founding visions of the American city—Alexander Hamilton’s “cities are necessary for our economic well-being” and Thomas Jefferson’s “cities are corrupting”—before explicating his “five Rs.” He supplied examples of the firm’s work illustrative of Re-development (Water Street), Re-integration, Re-thinking (Nordhavnen: City Regenerative), Re-positioning (Nassau Hub Redevelopment Plan), and Re-vitalization. Quoting Robert Ivy’s March 2010 editorial in Architectural Record, “The density of existing cities, and the interdependencies they provide, point to the best solutions, rather than designs for the most sustainable individual building and/or communities,” Mark emphasized the need to strategically invest in infrastructure and cities. Per person, cities produce ¼ the greenhouse gas emissions of suburbs because of a highly developed mass transit system. The mayor’s office, in a bid for increased sustainability, launched plaNYC, part of which targets reducing greenhouse gas emissions 30% by 2030 from 2005 levels. It was noted that buildings contribute 79% of carbon gas emissions in NYC, thus a large part of this challenge rests on the shoulders of the A/E/C industry.     

Thus, there is no doubt that climate change will impact projects! Michael Gerrard, Director of the Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, reviewed his studies of environmental legislation, including National Environmental Policy Act, State Environmental Quality Review, and City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR). While Congress questions the existence of global warming, litigation has established that greenhouse gases must be evaluated as “air pollution” in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Gerrard noted that there is draft text to extend this quantification of emissions to the Environmental Assessment Statement process, and that the new edition of the CEQR Technical Manual has detailed metrics for greenhouse gas emissions. 

If that it isn’t change enough, the 2010 Sea Level Rise Task Force recommended that the State adopt sea level rise projections for the year 2100. This would classify areas at risk of coastal flooding, require evaluating projects in those areas to determine whether they should be classified as Type 1 (full EIS) or not, and recommend changes to building codes. Merely consulting FEMA maps is inadequate because they are based on past performance not future projections. Organizations such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and insurance companies are beginning to add disclosure requirements relative to risk of sea level rise. And closer to home, litigation has been emerging for failure to account for rising sea level, which will present liability for architects and engineers.