Competing Views of Land Use Process at Charter Revision Meeting

By [Dan Rivoli] The commission charged with updating the city charter recently heard suggestions on changing the public land use process. A five-member panel of experts representing city government, community planners and the real estate industry gathered at the Queens Public Library in Flushing June 24 to testify in front of the Charter Revision Commission. Currently, when a developer needs a variance or a special permit, they must embark on a 7- to 8-month process formally known as the Uniform Land Use Review Process. The project goes in front of the community board, the borough president and City Planning Commission, before receiving final approval from the City Council. This process often results in a series of revisions to a plan. Tom Angotti, a professor of urban affairs and planning at Hunter College and CUNY Graduate Center, was the panelist most critical of the land use review process. While this process is supposed to be public, Angotti noted there are informal meetings with city officials and developers in which out important details are hashed out before a community board gets to delve into the project. â??This is a problem we have: a pre-ULURP without sunshine, Angotti said. â??[Community boards] perceive that what is presented is a fait accompli. Even community boards try to get an early voice into a development project in the community. In 2008, the West Side Spirit reported that Community Board 7 created an ad hoc â??working group for the Riverside Center development. That group held private meetings with developers that may have violated open meetings laws. Another complaint from Angotti is the lengthy and â??onerous process for neighborhoods to craft local, comprehensive plans for development. The 1989 charter revision gave community boards and borough presidents the authority to craft these plans. They are known as â??197-a plans, named after a section of the city charter. But only 13 plans's mostly crafted by community boards's have been adopted by the City Council. Angotti noted that these plans are advisory and City Planning can hold up a plan indefinitely. The Department of City Planning, however, told the charter commission that the tweaks to the land use process should be minimized. David Karnovsky, the general counsel to the Department of City Planning, defended the relationship between the community board, which is advisory, and City Planning, which takes binding votes. â??No applicant comes before the Planning Commission and says, â??Ignore them. They"re only advisory," Karnovsky said. As for the real estate"s view of ULURP, Paul Selver, a land use attorney and partner at Kramer Levin, called the process sound. But Selver, whose clients include Riverside Center developer Extell, said City Planning should have the final authority for approving special permits, calling the City Council"s vote â??unnecessary. He also wants 197-a plans to have a 10-year sunset so they can be â??current and accurate. Selver also wants 25 percent of community board members to be business owners that operate their own stores. With competing ideas and opinions on community boards, development and City Hall, perhaps the land use process can be spared an overhaul, suggested Vishaan Chakrabarti, the director of the Real Estate Development program at Columbia University. â??It works, he said, â??because everyone comes out of the process unhappy.