Sustainability and Resiliency

American Institute of Architects New York (AIANY) testimony for the Joint Legislative Budget Hearing on Housing expressing support for tools for affordable housing development and strategies to promote low-carbon construction with a focus on adaptive reuse and circularity. AIANY expressed support for the following:

• SEQRA Reforms
• J-51 Tax Incentive
• Financial Tools for Embodied Carbon (A6566/S7648)
• Embodied Carbon in Building Code (A8456/S7998)
• Eligible Criteria Expansion for C-PACE (A5404/S1335)
• Deconstruction Ordinance (A8637/S8168)
• Mass Timber Affordable Housing Incentives (A9255/S8918)

American Institute of Architects New York Chapter (AIANY) is thrilled to present our 2026 Policy Platform for New York. AIANY represents over 5,000 architects and design professionals committed to positively impacting the physical and social qualities of our city. The purpose of this document is to share an overview of the top policy priorities of the architecture and design community for the coming year and present recommendations to improve the built environment. Our attention in 2026 will be set on housing, sustainability, public realm, transportation and infrastructure, and procurement policy. New York is facing crises like never before with affordable housing being out of reach for many New Yorkers, more frequent extreme weather events, and an uncoordinated use of public space. This document presents a number of recommendations to remedy these persistent challenges for New Yorkers and details opportunities to take legislative action.

As New York City charts a bold course towards an equitable low-carbon future, the next four years present a critical window to accelerate progress towards our greenhouse gas emission (GHG) reduction goals. Particularly in the wake of massive federal cuts, a comprehensive building decarbonization strategy is needed in New York to improve air quality for public health, increase resilience to storms and blackouts, and maintain leadership combating climate change. Facing challenges with energy affordability, security and resilience, waste and landfill capacity, and meeting City climate goals, the next administration must have a clear vision and action plan that is achievable, cost-effective, and ambitious.

In an effort to make New York more resilient in the wake of federal backsliding on decarbonization policy, namely the work of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the American Institute of Architects New York Chapter (AIANY) has developed a plan to enhance the City’s current goal of reducing operational GHG emissions 40% by 2030 and 80% by 2050 and to outline strategies to tackle the whole life cycle of carbon in the built environment. To shape this action plan, the AIANY Committee on the Environment (COTE) convened industry leaders in design, construction, finance, and real estate for a series of stakeholder engagement sessions to examine the future of decarbonization policy.

Continuing the City’s climate leadership, the next administration must take ambitious and decisive action to reduce carbon in our built environment by implementing a balance of carrots and sticks to effectuate change in design and construction. New York has been a proven leader in reducing operational carbon; however, mechanisms to reduce other forms of carbon emissions in buildings are needed to manage the embodied carbon of construction and support a transition to a circular economy. The following recommendations detail a strategy to regulate the whole life cycle of carbon through three stages: production and construction (Embodied Carbon), use and maintenance (Operational Carbon), and end of life (Circularity). These recommendations include governance strategies, legislative action, code changes, and agency guidelines.

AIANY, alongside more than 50 professionals from the public sector, non-profits, design professionals, academics, and consultants, formed the New York State Embodied Carbon Working Group to identify high-impact, near-term policy recommendations to reduce embodied carbon across New York State’s built environment— the emissions and environment associated with the production, transportation, installation, maintenance, and disposal of construction materials.

This document provides a strategic summary of the vision and near-term recommendations of our forthcoming Action Plan, which will inform policymakers on practical pathways to achieve New York State’s ambitious climate goals, foster innovation, create jobs, and build healthier, more resilient communities. Complementing additional efforts already underway by state and local entities — such as New York State Office of General Services (OGS) Executive Order 22 Embodied Carbon Guidance and New York State Homes and Community Renewal 2025 Sustainability Guidelines— these recommendations are impactful, actionable in the near future, and foundational to the overarching vision. They represent a subset of what is needed to transform the way building materials are used in New York State.

This approach is organized into three interconnected strategies: providing upfront financial support, scaling up requirements in codes, and shifting towards waste reduction and reuse.

The Boston Society for Architecture (BSA/AIA), AIA New York (AIANY), and AIA Los Angeles (AIA|LA) partnered on a five-part series on financing climate-forward, affordable housing projects aimed to educate stakeholders on how to stack financing, making green, decarbonized, and affordable housing a feasible reality for the future. In Boston, New York, and Los Angeles – three of the most expensive and regulated housing markets in the country – the production of green, affordable housing is shaped by a web of interlocking constraints. These include some of the strictest energy codes, antiquated zoning laws, high construction and land costs, and onerous permitting processes. At the same time, each region faces duel and urgent crises of housing affordability and climate change, making the stakes for building new housing higher than ever. This report captures the key takeaways from the series – offering practical tools, policy frameworks, case studies, financing strategies, and a call to action for advocacy at the local, state, and national level. By surfacing real examples and actionable insights, Penciling Out aims to support design professionals and decision-makers in turning policy ambition into built outcomes.

American Institute of Architects New York Chapter supports A8202/S8000, which codifies a portion of Executive Order 22 focused on procurement requirements for state projects by mandating environmental product declarations (EPDs) for common construction materials. 

A8202/S8000 would apply to all state projects of 5,000 square feet or larger, new construction or renovation. This bill would mandate environmental product declarations (EPDs) for common construction materials and project life cycle assessments to demonstrate compliance with maximum global warming potential (GWP) limits set by OGS. Common construction materials cover concrete, asphalt, and steel with other materials to be reviewed and designated by OGS every three years. 

This bill seeks to protect the invaluable progress made by OGS and New York State agencies over the past two years and provide flexibility for OGS to issue guidance.

AIA New York, Natural Resource Defense Council, New York League of Conservation Voters, Urban Green Council, New York Building Congress, Regional Plan Association, and the Municipal Arts Society write to express our support for A6566 (Carroll) / S7648 (Kavanagh), which establishes incentives to encourage the use of low-carbon construction materials and products by providing financial support for concrete manufacturers to develop environmental product declarations (EPDs) and unlocking a sales tax exemption to benefit customers of low-carbon materials.

A6566/S7648 takes meaningful steps to establish financial tools for the owner, builder, and manufacturer, promoting innovation, product differentiation, and support for regional supply chains. The bill proposes two financial tools:

1. A sales tax exemption for certain low-carbon building materials, and
2. A grant program for concrete manufacturers for the development of environmental product declarations (EPDs).

American Institute of Architects New York (AIANY) testimony to the Joint Legislative Budget Hearing expressing support for a statewide strategy to unlock housing opportunities in transit rich neighborhoods and eliminate burdensome barriers to development caused by parking mandates and onerous environmental review.

AIANY expressed support for:

• S925C (May)/A4933A (Kelles) – 2023: Streamlines the environmental review process for sustainable housing.
• A06670 (Solages) – 2023: Directs municipalities to enable transit-oriented development by permitting denser residential constructions within a half mile of a rail station or bus stop/station.
• S162 (Hoylman-Sigal)/A5700 (Kelles) – 2023: Prohibits local exclusionary zoning measures like parking mandates.

According to the EPA, the US industrial sector is linked to nearly a third of annual U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the manufacturing of construction materials and products accounts for 15% of annual global GHG emissions. As tracked by the UN, current emissions reduction efforts amount to only 2.6% by 2030 compared to the 43% that scientists say is necessary by 2030. Manufacturing impacts also have a negative effect on human health and environmental justice for fenceline communities near polluting facilities and supply chains.

New York State and New York City recently issued executive orders (EO 22 and EO 23, respectively) that recognize the importance of embodied carbon emissions in building materials. NYS’s requirements generally focus on material transparency and reporting as first steps to help the industry become familiar with the issues; however, they do not yet mandate reductions. In PlaNYC (2023), the City commits to reduce the carbon footprint of the construction industry by 50% by 2033, including tactics related to low-carbon materials and equipment by way of the C40 Clean Construction Accelerator. Moving forward, New York could look to CALGreen, the California green building code, as a model for regulating embodied carbon flexibly across large private-sector new construction projects.

American Institute of Architects New York (AIANY) and the New York City Hub of the Carbon Leadership Forum (CLF NYC) have compiled the following recommendations for how New York City and State can strengthen existing efforts by expanding limits on embodied carbon for specific materials and requiring project life cycle assessments. While EO 22 and EO 23 take meaningful action to address embodied carbon, current efforts are not enough to reach NY’s goals at the state and city level. We have prepared this memo to showcase opportunities to reward buildings that focus on creative design solutions, use less new material, support low carbon products, and value durability and deconstructability.

These recommendations build off well-established policies implemented in states and municipalities across the country. An aligned memo similar to this document is planned to be shared on circular economy at a later date.

American Institute of Architects New York (AIANY) and the New York City Hub of the Carbon Leadership Forum (CLF NYC) have compiled the following recommendations for how New York City and State can strengthen existing efforts by expanding limits on embodied carbon for specific materials and requiring project life-cycle assessments.

Material Reporting and Thresholds

1. Expand reporting using Type III EPDs that comply with maximum GWP limits to the private sector, and add materials covered for the public sector

2. Create incentives to help small manufacturers connect to EPA grant programs and facilitate EPD creation

Project Reporting and Performance Requirements

3. Mandate project LCAs

4. Require reductions in whole building embodied emissions

5. Expedite permitting process for projects submitting LCAs as part of a broader green incentive program

6. Provide support for design and construction firms to learn and adopt tools to predict embodied carbon and whole life carbon performance

Commitments

7. Explicitly include quantitative and time-bound embodied emissions targets in state and city climate goals

On January 5, 2025, Congestion Pricing was officially implemented in New York City. Each day, around 700,000 vehicles enter the Central Business District. Congestion pricing will take cars off the street, improve air quality, and secure critical funding for transit improvements. The toll revenue will be used to make more stations ADA-accessible, modernize subway signals, buy electric buses, and improve transit safety and reliability. The details of the toll structure are as follows.

AIANY, as part of the Congestion Pricing Now Coalition, sent a letter to Governor Hochul urging her to turn on the program and continue taking steps to kick start the program in advance of the Trump Administration coming into office. New York stands to lose out on $16.5 billion in transit funding for essential projects if congestion pricing is not implemented.

AIANY Comments on NYC Department of Building’s proposed amendment to Article 320 of Chapter 3 of Title 28 of the New York City Administrative Code, the third rules package for Local Law 97. AIANY has been a long-time supporter of Local Law 97 and efforts to successfully implement the law to meet the greenhouse gas reduction goals. In recognition of the challenges to comply with the law and the housing affordability challenges New Yorkers are faced with, we strongly support the Affordable Housing Reinvestment Fund (AHRF) as a tool to support affordable housing. This program will be a valuable resource for HPD to assist low income buildings make necessary energy efficient retrofits. We support efforts to incentivize and aid residential buildings in complying with Local Law 97, and AHRF is an important resource enabling NYC to hit our carbon reduction targets.

The North American Electric Construction Coalition is a collection of government officials from some of the largest cities around the world and are committed to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, achieving carbon neutrality, and advancing the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement through the increased use of electric construction equipment. The market availability for electric construction equipment is nascent. Therefore, this letter intends to signal a commitment to use more electric construction equipment in North America. AIA New York along with other organizations also signed on in support of this initiative.

American Institute of Architects New York (AIANY) writes to express concerns with Int 0772-2024. The proposal would alter the building emissions calculation, adjustments, and penalties for co-ops and condos with ground floor open and green spaces adjacent to the building. AIANY supports the section of the bill to adjust penalties for buildings that have installed energy efficiency systems, such as solar photovoltaic systems and submetering for individual apartments, but we are concerned about the implications of expanding the gross floor area for calculating the building’s emissions. AIANY strongly supported Local Law 97 of 2019, and we want to see its implementation have the largest impact possible to meet the ambitious goals outlined in the law.

We are pleased to provide our members with a Voter Guide to candidates in districts located in Manhattan for the New York State Assembly and State Senate who are strong supporters of issues that matter to architects and our 2024 legislative agenda. Candidates were evaluated based on their policy positions, the strength of their campaigns, and responses to AIA New York’s candidate questionnaire. Those who are highly rated from that evaluation are marked with an asterisk. Before the election, remember to confirm which assembly and senate district you live in.

AIA New York letter to Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins and Speaker Carl Heastie expressing support for a number of housing and sustainability policies and encouraging their inclusion in the Fiscal Year 2025 New York State Budget. AIANY urged their consideration of the following recommendations during the final stages of budget negotiations.

Recommendation #1: Enable and Incentivize Office to Residential Conversion

• Eliminate the FAR cap and give NYC the authority to determine FAR
• Tax incentive for office to residential conversion with affordable units
• Extend date in the Multiple Dwelling Law that conversions are permitted from 1961 to 1990

Recommendation #2: Create Tax Incentive Program for Affordable Housing Production

•  Extend the project completion deadline for vested projects in 421a
• Create a new tax abatement program for affordable housing construction

Recommendation #3: Legalize and Incentivize ADUs

• Tax incentive for accessory dwelling units
• Give NYC authority to legalize and create an amnesty program to convert basement units to legal dwelling units

Recommendation #4: Eliminate the 100 Foot Rule in the Public Service Law

Recommendation #5: Incentivize Energy Efficiency Retrofits

• Whole Building Initiative
• GREEN Buildings Act

AIANY letter to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority expressing support for New York’s Central Business District Tolling Program, also known as congestion pricing. In the NYC metropolitan area, congestion in the central business district creates untenable delays for emergency vehicles, buses, delivery vehicles, and drivers who have no other choice but to take cars and trucks into the zone. Chronic disinvestment in transit has meant an unreliable, inaccessible system that lurches from crisis to crisis. Congestion pricing is a proven solution for reducing traffic congestion, improving air quality, and raising money to fund public transit.

AIANY testimony to the Joint Legislative Budget Hearing for Environmental Conservation expressing support for Part P of Governor Hochul’s Fiscal Year 2025 Executive Budget in the Transportation, Economic Development, and Environmental Conservation Article VII Legislation. This proposal would make critical changes to the Public Service Law related to the mission of the Public Service Commission by eliminating the “100 foot” rule and making other amendments to meet the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) greenhouse gas emission reduction requirements. The “100 foot” rule requires utilities to supply gas to any customers who want it and demands that ratepayers foot the bill to hook them up if those customers live within 100 feet of an existing line. The Affordable Gas Transition Act will allow customers who want to use gas to do so while enabling the cost-effective transition to clean, energy efficient electric heating and other alternatives to natural gas.

AIANY letter to Governor Hochul expressing support for a number of housing, sustainability, and transportation and infrastructure policies in the Fiscal 2025 Executive Budget. New York is facing crises like never before with affordable housing being out of reach for many New Yorkers, more frequent extreme weather events, and an uncoordinated use of public space. The policies outlined in the FY25 Executive Budget are important incremental steps towards addressing these challenges and are essential for achieving these overarching goals of change.

American Institute of Architects New York (AIANY) is thrilled to present our 2024 Legislative Agenda for New York City and New York State. AIANY represents over 5,000 architects and design professionals committed to positively impacting the physical and social qualities of our city. The purpose of this document is to share an overview of the top policy priorities of the architecture and design community for the coming year and present recommendations to improve the built environment. Our attention in 2024 will be set on affordable housing, sustainability, public realm, transportation and infrastructure, and procurement policy. New York City is facing crises like never before with affordable housing being out of reach for many New Yorkers, more frequent extreme weather events, and an uncoordinated use of public space. This document presents a number of recommendations to remedy these persistent challenges for New Yorkers and details opportunities to take legislative action.

AIANY testimony to the New York State Fire Prevention and Building Code Council on updates to the Uniform and Energy Code. As a staunch supporter of the All-Electric Buildings Act, AIANY encourages the Building Code Council, NYSERDA, and the Department of State fully comply with the law to ensure we meet New York’s bold decarbonization goals.

AIANY letter to the New York City Department of Buildings on the proposed rules on Local Law 97. The proposed rules are a step in the right direction towards achieving out ambitious climate goals and for New York to continue to lead the way in fighting climate change. The rules incentivize long-term carbon reduction planning, establish a “credit” that can be applied towards emission reduction targets to encourage early adoption of electrification projects, limit the use of renewable energy credits, and provide a pathway for buildings that do not comply with 2024 emission limits to demonstrate a “good faith effort.”

AIANY testimony to the City Council Subcommittee on Zoning and Franchises on City of Yes for Carbon Neutrality. AIANY recommended the following changes to the proposal:

1. Reconsider a 50% reduction from the ASHRAE 90.1. Instead, consider setting a very progressive yet potentially achievable reduction factor or adopting a tiered approach for energy reduction, such as 30% reduction for 3% area exclusion and 50% reduction for 5% area exclusion.
2. Amend EUI language from 38kbtu source EUI to 38kbtu site EUI. Consider EUI targets specific to building use, as energy use will differ significantly amongst different building uses. These targets could be similar to goals and thresholds set by other local laws.
3. Establish an expert group to review and refine the Ultra-Low Energy Building criteria.

AIANY, as a member of the Congestion Pricing Now coalition, letter to the Traffic Mobility Review Board to express support for New York’s Central Business District Tolling Program. Specifically, the letter outlines the coalition’s support for the use of bridge and tunnel toll credits, a per-ride surcharge paid by the passenger rather than a once per day toll paid by the driver of for-hire vehicles, and an exemption for taxis.

AIANY letter to the City Planning Commission expressing support for City of Yes for Carbon Neutrality. AIANY makes the following recommendations to amend proposal 8 to “Fix Zone Green”:

1. Reconsider a 50% reduction from the ASHRAE 90.1. Instead, consider setting a very progressive yet potentially achievable reduction factor or adopting a tiered approach for energy reduction, such as 30% reduction for 3% area exclusion and 50% reduction for 5% area exclusion.
2. Amend EUI language from 38kbtu source EUI to 38kbtu site EUI. Consider EUI targets specific to building use, as energy use will differ significantly amongst different building uses. These targets could be similar to goals and thresholds set by other local laws.
3. Establish an expert group to review and refine the Ultra-Low Energy Building criteria.

AIANY, as a member of the Congestion Pricing Now coalition, letter to the Traffic Mobility Review Board in support of New York’s Central Business District Tolling Program. The coalition makes the following recommendations:

1. Use bridge and tunnel toll credits to reduce excess travel – particularly through environmental justice communities
2. On for-hire vehicles, assess a per-ride surcharge paid by the passenger, rather than a once per day toll paid by the driver
3. Commuter buses, both public and private, must be exempt from tolls
4. No additional exemptions should be granted besides commuter buses and legislatively mandated exemptions
5. Trucks and large vehicles should pay a per axle toll

AIANY, New York League of Conservation Voters, and Urban Green Council letter to the City Planning Commission in support of City of Yes for Carbon Neutrality. The proposed changes in the amendment because they will update NYC’s zoning regulations to make our world-leading efforts to prepare for climate change easier, and ensure that zoning is not standing in the way of climate progress. We are particularly supportive of the elements that enable and reward:

• Energy efficient design and retrofits
• Building electrification and associated equipment
• Rooftop and other elevated solar
• Battery storage
• Electric vehicle charging
• Infrastructure to support bicycles and other micromobility options

March 2023

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
NYNJHAT Study Team, Planning Division
26 Federal Plaza, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10279-0090

RE: New York—New Jersey Harbor and Tributaries Study, Tentatively Selected Plan

Dear Mr. Bryce W. Wisemiller and Ms. Cheryl R. Alkemeyer:

We, the 45 undersigned members of the Rise to Resilience Coalition, appreciate the opportunity to submit public comments on the Draft Integrated Feasibility Report and Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement for the New York-New Jersey Harbor and Tributaries Study (“NYNJHATS”) and for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (“Corps”) commitment to reducing coastal storm risk in the New York and New Jersey Harbor region.

The Rise to Resilience Coalition, comprised of over 100 organizations representing residents, leaders in business, labor community and justice, volunteer organizations, scientists, environmental advocates, and design professionals, have been engaged on NYNJHATS since its inception.

As part of the March 2023 public comment period, the Rise to Resilience Coalition puts forward the
following recommendations:

1. Give greater consideration to environmental justice through an iterative approach,
2. Prioritize natural and nature-based features (“NNBFs”) and non-structural solutions, and
3. Address multiple climate hazards.

These priorities reflect the input of multiple community and environmental organizations with on-the ground experience in vulnerable communities and technical expertise in resilience, align with the Water Resources Development Act (“WRDA”), and are consistent with several executive and agency policy directives and memos, such as Executive Order 14008, the Justice40 Initiative, and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works’ Implementation of Environmental Justice and the Justice40
Initiative memorandum.

Additionally, Appendix A captures comments and questions from more than 50 organizations that participated in a HATS comment sharing workshop, hosted by Waterfront Alliance, Rebuild by Design, and Environmental Defense Fund on February 17, 2023. Appendix B references the Guiding Principle for Coastal Infrastructure, developed with over 80 attendees at a meeting hosted by Rebuild by Design on December 2nd, 2022.

Since 2019, the Rise to Resilience Coalition has worked closely with Congressional leadership and local sponsors to secure modifications to the NYNJHATS authorization. The Coalition advocated for adjustments to the study to incorporate more holistic and equitable approaches that address multiple flood threats. Specifically, the Coalition sought to include tidal flooding associated with sea level rise and low-frequency precipitation events (along riverine floodplains) as individual threats and as compounding threats during a coastal storm. Additionally, the Coalition advocates for increased public engagement in communities most impacted by the project’s design and most vulnerable to flood risk. Of equal importance, was an articulation of how community values, lived experiences, and expertise will be considered in alternative selection and design.

This is the largest public infrastructure project proposal in our region in recent history, and it is the critical responsibility of the Corps to work closely together with the non-federal sponsors and communities to develop a plan that is rooted in the most accurate science, prioritizes social equity and public values, ensures access to the waterfront for all communities, and preserves our diverse cultural and ecological landscape for the most beneficial outcome for all. Our region faces significant climate challenges, and we urge the Corps to move forward with solutions that ensure the equitable resilience, accessibility, and ecological integrity of our communities.

1. Greater Environmental Justice Considerations Through an Iterative Approach

The Corps must recognize the disproportionate climate risks that puts low-income communities and communities of color at greater risk of flooding. These communities experience greater hardship in recovering after disasters, resulting in compounding personal and societal impacts to health, livelihoods, and the environment.

Recommendation 1(A): Center Disadvantaged Communities and Align NYNJHATS with the Water Resources Development Act of 2020 and 2022, Executive Order 14008, and the Justice40 Initiative Guidance.

The Rise to Resilience Coalition worked with members of Congress to expand the authorization of NYNJHATS via the Water Resources Development Act of 2020 (WRDA 2020), including a specific directive in Section 203 to consult with affected communities and have since had several discussions in 2021 and 2022 with the non-federal sponsors of NYNJHATS who are aligned in this perspective.

The model to date has been to bring community stakeholders in to comment on what has already been done. An equitable route, as it pertains to centering disadvantaged communities, would require bringing those communities in from the beginning, so that lived experiences and expertise can be a part of the design and implementation stages.

In addition to WRDA 2020 and 2022, consideration of greater consultation with environmental justice and disadvantaged communities is consistent with the Biden Administration’s Executive Order 14008, Executive Order 13985, and the Justice40 Initiative. To that end, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Michael Conner, issued interim environmental justice implementation guidance to the Corps on March 15, 2022, titled Implementation of Environmental Justice and the Justice40 Initiative. In Section 10 of Assistant Secretary Conner’s memorandum, he makes it clear that the Corps will take more
proactive measures toward achieving environmental justice in their scoping, planning, and construction phases.

“For projects which are in the study and planning phases, we will take a more proactive approach towards achieving environmental justice. This may take time to achieve, but the end result will be an approach to studies which will focus on a comprehensive evaluation of the total benefits of each plan including equal consideration of applicable benefit types in the study scope of work where the disadvantaged communities play a key role in the effort to advance their needs. This new approach goes beyond “doing no harm” to focus on putting the disadvantaged communities at the front and center of studies. This will require a commitment starting at the earliest phase in the process. USACE is directed to initiate outreach and engage disadvantaged communities early in the process to identify and address problems.”

To date, the Corps has not taken the necessary steps to center disadvantaged communities in NYNJHATS as outlined in the above-mentioned legislation, Executive Order, and implementation guidance. Before moving to the agency milestone and Chief’s Report, we urge the Corps to demonstrate environmental justice considerations in the tentatively selected plan, which requires a more proactive approach to engagement with disadvantaged communities.

Recommendation 1(B): Update the Cost-Benefit Analysis and Thoroughly Evaluate Coastal Storm Risk for All Citizens in the Study Area, Centering Disadvantaged and Environmental Justice Communities.

The current model for prioritization of flood protection does not sufficiently capture environmental justice considerations. Economic impacts, particularly where property values are higher, hold greater consideration. This imbalance results in several environmental justice communities not receiving equal or equitable access to flood protection as a result of historic injustices and disinvestment.

We recommend the Corps thoroughly evaluate coastal storm risk for all citizens in the study area, centering disadvantaged communities and environmental justice communities, in accordance with Justice40, Water Resources Development Act of 2020, and the interim guidance issued by Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Michael Connor.

The Corps should improve or modify its cost-benefit analysis and decision-making process to address equity and environmental justice. The Corps’ plan was created and selected using a cost benefit analysis of different possible scenarios to address the needs of the New York-New Jersey Harbor region. In order to equitably address the needs of low-income communities and communities of color, the cost-benefit analysis used for project selection must be revised to assign value to communities most impacted by climate change that do not have a high level of residential mobility, prioritizing population density or replacement value. To do this, we need to remove the bias towards wealthy neighborhoods and housing stock. In areas where there is a scarcity of low-income housing, existing low-income residential properties should be given a higher value, reflecting scarcity not the resale value of that property.

Going forward, the Corps must include social and economic costs to show the full impact of these studies and proposed solutions, as well as clearly articulating the residual economic and social risks. If cost-benefit analyses are not modified, the Corps must develop an alternative method to effectively capture the value of protecting low-income communities, renters, communities of color, and environmental justice communities. In doing so, the Corps should also account for the multiple benefits of natural infrastructure, as well as the true costs of flood threats and disasters to a community. The Corps can address disproportionate flood risks and begin to address systemic inequalities by considering the cumulative impacts of flood disasters to communities and improve the cost-benefit methodologies to make more equitable investment decisions.

The tentatively selected plan leaves several environmental justice communities with flood risks out of the project, including, but not limited to, Hunts Point, Sunset Park, and South Williamsburg.

Recommendation 1(C): Create an Iterative Process and Extend the Public Comment Period.

In a letter to Colonel Matthew Luzzatto, New York District Commander and District Engineer, on July 27, 2022, regarding the establishment of an Environment and Climate Justice Working Group for NYNJHATS, several members of the Rise to Resilience Coalition called for a more iterative approach to finalizing NYNJHATS, as described by the following timeline.

This proposed timeline includes a Refined EIS ahead of the agency decision milestone, where the Corps would host additional public meetings on revisions made to the Tier 1 EIS based on feedback received to date. The feedback gathered through this process should be used to refine the plan in an iterative way, ensuring communities are a thoughtful partner to the Corps and the non-federal sponsors throughout the entirety of NYNJHATS.

Through this updated timeline, we urge the Corps to partner with the non-federal sponsors and communities most affected by NYNJHATS to extend the public comment period and host several additional convenings. The current public comment period, although extended twice, does not provide sufficient time, access to resources, or community input to shape the future of the plan.

Recommendation 1(D): Develop a Robust and Equitable Public Engagement and Community Empowerment Strategy That Prioritizes Regular Communications with Environmental Justice Communities.

Building upon Recommendation 1(C), we advise the Corps to develop a robust public engagement and community empowerment strategy to foster an ongoing dialogue between the communities affected by NYNJHATS. One of the steps to achieving this result is the formation of the Environmental and Climate Justice Working Group (“the Working Group”).

This Working Group would support and advise on how to ensure that the concerns, priorities, and proposed solutions of those most impacted by the threats of climate change are centered in the final plan. These goals would be accomplished by bringing together the project sponsors and partners (the State of New York, the State of New Jersey, and the City of New York), groups that represent large alliances of environmental and environmental justice groups, and frontline community organizations directly impacted by the area of NYNJHATS in one space. Specifically, the Working Group would support efforts to develop a robust outreach strategy and timeline, including target geographies and community organizations; a process for how frontline organizations will inform the selected plan, including strategy and tactics for reaching, listening to, and incorporating frontline community priorities into the design, including considering how funding for community participation can be provided; a process for how the states of New York, New Jersey, City of New York, and Corps will work together to maximize engagement and coordination/consistency review with other resilience projects; how the Corps will meet the statutory obligations of WRDA 2020 and 2022 to evaluate and address the impacts of low-frequency precipitation and sea level rise on the study area, value ecosystems services more effectively, and include a summary of any nature-based features that were considered and provide an explanation if nature-based features are not recommended.

Further, the a working group should have the opportunity to review the outcomes of the engagement strategy the Corps employs for the NYNJHATS, and provide suggestions on possible immediate remedies, if gaps are found, as well as improvements for processes in the future.

Together, we hope to build an effective strategy for ensuring that these perspectives are heard and incorporated into the final plan.

2. Prioritize Natural and Nature-Based Features and Non-Structural Solutions

The Corps’ International Guidelines of Natural and Nature-Based Features for Flood Risk Management, published in 2021, highlights the five foundational principles for the overall success of natural and nature-based features:

1. Expect change and manage adaptively.
2. Identify sustainable and resilient solutions that produce multiple benefits.
3. Use a systems approach to leverage existing components and projects and their interconnectivity.
4. Engage communities, stakeholders, partners, and multidisciplinary team members to develop innovative solutions.
5. Anticipate, evaluate, and manage risk in project or systems performance.

Nature-based solutions have a significant role to play in resilient infrastructure investments. The Corps’ own guidelines find that “effective and timely implementation of NNBF to address the future [flood risk management] challenges will depend on progress in three overarching areas of activity—developing and delivering, communicating and collaborating, and elevating and educating.”

We recommend that the Corps utilize the best practices outlined in these guidelines and prioritize the immediate implementation of natural and nature-based features as part of NYNJHATS. The Tier 1 EIS lacks specifics on how the Corps will include natural and nature-based features and non-structural solutions in the tentatively selected plan. We urge the Corps to outline how these solutions will be embedded into the plan, ahead of the agency decision milestone and Chief’s Report.

Recommendation 2(A): Prioritize Multi-Beneficial, Natural and Nature-Based Approaches and Consider Quality of Life, Economic, and Environmental Impacts.

Recognizing that investments go farther when multi-beneficial approaches are taken, Section 116 of WRDA 2020 explicitly requires the prioritization of natural and nature-based features and ecosystem services in cost-benefit analysis.

The tentatively selected plan relies too heavily on in-water barriers for protection and does not adequately study or model natural and nature-based features; for example, berms, dunes, increased elevation of waterfront sites, the use of pervious surfaces, daylighting streams (i.e., activating historic pathways for water for absorption and overflow), and other inland green infrastructure utilized to protect neighborhoods and mitigate both inland and coastal flooding.

We recommend the Corps employ and study the use of natural and nature-based features to reduce wave damage from smaller, more frequent storms. Examples include significant wetland, coastal shrubland, and edge forest restoration, provided that vulnerable structures are either sited outside of the future floodplain or meet design flood elevation and durability guidance. Nature-based features provide multiple benefits, and can be effective in reducing impacts from smaller, more frequent storms and gradual erosion.

Where structural solutions do move forward, we recommend the Corps employ natural and nature based features, such as naturalized slope and shape on stabilization features, plantings embedded within ripraps and revetments, and products such as specially textured concrete that attract marine and plant life, as well as consideration for beneficial gray infrastructure solutions, such as permeable pavement and ecologically enhanced concrete.

In accordance with WEDG standards, we recommend that if hardened or structurally reinforced edges and components are necessary, the Corps not use materials preserved with potentially toxic substances such as chromated copper arsenate, creosote, or others that can leach into the aquatic environment. Avoid materials containing PFAS contaminants. We encourage the Corps to use edge materials that have a chemical composition, alkalinity, toxicity, pH, and other features that support the native biological community and attachment of characteristic aquatic organisms. Standard steel and concrete structures do not meet these criteria, nor do some of the most common rock materials used for riprap. Additionally, design and enhance structural features to provide more heterogeneity and habitat supporting complexity than conventional stabilization methods:

• Use rough, textured, surfaces or varied gradation of rock that create interstitial spaces of varied size and shape, using a material with a pH that fosters attachment or provides refugia for native aquatic organisms. Examples include habitat and reef modules, oyster reefs, form liners, molds, pile casings, and structural enhancements.
• Use water retaining ecological features to increase diversity of habitat and maintain some intertidal zonation, such as precast tide pools.
• Incorporate nature-based features that provide multiple benefits, such as tiered reinforced edges with native plantings, oysters, mussels, and salt marsh grasses.
• Incorporate temporary stabilization strategies for wave attenuation and erosion reduction until vegetation is established.
• Consider additional external attachments such as hanging or floating habitats which can be utilized on seawalls and other hardened structures.

Additionally, as the Corps begins to analyze natural and nature-based features, we recommend increasing and expanding wetland areas at site edges where relevant. This includes restoring or designing wetlands at the interface between the land and water at a site to provide habitat, aesthetic value, and buffer zones. Coastal wetlands can serve as storm attenuation systems, reducing wave action before waves are able to make landfall. They can also serve as debris capture systems, reducing the impact of high velocity debris at the site. Wetlands should be designed to be wide and flat to maximize the surface area available for risk reduction potential. The Corps should consider relevant vegetation for different elevation scenarios, considering the potential for marsh migration with rising sea levels in the planting plan. Wetland areas should gradually slope to the upland regions of the side to reduce risk of erosion.

Recommendation 2(B): Pursue a Phased-Approach that Enables Implementation of Short- and Long-Term Measures.

The interim NYNJHATS report suggested that the tentatively selected plan may include provisions for adaptation, such as near-, mid-, and long-term options. Given the uncertainty in the planning horizon, we encourage the Corps to pursue a phased approach that enables understanding the relationship between local and more regional approaches, thoughtful decision-making accounting for the many local structural and non-structural projects now underway, and implementation of different options over different time scales and scenarios.

This approach should also enable implementation of near-term measures for which there is high confidence and support. It is critical that the Corps ensure the phased approach and resulting projects are designed with financial feasibility. The Corps should finalize plans through this study that reach holistic goals and can be completed given projected funding levels from local, state, and federal
sources.

The study should be pursued through a phased approach to authorization and development, prioritizing environmental justice, critical infrastructure, and nature-based features. This approach should be included in the final tentatively selected plan and Chief’s Report (by planning region or measure and including cost-share information) to move forward with elements of the plan while allowing for refinement of those that require further study.

We recommend the Corps move forward quickly with measures that protect critical infrastructure and environmental justice communities that are aligned with the best available science. The Corps should prioritize measures that protect critical infrastructure and communities most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, using the public comment period and social vulnerability and environmental justice analysis to inform prioritization.

Recommendation 2(B-2): Ensure Structural Capacity to Heighten Resilience Features in the Future

Risk projections do not carry absolute certainty. Antarctic ice is melting at an accelerating rate and sea level rise projections for the New York-New Jersey Harbor region have increased over time. Climate projections rely on assumptions about human behavior and policy change that are difficult to predict and subject to drastic change. (Please see related comments in recommendation 3B). The design life of these projects is long enough that the sea level rise and storm surge projections may be inadequate to protect those communities that they were designed to protect. As such, they should be designed to accommodate additional protection in the future.

While designing for adaptability can involve additional upfront costs, these features may encourage a longer project lifespan. The Corps should consider increasing the capacity of any structural systems to allow more cost-effective future upgrades to accommodate additional fill, heightened or additional seawalls, taller barriers, or other flood mitigation features.

By building to accommodate the possible expansion of systems in the future, the Corps ensures that it provides the resources to protect against today’s sea level rise and climate projections, while also ensuring that the region remains protected if climate change proves more severe than anticipated.

Recommendation 2(C): Thoroughly Evaluate Buyouts as an Option Equal in Value to Structural Solutions, Including Extensive Modeling on Costs and Long-Term Benefits, Ahead of the Agency Decision Milestone.

In addition to natural and nature-based features, the Corps should detail non-structural solutions, such as buyouts, as a legitimate solution for coastal storm risk. Examples of successful buyout solutions exist in both New York and New Jersey. Buyouts have not been thoroughly considered as part of a nonstructural solution to date. These solutions are among the few long-term strategies that eliminate risk where they occur, and therefore should be considered especially in areas expected to experience regular tidal flooding in the future.

The further refinement of the non-structural areas should explicitly include and evaluate buyouts as a strategy, detailing that this approach would be conducted in partnership with the relevant local sponsor. Working closely with cost-share and local partners, the Corps should incorporate the utility of non-structural and building-scale measures, including buyouts and relocation, for areas with certain risk profiles.

As an initial step, we recommend that the Corps develop a criteria and evaluation mechanism for prioritizing both individual properties and neighborhood-level or block-level buyout or relocation programs. A data-driven approach is a critical component of ensuring that such a program would be managed equitably (i.e., considerations of fair market pricing, pathways for public housing residents, and upward mobility). A prioritization scheme would need to be informed and led by a broad set of communities and residents to ensure that environmental justice and equity were centered. The results of such a study would help identify for which areas managed retreat is a reasonable option. A comprehensive risk reduction plan like NYNJHATS is incomplete without at least some reliable assessment of this option.

3. Address Multiple Climate Hazards

It is important and urgent to identify and prioritize federal investments in large-scale solutions to address the full suite of flood risk and build resilience across the region. The objectives of HATS have been limited to storm surge as the primary coastal climate hazard. This shortcoming of the study results in HATS not fully integrating the impacts and solutions for sea level rise and extreme precipitation and the ways in which they are connected, and compounding, storm surge.

Recommendation 3(A): Plan Holistically for Compounding Flood Risks in the Study Area and Pursue Solutions that are Effective Against Multiple Flood Threats.

The tentatively selected plan may differ if the objectives are expanded to manage the multiple flood risks across the region. The Rise to Resilience Coalition is concerned that solutions developed to mainly address coastal storms and storm surge can exacerbate the flood risk from sea level rise and low frequency precipitation events.

When stormwater systems across the region have their capacity reduced as a result of sea level rise and storm surge, precipitation-based and pluvial flood risks become an impact of storm surge and sea level rise. These must be addressed together. Every land-based solution should be designed in a way that enhances stormwater systems. A “do no harm” approach is insufficient when storm surge and sea level rise will actively harm the region’s stormwater discharge capacity.

The tentatively selected plan does not appear to address the full projected risks of sea level rise, as the storm surge gates would remain open except during storm conditions. High-tide projections in 2080 will flood many areas and the storm surge gates will have little-to-no impact on this expected “sunny-day flooding.”

We urge the Corps to follow the directive of Section 8106 of WRDA 2022, which directs the Corps to formulate alternatives to maximize the net benefits from the reduction of the comprehensive flood risk within the geographic scope of the study from the isolated and compound effects of:

• a riverine discharge of any magnitude or frequency;
• inundation, wave attack, and erosion coinciding with a hurricane or coastal storm;
• flooding associated with tidally influenced portions of rivers, bays, and estuaries that are hydrologically connected to the coastal water body;
• a rainfall event of any magnitude or frequency;
• a tide of any magnitude or frequency;
• seasonal variation in water levels;
• groundwater emergence;
• sea level rise;
• subsidence; or any other driver of flood risk affecting the area within the geographic scope of the study.

Recommendation 3(B): Use Local Climate Projections, as Authorized by the Water Resources Development Act of 2020 and 2022.

The Rise to Resilience Coalition has long been calling for the Corps to use local climate projections. The current sea level projections used for design, analysis, and effectiveness of alternatives are based on outdated projections. The draft analysis is based on ER 1100-2-8162 (June 2019), which states that it uses “… the most recent trends on relative sea level change from NOAA…” (main report p.176). The graph on that page indicates that the intermediate SLR prediction used by USACE for 2100 will be 1.8 feet. A 2022 NOAA publication projects a year 2100 intermediate SLR for the Northeast US of 1.3 meters (4.3 feet), more than double the design criteria.

Additionally, state and local projections for the region exceed the Corps’ projections and are based on regional models developed through extensive peer-review. The New York City Panel on Climate Change (“NPCC”), for example, estimates 2 to 4.2 feet of sea level rise in their moderate projections. The Rise to Resilience Coalition secured language in WRDA 2020 directing the Corps to use updated, local peer reviewed projections. Section 113(A) in WRDA 2020 calls for the Corps to “coordinate the review with the Engineer Research and Development Center, other Federal and State agencies, and other relevant entities. Section 113(B) in WRDA 2020 calls for the Corps “to the maximum extent practicable and where appropriate, utilize data provided to the Secretary by such agencies.”

Additionally, a letter from 18 members of Congress on May 26, 2021 reaffirmed this language, calling for the Corps to “ensure that the implementation guidance directing [the Corps] work related to NYNJHATS reflects the intent of the language included in WRDA 2020.” The letter also stated that “WRDA 2020 calls for a revision of existing planning guidance documents and regulations to ensure they are reflective of best available peer-reviewed data and the effects of sea level rise regardless of storm surge inducing events and inland flooding on communities in Section 113. The ability for cost-share partners to request use of local, peer-reviewed data should be clearly articulated in the guidance for this section. Authorization specifically for NYNJHATS (Section 203) was expanded to evaluate and address sea level rise and low-frequency precipitation events. For the NYNJHATS study, the [Corps] should use regionally down-scaled peer reviewed climate data like those developed by the New York City Panel on Climate Change and Rutgers University and the Mayor’s Office of Resiliency to model and map future flood risk in New York City.”

Lastly, the New York City Mayor’s Office of Climate and Environmental Justice (“MOCEJ”), penned a letter on March 8, 2022, requesting the Corps “use the New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC) [sea level rise] projections for the New York City Region.” The letter goes on to state that “NPCC [sea level rise] projections use a probabilistic approach drawing on an ensemble of 35 global climate models, integrated with observations of vertical land movement, glacio-isostatic adjustment and other important regional factors (e.g., ocean circulation) identified in [Corps’ sea level rise] guidance. The [Corps’] relative sea level change projections do not account for regional variation and are lower than the NPCC’s projections. Consequently, the NPCC projections provide a more accurate estimate based on New York City’s unique conditions, and are considered the best available, peer-reviewed data on SLR for the New York region. The use of the NPCC SLR projections would:

• Result in a better analysis of the onshore high frequency flooding needs and approaches;
• Facilitate a better benefits comparison analysis in the National Economic Development (NED), Regional Economic Development, Environmental and Other Social Effects categories; and
• Better inform the closure frequency analysis that feeds into the environmental impacts assessment and would have impacts on navigation channels and port operations.”

We encourage the Corps to conduct a residual risk study of the tentatively selected plan to quantify the costs associated with tidal flooding and permanent inundation from sea level rise over time using local projections. This should be used as a filter to determine which proposed measures within the study address multiple hazards, and to inform prioritization of which measures may need further analysis and refinement before being recommended for construction.

Conclusion

Adapting to this new reality offers an opportunity to create healthy, resilient, accessible, and equitable waterways that are alive with commerce and recreation, and exciting waterfront destinations that reflect the vitality and diversity of the communities that surround them. As the region’s premier Coalition advocating for climate resilience and adaptation, we strongly encourage the Corps to prioritize:

1. Give greater consideration to environmental justice through an iterative approach,
2. Prioritize natural and nature-based features (“NNBFs”) and non-structural solutions, and
3. Address multiple climate hazards.

These comments and recommendations are geared toward developing the best project for our region that addresses the full suite of climate hazards that lay ahead. We appreciate the Corps’ work to study options for increasing the resilience of our region. The New York and New Jersey Harbor Region remains highly vulnerable to climate change, and we need solutions that ensure the equitable resilience, accessibility, and ecological integrity of our communities. There is no silver bullet to address our increasing vulnerability. The contexts are nuanced, and the solutions varied.

The undersigned members of the Rise to Resilience Coalition thanks the Corps for this opportunity to submit public comments. We look forward to your response, and to changes in the tentatively selected plan that capture and address the recommendations put forward here, and of those across the Harbor region.

Sincerely,
American Institute of Architects (AIA) New York
American Littoral Society
Bronx River Alliance
Center for NYC Neighborhoods (CNYCN)
Columbia University Climate School, Center for
Sustainable Urban Development
Coney Island Beautification Project
Coney Islanders for an Oceanside Ferry
Environmental Defense Fund
Friends of Bushwick Inlet Park
Future City Inc.
Hackensack Riverkeeper
Hudson River Waterfront Conservancy, Inc.
Jamaica Bay-Rockaway Parks Conservancy
13
LES Ready!
The Municipal Art Society of New York
NAACP New Jersey State Conference
National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA)
Northeast Region
Natural Areas Conservancy
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
New Jersey Future
New Jersey League of Conservation Voters
New Jersey Progressive Equitable Energy
Coalition (NJPEEC)
New Jersey VOAD (Voluntary Organizations
Active in Disaster)
New York City Chapter of the Surfrider
Foundation
New York City Soil & Water Conservation
District
New York Disaster Interfaith Services (NYDIS)
New York City VOAD (Voluntary Organizations
Active in Disaster)
Newtown Creek Alliance
New York League of Conservation Voters
NY/NJ Baykeeper
Ocean Bay Community Development
Corporation
Rebuild by Design
Regional Plan Association
Regional Ready Rockaway
RISE (Rockaway Initiative for Sustainability &
Equity)
RETI Center
Save the Sound
Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter
South Bronx Unite
Stormwater Infrastructure Matters (SWIM)
Coalition
Trust for Public Land
Urban Ocean Lab
Waterfront Alliance
WE ACT for Environmental Justice
Wildlife Conservation Society

February 21, 2023 

Since our founding in 1857, the American Institute of Architects New York Chapter (AIA New York) and our members have worked to advance the quality of life of New Yorkers and protect the public’s health, safety, and welfare. AIA New York supports Governor Hochul’s budget proposal and its efforts to tackle climate change, the housing crisis, and much-needed infrastructure improvements. However, we would like to express concern that the budget does not address some of these issues aggressively enough. 

We congratulate Governor Hochul for planning to implement multiple programs that will end our dependence on fossil fuels for both new and existing buildings. However, as the budget is currently written, there are multiple exceptions for large buildings and certain types of buildings three stories or below that would be permitted to continue to use fossil fuels past 2025. We believe that a January 1, 2025 deadline for all small buildings would be a more appropriate target, as time is of the essence in the fight against climate change. With the right level of urgency and commitment, we are confident that New York can lead the way in creating a more sustainable and livable future for all. 

We also applaud the Governor’s forward-thinking approach to addressing the ongoing housing crisis by committing to the construction of 800,000 new affordable housing units over ten years, including a five-year, $25 billion housing plan to create and preserve 100,000 affordable homes. This critical investment will provide much-needed relief to families struggling to find affordable and safe places to live. The budget will also extend the completion deadline for vested 421a projects by four years to June 2030, offering projects that suffered delays during the COVID-19 pandemic the opportunity to seek the tax abatement. However, we are concerned that the budget does not tackle the housing crisis quickly enough to address the serious shortage in affordable and supportive housing. More should be done to incentivize the construction of affordable housing, including a replacement for the J-51 tax abatement and a total rehaul of 421a. While considerably more housing than outlined in the budget will need to be created and preserved in the years to come, it is nonetheless reassuring to see the Governor acknowledging this issue with greater emphasis. 

In addition to addressing critical social and environmental issues, the budget proposal also recognizes the importance of investing in our state’s infrastructure. The Central Business District Tolling Program, also known as the congestion pricing plan, will address gridlock in Manhattan and help finance the MTA’s capital improvements. Improving accessibility by making 70 more subway stations ADA-accessible and continuing work on Second Avenue Subway Phase 2 to extend service from 96th street to 125th street and connect with Metro-North are crucial steps towards a modern, efficient, and accessible transportation system. These infrastructure investments will not only improve the quality of life for our communities but will also drive economic growth and competitiveness for years to come. 

Together, these initiatives in the budget proposal will not only protect our environment and combat climate change but also improve the lives of all New Yorkers. We commend Governor Hochul for pushing these initiatives forward in her budget proposal. 

Thank you, Chair Sanchez, Chair Gennaro, and Chair De La Rosa, for holding this hearing today and the opportunity to testify. The American Institute of Architects New York, also known as AIA New York, is the professional association representing nearly 6,000 of New York City’s architects and related professionals. Since our founding in 1857, AIA New York and our members have worked to advance the quality of life of New Yorkers and protect the public’s health, safety, and welfare. Working alongside our partners in City government, AIA New York has and will continue to be a strong supporter of Local Law 97 (LL97).

As you know, buildings contribute two-thirds of the city’s total greenhouse gas emissions. LL97 is the centerpiece of the city’s climate strategy for large buildings and is crucial to delivering NYC’s low-carbon future. The law will also bring important co-benefits, like lower pollution and greater health and comfort to New Yorkers across the five boroughs. Among the weak spots in this endeavor is a workforce capable of delivering high performance buildings and electrifying everything possible. It is our belief that, at all levels, we do not yet have the necessary workforce to comply with LL97.

We have the means for building zero emissions, high performance buildings today. These are market ready solutions, and more and more products are coming into the market. These are buildings that will be easier and simpler to operate, and more durable buildings that require far fewer inputs. High performance buildings are conservative in nature—they cost less to operate with little or no cost premium to construct buildings to comply with the 2050 requirements of LL97.

At best, the vast majority of our new buildings are barely complying with the status quo (compliance with the energy code) let alone meeting the demands of 2030 and 2050. Each building built or renovated that doesn’t meet the 2050 requirements is a lost opportunity. We know it can be done. We have colleagues who are building buildings today that meet the 2050 goals of LL97.

We find there is a major discrepancy in the marketplace demand for workers and the projected supply of workers estimated to meet the goals of LL97 and the New York State’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act. Not only is it an issue of the quantity of workers, but also of the quality of their training. On the demand side, our members report that most clients are not requesting performance higher than required by the building code for renovations or new construction. This will not get to 2030 emissions levels, let alone 2050. Local law 154 of 2021, the all-electric buildings law, helps but doesn’t address decarbonizing existing buildings. All this puts the onus of decarbonization on the grid rather than assisting with lowering loads through higher efficiency, and decarbonizing the grid alone is not sufficient to meet carbon targets. We will not get a second chance.

On the supply side, the entire building ecosystem will need training and preparation that we suggest be done in phases, and that supports the growth of the nascent high performance retrofit industry in NYC: Owners, developers, building managers, contractors, leadership in architecture and engineering firms, policymakers and lenders—these are the makers of demand and we need them trained first to get retrofit projects in the pipeline. The generated projects will then induce a demand for training of the next level of workers, these including professionals such as architects, engineers, façade designers, energy analysis and scientists, regulators such as the Department of Buildings and their examiners and inspectors, members of the construction trades, construction managers, electricians, and HVAC mechanics, as well as certification professionals (PHIUS, PHI, HERS, etc.).

In technical education, we have levels of competency: awareness, understanding, and ability. We need to extend this to the different sectors. The general public needs an awareness of how buildings operate and how to transition to a fossil fuel free future. The average American spends 90% of their time indoors. They should have an understanding of how comfort is obtained and where electricity comes from. Leadership in the building sector should have an understanding of what is required for high performance buildings to meet LL97 and 80×50. Most still do not understand that a passive house quality enclosure is—the first step for getting nearly every building type in NYC on its way to meeting 80×50. Specific ability to realize high performance buildings is eventually needed in all trades and professions.

The specific ability training we recommend is Passive House. Our members who have been trained in this standard all attest to how much it has fundamentally changed their practice. It is a data-driven and scientific approach to high-performance building design; it is holistic and comprehensive. This training has been extensively subsidized by NYSERDA, training hundreds of design professionals and hundreds more tradespersons. Please note that NYSERDA subsidized these trainings without a clear market demand for these skills.

We would even invite the members of these committees to undertake such a course. We are confident that this level of understanding will help produce more productive policy decisions. Again, thank you to for holding this important hearing. Our organization and members remain committed to working with the Council and Administration to deliver NYC’s low-carbon future.

Thank you, Chair Sanchez and Chair Gennaro, for holding this hearing today. The American Institute of Architects New York, also known as AIA New York, is the professional association representing nearly 6,000 of New York City’s architects and related professionals.

Since our founding in 1857, AIA New York and our members have worked to advance the quality of life of New Yorkers and protect the public’s health, safety and welfare. Working alongside our partners in City government, AIA New York has and will continue to be a strong supporter of Local Law 97 (LL97).

As you know, buildings contribute two-thirds of the city’s total greenhouse gas emissions. LL97 is the centerpiece of the city’s climate strategy for large buildings and is crucial to delivering NYC’s low-carbon future. The law will also bring important co-benefits, like lower pollution and greater health and comfort to New Yorkers across the five boroughs.

AIA New York is committed to working with the Council and the Administration to successful implement Local Law 97 and ensure compliance within the design, construction and building industry. With important milestones approaching, increased funding is essential to continued climate progress, and to ensure all New Yorkers benefit from a recovery that boosts green jobs and healthy, low-carbon and efficient buildings.

The City must commit to properly funding the Office of Building Energy and Emissions Performance (OBEEP), which is housed within the Department of Buildings. The office is severely understaffed, with only a handful of staffers overseeing compliance for thousands of the city’s largest buildings, making enforcement more difficult. In addition, the staff shortage complicates the office’s ability to take on further responsibilities and initiatives related to compliance with LL97, such as providing education on sustainable design techniques. We applaud Speaker Adams and the Council’s response to the FY 23 Preliminary Budget, calling on the Administration to include baseline funding of $450,000 in the Executive Budget for six additional positions within OBEEP to assist with Local Law 97 implementation.

AIA New York also urges the City to lead by example, by increasing funding to achieve the City’s own requirements under LL 97, which include reducing emissions from government operations 40 percent by 2025 and 50 percent by 2030. The Department of Citywide Administrative Services is in charge of overseeing much of this work, and they have developed a comprehensive plan for meeting the targets. The city should invest further in those agencies that oversee capital works, as they are integral in ensuring that city buildings comply with the law’s provisions. Additional funding is needed to ensure the Department of Design and Construction and other agencies can pay for the work and are sufficiently staffed to oversee this significant increase in retrofits.

We have seen already that a lack of funding has decreased confidence in the ability of the city to effectively enforce the law. The best way for the city to rebut these concerns is to properly fund those city agencies who oversee its compliance.

Again, thank you for holding this important hearing today. Our organization and members remain committed to working with the Council and Administration to deliver NYC’s low-carbon future.

Members of the New York Congressional Delegation,

We are writing on behalf of New York’s design and construction industry professionals to thank you for your strong support of the American Jobs Plan. As outlined, the jobs plan would dramatically improve the quality of New York’s infrastructure, all while reducing inequality, mitigating against the effects of climate change, and creating thousands of good-paying jobs.

As the jobs plan is being debated in Washington, we want to reaffirm our support for its provisions and highlight some areas of improvement that we believe would benefit all New Yorkers:

• Increase funding for mass transit: New York alone requires hundreds of billions of dollars to fund mass transit improvements. We are pleased to know that necessary levels of funding will be dedicated to move the Gateway Program forward, however, we ask that other mass transit projects in New York also receive sufficient funding. Transporting New York’s people and freight more efficiently is imperative to our overall economic growth.
• Fund transportation alternatives: Allocate robust funding to fix our transit challenges through relatively lower-cost design and construction solutions, such as bus lanes, bike lanes, and the pedestrianization of streets. These solutions will reduce the strain on existing infrastructure and improve the quality of life for cyclists, pedestrians, seniors, and people experiencing disabilities. New York has numerous programs and legislation in place to do this, but they require more funding to be implemented successfully.
• Invest in reimagining urban highways: Highways have been critical to the success of modern cities, allowing for people and goods to move with ease, however, they have tremendous social costs, including polluting and dividing marginalized communities. We need dedicated federal funding to reimagine these transportation infrastructure assets into places that provide equitable access to open space, enhanced placemaking, and protection from the effects of climate change.
• Provide funding for New York to implement sustainability legislation: At the state and city level, New York is in the process of implementing, respectively, the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) and Local Law 97-2019. These ambitious pieces of legislation require our state and city governments to spend billions of dollars upgrading energy infrastructure and retrofitting government buildings. Yet, funding is needed to make these projects move ahead so that government can lead the way towards a greener, cleaner future.
• Increase funding for affordable housing: NYCHA alone requires at least $40 billion, most of which is expected to come from the federal government. Without significant federal investment, NYCHA’s residents will continue to live in dangerously dilapidated buildings.
• Couple funding for housing with removal of exclusionary zoning: The federal government has a long history of driving local policy through mandates and making the receipt of federal funding contingent upon compliance with important national objectives. Therefore, funding to local governments for the development of housing should be contingent upon the elimination of exclusionary zoning practices that are overly restrictive, decrease affordability, and harm our local and regional economies, i.e., single-family zoning. These policies have seriously hampered efforts to combat the housing crisis in New York City and its surrounding counties, increased segregation and inequality, and ultimately prevented the housing supply from matching the needs of New York’s residents. The jobs plan offers a unique opportunity to combat exclusionary zoning policies across all of New York.

Again, we thank you for your strong advocacy on behalf of New York’s built environment. We are committed to ensuring that the jobs plan becomes law and that billions of dollars of funding support New York’s economy. Please consider our members in the design and construction industries as a resource while you examine the jobs plan and other similar proposals.

Sincerely,

Benjamin Prosky, Assoc. AIA
Executive Director
American Institute of Architects New York

Carlo A. Scissura, Esq.
President & CEO
New York Building Congress

John T. Evers, PhD
President/CEO
American Council of Engineering Companies of New York

AIA New York strongly supports the electrification of buildings by ending their reliance on fossil fuels for power and other uses. Fossil fuels in buildings have been largely phased out throughout New York State and the rest of the country, both by mandate and by choice. However, this is not the case in New York City, making legislation necessary to accomplish this goal. Int 2317-2021 would do just this, by not allowing new or significantly altered buildings to use high-carbon-emitting substances.

Eliminating fossil fuel use in new buildings and those undergoing major alterations would have numerous positive impacts. As 70% of carbon emissions in New York City originate from buildings, electrification would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, since electric power will soon originate from a clean wind and solar-powered grid. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions would mitigate climate change and improve air quality while also decreasing the city’s reliance on non-renewable energy sources. The 2019 gas moratorium showed the supply of fossil fuels is unreliable, which makes the design and construction of buildings dependent on them challenging. Lastly, fossil fuels create an unnecessary fire hazard at construction sites and in occupied buildings. This endangers design and construction industry professionals, as well as everyday New Yorkers.

We hope this bill is just the start of reducing the city’s reliance on fossil fuels. Future legislation is needed to address existing buildings, most of which are still reliant upon these non-renewable energy resources. As comparatively few buildings undergo the types of alternations covered in this bill, additional legislation is needed to cover most other existing buildings. For instance, further action by the City Council and NYC Department of Buildings should be taken to encourage or mandate the replacement of boilers.

While AIANY is strongly supportive of the concepts in this bill, changes should be made to the existing legislation to ease implementation and compliance. These recommendations are outlined below and would ensure that the bill is as effective as intended.

Recommendations:

* Move to new portion of the code not relating to fuel signage, perhaps Section 24-173 (use of solid fuel) or a new section (24-178).

* Define covered buildings as “new buildings” and those undergoing renovations that fall in the ALT1 category, “Major alterations that will change use, egress or occupancy.”

* Lower kgs from 50 to 40 to make it essentially impossible for “clean” fossil fuels to emerge as an alternative in the future.

* Carbon dioxide, not carbon, should be used as the unit of measurement, since it is the industry standard.

* The exemption should be clarified and simplified and should require a formal application process to reduce loopholes. Language should be taken from LL97-2019 and DOB rules relating to its implementation.

* The law should take effect after one year for smaller buildings, two years for mid-size buildings, and three years for large buildings to allow the industry to adjust.

AIA New York in consultation with advisors on its Committee on the Environment offers its support for Intro No 1816, which would make NYC’s Energy Conservation Code one of the most advanced building energy codes in the country and would make a major contribution toward advancing the goals of energy efficiency and carbon reduction that the city has set for 2030 and beyond. While the new Code takes significant steps to reduce energy consumption and hence emissions, it is not stringent enough on its own to meet the 80×50 goal and the targets set by Local Law 97.

There are many improvements to lighting and mechanical systems that can improve a building’s energy performance and the updated regulations do address these to some extent, but as architects we have a particular awareness of the impact a building’s envelope can have on energy efficiency, and occupant health and comfort. High performance glazing, more effective insulation, and airtight construction should be the standard for all of our buildings, not just the exceptional few.

The new code does take steps toward envelope improvement, but there is still a long way to go. The argument is often made that setting standards for glazing, insulation, and airtightness will result in significantly higher construction costs and will have negative impacts on real estate values. But in fact, the opposite is true: high performing envelopes lead to lower upfront mechanical costs, increased leasable area, higher productivity from occupants, lifetime energy savings, and increased resilience.

While we think that this legislation is undeniably a step in the right direction and will help architects design better, more energy-efficient buildings, and we are unanimous in our opinion that adoption of the new code is far preferable to the alternative, our enthusiasm for the progress it offers is tempered by the knowledge that it simply does not go far enough to respond to the current climate emergency.

October 4, 2019

The Honorable Andrew M. Cuomo
Governor of New York State
NYS State Capitol Building Albany, NY 12224

Dear Governor Cuomo:

We are writing on behalf of the American Institute of Architects New York (AIANY) to express our support for the Arthur Kill Terminal project being developed by Atlantic Offshore Terminals in Staten Island, New York. AIANY and its nearly 6,000 members have proudly maintained a long-standing commitment to sustainability in architecture, seeing it as a vital component to the modern industry’s approach to design and construction.

New York is on the precipice of change. The enactment of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act and the state’s commitment to 9,000 megawatts of offshore wind by 2035, as well as the awarding of 1,700 megawatts—the nation’s largest procurement of offshore wind—signaled to the rest of the country that New York leads the nation in clean energy. The State is primed to become the supply chain hub for the multi-billion-dollar offshore wind industry. Therefore, the State must support the design and construction of port infrastructure to spur the development of offshore wind.

The Arthur Kill Terminal is uniquely positioned to handle the challenges of developing the offshore wind industry. Due to vessel access constraints, such as bridges and other barriers, most existing U.S. ports are unsuitable for wind turbine staging. Located on Staten Island’s Charleston neighborhood, the Arthur Kill Terminal is able to bypass these constraints with its completely unrestricted access to the Atlantic Ocean and facilitate offshore wind projects across the coast. As it stands today, the Arthur Kill Terminal is the only port in New York where offshore wind turbines can be staged and assembled onshore and brought out to sea.

AIANY is committed to fostering sustainable design and construction. We are pleased to express our support for the Arthur Kill Terminal project and look forward to working with you in advancing the development of offshore wind in New York.

Sincerely,

Benjamin Prosky, Assoc. AIA
Executive Director

Hayes Slade, AIA
2019 President

AIA New York strongly advocates for a more sustainable and equitable built environment. Through programming and by supporting various pieces of legislation, we have encouraged our 5,600 members to design in a more environmentally conscious manner.

Despite advances in sustainable design over the years, far more can be done to make our cities green. Crucially, we need to support efforts to retrofit existing buildings. While sustainable design for new buildings is increasingly widespread, far more New Yorkers live and work in older buildings, most of which have not been retrofitted according to the latest technologies and design practices.

If we do not retrofit our existing building stock en masse, we jeopardize the health and safety of ourselves and future generations. Right now, around 70% of New York’s carbon emissions are generated by buildings. In order to tackle issues around climate change, resiliency, and air quality, we need to retrofit our existing building stock.

Furthermore, continuing to overlook the retrofitting of existing structures may lead to greater inequity in our built environment. It should not be a luxury to live or work in a well-insulated building, though in New York City this is often the case. Those with sustainably designed apartments and offices often pay less in energy bills, which further exacerbates financial divides. If we do not address this issue now, our city will increasingly be divided between those who can afford to live and work with all the benefits of sustainable design, and the less fortunate who live and work in deteriorating buildings.

For these reasons, we applaud Council Member Costa Constantinides’ pieces of legislation, Int. 1252 and Int. 1253, which require existing buildings over 25,000 square feet to meet energy efficiency targets. For years, market forces and government incentives have led to slow but steady increases in retrofitting. Unfortunately, we do not have time for a process that does not require immediate improvements. We need the City to require that the bulk of our large building stock start retrofitting as soon as possible.

These pieces of legislation have the potential to significantly improve the daily lives of millions of New Yorkers, while also spurring the growth of the green sector. New Yorkers deserve to live and work in better conditions, and for that reason we ask the City Council to pass, and the Mayor sign, Int. 1252 and Int. 1253.

Sincerely,

Gerard F. X. Geier II, FAIA, FIIDA, LEED AP
President

Benjamin Prosky, Assoc. AIA
Executive Director

March 29, 2018

The American Institute of Architects, New York Chapter (AIANY) is expressing concerns regarding the proposed demolition of 270 Park Avenue, formerly known as the Union Carbide Building. Designed in 1961 by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, the building is a notable example of the International Style.

AIANY appreciates the level of discussion and awareness that has been brought to International Style buildings and Modern architecture’s heritage as a result of recent news regarding 270 Park Avenue. The International Style has become widely representative of the modern office building.

AIANY’s chief concern is the precedent this may set for sustainable design in New York. Currently, buildings are responsible for 70% of carbon emissions in New York City. The Union Carbide building was recently retrofitted in 2012, achieving LEED Platinum status, the highest possible rating. Without a better understanding of how it will be dismantled and what is going to replace it, demolishing such a recently renovated green building, particularly one as prominent as 270 Park Avenue, implies that sustainable design is a low priority.

Furthermore, if demolished, 270 Park Avenue would be the tallest building ever purposely razed. Demolition and construction are particularly energy intensive activities. As mentioned in AIANY’s recently-released Zero Waste Design Guidelines, construction and demolition waste account for 25-45% of the solid waste stream by weight nationwide. Construction and demolition waste is also often contaminated – with paint, adhesives, and fasteners. Demolition of 270 Park Avenue would represent a shift away from the values of sustainability and responsibility in building design, which are championed by architects in New York and beyond.

AIANY asks that JPMorgan Chase and our elected officials find a way to address these pressing concerns. We hope there will be studies to investigate adaptive reuse approaches, which may retain or work with the existing structure, in order to minimize the environmental impact of demolition. As architects, we strongly believe in new and innovative design, but also recognize the value of historically influential architecture and champion sustainability. The Chapter hopes to be a resource to JP Morgan Chase and our elected officials, as we strive for the common goal of keeping New York vibrant and economically competitive.

Policy roadmap for local candidates to maintain New York City’s national leadership on climate change by upgrading its buildings, training its workforce and streamlining energy efficiency. Developed by AIANY, Urban Green Council, REBNY & 32BJ SEIU.

Testimony before the New York City Council Committee on Environmental Protection on a series of energy-related: Intro 1629; Intro 1637; Intro 1644; Intro 1651.

AIA New York opposes the administration’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement.

On 1.31.17, AIANY testified before the NYC Council Committee on Sanitation and Solid Waste Management in favor of Intro 201, a bill to require recycling of discarded carpet from commercial buildings.

In 2014, U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions totaled 6,870 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents, a per capita total of 17 metric tons for each resident of the United States.

Recent changes in policy and regulations at the federal level—such as withdrawing the United States from the Paris Climate Accord, and the rescinding of water pollution regulations, and the suspending of climate-sensible safeguards at the EPA, to name a few—are reversing a decades-long course of positive and protective actions in defending the quality of our national environment.

AIANY testified before the City Council Committee on Housing and Buildings with Urban Green Council. The hearing addressed: Int. No. 1160, Int. No. 1163, Int. No. 1165, and Int. No. 1169, which would update NYC’s Energy Code.

AIANY submitted a statement requesting that the effective date of the State Energy Code be extended to January 1, 2017.

AIANY submitted testimony supporting AIANY supports Intro. 478 in its effort to encourage the elimination of fossil fuels and the implementation of photovoltaic systems but suggested that the best approach to achieving this would be to focus on whole building analyses.

AIANY submitted testimony at the oversight hearing on the resiliency and sustainability sections of the OneNYC plan.

On 09.25.15, AIANY submitted testimony on Intro. 721-A, green building standards for certain capital projects.

Illya Azaroff, AIA, testified at the 09.25.15 oversight hearing on the Build it Back program.

AIANY submitted testimony for the record on Intro. 609 regarding ground source heat pumps.

This oversight hearing and conference covered on site-sourced and stored renewable energy. AIANY provided testimony on select technologies.

This oversight hearing examined the City’s Enhanced Emergency Response Plans post Superstorm Sandy. Illya Azaroff, AIA, Co-Chair, AIANY Design Risk and Reconstruction Committee (DfRR), testified.

AIANY testified in favor of Int 0378-2014, A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to reducing greenhouse gases by eighty percent by 2050.

This oversight hearing addressed “An Examining of the City’s Clean Waterfront Plan.” AIANY Design Risk and Reconstruction (DfRR) Committee testified.

On July 16th, AIANY Executive Director Rick Bell, FAIA, addressed the newly formed MTA Reinvention Commission to discuss issues related to design, resilience, and capacity.

We wrote to Ambassador Elizabeth M. Cousens in support of the proposed Sustainable Development Goals on cities and human settlements by the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals.

A broad coalition of City Council members, business leaders and advocates from transportation, environmental and health organizations called on Mayor Bill de Blasio to make sustainability and climate resiliency high priorities for the next 100 days of his administration and beyond.