Oversight - Shared Housing in NYC," Hosted by the Committee on Housing & Buildings

(00:00:00)

Senior Legislative Council analyst and data scientist. Before I turn to my committee, I also just want to take a moment because you are two of the agencies that are working the hardest for everything that you are doing. Thank you for everything that you are doing to respond to the heat complaints that I know have skyrocketed over time. We appreciate all of the overtime.

(00:00:32)

We are joined today by my committee members. Sorry, sorry Carolyn. Sorry. Blame the babies, right? Poor babies. Always blame the babies. CM Hudson. CM Zhuang and oh my gosh, I am sorry. CM Salaam. He goes right before me on the... he goes right before me. My apologies. I love you colleagues. You are all the best. Before we turn to the administration's testimony, we are going to turn to her legislation. Who is going to speak on her legislation.

(00:01:17)

Thank you. I am proud to introduce this legislation in desperate need of affordable housing and increasing our housing stock. City Council can deliver on both of those. Housing rules have not kept up with how New Yorkers actually live today. This bill addresses a clear gap in our codes to effectively recognize two options or outdated SRO rules that no longer reflect modern safety standards. As a result, students and immigrants and small families are priced out of legal housing options.

This legislation legalizes a form of housing that New Yorkers are already... Sixty percent of New Yorkers live in some form of shared housing. People who choose to live in this way in a comfortable and regular environment. By modernizing and legalizing shared housing we are creating an environment and also creating an option that is more affordable than a studio apartment in Manhattan which is closer to $4000 a month. A price that people really cannot... This legislation also supports the conversion of office buildings for shared housing, allowing shared housing as part of office to residential. The bill unlocks new opportunities to bring life back to struggling commercial districts while rapidly expanding the supply of affordable housing.

Conversions are uniquely situated for shared living and can be delivered more quickly and at lower cost than traditional housing. Shared housing largely exists in an unregulated and informal manner. This bill changes that. This bill requires proper sprinkler systems and fire safety measures and professional management, bringing transparency and accountability to a housing model that most desperately needs it. This bill is about housing that reflects the diversity of artists and young people trying to make it in this city and older adults, all with housing that is done rightly and safely, transparently and affordably.

(00:03:56)

Thank you. Thank you, CM Virginia Maloney.

(00:04:32)

Good morning, Chair Sanchez and members of the Committee on Housing and Buildings. My name is Michael Sandler. I am the associate commissioner for the Office of Neighborhood Strategies. I am joined by my colleagues Lucy Santiago, Deputy Commissioner for Neighborhood Services, Emily Osgood, Deputy Commissioner for Housing, and Commissioner Manous for homeownership opportunities. We appreciate the opportunity to testify today in partnership with the Chair and all the partners that make affordable housing possible.

Today I am here to discuss a few of the critical issues and opportunities facing us. My testimony will focus primarily on shared housing and discuss the issues tackled in the other bills being heard today. Limited housing choices and our limited housing supply does not mean that we must not work aggressively to expand housing choice for all. We must innovate and learn from the past. Reintroducing shared housing is an incredible opportunity to do just that.

Shared housing, privately leased bedrooms with shared kitchens, bathrooms and living spaces, has a long history. Models like boarding houses provided affordable options for immigrants, young workers and people navigating life transitions. Mid 20th century policies ultimately eliminated most of this housing. This change, meant to help New Yorkers, unintentionally contributed to the shortage of low cost options for single people.

Between 2013 and 2023 the number of small households grew by more than eleven percent while the number of small units grew only by seven percent. Many single New Yorkers rely on illegal arrangements that leave them with compromised tenant protections and compromised safety. We are now seeing striking growth in informal and commercialized living arrangements and strong demand for shared housing.

Intro 66 responds directly to this need and builds on nearly a decade of research, testing and inter agency collaboration. The shared housing roadmap released in November of last year draws on lessons from the Share NYC pilot and engagement with tenants, operators, advocates and other municipalities. City of Yes for Housing Opportunity removed zoning barriers and now this legislation advances the remaining work to allow shared housing as of right and to regulate it.

Shared housing creates practical opportunities in markets for office to residential alternatives and supports illegal conversion programs across the city. Programs across the city already demonstrate how shared housing can support young adults and newcomers tied to the shelter system or transitional housing. To be clear, shared housing is not for everyone. Rather, it is one additional tool to address the shortage of low cost housing options at a time of historically low vacancy rates.

Addressing the housing crisis requires a multi pronged approach. After the original introduction of this bill in November 2025, we heard feedback from stakeholders that made it clear that the ratios of kitchens and bathrooms as well as safety standards need refinement based on this feedback. We look forward to hearing more detailed feedback today and working with the Council to strengthen this legislation and advance it.

Switching gears, we would like to discuss emergency displacement. Having to vacate your home because of emergency is a nightmare scenario. For few of us this is the reality for New Yorkers who have been displaced from their homes due to fires or who have had to vacate due to unsafe conditions. Intro 271 addresses HPD services and enforcement following a city issued vacate order.

The American Red Cross currently responds to fires in partnership with multiple agencies and provides multiple on site services to families in need, including informing displaced tenants of available resources and emergency housing referrals to HPD for temporary housing placements following displacement events such as fires or other conditions. We recognize the importance of clear and direct communication so residents can understand how the City is responding and what resources are available.

We appreciate the Council's leadership in the last session to pass Local Law 109 regarding inter agency coordination in response to vacated properties. Our efforts are also supported by the Mayor's Office of Housing Recovery Operations which supports residents displaced by fires, natural disasters or other emergencies and facilitates communication between property owners and relevant agencies. We look forward to continuing this work in partnership with the Council.

In addition to directly supporting displaced residents, HPD also works through our monitor and enforcement team to monitor and support timely repair of vacant properties so residents can return home. Many of HPD's current enforcement and monitoring approaches are prioritized based on this concern that the bill's requirement could result in HPD initiating Article 7-A procedures if corrections are not made within a short time frame, even if corrections are not necessary.

The Article 7-A program is an important tool for addressing extremely distressed properties and persistent violations after other enforcement efforts have failed. We look forward to continuing to work with the Council to address these concerns while advancing our shared goal of supporting displaced residents and the residents of vacated buildings.

Now I am eager to dive into an extremely important part of connecting New Yorkers to homes. Intro 418 would require HPD to create an in person Housing Connect assistance program. We do not want to unintentionally make it harder for New Yorkers to access housing. We recognize the intent behind this bill in ensuring New Yorkers have support while navigating the affordable housing process. We deeply believe in this priority as an agency.

We have a number of existing relationships with community based organizations that highlight this priority. We have announced plans to expand support for these organizations this year. We recently launched a neighborhood based initiative in partnership with the Public Library system to provide the kind of in person support we believe is critical, from digital guidance to multilingual application assistance. These programs are connecting New Yorkers to housing opportunities and we welcome the opportunity to discuss how we can work with the Council on these efforts.

Moving to Intro 427, which addresses how affordable housing units, also known as second generation units, are re rented through the Housing Connect portal. This touches on one of our highest priorities in terms of policy process and technology improvements. With input from a robust variety of stakeholders, we are actively rethinking how best to connect New Yorkers with these important opportunities.

We recently rolled out a temporary update, the third update announced over the last few years, to improve turnaround times and prioritize rental upgrades. For our next phase of work on improvements to Housing Connect, re rentals will continue to be required to be posted publicly and accessibly, but it will not be necessary to send applications through Housing Connect, though many may continue to do so. This added flexibility is one example of ways we are trying to help fill units faster and reduce vacancy periods.

We appreciate questions from the Council and the deep partnership and collaboration with the Council and other stakeholders on this topic. We are hopeful that today's discussion continues to inform and advance our work.

Finally, I would like to transition to talking about Intro 421, a cleanup bill that clarifies the City's approach to housing units including cellars of one and two family homes. Local Law 82 of 2024 enabled the legalization of existing basement and cellar residences, and this bill corrects language to ensure new lawful cellar residences benefit from this law. This technical fix will enable the City to make it as simple and straightforward as possible for homeowners to add safe units to their properties and be able to rent their cellars legally.

Thank you for your continued partnership in expanding access to safe affordable housing. We look forward to working closely with Speaker Adrienne Adams and Chair Sanchez to deliver meaningful results for New Yorkers across the city during this legislative session.

(00:14:04)

Thank you. Good morning, Chair Sanchez and members of the Committee on Housing and Buildings. I am Gus Siolas, Deputy Commissioner for Development and Technical Affairs at the New York City Department of Buildings. I am joined by my colleague Keith Wen, Assistant Commissioner for Code and Zoning. I am pleased to testify before the committee regarding Intro 71.

Intro 71 would require the permit holder responsible for scaffolding and sidewalk sheds to repair or replace any tree on public property in the public right of way that is damaged as a result of such sidewalk shed installation. The Department is supportive of the intent of this bill and the goal of protecting the City's urban canopy. We recognize the value trees add to the quality of life for New Yorkers.

We are coordinating with our colleagues at the Department of Parks and Recreation to determine the most effective approach to implementation. To that end, city agencies are currently taking proactive measures to minimize the potential impact on city owned trees. Additionally, the Department has engaged consultants to develop alternatives to the widely used sidewalk shed systems we currently see. The goal of this endeavor was to improve pedestrian and building safety while also being more considerate of the urban environment.

The design criteria required selected firms to account for a number of factors including street furniture and trees. The Department unveiled six new designs in the latter part of last year. The designs allow for flexibility and versatility to address New York City's unique streetscape conditions. The Department continues to work closely with the selected firms on implementation of the new sidewalk shed systems.

While the Department remains committed to implementing strong pedestrian protections, it also recognizes the importance of reducing the visual impact on the urban environment and preventing temporary structures from remaining in place too long. The Department looks forward to working with the City Council on this issue. Thank you very much.

(00:16:36)

Thank you so much for your testimony. I am going to begin with questions and then turn to my colleagues before coming back. Starting with Intro 66 by CM Maloney, the committee is committed to tenant protection and we understand that allowing shared housing arrangements could increase those protections. Could you walk us through exactly how the shared housing arrangements that this bill would legalize would replace or supplement existing arrangements?

(00:17:29)

Sure. I think there are a few main forms that we see today. One would be a professionalized living operator who is renting either an entire building or individual rooms and managing shared space. We also see landlords of multiple dwellings renting out individual rooms within those buildings. Then I think there is also a category which often has illegal temporary walls that are put up carving up an apartment.

These arrangements are illegal in New York City depending on the exact arrangement. Within an apartment in New York City today, there is a requirement that putting a lock on a bedroom door creates an illegal condition, which makes that arrangement problematic and creates safety issues, especially if that bedroom door is the only access point to a fire escape.

Under Intro 66, new construction shared housing or adaptive reuse of buildings would create a new form of shared housing where tenants can rent individual rooms within a shared housing dwelling. Each tenant will have an independent relationship with their landlord and an enforceable lease.

(00:19:58)

And how does HPD envision enforcing against the existing illegal activity that we see today? Do you anticipate needing additional resources or do you envision this leading to more legal activity?

(00:21:03)

So I think that we do not see this as necessitating an expansion of resources or new resources today in New York City. We have today shared housing in New York City of quasi legality, a safety issue. HPD encounters a safety issue now. We enforce now. Under this new arrangement we will continue to work with our colleagues at DOB and enforce housing quality issues. We think that the creation of 311... So I think that this is something that will allow us to more effectively enforce and know arrangements that are going to be created through shared housing.

(00:23:09)

What legal protections will occupants have against evictions? How do those differ from the protections that individuals have today if they are living in illegal arrangements? Do tenants who have a right to counsel in eviction proceedings if this bill were to become law?

(00:23:40)

Yeah, that is a great question. I think we anticipate that currently today residents that are not on a lease lack some of the protections that residents that are on a lease have. Additionally, right now in a shared situation, all of the tenants that are on a lease cannot be treated separately in a housing court situation. So if there is a problem tenant within a building, it can often lead to instability or destability for the other tenants within that unit.

So having an individual lease means that tenant is not subject to housing instability because of the actions of their roommate. So that is a huge benefit for tenants. Tenants on a lease will have access to rights to counsel in eviction proceedings and also would be subject to the new protections offered under state law.

(00:26:03)

So they would have access to counsel.

(00:26:05)

Yeah.

(00:26:06)

Thank you. And then my second question and then I will turn it over to the bill sponsor for questions on this legislation or anything else. This Council was contemplating and is still discussing with HPD the idea of requiring a certain subset of HPD production to be two to three bedroom units, because there is a concern in many communities that the projects that are financed by HPD are not family sized units.

I know I have several colleagues that are concerned about this piece of legislation as they view it as a threat to have more production in on the size of shared units or small units or studio apartments. So can you describe for them and for anyone with this concern if the administration anticipates that owners of buildings with family sized units would convert those units into shared housing? How expanding the ability to have shared housing in New York City comports or relates to this concern that many of my colleagues share around insufficient number of two and three bedroom apartments?

(00:28:58)

Yeah, thank you for that question. So I say first and foremost, the proposed Int 0066 does not allow the conversion of existing housing units to shared housing. So anything that is built as an apartment today could not be converted to shared housing under this legislation. This allows for the new construction or adaptive reuse of office space to shared housing models.

We see this as a benefit to families who are seeking two and three bedroom apartments. Right now shared housing exists in today housing market through the variety of typologies that we have discussed already. Single adults are pooling their resources and renting multiple bedroom apartments and are increasing the rent, out competing families who cannot afford that same rent. So we see giving an option for single adults other than a roommate situation can help ease the burden on families who are seeking family sized apartments.

We do not think that every single adult... Some single adults are seeking roommates for the community and because they desire that option and others are doing so out of economic necessity. We believe that if given another option they will pursue that.

(00:30:53)

Thank you. I need to acknowledge that we are joined by CM Feliz on Zoom. What would prevent an owner of an existing office building from converting to shared housing and then converting it to luxury apartment building? And said differently just playing devil's advocate around concerns that others might have. What is to prevent a shared housing setup from becoming a different kind of housing, temporary housing for instance by the City?

(00:31:43)

So I think just on the first question, shared housing in adaptive reuse is only allowed where residential conversion is also allowed. So there is no situation where someone might convert to shared housing in order to sneakily get into being able to convert to family housing or luxury housing. Short term rentals are not allowed under Int 0066. The proposal is to create Class A permanent housing with at least 30 day leases. So this is traditional housing. This is housing with a lease. We believe it will be operated that way.

(00:31:43)

It is not allowing for the construction of new congregate shelters or other types of housing.

(00:31:43)

Thank you. So there should not be an anticipation that these shared housing typology would be converted to temporary shelters by the City or shelters by the City.

(00:31:43)

I do not anticipate that. I do not know if you have anything to add.

(00:31:43)

We do not think the legislation would exacerbate that risk. We would need to use the same tools we would use today to address issues like that. But this legislation is instead creating a path for a legal safe approach. Our enforcement efforts as they exist would have to run in parallel and any siting rules related to the siting of shelters would continue to apply.

(00:31:43)

Okay. All right. Thank you. CM Maloney.

(00:31:43)

Thank you so much. So you clarified that this will only apply to new construction or office conversions. Do you have a sense of what the breakdown might be between the two?

(00:31:43)

I think as the chair said, this is kind of a first cautious step towards reintroducing shared housing. We have heard from operators who are interested in both new construction and in adaptive reuse. I think that as this comes online beginning next year, we will continue to monitor and kind of see. But we do think that this is particularly a great opportunity for adaptive reuse just given the challenges that we have seen in adapting office floor plates to housing. We think that this solves some of those challenges and can help facilitate it.

(00:31:43)

Great. And on the underutilized office spaces, are there... Do you have an analysis on the office buildings that would fail to pencil out with existing housing legislation but could pencil in as shared housing?

(00:31:43)

Yeah, we have done some analysis of this. Last year we looked at the conversion of a sort of a hypothetical City owned office building to shared housing and looked at sort of what it would look like to convert it to traditional apartments versus shared housing. And we saw a more than 40% reduction in total development cost per bedroom converting to shared housing versus traditional apartments just given some of those floor plate difficulties.

(00:31:43)

Great. No further questions.

(00:31:43)

Great. Thank you. I would now like to turn it over to CM Salaam, followed by Zhuang.

(00:31:43)

Thank you. And good morning. Given the current trend of gentrification and new construction in many areas, how does HPD ensure that long term residents, especially renters who are low income and elderly, are not displaced by the introduction of shared housing or other new affordable units?

(00:31:43)

Yeah, thank you for that question. That is an important topic and one that we care deeply about. Int 0066 allows for new construction of more affordable housing options than we see constructed today and it also very explicitly does not allow for the conversion of existing apartments to shared housing.

I think one of the things that we see right now in gentrifying communities and lower income communities is landlords that are illegally carving up family apartments and renting individual rooms. We see this as something that would allow a safety valve to allow for that to happen in a safer way and can hopefully kind of reduce some of that pressure that you see in gentrifying communities today.

(00:31:43)

What specific outreach strategies and partnerships does HPD employ to ensure that senior residents and non English speaking tenants have access to housing portal assistant programs? And how do you ensure that these outreach efforts are reaching those who face barriers such as digital literacy or limited access to technology?

(00:31:43)

I might tap in my colleague Emily Osgood to speak to that.

(00:31:43)

HPD has relationships with a number of community based housing ambassador organizations, 46 to be exact. A subset of whom have funding from the Council, small amount of funding from the Council.

And so these community based organizations meet people where they are in their neighborhoods, speaking the languages that they speak, serving needs for in person assistance, help with paper documentation when needed, storefronts, in person educational events, etc. And so we are supportive of exploring how we can further enhance the services that those valued community based housing ambassadors provide for New Yorkers.

(00:31:43)

And with the growing number of sidewalk sheds and scaffolding installations, how does the department ensure that small businesses, especially those in commercial corridors, are adequately compensated for lost revenue or disruption during longer construction projects? And what oversight measures are in place to minimize disruption to those local businesses?

(00:31:43)

Hi CM. Let me do my best to answer that from our standpoint. While we do not directly compensate businesses, we do have enforcement programs circled around long standing sheds where if a shed is in place more than x number of years, we take proactive enforcement measures against the property owners who have them in place. The idea being that there is a certain amount of time necessary to make the respective repairs that are ongoing typically in an existing building where you have the shed overhead of a commercial establishment. And by going after the property owners to get them to do the right thing and making it more financially impactful on them to keep the shed in place, we motivate them to do the work a lot faster and get the shed down as quickly as possible.

Right now I believe that number is greater than five years and we are working to see what can be done to expand that effort as it is a benefit overall to the City to get both the sheds down as well as to make the necessary repairs happen. From our standpoint these are repairs that are necessary. The reason the shed is there is there is an overhead hazard to the public at large, those same people who would be going in and out of that commercial establishment. So we need that abated before we can get rid of the pedestrian protection. The shed just happens to be the version of pedestrian protection that people most often choose.

The other effort that we are taking on head on actually is redesigning sidewalk sheds. Up until now, sidewalk sheds have been predominantly reusing a design that was first developed in 1974. And it has become outdated and outmoded from the pedestrian experience perspective as well as from the commercial establishments inside. If you look at the new sidewalk shed designs that we shared renderings of late last year, you will see we paid a lot of attention with our selected firms that won these RFPs to the pedestrian experience, but also to the experience of those inside of the commercial establishment on the ground floor.

We are struggling greatly to remove, for instance, the X bracing that could make you feel trapped inside of the sidewalk shed. We are working to raise the elevation of the sidewalk shed and utilize maybe alternative materials for the decking to allow more light in both to directly underneath as well as into the commercial spaces around there. The goal of these RFPs is similar to what was done with the urban canvas design earlier in a couple administrations ago. But the goal here is that the City will own the intellectual property and we will make these designs available to any owner, property owner, designer, developer to utilize directly through our building code. These measures we hope will go a long way while still protecting the pedestrians from the overhead hazards.

(00:33:58)

And chair, if I just have just one last question. With the growing number of vacate orders due to unsafe living conditions, how does DOB ensure that property owners are complying with repair and safety regulations in a timely manner to prevent tenants from living in hazardous conditions for extended periods of time? And how does the DOB track and enforce compliance in buildings with frequent safety violations?

(00:34:44)

So we will definitely circle back with our enforcement team to make sure that we have the best answers for you on that. But ultimately when we issue a violation, if it is a Class 1 violation, there are many instances where there are required reinspections by the department for immediately hazardous conditions. We actively track these on our website. We encourage folks to continue to call 311 for conditions that have not been abated. They can call anonymously from that regard so that we can continue to stay on top of these property owners.

We also... There are a number of enforcement programs that as properties continue to accrue violations there are certain penalties and restrictions on what else they can do within the building. As far as business with the department, we obviously always want them making the necessary repairs and obviously getting a permit to make the necessary repairs, but we might have, for instance, professional certification restrictions if we are finding that they had done, for instance, work without a permit on the property that would require them to go through full plan exam and greater oversight of the work that they are doing.

(00:35:55)

Thank you, chair.

(00:35:56)

Thank you, CM Zhuang.

(00:35:59)

Thank you. Thank you, Assistant Commissioner. I have some questions about the shade in the commercial corridor in my district. Almost everyone has put their items outside. They have store license so they can put their items outside. They sell in the summer. It is very hot. They like always to put a shade or umbrella in the sidewalk and every time sanitation come just say illegal, illegal, illegal. But they never told the landlord or the business owner how to correct that. This is belong... How to correct the shade is belong to DOB right?

(00:37:25)

If this is construction that is connected to the building, it is part of DOB. If it is a traditional temporary construction shed that you see that would go up on a construction site, that would also be DOB. If these are outdoor dining sheds or similar types of structures, I believe now there is a different entity that is handling those permits. DOT I believe is the one. We can gladly circle back with you on any specifics there and we can make sure that whether it is DOB or another agency that we get you the right information.

(00:38:11)

Yeah, the issue here is a lot of business owner tell me they want to correct, saying it is illegal but no one tell them how to correct that and how to make that legal. And then for business they put the like fruits outside in summer it is very hot. So put a shade there will be help for the business and also even pedestrian they like to walk in the shade but there is no one really give us answer how to fix that, where to fix that. Like they do not know what to do. Even ask us our office, we do not know which direction to send to them. I would love to work with you to address that issue.

(00:38:45)

Understood. Thank you. We would like that.

(00:38:48)

Thank you.

(00:38:49)

Thank you so much, CM Zhuang. So just a couple more questions on Int 0066 and shared housing. So I asked a little bit about the new rights that tenants with these new leases that did not have leases before would have. But I have a couple more questions. Would these units be rent regulated? If not, would they be protected through good cause protections? Does HPD anticipate using subsidy, City subsidy dollars to finance to subsidize the financing of these units? Or using vouchers to make them affordable to those who need it the most.

(00:39:26)

Yeah, those are great questions. I will try to take each of them. If I miss any, feel free to ask again. In terms of rent stabilization, shared housing units would be rent stabilized if they were created under any of the state tax incentives that require the creation of rent stabilized housing. So if you were to use one of those programs that require the provision of affordable housing along with the tax incentive, then you would be creating affordable and rent stabilized shared housing units through that. We do believe that good cause, where it applies, would apply to any tenant with a lease in a shared housing unit as well. And then in terms of rental assistance, it is allowed under all of the programs and we will be spending the next year before the new law goes into effect on January 1st, 2027 to make sure that we are working with all of our partners at the voucher agencies to make sure that we have programs and policies in place to allow folks to use rental assistance towards shared housing units.

(00:40:24)

Got it. So this might be a very basic question just from me, but good cause protections are defined by the size, the number of units in a building. How are we going to quantify the number of units in a building that has shared housing units?

(00:40:40)

I believe that each of the rooming units would count towards it, but we can follow up and clarify. I think we need to look into that and can follow up.

(00:40:49)

Okay. Or is it the amenities of bathroom, number of bathrooms? I do not know. Just would be... Yeah, we will follow up. Okay.

(00:40:56)

Thank you. And another 101 question just to get an understanding of the New Yorkers that would be, we would be supporting by enabling this kind of housing. Can you share a little bit about the characteristics of those New Yorkers? Their ages, their income levels... what describes them?

(00:41:25)

Yeah, I mean I think that what we see today in terms of demand within the co-living space is really high demand among young professionals and we see that that would likely continue under the new construction typology is that new New Yorkers who want to live in a convenient location near their work and who are looking for a flexible option with built-in community we see as the predominant type. But we also see today a variety of New Yorkers are using various shared housing typologies and we think that in the future we could see also New Yorkers going through various life transitions or who are just looking for a cheaper option in an amenity rich area. This could be appealing to them.

(00:42:05)

Great. Thank you. Okay, turning to intro 71 on sidewalk sheds. Deputy Commissioner, you mentioned that DOB unveiled six new designs in the latter part of 2025. They look very cool. Can you share with us are they already in use? And if not, when can New Yorkers anticipate these new designs on the streets?

(00:42:48)

So the department is still working with our design consultants that were the selected winners of these RFPs to finalize their designs. And we hope to share the actual designs themselves later this year via potentially the rule making process. Then folks will be able to see exactly the nuts and bolts that go into making these sheds.

(00:43:14)

Got it. Does the department anticipate that those are going to cost more to implement than the designs we have been using?

(00:43:23)

It is going to vary based on the different scenarios of what you see out there. So you could see some very elaborate and robust sidewalk sheds on some of the larger buildings. Potentially these sheds would cost more than your traditional design shed for some of the smaller properties, but we think that the overall aesthetic improvement and safety improvements we think would be worth the effort, but we have to wait till the designs are actually finalized.

(00:43:55)

Got it. And will buildings that need to have sidewalk sheds up be required to use these new designs or will the old design, the old traditional design, still be an option?

(00:44:09)

That right now is still to be determined. The goal would be to discuss this and how we would roll out these new shed designs and see how they could be implemented in the City.

(00:44:24)

Got it. Okay. Anything we can do to make it worse and bad to have a sidewalk shed up, we should do because we do not want them up. We want New Yorkers to be able to walk without obstruction. And if they want shade, then that is fine and we can talk about that in a different context than these sidewalk sheds that stay up forever. Okay. So specifically with respect to the legislation and replacing trees, can you share with us who is liable today for replacing or repairing a city-owned tree that is damaged by scaffolding or a sidewalk shed?

(00:44:55)

I believe it would potentially be the property owner. It could be the contractor if it is new construction.

(00:45:01)

Got it. Okay. I do not know if we shared these questions with you in advance, but do you know how much it costs to replace a tree?

(00:45:08)

No, I do not. That is something for parks department would probably have the best available info.

(00:45:14)

Got it. And do you know about... Hey, perfect. Nice to see you, Matt. Do we have to... I did raise my hand earlier. I do not know if that counts. Okay. Yes, that does count.

(00:45:24)

So cost per tree. And then an additional question for parks is how many complaints do we have of scaffolding specifically, to the extent that we have that specificity, ruining a tree.

(00:45:35)

Sure. Thanks very much. Appreciate it. My name is Matt Doyle from the chief of citywide legislative affairs for the parks department. So tree planting costs can vary obviously depending on the condition and other location things of that nature. But it can cost several thousand dollars for a tree replacement that is determined by a variety of factors.

Separate and apart from that, just to give some context here we have something in the vicinity of close to 670,000 street trees and at any given time we very roughly estimate maybe 25,000 roughly trees are in close proximity to a sidewalk shed. Thankfully incidents of construction related damage to street trees are pretty uncommon. We probably get 100, 150 sort of reports that come to our attention. That can be through 311 or other mechanisms or staff observation on its own. So it is relatively minimal, but we do take it quite seriously. In that universe, we do not necessarily track whether a given instance of damage was directly shed or scaffold related. So that is a data point that is not tracked in quite that way, but suffice it to say that as we are investigating a certain incident, we are able to usually piece together whether a shed was involved.

(00:47:18)

Got it. Thank you. And in that instance that a scaffold or sidewalk shed was involved, it is the property owner that is responsible.

(00:47:26)

So there are a couple different mechanisms. In some cases the property, as deputy commissioner Sarakus noted, in some cases property owner. In other cases if a scaffold is actually involved there is that will be permitted and there is a way to identify that end. So in that case it is often the permittee if you will that is engaged with, but nine times out of 10 the property owner is involved in that discussion in one way or another.

(00:47:47)

Got it. Okay. Thank you. And I think the deputy commissioner said parks and buildings are discussing the best way to handle this. But it does sound like existing practice is for the permit who is paid for by the owner. They are the ones that are addressing these conditions. So does this Bill change anything?

(00:48:10)

By and large yeah I think there are mechanisms that are already in place both through the admin code and through parks rules for the City to seek replacement or restitution in case of severe damage. What this Bill seems to do is sort of draw a sharper focus on sheds and scaffolding directly, which is... but as deputy commissioner Sarakus noted we are already actually talking through a variety of approaches more on the sort of the proactive or prescriptive end of things right in terms of design, in terms of making sure that more permittees are aware of the importance of tree protection. Those sort of more positive approaches as well and we would be happy obviously to work with the Council whether it is through this Bill or otherwise to kind of talk through that.

(00:49:12)

Thank you so much. So now moving to intro number 271 on vacate orders. I just want to start with this example. I know that many of you who are at the dais were involved in the response. So I just want to use this example to highlight or understand better an existing problem. So about two weeks ago there was a fire in my district during the blizzard at 2264 Grand Avenue. When we received notification from the fire department, they told us in a very short email that one unit was impacted and it was a fatal fire. So we did lose a neighbor and her wife is recovering in the hospital thankfully. But we were told that the fire was contained to that one unit, that no one else was impacted.

Now, as I usually do, as you folks know, I myself or if not my team will go onsite to just see what is going on, check on neighbors because it is such a scary experience when a fire happens and you just do not know what is next. Now, what I found there, and it was during the blizzard, so my little car could not handle that snow. So the speaker actually picked me up and we went together. And what we found when we went was an entire row of apartments that were impacted. Many tenants in the sub sub-zero temperatures on the ground having no idea what to do, having no idea if their units were safe and just a very emotional scene, right? They lost a neighbor and they did not know what to do.

And so I quickly understood that there had been a breakdown in communication. That is typically the scene where we would have HPD responding, Department of Buildings responding, NISEM potentially coordinating because of the impact on families and all the rest. So my question is in this fire response what exactly went wrong? Why were there 10 vacates issued after much communication between myself, agencies, deputy mayors, mayor himself? What went wrong that day in terms of communication and what could have prevented that?

(00:51:32)

I will start. Good morning, CM. Thank you very much, CM Sanchez. As you know, I was in the loop that day on this and obviously a terrible tragedy. A response from the agencies was a little delayed due to the snowstorm. I think we are internally all discussing that particular incident to identify what we can do better to make sure that we are absolutely responsive to the needs of New Yorkers when there is a fire.

(00:51:32)

As you know, American Red Cross is usually our first response after the fire department. So we are talking with them, we are talking with the fire department, with the buildings department to make sure that there are no cases that fall through the cracks. And we are committed 100% to making sure that New Yorkers that experience such an event have the full support of all of those entities and the City.

So you know that ARC, HPD, DOB, and NISEM at the larger events where they are coordinating, often send multiple teams out to buildings. We provide emergency housing to folks when their units are damaged, when we see either a vacate order or the American Red Cross observes damage that is to the level where the households cannot continue to reside and so we are happy to continue conversations with you around this particular incident.

(00:51:32)

Thank you deputy commissioner. I mean my question is there was clearly a breakdown in communication. When I contacted you and other agencies there was not, there did not appear to be awareness of the extent of damage at this fire. So does FDNY as a matter of policy, does FDNY respond by sharing information with HPD immediately when there is a fire or with American Red Cross? What exactly happens when it is not a three-alarm fire? So NISEM is not activated. What happens in terms of inter agency communication?

(00:51:32)

And sorry I know buildings was there and you issued one vacate for the most impacted unit but then the department of buildings said that because according to the laws that you enforce there was not reason for other vacates, that those would have to be issued by HPD. So I am just curious on the communication required. What is the protocol or policy internally?

(00:51:32)

Thank you CM. So the FDNY communications are monitored I believe by both Department of Buildings and the American Red Cross and that is how the information is usually received by the agencies. So again further discussion with you on those issues we are happy to continue.

(00:51:32)

Okay. Thank you. Yes so I would definitely appreciate that. So in the aftermath of a fire, now turning back to the example of Wallace Avenue and CM Riley's district, Heath Avenue and mine and countless others across the City of New York, what tools today does HPD have to force or incentivize or force, whatever word we want to use, depending on the timeline, an owner to correct conditions after there has been a fire that has vacated an entire property.

(00:51:32)

Thank you, CM. As you know, most of the fires that we respond to in the City are not full building vacates, right? Most fires are partials and the agencies do some monitoring around those. For the two examples that you gave, the Wallace Avenue and the Heath Avenue, as you stated, those are full building fires. HPD in those cases monitors the owner's compliance with moving towards correction and a full building fire, a full building vacate can be quite destructive and even in a best case scenario would take some time for repairs to be made after insurance proceeds and investigations.

In both of these cases, Wallace Avenue and Heath, HPD initiated legal action against the owner, comprehensive litigation, and both of those cases are in progress by HPD's housing litigation division. So we are seeking correction of all conditions, restoration of all tenants in those properties and that is an ongoing process.

(00:51:32)

Got it. CM Krishnan's Bill 271 would require HPD to commence 7A proceedings. I understand your testimony today to sort of be against the requirement of initiating 7A proceedings, but can you for the benefit of the public remind us what a 7A, what that does to a property and how often, excuse me, how often HPD has used that in the past say 5 years whatever time period you have the information for and why you would not be supportive of the requirement to pursue a little bit more often.

(00:51:32)

Thank you, CM. The 7A program is a program in which HPD or tenants can go into housing court and seek the appointment of an administrator. That administrator would be responsible for the day-to-day maintenance of the property, would collect rents, would stand in place of the owner. The owner, we are not taking the building from the owner, but the administrator is managing the building.

The use of the 7A program right now is for tenant occupied buildings where basically the building has gone through enforcement actions and the owner has been unresponsive or there is no owner and we feel the need that the building is in such a condition that it needs an administrator. We absolutely want to work with the Council on stronger tools around vacates and the enforcement of vacates, but we believe that the use of this program for every building that is issued a vacate within a very short time period is excessive for that purpose. Not to say that it would never be considered on a building as such a building, but the majority of property owners comply within a reasonable amount of time and are working diligently to restore their property.

Wallace Avenue and Heath Avenue are exceptions to the general rule around vacates. And so again, while we understand and appreciate that different or more tools could be helpful in dealing with 90%, 95% of your fire damage properties. 7A is a tool that is really not the appropriate one for the majority of situations.

(00:51:32)

Thank you. I know CM Krishnan feels very passionately about the 7A proceeding and its success in his time as a housing attorney. I just want to state, as you know, I fundamentally believe that HPD needs stronger tools for these very bad actors, like the worst of the worst, right? That are the exceptions to the rule, but these exceptions to the rule are impacting hundreds of residents, right? Who are homeless, who are living in shelter, who are displaced from their communities and their families. And so I just want to continue to have that conversation about what are the strongest possible tools we can use to act on these terrible actors.

(00:51:32)

And we absolutely are 100% in agreement with that, CM.

(00:51:32)

Thank you. Okay, intro number, let us see, what do I want to ask about? It is a lottery. On Int 0421-2026, cellar apartment legalization. You know, just to make sure we stay on the record, can you help us understand why the bill, why this cleanup is needed at this time?

(00:51:32)

Again, because I asked you the same question two months ago.

(00:51:32)

Yes, thank you CM. So just to reiterate from last time we spoke about this. We believe that the intention of the legislation that was passed as part of City of Yes was to create more possibilities for cellar and basement apartments. And we did do this by modifying the Housing Maintenance Code to permit it in existing buildings. But inadvertently left out the possibility for new construction buildings to have legal cellar and basement apartments. And so that is what this legislation would do now is just correct that technical error.

(00:51:32)

Okay, thank you so much. Great. Okay. On Int 0418-2026, Housing Connect services, you know, my office is probably one of the biggest users of the housing ambassador program. We want it expanded. We know we need more support. I shared last time that in my office alone, a tenant could be waiting 6 months for an appointment with a housing ambassador. And so, you know, there is certainly the need for more resources to support tenants who are looking for affordable apartments. So, just can you tell us what you are hearing from the community-based organizations that provide housing ambassador services about their case loads and about their wait lists?

(00:51:32)

Sure. Thank you, CM. We meet often with the housing ambassador organizations including having done since we last spoke I think with your office. We by the way really appreciate the deep partnership that your office and your team has brought to the table on these topics. We have spoken with and through introductions through your office I think tenant advocate organizations like Aurora as well as our existing housing ambassador partners. There is an enormous demand for their services. We do not have specific numbers on the timeline for a wait list as I think you said for a housing ambassador organization, but we are very committed to supporting the work of these organizations and exploring how we can expand our support in the future for them.

I do want to add that which I left off before when responding to CM Salaam, that we also have launched neighborhood tech help program that serves to bridge that digital divide a lot of our neighbors and New Yorkers may experience when applying for housing. And that is in partnership with the New York Public Library. And we are happy to have both of those programs and the housing ambassadors helping New Yorkers where they are in their communities.

(00:51:32)

You mentioned libraries as one of the places.

(00:51:32)

Yes.

(00:51:32)

Great. Thank you. I look forward to hearing more about how that is going. Okay. Int 0427-2026 related to the re-rent process. Last year, HPD issued a waiver to facilitate occupancy of re-rental units, allowing owners to circumvent the usual time-consuming process that had left these affordable apartments sitting vacant for months. Our understanding is that this waiver is set to expire in April of this year. What are HPD's short-term and long-term plans for re-rental units and the process for re-renting once this waiver expires?

(00:51:32)

So we have spent the last several months meeting with a whole variety of stakeholders including applicants, advocate organizations, owners, developers, marketing agents, not to mention with elected officials and teams like yours to gather input about what the best set of options could be for re-rentals for filling affordable vacancies in the future. We are actively reviewing all of the wide range of feedback that we received and we did receive a wide range. So it is very much something that we are actively reviewing and actively rethinking at this time.

(00:51:32)

Great.

(00:51:32)

All right. Thank you. Thank you so much. That concludes my questions. Thank you so much for your testimony today. This is probably the shortest hearing we will have. Thank you.

(00:51:32)

Thank you chair.

(00:51:32)

Thank you.