STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- Richmond residents are arguing that a new city proposal will remove opportunities for public input on proposed developments in their neighborhood, claiming it will allow for weaker environmental protections and denser residential areas.
The Richmondtown and Clarke Avenue Civic Association is against a Department of City Planning (DCP) proposal, which was published in November, that would streamline rules in Staten Island’s three special districts.
The proposal would combine the three existing districts on Staten Island -- Special Natural Area District, Special South Richmond Development District and Special Hillsides Preservation District -- into one special district to be named the Special Natural Resources District.
The DCP said on its website that the proposal is being updated “to reflect updated environmental science and a more holistic approach to natural resource preservation with clear development standards resulting in better and more predictable outcomes.”
But according to Carol Donovan, president of the Richmondtown and Clarke Avenue Civic Association, residents are concerned the new set of rules would give more flexibility to developers and lessen environmental protections of the borough’s forests and wetlands.
“This is not helping the environment,” said Donovan. “City Planning had written regulations to review special natural area districts, and now this proposal would undo everything they did.”
The three existing districts were established by DCP in the 1970s and 1980s to ensure that neighborhood development and preservation of environmentally sensitive resources are balanced.
DCP said it has developed the current proposal over the last three years, convening with working groups including representatives from local institutions, homeowners, landscape architects, elected officials, local civics and environmental groups and city agencies.
WHAT WOULD CHANGE?
Under the current special districts system, property owners can remove or modify natural features through a site-by-site review by the City Planning Commission (CPC). The DCP said this doesn’t consider the site’s relationship to the “larger ecological context,” and that the current system is a one-size-fits-all approach for parcels of all sizes, land use or type of natural feature.
Donovan said the proposal changes which sites would require review by the CPC, which currently offers opportunities for public input and participation.
The city’s proposed changes would streamline review for development on small properties that are less than one acre -- allowing owners to proceed directly to the Department of Buildings (DOB) for plan review and compliance of regulations, according to the DCP proposal.
These applications would appear only on the DOB’s website.
This would change the current two-step process that requires a homeowner with a site under one acre to go through public review with the CPC and then also apply to the DOB, which the DCP said “adds time and expense to development projects without demonstrable benefit.”
However, Donovan said that posting proposed developments on the DOB’s website is not sufficient.
“That’s not the same thing as having a public hearing where the public is formally notified," she said. "There’s no way Staten Islanders can spend their days studying the buildings website to say, ‘I wonder if anything is happening on some portion of Staten Island.’ That’s impossible.”
Without going through the CPC, changes to a site under one acre would not be available for public input, Donovan added.
“It’s the point that there won’t be an opportunity for public review if virtually all of the development would pass through the Department of Buildings,” Donovan said. “You don’t have the notification of the public, you don’t have the opportunity for public participation. That’s a key issue.”
According to the DCP, any complaints or concerns will be directed to DOB for enforcement of the zoning resolution requirements.
Larger sites of one acre or more, as well as ecologically sensitive sites in escarpment (steep slopes) and resource adjacent areas, would require review by the CPC, referral to Community Boards and an application to the DOB.
According to the DCP, these larger sites require public review because they “contribute more to the public realm and natural habitat.”
“Back in the fall, as we just started to review the document line-by-line, it does nothing to help the communities of Staten Island,” said Donovan. “It’s only going to let everything pass through the Buildings Department, which is not the same as having City Planning review and public input. City planning would be reviewing lots that are over an acre. Well, how many lots are there like that?”
Donovan said that without City Planning review and public input, it’s possible that there could be more development on Staten Island.
According to the DCP, the agency will continue to take into account testimony it heard during its scoping meeting in December and at future meetings with civic and community groups.
“The Department of City Planning proposal updates decades-old rules to enhance natural resource preservation in Staten Island’s greenest neighborhood, while also offering clear rules for home projects,” said Joe Marvilli, a spokesman for DCP. “We encourage community members to attend any upcoming meetings on this topic, both before and during the formal public review process.”
You can go here to read the full draft proposal by City Planning.
The proposal has not yet been scheduled to enter the formal public review process, according to DCP.
FOLLOW ANNALISE KNUDSON ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER.