During major storms like hurricane Sandy, New York City is an easy target for flooding, because the area of impermeable surfaces, like concrete and asphalt, outweigh permeable surfaces, like grass, throughout the city. As a result, after a large storm, according to the Department of Environmental Conservation, raw sewage runs off into the Hudson River. To prevent that, a bill, authored by Assembly Member Linda Rosenthal, is currently in the New York Senate for a green space tax abatement for building owners. In the agreement, the owners will receive $4.50 per square foot of concrete that is converted into green space.

​The new bill, currently in the New York Senate, was started on the Upper West Side, and was approved by Upper West Side community members like City Council candidate Mel Wymore and the West End Preservation Society. On the Upper West Side, old brownstones are known for their “doughnut” backyards. According to Rosenthal, this bill would be an incentive for building owners to stop paving over backyards. In fact the bill was unanimously supported by Community Board 7.
​
“If I walk around the back of my building, everything is concrete. It would smell nicer and ​be more aesthetically pleasing, at the very least if it were green,” said Linda Rosenthal.

​But this issue would not just be helpful for the Upper West Side, according to the bill’s supporters.

​“One of the interesting things about New York is that these rowhouse backyards are all over the place in different areas in the city,” said Evan Mason of Sustainable Yards NYC, an initiative trying to claim back urban green spaces. “If people were to remove these concrete spaces, there could be real change.”

​According to Mason, there are 53,000 acres of open space in New York City. There are multiple ways that more greenery could affect the city. One, she said would be the immediate impact on sewage runoff during major storms. Mason said that this would save the city money by burdening the water treatment center less. During a large storm with mostly rain like Tropical Storm Irene, rain can seep into the permeable ground causing less runoff. However, storms like Hurricane Sandy with more flooding from storm surge than rain, would probably not affect the storm run-off.

​But in addition to helping the city out during a rainstorm, Sustainable Yards argues that more green space can also improve quality of life. Evan Mason explained that it is a no-brainer: when more trees and vegetation are planted, the air becomes cleaner, and an urban setting becomes more livable.

​“People like the idea of turning the hands of time and reducing the ‘concrete creep’ and this isn’t as difficult to manage as other sustainability measures,” said Mason.
​This tax abatement is also very similar to the fairly new tax abatement which offers incentive for green roofs.

​“It seems like there’s not a lot of emphasis on trying to greenify backyards. We are trying to encourage people to plant trees, and use small flagstones as their concrete space,” said Jay Adolf, a Community Board 7 member.

​Linda Rosenthal said that the bill has to go through a committee first, before it can go to the floor, and it will hopefully be passed later this year.

By Sean Creamer and Anam Baig

James Harmon’s brownstone (center) at 32 W. 76th St.

Earlier this week, the Supreme Court weighed a decision that could have meant the destruction of rent regulation in New York. The court decided on Monday morning, after several delays and requests for more information, not to hear a case brought by Upper West Side resident James Harmon against the state’s rent regulation laws. While supporters of Harmon’s fight grumble and regroup and advocates of rent regulation breathe a collective sigh of relief, many people have said that they were surprised that the challenge went this far in the first place, and that the fight to keep rent regulations in place is not likely to end any time soon.

City and state agencies charged with defending rent regulation reiterated the long-standing viability of the law, even as it is has faced legal challenges in the past.

“We are pleased that the Supreme Court will allow the existing court rulings dismissing this case to stand. Rent regulation in New York City has a long history, and the court properly left it to elected state and city officials to decide its future,” said Alan Krams, senior counsel of the Appeals Division, in a statement issued by the New York City Law Department.

While rent control is designed to enable people who cannot afford market-rate rents to stay at a comfortable level in the city, one disgruntled property owner decided that his tenants were taking advantage of this system. Harmon sued to overturn the regulations that he said amounted to the taking of his property, since he was not able to rent the units out at market rates.

The court declined to hear the case because of the fact that Harmon and his wife Jeanne were aware that the building was rent controlled when they inherited the property.

Harmon, an Upper West Side resident, inherited the five-story brownstone building on West 76th Street. At that time, he became the landlord of several tenants who were living in rent-controlled apartments. According to previous statements made by Harmon, he felt that these tenants were affluent citizens and did not belong in rent-controlled apartments.

“It’s pivotal that the Supreme Court even thought about taking it, said Sue Susman, the president of the Central Park Gardens Tenants’ Association. “For decades, the U.S. Supreme Court was in support of the regulation.”

Harmon had several avenues he could have taken to alleviate the situation, but he chose to go to court, Susman said. He could have filed a hardship increase application, where he could have showed the State Housing Agency his account books and had his tenants pay a higher percentage of regulated rent.

Harmon, an attorney, argued that under his Fifth Amendment rights, the fact that rent control even exists is an unconstitutional seizure of his personal property by the government. The court ruled that there was no “taking of property” and dismissed the case, but Harmon appealed, touting his 14th Amendment right to due process which he claims was denied him. The case was denied in both the Federal District Court and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

He pleaded to the courts that rent stabilization laws were denying him the ability to earn as much as he could from his apartments. He has to offer the rent-stabilized apartments at 59 percent below the regular market price to his tenants, is not able to choose his tenants and has no say over who inherits the apartments when their tenants die. Even when a beneficiary of the deceased takes over the property, they too are graced with below-market-rate rents.

Harmon’s lawsuit was against several parties who are in charge of rent control policies, including Jonathan Kimmel, the chair of the Rent Guidelines Board, and Darryl Towns, the commissioner of the New York State Homes and Community Renewal.

After the denial of both federal courts, the Harmons petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, which would allow the Harmons to appeal to the Supreme Court for a final decision in their case. The state and city each filed a brief defending the Rent Stabilization Law as constitutional, urging the Supreme Court not to grant the petition. With the decision on Monday, the case has finally reached its last stop.

“The Harmon family is disappointed in the Supreme Court’s decision,” Harmon said in an email. “We still believe that the Constitution does not allow the government to force us to take strangers into our home at our expense for life. Even our grandchildren have been barred from living with us. That is not our America.”

While Harmon was looking to free himself of his rent-stabilized tenants, his efforts snowballed into a movement with the aim of dismantling rent control policies in New York City. Real estate interest groups stood together to oppose a sanction that they believe impedes their rights, but most local politicians support rent regulation and fight to renew it every time it is set to expire.

“I am gratified that the United States Supreme Court has denied review of the Harmon case, which could have spelled the end of rent regulation in New York City,” Assembly Member Linda Rosenthal said in a statement. “This is a victory for millions of rent-regulated tenants throughout New York City who would not be able to afford to live in this city were it not for rent regulation.”

But a local group is still hoping it can get the city to intervene, or perhaps convince the university to change its plans.

The group, the Committee to Preserve the Morningside Brownstones, has been gathering information on the buildings’ history and significance to the neighborhood since the permits were awarded Nov. 30, and recently started to go public with its efforts.

“The only absolute protection is to designate them on the city level,” said Harry Schwartz, a member of the group who lives on Morningside Drive and West 115th Street.

The university has no immediate plans for the lot.

“It will be retained for future development,” said spokesperson Daniel Held.

Supporters of keeping the brownstones are now unsure of what Columbia will construct in the buildings’ footprint.

But that hasn’t kept neighbors from guessing.

“It could be a vast parking lot behind us with cars coming in all through the day, undergrad housing or something like a science research facility,” said Nancy Kricorian, an author and activist who has met with university officials about the demolition. “There are so many nightmare scenarios.”

Kricorian, whose bedroom window faces the parking lot that is next to these brownstones, says a new building would ruin the residential character of the neighborhood.

Other brownstone supporters, including Assembly Member Daniel O’Donnell, want Columbia to rehabilitate the buildings, now clad in black netting from little maintenance.

“The condition has clearly deteriorated since their ownership,” O’Donnell said. “There are many buildings across the city in much worse disrepair that are salvaged and revived to their original glory.”

In 2002, Columbia bought the brownstones, which were “dilapidated after years of neglect,” according to Held, the university’s spokesperson. “The university invested the funds necessary to prevent further deterioration and to protect the public.”

The city’s Landmark Preservation Commission has yet to schedule a hearing on the proposal to protect the area bounded by West 110th Street and Tiemann Place, from Morningside Park to Riverside Park—much to O’Donnell’s chagrin.

But going forward, O’Donnell wants to raise awareness of the historic nature of the brownstones and their importance to Morningside Heights’ character.

“I intend to bring these buildings to the attention of the mayor,” O’Donnell said, “and name the bulldozers after [landmarks commissioner] Rob Tierney and Michael Bloomberg.”

Community Board 7 and West Side elected officials met on June 12 to prepare for demolition of the brownstones, 732 and 734 West End Ave., near West 96th Street. Although the official start date of the demolition was not finalized at the meeting, Sackman, the buildings’ owner, reached a deal to delay work until P.S. 75, on West End Avenue and West 96th Street, closes for the summer.

“I would prefer if these brownstones didn’t get torn down, but the good news is they will wait till school is out,” said Council Member Gale Brewer.

Demolition will take approximately 60 days and leave a filled vacant lot, as Sackman doesn’t have the financing to build yet. The city is also to looking for ways to cut down on noise and dust, particularly because an adjacent building houses a senior residence.

Scaffolding has been up on the buildings since June 2, and nearby residents and school officials were worried about the dust, debris and increased traffic from demolition.

These two brownstones will be torn down this summer. Photo by Andrew Schwartz

“I thought it was an excellent idea to try and allay the fears of the people impacted,” said Erika Peterson, vice president of the West End Preservation Society. “Overall, they tried to offer some solutions and be helpful.”

A construction task force assembled by Community Board 7 and Brewer’s office plans to closely monitor the demolition throughout the summer to make sure that work is carried out as safely as possible.

The imminent demolition, along with a new study by Columbia Professor Andrew Dolkart, has spurred preservationists to push for creation of a landmark district. Last month, more than 80 residents gathered at The West End Institutional Synagogue to learn more about Dolkart’s study, which supports turning the entire avenue, from West 70th to 107th streets, into a historic district. Currently, only select buildings and areas on the avenue are landmarked. Dolkart’s study showed that many structures have a high degree of common elements in terms of size, design and the time period in which they were constructed.

“Either it is a landmark district, or it isn’t. It’s an absurdity to go in and out of a historic district,” Dolkart said, referring to the current patchwork of protected buildings.

Borough President Scott Stringer, who attended the May meeting, added, “It’s very easy to support the big name areas, but we all know that everyone who has walked down West End Avenue knows how magical it is. West End Avenue can disappear the same way other non-landmarked areas have.”

In addition to Brewer and Stringer, State Sen. Eric Schniderman and Assembly Member Linda Rosenthal have also spoken out in support of the historic district.

But Michael Slattery, senior vice president of research at the Real Estate Board of New York, argues that buildings should be not be clumped together in a historic district.

“You have to look at the individual buildings,” he said.

Landmarking adds to the cost of repairs and upkeep, Slattery added, and creates an extra level of bureaucracy for even small changes to interiors and façades.

The Landmarks Preservation Commission has already reviewed the buildings submitted by the society and decided that the proposal was strong enough to include additional buildings, according to Elisabeth de Bourbon, director of communications.

“Commission staff will survey the additional buildings outside the current proposal this fall,” de Bourbon said.

Twelve neighborhoods in New York are currently waiting to be evaluated as historic districts, including West End Avenue. The commission is also trying to focus on districts outside of Manhattan, de Bourbon said.

The society, though, feels confident about its case.

“With the Dolkart Report in the hands of the LPC and all of the political and citizen support,” said Richard Emery, the society’s president, “we are optimistic that we can get the historic district designation calendared in this municipal election cycle.”