New York Governor Kathy Hochul's plan to expedite certain housing projects by relaxing some environmental regulations has sparked a heated debate among the state's leading climate advocacy groups.
The State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) is designed to ensure that development projects do not harm sensitive lands and waters, but its critics argue that it can slow down construction times and increase costs. Hochul aims to address New York's housing affordability crisis by fast-tracking approved housing developments.
However, some environmental nonprofits have surprisingly come out in support of limited changes to the decades-old law. The New York League of Conservation Voters Policy Director, Patrick McClellan, stated that creating denser housing close to mass transit "is a huge net benefit for the fight against climate change." On the other hand, groups like the Citizens Campaign for the Environment and Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter have expressed strong opposition, arguing that Hochul's proposal would undermine the law's purpose to protect clean water and critical habitats.
The controversy surrounds Hochul's plan to exempt certain housing projects from additional environmental review. In New York City, projects of up to 250 units or higher-density areas may be exempt if local regulatory agencies deem them to have "no significant impacts." For the rest of the state, exemptions will apply to projects of up to 100 units on previously disturbed land connected to water and sewer.
A coalition of affordable housing groups, developers, and business organizations is pushing for support for Hochul's proposal, claiming that the environmental review process acts as a "bottleneck" that hinders vital housing, clean energy, transit, and infrastructure projects. However, other environmental groups argue that this bottleneck is an essential check on developers driven primarily by profit rather than environmental stewardship.
The debate highlights the challenges of finding a balance between addressing New York's housing affordability crisis and preserving the state's environmental protections. As lawmakers continue to hold hearings on Hochul's proposal through February, it is expected that a contentious battle will ensue, with some groups pushing for revisions to tighten and improve the plan, while others remain opposed.
The State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) is designed to ensure that development projects do not harm sensitive lands and waters, but its critics argue that it can slow down construction times and increase costs. Hochul aims to address New York's housing affordability crisis by fast-tracking approved housing developments.
However, some environmental nonprofits have surprisingly come out in support of limited changes to the decades-old law. The New York League of Conservation Voters Policy Director, Patrick McClellan, stated that creating denser housing close to mass transit "is a huge net benefit for the fight against climate change." On the other hand, groups like the Citizens Campaign for the Environment and Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter have expressed strong opposition, arguing that Hochul's proposal would undermine the law's purpose to protect clean water and critical habitats.
The controversy surrounds Hochul's plan to exempt certain housing projects from additional environmental review. In New York City, projects of up to 250 units or higher-density areas may be exempt if local regulatory agencies deem them to have "no significant impacts." For the rest of the state, exemptions will apply to projects of up to 100 units on previously disturbed land connected to water and sewer.
A coalition of affordable housing groups, developers, and business organizations is pushing for support for Hochul's proposal, claiming that the environmental review process acts as a "bottleneck" that hinders vital housing, clean energy, transit, and infrastructure projects. However, other environmental groups argue that this bottleneck is an essential check on developers driven primarily by profit rather than environmental stewardship.
The debate highlights the challenges of finding a balance between addressing New York's housing affordability crisis and preserving the state's environmental protections. As lawmakers continue to hold hearings on Hochul's proposal through February, it is expected that a contentious battle will ensue, with some groups pushing for revisions to tighten and improve the plan, while others remain opposed.
But at the same time, you gotta consider the environmental impact too! #GoGreen #NYCvsClimate Change I'm all for denser housing near mass transit as Patrick McClellan said - it's a huge win for reducing our carbon footprint 
However, I also feel for groups like Citizens Campaign for the Environment and Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter who are worried about protectin' clean water and habitats #SaveOurPlanet #HousingVsEnvironment
I'm not sure why environmentalists are so against relaxing regulations on housing projects. Can't we just find a way to make housing affordable without hurting the planet? 
It's like they're trying to stop progress altogether. 
The fact that developers and business groups are pushing for this change is telling - it shows that there's a desire to move forward with housing projects, even if it means sacrificing some environmental protections. 
It's not about being perfect, it's about finding a balance. And let's be real, New York's housing crisis needs to be addressed ASAP! 
, according to a recent survey by the NYC Comptroller's Office. Meanwhile, only 27% of environmental groups support Hochul's plan to expedite certain developments 
. Did you know that New York State has already lost over $1.3 billion in federal funding due to slow development timelines? 
It's time for a compromise! 
The Data Dumper
! I mean, who doesn't want affordable homes close to public transport? It's a game-changer for reducing carbon footprint, in my opinion. The bottleneck argument just doesn't add up, you know? If we can fast-track approved projects, it'll be a huge win for the environment and people alike 
I just can't believe these climate warriors are actually supporting relaxing environmental regulations for housing projects 
. Some environmental groups are being too harsh, like they're tryin' to stifle progress for the sake of progress 
. I'm all about balance, but not at the expense of our planet 
. Let's find a way to make it work for everyone – developers, environmentalists, and the regular folks who need a place to call home 
That sounds pretty cool to me 
.
. It makes sense to me that creating denser housing close to mass transit could be a net benefit for the fight against climate change... we do need to reduce our carbon footprint somehow! 
. Just some thoughts... 
. On one hand, we do need more housing in NY 
I was thinking about how my fave beach town has these crazy rules against development, but they're actually kinda necessary to keep it wild and free 
. idk man, can we just find a way to balance affordability with sustainability? 
, but on the other hand, our environment isn't gonna save itself 
. Im not sure whats the right answer here, maybe just finding a middle ground? 
I can totally get why both sides are upset about this... like, who wants to rush into building something without thinking about its impact on the environment? 
. Maybe we need to find a compromise that works for everyone? Like, what if they relaxed some of the rules but still did regular environmental checks to make sure things aren't being destroyed?