HOUSING

EQUITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE

For the American Jobs Plan to Succeed, It Must Bring All Americans to the Table

By Elizabeth Velez and Cheryl McKissack Daniel

At long last the federal government has delivered its largest infrastructure investment in generations. While this package will fund measures such as rail transit, broadband access and clean water, we must also continue to push for investments in our social infrastructure that will truly close our country’s growing wealth and opportunity gaps.

The stakes are exceptionally high. Ride a few exits on most major thoroughfares and you will see how past infrastructure led to segregation, displacement, food deserts and lasting economic and health challenges. This is no accident: highway and infrastructure developments became a new method to racially divide cities across the U.S. in the mid-20th Century. Ports, power plants and waste treatment facilities were intentionally sited near communities of color. Generations later, these Americans bear the lasting effects through asthma, heart disease and other underlying conditions.

Infrastructure has been the backbone of the nation for decades, driving economic growth and supporting our communities. But it is time to think critically about who these investments serve, and who they exclude, and rebuild a nation that works for us all.

We’re making important steps toward progress in Washington. The bipartisan infrastructure plan will spur economic development, but the quest for common ground came at a cost. Funds for affordable housing, public schools and renewable energy for underserved communities were cut. As we look to recover from the economic downturn and hardships of the pandemic – which disproportionately harmed people of color, in terms of both their health and economic stability – we must ensure these infrastructure upgrades aren’t just a bridge to nowhere. Instead, they must connect marginalized communities to new opportunities in cutting-edge sectors.

Because large infrastructure packages and public works of the past have historically excluded people of color. The New Deal of the 1930’s made big promises to everyone – but delivered mainly to white, middle-class Americans. We need to hold the administration and Congress accountable, so they advance policies like Build Back Better that prioritize forwardthinking, sustainable and equitable infrastructure developments.

Investing in infrastructure has proven to be, in turn, an investment in minority- and women-owned businesses. New York State’s Minority- and WomenOwned Business Enterprise Program is a strong example of action taken to prioritize business procurement from professionals who face structural barriers that make it harder to run and scale a business successfully. Since the advent of the program, the building and construction industry has had the greatest demonstrated response. MWBEs won more than $2.93 billion in state contracts during the fiscal year ending in March 2019, 60

generations. While this package will fund continue to push for investments in opportunity gaps.

The stakes are exceptionally high. Ride and you will see how past infrastructure deserts and lasting economic and health a new method to racially divide cities across the U.S. in the mid-20th Century. communities of color. Generations later, these Americans bear the lasting effects

percent of which came from contracts for construction services. Still, in a $52 billion market, we must do more to be equitable But it is time to think critically about who and represent all our communities. While New York has been a leader in investing in MWBEs, we must hold ourselves accountable as well to be sure that infrastructure capital requests benefit toward progress in Washington. The minority and disadvantaged communities. bipartisan infrastructure plan will spur We hope to see a commitment to focusing on the disparities within disparity. Equity is common ground came at a cost. Funds not simply a term, but a nuanced approach that acknowledges MWBEs are not a monolith. We need to peel back the layers communities were cut. As we look to of oppression and inequality to serve Black and Latinx owned firms. We must ensure the recently passed disproportionately harmed people of infrastructure bill is a down payment color, in terms of both their health and – not the final check. As long as our commitment to equity and inclusion is intentional and intersectional, we have a real opportunity to uplift marginalized connect marginalized communities to new communities while rebuilding the systems that have caused real and

Because large infrastructure packages lasting harm for far too long.

white, middle-class Americans. We need to hold the administration and Congress accountable, so they advance policies like to be, in turn, an investment in minority- is a strong example of action taken to professionals who face structural demonstrated response. MWBEs won more percent of which came from contracts for construction services. Still, in a $52 billion We hope to see a commitment to focusing of oppression and inequality to serve Black

Elizabeth Velez (left) is the President of the Velez Organization and Chair of the New York Building Congress. Cheryl McKissack Daniel (right) is the President and CEO of McKissack and McKissack and Chair of the New York Building Foundation.

VELEZ ORGANIZATION; MCKISSACK & MCKISSACK; SIBSKY2016/SHUTTERSTOCK

DRONES AND THE BUILDING INDUSTRY

While architects and engineers see drones as the future of the field, a 70-year-old law is keeping them a 70-year-old law is keeping them grounded in New York City.

On project sites across the country architects and engineers are now flying commercial drones, which can be applied in a variety of ways to the building process, whether in the design, construction or inspection stages. Yet in New York, home to many of the tallest buildings and largest developments in the United States, a local law dating back to 1948 is restricting the operation of drones in the city’s airspace.

The building industry touts drones, which can generate 3-D models and detailed imagery of structures and sites, as a valuable tool that saves time as well as money. “What we have seen from using drones is they are a very fast and efficient way to collect data on the condition of whatever you are looking at, whether a building façade or a roof—or it could be internal to the building if you are surveying for mold or looking for deteriorating structure,” said Ray Daddazio, senior consultant and president emeritus at the engineering consulting firm Thornton Tomasetti.

The data that drones can collect, Daddazio added, is not limited to the visible spectrum: They can be deployed with different types of sensors, including thermal sensors capable of identifying heat loss in a building.

Drones can also be piloted into compact spaces and access places that would otherwise be difficult to reach, and thus serve as an alternative to having workers perform tasks such as scaling a roof or climbing scaffolding, leading to safer conditions on project sites. That maneuverability, moreover, renders them a useful tool for building façade inspections, which New York City mandates every five years.

For some tasks drones negate the need to erect scaffolding, which can mar pedestrian walkways for prolonged periods of time. And since drones can inspect façades at a fraction of the cost, they could be utilized not only by property managers, but a city agency like NYCHA, which oversees more than 1,500 buildings six stories or taller.

While architects and engineers see drones as the future of the field, a 70-yearold “avigation” law—requiring that all aircraft take off and land at airports—is effectively barring their use in New York City.

“An outdated local law, drafted decades before the advent of what are popularly known as ‘drones,’ is leaving New York City on the ground while other cities are already using rapidly advancing technologies to support business and improve safety,” said Council Member Paul A. Vallone. “The use of drone technology for compliance with building inspections would help all property owners, especially co-op and condo boards who pay large sums for current facade inspections.”

Proponents of drones argue that the prohibitions imposed by the 1948 statute are so broad as to constitute a no-fly zone, which only the federal government can establish. In 2016, the Federal Aviation Administration enacted a regulatory framework permitting a broad spectrum of commercial drone uses.

Other major cities—such as Los Angeles, Chicago and Miami—have already authorized the use of drones, and New York state itself has established standards for their use. Last year, the City Council passed a bill requiring a feasibility study on using drones for façade inspections. The building industry is hoping that the City Council will clarify that the avigation statute does not bar drones as well as create rules that allow qualified professionals to operate them.

“The Housing and Buildings Committee is currently examining how we pass legislation that would, at least, establish a pilot program permitting the use of

drones in important building management tasks like façade inspections and energy efficiency assessments,” said Council can be applied in a variety of ways to the Member Robert E. Cornegy, Jr. Earlier this year, the Buildings Department released a new report that New York, home to many of the tallest found drones have the potential to be buildings and largest developments in the effective tools in façade inspections. Legislative action, nonetheless, will be 1948 is restricting the operation of drones needed to fully pave the way for their in the city’s airspace. usage.

The building industry touts drones, “We applaud the Buildings Department which can generate 3-D models and and City Council for working to lift barriers detailed imagery of structures and sites, preventing the use of drones and other as a valuable tool that saves time as well new technology,” said Carlo A. Scissura, president and CEO of the New York drones is they are a very fast and efficient Building Congress. “It is now crucial that way to collect data on the condition of the incoming Council Members continue whatever you are looking at, whether a this work in advancing drones, so we can building façade or a roof—or it could be spur economic development and create internal to the building if you are surveying new opportunities within the building for mold or looking for deteriorating industry.” The NYPD has stated that if New York consultant and president emeritus at the were to legalize drones, such legislation engineering consulting firm Thornton would have to prioritize public safety, given the city’s population density as well

The data that drones can collect, as terrorism threats. Council Member Cornegy, Jr. told City & State that he was confident that the city could “create a with different types of sensors, including thoughtful legal and regulatory framework thermal sensors capable of identifying that ensures drones used in building heat loss in a building. management are operated in a safe and

Drones can also be piloted into compact responsible manner,” adding that major spaces and access places that would components of that framework already otherwise be difficult to reach, and exist in the FAA regulations. thus serve as an alternative to having “It would be up to us to apply the workers perform tasks such as scaling necessary additional safety standards a roof or climbing scaffolding, leading we would need for our city’s unique built to safer conditions on project sites. That environment – whether that be a focus on maneuverability, moreover, renders them a insurance provisions, privacy protections, useful tool for building façade inspections, notices to building occupants and which New York City mandates every five neighbors, or appropriate notifications to local law enforcement,” he said. need to erect scaffolding, which can mar pedestrian walkways for prolonged periods of time. And since drones can inspect stories or taller. old “avigation” law—requiring that all “An outdated local law, drafted decades known as ‘drones,’ is leaving New York City on the ground while other cities are already using rapidly advancing technologies to use of drone technology for compliance property owners, especially co-op and condo boards who pay large sums for Proponents of drones argue that the Administration enacted a regulatory framework permitting a broad spectrum of Other major cities—such as Los Angeles, York state itself has established standards for their use. Last year, the City Council passed a bill requiring a feasibility study The building industry is hoping that the City Council will clarify that the avigation statute does not bar drones as well as create rules that allow qualified is currently examining how we pass legislation that would, at least, establish a pilot program permitting the use of drones in important building management tasks like façade inspections and energy efficiency assessments,” said Council Member Robert E. Cornegy, Jr. Earlier this year, the Buildings Department released a new report that found drones have the potential to be Legislative action, nonetheless, will be needed to fully pave the way for their “We applaud the Buildings Department and City Council for working to lift barriers preventing the use of drones and other new technology,” said Carlo A. Scissura, president and CEO of the New York Building Congress. “It is now crucial that the incoming Council Members continue this work in advancing drones, so we can spur economic development and create new opportunities within the building industry.” The NYPD has stated that if New York were to legalize drones, such legislation would have to prioritize public safety, given the city’s population density as well as terrorism threats. Council Member Cornegy, Jr. told City & State that he was confident that the city could “create a thoughtful legal and regulatory framework that ensures drones used in building management are operated in a safe and responsible manner,” adding that major components of that framework already exist in the FAA regulations. “It would be up to us to apply the necessary additional safety standards we would need for our city’s unique built environment – whether that be a focus on insurance provisions, privacy protections, notices to building occupants and neighbors, or appropriate notifications to local law enforcement,” he said.

THE FUTURE OF NYBC How the New York Building Congress Is Preparing for the Next 100 Years

By Frank J. Sciame and Dominick M. Servedio

New York City is at a pivotal moment. Much as when the New York Building Congress was founded in 1921, we again face the economic fallout of a devastating pandemic, a deep need to invest in our infrastructure and unprecedented advancements in technologies that let us build like never before.

Now, however, we have an organization with generations of experience to meet the challenges of tomorrow.

From its origins as an organization intent on fostering cooperation and enhancing ethics across multiple sectors, the Building Congress has touched nearly every major project in the tri-state area. Its members have played a vital role in shaping the city, from building the Empire State Building during the Great Depression to rushing to Ground Zero on September 11th to aid in the recovery and rebuild. And most recently, when COVID-19 challenged the very essence of New York, our members worked tirelessly to build back better and stronger.

As New York has grown, so has the Building Congress. Over the last century, our membership has become more robust, public and private partnerships have expanded and strengthened and we have advocated tirelessly on behalf of sound public policy.

With over 500 constituent members representing more than 250,000 skilled tradespeople and trained professionals, the Building Congress is a unique and essential association dedicated to the continuing success of our region. Not surprisingly, its sense of community, its spirit of collaboration and its ability to unite a diverse array of stakeholders — architects, engineers, contractors, developers, laborers, elected officials, owners, attorneys, accountants, lobbyists and other support professionals, just to name a few — have enabled generations to take the impossible head-on and realize the most complex, ambitious projects in the world.

As it always has, the Building Congress must again expand its efforts on behalf of the industry and the region. Our organization must recalibrate to meet this challenging moment with the force of 100 years of experience as well as the mission of building a better future.

To do so, we must invest in programs that inspire the next generation of building professionals. Building Congress membership must expand beyond the five boroughs. Our presence in Albany and Washington, D.C. will become stronger, to advocate for policies that create good jobs, spur economic development and promote green building.

The future has so many opportunities. The historic bipartisan infrastructure package will pour more than $1 trillion into repairing and expanding strained transportation infrastructure, expanding broadband and upgrading utilities. The bill is transformative for the entire nation, but we will especially feel the effects in

pandemic, a deep need to invest in with generations of experience to meet area. Its members have played a vital on September 11th to aid in the recovery

the New York region. From reimagining the entire Brooklyn-Queens Expressway to extending the Second Avenue Subway, and to find better ways to move people and goods, the Building Congress will lead the charge with passion and innovation. Looking to the next 100 years of With over 500 constituent members impact, the Building Congress will bring the hardworking spirit of New York City and the building industry to projects across the state and throughout the nation. We will leverage the tools available to us and our network of industry professionals around the country to ignite a building boom that stimulates the economy, creates jobs and delivers new schools, housing, bridges, transportation infrastructure and other public works that improve our cities and people’s lives.

must again expand its efforts on behalf organization must recalibrate to meet but we will especially feel the effects in the New York region. From reimagining to extending the Second Avenue Subway, and to find better ways to move people the nation. We will leverage the tools people’s lives.

Frank Sciame (left) is the Chairman and CEO of Sciame Construction and Chaired the New York Building Congress from 2004 to 2006. Dominick Servedio (right) is the Chairman of STV Group, Inc. and Chaired the New York Building Congress from 2006 to 2008. Together, they served as Co-Chairs of the New York Building Congress Centennial Commission.

COURTESY OF SCIAME CONSTRUCTION; COURTESY OF STV GROUP

BUILDING CONGRESS’ CENTENNIAL

BOOK The following is an excerpt from What We Build, a commemorative book produced by the New York Building Congress. This book covers the last 100 years of the organization and the building industry, including some of the most impactful projects. a commemorative book produced by the New York including some of the most impactful projects.

New York in the 1920s was building at a pace that dwarfed that of any city in history. Booming back to life after the close of World War I, it reveled in the culmination of half a century of industrial and civic expansion. The City had annexed Brooklyn barely two decades earlier, during which period the overall population had more than doubled. The Bronx, anointed “the wonder borough,” emerged as New York’s fastest-growing area, absorbing half a million new residents. The city’s vast growth in people, wealth, land, business and technology (like widespread electricity) meant an unprecedented demand for building. Thousands of structures — homes, schools, museums, libraries, churches, synagogues, apartments, department stores, movie studios, hotels, theaters, offices and stadiums — grew like mushrooms in every borough and on every corner. Available space — particularly in Manhattan — was shrinking rapidly.

There was, however, remarkably little training, oversight and coordination related to the new buildings’ assembly.

The general public, citing disruption, corruption and general chaos, began to mistrust the building industry, as did local and national officials. Members of the industry were themselves fed up with fights between trades, dishonest competition, poor working conditions,

worker mistreatment (particularly of immigrant and minority workers) and numerous accidents, among many other to life after the close of World War I, issues. “Charges of abuse and uneconomic practice were being made right and left,” noted Thomas S. Holden, Vice President of data company F.W. Dodge Corporation and former Building Congress President, in 1946. “Moreover, instead wonder borough,” emerged as New York’s of being one industrial unit delivering a completed product to the buyer, there were innumerable individuals and industries each selling services or ideas, bricks or bath tubs, sand or steel, to a public interested only in an assembled structure.” The New York Building Congress was born as an antidote to this profound dysfunction. In April 1921, a group of architects, engineers, contractors and “labor men” met for the organization’s first formal meeting. According to the Building Congress’ first annual report, the group “started out with the idea that the building industry was disorganized and that the only hope for effective related to the new buildings’ assembly. improvement in the industry was to

practice were being made right and left,” dysfunction. In April 1921, a group of “labor men” met for the organization’s the group “started out with the idea that

30 SPONSORED CONTENT SPONSORED CONTENT Members of the New York Building Congress in the early decades of the organization.

render through cooperation of all of its elements some measure of that service which the public had the right to demand of us.”

Founding Building Congress President Stephen F. Voorhees, a Partner at McKenzie, Voorhees, Gmelin and Walker, stressed the need for cooperation across the entirety of the building industry: “These things can be accomplished by a united industry, but they cannot be accomplished by individual efforts, or the efforts of associations,” he intoned.

The template was quickly set with the formation, over the course of that first decade, of individual committees tackling challenging, unmanaged issues such as building codes, standards, ethics, labor issues, apprenticeship and legal action.

One of the Building Congress’ first major accomplishments was the creation, on December 13, 1921, of a “Code of Ethics for the Building Industry.” According to that measure (which The New York Times announced as an “attempt to cure existing trade evils”), it would be unethical for anyone in the business to “improperly increase the cost of work or to produce work or workmanship inferior to that contracted for.”

Other initial rules, applicable across the spectrum of building roles — from building owners and bankers to general contractors and laborers — prohibited maligning competitors, circumventing existing building ordinances, allowing unsafe or unsanitary working conditions or withholding financial data on projects.

Another triumph was the formation, in 1922, of an apprentice program that, in addition to providing evening classes at vocational schools, partnered with firms across the city. In short order, the program had trained 7,000 apprentices in such trades as carpentry, painting, plastering, cement masonry, plumbing, wiring and bricklaying. Other significant achievements included the creation of standardized specifications across dozens of trades, the organization of group functions and activities, the establishment of an arbitration court to settle disputes, the launch of a craftsmanship awards program (the Building Congress’ Certificate of Superior Craftsmanship became a coveted item in town) and the rollout of scientific surveys to help keep industry players abreast of better practices.

Finding work wasn’t the main problem in these years; ensuring it was done correctly was. The Building Congress helped temper the industry’s turmoil, waste, confusion and growing complexity. It also brought together its scattered players for the first time, initiating programs that, for instance, would spur the building industry to extend the construction year through all four seasons rather than halting construction for the winter.

Membership grew at a startling clip.

In the first half of 1924, for instance, the organization expanded from 400 members to 1,400. The organization’s first three presidents were industry luminaries: Voorhees; R.H. Shreve, a founder of the firm Shreve, Lamb

elements some measure of that service the entirety of the building industry: & Harmon; and Robert D. Kohn, the architect who designed, among other projects, the Old New York Post Building, the Fieldston School, an expansion of Macy’s Herald Square and Temple Emanu-El.

These early leaders would shepherd the industry through a decade of seismic changes led by a new innovation: the skyscraper. It wasn’t a brand-new type of building by any means. But in New York City — thanks to steady money, new building technologies (from elevator brakes — an innovation developed by Building Congress Charter Member Otis Elevator — to the expansion of steel production), recent setback rules

COURTESY OF THE NEW YORK BUILDING COURTESY OF THE NEW YORK BUILDING CONGRESSCONGRESS and remarkable ego and bravado — it was achieving unheard-of heights and dazzlingly modern new forms at dizzying rates. Day after day, investors announced what was next going to become the tallest tower in the world.

While the organization worked diligently to curb the chaos of the industry, the Building Congress firmly backed the city’s remarkable explosion in density. The group’s second President, R.H. Shreve (who led the Building Congress from 1925 to 1929), would lead Shreve, Lamb & Harmon, the architecture firm responsible for one of the greatest buildings of all — the Empire State Building.

The skyscraper — an unprecedented feat of monumentality — was helping craft a new national identity based on sweat, swagger, industrialization and the splendor of height. Movies, magazines and the public at large were utterly in the thrall of this newest of building types.

“A city of free clear columns walled in metal and glass rising forty or sixty or eighty stories into the air...a city beautiful from the air and from the sea,” marveled Fortune magazine, in its 1930 Skyscraper series.

There were, however, also naysayers. Many felt that the new high rises symbolized the growing chasm between haves and have-nots. Others, like critic

Lewis Mumford, declared that the new, towering metropolis emphasized “the feral rather than the human quality” of civilization. And as reported in the Building Congress News, Frank Lloyd Wright, later speaking to an assembly of the Manhattan chapter of the National Real Estate Board, warned: “Stop aiding and abetting this crowding; see the skyscraper as a menace; and stop now to realize that only the human values have any validity.” Love them or hate them, skyscrapers weren’t the age’s only built marvels. As the metropolis swelled, the need for infrastructure — roads, bridges, tunnels and utilities — grew apace. Those planning and building these exceptional, city-enabling structures — often toiling underground rather than high in the sky — typified a city that was exuberantly showcasing superlative invention and hard work. Taken together, these projects pieced the puzzle of New York into the living, breathing, 20th-century model upon which all other American cities would be judged. The projects that followed helped make the Big Apple simultaneously into the country’s center of art and culture and its capital of industry. However, the very idea of New York might never have materialized were it not for that April 1921 meeting of what would become the Building Congress. In just a few short years, the organization set the tone for the once-disorganized industry to come together in times of challenge. The daring, civic-minded actions of its charter members would gel into the principles by which many in the industry still live today. Kohn, in his 1931 farewell report as President, summarized the Building Congress’ first 10 years as follows: and remarkable ego and bravado — it “The Building Congress has grown to be more than a combination of its many committees; it has developed a leadership in the building industry second to none; and with this leadership it has been given the responsibility for maintaining the highest standards of human relationships, ethical practices and good workmanship. It is looked upon as an organization for the development of sound and progressive measures for the benefit of no one group, but of the entire industry.” Shreve, Lamb & Harmon, the architecture and the public at large were utterly in the feral rather than the human quality” realize that only the human values have weren’t the age’s only built marvels. — typified a city that was exuberantly the puzzle of New York into the living, might never have materialized were it not to come together in times of challenge. to be more than a combination of its it has been given the responsibility for as an organization for the development of benefit of no one group, but of the entire

Your Business Improvement District

Transforming the Far West Side one plant, one tree, one park at a time. THE 2021 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POWER 75 Jobs, jobs, jobs – and who’s creating them in New York.

APOLITICIAN’S FATE is often tied to the state of the economy. And it’s no surprise, since voters perennially rank the economy as a top concern – or as Democratic strategist James Carville once remarked, “It’s the economy, stupid.”

In Washington, for example, President Joe Biden is contending with rising prices as he seeks to sell his infrastructure and climate change plans as job creators. In Albany, Gov. Kathy Hochul has promised to focus on access to child care, the needs of localities and an expansion of the high-tech sector as she shapes her own economic development agenda. Also, in New York City, executives are welcoming Mayor-elect Eric Adams’ business-friendly rhetoric.

Economic development isn’t just about courting big corporations or even adding jobs, of course. Empire State Development and the New York City Economic Development Corp. explicitly aim to create a more diverse and inclusive economy, while countless experts and advocates emphasize the need to aggressively tackle income inequality. A lack of qualified candidates in many sectors during the coronavirus pandemic has renewed calls for greater investment in workforce development. Others note the importance of continuing to cultivate sectors like the life sciences as the state shifts away from its traditional reliance on Wall Street.

City & State’s inaugural Economic Development Power 75 identifies the policymakers who are driving economic development strategies in New York and positioning the state for a post-pandemic recovery, including elected officials, government appointees and leaders of chambers of commerce, trade associations, business improvement districts, labor unions, corporations and nonprofits.

Researched and written by City & State’s Kay Dervishi, Jon Lentz and Julia Santiago, along with freelance journalist Alice Popovici.