On April 1, 2026 at 10:00 a.m., the New York City Planning Commission (CPC) will hold a public hearing on proposed rules to implement the new Affordable Housing Fast Track program, one of the ballot proposals approved by voters in last November’s election. These rules will shape how neighborhoods are evaluated for housing production—and determine where major projects may move forward with significantly reduced public review.
While the City has not yet identified which community districts will fall into the “Bottom 12”—the 12 districts with the lowest rates of affordable housing production relative to their size—the methodology used to calculate those rates raises serious concerns. Based on how these rules are structured, it is entirely possible that neighborhoods like the Upper East Side, despite being among the densest residential areas in New York City, could be classified as underperforming. This would not necessarily reflect a lack of housing—or even affordable housing—but rather how the City has chosen to define and measure what counts.
What the Proposed Rules Would Do
At the heart of the proposal is a new formula: the City will measure how many new affordable housing units are created in each community district over a five-year period and compare that number to the total housing stock at the beginning of that period. Using this calculation, the City will rank all districts and identify the 12 with the lowest rates of affordable housing production.
The first list must be published no later than October 1, 2026, and will remain in effect for a full five-year cycle. Importantly, the list will be considered final once issued, meaning that even if errors or omissions in the underlying data are discovered later, the rankings will not be revised.
Once the list is published, qualifying projects in those districts—specifically those providing permanently affordable housing under Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (MIH)—may apply for Fast Track beginning in 2027. These projects would move through a dramatically accelerated approval process, bypassing the City Council and receiving a final decision from the CPC in as little as 90 days.
The Problem Lies in How “Affordable Housing” Is Calculated and Defined
The proposed methodology creates a narrow and often misleading picture of affordability in community districts. Key concerns include:
Existing and preserved housing is not counted
The formula ignores rent-stabilized and other existing affordable units, as well as efforts to preserve them, despite their critical role in preventing displacement and maintaining neighborhood stability. In addition, certain housing types such as shelters and supportive housing, and contributions toward maintaining existing affordable units are excluded altogether, even though they are essential parts of the housing system.
All units are treated the same
A small studio is counted the same as a family-sized apartment. A more accurate approach would consider square footage, not just unit count, to better reflect real housing capacity. In addition, units affordable at higher income levels (higher AMI bands) are counted the same as those serving lower-income households. The methodology does not account for either unit size or depth of affordability.
Net loss is ignored
The methodology counts only new units and does not account for what is lost. If existing affordable housing—including rent-stabilized units—is demolished and replaced with a development that contains fewer affordable units, that loss is not reflected in the calculation. This can obscure an overall decline in affordability. The impact is particularly significant on the Upper East Side, where Yorkville’s historic tenement buildings—long a source of rent-regulated and relatively affordable housing—are being demolished at a rapid pace, often replaced by developments with fewer units and reduced affordability.
High-cost neighborhoods are disadvantaged
Neighborhoods like the Upper East Side and Upper West Side face higher land and construction costs and often receive fewer subsidies, such as HPD vouchers, making it more difficult to produce the types of projects this formula rewards. On the Upper East Side, there is an urgent need to address the ongoing loss of rent-stabilized and relatively affordable housing, and to expand protections to buildings that currently lack them.
One example is the City and Suburban First Avenue Estate, where, following the denial of a hardship application to the Landmarks Preservation Commission, HPD-supported financing helped secure much-needed affordable housing. This model should be replicated in other appropriate buildings across the neighborhood.
Data may be incomplete or inaccurate
The system relies on multiple agencies with inconsistent records, includes “confidential” projects that cannot be independently verified, and locks in rankings for five years—even if errors are later identified. It remains unclear whether communities will have any meaningful opportunity to review or challenge inaccuracies.
Reduction of public input and review
FRIENDS also has serious concerns about the reduction of public input and oversight embedded in the Fast Track process with the elimination of City Council review. We raised these concerns when the ballot proposals were first introduced, and they remain relevant as the rules are now being implemented. While we understand the need to streamline processes and reduce unnecessary delays, this should not come at the expense of meaningful community engagement.
Our Perspective
FRIENDS shares the City’s goal of both increasing and preserving affordable housing on the Upper East Side, in alignment with HPD’s Fair Housing Plan. Our work has consistently emphasized the importance of protecting the neighborhood’s existing housing stock—particularly its historic tenement-style buildings, which have long provided relatively affordable homes.
We believe that both the preservation and creation of affordable and relatively affordable housing are essential to keeping our neighborhoods vibrant, livable, and reflective of their historic character.
Our research shows that these existing buildings are under intense development pressure and are being demolished at an alarming rate, often replaced with new construction that does not serve the same populations. This ongoing loss underscores a central concern with the proposed rules: by focusing almost exclusively on new construction, they overlook the critical role of preservation in maintaining affordability and preventing displacement.
A more balanced approach would recognize that both new development and preservation are essential to sustaining diverse, livable neighborhoods.
Sign up here for the CPC Hearing on April 1, 2026.
Other resources:
City Planning Commission - Affordable Housing Fast Track methodology