Summary#
S10695 would amend New York’s Executive Law and New York City’s Administrative Code; it would not create a new agency or a general 30-day deadline to issue permits. The bill’s title describes its goal as speeding permit decisions for residential and mixed-use buildings. It was introduced and referred to the Rules Committee, so it is not law.
- For a complete residential or mixed-use permit application, a local or county building department, where applicable, would have to give the applicant an estimated review timeframe.
- If that estimate is more than 30 business days, the applicant may hire a qualified professional licensed under specified parts of New York’s Education Law, at the applicant’s own expense, to examine the plans and specifications for code compliance.
- After the professional submits a report, the building department must process the application and issue or deny it within 20 business days.
- The bill does not let the professional issue the permit: the building department retains the duty to decide the application.
What it means for you#
- Applicants for residential or mixed-use permits: You would receive an estimated timeframe after your application is deemed complete. If the estimate exceeds 30 business days, you could pay for a private professional review.
- Building departments: They would have to provide estimates and, after receiving a professional’s report, process and decide the application within 20 business days.
- Applicants and the public: The bill does not establish a general 30-business-day deadline for the department’s first review. It also does not say the department must accept the professional’s conclusions.
- New York City applicants: The bill would add a corresponding rule to the city’s Administrative Code. The materials do not include the parent laws, so the existing rules and how much this changes them could not be verified.
- The bill would take effect 90 days after it became law.
Money#
No publicly available information on estimated public costs is included in the supplied materials.
- The applicant would pay the private professional’s cost. The bill gives no fee amount or estimate.
- The bill would require departments to provide estimates and meet the 20-business-day deadline after a report is submitted, but it gives no staffing or implementation cost.
- The bill does not provide a funding source.
What is unclear#
- The bill does not set standards for the private professional’s report or explain how the department should handle disagreements with it.
- It does not say how the review estimate must be calculated, or what happens if the department misses the 20-business-day deadline.
- The bill uses “qualified professional” and refers to specified professional licences, but the supplied text does not define which professionals qualify in each case.
- The supplied materials do not include the current versions of the amended laws, so the existing review process and the full extent of the change are unclear.
- No publicly available information is supplied about expected application volumes, private review fees, or implementation costs.
Case for#
- The bill appears intended to address long waits for building-permit decisions.
- A possible argument for the approach is that applicants could seek a private code review when the department estimates a wait longer than 30 business days.
- Requiring the department to decide within 20 business days after receiving the report could provide a clearer deadline for that stage, while leaving the permit decision with the department.
Case against#
- One concern is that applicants who can afford a private review could have an option unavailable to those who cannot.
- The first review has no fixed 30-business-day deadline: the department must provide an estimate, and an estimate over 30 days allows—but does not require—the applicant to hire a professional.
- The bill does not explain whether the department must follow the private professional’s findings, which could leave uncertainty about the value of paying for the review.