New York Rising

New York Rising
Name	New York Rising
Type	Recovery program
Founded	2013
Location	New York

New York Rising was a post-disaster recovery initiative launched after Hurricane Sandy to coordinate reconstruction, resilience planning, and community revitalization across affected regions. The initiative involved collaboration among state officials, municipal leaders, nonprofit organizations, and federal agencies to allocate resources, oversee projects, and engage stakeholders. It combined technical assistance, grant administration, and public outreach to support housing, infrastructure, and economic recovery in coastal and inland communities.

Background and purpose

The program grew out of responses to Hurricane Sandy, Superstorm Sandy, and their impacts on New York City, Long Island, Hudson Valley, and New York State coastal counties, with aims tied to disaster recovery seen in precedents like Hurricane Katrina relief efforts and FEMA mitigation strategies. State leadership by figures associated with the Andrew Cuomo administration coordinated with federal entities such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and legislative frameworks including provisions from the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. Localities including Brooklyn, Queens, Nassau County, and Suffolk County sought technical guidance that echoed planning efforts from US Army Corps of Engineers and resilience initiatives supported by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Program structure and administration

Administration was managed through a combination of state offices, interagency task forces, and regional advisory councils, reflecting organizational patterns similar to the New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services, Empire State Development, and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Project selection drew on input from municipal mayors, county executives, and civic groups drawn from communities like Staten Island, Rockaway Peninsula, and Fire Island. Teams included consultants from firms with ties to Urban Land Institute methodologies and partners from universities such as Columbia University, New York University, and State University of New York campuses to provide planning, engineering, and economic analysis.

Funding and grants

Funding combined federal allocations, state appropriations, and competitive grants administered alongside programs like the Community Development Block Grant program managed by HUD, with parallels to funding mechanisms used after Hurricane Katrina and following Tropical Storm Irene. Major sources included HUD disaster recovery funds, state-issued bonds, and philanthropic contributions from institutions comparable to the Rockefeller Foundation and Ford Foundation, while grant administration involved entities like Local Initiatives Support Corporation and regional planning bodies reminiscent of the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority's coordination role in infrastructure investments. Grantee recipients ranged from municipal governments in Hempstead and Buffalo to nonprofit developers and housing authorities such as the New York City Housing Authority.

Projects and outcomes

Projects spanned residential elevation programs, seawall construction, wastewater treatment upgrades, revitalization of commercial corridors, and coastal habitat restoration, echoing initiatives undertaken in places like New Orleans and Jersey Shore. Notable interventions included infrastructure upgrades in Coney Island, flood protection planning for Lower Manhattan neighborhoods, and resilient reconstruction in Rockaway Beach and Far Rockaway, involving contractors and planners who had worked on projects near Battery Park City and Red Hook. Outcome measures tied to metrics used by organizations like the Brookings Institution and Natural Resources Defense Council tracked housing units restored, miles of transportation infrastructure improved, and green infrastructure installations inspired by programs in Portland, Oregon and Seattle.

Impact and criticism

Supporters cited accelerated rebuilding in affected communities and improved resilience planning comparable to post-disaster efforts championed by Michael Bloomberg initiatives and urban resilience frameworks promoted by the 100 Resilient Cities program. Critics raised concerns about allocation transparency, the pace of disbursement, and equity similar to controversies following Hurricane Katrina and debates involving HUD disaster grants, with watchdog organizations and press outlets such as The New York Times, Gothamist, and ProPublica reporting on administrative delays and community complaints. Legal challenges echoed litigation patterns seen in disputes involving FEMA determinations and community groups including ACLU chapters and local civic associations seeking greater inclusion.

Legacy and related initiatives

The program's approaches influenced subsequent resilience planning, informing regional strategies by entities like the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, metropolitan planning efforts by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, and coastal protection proposals advanced by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Governor's Office of Storm Recovery. Related initiatives include broader climate adaptation programs, municipal resilience plans in New York City and suburban counties, and national recovery models referenced in federal dialogues with agencies such as Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Agency, while academic analyses from institutions like Princeton University and Harvard University continue to evaluate long-term outcomes.

Category:Disaster recovery programs