Q&A
Debate on parking mandate removal and concerns about negotiating power with developers
3:07:20
·
104 sec
Council Member Brooks-Powers and Daniel Garodnick engage in a debate about the removal of parking mandates and its potential impact on transit-poor areas. The council member expresses concerns about losing negotiating power with developers if parking mandates are removed.
- Garodnick argues that the current system is a one-size-fits-all approach, and the proposal aims to provide flexibility
- Brooks-Powers emphasizes that communities are not the same and one size does not always fit all
- The council member raises concerns about losing leverage in negotiations with developers for community benefits if parking is no longer a negotiating point
- Brooks-Powers argues that removing parking mandates could further disadvantage already disadvantaged communities
- The debate highlights the tension between providing flexibility and maintaining community leverage in development negotiations
Selvena N. Brooks-Powers
3:07:20
But we're not the
Daniel Garodnick
3:07:20
same zoning district, the same way across the city.
3:07:24
We think that we need the level of flexibility to allow for your district to be different from other districts where their transit access is better.
3:07:33
And today, we are over defining the thing in ways that is, you know, over presenting parking in places where it is not needed, and we believe that it will continue to be provided in areas where it absolutely is needed.
3:07:46
That's why we created such flexibility in this proposal.
3:07:49
And the last thing I would say I'm
Selvena N. Brooks-Powers
3:07:50
just sorry really quickly on that point because I just wanna clarify because that communities are not the same and one size does not always fit well.
Daniel Garodnick
3:07:57
That's right.
Selvena N. Brooks-Powers
3:07:58
And I think that it's important to revisit this in the sense that when we are negotiating u lirbs, we have developers that come and they wanna maximize profit.
3:08:09
That's fine.
3:08:10
They're they're business owners of Capitalists' society.
3:08:12
Got it.
3:08:13
However, we need to make sure that we can still negotiate for other needs and interests of the community and not be held back because now we have to start negotiating from a deficit because we know we need parking.
3:08:27
So when they come to me and say, you know what?
3:08:29
We have no parking, including here.
3:08:31
It's all housing.
3:08:32
And I said, no.
3:08:32
I need parking.
3:08:34
That means I can't say, well, I need you to invest in infrastructure.
3:08:37
I can't get a community center.
3:08:39
Those it it puts us at a disadvantage and those are the communities that are already disadvantaged communities.
3:08:45
So this would further disadvantage communities like mine.
3:08:48
So I think you need to revisit that part.
Kevin C. Riley
3:08:51
Jeff, if I may answer Jack, can you just say that for the second round to answer the rest of your questions?
3:08:56
I'm gonna move on to Council member Rivera followed by Council member Northeast and Council member Henif.
3:09:03
Council member Rivera.
