Q&A
Infrastructure concerns, particularly flooding issues in Council Member Riley's district
1:41:32
·
3 min
Council Member Riley raises concerns about infrastructure issues, particularly flooding, in his district and how the zoning proposal might impact these problems. Chair Garodnick responds to these concerns.
- Riley emphasizes the existing flooding problems in his district and the need to address them
- Garodnick explains that the Department of Environmental Protection has studied the potential impacts of the proposal
- The chair asserts that due to the modest nature of the proposed changes, there would not be significant adverse impacts on infrastructure
Kevin C. Riley
1:41:32
Alright.
1:41:33
Thank you.
1:41:33
Although I have other questions, I'm going to ask this last one to give my colleagues an opportunity to ask their questions starting with madam speaker, but I would like to focus on my district for a moment.
1:41:45
We clearly have an infrastructure issue when it comes to storm water.
1:41:49
Our streets regularly flood and sometimes the homes as well.
1:41:53
Addressing the housing crisis cannot just be about creating housing for new residents, but must also address the need of existing residents, especially our homeowners.
1:42:03
For my constituents, that means addressing the flooding and providing more affordable home ownership opportunities.
1:42:10
I know madam speaker who cares deeply about home ownership just like I do will go deeper into this concern.
1:42:17
But focusing on the infrastructure issue, can you please specify how the administration will address the flooding that has been a real impact on my residents within my community?
Daniel Garodnick
1:42:28
Thank you.
1:42:30
Well, the first and most important point is that we studied the potential impacts of this proposal and found a narrow set of areas where we believe there would be an impact Questions about water and sewer infrastructure were not among them.
1:42:49
Now, this does not mean to say that problems that exist in neighborhoods are either fixed or hurt by this proposal.
1:42:58
It just means that the city needs to continue to focus to address known problems and that this proposal with its diffuse nature and modest impacts neighborhood by neighborhood would not actually significantly impact the current circumstances.
1:43:19
So your point is very well
Kevin C. Riley
1:43:21
if I may interrupt because I'm hearing this from my my constituents.
1:43:25
Kevin, we're talking about building more density.
1:43:28
That's more toilets being flushed.
1:43:30
That's more people taking showers.
1:43:31
That's more people washing, you know, dishes.
1:43:34
This is going to in really impact the sewer system.
1:43:39
So I don't understand how the study that you guys did with adding more density within communities.
1:43:45
You feel like it does not impact the soil.
Daniel Garodnick
1:43:47
It's so little density that it does not have a significant adverse impact.
1:43:52
Is the short answer?
1:43:53
Department of Environmental Protection.
1:43:56
You have a letter in front of you from the Department of Environmental Protection.
1:44:01
I've confirmed that with my team, which actually says that they have looked at this.
1:44:06
And they have considered this very question because it is a point of concerns.
1:44:11
You're properly raising it.
1:44:12
I certainly am concerned about it.
1:44:13
No commission concern.
1:44:14
Carrie Anne is concerned about it.
1:44:16
We wanna make sure that, you know, the impacts here are not actually making things worse as it relates to storm water, as it relates to flushing toilets and things like that.
1:44:26
Because it is so modest, you know, there's there's just not a significant adverse impact there.
1:44:32
That's the short answer.
Kevin C. Riley
1:44:33
Thank you, chair.
1:44:35
Madam Speaker.
