PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Testimony by Pamela Wolf, President of Safe Chelsea, on City of Yes for Housing Opportunity
10:11:54
·
124 sec
Pamela Wolf, president of Safe Chelsea, criticizes the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal, arguing that it fails to mandate new affordable housing and could lead to the destruction of existing affordable units. She uses an example from Chelsea to illustrate how the Universal Affordability Preference could potentially increase housing costs and negatively impact neighborhood character.
- Wolf argues the proposal could result in the demolition of older, more affordable buildings to be replaced by fewer, more expensive units.
- She highlights concerns about increased building heights in Chelsea, potentially affecting the historic district and the High Line.
- The testimony suggests that the profit motive to build taller in view-rich areas could have unfortunate consequences for both housing costs and neighborhood character.
Colette Wong
10:11:54
Thank you.
10:11:56
I am Pamela Wolf, president of safe Chelsea.
10:11:59
While city of yes for housing opportunity has some laudable provisions, it fails to mandate new affordable housing and encourages the destruction of existing affordable housing.
10:12:12
Even the sole city of yes initiative for affordable housing, the universal affordability preference could be counterproductive in neighborhoods like ours.
10:12:22
For example, take the 3 older buildings between the high line and 10th Avenue just north of 22nd Street in the special West Chelsea, his West Chelsea zoning district.
10:12:36
Their 29 apartments fall a bit below Chelsea's median rents for apartments of the same size.
10:12:43
Under city of yes, they could be demolished and replaced by a building containing far fewer, astronomically more expensive, and sprawling new apartments with high line views and only the handful of affordable apartments needed to satisfy the program's 20% affordability requirement.
10:13:04
The result would be a dramatic net increase in housing cost.
10:13:09
The new building could be 45 feet taller than now permitted under an eighty foot height limit that was designed to respect the low rise Chelsea historic district Cross Tenth Avenue, and one and one half times that height or a 125 feet.
10:13:27
On one side, it would dwarf the historic district, and on the other, it would rob the high line of light and open space that the special zoning district was specifically crafted to preserve.
10:13:39
The profit motive to build taller in this view rich area would be irresistible with deeply un unfortunate consequences for both housing costs and neighborhood character.
10:13:51
The universal affordability preference could very well yield a net loss and affordability on any Thank
Shaun Abreu
10:13:58
you, Pamela.
