Carol Marion from Bayside on opposition to City of Yes for Housing Opportunity
5:28:40
·
3 min
Carol Marion, a long-time Bayside resident, strongly opposes the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity plan, arguing that it fails to address the diversity of New York City neighborhoods and will harm communities over time. She criticizes the plan for benefiting developers and real estate interests rather than creating truly affordable housing.
- Expresses concern that the plan will replace owner-occupied housing with market-rate rentals and increase density without improving infrastructure
- Questions the plan's approach to illegal basement apartments and the lack of changes made after community board hearings
- Argues against accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and transit-oriented development (TOD), citing concerns about loss of green space and increased flooding
- The plan does not address the diversity of NYC neighborhoods
- It will destroy communities over time
- It will not create affordable housing
- It will replace owner-occupied housing with market-rate rental units
- It will increase density without infrastructure improvements
- The plan benefits rich developers, architects, and real estate developers
- The city has not listened to community board feedback
- One-size-fits-all approach doesn't work for diverse NYC neighborhoods
- Against accessory dwelling units
- Concerns about loss of green space and increased flooding
- Lack of flexibility for different community needs
[EXPERIMENTAL]
Which elements of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity were discussed in this testimony?
- ADU
- Transit-Oriented Development
The following are AI-extracted quotes and reasoning about which elements of the proposal were discussed in this testimony.
This is a quick, close approximation. Occasionally, the connection between a testimony's transcript and specific elements of City Planning's proposal is tenuous.
Read about this AI-generated analysis here.
ADU
"Now, I would also like to finish by just saying that many of us here and I talk to my neighbors are against the accessory units."
The speaker explicitly mentions being against accessory units, which directly relates to the Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) element of the City of Yes For Housing Opportunity proposal.
"It will increase density without infrastructure improvement and and enforcement of illegal Basement Apartments, which I'd like to ask you guys, where do you stand with the egress window requirement?"
While not directly mentioning ADUs, the speaker discusses basement apartments and egress window requirements, which are closely related to the ADU element of the proposal.
Transit-Oriented Development
"We are against the DOD"
The speaker mentions being against 'DOD', which likely refers to Transit-Oriented Development (TOD). This indicates that the speaker is discussing this element of the proposal, even though they used an incorrect acronym.
About this analysis:
This analysis is done by AI that reasons whether or not a quote from the testimony discusses a particular element of the proposal.
All the prompts and data are open and available on Github.
You can search for testimonies that mentioned a specific element in the table on the main meeting page.
When an element is explicitly stated in the testimony (e.g. "Universal Affordability Preference" or "UAP"), the analysis is accurate.
But the connection between a quote from the testimony and an element of the proposal is sometimes implicit.
In these cases, the AI might eagerly label a testimony as discussing a proposal when the connection is tenuous, or it might omit it entirely.