The citymeetings.nyc logo showing a pigeon at a podium with a microphone.

citymeetings.nyc

Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
TESTIMONY

Council Member Christopher Marte on concerns with the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal

2:10:47

·

4 min

Report an issue

Council Member Christopher Marte expresses deep concerns about the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal, highlighting issues with transparency, community understanding, and potential negative impacts on affordable housing and neighborhood character. He argues that the proposal primarily benefits developers rather than addressing the needs of average New Yorkers.

  • Criticizes the rushed and complex nature of the proposal, which spans over 1300 pages and is difficult for community members to fully grasp
  • Argues that the plan will lead to unaffordable housing conversions, loss of public buildings to luxury condos, and diminished livability in neighborhoods
  • Calls for mandated affordability, strengthening of the Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (MIH) program, and 100% affordability on public land
  • The proposal is too large and complex for the public to fully understand in the given time frame
  • Lack of transparency and clear communication about the proposed changes
  • The plan will not create affordable housing
  • Conversion of office buildings to residential will not be affordable
  • Loss of public buildings to luxury condos
  • Micro apartments will force families to look elsewhere
  • Reduction in yard space, air, and light
  • Rents will continue to rise
  • The plan benefits those who profit from New York, not New Yorkers
  • Need for mandated affordability instead of trickle-down approach
  • Calls for strengthening the MIH program and requiring 100% affordability on public land
  • Opposes changes to apartment sizes and open space regulations

[EXPERIMENTAL]

Which elements of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity were discussed in this testimony?

  • Residential Conversions
  • Campuses
  • Small and Shared Housing

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.

Residential Conversions

"When we convert our office buildings to residential, they're not gonna be affordable."

This quote directly references the residential conversion element of the proposal, expressing concern that such conversions will not result in affordable housing.

Campuses

"When we lose beautiful public buildings to luxury condos, our communities suffer."

This quote seems to be referring to the campuses element of the proposal, which allows for the conversion of underused space in various campuses, including public buildings, into housing. The speaker is expressing concern about the potential loss of public buildings to luxury housing.

Small and Shared Housing

"When we build micro apartments, our families will have to look elsewhere."

This quote directly refers to micro apartments, which are a part of the small and shared housing element of the proposal. The speaker is expressing concern about the impact of such housing on families.

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.

↗ Why are there transcription and diarization errors?
Christopher Marte
2:10:47
Hey, Dan.
2:10:48
Can you hear me?
Dan Garodnick
2:10:49
I can.
2:10:49
Hello, council member.
Christopher Marte
2:10:51
Hey.
2:10:52
Good to see you, and good afternoon, everyone, and thank you commissioners for allowing me to testify today.
2:10:58
And thank you to all the members of the public who have come out to testify today to make their voices heard through a process that can sometimes feel rushed, performative, or undemocratic.
2:11:09
Thank you for my community boards in Lord Manhattan, who have not chilled away from this massive undertaking, and to the rest who have dedicated hundreds of hours of their time as volunteers to present thoughtful comments and concerns in their resolutions.
2:11:24
We've seen how big these types of evidence are.
2:11:26
And this is by far the largest.
2:11:29
This proposal would change the fabric of our neighborhoods, of our homes, and our open spaces.
2:11:34
Of our light and air and for generations to come.
2:11:38
This hearing and a handful of other public opportunities to wait it undoubtedly undermines the importance and the weight of community driven planning.
2:11:47
Yet New Yorkers are continuing to pay attention and suffice for their neighborhoods.
2:11:52
I'm doing the same.
2:11:53
I'm a New Yorker, fighting for my home, fighting for my neighbors, and for my city.
2:11:57
It has taken my team weeks to fully understand the breadth of the changes proposed in these 1300 plus pages.
2:12:05
This is partly because many of the exact changes did not make it into the city slides, into the community board presentations, or into the proposal checklist handed out I promised as covered everything.
2:12:17
Sony for economic opportunity was similar, complex, and multifaceted but the materials were more or less completely in line with the summaries of the changes that were being proposed.
2:12:29
This time, we had to dig even deeper to figure out what this plan actually was and how it was actually changing.
2:12:37
We all know that Euler is an inadequate process in many ways, but it's the responsibility of the city to be transparent and forthcoming with its proposal.
2:12:45
Many community board members, let alone members of the public, not all versed in the nuance of zoning, still do not fully grasp some aspects of this text amendment.
2:12:56
And while I'm grateful for John and the team at DCP for having attend so many community meetings, This lack of understanding is perhaps my deepest concern.
2:13:06
Maybe no matter how many 100 of meeting DCP is presented at, This text amendment will be too big, too technical, too far reaching for the time and the capacity that we have.
2:13:18
Whether this was part of the strategy for passing it or not, it's unacceptable and should serve as a lesson for future administrations and city servants that changes of this magnitude cannot be passed in one plan.
2:13:32
3 applications in little little over 1 year.
2:13:36
I believe that's irresponsible, disingenuous, and a misappropriation of the Mueller process.
2:13:43
As for my recommendation, They follow a simple rubric.
2:13:47
Who is it for?
2:13:48
And what are we getting in return?
2:13:50
When we convert our office buildings to residential, they're not gonna be affordable.
2:13:55
When we lose beautiful public buildings to luxury condos, our communities suffer.
2:14:00
When we film night show with new development, the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers on nitrile wait list just have to keep on waiting.
2:14:08
When we build micro apartments, our families will have to look elsewhere.
2:14:13
Our yards will shrink, our air and light will be taken away, and our rents will continue to rise.
2:14:19
This is not a plan for New Yorkers.
2:14:21
This is a plan for people who profit off New York.
2:14:24
We cannot wait for affordability to trickle down.
2:14:27
We need it now, and we need to mandate it.
2:14:31
We must deepen and strengthen the failed NIH program required a 100% affordability on public plan.
2:14:38
And and brain end the changes to apartment sizes, open space, and other regulations that will only further diminish the livability of the city.
2:14:49
My specific modifications are being shared with DCP and the commission, and I look forward to these changes being nice.
2:14:58
Thank you so much.

Follow-up discussion/remarks

QUESTION

Chair Garodnick questions Council Member Marte on affordable housing proposals

2:14:59

·

5 min

Chair Dan Garodnick engages Council Member Christopher Marte in a discussion about affordable housing initiatives in Lower Manhattan. Garodnick inquires about Marte's stance on specific aspects of the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal, particularly the Universal Affordability Preference and deepening of affordability options.

  • Marte emphasizes the need for mandated affordability in new developments, citing past failures of voluntary programs
  • Garodnick highlights the new state-authorized tax incentive for office-to-residential conversions that includes mandatory affordability requirements
  • The exchange reveals differing perspectives on the effectiveness of incentives versus mandates for creating affordable housing
  • The proposal is too large and complex for the public to fully understand in the given time frame
  • Lack of transparency and clear communication about the proposed changes
  • The plan will not create affordable housing
  • Conversion of office buildings to residential will not be affordable
  • Loss of public buildings to luxury condos
  • Micro apartments will force families to look elsewhere
  • Reduction in yard space, air, and light
  • Rents will continue to rise
  • The plan benefits those who profit from New York, not New Yorkers
  • Need for mandated affordability instead of trickle-down approach
  • Calls for strengthening the MIH program and requiring 100% affordability on public land
  • Opposes changes to apartment sizes and open space regulations

[EXPERIMENTAL]

Which elements of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity were discussed in this testimony?

  • Residential Conversions
  • Campuses
  • Small and Shared Housing

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.

Residential Conversions

"When we convert our office buildings to residential, they're not gonna be affordable."

This quote directly references the residential conversion element of the proposal, expressing concern that such conversions will not result in affordable housing.

Campuses

"When we lose beautiful public buildings to luxury condos, our communities suffer."

This quote seems to be referring to the campuses element of the proposal, which allows for the conversion of underused space in various campuses, including public buildings, into housing. The speaker is expressing concern about the potential loss of public buildings to luxury housing.

Small and Shared Housing

"When we build micro apartments, our families will have to look elsewhere."

This quote directly refers to micro apartments, which are a part of the small and shared housing element of the proposal. The speaker is expressing concern about the impact of such housing on families.

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.

↗ Why are there transcription and diarization errors?
Dan Garodnick
2:14:59
Thank you very much, council member.
2:15:01
We appreciate your being here with us and your comments.
2:15:04
I just have one for you.
2:15:09
You know, as well as we do that there were 0 affordable units produced in your district in 2023.
2:15:16
1 of the component parts of this proposal of the so affordability preference would create an incentive for affordable and only for affordable housing.
2:15:27
So one question that I have is, do you support that part of this proposal in particular?
2:15:34
And how else would you propose to achieve the goals that you're that you're talking about here.
Christopher Marte
2:15:39
Let me talk about that statistic that you just mentioned.
2:15:43
Yeah.
2:15:43
2023, it was a really rough year.
2:15:46
Downtown when he came to affordability because that was years into making.
2:15:51
You worked downtown.
2:15:53
Many of the people on this call live or work downtown.
2:15:55
We see construction an optimal dormant head.
2:15:58
But what we don't see is affordability because it's not mandated.
2:16:02
So the past 2 years, my district had the largest amount of new units being created, mostly from commercial to residential uses.
2:16:11
But because there wasn't a mandate to push affordable housing into those buildings, there were none.
2:16:18
And so the statistic that you mentioned is actually symbolic of what we need to fix.
2:16:24
And I think that's why we need to increase and deepen affordability and mandate it to any new development throughout the city.
2:16:33
Okay.
2:16:34
And, also, furthermore, we know that development takes 2 or 3 years and many of the decisions that were made for those new developments were in previous administration.
2:16:44
However, if you look at this year, We have Grand Street Guild building, a 300 plus 100 percent affordable building in my district, where they're gonna have the lowest AMI.
2:16:56
The 30% are going to people who are currently homeless.
2:17:00
Also, we've seen the new development of CPC and Gautham development, which also added another a 100% development building.
2:17:08
So I feel like Under my administration and the work we have advocated for years, we're finally able to see affordable housing being created in Lower Manhattan.
Dan Garodnick
2:17:19
Thank you for that.
2:17:21
Well, I wasn't maybe I missed the point about the universal affordability preference and the incentive for affordable only.
2:17:29
Is that a is that a piece of this proposal that you support?
Christopher Marte
2:17:33
Well, I believe if if it's voluntary, they won't do it downtown, and they probably won't do it in the rest of the city.
2:17:40
Right?
2:17:41
When you look at DIAH, I think it's great that we're doing away with it because it really hasn't worked.
2:17:46
And so instead of falling into maybe a a shinier trap, let's just mandate affordability.
2:17:54
Because, typically, in a regular process, we give a little, but we get something in return.
2:17:59
I feel like right now, under city of yes housing opportunity, We're giving them everything, and we're barely getting crumbs.
2:18:06
And so I think what we should be asking for and what we should get from these developers is deep affordability and mandate affordability.
Dan Garodnick
2:18:15
Yep.
2:18:16
For one of the 1 of thank you, Cosmo.
2:18:19
I'm sorry.
2:18:19
I didn't mean to interrupt you.
2:18:21
One of the component parts of the proposal deepens NIH like you suggested here by allowing the deep affordability option the 40% AMI to be mapped on its own.
2:18:34
Is that something that you support?
Christopher Marte
2:18:37
Yeah.
2:18:37
Of course.
2:18:38
I think we but I think I think I believe that we should have better options, of course.
2:18:44
Like, when we look at the homeless crisis in New York City, is people who can't even afford some of the affordable units that are going online now.
2:18:53
And so we should definitely deepen the affordability of that, but also increase how much we're getting in return.
2:19:01
Okay.
Dan Garodnick
2:19:01
And then lastly, I just will observe, and I and this is important for going forward and obviously would not change any of the prior conversions from office residential that you noted.
2:19:14
But There is now an in a state authorized tax incentive for the conversion of office residential, which does include that affordability component that you and I both want to see an office to residential conversion.
2:19:27
So I just note that that obviously does not contradict your points about what has happened in in prior iterations, but I just will will note that.
2:19:35
And I think that's so
Christopher Marte
2:19:36
and I think that's why we need to mandate it.
2:19:38
If we're already giving them a tax incentive to do this, let's just force them to do it.
Dan Garodnick
2:19:43
Well, if they take the tax incentive, then they are required to do it.
2:19:47
Just to be clear, it becomes mandatory if you take tax incentive.
2:19:50
So it's not a you get the tax incentive and then maybe you do it, maybe you don't.
2:19:54
If you take the tax incentive, it is a mandatory.
Sanford Miller
2:19:57
Yeah.
Dan Garodnick
2:19:58
Okay.
2:19:59
Thank you, counsel, member.
2:20:00
We appreciate it.
2:20:01
Good to see you.

Subscribe to the citymeetings.nyc newsletter

Highlights of meeting moments and curious claims every 1-2 weeks.

Read previous issues

Citymeetings.nyc pigeon logo

Is citymeetings.nyc useful to you?

I'm thrilled!

Please help me out by answering just one question.

What do you do?

Thank you!

Want to stay up to date? Sign up for the newsletter.