Daniella Lombardo Sarkis, resident of Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, on concerns about City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal's impact on local infrastructure and community character
11:41:05
·
3 min
Daniella Lombardo Sarkis, a homeowner from Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, testifies against the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal in its current form. She argues that the one-size-fits-all approach doesn't account for local infrastructure limitations and could negatively impact the character of residential neighborhoods.
- Expresses concerns about Bay Ridge's outdated drainage and sewage infrastructure, limited public transportation, and the potential strain on public safety services
- Highlights the risk of developers exploiting the proposal, citing the example of a recently closed school site that could be redeveloped into large buildings in a residential area
- Urges the City Council to vote no on the current proposal and allow for more community input and tailored solutions
- One-size-fits-all approach is not appropriate for all neighborhoods
- Community Board 10 opposes the proposal
- Local communities and elected representatives should have input
- Concerns about antiquated drainage and sewage infrastructure
- Worries about overburdening existing transportation and parking
- Public safety concerns, especially regarding ADUs and illegal conversions
- Fear of developers taking advantage of zoning rule changes
- Potential negative impact on property values and neighborhood character
- Concerns about living next to basement apartments or inhabited sheds
- Urges City Council to vote no on the proposal in its current form
[EXPERIMENTAL]
Which elements of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity were discussed in this testimony?
- Residential Conversions
- Parking Mandates
- ADU
- Campuses
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
"utilizing empty office space and commercial days."
This quote suggests that the speaker is aware of the proposal to convert empty office and commercial spaces, which aligns with the Residential Conversions element of the City of Yes For Housing Opportunity proposal.
Parking Mandates
"This goes for our entire infrastructure, including parking and transportation, where we have one train line in and out of Bay Ridge, the R train, a local train."
While the speaker doesn't directly discuss removing parking mandates, they express concern about the existing parking and transportation infrastructure, which is related to the parking mandates element of the proposal.
ADU
"Specifically with request back to the ADUs. We already have an overburden department of building staff who cannot respond to the current complaints with illegal conversions and other dangerous living conditions, which is owning it being ignored. If we now in essence legalize these things, which are currently illegal, How can we expect the DOB and its inspectors to ensure that these ADUs will be safe?"
This quote directly addresses the ADU element of the proposal, expressing concerns about safety and enforcement issues related to legalizing ADUs.
"It makes me sick to think that I could potentially be living next door to a store in someone's basement. Or inhabited shed in my neighbor's yard."
This quote further discusses ADUs, mentioning potential basement conversions and backyard structures, which are types of ADUs proposed in the City of Yes For Housing Opportunity plan.
Campuses
"For example, my daughter attended a on Bainbridge Visitation Academy, which just permanently closed a few weeks ago. This is a 7 and a half acre site in the middle of an entirely residential neighborhood. And if this proposal would be passed in its current form, developers would be able to take advantage of the face base affordable housing portion of this proposal amongst other components and build monstrous buildings across the street and surrounded by single family homes rather than the current zoning, which is r 31."
While not directly mentioning the Campuses element, this quote discusses a large institutional property (a closed school) that could potentially be redeveloped under the new zoning rules, which is related to the Campuses element of the proposal.
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.
Follow-up discussion/remarks
Chair Garodnick clarifies proposal details and addresses concerns
11:44:22
·
44 sec
Dan Garodnick, Chair of the City Planning Commission, addresses a misconception about the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal and clarifies its scope. He emphasizes that the proposal does not allow for stores in residential basements and distinguishes it from other recent proposals.
- Garodnick specifically refutes the concern about stores in basements, stating it's not part of this proposal
- He mentions a separate economic opportunity proposal that recently passed the City Council
- The chair emphasizes that the current proposal focuses solely on housing and housing opportunity
- One-size-fits-all approach is not appropriate for all neighborhoods
- Community Board 10 opposes the proposal
- Local communities and elected representatives should have input
- Concerns about antiquated drainage and sewage infrastructure
- Worries about overburdening existing transportation and parking
- Public safety concerns, especially regarding ADUs and illegal conversions
- Fear of developers taking advantage of zoning rule changes
- Potential negative impact on property values and neighborhood character
- Concerns about living next to basement apartments or inhabited sheds
- Urges City Council to vote no on the proposal in its current form
[EXPERIMENTAL]
Which elements of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity were discussed in this testimony?
- Residential Conversions
- Parking Mandates
- ADU
- Campuses
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
"utilizing empty office space and commercial days."
This quote suggests that the speaker is aware of the proposal to convert empty office and commercial spaces, which aligns with the Residential Conversions element of the City of Yes For Housing Opportunity proposal.
Parking Mandates
"This goes for our entire infrastructure, including parking and transportation, where we have one train line in and out of Bay Ridge, the R train, a local train."
While the speaker doesn't directly discuss removing parking mandates, they express concern about the existing parking and transportation infrastructure, which is related to the parking mandates element of the proposal.
ADU
"Specifically with request back to the ADUs. We already have an overburden department of building staff who cannot respond to the current complaints with illegal conversions and other dangerous living conditions, which is owning it being ignored. If we now in essence legalize these things, which are currently illegal, How can we expect the DOB and its inspectors to ensure that these ADUs will be safe?"
This quote directly addresses the ADU element of the proposal, expressing concerns about safety and enforcement issues related to legalizing ADUs.
"It makes me sick to think that I could potentially be living next door to a store in someone's basement. Or inhabited shed in my neighbor's yard."
This quote further discusses ADUs, mentioning potential basement conversions and backyard structures, which are types of ADUs proposed in the City of Yes For Housing Opportunity plan.
Campuses
"For example, my daughter attended a on Bainbridge Visitation Academy, which just permanently closed a few weeks ago. This is a 7 and a half acre site in the middle of an entirely residential neighborhood. And if this proposal would be passed in its current form, developers would be able to take advantage of the face base affordable housing portion of this proposal amongst other components and build monstrous buildings across the street and surrounded by single family homes rather than the current zoning, which is r 31."
While not directly mentioning the Campuses element, this quote discusses a large institutional property (a closed school) that could potentially be redeveloped under the new zoning rules, which is related to the Campuses element of the proposal.
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.