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

citymeetings.nyc

Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
TESTIMONY

Howard Slatkin, Executive Director of Citizen Housing and Planning Council, on zoning reform to address housing scarcity in NYC

3:52:48

·

3 min

Report an issue

Howard Slatkin testifies in support of proposed zoning text amendments aimed at addressing New York City's persistent housing shortage. He argues that current zoning regulations, which he calls 'zoning for scarcity', have led to unintended consequences that disproportionately affect those with the least resources.

  • Slatkin highlights how current regulations create absurd situations, such as neighborhoods losing housing units despite demand and the illegality of certain living arrangements.
  • He emphasizes that the proposed changes will help reverse 'zoning for scarcity' to better align with New Yorkers' housing needs.
  • Slatkin suggests additional modifications to the proposal, including a permanent off-site option for the Universal Affordability Preference (UAP) program and vesting certain existing development rights.
  • The proposed zoning text amendments are an important step forward for NYC zoning
  • Current zoning regulations have created a persistent housing shortage
  • Zoning for scarcity creates unintended consequences that hurt everyone, especially those with the least
  • Current regulations often produce absurd results, such as losing housing units in some neighborhoods
  • The proposal will help reverse zoning for scarcity and better align with housing needs of New Yorkers
  • Zoning changes must be accompanied by sustained public investment and other regulatory changes
  • Suggests modifications to the proposal, including a permanent off-site option for UAP program and vesting certain existing development rights

[EXPERIMENTAL]

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

  • UAP
  • Parking Mandates
  • ADU
  • 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.

UAP

"This includes providing a permanent off-site option everywhere that the UAP program applies."

The speaker directly mentions the UAP program and suggests a modification to it, indicating that they are discussing this element of the proposal.

Parking Mandates

"It might trigger impossible parking requirements or require rezoning of the entire block."

While not explicitly mentioning removing parking mandates, the speaker refers to 'impossible parking requirements' as a barrier to housing flexibility, which aligns with the proposal's aim to remove parking mandates.

ADU

"We have a true story of Missus Vallez in her nineties who purchased a 2 family house in the Bronx or at least that's what she thought it was when she bought it. With a downstairs unit that she rents to a man who helps her with their chores and groceries pays her $800 a month in rent that supplements her Social Security income. But this is illegal because that unit is not illegal unit and it cannot be legalized today."

This story illustrates the current limitations on accessory dwelling units, which the City of Yes proposal aims to address by allowing homeowners to create legal ADUs.

Small and Shared Housing

"Single adults who can't find small apartments and together to occupy housing that could otherwise house families."

This quote discusses the issue of single adults not being able to find small apartments, which is directly related to the small and shared housing element of the proposal.

"A family of 4 can live together in a house, but if the parents were to separate and still want to live together for the to be close to the children, With the same four people living in separate units, this is often not permitted."

This example illustrates the current limitations on creating smaller, separate living spaces within existing housing, which the small and shared housing element of the proposal aims to address.

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?
Howard Slatkin
3:52:48
Hi.
3:52:49
Good to see you.
3:52:50
Good afternoon.
3:52:51
Chegg Rodnick, commissioners.
3:52:52
Thank you for having me at the hottest cooling center in New York City.
3:52:58
I'm the executive director of citizen housing and planning council, and I'm testifying in support of the proposed zoning tax amendments, which are an important and sorely needed step forward for zoning in New York City.
3:53:09
63 years ago, the 1961 zoning resolution launched an era of what while the call zoning for scarcity by cutting the city's housing capacity by an estimated 80%.
3:53:19
Over decades, with the help of some downzoning along the way, this has landed us the persistent housing shortage.
3:53:25
Zoning for scarcity creates a hunger games of unintended consequences that hurts everyone, but most of all, those who have the least.
3:53:33
Single adults who can't find small apartments and together to occupy housing that could otherwise house families.
3:53:39
As affluent residents stave off new housing in their neighborhoods of their children, flowed in nearby neighborhoods along with other housing seekers, kindling, gentrification, and displacement.
3:53:49
Under zoning for scarcity, we debate whether proposed new housing is the right kind of housing.
3:53:54
We can certainly make thoughtful choices about how subsidies and programs can make housing better meets specific needs, but the only wrong kind of housing for people is no housing at all.
3:54:05
Today's regulations create some absurd results.
3:54:07
We have neighborhoods that are losing housing units overall, not because more people don't want to live there, but because we won't let them.
3:54:15
You can often combine 2 units into a single unit can't do the opposite.
3:54:19
A family of 4 can live together in a house, but if the parents were to separate and still want to live together for the to be close to the children, With the same four people living in separate units, this is often not permitted.
3:54:31
It might trigger impossible parking requirements or require rezoning of the entire block.
3:54:36
We have a true story of Missus Vallez in her nineties who purchased a 2 family house in the Bronx or at
3:54:41
least that's what she thought it
3:54:42
was when she bought it.
3:54:44
With a downstairs unit that she rents to a man who helps her with their chores and groceries pays her $800 a month in rent that supplements her Social Security income.
3:54:53
But this is illegal because that unit is not illegal unit and it cannot be legalized today.
3:54:59
The simple summary of this long complex proposal is that it will help reverse zoning for scarcity so that regulations better align with the housing needs of New Yorkers.
3:55:08
I won't dwell on all the details of how it does that.
3:55:12
Better zoning must be accompanied by sustained public investment, including all the additional capital for affordable housing provided in this year's final budget as well as other regulatory changes that make it easier to do the right thing.
3:55:25
Without these zoning changes, our housing crisis will only get worth worse.
3:55:29
We're submitting written testimony that details a number of important modifications that the commission should make, we believe, to the proposal to enable it to better address our housing needs.
3:55:39
This includes providing
3:55:40
a permanent
3:55:41
off-site option everywhere that the UAP program applies.
3:55:46
Vesting certain existing development rights and making a number of other changes.
3:55:52
But at this point, happy to answer any questions.

Follow-up discussion/remarks

QUESTION

Chair Garodnick asks about making universal affordability preference more stringent or mandatory

3:55:55

·

113 sec

Chair Dan Garodnick inquires about the impact of making the universal affordability preference (UAP) more stringent or mandatory. Howard Slatkin explains the relationship between zoning, housing production, and affordability.

  • Slatkin emphasizes that zoning allows housing to be built, but money and funding make it affordable
  • He cautions that more restrictive zoning leads to less housing production
  • Slatkin describes UAP as a 'box to put your program in,' incentivizing participation in affordable housing programs
  • The proposed zoning text amendments are an important step forward for NYC zoning
  • Current zoning regulations have created a persistent housing shortage
  • Zoning for scarcity creates unintended consequences that hurt everyone, especially those with the least
  • Current regulations often produce absurd results, such as losing housing units in some neighborhoods
  • The proposal will help reverse zoning for scarcity and better align with housing needs of New Yorkers
  • Zoning changes must be accompanied by sustained public investment and other regulatory changes
  • Suggests modifications to the proposal, including a permanent off-site option for UAP program and vesting certain existing development rights

[EXPERIMENTAL]

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

  • UAP
  • Parking Mandates
  • ADU
  • 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.

UAP

"This includes providing a permanent off-site option everywhere that the UAP program applies."

The speaker directly mentions the UAP program and suggests a modification to it, indicating that they are discussing this element of the proposal.

Parking Mandates

"It might trigger impossible parking requirements or require rezoning of the entire block."

While not explicitly mentioning removing parking mandates, the speaker refers to 'impossible parking requirements' as a barrier to housing flexibility, which aligns with the proposal's aim to remove parking mandates.

ADU

"We have a true story of Missus Vallez in her nineties who purchased a 2 family house in the Bronx or at least that's what she thought it was when she bought it. With a downstairs unit that she rents to a man who helps her with their chores and groceries pays her $800 a month in rent that supplements her Social Security income. But this is illegal because that unit is not illegal unit and it cannot be legalized today."

This story illustrates the current limitations on accessory dwelling units, which the City of Yes proposal aims to address by allowing homeowners to create legal ADUs.

Small and Shared Housing

"Single adults who can't find small apartments and together to occupy housing that could otherwise house families."

This quote discusses the issue of single adults not being able to find small apartments, which is directly related to the small and shared housing element of the proposal.

"A family of 4 can live together in a house, but if the parents were to separate and still want to live together for the to be close to the children, With the same four people living in separate units, this is often not permitted."

This example illustrates the current limitations on creating smaller, separate living spaces within existing housing, which the small and shared housing element of the proposal aims to address.

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
3:55:55
I had just one for you and thank you for that.
3:55:59
We have heard throughout the course of the day today.
3:56:03
Some calls for the universal affordability preference to be either more stringent or even mandatory.
3:56:10
And I understand why that's an appealing statement.
3:56:14
But can you break that down for us as to what that would mean and what the practical impact would be or if it's even possible?
Michael Sutherland
3:56:23
Sure.
3:56:25
Well, I think you have to understand the role that zoning plays in the production of housing zoning either allows housing to get built or it doesn't.
3:56:34
Zoning doesn't actually make the housing gets built money is what makes the housing built.
3:56:39
And money is what funding is what makes housing affordable.
3:56:43
Right?
3:56:43
We have myriad tax incentive and other subsidy programs that are operated by the city and state.
3:56:49
Order to fund affordable housing.
3:56:51
The more restrictive we make the zoning, the more we add restrictions on the circumstances under which you're allowed to build housing, the less housing we will get.
3:57:00
And that's what we've gotten.
3:57:02
If we make it more difficult to build housing, if we make it costs more or require more sub $50 in order to build that housing, we will get less housing or the affordable housing resources we have won't go as far because we have to pour more into every unit in order to get that to happen.
3:57:17
So the idea is that I think it's best to understand the UAP program, not as an affordable housing program.
3:57:24
But I like to call it a box to put your program in.
3:57:27
If you're using UAP or participating in the new 485x program, or one of HPD's 100 percent affordable housing programs or one of the state's programs.
3:57:37
And as a result, congratulations, you get to build more than somebody who's not participating in one of those programs.
3:57:42
That is how we can maximize the amount of investment we get in housing and specifically in the forecasting.
QUESTION

Commissioner Benjamin inquires about basement apartment legalization and affordability

3:57:52

·

7 min

Commissioner Gail Benjamin questions Howard Slatkin about the feasibility and implications of legalizing basement apartments under the proposed zoning changes. Slatkin explains that legalization costs vary widely and advocates for code modifications to focus on safety rather than strict compliance with new building standards.

  • Slatkin emphasizes that zoning changes alone are beneficial but can be significantly improved with accompanying code changes
  • The discussion touches on the need for financial support for homeowners to legalize units and the importance of making the process accessible to ordinary people
  • Commissioner Benjamin probes whether support for the proposal is contingent on future code changes from other agencies, to which Slatkin affirms the zoning changes' standalone benefits while emphasizing the desire for complementary code modifications
  • The proposed zoning text amendments are an important step forward for NYC zoning
  • Current zoning regulations have created a persistent housing shortage
  • Zoning for scarcity creates unintended consequences that hurt everyone, especially those with the least
  • Current regulations often produce absurd results, such as losing housing units in some neighborhoods
  • The proposal will help reverse zoning for scarcity and better align with housing needs of New Yorkers
  • Zoning changes must be accompanied by sustained public investment and other regulatory changes
  • Suggests modifications to the proposal, including a permanent off-site option for UAP program and vesting certain existing development rights

[EXPERIMENTAL]

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

  • UAP
  • Parking Mandates
  • ADU
  • 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.

UAP

"This includes providing a permanent off-site option everywhere that the UAP program applies."

The speaker directly mentions the UAP program and suggests a modification to it, indicating that they are discussing this element of the proposal.

Parking Mandates

"It might trigger impossible parking requirements or require rezoning of the entire block."

While not explicitly mentioning removing parking mandates, the speaker refers to 'impossible parking requirements' as a barrier to housing flexibility, which aligns with the proposal's aim to remove parking mandates.

ADU

"We have a true story of Missus Vallez in her nineties who purchased a 2 family house in the Bronx or at least that's what she thought it was when she bought it. With a downstairs unit that she rents to a man who helps her with their chores and groceries pays her $800 a month in rent that supplements her Social Security income. But this is illegal because that unit is not illegal unit and it cannot be legalized today."

This story illustrates the current limitations on accessory dwelling units, which the City of Yes proposal aims to address by allowing homeowners to create legal ADUs.

Small and Shared Housing

"Single adults who can't find small apartments and together to occupy housing that could otherwise house families."

This quote discusses the issue of single adults not being able to find small apartments, which is directly related to the small and shared housing element of the proposal.

"A family of 4 can live together in a house, but if the parents were to separate and still want to live together for the to be close to the children, With the same four people living in separate units, this is often not permitted."

This example illustrates the current limitations on creating smaller, separate living spaces within existing housing, which the small and shared housing element of the proposal aims to address.

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?
Gail Benjamin
3:57:52
Hi.
3:57:52
Good to see
UNKNOWN
3:57:53
you again too.
3:57:53
Good to see
Joseph Douek
3:57:53
you again too.
Gail Benjamin
3:57:54
In different places that we have in our app.
3:57:57
Two questions for you.
3:57:59
The first is Mrs.
3:58:00
Vallez.
3:58:00
Yes.
3:58:01
If Missus Valaz, under this proposal, wanted to try and legalize that apartment.
3:58:06
I've seen estimates as high as 80 to a $100,000 to accomplish that if it's a basement apartment.
3:58:14
Right.
Robert Poole
3:58:15
Well
Michael Sutherland
3:58:15
So so And there's how is that gonna work?
Joseph Douek
3:58:17
Yeah.
3:58:18
Sure.
3:58:18
Sorry.
Gail Benjamin
3:58:19
And there's no requirement that the apartments stay affordable.
3:58:22
So if she wanted to remove that tenant once she spent her money, and replace it with a tenant who would play $4000, that would be fine under this proposal.
Michael Sutherland
3:58:33
I wouldn't agree with that characterization, but let me give you my
Eustacia Smith
3:58:36
Okay.
Michael Sutherland
3:58:39
The first of all, the amount of the cost associated with legalizing a basement apartment varies widely.
3:58:46
Actually, we were the CHPC.
3:58:50
We were the evaluator on the Eastern York basement apartment legalization pilot program.
3:58:56
And what we found is that there is a wide range of costs.
3:59:01
Sometimes it's relatively inexpensive.
3:59:03
Actually, and I don't need to highlight anyone in particular, but the apartment that I referenced.
3:59:07
And my testimony is actually looks like a legal apartment.
3:59:11
You wouldn't know it unless you've measured curve height and looked at the front of the building.
3:59:15
And that's why it is not allowed under current zoning.
3:59:22
That built that unit is probably pretty easy to legalize because it meets all applicable codes and standards.
3:59:27
Right?
3:59:27
It was built in a way that resembles a legal unit.
3:59:32
There are circumstances that we found where because your ceiling height stone comply with code requirements, you might have to in order to get, like, 3 or 6 inches more clearance, you might have to dig out your seller.
3:59:45
And go down an extra 3 to 6 inches, which can cost 100 of 1000 of dollars.
3:59:49
And that's we saw a very bimodal distribution of costs.
3:59:53
And that's why at CHPC we've advocated for as part of a legalization program modifications to codes to rely on really strictly those code provisions that are safety oriented and need to be met and to relax other provisions so that they're more flexible to address the shape and size of existing buildings.
4:00:14
So if you don't that exist that additional 3 inches ceiling height is often not a safety issue at all.
4:00:21
And if it's not a safety issue, why would we ask someone to spend a $150,000 to do that work?
4:00:26
So there are circumstances where we think we should make it cheaper and easier to make the units safe.
4:00:32
We think that you should only legalize them if they are safe.
4:00:35
And that our standards really should focus on safety and not compliance with standards that were written with new buildings in mind.
4:00:44
I hope that did I get to every part of your question?
4:00:46
Because I was really focused on the first portion.
Gail Benjamin
4:00:48
Yes.
4:00:49
Okay.
4:00:50
I'm just concerned that it's is this a real promise or possibility for most homes?
Michael Sutherland
4:01:01
Yeah.
4:01:01
I think that's an excellent question.
4:01:06
Right?
4:01:06
I think part of the problem is that we already have an estimated tens of 1000 of units that people are living in.
4:01:13
Right?
4:01:14
And if we were if they were to stop living in them, we would have not a 100,000 people in shelter, but a 120, 130, some other larger worse number and that's something that we really desperately need to avoid.
4:01:26
So how do we maintain housing for for people in those units, some number of those units are going to be less costly and easier to upgrade and those will can happen on their own.
4:01:38
There's some other category of units and homeowners who don't have access to capital can take out a loan in order to do this work.
4:01:45
Where there's going to be a need for support.
4:01:46
And when the city, when HPD, put out its plus 1 ADU RFP, they got an extraordinary response to people who said I would like to do that if you'll help me pay for it.
4:01:57
And so there's definitely gonna be a need for resources.
Gail Benjamin
4:01:59
When they did run that, informational gathering.
4:02:03
They didn't get into very many people there.
Michael Sutherland
4:02:06
Is that the meeting?
4:02:07
Yeah.
4:02:08
Okay.
4:02:09
Well, they did get a large number of application And so I think there's a lot of interest in the ability to do this.
4:02:15
It's hard because homeowners are ordinary people.
4:02:19
And people who have these apartments aren't experts at how to go to the buildings department and work out permit problems, which is one of the reasons why we think it's extremely important.
4:02:28
To simplify and streamline safety requirements in a legalization program, so ordinary people can do it.
4:02:35
Because this isn't supposed to be something that you can only do if you're an experienced developer.
4:02:39
Right?
4:02:39
This is supposed to be something that's within reach of ordinary homeowners.
Gail Benjamin
4:02:42
And you think the zoning proposals by itself do that?
4:02:46
Or are you also looking to the fact that somewhere out there, there will be other agencies DP, DOB, the fire department, BSA, maybe.
4:02:58
That will come up with these regulations some point in the future?
Michael Sutherland
4:03:02
I would say, well, we've been very clear because we've been proposing this for many years at CHPC.
4:03:06
And before I arrived at CHPC, that it's not just zoning, but it's zoning and its code changes in order to streamline the process and make this more accessible.
4:03:15
Code, the zoning is important.
4:03:16
Without the zoning, you can do this, and we have an intractable problem.
4:03:19
We learned that through the East New York basement pilot program that the screening process filtered out all these buildings because they couldn't add parking space.
4:03:28
And that was an unreasonable thing to ask a building to do in order to legalize an existing unit.
4:03:34
It doesn't work.
4:03:35
So let's create a workable process.
4:03:37
Some of that is the zoning changes.
4:03:39
Some of that is code changes that give you relief from building code.
4:03:45
The state legislature recently granted limited authority to provide relief from the multiple dwelling law when you're going from 2 units to 3 units, so you don't have to do silly things like provide a power patch and rooftop access.
4:03:55
If you're a tenement building, you're really a pitched roof house let's let you make that a 3 unit pitched roof house.
4:04:02
So it's really about providing code changes that make those changes workable at lesser cost for more people.
4:04:11
But I think that we think that's a really important addition to the zoning proposal.
Gail Benjamin
4:04:16
And without it, you you're still supportive, though.
4:04:18
Was it never if the code changes never happen, you're still supportive?
Michael Sutherland
4:04:21
I don't think we would want to be ask that question.
4:04:24
The Sophie's choice that you are presenting me is not one that
Joel Siegel
4:04:27
we are offering that.
Max Davidson
4:04:28
That's We think it's
Michael Sutherland
4:04:28
the zoning stands.
4:04:29
The zoning stands.
4:04:31
On its own as a beneficial thing, it can be dramatically improved with code changes.
4:04:36
We are not satisfied with the 1, but we would not be satisfied with that design change.
Gail Benjamin
4:04:40
Okay.
4:04:40
And the reason I ask is now to be combative, but really because that's the position we have that this is what we do without knowing what's going to happen with the building's department or changes later on or the city council or any of those things.
4:04:56
So we're looking at purely just the zoness and if there's no other support and whether people are still supportive.
Michael Sutherland
4:05:05
I would just say unequivocally, this stands on its own as beneficial and we can improve on OIBDA code changes.
Gail Benjamin
4:05:11
Okay.
4:05:12
Thank you.
QUESTION

Commissioner Douek inquires about off-site options for Universal Affordability Preference

4:05:14

·

3 min

Commissioner Joseph Douek asks Howard Slatkin about the off-site option for the Universal Affordability Preference (UAP) program and its potential benefits. Michael Sutherland, a policy analyst, responds by explaining the complexities of implementing UAP in different housing scenarios.

  • Sutherland discusses the challenges of applying UAP to homeownership buildings and suggests off-site options as a solution
  • He explains how off-site options could help fund affordable housing developments in high-cost neighborhoods
  • The conversation touches on the difficulties of mixing rental and condo units on the same site and the need for more flexible options in the UAP program
  • The proposed zoning text amendments are an important step forward for NYC zoning
  • Current zoning regulations have created a persistent housing shortage
  • Zoning for scarcity creates unintended consequences that hurt everyone, especially those with the least
  • Current regulations often produce absurd results, such as losing housing units in some neighborhoods
  • The proposal will help reverse zoning for scarcity and better align with housing needs of New Yorkers
  • Zoning changes must be accompanied by sustained public investment and other regulatory changes
  • Suggests modifications to the proposal, including a permanent off-site option for UAP program and vesting certain existing development rights

[EXPERIMENTAL]

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

  • UAP
  • Parking Mandates
  • ADU
  • 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.

UAP

"This includes providing a permanent off-site option everywhere that the UAP program applies."

The speaker directly mentions the UAP program and suggests a modification to it, indicating that they are discussing this element of the proposal.

Parking Mandates

"It might trigger impossible parking requirements or require rezoning of the entire block."

While not explicitly mentioning removing parking mandates, the speaker refers to 'impossible parking requirements' as a barrier to housing flexibility, which aligns with the proposal's aim to remove parking mandates.

ADU

"We have a true story of Missus Vallez in her nineties who purchased a 2 family house in the Bronx or at least that's what she thought it was when she bought it. With a downstairs unit that she rents to a man who helps her with their chores and groceries pays her $800 a month in rent that supplements her Social Security income. But this is illegal because that unit is not illegal unit and it cannot be legalized today."

This story illustrates the current limitations on accessory dwelling units, which the City of Yes proposal aims to address by allowing homeowners to create legal ADUs.

Small and Shared Housing

"Single adults who can't find small apartments and together to occupy housing that could otherwise house families."

This quote discusses the issue of single adults not being able to find small apartments, which is directly related to the small and shared housing element of the proposal.

"A family of 4 can live together in a house, but if the parents were to separate and still want to live together for the to be close to the children, With the same four people living in separate units, this is often not permitted."

This example illustrates the current limitations on creating smaller, separate living spaces within existing housing, which the small and shared housing element of the proposal aims to address.

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
4:05:14
Commissioner Dweck?
Joseph Douek
4:05:15
Howard, great to see you.
4:05:17
You mentioned an off-site option for the UAP.
4:05:21
If you could briefly speak to us about that and what would be the benefit of that end?
4:05:25
Would it align with the new 485x that you referred to?
Michael Sutherland
4:05:30
Right.
4:05:31
Thanks for that question.
4:05:33
This is this
Joel Siegel
4:05:34
is this this gets into
Michael Sutherland
4:05:35
a lot of the complexities.
4:05:37
And back to this this issue that I mentioned about looking at UAP as a box to put your program in, If you are building rental housing in an area where you, you know, in a district that has UAP 485x is going to be your best tool available to if you're not building it with subsidy, if you're building it privately financed housing, the tax exemption is your best way to provide the affordable units and comply with.
4:06:05
But there are a lot of buildings that for which that won't work financially or there are homeownership buildings.
4:06:14
And if you're building those buildings, do you have no avenue to contribute to affordable housing and get any sort of zoning benefit for it?
4:06:24
The current zoning has, of course, inclusionary housing program has an off-site option in it, which has been used over the years by condominium developers.
4:06:33
To basically fund an off-site affordable housing development in exchange for getting the additional flooring.
4:06:41
And because the new program is not is a 1 to 1
Robert Poole
4:06:49
I'd I'd
Joseph Douek
4:06:49
I'd I'd I'd call it
Michael Sutherland
4:06:50
a bonus.
4:06:51
It's really a replacement floor area, right.
4:06:54
The UAP program, obviously, one square foot of market rate floor area for every square foot of I should say it offers you one square foot
Joseph Douek
4:07:02
of floor area for every foot
Michael Sutherland
4:07:03
of affordable housing you provide.
4:07:04
So it really just offers you floor area for the affordable housing.
4:07:07
If you're a building, a homeownership building, that is enough for you to provide land.
4:07:15
To a developer of affordable housing somewhere else in the neighborhood.
4:07:17
And why that's really important is because the biggest challenge to building subsidized housing in high cost areas is lack of access to the land.
4:07:25
The land prices are too high.
4:07:27
So the value of the incentive in UAP neutralizes that factor because in a high cost neighborhood, the value of that incentive is greater and can pay for the land for an affordable development.
4:07:39
And what that means is that less public subsidy has to go into building affordable housing in that neighborhood.
4:07:45
And that's the idea behind our proposal.
4:07:47
There are also types of affordable housing like supportive housing that don't lend themselves to mixed income formats.
4:07:53
So that are really important to support as well.
Joseph Douek
4:07:57
To the bottom of it.
4:07:57
So in homeownership cases, you believe that it's the best option would be to have it off-site.
Michael Sutherland
4:08:06
It may be possible to mix rental and condo on the site.
4:08:10
It can be very challenge out to do that.
4:08:13
It has been done in some limited instances.
4:08:15
I don't think it's a generalizable solution.
4:08:17
I think more options are necessary.
4:08:19
And I think that it's a because this is not a bonus program.
4:08:24
I think the off-site option shouldn't be seen in the way that sometimes we've looked at off-site options in the past as a lesser way of complying with a requirement.
4:08:34
This is the easier way you don't want to do the full it's not going to work that way in a UAP offset option because it's a box to put your program in.
4:08:43
There is no program.
4:08:45
For this kind of housing.
4:08:46
So we need to support the programs that can build affordable housing elsewhere in that
4:08:49
neighborhood.
Joseph Douek
4:08:50
Thank 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.