Nick Selker, a resident of the Upper West Side and a renter, expresses support for the City of Yes initiative to address New York City's housing crisis. He argues that the current urban planning approach is failing to meet housing needs, citing high rents, low vacancy rates, and rising homelessness.

• Selker emphasizes that the core tenets of the City of Yes legislative reform provide much-needed affordable housing options.
• He references research showing that increasing housing supply, even market-rate housing, can lower rents in surrounding areas.
• Selker supports specific policies within the initiative, including Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), Single Room Occupancy (SROs), Universal Affordability Preference (UAP), and transit-oriented development.

• The city has a housing crisis with high rents and low vacancy rates
• Current urban planning approach is not meeting housing needs
• City of Yes provides a variety of affordable housing options
• Increased housing supply affects and can lower rental prices
• ADUs, SROs, UAP, and transit-oriented development are beneficial policies
• Cities that encourage housing see rents fall, while restrictive zoning leads to rent increases
• Current housing shortage hurts renters
• The city needs more shelters for current and future residents

[EXPERIMENTAL]

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

• UAP
• ADU
• Transit-Oriented Development
• 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.

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.