Phyllis Inserillo, Co-President of Howard Beach Lindenwood Civic Association, on opposition to City of Yes for Housing Opportunity zoning amendment due to flooding risks and community concerns
3:37:51
·
3 min
Phyllis Inserillo, representing the Howard Beach Lindenwood Civic Association, voices strong opposition to the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity zoning amendment. She emphasizes that the Howard Beach community, consisting of over 28,000 residents, overwhelmingly rejects the proposal due to concerns about overdevelopment, infrastructure strain, and particularly the area's vulnerability to coastal flooding.
- Inserillo argues that Howard Beach should be removed from the plan due to significant coastal flooding risks, which pose threats to property and personal safety.
- She criticizes the citywide approach of the plan, suggesting it should be broken down and voted on piece by piece by community boards and the City Council.
- The testimony highlights community needs such as more first responders, better infrastructure, and solutions to existing flooding issues rather than increased housing density.
- Howard Beach community is overwhelmingly opposed to the City of Yes Housing Opportunity amendment
- The community faces significant coastal flooding issues, which make increased development unsafe
- Increasing FAR and adding ADUs will worsen flooding and strain infrastructure
- The plan should be voted on piece by piece by community boards and City Council, not as a citywide change
- Howard Beach says no to overcrowded classrooms, longer waits for infrastructure fixes, and housing units on top of stores
- The community needs more police officers, EMS workers, firefighters, and better laws to protect families
- Better infrastructure for sewers and utilities, and solutions to flooding issues are needed
- Homeowners are burdened with high property taxes and mortgages
- 12 out of 14 community boards in Queens have voted against this plan
[EXPERIMENTAL]
Which elements of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity were discussed in this testimony?
- Town Center Zoning
- Parking Mandates
- ADU
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.
Town Center Zoning
"We are saying no to housing units on top of stores on Crosby Boulevard."
This quote directly references the concept of housing above stores, which is a key aspect of the Town Center Zoning element of the proposal.
Parking Mandates
"They did not choose to live in a community that is overburdened with too many people, minimal parking, or overdevelopment."
While not explicitly mentioning the removal of parking mandates, this quote indicates concern about minimal parking, which is related to the proposal's aim to remove parking mandates.
ADU
"ADUs can put extra stress on existing infrastructure, especially in areas where the drainage systems may already be under pressure during heavy rains or floods."
This quote directly mentions ADUs (Accessory Dwelling Units) and discusses potential issues with their implementation in the context of the community's infrastructure and flooding concerns.
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.