citymeetings.nyc

Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.

TESTIMONY

Roberta Gelb, resident of Chelsea, Manhattan, on City of Yes and its impact on affordable housing and community input

9:43:38

·

3 min

Report an issue

Roberta Gelb, a long-time Chelsea resident, expresses strong opposition to the City of Yes initiative, arguing that it prioritizes luxury housing development over truly affordable housing and diminishes community input in urban planning.

Gelb criticizes the lack of action on vacant apartments and warehoused rent-stabilized units while people are homeless or on long waiting lists for housing
She warns that the City of Yes plan may erode protections established by previous community plans like the Chelsea 197-a plan
Gelb argues that building luxury housing does not create affordable housing, likening it to a failed 'trickle-down' approach

Affordable housing should be preserved and created, not just luxury housing
Many apartments are vacant while people are homeless or on waiting lists
Rent-stabilized apartments are being warehoused
The Chelsea Plan (197a) protections are at risk
Community input through ULURP is at risk
Different types of housing are needed (for homeless, artists, seniors, teachers)
Building luxury housing doesn't create affordable housing
The plan weakens regulations that maintain neighborhood character
The plan makes it easier to build on limited open space

[EXPERIMENTAL]

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

I was not able to tie quotes from the testimony back to specific elements of the proposal. Check out another testimony 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.

↗ Why are there transcription and diarization errors?

Roberta Gelb

9:43:38

My name is Roberta Gail.

9:43:39

I moved into Chelsea in 1977.

9:43:42

And since 1977, I fought to create and preserve affordable housing.

9:43:47

I've worked with the Chelsea Coalition on housing and the Chelsea Reform Democratic Club.

9:43:52

Someone said our testimony doesn't matter because this is a done deal.

9:43:57

And to our elected officials, let me remind you that we have good memories.

9:44:02

Options to create housing should not be limited to developing luxury housing.

9:44:07

Everyone screams about the lack of housing, but numerous apartments in nature are vacant while people are sleeping on the street and others have been on waiting lists for years.

9:44:20

Rent stabilized apartments are being warehoused.

9:44:23

Waiting for the city of yes to destroy whatever protections we currently have.

9:44:28

What are you doing about that?

9:44:32

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it in the Chelsea Plan, which came out in 1997, it was a plan 197a to protect our community.

9:44:46

And Tom Duane said after that, while the historic district has remained untouched, our fears concerning high rise development on 6th and 7th Avenue's 14th 23rd streets have been born out.

9:45:00

I'm afraid that the protections we got with 197 a as slim as they were will be lost.

9:45:06

We also fought for Eulerve to ensure community input.

9:45:10

And now that's also at risk.

9:45:12

I know.

9:45:12

It's just a few things that fall in that category.

9:45:16

But it's a slippery slope.

9:45:18

You start taking away the one piece that we have to have community input You start with 4, soon it'll be 6.

9:45:27

We need different kinds of housing.

9:45:29

We need thoughtful planning like the woman who talked about the nonprofit development.

9:45:35

We need housing for the homeless who I guess don't meet the $40,000 a year income level for city employees.

9:45:43

Can afford a $6,000,000 coop, we need housing for artists who come to the city to hone their craft.

9:45:50

And we need housing for seniors and for teachers.

9:45:53

We're staring down a massive zoning change to allow for more luxury market rate housing and We throw around these terms.

9:46:02

Affordable, market rate, luxury.

9:46:04

I'm not sure what affordable means, but I know what market rate luxury means.

9:46:08

It means as much as we can get.

9:46:10

Reagan said, we have a trickle down theory.

9:46:13

It didn't work then.

9:46:14

It won't work now.

9:46:16

Building, luxury housing doesn't create affordable housing.

9:46:21

The city of yes is a kiss.

9:46:23

To for profit developers.

9:46:25

The plan includes provisions that would give you larger and tall luxury condos in our neighborhoods We move a week in long standing regulations that help us maintain our neighborhood character and make it easier to build upon the tiny sliver of open

Maria Deinnocentiis

9:46:41

pit in

Roberta Gelb

9:46:42

space?

9:46:42

I say no.

Follow-up discussion/remarks

REMARKS

Chair Garodnick addresses concerns about public input and zoning changes

9:46:46

·

85 sec

Dan Garodnick, Chair of the City Planning Commission, responds to testimony by emphasizing that public input is being heard and considered in the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity initiative. He clarifies the specific areas where changes are being made to the review process and reiterates the extensive community engagement that has taken place.

Garodnick outlines three categories where special permits are being changed to a lesser public review process
He emphasizes that the initiative is not a "done deal" and that feedback from community boards and public hearings will be reviewed and considered
The chair highlights the ongoing nature of the process, including potential recommendations and changes by both the City Planning Commission and the City Council

Affordable housing should be preserved and created, not just luxury housing
Many apartments are vacant while people are homeless or on waiting lists
Rent-stabilized apartments are being warehoused
The Chelsea Plan (197a) protections are at risk
Community input through ULURP is at risk
Different types of housing are needed (for homeless, artists, seniors, teachers)
Building luxury housing doesn't create affordable housing
The plan weakens regulations that maintain neighborhood character
The plan makes it easier to build on limited open space

[EXPERIMENTAL]

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

I was not able to tie quotes from the testimony back to specific elements of the proposal. Check out another testimony 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.

↗ Why are there transcription and diarization errors?

Dan Garodnick

9:46:46

We heard you.

9:46:47

We heard you loud and clear.

9:46:49

Thank you.

9:46:50

I appreciate it.

9:46:50

I will just reiterate for the benefit of those who weren't here before.

9:46:55

There are 3 categories which we are changing a special permit to something which has lesser of a public review.

9:47:02

And it was specifically related to policy issues which have been presented to us, like Landmark TDRs, which have not been significantly used over the last 60 years, allowing a little more floor area for supportive housing in R6 and R72 districts and review of railroad rights of way.

9:47:22

So and I will also note that on the subject of done deal and this is a process.

9:47:30

We're in the middle of our 9th, 10th hour of a public hearing after having visited 59 community boards, 175 times we've got feedback, we're hearing remarks, and we will review, consider, make recommendations and or changes as will the city council.

9:47:50

So to me, this is the process that we are supposed to be doing.

9:47:55

And I hope that those who have taken the time out in their day, you know, particularly those who have come out to say that they're opposed to one thing or another, do understand that that is how this ordinarily goes and how we expect this will go here.

9:48:10

Okay.

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.