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

citymeetings.nyc

Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
TESTIMONY

Suwen Cheong, Chair of the Land Use Committee of Brooklyn Community Board 9, on the negative impacts of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity on Prospect Lefferts Gardens and surrounding areas

4:30:14

·

3 min

Report an issue

Suwen Cheong, representing Brooklyn Community Board 9, strongly opposes the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity initiative, citing potential detrimental effects on the community. She argues that the proposed changes would lead to widespread displacement, demolition of existing buildings, and the construction of larger, less affordable structures that do not fit the neighborhood's context.

  • Cheong highlights that the Universal Affordability Program (UAP) would allow for density increases far exceeding the advertised 20%, reaching up to 77% in some areas.
  • She expresses concern that the initiative would incentivize landlords to evict long-term tenants paying below-market rents in order to redevelop properties.
  • Cheong calls for a more tailored approach to housing and planning needs, rejecting the one-size-fits-all policy proposed by the initiative.
  • CB9 overwhelmingly opposes the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity in its entirety
  • Two-thirds of CB9 district is covered by non-contextual R6 and R7 zoning, which is slated for the highest density increases
  • The Universal Affordability Program (UAP) would lead to significant increases in FAR, much larger than 20%
  • Most lots in these districts are already significantly underbuilt
  • UAP income and rent levels are higher than the district's median income
  • The proposal would push land prices down enough to demolish thousands of small buildings
  • Displacement of current residents during construction without compensation
  • New housing will not be affordable for the median family in the district
  • The proposal is seen as an 'extinction level event' for the community
  • Rent-stabilized apartment buildings face threat of demolition or significant alteration
  • Concerns about increased eviction pressure on long-time tenants
  • The proposal doesn't consider that different areas are starting from different places in terms of density and affordability

[EXPERIMENTAL]

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

  • UAP

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

"CB-nine overwhelmingly opposed the city of yes for housing opportunity in its entirety because 2 thirds of our district is covered by noncontextual R6 and R7 zoning, which is slated for the highest density increases under the universal affordability program."

This quote directly mentions the Universal Affordability Preference (UAP) program and its impact on zoning in the speaker's district.

"The increase in R6 on Nara Street is 77% from a 2.2 f a r to a 3.9 f a r And on our 7 narrow streets, it is 50% from 3.44 to 5."

This quote provides specific examples of the density increases proposed under the UAP, which is a key element of the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal.

"Moreover, the UAP income and rent levels are higher than our meeting income particularly for studio apartments."

This quote directly discusses the affordability levels proposed in the UAP, which is a central aspect of this 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.

↗ Why are there transcription and diarization errors?
Suwen Cheong
4:30:14
My name is Suen Shong, and I'm a resident of Prospect Lufords Gardens in Brooklyn.
4:30:18
A lifelong New York City resident in the Chair of Community Board 9's Land Andrews Committee.
4:30:22
The Board has submitted our feedback via the zoning application portal but I will make additional comments today on my own behalf to clarify and expand on our statements.
4:30:31
CB-nine overwhelmingly opposed the city of yes for housing opportunity in its entirety because 2 thirds of our district is covered by noncontextual R6 and R7 zoning, which is slated for the highest density increases under the universal affordability program.
4:30:45
These are much larger than 20% increases.
4:30:48
The increase in R6 on Nara Street is 77% from a 2.2 f a r to a 3.9 f a r And on our 7 narrow streets, it is 50% from 3.44 to 5.
4:30:59
The majority of lots in these districts are already significantly underbuilt.
4:31:03
More than half of our 38100123 family buildings are in these districts intended for larger apartment buildings.
4:31:09
Moreover, the UAP income and rent levels are higher than our meeting income particularly for studio apartments.
4:31:15
Most of our small buildings which have not already been demolished Teeter on the cusp, and we have done the lot by lot zoning and financial analysis to know that the UAP increases would push down land prices enough to demolish thousands more of these buildings.
4:31:27
Day, and the people who live there will be replaced by some market rate buildings 3 to 4 times the size of our current neighborhoods where the vast majority of buildings are less than 5 stories tall.
4:31:36
Yes, some of the new housing will be income restricted.
4:31:39
But those displaced for construction without compensation will have to wait 2 to 3 years for completion, then competed in a lottery with the rest of the city for apartments that aren't affordable for even the median family in our district.
4:31:50
These are not incremental changes.
4:31:52
This is an extinction level event for our community, already one of the densest in Brooklyn.
4:31:57
We are not going to say yes with conditions and beg you to cut off just a hand or a foot instead of killing us.
4:32:02
If you want to work with us to make your proposals better, Then stop jamming one size fits all down north throats and everything as of right and work with our communities individually to meet our housing and planning needs.
4:32:13
Moreover, the majority of housing and affordable housing in our district consists of rents stabilized apartment buildings.
4:32:18
Some of these, including most the apartment buildings in Washington Avenue, some buildings in East Flatbush, and all three of our low density nitrile are extremely underbuilt to the present zoning and face a threat of demolition.
4:32:29
Like the smaller homes.
4:32:31
Even where they fit the current zoning exactly, since they are in R6 and R7 districts, they will receive huge increases in density.
4:32:37
We are already seeing examples of buildings doubling their size through vertical extensions by first emptying the building of all tenants, then adding reinforcements down to the foundation to support floors.
4:32:48
No, it would not make sense for a landlord whose tenants are paying market rate to empty a building and lose rents to add middle income housing.
4:32:54
But many long time tenants are paying far below market rate, maybe 500 or $700 for a 1 or 2 bedroom.
4:33:01
These tenants are already facing enormous eviction pressure from landlords.
4:33:04
Central Brooklyn has among the highest eviction rates in the city.
4:33:07
Landlords are already emptying buildings through failure to repair for decades after fires.
4:33:12
Adding incentives for redevelopment can only add fuel to the fires.
4:33:16
Even if you believe contrary to your own eyes, that these things will not happen frequently.
4:33:20
You are asking us to lay down on the railroad tracks and play a chicken with developers and landlords.
4:33:25
We will not say yes to this.
4:33:27
Building a little bit more everywhere doesn't work when we aren't all starting in the same place.
4:33:31
CB9 must first be resuming out of density more closely to act

Follow-up discussion/remarks

QUESTION

Commissioner Osorio inquires about racial equity concerns in City of Yes proposal

4:33:39

·

143 sec

Commissioner Juan Camilo Osorio asks Suwen Cheong, Chair of Brooklyn Community Board 9's Land Use Committee, to expand on the board's concerns regarding the racial equity report for the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal. Cheong emphasizes the need for community-level analyses of potential displacement and demolition impacts on communities of color.

  • Cheong highlights that the current racial equity report lacks specific community-level environmental impact assessments
  • She stresses the importance of examining impacts on homeowners, rent-stabilized buildings, smaller market-rate buildings, and small businesses
  • Cheong points out existing issues of racial discrimination in evictions and the risk to underbuilt properties from zoning density increases
  • CB9 overwhelmingly opposes the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity in its entirety
  • Two-thirds of CB9 district is covered by non-contextual R6 and R7 zoning, which is slated for the highest density increases
  • The Universal Affordability Program (UAP) would lead to significant increases in FAR, much larger than 20%
  • Most lots in these districts are already significantly underbuilt
  • UAP income and rent levels are higher than the district's median income
  • The proposal would push land prices down enough to demolish thousands of small buildings
  • Displacement of current residents during construction without compensation
  • New housing will not be affordable for the median family in the district
  • The proposal is seen as an 'extinction level event' for the community
  • Rent-stabilized apartment buildings face threat of demolition or significant alteration
  • Concerns about increased eviction pressure on long-time tenants
  • The proposal doesn't consider that different areas are starting from different places in terms of density and affordability

[EXPERIMENTAL]

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

  • UAP

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

"CB-nine overwhelmingly opposed the city of yes for housing opportunity in its entirety because 2 thirds of our district is covered by noncontextual R6 and R7 zoning, which is slated for the highest density increases under the universal affordability program."

This quote directly mentions the Universal Affordability Preference (UAP) program and its impact on zoning in the speaker's district.

"The increase in R6 on Nara Street is 77% from a 2.2 f a r to a 3.9 f a r And on our 7 narrow streets, it is 50% from 3.44 to 5."

This quote provides specific examples of the density increases proposed under the UAP, which is a key element of the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal.

"Moreover, the UAP income and rent levels are higher than our meeting income particularly for studio apartments."

This quote directly discusses the affordability levels proposed in the UAP, which is a central aspect of this 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.

↗ Why are there transcription and diarization errors?
Juan Camilo Osorio
4:33:39
Thank you, Jared.
4:33:40
Thank thank you for your testimony today and for what was submitted on behalf the board.
4:33:44
I have a question about the comments from the board.
4:33:48
I'm wondering if you can expand a little bit on the concerns that your board has regarding the findings of the race equity report, and what opportunities do you see for the proposal to address that?
Suwen Cheong
4:34:00
So our district as you know is majority people of color.
4:34:07
And the racial equity report simply goes down and kind of lists the demographic aspects of each neighborhood without looking specifically at community level environmental impacts, as I said, the amount of demolition and displacement that could that could especially happen on existing housing and how that would affect communities of color.
4:34:38
And so we think those community level analyses need to be done.
Juan Camilo Osorio
4:34:45
Thank you.
4:34:46
Are there any other recommendations that you you wanna put forth to be considered as part of a final EIS in this regard?
Suwen Cheong
4:34:55
In in in terms of what the EIS needs to look at.
Juan Camilo Osorio
4:35:00
And and strategic in terms of race equity?
Suwen Cheong
4:35:03
Oh, in terms of the racial equity report, Yeah.
4:35:07
No.
4:35:08
I I I think we absolutely need to need to look at these impacts on our not only our homeowners, but also our rent stabilized buildings, our smaller buildings that might be all market rate, our small businesses, We're already seeing these buildings being emptied by landlords.
4:35:30
We've already had buildings where tenants had to sue the landlords for racial discrimination in in evictions, and those buildings are extremely underbuilt.
4:35:41
And they they would be at risk from zoning density increases even if it's for income restricted housing.
4:35:49
And we don't think that the EIS is looking at that and the racial impact analysis is is not looking at that.
Juan Camilo Osorio
4:36:00
Thank you.
4:36:00
I very much appreciate that.
Suwen Cheong
4:36:02
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.