Tibita Kaneene, representing Manhattan Community Board 7, expresses strong support for the City of Yes initiative while offering several caveats and suggestions for improvement. The speaker addresses various aspects of the proposal, including affordable housing, zoning districts, building conversions, and low-density district proposals.

• Suggests modifications to the Universal Affordability Preference (UAP) and recommends maintaining public hearings and review processes
• Approves of nonresidential building conversions to residences with some adjustments
• Expresses concerns about certain amendments in low-density districts, including open space requirements and square footage reductions
• Emphasizes that affordable housing has been the district's top need for years and overall views City of Yes as a positive step towards addressing this issue

• Strong support for City of Yes with some caveats and suggestions
• Concerns about potential reduction in affordable units due to replacing voluntary inclusionary housing with UAP
• Suggestion for 20% FAR credits for off-site preservation of affordable housing
• Opposition to eliminating public hearings and review by elected officials
• General approval of eliminating obstacles to quality housing developments in non-contextual zoning districts, but with community input
• Support for conversion of nonresidential buildings to residences, with suggested 35-year age requirement
• Approval of creating R11 and R12 district designations, subject to ULURP and mandatory 30% affordable housing
• Disapproval of miscellaneous amendments without additional information
• Disapproval of certain proposals for low-density districts
• Overall support for City of Yes as it addresses the district's top need of affordable housing

[EXPERIMENTAL]

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

• UAP
• Residential Conversions

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.