Warren Schreiber, President of Queens Civic Congress, on opposition to City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal
2:24:12
·
147 sec
Warren Schreiber, representing 75 civic groups in Queens, expresses strong opposition to the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity proposal. He argues that the initiative threatens the American dream, undermines previous community-led rezoning efforts, and fails to address the needs of diverse Queens communities, particularly in terms of affordable housing and transit access.
- Criticizes the proposal as a 'gift to developers' that would undo years of community-led rezoning efforts
- Highlights concerns about the parking mandate removal, citing Northeast Queens as a 'transit desert' with limited bus options
- Argues that the proposal does not effectively address affordable housing needs for those on the lowest rungs of the economic ladder
- New York City is not one-size-fits-all
- Queens Civic Congress members prefer quiet communities with 1 and 2 family housing
- Community boards have worked since 2005 to rezone and protect communities from overdevelopment
- City of Yes is seen as a gift to developers that will undo previous rezoning efforts
- The proposal threatens the American dream and generational wealth
- The plan has nothing to do with affordable housing for those on the lowest economic rungs
- Concerns about parking mandates, especially in transit deserts like Northeast Queens
- Queens bus network redesign will result in reduced service
- Queens Civic Congress opposes City of Yes in its entirety
[EXPERIMENTAL]
Which elements of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity were discussed in this testimony?
- Parking Mandates
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.
Parking Mandates
"I just wanna add, I have a few seconds that people have spoken about the parking mandate where I lived in Northeast Queens, we could be the poster child for a transit desert."
The speaker directly mentions the parking mandate, which is a clear reference to the proposal's element of removing parking mandates. He uses this to argue against the proposal by highlighting the lack of transit options in his area.
"I have rebuses. One bus will take me to flushing. The other bus will take me to flushing, and I have a third bus that will also take me to flushing. That doesn't give me a lot of options, and we are now in a position with the Queen's bus network redesign which is going into effect soon will result in a reduction of that service."
This quote further elaborates on the speaker's argument against removing parking mandates by emphasizing the limited public transportation options in his area, which implies a continued need for parking.
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.