citymeetings.nyc

Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.

Q&A

Scope and complexity management of the proposed comprehensive plan

1:49:22

·

113 sec

Chair Richard R. Buery Jr. asks how comprehensive the proposed plan would be, questioning if it includes infrastructure like schools and sanitation.

Annie Levers confirms the goal is to integrate land use with the city's ten-year capital strategy, requiring an assessment of infrastructure needs first.

Addressing concerns about complexity, Levers stresses the importance of clear timelines to prevent planning fatigue and build trust, rather than letting the process drag on indefinitely.

Richard R. Buery Jr.

1:49:22

When you describe a comprehensive plan, how comprehend is comprehensive?

1:49:27

Do that include schools, sanitation needs, transportation?

Michelle de la Uz

1:49:32

Yes.

Richard R. Buery Jr.

1:49:33

Okay.

Annie Levers

1:49:35

Yes.

1:49:35

It would.

1:49:35

I mean, the the proposal that we, that I I think makes sense for the city to pursue is one that actually integrates the city's ten year capital strategy, which outlines all of our city's planning for that kind of infrastructure with our land use plans.

1:49:51

And what that requires is the city to first and foremost do an assessment of the the state of good repair of our infrastructure, which we are not currently doing a great job at.

1:50:03

So it would start there and look at where we need to make repairs.

1:50:07

First and foremost, prioritize the areas that need those investments and then match that with a land use plan that actually makes sure that the areas experiencing significant growth are being matched with the infrastructure they need to support it.

Richard R. Buery Jr.

1:50:19

And what would you say to those who might say that the mere complexity of that plan, not only the the the sort of the surface complexity, but the need to engage with the MTA, other bodies or not even so city bodies risk creating something that is so complex and difficult that, in fact, the process gets buried under the weight of the plan itself?

Annie Levers

1:50:42

I think that's why you need clear time frames.

1:50:45

Like, I agree that it is not a good idea to let the planning process go on forever, in part because I think it will just bog down community conversations and actually erode public trust in government and just give everyone planning fatigue.

1:50:59

So I think what what makes sense is to have a timeline for actually developing the plan that creates room for building true consensus among community members and making, you know, making sure that people have an opportunity to weigh in without letting it go on forever.

← Previous Chapter

Balancing democratic input and emergency action in housing reform

Next Chapter →

Testimony by DeRay Mckesson from Campaign Zero on CCRB reform and police accountability