During a Wednesday marathon session the City Planning Commission heard testimony from almost 200 people who were equally divided on the City of Yes Housing Opportunity proposal. Supporters were mostly developers, architects, funders, clergy, progressive activists and just plain folks. Those opposing were mostly from outer borough community associations and historic preservation organizations.
Half testified via Zoom, including one poor soul waiting for hours on his iPhone, by which time he was in a dentist’s chair. Sitting in the hearing room in the basement of 120 Broadway for more than 10 hours was no less painful. But I wanted to explain why I opposed the City of Yes.
The city’s 1,386 pages of zoning text amendments published in April contain some great items (empty office building spaces can be converted to residential, more incentives for affordable and supportive housing, etc.). But many amendments target neighborhoods filled with 1 and 2 family homes in the outer boroughs that are within a half-mile of public transit.
There, multiple dwellings can be built on the corners of most residential streets; any garage can be converted into living space; any private homeowner can erect a 25 foot tall dwelling in the backyard; homeowners can almost double the size of their houses; parking for new housing is no longer required. All that is “as of right” — no review, no checks. The inherent decency of absentee owners and rapacious developers, overseen by a suddenly energ.
