After the land use lawyer and the urban planner finished speaking, it was the politicians turn to speak. A staff member representing State Senator Martin Connor (from Brooklyn) spoke first. Connor enthusiastically supported the project and made the claim that some of the affordable housing would be affordable to families with as little as $20,000 annual income. This was the first precise numbers about rental/ownership pricing, and I must’ve heard wrong because that’s a ridiculous, unprecedented number.
Next, a rep for assemblyman Vito Lopez spoke. While Vito liked that the project provided affordable housing, gave homes to displaced area peoples, and created open space, he had some serious concerns about the proposal. He was specifically concerned with the proposal’s density and the strain it would put on a neighborhood that has overburdened city services. He also was concerned about how the project would alter the neighborhood’s low-rise identity. At times his speech even became interestingly academic, as he called neighborhoods “complex organisms” and referenced to Jane Jacobs. He asked, “Why should affordable housing come at the expense of communities and at large scale density?” and asked people to dismiss the usual, illogical strict bureaucratic focus in order to give this proposal a serious look. He said he would not support the project until CPC reduced the height and density. This speech shocked most of the people at the meeting. As soon as he mentioned Jane Jacobs, audience members began excitedly looking around in disbelief asking if he was reading the right speech. I was caught off guard, but mostly I was happily impressed. Sure, it might just be a political ploy, but it was delightful and shocking. Ron pointed out that it was a completely academic speech, and therefore it was shouldn’t be trusted as sincere or realistic. On the day, it ended up being the most anti-CPC statement made.
Council Member Diana Reyna followed by asking for more affordable housing for low and moderate-income households. In truth, I think this was the smartest speech (apparently she had called up local community organizations the week before to try and gauge how the community felt). She said the need for affordable housing was so great that it should be 50-50 market to affordable. Maybe it’s shooting too high, but at such a preliminary stage in the process, it’s good to shoot high and let CPC know your ideals. I think the woman from LESCO agreed with me because she started crying “muy bien” to herself towards the end of Reyna’s speech.
All three politicians made very different speeches; their stances seemed to present the three major viewpoints about CPC’s proposal. One complacent speech addressing the affordable housing accomplishments and nothing else; one academic speech questioning density and impact; one asking for greater affordable housing and expressing caution and desire for an even better proposal.
No comments:
Post a Comment