T
he City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, a zoning change proposal, aims to address the city's housing shortage while minimizing its impact on infrastructure. The Adams administration claims it won't lead to excessive housing development, with at most 1% of the 500,000 homes planned over the next decade being built under this amendment. However, City Council members expressed concerns about eliminating minimum parking requirements and the strain on sewers and other infrastructure.

    Department of City Planning Director Dan Garodnick assured that developers in car-dependent areas would still build parking to meet demand, but acknowledged the city's infrastructure needs are significant. He argued that the incremental density added by City of Yes wouldn't cause adverse effects. Council members may try to maintain some parking mandates and secure infrastructure capital commitments before approving the proposal.

    They may also push for deeper affordability requirements as part of the Universal Affordability Preference program, which could be met with resistance from developers who view UAP as inferior to Voluntary Inclusionary Housing. The debate highlights the challenge of distinguishing genuine concerns about neighborhood character from attempts to block new housing due to racial or socioeconomic biases.

    The City Council must balance addressing legitimate infrastructure concerns with advancing modest progress on the city's housing shortage.