in LTCP, Politics and Plans, System Change

Planning Index

In each post below, The Report seeks observations of how the relationship between the powerful and influential moneymakers of New York City will change the lives of about seven and a half million ordinary working-class, poor and retired people, small business owners, struggling first responders, and so on. All of the following is a rough first draft that examines the effect of the Long Term Comprehensie Plan (LTCP) on ordinary people. Corrections toward improving clusters of facts are welcomed when made concrete. That means the following: names of people, places, times, dates, and numbers that can be verified or ascertained. If not, comments will be ignored. We are grateful to all, privacy is supreme.

Part I GOS-3P-RE™

This is an open set of planning questions about the LTCP as if it was a law.  It seems unlikely, except for one thing.  Some members of the Council are just as mad at the Department of City Planning (DCP) as you are. A process is offered to frame those questions with a monitoring process. Have at it.

Part II Rolling the Dice

Carl Weisbrod’s presentation is first, speaking as Chair of the thirteen-member City Planning Commissioner in 2016. The second is by Marisa Lago speaking as Director of the Department of City Planning. The LTCP looks as if it is an honest power grab by term-limited council members, as they are rolling the dice on the next Mayor of NY.

Part III Inclusionary Energy

Seeing the Climate Mobilization Act (CMA) as a compounding factor of the LTCP as a contributor to ongoing heightened displacement risk. A long-term comprehensive plan will be looking at a pile of houses on stilts thanks to the compromises in City Planning Commission Approves Citywide Coastal Zoning Rules.

Part IV Megadevelopment

Imagines the law as a bait and switch 5-year confidence game. And, while there are conspirators, this is not a conspiracy. Conditions necessary to evaluate displacement will require data on three factors. First forced physical development (evictions, demolitions, etc.) Second, economic displacement (direct and indirect), and third, exclusionary change factors. The third factor is a key market driver. Housing was a function of the neighborhood dynamics of diverse urban society. Housing is no longer local, it is now subject to urban real estate market forces, due to the injection of unregulated capital into housing markets from nonlocal sources.

Part V Flushing – A Wicked Problem

Looking for197a  alternative process that invests in the community district power. A good first step would not be the planning as usual approach. A creative approach would be to seed a wicked plan to get to the wicked problems.

Part VI Doublespeak+

Ranked-choice and pocketbooks research have a strange combination in Flushing worthy of a deep poly science challenge. It is a look into why the problems presented are wicked.

Part VII Summary of 2.23.21 Hearing

I don’t really know. The Report people are thinking of something but not sure what yet, but and moving toward the first shot at a City Council strategy that alters the Council. Needs work.

Part VIII Getting Strategic

The only way to be sure is to go strategic—first, the discovery of weak, but influential appointments to local boards. After that, motivation for development will be second and money third and first. Watch for cycles.

Part IX No MAS No MAS

New Mayor, new council (more quickly in a Census year, districting) has taken the LTCP as a good idea. Some see it as a dog, a sleeping dog, and think poking it might be a good idea. Others are not so sure, this post presses for more detail.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.