First Yards Tower To Be Half-Affordable
Amid all the photo ops at yesterday’s groundbreaking ceremony for Atlantic Yards, there was one big piece of news (well, two if you count Governor Paterson’s disclosure that he grew up on Grand Avenue between Gates and Greene!): Mayor Bloomberg announced that he’d gotten Forest City Ratner to commit to making 50% of the units…
Amid all the photo ops at yesterday’s groundbreaking ceremony for Atlantic Yards, there was one big piece of news (well, two if you count Governor Paterson’s disclosure that he grew up on Grand Avenue between Gates and Greene!): Mayor Bloomberg announced that he’d gotten Forest City Ratner to commit to making 50% of the units in the first residential tower—which currently is slated to get underway in the first half of next year—on the site affordable. As the Brooklyn Paper reported earlier this week, Ratner’s also been toying with hiring David Childs in an effort to beef up on name brand architects after tossing Frank Gehry overboard.
Affordable Housing Deal at Atlantic Yards [Crain’s]
After Years of Controversy, Ceremonial Shovels Come Out [NY Times]
Protests at Groundbreaking for B’klyn Arena [NY Post]
Photo from nycmayorsoffice
Um, perhaps second phase ought to involve spellcheck.
Bob — and I always thought graffitiing “’98” signified something to do with Irish rebellion against the British crown. Now I realized it’s disgruntled trolley dodgers rebelling against being ruled by our Manhattan overlords.
The “affordable” units won’t necessarily be cheaper than the “market rate” units. They are all subsidized- Ratner has gotten a bouquet of subsidies, and he will continue to get them.
quote:
Their first offering had those subsidized units being offered to people with a combined income capped at $130K. I’m sorry, but at that amount of money, you certainly aren’t rich in this city, but you are doing well over the norm, and are not who I think of when I think of those needing affordable housing.
true… but people who choose to buy in these kinds of buildings most CERTAINLTY do not want a family of 4 making < 50 K living next to them.
*rob*
I agree with dirty hipster, tacking the extremely vague, but populist term “affordable” on otherwise unpalatable projects is disgusting. Where is it in writing that shows their definition of “affordable”? Their first offering had those subsidized units being offered to people with a combined income capped at $130K. I’m sorry, but at that amount of money, you certainly aren’t rich in this city, but you are doing well over the norm, and are not who I think of when I think of those needing affordable housing.
actually, thinking about it.. i take back the term subsidized… because technically the units arent actually being subsidized.. just offered at a lower rate then rest..
*rob*
Posted by: Butterfly at March 12, 2010 9:42 AM
Sure they are – the developer isn’t offering them half affordable for shits and giggles.
I assume he’s getting tax breaks or something else to make this attractive.
FtGreeneCorey,
I like your phase II!
Undo the great mistake of 1898!
actually, thinking about it.. i take back the term subsidized… because technically the units arent actually being subsidized.. just offered at a lower rate then rest..
*rob*
1/2 affordable to those making combined incomes of what, 250K? The other half unaffordable to anyone with any sense.
the term affordable is stupid. they only now use the term affordable to replace the term subsidized. because most people who are paying out the butt to live in a building probably wouldnt want to live next to someone living in a subsidized apartment. it’s like someone who pays 2000 dollars for a studio in a building that’s half filled with section 8 tenants and / or rent controlled tenants. there’s a bit of resentment (from both sides actually). im all for mixed SES buildings, but in luxury buildings, im sorry, it just doesnt work.
*rob*