Affordable Housing: Promises vs. Reality
The Gotham Gazette published an interesting article this week examining Mayor Bloomberg’s track record in affordable housing. A keystone to the Mayor’s housing plan is inclusionary zoning—granting benefits, such as a 33 percent higher floor to area ratio, to developers who include permanent affordable housing in their plans. Critics say that the plan hasn’t delivered…
The Gotham Gazette published an interesting article this week examining Mayor Bloomberg’s track record in affordable housing. A keystone to the Mayor’s housing plan is inclusionary zoning—granting benefits, such as a 33 percent higher floor to area ratio, to developers who include permanent affordable housing in their plans. Critics say that the plan hasn’t delivered nearly as much affordable housing as promised and supporters say that the plan can work, given enough time. In Greenpoint-Williamsburg, for example, the program has created 768 affordable rentals since 2005, and the goal is 2,200 over the course of a decade. Also, in 2005, the city promised over 6,000 units from already approved projects, but since then only 2,716 have come into existence, mostly in Manhattan, and this figure includes renovations of existing affordable apartments, not just new units. Also, between 2005 and 2008, the city lost 20,000 rent-stabalized apartments to market-rate developments, which tips the mayor’s affordable housing balance into the red. Alternative solutions proposed include mandatory as opposed to optional inclusionary housing, and a new focus on preservation and regulation of existing housing, as opposed to new construction. “The priorities that Bloomberg has put on development of new construction as a solution to affordable housing has been the wrong emphasis,” Mario Mazzoni, the lead organizer at the Metropolitan Council on Housing, told the Gazette. “You cannot build yourself out of the affordable housing crisis in New York City.”
Affordable Housing Not Included [Gotham Gazette]
Affordable housing map, showing completed vs. closed inclusionary housing projects, from The Gotham Gazette
Montrose Morris t 10:15-
And THAT is why MM got the Lifetime Achievement Award!
How many times have people said on this blog, how the mix of people and culture are what makes this city so great? Well, you can kiss that goodbye if those who don’t earn as much have to move further and further out. It isn’t a matter of a developer not being able to build or renovate affordable housing and not make money. They can- they do so all over the world. Its a matter of wanting to make the most amount of money for the least expense. And the glut of luxury housing is the result.
What bothers me most is the underlying feeling that people who don’t make a lot of money are not entitled to live in NYC proper, or in decent housing or neighborhoods. No matter the majority of them have also worked hard all their lives, and paid taxes too.
nobody said uber wealthy. that’s the problem — the liberals see this as black and white. The largest single force raising market rates is the lack of market rate apartments. Rent control exacerbates the problem, and we’re addicted to it now. the solution is to build market rate housing, and gradually eliminate support programs, except for people who truly can’t help themselves.
if you want to make 20K a year as a bartender while you wait for your band to take off, I don’t want to pay your rent.
A vibrant, functioning, and livable city has housing for all income levels within its borders. Said city needs everyone to fill the myriad of jobs, many low paying, but necessary to the running of the city. Not to mention all of the people in the middle who make this city run. A city of the rich, where everyone else commutes in from outside is unacceptable. Deal with it, joe the bummers of the world. We need public housing, we need affordable lower middle class and middle class housing, and we need luxury housing. As great as they are to visit, I don’t want to live in a Paris, surrounding by angry slums, or a Rio with its favelas, nor do I want a Johannesburgh. I’m also not interested in living in a Detroit, with the rich surrounding a decaying inner city. All of us are necessary, all of us should be able to live within the city, if we so choose. The old and ridiculous argument that the poor, or lower classes are clamoring to live on Park Ave is just that, ridiculous. But they shouldn’t have to be consigned to Yonkers, and a 2 hour commute to a low paying job in order to survive. There is enough room in this city for a mix, especially in Brooklyn. Let’s rehab the buildings we have, which are in neighborhoods all over this borough, and put public money where it serves the public. No one is looking for a handout, just a chance to live in decent housing, so they can go about their business and earn a living and raise their families.
quote:
I’m tired of politicians mainstreaming a giant welfare program to get votes.
okay, i sorta kinda agree with you on that one. that is one of the reasons cities like Detroit will never, EVER come back.
*rob*
b-tch PLEASE joe the plummber… if im someone making 20K a year working in manhattan i am NOT moving to f’ing yonkers or newark. sorry but your ridiculous notion that nyc proper should only be for the uber-wealthy is but a stupid pipe dream.
*rob*
Montrose;
Alot of the housing in this city does not have “great bones”. The street you cite is in Crown Heights, which was developed for wealthy folks, and hence the housing stock tends to be of higher quality. There are vast areas of this city, however, in which the housing stock consists of structures erected in the 1920’s, at which time there was a housing boom similiar to that we just went through. This housing was not built for the wealthy. It was built for the upwardly-mobile working class streaming out of the Lower East Side and other such areas. While this housing was perfectly fine for its day, it is rapidly becoming obsolete. Take a drive through areas like East Flatbush, Bensonhurst and Brownsville and you will thousands of such units. It is not advisable to restore this housing. It is obsolete by today’s standards, in all aspects: structurally, mechanicals and even aesthetically.
Our governments, on all levels, are rapidly approaching their fiscal limits. The only way to make housing affordable is to increase supply, via the private sector. Moreover, like in any functioning market,supply will be added at the high end, which in turn will automatically increase supply for the other segments of the market. If a wealthy person trades in his used car for a new one, a lower-income person also benefits (through purchasing the used car).
It also really gets me that during a building boom that produced literally thousands of apartment units in Williamsburg/Greenpoint, they only managed to build 768 affordable units? And their goal was ONLY 2,200 in TEN years, and they are acting like they’ve accomplished something?
metro new york city has no affordable housing crisis whatsoever. Just go on craigslist with 500/month to spend on rent, and you will find a place within commuting distance to your job in the city. That includes yonkers, where you can buy a studio for 80K, newark, where you can get public transportation.
wait, people want a handout for rent, and they want their pad to be in Flatiron? Chelsea? I can’t believe this is taken seriously. Come on, look up the east river next time you go over the manhattan bridge, and just breathe in the amount of public housing that blankets that land in lower manhattan. This has gone way too far. We work our asses off to live here and pay market rate. I’m tired of politicians mainstreaming a giant welfare program to get votes.
but montrose.. en suite bathrooms, double vanities, soaking tubs, and a giant encasement for rosie the robot would never fit in those old buildings, duhhhh.. and isnt that what everyone DESERVES. i mean how could someone possibly live without those things!?!
and yes, i totally agree with what you say.
*rob*