Author Topic: Potential Woodside Rezoing / Affordable Housing Development  (Read 5242 times)

Offline theplanesland

  • Mayor
  • *******
  • Posts: 604
Re: Potential Woodside Rezoing / Affordable Housing Development
« Reply #15 on: August 29, 2014, 03:52:07 PM »
it's interesting how we (as an urban society) go back and forth on that last issue. back in the early '80s, i lived in a completely dilapidated tenement that was the last occupied structure on east 6th between C and D on the Lower East Side. the city declared eminent domain and razed the building to put up a block of low rise projects -- having deemed the high rises to be failures for a variety of reasons. the same was done in wide swaths of the south bronx.
i know that public housing and market rate housing are two different things, but your suggestion just brought that to mind.

I understand. But public housing *is* a different thing, one which has a range of serious problems specifically with elevators (maintenance, misuse, etc.) and staircases (disabled residents unable to use them, predators harvesting victims through them, etc.) And in the 80s, there *wasn't* the demand for NYC housing we have now, so there wasn't any need to additionally densify. I remember when I was a kid people were talking about *shrinking* the city's housing stock.

Offline Shelby2

  • Global Moderator
  • Mayor
  • *****
  • Posts: 5342
Re: Potential Woodside Rezoing / Affordable Housing Development
« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2016, 01:20:30 AM »
I think this is a different development than the one being discussed, but just thought I would mention that the Phipps redevelopment for an affordable complex just got shot down.

http://therealdeal.com/2016/09/19/phipps-houses-abandons-rezoning-application-for-controversial-sunnyside-project/

Offline deja

  • Council Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 281
Re: Potential Woodside Rezoing / Affordable Housing Development
« Reply #17 on: September 20, 2016, 04:11:42 AM »
I'd also say that any housing created have a good mix of "affordable" and middle income apartments because "affordable" generally only refers to low income.  That's not good for anyone because it either remains highly subsidized or its owners neglect it because it's not adequately profitable.  In the end, you end up with the equivalent of poorly run housing projects.  That's not even getting into the negative social issues.

I think what the city also needs is another massive round of Mitchell Lama housing as the old developments continue to leave the program.

Jackson Heights Life

Re: Potential Woodside Rezoing / Affordable Housing Development
« Reply #17 on: September 20, 2016, 04:11:42 AM »