Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
^
Because that worked so well in the Soviet Union. Luv those commie blocks.
They may not look appealing to some, but in fact well maintained apartment complexes often have some of the highest quality of living of any city buildings; elevators, parking, views, balconies, spacious more spacious then the tenements, utility/cable discounts due to building's purchase in bulk, residential park area, etc...
"Tower in the Park" architecture was really only abandoned because of crime in public housing and the lack of funds public housing authorities ended up having as funding was cut to maintain these buildings. In reality this hysteria is more a problem of poverty then of the tower in the park model. Tower in the Park affordable housing til this day remains the bulwark of truly affordable housing in New York City and works especially well here due to the public transportation system. In less dense cities in may not work as well because they often have very poor public transportation systems which then completely isolates the complex and makes it undesirable, but here in New York the city is so condensed that the model works well as should actually be modified and expanded. The kind of private-public scatter site buildings that Bloomberg and De Blasio have been building don't even offer up enough units to put a dent in the loss of units hemmorhaging from Mitchell Lama and Rent Stabilized Apartments.
When a Lower income area becomes more desirable the city should sell the building and evict and give them vouchers or move them to other projects. Beggars cant be choosers, Projects should not be in manhattan south of CP.
How about self checkout whole foods, Apple stores and Starbucks for your convenience?
Actually, by "commie bloc" I was actually talking about the housing built in Russia during the Soviet era. Take our housing projects (which are bad enough to begin with) and make them two orders of magnetude worse.
But looking at our housing projects, the state they're in now is a good indication of why they shouldn't be built, an really, that we should get rid of the ones we have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoogeyDownDweller
They may not look appealing to some, but in fact well maintained apartment complexes often have some of the highest quality of living of any city buildings; elevators, parking, views, balconies, spacious more spacious then the tenements, utility/cable discounts due to building's purchase in bulk, residential park area, etc...
"Tower in the Park" architecture was really only abandoned because of crime in public housing and the lack of funds public housing authorities ended up having as funding was cut to maintain these buildings. In reality this hysteria is more a problem of poverty then of the tower in the park model. Tower in the Park affordable housing til this day remains the bulwark of truly affordable housing in New York City and works especially well here due to the public transportation system. In less dense cities in may not work as well because they often have very poor public transportation systems which then completely isolates the complex and makes it undesirable, but here in New York the city is so condensed that the model works well as should actually be modified and expanded. The kind of private-public scatter site buildings that Bloomberg and De Blasio have been building don't even offer up enough units to put a dent in the loss of units hemmorhaging from Mitchell Lama and Rent Stabilized Apartments.
As long as a couple of hundred thousand (or whatever the number is) immigrants pour into NYC every year, it doesn't matter what you do. I'm not for it, but a 5-year freeze on immigration would create lots of affordable housing in NYC.
- Dramatically upzone neighborhoods along subway lines, especially in the outer boroughs. Use the money from selling off extra air rights, and 30 years worth of resulting increase in property tax revenue along the subway route zones to fund the MTA. If the development happens to be in an overcrowded school district, give the developer extra air rights for free in return for building a new school or expanding an existing school.
- Eliminate rent stabilization and rent control.
- Eliminate tax incentives such as 421a, 421b (only if rent stab is eliminated).
- Increase property tax on parking spots/garages for non-commercial vehicles. - Gradually sell off NYCHA housing in expensive areas, restoring the street grid, and using the proceeds to fund NYCHA.
- Increase and enforce NYCHA criminal background ineligibility periods, making NYCHA much more safe and desirable for low income law-abiding families.
NYCHA properties are slowly being privatized in Manhattan, and in valuable parts of Brooklyn and Queens.
Get the city out of the housing business. Get them out of the way of the people that are in the housing business. Let the market correct itself after years of government mangling.
Specifically, get rid of rent regulation and landmarking. Why are there any 4-6 floor 100+yo brick walk up on the avenues? Because the owners can't empty them, and a lot are landmarked and can't be torn down. This is ridiculous.
Much has been made over how all new housing is being made for the rich. That's because the city can't generate enough housing at any give time to satisfy the demand from the wealth. Just ramp up the production so that it does.
And look at areas like the central and west Village. This area has some of the best transit service in the city. And it's all old, low rise crap. Get rid of the landmarking, double or triple the zoning FARs, and watch a lot of the housing problem go away.
The city likely has decided to keep the cost of housing high and in short supply in places like the West Village. Real estate is extremely expensive there and therefore property tax revenue is good. Why would they want to build a lot of new housing to lower prices? It makes no sense.
As long as a couple of hundred thousand (or whatever the number is) immigrants pour into NYC every year, it doesn't matter what you do. I'm not for it, but a 5-year freeze on immigration would create lots of affordable housing in NYC.
Truth. Everyone wants to blame "hipsters", but the fact is that mass immigration will also ensure rents are somewhat high.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
