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.
I highly doubt that. @ most the spillover will go into Yonkers which is the most affordable part of westchester. Most of Westchester is highly wealthy so theyre not going to go there. South Shore??????? Try stapleton if they even go down there. besides i dont think people like airborne guy want those folks as his new neighbors.
So far the Bronx has been stubbornly resistant to gentrification. And although NY is one of the models of gentrification, theres still large swaths of the city that havent been conquered by the gentrifier wave. Half of bushwick is still rough the same can be said for bed stuy and crown hts. Flatbush and the East Flatbush are damn near untouched. The city is trying to manually start a gentrification wave in East NY. This is not DC or san francisco where gentrification swallowed up darn near the entire city bc the city area was small.
You mention Chicago and what they did with their public housing. You forgot to mention how it took YEARS upon YEARS to evict the people out the projects and then it took even more time before they were finally bulldozed....and NYCHA has ALOT MORE public housing than the CHA ever did so yea....
So what does years upon years have to do with anything? It happened, didn't it?
The city talked about developing the Queens and Brooklyn waterfront in the early 80s. It's finally happening NOW. Look at East River Brooklyn and Queens these days. It took them decades, but they did it.
Yonkers has some bad parts to it too.
Gentrification has been going on for 100 years. Midtown was once tenement housing and had a high Black population. Not any more.
Robert Moses bulldozed down whole neighborhoods.
And truthfully, a lot happened under Bloomberg.
Rising rents rapidly displaced white working class populations in places like Greenpoint, Williamsburg, Yorkville, Hells Kitchen, etc.
Btw, Central Park once was an inhabited neighborhood (poor Blacks). It's a park now. They cleared them out.
De Blasio rather rapidly reduced the thug population in Manhattanville projects by having 400 cops haul a number of people out.
I think the thought of Bronx and certain other areas gentrifying is scary to some people here who go into denial about it.
But as I said, Bloomberg rezoned much of the city and completely killed off industrial NYC (which Robert Moses always wanted). The city has money flowing in from around the world as the world's financial capital.
You mention Chicago and what they did with their public housing. You forgot to mention how it took YEARS upon YEARS to evict the people out the projects and then it took even more time before they were finally bulldozed....and NYCHA has ALOT MORE public housing than the CHA ever did so yea....
So far the easiest step I have seen is more active policing in NYCHA, especially the ones with a satellite police station who only job is to monitor the NYCHA buildings. At least in western queens a lot of the crime activity has been neutralized and made safe. Even queensbridge doesn't seem so bad like in the 90's.
I have always been somewhat curious on why queens is so much safer than most of the other boroughs. Most of the NYCHA buildings in queens seems rather tamed compared to the wild stories you read in the newspaper about Brooklyn and Bronx.
No tearing down ALL the projects would be the best bet. From there they can just relocate the undesirables to the far outskirts of the city, like Suffolk county. It'll work quit easily too. by stuffing six families into three story homes. Don't worry section-eight will cover the expense.
So far the easiest step I have seen is more active policing in NYCHA, especially the ones with a satellite police station who only job is to monitor the NYCHA buildings. At least in western queens a lot of the crime activity has been neutralized and made safe. Even queensbridge doesn't seem so bad like in the 90's.
I have always been somewhat curious on why queens is so much safer than most of the other boroughs. Most of the NYCHA buildings in queens seems rather tamed compared to the wild stories you read in the newspaper about Brooklyn and Bronx.
Here's my prediction, its as good as any so far. NYCHA used to have a cap on rents. No matter how much you made you only paid up to a certain amount. A few years ago they started giving out section 8 vouchers to residents. They also started accepting people with section 8 vouchers. Some people that were residents did not see the need to apply since the rents were based on income similar to section 8. Once you hit the cap that was it.
Fast forward to today. The cap is off because funding from the Feds was cut alot. Its strictly by income so you now have working people paying $1200, $1500, $1800 etc. So what are they looking to do, since there rent is so high? They are buying Mitchel Lama coops, and putting down payments on houses. While non working, or very low income people move into the apts after they move out. Most new residents are from shelters, a few are disabled, or seniors.
I think you are going to have very high crime near projects, especially in the Bronx, since many shelters other housing are there. Many of the city's poor were pushed into the Bronx because of rising rents in the other boros, and gentrification. Gentrification is more than just rising rents. It demands a life style change, the whole economy of any area changes to support the new residents. The people that were there before gentrification usually are unable to adjust financially and must move on.
Areas with private homes will become better as more middle income people start investing in buying homes in areas that were previously a little run down. As long as the real estate industry doesn't become greedy. The people with real money will not move out of the trendy areas. They should keep these areas priced to attract working middle income people.
I think the thought of Bronx and certain other areas gentrifying is scary to some people here who go into denial about it.
But as I said, Bloomberg rezoned much of the city and completely killed off industrial NYC (which Robert Moses always wanted). The city has money flowing in from around the world as the world's financial capital.
Bloomberg and Robert Moses are two different minds with two different ideas on how a city should be runned and developed. Moses was all about highways and cars as the future development of NYC. Moses was the master builder and probably a greater builder than mayor Michael Bloomberg. Moses connected the city in so many ways especially connecting NYS with Long Island via the Bronx and Staten Island with Brooklyn. Problem is that Moses got hit with negativity for destroying neighborhoods with public works such as the Cross Bronx Expressway, BQE and so others which lead to a long terrible decline for many neighborhoods. He even did things like segregate the poor from certain areas like 125 street where the street makes a sharp turn towards the north instead of going west so that blacks could not use the West Side Park. If it wasn't for Robert Moses structures like the UN and Lincoln Center would have not been built. Robert Moses left bad tastes in peoples mouths especially with Jane Jacobs. IF anyone wants to know anything about gentrification, they should read up on Jane Jacobs.
Bloomberg on the other hand? He too wanted to be a master builder. He only served the interest of the rich and wealthy, he neglected the middle class who are leaving in droves and neglected the poor. Helped the city bring in plenty of business which is a good thing, and he did help diversify the city economy. Big problem with Bloomberg was his illegal 3rd term push, snow storm blunder, rising costs, increased gentrification and inequality which became the hall mark of his regime. He too left a bad tastes in New Yorkers mouths.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYer23
So far the easiest step I have seen is more active policing in NYCHA, especially the ones with a satellite police station who only job is to monitor the NYCHA buildings. At least in western queens a lot of the crime activity has been neutralized and made safe. Even queensbridge doesn't seem so bad like in the 90's.
I have always been somewhat curious on why queens is so much safer than most of the other boroughs. Most of the NYCHA buildings in queens seems rather tamed compared to the wild stories you read in the newspaper about Brooklyn and Bronx.
Except for Queens Bridge which at one time was one of the most notorious housing projects in the city. Queens projects are tame because Queens barley has any housing projects, maybe just a little bit over a dozen and the best housing project is Pomonok which is in Queens. Manhattan, Bronx and Brooklyn are dwarfed with housing projects in and around their boroughs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAS
Here's my prediction, its as good as any so far. NYCHA used to have a cap on rents. No matter how much you made you only paid up to a certain amount. A few years ago they started giving out section 8 vouchers to residents. They also started accepting people with section 8 vouchers. Some people that were residents did not see the need to apply since the rents were based on income similar to section 8. Once you hit the cap that was it.
Fast forward to today. The cap is off because funding from the Feds was cut alot. Its strictly by income so you now have working people paying $1200, $1500, $1800 etc. So what are they looking to do, since there rent is so high? They are buying Mitchel Lama coops, and putting down payments on houses. While non working, or very low income people move into the apts after they move out. Most new residents are from shelters, a few are disabled, or seniors.
I think you are going to have very high crime near projects, especially in the Bronx, since many shelters other housing are there. Many of the city's poor were pushed into the Bronx because of rising rents in the other boros, and gentrification. Gentrification is more than just rising rents. It demands a life style change, the whole economy of any area changes to support the new residents. The people that were there before gentrification usually are unable to adjust financially and must move on.
Areas with private homes will become better as more middle income people start investing in buying homes in areas that were previously a little run down. As long as the real estate industry doesn't become greedy. The people with real money will not move out of the trendy areas. They should keep these areas priced to attract working middle income people.
I agree with this. I personally know someone who is paying 1800 for a 3 bedroom NYCHA which in my opinion seems to a be a bit too high, however 1800 is like market rate in some areas of the city. NYCHA rents will continue to go up on those who work and make a decent wage or salary and will probably displace those residents since they can not keep with yearly 200 dollar increases. Working class folks do not benefit from NYCHA and only the working poor do which it was designed for initially. NYCHA needs 20 billion dollars in aide to improve the whole entire system on the cheap. That's more than NASA annual 16 billion dollar budget that the Feds can nearly afford. The funny thing about NYCHA is that its really a mixed income housing now a days. You might have one family paying 2k for one apartment a month and for the same apartment below another family is paying 400 dollars a month.
My prediction is that NYCHA will continue to deteriorate over time if Albany and Washington does not step in the aid the broke authority. More of the working class to lower middle class folks that live in NYCHA will be pushed out or forced to move because they can not afford rent increases while their wages remain stagnant. This will free up apartments and yes more and more poor people will move into them. Wasnt it recently that NYCHA wanted to experiment with letting excons move back into developments? The good tenenats who worked and kept the building decent enough will be gone. Also NYCHA will sell some buildings in order to generate revenue which imo is the right thing for them to do. NYCHA sold a building here in Mott Haven recently and many more are going to go.
What I find amazing is the amount of gentrification in this city are right next to housing projects, and how gentrification circumnavigates in and around project development. In downtown Brooklyn you see NYCHA buildings across the street from Condos. I don't think projects stop or hinder gentrification. If that is the case LES, Bedstuy, Fort Greene, Downtown Brooklyn, Harlem, Astoria, Mott Haven and a slew of other neighborhoods wont have any gentrification due to the projects. Also lands next to housing projects are not cheap either and being grabbed like hotcakes on a Saturday brunch.
Last edited by Bronxguyanese; 03-17-2015 at 10:21 AM..
All it takes is couple of rats moving in and other rats will come for their feeding. All the momentum built up by gentrification will go down the drain with De Blasio's plan. Just because the poor can get help with rent doesn't mean they can afford the cost of living nearby. Sure, more city assistance will cover that and enjoy your income taxes going to these people.
I agree with this. I personally know someone who is paying 1800 for a 3 bedroom NYCHA which in my opinion seems to a be a bit too high, however 1800 is like market rate in some areas of the city. NYCHA rents will continue to go up on those who work and make a decent wage or salary and will probably displace those residents since they can not keep with yearly 200 dollar increases. Working class folks do not benefit from NYCHA and only the working poor do which it was designed for initially. NYCHA needs 20 billion dollars in aide to improve the whole entire system on the cheap. That's more than NASA annual 16 billion dollar budget that the Feds can nearly afford. The funny thing about NYCHA is that its really a mixed income housing now a days. You might have one family paying 2k for one apartment a month and for the same apartment below another family is paying 400 dollars a month.
My prediction is that NYCHA will continue to deteriorate over time if Albany and Washington does not step in the aid the broke authority. More of the working class to lower middle class folks that live in NYCHA will be pushed out or forced to move because they can not afford rent increases while their wages remain stagnant. This will free up apartments and yes more and more poor people will move into them. Wasnt it recently that NYCHA wanted to experiment with letting excons move back into developments? The good tenenats who worked and kept the building decent enough will be gone. Also NYCHA will sell some buildings in order to generate revenue which imo is the right thing for them to do. NYCHA sold a building here in Mott Haven recently and many more are going to go.
What I find amazing is the amount of gentrification in this city are right next to housing projects, and how gentrification circumnavigates in and around project development. In downtown Brooklyn you see NYCHA buildings across the street from Condos. I don't think projects stop or hinder gentrification. If that is the case LES, Bedstuy, Fort Greene, Downtown Brooklyn, Harlem, Astoria, Mott Haven and a slew of other neighborhoods wont have any gentrification due to the projects. Also lands next to housing projects are not cheap either and being grabbed like hotcakes on a Saturday brunch.
I have sources at NYCHRA and many people are coming in for one shot deals that are working and living in NYCHA. This is how they are aware of the rents. Working people are searching earnestly for other housing alternatives. Developers are renovating old houses in the Bronx now. This can be a better alternative for people because coop loans are harder to come by. Also 2 or 3 generations can live in 2 or 3 family homes.
All it takes is couple of rats moving in and other rats will come for their feeding. All the momentum built up by gentrification will go down the drain with De Blasio's plan. Just because the poor can get help with rent doesn't mean they can afford the cost of living nearby. Sure, more city assistance will cover that and enjoy your income taxes going to these people.
Don't you just love income redistribution?
Not even.
Gentrification is far greater than any one mayor.
Bloomberg I might add was a Democrats for most of his life and only became a Republican because no one else was running as a Republican in 2001. He got Rudy's endorsement and rode that into office.
But much of Bloomberg's politics were progressive and even called nanny state. De Blasio is more of the same.
And yet the corporate sector had major expansions under Bloomberg's "nanny" state, and you had the completely destruction of industrial working class neighborhoods, to be replaced by hip and cool white collar jobs and professionals. All of this is continuing under de Blasio and has not slowed down at all.
You needn't worry about the rich or the upper middle class. Truthfully the rich never left NYC, not under Lindsay and not under Dinkins either. Gentrified midtown and UES and Midtown East did not become poor neighborhoods once they pushed the poor out.
What got wiped out under Bloomberg, and what will continue to get wiped out under de Blasio is working class people and small businesses. The only working class people really necessary to the city at this point are civil servants and those working in the service sector. Others can go bye bye (warehouses can all go to Jersey, shipping already has), manufacturing is dead, back office paper processing work has largely been pushed out of the city etc.
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.
