Mayor DeBlasio announces major plans to overhaul NYCHA (New York, Newark: rent, tenants)
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.
Would really love to see an accurate break down of just how much of subsidy NYCA units receive. From free electricity (which encourages high usage and discourages conservation), parking spaces and the rest.
I kind of agree with this. NYCHA really needs to do something about this. They should start charging rents utilities but at a certain percentage and should be totaled in their month rent bills. They should at least pay 1/3 of a full water bill and 1/3 for electricity. These ideas should be proposed and should be at the forefront for improving and saving NYCHA. This would make residents cautious of using less and conserving energy.
Yeah right on the parking space. Paying market rate for a lot with heavy foot traffic from criminals? Not worth it. Do you know how many shattered car windows I've seen on NYCHA lots? It's completely criminal. Vandalism is insane especially throughout the Summer. My relative had her car vandalized 5 times last year. If anyone outside of NYCHA residents is willing to park there, they are a complete idiot.
Somebody doesn't like your relative, I'm just saying. You think she's just that unlucky? 5 times in 1 year?
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
NYC is really getting you guys down. Look, the projects aren't going anywhere. It's federal law that you can't demolish public housing unless you replace it with public housing. Look at Newark - they're doing the same thing Chicago is. The buildings are still structurally sound. Majority of the issues you hear about are leaks and mold. You don't hear about the facades of NYCHA chipping off, like that 2 year old that got killed on the Upper West Side. Sorry but the reality is not everybody works for a high salary in NYC, and there are jobs that just don't command a high salary that need to employ people. Can't go to Long Island or Westchester - they're just as expensive as NYC for rent. Guess we'll just rely on a rotating staff of high school kids and elderly to ring me up for my Band-Aids and cough syrup. It won't happen. It would be nice if every adult in the US got a bachelors - it's not happening!
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
NYC is really getting you guys down. Look, the projects aren't going anywhere. It's federal law that you can't demolish public housing unless you replace it with public housing. Look at Newark - they're doing the same thing Chicago is. The buildings are still structurally sound. Majority of the issues you hear about are leaks and mold. You don't hear about the facades of NYCHA chipping off, like that 2 year old that got killed on the Upper West Side. Sorry but the reality is not everybody works for a high salary in NYC, and there are jobs that just don't command a high salary that need to employ people. Can't go to Long Island or Westchester - they're just as expensive as NYC for rent. Guess we'll just rely on a rotating staff of high school kids and elderly to ring me up for my Band-Aids and cough syrup. It won't happen. It would be nice if every adult in the US got a bachelors - it's not happening!
Oh I don't know about all that.
It was actually the feds who told NYCHA that Markham Houses basically had to come down. Their position was the housing was meant to be temporary (for those working on defense related projects on SI during WWII and later returning servicemen and their families), but now they would no longer fund the worn out complex. Basically the buildings were old and cost of repairs/ maintenance not to mention bringing them up to modern code was more than they were worth.
Again NYCHA has been there and done that; The Markham Homes on Staten Island.
When they moved previous tenants out prior to demolition of MH it spread some of the worse elements to other NYCHA projects and elsewhere on Staten Island.
The other problem came that even with promises that residents would be allowed to return, that rarely was the case. Building new costs money and even NYC couldn't "give" apartments away. So the higher rents meant many former residents could not afford to return to Markham Gardens.
Finally the last fly in the ointment was the City and IIRC federal government went with the "inclusionary housing' model. That is various incomes levels were mixed into the new MH development with the idea it wouldn't then turn back into a crime infested hood once again. Well you have to offer different things to attract "middle class" residents and people weren't prepared to pay that kind of rent/purchase price for living in that part of West Brighton.
As with Markham Gardens the only way NYCHA/NYC is going to be able to leverage its minimal funds for new public housing developments is to go with a public/private venture. That being said off the bat you will find what replaces any current housing project will *NOT* be another housing solely for the "poor". Private enterprise is going to want something in the way of returns on their investments and that usually means mixed income housing.
Other problems off the bat are NYC already has a vast shortage of low income housing. Where are you going to put hundreds of households displaced by pending demolition of a current housing project until the new is built? It took a *very* long time IIRC can vast efforts to relocate residents of Markham Houses so that thing could be torn down.
Staten Island is not like most of the rest of the city though. I'm not gonna say for sure it would work but I think mixing in these folks with other people in a lower density setting would be better instead of isolating them.
NYC is really getting you guys down. Look, the projects aren't going anywhere. It's federal law that you can't demolish public housing unless you replace it with public housing. Look at Newark - they're doing the same thing Chicago is. The buildings are still structurally sound. Majority of the issues you hear about are leaks and mold. You don't hear about the facades of NYCHA chipping off, like that 2 year old that got killed on the Upper West Side. Sorry but the reality is not everybody works for a high salary in NYC, and there are jobs that just don't command a high salary that need to employ people. Can't go to Long Island or Westchester - they're just as expensive as NYC for rent. Guess we'll just rely on a rotating staff of high school kids and elderly to ring me up for my Band-Aids and cough syrup. It won't happen. It would be nice if every adult in the US got a bachelors - it's not happening!
You can find cheaper rent in LI. LI can be expensive overall though.
NYC is really getting you guys down. Look, the projects aren't going anywhere. It's federal law that you can't demolish public housing unless you replace it with public housing. Look at Newark - they're doing the same thing Chicago is. The buildings are still structurally sound. Majority of the issues you hear about are leaks and mold. You don't hear about the facades of NYCHA chipping off, like that 2 year old that got killed on the Upper West Side. Sorry but the reality is not everybody works for a high salary in NYC, and there are jobs that just don't command a high salary that need to employ people. Can't go to Long Island or Westchester - they're just as expensive as NYC for rent. Guess we'll just rely on a rotating staff of high school kids and elderly to ring me up for my Band-Aids and cough syrup. It won't happen. It would be nice if every adult in the US got a bachelors - it's not happening!
Repped. If they do destroy any public housing they would have to move them into other public housing or give them Section 8.
With that said the city has partially privatized 4 housing projects in Manhattan. I can see them moving people out of projects in extremely expensive neighborhoods and resettling them in the Bronx, Northeast Brooklyn, Jamaica, or certain parts of the Rockaways. Or even in bad suburbs like Mt. Vernon.
wasnt the idea of projects to help people who were down on their luck either job wise or health, until they got back on their feet.
not to give life tenancy.
No it is to subsidize housing costs to those who can't afford market rate housing. That's why rent is based off of income, anywhere from 23-30% of gross.
No it is to subsidize housing costs to those who can't afford market rate housing. That's why rent is based off of income, anywhere from 23-30% of gross.
No small amount of these projects IIRC were built to address the housing shortages during and after WWII. You killed two birds with one stone. Blighted slums were cleared and housing was built for returning servicemen and their families along with others.
That being said you speak to first, second or even third generation (in some cases) residents of housing projects (or at least those who grew up in them), and you'll often hear most were not the crime ridden vertical slums they have become today.
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.
