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.
And where will this housing be built? Is there some plan to distribute it fairly across the city or will it be concentrated (dumped) in moderate and low-income areas, which is the current situation?
Will Park Slope, Riverdale and the Upper East Side get these developments too? If they don't, then the mayor is a complete hypocrite. On the one hand, the city says it wants to reduce school segregation, but continues to develop in ways that will have the opposite result. I'd like to see a new supportive housing development across the street from his brownstone.
There needs to be some discussion in politics and in the media about fairness of placing these developments.
Not so much worried about where but the cost. Over one billion USD to deal with such a small percentage of homeless seems totally stupid. Someone is going to make money off this deal am totally sure.
It breaks down to nearly $300k per person helped. That is just to get the 15K into housing. The ongoing costs will bring the tab up more, much more over the years afterwards.
NYS needs to ditch that "must help the poor" mandate in its constitution so this housing as a legal right nonsense can end.
Believe me, if he started talking about building these developments throughout the city, the plan would be dead in the water. Privileged areas are counting on moving the problem "somewhere else".
It also seems like an incentive for more homeless to relocate here. Why not? Seems like a great deal.
Believe me, if he started talking about building these developments throughout the city, the plan would be dead in the water. Privileged areas are counting on moving the problem "somewhere else".
It also seems like an incentive for more homeless to relocate here. Why not? Seems like a great deal.
We all know where this new housing is going to be built. East New York where mayor de Blasio had huge plans for an affordable housing expansion. Well off areas are already developed and politically won't tolerate this. Gentrifying areas are too expensive for the city to do this. So these new low income units will go to East New York or parts of the Bronx.
Being homeless is only a symptom of a much bigger problem most homeless people have. Substance abuse, disabilities, mental illness, criminality, laziness and unwilling to work etc..
Finding homes is just a band aid and will just be another money pit. A total solution must be tabled that includes treatment, education etc... The public needs to know if these homeless people are able to be rehabilitated to live meaningful productive lives. If they aren't than a solution needs to be found for those. Warehousing them on the tax payers dime in public housing for life isn't the answer.
Right now for every success story there are thousands of failures. Those failures cost millions of dollars of tax payer money.
And where will this housing be built? Is there some plan to distribute it fairly across the city or will it be concentrated (dumped) in moderate and low-income areas, which is the current situation?
Will Park Slope, Riverdale and the Upper East Side get these developments too? If they don't, then the mayor is a complete hypocrite. On the one hand, the city says it wants to reduce school segregation, but continues to develop in ways that will have the opposite result. I'd like to see a new supportive housing development across the street from his brownstone.
There needs to be some discussion in politics and in the media about fairness of placing these developments.
I understand it would be amazing if they focused their efforts on affordable housing in manhattan and those areas, but if you think about it, it doesn't really make sense. Why put someone who is homeless or low income in manhattan where the prices are super inflated. It sets them up for failure. They have articles talking about how people are moving out of manhattan because prices are so expensive (food, housing,).
And where will this housing be built? Is there some plan to distribute it fairly across the city or will it be concentrated (dumped) in moderate and low-income areas, which is the current situation?
Will Park Slope, Riverdale and the Upper East Side get these developments too? If they don't, then the mayor is a complete hypocrite. On the one hand, the city says it wants to reduce school segregation, but continues to develop in ways that will have the opposite result. I'd like to see a new supportive housing development across the street from his brownstone.
There needs to be some discussion in politics and in the media about fairness of placing these developments.
His criteria for these housing is very ripe for abuse and people who work in these agencies to sign up their family and friends.
Putting affordable housing in these areas means the mayor is gonna pick a fight with developers in the area.
I understand it would be amazing if they focused their efforts on affordable housing in manhattan and those areas, but if you think about it, it doesn't really make sense. Why put someone who is homeless or low income in manhattan where the prices are super inflated. It sets them up for failure. They have articles talking about how people are moving out of manhattan because prices are so expensive (food, housing,).
Land prices for much of Manhattan, parts of Brooklyn, Queens and even the Bronx make building purely "affordable" or "supportive" housing difficult. Best de Boob can hope for in such instances is to dragoon developers/land lords into providing via zoning and or tax incentives.
Even when the City succeeds in obtaining land many communities want nothing to do with any sort of supportive housing. If word gets out local opposition can and often has dragged things out for years via legal and other actions.
Being homeless is only a symptom of a much bigger problem most homeless people have. Substance abuse, disabilities, mental illness, criminality, laziness and unwilling to work etc..
Finding homes is just a band aid and will just be another money pit. A total solution must be tabled that includes treatment, education etc... The public needs to know if these homeless people are able to be rehabilitated to live meaningful productive lives. If they aren't than a solution needs to be found for those. Warehousing them on the tax payers dime in public housing for life isn't the answer.
Right now for every success story there are thousands of failures. Those failures cost millions of dollars of tax payer money.
But that's what "supportive housing" is. Housing that have the support staff to address these issues.
But that's what "supportive housing" is. Housing that have the support staff to address these issues.
Suggestion - do not respond to people who use a form of the phrase "tax payer's dime."
And you are right, of course.
What's also quite wrong is the willful ignoring of the culture and society that contributed to the problems in the first place. It isn't always about things people can control.
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.
