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.
Fair enough but I have no experience staying at "top rated hostels". I dunno about that one. The people that will enter into these co-living places do so because they cannot afford better options. The company just frames it in advertising to convince kids it is all good and this is the new thing that is acceptable.
Back to the original topic: I think "co-living" will definately downgrade housing options in NYC. They just fluff it up with "amenities" and tricky advertising but it a step down for everyone. I know they tout it as a solution but it is really just a repackaging of youth hostels or shared AirBNB's and they should not be defined as Single Room Occupancy.
Just google "best hostels" for any random city, and see photos, descriptions and reviews. A lot of people who stay at hostels could afford a hotel without problem, but do not see any reason to spend more than they need to, particularly if the hostel stay can also be more enjoyable.
Having said that, I do have to admit that some cities (and NYC is among them) do not have any good hostel options, and their "best hostel" listings are quite awful, and in no way comparable to the best hostels in some other cities. In that situation, I would prefer to stay at an AirBnB. But 2/3 of the world cities do not have such a situation, ie, they have at least a couple of excellent hostels (many more than a couple in some countries).
Just google "best hostels" for any random city, and see photos, descriptions and reviews. A lot of people who stay at hostels could afford a hotel without problem, but do not see any reason to spend more than they need to, particularly if the hostel stay can also be more enjoyable.
Having said that, I do have to admit that some cities (and NYC is among them) do not have any good hostel options, and their "best hostel" listings are quite awful, and in no way comparable to the best hostels in some other cities. In that situation, I would prefer to stay at an AirBnB. But 2/3 of the world cities do not have such a situation, ie, they have at least a couple of excellent hostels (many more than a couple in some countries).
Hostels are illegal in NYC and state for that matter. Only those that existed prior to enactment of law are still around such as that one in Harlem.
Albany passed laws at behest of city/hotel lobby that makes "short stay" accommodations illegal unless under certain circumstances. As always democrats/liberals/progressives got a hair across their behinds because it was felt these hostels, AirBnB and whatever were taking away from so called "affordable" housing.
It is a 14 day max stay per year at most (but not all) youth hostels in New York City. But like anything else here people find ways around it. AirBNB is one loop hole hostels operate out of their website. But I say let them get away with it because youth hostels help young people experience the city on a budget.
These places are good for travelers and if you live here and get in a pinch and need a place to sleep. You probably get the price you pay for. If you are young and want to stay in NYC and experience it on a budget I say jump in on it but read a bunch of negative stuff that happens at AirBNB's just to prepare yourself and be on the safe side.
Okay, I read the original article again more carefully, and it seems there will be 3 different pod share buildings - a huge one with about 250 pods in East Harlem, and then 2 smaller ones.
It seems that the huge building will be predominantly market-rate (whatever that means - there is no pod share market in NYC yet, so I guess this building itself will establish the market rate for pods), with some pods reserved for people within certain income limits (it does not say low income, though). The smiling guy is the developer for that building. It appears that this large complex of pods will function like an extended-stay pleasant hostel for regular people who like that sort of thing, probably mostly single millenials in entry-level jobs (but as I said, I wouldn't mind a crashpad like that myself, although I am almost retired).
The other two buildings with smaller number of pods are being developed by different two developers (not shown in any pictures), and they will be for low income tenants. These two will therefore likely function as something very similar to homeless shelters, and yes, in that case I could see assault and murder as possibilities...
In summary, I expect these developments to confirm my general observation, that the quality of housing in the long-term depends mostly upon the quality of occupants. I would expect the large building to thrive and have a huge waiting list, and two smaller ones to smell of urine and danger after about 4 months. The first development vs. the other two probably have a very different future.
We can meet again on this thread in a few years, and see how things played out :-).
Last edited by elnrgby; 10-10-2019 at 07:45 PM..
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.
