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.
Why aren't there more middle income Housing Preservation & Development (HPD) lotteries with a certain amount of apartments reserved specifically for people currently living in the same neighborhood at affordable rates? This practice already happens at least on a small scale (I have three friends who bought this way in Harlem). We need to see more of this in the other boroughs.
There are actually a lot of HPD middle income developments all around the city with %'s of units set aside for neighborhood residents and city workers.Here is a link to a list of current lotteries. HPD - Apartment Seekers - Current Housing Lotteries
There are always more being added.
The fact that you know 3 people who have bought apartments this way should be an indication that the program is bigger than you think.
It's critical that 'normal' people can get housing in and around the city and more effort should be spent to make affordable housing available, but I'm torn on the housing lottery. On the one hand, someone get's a great deal for a new home. On the other something like 19 people end up paying more for their own homes (and/or in local taxes to allow for the subsidy to the developer) for that one lucky winner (I believe typically 5% of a building gets reserved for lottery). It doesn't seem equitable. I'd rather see more effort towards reducing the obstacles required to create new affordable housing, relaxing zoning restrictions and creating greater housing density in low density areas, so that everyone can benefit. The land is not an issue ... there are plenty of parking lots and 2 story buildings around that wouldn't be missed if replaced with something that might hold more housing units). My $0.02.
It's critical that 'normal' people can get housing in and around the city and more effort should be spent to make affordable housing available, but I'm torn on the housing lottery. On the one hand, someone get's a great deal for a new home. On the other something like 19 people end up paying more for their own homes (and/or in local taxes to allow for the subsidy to the developer) for that one lucky winner (I believe typically 5% of a building gets reserved for lottery). It doesn't seem equitable. I'd rather see more effort towards reducing the obstacles required to create new affordable housing, relaxing zoning restrictions and creating greater housing density in low density areas, so that everyone can benefit. The land is not an issue ... there are plenty of parking lots and 2 story buildings around that wouldn't be missed if replaced with something that might hold more housing units). My $0.02.
I completely agree with every single word written here.
It's critical that 'normal' people can get housing in and around the city and more effort should be spent to make affordable housing available, but I'm torn on the housing lottery. On the one hand, someone get's a great deal for a new home. On the other something like 19 people end up paying more for their own homes (and/or in local taxes to allow for the subsidy to the developer) for that one lucky winner (I believe typically 5% of a building gets reserved for lottery). It doesn't seem equitable. I'd rather see more effort towards reducing the obstacles required to create new affordable housing, relaxing zoning restrictions and creating greater housing density in low density areas, so that everyone can benefit. The land is not an issue ... there are plenty of parking lots and 2 story buildings around that wouldn't be missed if replaced with something that might hold more housing units). My $0.02.
the zoning resolution is antiquated.....i believe it was written in 1961.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
There are actually a lot of HPD middle income developments all around the city with %'s of units set aside for neighborhood residents and city workers.Here is a link to a list of current lotteries. HPD - Apartment Seekers - Current Housing Lotteries
There are always more being added.
The fact that you know 3 people who have bought apartments this way should be an indication that the program is bigger than you think.
Not really, the fact that they were all in Harlem indicated to me that the program wasn't inclusive of many neighborhoods at all.
There are actually a lot of HPD middle income developments all around the city with %'s of units set aside for neighborhood residents and city workers.Here is a link to a list of current lotteries. HPD - Apartment Seekers - Current Housing Lotteries
There are always more being added.
The fact that you know 3 people who have bought apartments this way should be an indication that the program is bigger than you think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple][
It's critical that 'normal' people can get housing in and around the city and more effort should be spent to make affordable housing available, but I'm torn on the housing lottery. On the one hand, someone get's a great deal for a new home. On the other something like 19 people end up paying more for their own homes (and/or in local taxes to allow for the subsidy to the developer) for that one lucky winner (I believe typically 5% of a building gets reserved for lottery). It doesn't seem equitable. I'd rather see more effort towards reducing the obstacles required to create new affordable housing, relaxing zoning restrictions and creating greater housing density in low density areas, so that everyone can benefit. The land is not an issue ... there are plenty of parking lots and 2 story buildings around that wouldn't be missed if replaced with something that might hold more housing units). My $0.02.
There are plenty of empty lots and buildings that could be gutted and renovated but developers aren't going to invest in these projects unless there's a certain profit margin for them. And, with the number of people in New York with means, plus those banging down the door to get in, there seems to be a built-in market for high-end residential. I don't think the problem has to do with zoning. Building middle class housing just doesn't bring in the dollars. I think the lotteries are a start. It'll at least add affordable units where there are none.
Also, I reviewed the HPD website for housing in the lottery and given the size of New York City, and its population, the number of offerings is pitiful and lack neighborhood diversity.
I also wish there would be more developments joining the Mitchell-Lama program than leaving.
And, with the number of people in New York with means, plus those banging down the door to get in, there seems to be a built-in market for high-end residential. I don't think the problem has to do with zoning. Building middle class housing just doesn't bring in the dollars. I think the lotteries are a start.
In saying 'New York City' I really mean the entire city, not just Manhattan. I don't think there are a high number of high rollers seeking that dream pad in queens.
I think one example is Long Island City. That area was nothing until Rose Properties got the zoning approval to redeveloped it. And yes, it's not 'cheap'. Yet. But that's just how things work, it's new. Give it ten years and a few more projects and in inflation adjusted terms those rents will look attractive the rents won't go down in actual dollars, but they simply won't rise as fast as inflation due to increasing supply. This is how other cities solve the housing problem, they encourage increased supply instead of trying to manipulate prices (which typically has the effect of reducing supply).
There are plenty of empty lots and buildings that could be gutted and renovated but developers aren't going to invest in these projects unless there's a certain profit margin for them. And, with the number of people in New York with means, plus those banging down the door to get in, there seems to be a built-in market for high-end residential. I don't think the problem has to do with zoning. Building middle class housing just doesn't bring in the dollars. I think the lotteries are a start. It'll at least add affordable units where there are none.
Also, I reviewed the HPD website for housing in the lottery and given the size of New York City, and its population, the number of offerings is pitiful and lack neighborhood diversity.
I also wish there would be more developments joining the Mitchell-Lama program than leaving.
When you build high-end residential, you give wealthier people somewhere else to go, so they don't move into older housing. Thus, less competition for older housing and it keeps prices for older housing lower.
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.
