NEW YORK : De Blasio Unveils Affordable Housing Initiative

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by The North One

I don't know, I think in terms of business the major companies in London wanted to be in the EU, I think Brexit will mostly benefit Paris and Berlin rather than NYC.

Berlin isn't a financial center. Not sure why it would benefit from Brexit. Paris obviously is.

NYC isn't in Europe, obviously. Has nothing to do with jobs that need to be in Europe. Those will go to EU financial centers like Frankfurt and Luxembourg.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Berlin isn't a financial center. Not sure why it would benefit from Brexit. Paris obviously is.

NYC isn't in Europe, obviously. Has nothing to do with jobs that need to be in Europe. Those will go to EU financial centers like Frankfurt and Luxembourg.

Excuse me, I know very little of Berlin other than the fact it's cultural mecca.

But yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. I don't think NYC will be notably effected.

[chris08876]

Mayor Signs Intro. 775-A, Limiting Power Of Landmarks Preservation Commission

On Tuesday, Mayor Bill de Blasio signed City Council bill Intro. 775-A. The bill imposes deadlines on the Landmarks Preservation Commission and gives additional power to property owners.

As reported in YIMBY’s mid-year landmarking update last Friday, the bill, now law, gives the commission a period of one year from calendaring to vote for individual landmarks, interior landmarks, and scenic landmarks. If action is not taken on a calendared item by the one-year mark, the item will be removed from the calendar. There is an option for a one-year extension, but only with the consent of the property owner. For historic districts, the period of consideration is limited to two years.

Additionally, any item on the commission’s calendar at the time the law takes effect would have to be dealt with in 18 months, or be removed from the calendar. Again, there is the option for a one-year extension, but only with the consent of the property owner.

Preservationists decried the bill as one that guts the landmarks law created in 1965. “This law effectively makes the designation powers of the LPC much more limited, while providing the agency with no additional resources to perform its complex work,” said the Historic Districts Council on Thursday. The organization represents over 500 smaller ones across the five boroughs.

On the other side, there is this statement from the Real Estate Board of New York. “We want to thank the New York City Council for adopting legislation that will create reasonable timelines for the process of designating new landmarks,” said REBY president John H. Banks, III. “We also want to thank the many civic, labor, clergy, and community leaders… and others who raised their voices to call for a smart and sensible way to help property owners know what to expect and make sure future backlogs are avoided.”

It’s hard to say just when the impact of this law will be felt, but it could easily lead to less preservation in New York City.

=======================
http://www.yimbynews.com/2016/07/may...ommission.html

[NYguy]

http://ny.curbed.com/2016/7/26/12284...-blasio-update

New York City's Ambitious Affordable Housing Agenda Is Ahead of Schedule
The De Blasio administration announced that it’s financed 52,936 affordable homes so far


BY EMILY NONKO
JUL 26, 2016

One of the major hallmarks of Mayor de Blasio’s administration has been the creation or preservation of 200,000 affordable housing units over a decade—and two years in, the administration is reporting that the ambitious plan is now ahead of schedule. A press release sent out today reports that for the fiscal year of 2016, the administration secured 23,284 affordable apartments. That’s the second highest production in New York City history, and the most since Ed Koch was mayor.

With those numbers, the release states, "the Mayor’s Housing New York plan now is ahead of schedule, with 52,936 affordable homes financed so far, enough for 130,000 New Yorkers." It also points out that 3,500 apartments were built for New Yorkers earning less than $24,000 per year, while more than than 4,000 affordable units for low-income seniors are now underway.

[C.]

I hate the term "preservation" of affordable housing. It's too easy to manipulate and it's not adding to the overall housing supply. I'm looking at new construction, which they're not doing that bad of a job actually.

[chris08876]

Note: ... will announce Thursday that it built or preserved 21,963 units of housing in 2016 for poor and working-class New Yorkers, the most since 1989.


= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =



New York Secures the Most Affordable Housing Units in 27 Years

Despite the loss of a key housing program, the administration of Mayor Bill de Blasio will announce Thursday that it built or preserved 21,963 units of housing in 2016 for poor and working-class New Yorkers, the most since 1989.

The total includes 6,844 apartments in newly constructed buildings, according to data provided by city housing officials. The announcement will be made at a news conference in Brooklyn.

These apartments are earmarked for families and individuals who meet income requirements, with about 35 percent of the units set aside for three-person households making no more than $40,800.

“I want people struggling out there to know that this is still your city,” Mr. de Blasio said Wednesday. “We are fighting to keep New York a place that seniors, the middle class and families trying to make it to the middle class can actually afford.”

Although the real estate market has softened in recent months, many New Yorkers have found it difficult or impossible to find homes within their means. Mr. de Blasio, a Democrat, made affordable housing a centerpiece of his administration — even before he took office in 2014 — pledging to build or preserve 200,000 units over the next decade.

Over the past three years, the capital funding for the city’s housing agency has doubled, rising to $798 million this year, from $400 million in 2014.

But affordable housing remains a challenge, given the city’s increasing population, the demand for housing at all income levels and a wave of luxury development that has washed over nearly every neighborhood in the city. And the administration has had little success in reducing the city’s homeless population, which climbed above 60,000 people last year.

The administration has smarted from claims by advocates for low-income housing that too many apartments are being given to moderate-income New Yorkers, rather than to the truly poor, who still make up a sizable portion of the population.

In response, the de Blasio administration has increasingly sought to earmark more affordable apartments for New Yorkers with what are called very low and extremely low incomes. About one-fifth of the apartments — far above the 8 percent goal set in the city’s housing plan — built or preserved in 2016 were for those earning less than $25,000.

“This is an important and ambitious plan,” said Benjamin Dulchin, the executive director of the Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development. “It is truly impressive to see the city not just meeting, but surpassing its goals for low-income people.” But, he added, more of the apartments should be set aside for the poorest New Yorkers.

Even as the city builds more housing every year, thousands of affordable apartments exit the city’s housing programs as agreements expire — unless the city intervenes. In addition, a city program that provided developers with substantial property tax breaks for designating 20 percent of their units for low- and moderate-income renters expired last year. Attempts to revive the 421-a incentive have failed.

==============================
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/n...e-housing.html

[mhays]

Yay, way more expensive for everyone not in the protected group!

[chris08876]

With Ben Carson’s confirmation as HUD Secretary, NYCHA plans next steps

Retired neurosurgeon and failed Republican presidential nominee Dr. Ben Carson is officially the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which will put him in charge of 8,000 federal employees and an agency with a $47 billion budget, tasked with overseeing most of the nation’s affordable and public housing, enforcing fair housing laws, and providing low-income persons with mortgage insurance. The senate voted yesterday 58-41 to confirm his appointment; the relative lack of Democratic pushback was surprising considering Carson not only has no political experience, but no apparent knowledge of housing, development, or urban issues. Likely with this in mind, the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) has already extended an invitation for Carson to come tour the city’s housing developments.


According to HUD’s website, its mission is to “create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all,” by “working to strengthen the housing market to bolster the economy and protect consumers; meet the need for quality affordable rental homes; utilize housing as a platform for improving quality of life; build inclusive and sustainable communities free from discrimination, and transform the way HUD does business.”

Here in NYC, the nation’s largest stock of affordable housing relies significantly on HUD funding (for 56% of its total revenue, to be exact), which is something Carson has some personal experience in. He grew in a poor area of Detroit near public housing complexes (though he was quick to say he never actually lived in one) and his mother received food stamps for their family. But he’s been widely criticized for saying government assistance programs encourage dependence, inciting fears that he’ll support budget cuts to such programs. In a letter to Carson, obtained by Politico, NYCHA Chair Shola Olatoye addressed these concerns:

In 2015, NYCHA adopted an entrepreneurial ten-year investment plan to secure the agency’s finances, increase efficiencies, and leverage private funding to preserve our housing stock, in part through HUD’s Rental Assistance Demonstration. Additionally, the City of New York has funded repair of NYCHA’s worst rated roofs, the first step in our comprehensive capital repair strategy. I look forward to discussing these practical strategies to prevent the loss of public assets that NYCHA is pursuing in partnership with HUD.

Olatoye has previously spoken about how a new (and controversial) NYCHA policy of using private developers to lease, manage, and upgrade the city’s 15,000 units of public housing “very much speaks to the principals of a Republican administration,” a good thing for the agency considering it needs HUD’s approval to move forward with the process.

Another HUD issue that affects NYC directly is the Fair Housing Act, a civil rights legislation passed in 1968 to prohibit housing discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, and familial status. Carson has publicly said that he supports this law, as well as programs that provide rental assistance for the poor.

In an official White House statement, Carson said:

I am immensely grateful and deeply humbled to take on such an important role in service to the American people. Working directly with patients and their families for many years taught me that there is a deep relationship between health and housing. I learned that it’s difficult for a child to realize their dreams if he or she doesn’t have a proper place to live, and I’ve seen firsthand how poor housing conditions can rob a person of their potential. I am excited to roll up my sleeves and to get to work.

=======================
https://www.6sqft.com/with-ben-carso...ns-next-steps/

[chris08876]

Cuomo's 421-a tweak likely gives developers too big a tax break

Recent proposed changes to the 421-a tax incentive program could put millions of dollars in developers' pockets without providing any additional upside for New Yorkers, data from a recent report and a Crain's analysis suggest.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo in January penned a bill outlining the latest version of the policy, which is designed to encourage new rental projects by offering developers a break on their city property taxes. In exchange, developers have to include affordable housing in the completed buildings. Although most of Cuomo's bill is based on 2015 legislation written by the de Blasio administration, a new component could dole out more tax benefits than necessary.

Developers of rental buildings topping 300 units in Manhattan south of 96th Street would have to pay an average wage of at least $60 per hour, while the threshold along the Brooklyn-Queens waterfront would be $45 per hour. The projects also would have to adhere to stricter affordable housing parameters. As compensation, Cuomo is offering developers 35 years of full tax exemption, a decade longer than the 2015 version.

Average wage figures are hard to come by, making the state's math difficult to check. But data and interviews with construction experts suggest that the wage floor will not significantly increase costs, meaning the additional exemption is likely too generous.

For example, an extra 10 tax-free years would be enough to compensate Manhattan developers for a 36% increase in labor costs, according to a conservative Crain's analysis of data from a recent study, even taking into account the stricter affordable housing requirements. If a low-rise developer who typically hires the cheapest labor available were to suddenly hire the most expensive, the increase in costs would be in the range of 30%, according to a commonly applied rule of thumb the industry uses to account for the spread between union and nonunion labor rates. But developers in the wage zones won't be building low-rises, meaning the rate of increase would be lower.

Construction experts interviewed by Crain's—who asked not to be named in an article critical of the governor's proposal—said the mandate likely would push labor costs up by roughly 5% in Brooklyn, and slightly more in Manhattan. That would mean the majority of the extra tax break devoted to the extra labor costs, worth several million dollars for the average building, could go into developers' pockets and increase how much they would be willing to pay for land.

Cuomo's office disagreed.

"The cost of the wage requirement for new residential projects with 300 units or more in certain areas of Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens will be at least as large as the tax abatement to developers," a spokeswoman for the governor said.

================================
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article...ig-a-tax-break

[mhays]

This is why mathematicians shouldn't publish studies on markets.

If development cost is cheaper, then typically more stuff will get developed. The whole supply-demand equation will benefit, with buildings competing against each other on price.

Maybe they'd get a lemonade stand analogy. If Jimmy is making a killing, Jenny is going to notice, and open up another stand. Plentiful supply will become price competition.

[C.]

Originally Posted by mhays

This is why mathematicians shouldn't publish studies on markets.

If development cost is cheaper, then typically more stuff will get developed. The whole supply-demand equation will benefit, with buildings competing against each other on price.

Maybe they'd get a lemonade stand analogy. If Jimmy is making a killing, Jenny is going to notice, and open up another stand. Plentiful supply will become price competition.

Bingo. Anyway, this is the one area where I think Trump will bring in some good. The cuts to NYCHA is gonna force the agency to sell off and redevelopment excess land holdings (surface parking lots) to pay for critical differed maintenance.

[pdxtex]

41 billion dollars, 80k new units in a city of 8 million people.......aside from whats the point, that's also a $%^k-ton of dough..$512,500 a unit....what a deal!! socialism is great until you run out of other peoples' money. .

[yankeesfan1000]

Originally Posted by CIA

Bingo. Anyway, this is the one area where I think Trump will bring in some good. The cuts to NYCHA is gonna force the agency to sell off and redevelopment excess land holdings (surface parking lots) to pay for critical differed maintenance.

I would take it a step further.

NYCHA is facing $17B-18B in unfunded upgrades (leaky roofs, broken elevators), and is currently running $60-80MM annual budget deficits.

The real solution to making housing more affordable in New York is to expand the subway system, and upzone along those corridors. So, lease the land the 300+ housing developments currently occupy to private developers, require some sort of affordable/market split in the new buildings, give current occupants the option to move into a brand new development that has an affordable component, and a unit set aside for them/their family, or they can try their luck finding an apartment on their own, and then use the revenue from leasing the land to upgrade the subway system.

I really don't see any other way. Some of these buildings are evacuating tenants on the upper floors because the roof leaks are so bad. These repairs can't be spread over 40 years, they need to be made over the next 15-20 at most. Even if you don't adjust for inflation over that period, I don't see any way the NYCHA can come up with $850MM per year for the next 20 years to fund this, without massive cash infusions from the city.

[chris08876]

I hope this passes. This could be a good thing unit wise.

But it might just be wishful thinking...

I always thought the FAR ratio was silly anyways. Just another asinine roadblock for quality developments. It should be repealed for everything; hotel/resi/office and so on.

= = = = = =

= = = = = =

State Senate wants more NYC resi towers: Upper house has approved lifting the city’s floor-area ratio cap

The state Senate has put legislation into the budget bill it recently passed that would eliminate the maximum floor-area ratio for residential projects.

The move would get rid of the rule that bars residential towers in New York City from exceeding more than 12 times their lot size, leading to more tall buildings on city streets, according to Crain’s.

Some planners support the idea as a solution to New York’s affordability crisis, as the move could enable the city to zone certain areas for extremely dense residential developments with tens of thousands of affordable apartments.

However, the measure is unlikely to become law, as a spokesman for Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie told Crain’s that his chamber would not pass the measure.

But two years ago, an effort to eliminate the FAR cap did not even pass the state Senate, signifying that the Real Estate Board of New York has made progress on this issue with legislators.

========================
TRD

[chris08876]

Mandating density by train stations would create lots of housing, think tank says

Using California’s proposed bill to mandate density near transit stops in an effort to chip away at its housing shortage, the Regional Plan Association argued this week that large swaths of New York City are similarly underdeveloped.

California's statewide proposal would require at least 8-story buildings on wide streets within a five-minute walk of transit and at least 4- or 5-story buildings on narrow streets up to a 10-minute walk from the nearest stop. The idea is that concentrating housing near public transportation is the most efficient way to address the housing crunch.

Applying that metric to subway and commuter rail stations in the five boroughs, the the RPA found that 85% of the city would need to boost its density to be compliant, according to a blog post published Tuesday.

“New York’s zoning isn’t as transit-friendly as you might think,” wrote the post’s authors, Moses Gates and Sarah Serpas.

The RPA then looked at which of these areas might actually yield new development if the city or state were to adopt a policy similar to California’s, and found that new construction might pencil out across large swaths of Brooklyn and Queens. Areas like Windsor Terrace in Brooklyn and Woodside in Queens, for example, have densities that are too low considering their proximity to public transit, the report argues. And parts of Forest Hills, Queens, and Midwood, Brooklyn, only allow single-family homes despite being within walking distance of an express subway stop into the country’s largest job center.

“Not allowing more homes where they make sense—near jobs and transit—means we either have to build them where they don’t make sense, or not build them at all,” Gates and Serpas wrote. “Either way, it leads to worse commutes, more crowding and a more expensive and less livable city.”

=========================
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article...ots-of-housing

[jd3189]

Sounds good. Parts of Brooklyn and Queens are dense but still suburban in nature.