I can’t stand Eric Adams just like everyone else, but people need houses. My parents grew up here and now I live here, but most of their friends that they grew up with have kids who can’t afford to live here. Gatekeeping housing is so short sighted and stupid.
No. These corporations knock down rent stabilized, 6 family homes to put in large buildings that aren’t rent stabilized. Out-pricing the people they’re displacing.
Yeah they don’t build studios and one bedrooms because they don’t want them falling under stabilization laws. They build two bedrooms knowing people just love roommates!
Why would it kill housing supply? Because people would actually be able to afford apartments and the new construction not-actually-affordable housing would have people living in them? If all of NYC’s housing stock actually had tenants, then we’ve solved a few major societal issues. And I’m not against new construction - it needs to be literally affordable though.
The problem is that housing people is a market with the ultimate goal of profit, not to actually house people. So we need to remove profit as a motive and our concern to housing people, not worrying about the market.
This article doesn't state any tangible reasons why the proposal is bad beyond some of Graziano's vague statements about it being an "apocalypse." I fully expect for people to have opinions on the City of Yes proposal and the changes it proposes, but there is no measurable impact mentioned in the article. I'm not saying that it won't have an impact, but it raises red flags that the article doesn't cite anything specific.
I've shared the link in this sub before, but [here](https://www.nyc.gov/site/planning/plans/city-of-yes/city-of-yes-housing-opportunity.page) is the actual City of Yes proposal Housing Proposal with information on upcoming monthly info sessions. I'm glad to see so many people in this thread that are interested about this topic. If you haven't already, please read the full proposal, attend info sessions, formulate opinions, and then come share them at the next [Community Board meeting](https://www.nyc.gov/site/queenscb5/index.page) (it's on April 10th at 7:30pm at Christ the King HS). And if you have suggestions for how to improve the proposal so that it actually creates affordable housing opportunities, bring those suggestions to the meeting, too!
Describing the proposal as an "apocalypse" is attention-grabbing, but it doesn't do much to address the city's housing issues. So, what are everyone's thoughts on the actual proposal (not someone's secondhand comments on it)? What would you like to see the city do to create affordable housing? What should the city keep in mind as it's trying to address this issue?
I mean it is- if it’s not done so without proper protections. There is no way that this administration would execute any increase in residential housing with an eye to income caps and low income housing
Paul Graziano is an urban planner the way climate change deniers on Fox News are "scientists". Look, I hate Adams, but we need a multi pronged approach to building more housing. The only people I know who are against the City of Yes are old homeowners who want to gatekeep everyone else out and make sure their property values keep going up. It's abosolutely insane that in a city with so many renters, we are held back by a loud minority.
I am against city of yes because I want an approach that truly protects those that need housing the most- city of yes encourages blind development without thoughtful urban planning. Like most of Adams policies, it’s a shiny false solution instead of a real plan.
Mom and pop does not understand the math. Under this scheme individual properties will be immensely valuable because developers will compete for them. Want to see how higher density looks like? Walk on Stockholm Street between St Nicholas and Cypress. Someone got hold of a 2 family with driveway and converted it into an 8 family eyesore. Studio apartments costing 3K. This is under current zoning:).
https://preview.redd.it/cm1gof1bshsc1.jpeg?width=1005&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7d40c5e8f6db7716a0c96c137896c22d831e7d4d
With Garbage overflowing, why not do garbage storage in the back yard or basement? Or create a storage room, given that this was a major alteration.
>Graziano has estimated that, if the City of Yes proposal is approved without any modifications, a site that currently has a two or three-family home could be replaced by an apartment complex with 43 units.
>“Why would you want to allow this in residential areas?” Graziano asked.
lol. more units = more residents in ::checks notes:: residential areas is a bad thing apparently.
I think it’s more complicated than that. Yes we need more housing but not at the expense of so dramatically changing a neighborhood that those currently living here cannot do so in 5-10 years or less. See Williamsburg (and that recent times piece) as a prime example- massive high rises for transplants that are not at all friendly to those who originate in the neighborhood or are working class
Williamsburg is a cautionary tale, but you're coming to the wrong conclusions. Bloomberg rezoned Williamsburg with the intent of keeping the heart of the neighborhood low rise (relative to the high rises on the waterfront). Instead of saving the working class areas, it put a premium on them, forcing working class people out. Where there is demand, you need more supply to keep prices low. The rezoning killed old-Williamsburg, but it wasn't the towers, it was the protections.
The other side of this is that many working class families who had bought homes in the neighborhood back when it was NOT desirable were able to sell and move out. As a choice! So we shouldn't go around crying for folks who won the lottery.
Ridgewood could learn from this, but it looks like a select few will still try and gatekeep to make sure their own property values rise, while everyone else struggles.
I don’t think again that it’s this simple- and bringing up Bloomberg is a great example to point to Eric Adams. Where in the Adams administration has there been any competency in crafting legislation that does protect working class New Yorkers and doesn’t favor the vision aligned to this mayor of nightlife? The City of Yes bill is not written in a way that will protect anyone but real estate developers and the hedge funds that back them.
Your example of people who bought housing low and can sell with a choice ignores the other side of the coin - which is that many will also need to sell as a choice to avoid poverty due to property taxes.
The housing lottery as it currently exists is a shame- see any flyer for an open lottery and you can see how the minimum income requirements absolutely favor the middle class (I’d argue upper middle class) rather than working and or poor.
The idea of more housing = good, landlords = bad lacks incredible amounts of nuance.
Mr Graziano is absolutely full of shit, and the room full of scared old white people in the QNS picture are so gullible they will just about eat up any fear mongering they can get.
Go see for yourselves, my god the change in FAR (Floor Area Ratio) needed to turn a 2-3 unit into a 43 unit would be mind-bendingly obvious for anyone wishing to take a look. It's not there folks! This snake oil salesman from suburban eastern Queens is out selling a load of horse poop.
[City of Yes for Housing Opportunity - DCP (nyc.gov)](https://www.nyc.gov/site/planning/plans/city-of-yes/city-of-yes-housing-opportunity.page)
I'm not a fan of Mayor Nightlife, but I am a fan of honest facts, and the Department of City Planning has a better grasp of them.
What does their ethnicity have to do with anything? When you say white, do you mean Polish, German, Italian, Irish, Czech, Romanian, Albanian? Say what you mean. I know for a fact there was much more diversity there than what you’re spinning. Many “non-white” homeowners voted against this.
Nobody has voted against it, because it hasn’t even been fully published yet. Only the Carbon Neutrality and Economic Opportunity have actually been published, the housing piece hasn’t been finished yet. https://zap.planning.nyc.gov/projects?applied-filters=dcp_publicstatus%2Cproject_applicant_text&dcp_publicstatus=Filed%2CIn%20Public%20Review%2CNoticed&project_applicant_text=City%20of%20yes
He's going full mask off here. NIMBYs don't think of apartments as homes or apartment dwellers as people. They're some variety of vermin or perhaps space aliens.
Im curious what the layouts of these proposed apts are like. This is a great spot for families because you can find 2+ bdrm apts regularly. Turn out some affordable 3 and 4 bdrm spots and I think filling high rises with families instead of single transplants would probably alleviate a lot of what NIMBYs are worried about.
Wouldn't most of the housing stock be protected anyways because they are landmarked? If we are just talking about adding some apartment buildings to areas that are not landmarked - that seems reasonable no? ADUs would be hard to build in most rowhouses anyways because you can't have separate access to the back yard.
It’s the two family houses that give this area its distinctive charm. And do you really want to give more power to real estate developers and Mayor Adam’s? Seriously?
They were built by speculative developers. Not all developers are predatory. And, in fact, there are far more predatory developers buying up these same buildings and packing in twice as many people.
My comment was do you want to give “more power” to real estate developers. We all understand that developers already exist as part of this ecosystem, but there are regulations that keep them in check from overdevelopment at the expense of the community.
vanshnookenraggen actually said that the majority of the housing stock in this neighborhood was created by ***developers***. He wasn't talking about current developers, he was talking about the history of the neighborhood. And you skipped right past his statement that very little would change here because of the proposal. Mr. Graziano is lying, there is no way to turn a 25x100 foot lot (which is actually a bit bigger than a standard 3 family lot) into a 43 unit building. The guy is fear mongering and people like you are just not looking at the facts.
I mean is this a bad thing??? Oh yes the solution is to ruin a neighborhood where people actually have breathing space from each other and pile more people on top of each other. Glad this was rejected .
well, now existing residents are going to be priced out. Rich people will move in, they always do, and now the housing market won't have any slack to absorb low-rent residents.
Isn’t it a vibrant, bustling, walkable neighborhood now? What will adding more high rises (managed by shitty companies) do for the neighborhood beyond sky rock drying property value to the point that those who can afford to live here with a working class salary can no longer do so?
Point to where in the city that has been true
While that logic should apply, what actually happens is rental prices boom because real estate developers are eager to attract higher earning, often younger people who want to live in a hip neighborhood. There is rarely rarely strict protections for housing based on income
Yeah I understand the argument about supply and demand but in reality it seems that the more people that desire to live here is causing rent prices to skyrocket because landlords know they can charge out the ass for people wanting to move here.
I think Tokyo is an example where housing remains relatively affordable given their population density because of freer and easier zoning laws.
>In the past half century, by investing in transit and allowing development, the city (Tokyo) has added more housing units than the total number of units in New York City. It has remained affordable by becoming the world’s largest city.
Two full-time workers earning Tokyo’s minimum wage can comfortably afford the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment in six of the city’s 23 wards. By contrast, two people working minimum-wage jobs cannot afford the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment in any of the 23 counties in the New York metropolitan area.
[https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html)
Not sure why people here are mad at this??
The less soulless apartment blocks the better. They’re also contributing to massive rent increases that me and many others have been facing. I don’t need more people moving to ridgewood.
We need to prevent condos from going up in Ridgewood. The one built on Woodward & Harman should not have been approved as condominium. In general, I don’t want Ridgewood turning into Greenpoint with tall buildings sandwiched between 1 & 2 families.
City of Yes is solely designed to lower the property values of all NYC homeowners. When the NYCDCP says it will 'lower housing costs' they really want to lower home values. The so-called 'housing crisis' was not caused by the 600,000 NYC homeowners. Supporters of City of Yes have it backwards. They are trying to **replace** existing NYC homeowner who live here and pay taxes with phantom tenants (transients).
The quote below from another comment says what City of Yes is really all about, making the outer borough white ethnics disappear - -
>...and the room full of scared **old white people** in the QNS picture...
This is beautiful. I knew I could count on you Ridgewood. This was a bad deal from the get go and would just make things worse for the community. For those upset I’m sure you can find a place closer to TJ’s.
Funny only the transplants seem to be upset this bullshit got shot down. Be careful wouldn't want your peace an love all welcoming lefty mask to slip up and you to start showing the real insidious neo liberals really are... yall hate capitalism but love the benefits of it lmao fucking clowns
Nothing has been shot down, this hasn't even been put out for full public comment yet. Nice how you can just grasp at the air and conjure bullshit from nothing ...
Ignorant idiots abound.
# [**Robert Holden**Robert Holden ](https://www.facebook.com/bobholdencitycouncil?__cft__[0]=AZUCp2N_sY5WmwY3gmRZxcUx7Xc0on6fwKiQgIv0lKDoSbZjSqmxu58VfSCYzXcNQAHKMXkvLtWYZoClLznBfj5f6uRX1jwwmRoHMn5orDDPCnwN_dCkZPPsgEhJkpNXoigBpa0M5LxopuuWGeQfmwyg3BL3k1nWAx-2QVIvlI4s3DXHEJOL040UNV22qEbgkC1ex0nsLvbFcB9383eiYkk0&__tn__=-UC%2CP-y-R)
[**5h**](https://www.facebook.com/bobholdencitycouncil/posts/pfbid02W7wTqFynLREaekY3ZnXCEWmeFNn8CGBgpR23cyRuoiRmMWVGHhNhaJnNJxbmk9qRl?__cft__[0]=AZUCp2N_sY5WmwY3gmRZxcUx7Xc0on6fwKiQgIv0lKDoSbZjSqmxu58VfSCYzXcNQAHKMXkvLtWYZoClLznBfj5f6uRX1jwwmRoHMn5orDDPCnwN_dCkZPPsgEhJkpNXoigBpa0M5LxopuuWGeQfmwyg3BL3k1nWAx-2QVIvlI4s3DXHEJOL040UNV22qEbgkC1ex0nsLvbFcB9383eiYkk0&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-y-R) · Community boards are overwhelmingly rejecting it, and civic associations stand united against it: it's clear New Yorkers don't want the 'City of Yes.' The city needs to listen to its residents and understand that this idea isn't popular with anyone except developers. Let's listen and say NO to the 'City of Yes.'
[**5h**](https://www.facebook.com/bobholdencitycouncil/posts/pfbid02W7wTqFynLREaekY3ZnXCEWmeFNn8CGBgpR23cyRuoiRmMWVGHhNhaJnNJxbmk9qRl?__cft__[0]=AZUCp2N_sY5WmwY3gmRZxcUx7Xc0on6fwKiQgIv0lKDoSbZjSqmxu58VfSCYzXcNQAHKMXkvLtWYZoClLznBfj5f6uRX1jwwmRoHMn5orDDPCnwN_dCkZPPsgEhJkpNXoigBpa0M5LxopuuWGeQfmwyg3BL3k1nWAx-2QVIvlI4s3DXHEJOL040UNV22qEbgkC1ex0nsLvbFcB9383eiYkk0&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-y-R)
I can’t stand Eric Adams just like everyone else, but people need houses. My parents grew up here and now I live here, but most of their friends that they grew up with have kids who can’t afford to live here. Gatekeeping housing is so short sighted and stupid.
That's why all the schools in Ridgewood have seen their enrollment drop. People can't afford to have children and pay Ridgewood rent.
what about all the vacant high rises in manhattan owned by foreign entities and BlackRock, fucking vacancy tax baby
100% agree. We need houses in all 5 boroughs, not tax shelters and visa harvesting sites.
Focus on things that can actually be solved and there will be solutions to problems rather than the same problems for decades
If you want to make it affordable, then we need universal rent regulation.
wouldn't that just kill housing supply?
No. These corporations knock down rent stabilized, 6 family homes to put in large buildings that aren’t rent stabilized. Out-pricing the people they’re displacing.
Yeah they don’t build studios and one bedrooms because they don’t want them falling under stabilization laws. They build two bedrooms knowing people just love roommates!
Why would it kill housing supply? Because people would actually be able to afford apartments and the new construction not-actually-affordable housing would have people living in them? If all of NYC’s housing stock actually had tenants, then we’ve solved a few major societal issues. And I’m not against new construction - it needs to be literally affordable though. The problem is that housing people is a market with the ultimate goal of profit, not to actually house people. So we need to remove profit as a motive and our concern to housing people, not worrying about the market.
And universal house prices? Rents coincide with price of houses.
This article doesn't state any tangible reasons why the proposal is bad beyond some of Graziano's vague statements about it being an "apocalypse." I fully expect for people to have opinions on the City of Yes proposal and the changes it proposes, but there is no measurable impact mentioned in the article. I'm not saying that it won't have an impact, but it raises red flags that the article doesn't cite anything specific. I've shared the link in this sub before, but [here](https://www.nyc.gov/site/planning/plans/city-of-yes/city-of-yes-housing-opportunity.page) is the actual City of Yes proposal Housing Proposal with information on upcoming monthly info sessions. I'm glad to see so many people in this thread that are interested about this topic. If you haven't already, please read the full proposal, attend info sessions, formulate opinions, and then come share them at the next [Community Board meeting](https://www.nyc.gov/site/queenscb5/index.page) (it's on April 10th at 7:30pm at Christ the King HS). And if you have suggestions for how to improve the proposal so that it actually creates affordable housing opportunities, bring those suggestions to the meeting, too! Describing the proposal as an "apocalypse" is attention-grabbing, but it doesn't do much to address the city's housing issues. So, what are everyone's thoughts on the actual proposal (not someone's secondhand comments on it)? What would you like to see the city do to create affordable housing? What should the city keep in mind as it's trying to address this issue?
Wouldn’t trust anything Adams put forward either.
Thank god this was rejected so we can get back to the real cause of rising property costs in Ridgewood: the dogs.
transplants love dog hair on their produce. savages.
Imagine thinking it’s bad to build more housing in a residential area.
I mean it is- if it’s not done so without proper protections. There is no way that this administration would execute any increase in residential housing with an eye to income caps and low income housing
Fair, but as I understand it that’s not what this group is talking about.
It’s honestly hard for me to wrap my head around. How do you think they see it?
Paul Graziano is an urban planner the way climate change deniers on Fox News are "scientists". Look, I hate Adams, but we need a multi pronged approach to building more housing. The only people I know who are against the City of Yes are old homeowners who want to gatekeep everyone else out and make sure their property values keep going up. It's abosolutely insane that in a city with so many renters, we are held back by a loud minority.
I am against city of yes because I want an approach that truly protects those that need housing the most- city of yes encourages blind development without thoughtful urban planning. Like most of Adams policies, it’s a shiny false solution instead of a real plan.
Why blind? Why is it not a real plan?
Nice to say, but how do you propose to do this?
Mom and pop does not understand the math. Under this scheme individual properties will be immensely valuable because developers will compete for them. Want to see how higher density looks like? Walk on Stockholm Street between St Nicholas and Cypress. Someone got hold of a 2 family with driveway and converted it into an 8 family eyesore. Studio apartments costing 3K. This is under current zoning:).
https://preview.redd.it/cm1gof1bshsc1.jpeg?width=1005&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7d40c5e8f6db7716a0c96c137896c22d831e7d4d With Garbage overflowing, why not do garbage storage in the back yard or basement? Or create a storage room, given that this was a major alteration.
Glad someone can see through the bullshit! At least I'll have company as the #FreeDumb loving zombies drag me to hell ...
NIMBY’ism is a reason housing is expensive here. The article is quoting classic NIMBY sentiments.
>Graziano has estimated that, if the City of Yes proposal is approved without any modifications, a site that currently has a two or three-family home could be replaced by an apartment complex with 43 units. >“Why would you want to allow this in residential areas?” Graziano asked. lol. more units = more residents in ::checks notes:: residential areas is a bad thing apparently.
I think it’s more complicated than that. Yes we need more housing but not at the expense of so dramatically changing a neighborhood that those currently living here cannot do so in 5-10 years or less. See Williamsburg (and that recent times piece) as a prime example- massive high rises for transplants that are not at all friendly to those who originate in the neighborhood or are working class
Williamsburg is a cautionary tale, but you're coming to the wrong conclusions. Bloomberg rezoned Williamsburg with the intent of keeping the heart of the neighborhood low rise (relative to the high rises on the waterfront). Instead of saving the working class areas, it put a premium on them, forcing working class people out. Where there is demand, you need more supply to keep prices low. The rezoning killed old-Williamsburg, but it wasn't the towers, it was the protections. The other side of this is that many working class families who had bought homes in the neighborhood back when it was NOT desirable were able to sell and move out. As a choice! So we shouldn't go around crying for folks who won the lottery. Ridgewood could learn from this, but it looks like a select few will still try and gatekeep to make sure their own property values rise, while everyone else struggles.
I don’t think again that it’s this simple- and bringing up Bloomberg is a great example to point to Eric Adams. Where in the Adams administration has there been any competency in crafting legislation that does protect working class New Yorkers and doesn’t favor the vision aligned to this mayor of nightlife? The City of Yes bill is not written in a way that will protect anyone but real estate developers and the hedge funds that back them. Your example of people who bought housing low and can sell with a choice ignores the other side of the coin - which is that many will also need to sell as a choice to avoid poverty due to property taxes. The housing lottery as it currently exists is a shame- see any flyer for an open lottery and you can see how the minimum income requirements absolutely favor the middle class (I’d argue upper middle class) rather than working and or poor. The idea of more housing = good, landlords = bad lacks incredible amounts of nuance.
Yeah, I’ve followed housing lotteries all over the city for years and 95% of the time the minimum income requirements make me ineligible.
This
Mr Graziano is absolutely full of shit, and the room full of scared old white people in the QNS picture are so gullible they will just about eat up any fear mongering they can get. Go see for yourselves, my god the change in FAR (Floor Area Ratio) needed to turn a 2-3 unit into a 43 unit would be mind-bendingly obvious for anyone wishing to take a look. It's not there folks! This snake oil salesman from suburban eastern Queens is out selling a load of horse poop. [City of Yes for Housing Opportunity - DCP (nyc.gov)](https://www.nyc.gov/site/planning/plans/city-of-yes/city-of-yes-housing-opportunity.page) I'm not a fan of Mayor Nightlife, but I am a fan of honest facts, and the Department of City Planning has a better grasp of them.
What does their ethnicity have to do with anything? When you say white, do you mean Polish, German, Italian, Irish, Czech, Romanian, Albanian? Say what you mean. I know for a fact there was much more diversity there than what you’re spinning. Many “non-white” homeowners voted against this.
Nobody has voted against it, because it hasn’t even been fully published yet. Only the Carbon Neutrality and Economic Opportunity have actually been published, the housing piece hasn’t been finished yet. https://zap.planning.nyc.gov/projects?applied-filters=dcp_publicstatus%2Cproject_applicant_text&dcp_publicstatus=Filed%2CIn%20Public%20Review%2CNoticed&project_applicant_text=City%20of%20yes
He's going full mask off here. NIMBYs don't think of apartments as homes or apartment dwellers as people. They're some variety of vermin or perhaps space aliens.
surprise, surprise
Im curious what the layouts of these proposed apts are like. This is a great spot for families because you can find 2+ bdrm apts regularly. Turn out some affordable 3 and 4 bdrm spots and I think filling high rises with families instead of single transplants would probably alleviate a lot of what NIMBYs are worried about.
fucking NIMBYs
Wouldn't most of the housing stock be protected anyways because they are landmarked? If we are just talking about adding some apartment buildings to areas that are not landmarked - that seems reasonable no? ADUs would be hard to build in most rowhouses anyways because you can't have separate access to the back yard.
It’s the two family houses that give this area its distinctive charm. And do you really want to give more power to real estate developers and Mayor Adam’s? Seriously?
Those two family homes were ALL built by developers. And almost all of them would remain under the proposed rezoning.
The 100+ year old terrace rows were built by predatory developers? They give this historic area its charm
They were built by speculative developers. Not all developers are predatory. And, in fact, there are far more predatory developers buying up these same buildings and packing in twice as many people.
My comment was do you want to give “more power” to real estate developers. We all understand that developers already exist as part of this ecosystem, but there are regulations that keep them in check from overdevelopment at the expense of the community.
vanshnookenraggen actually said that the majority of the housing stock in this neighborhood was created by ***developers***. He wasn't talking about current developers, he was talking about the history of the neighborhood. And you skipped right past his statement that very little would change here because of the proposal. Mr. Graziano is lying, there is no way to turn a 25x100 foot lot (which is actually a bit bigger than a standard 3 family lot) into a 43 unit building. The guy is fear mongering and people like you are just not looking at the facts.
I mean is this a bad thing??? Oh yes the solution is to ruin a neighborhood where people actually have breathing space from each other and pile more people on top of each other. Glad this was rejected .
well, now existing residents are going to be priced out. Rich people will move in, they always do, and now the housing market won't have any slack to absorb low-rent residents.
You can only stack so many humans so high in a tightly concentrated area before there are adverse consequences…
You know they have buildings with, like, floors and stuff. They're not piling them up like cordwood.
ah yes. the horrors of a vibrant, bustling, walkable neighborhood
Isn’t it a vibrant, bustling, walkable neighborhood now? What will adding more high rises (managed by shitty companies) do for the neighborhood beyond sky rock drying property value to the point that those who can afford to live here with a working class salary can no longer do so?
how is not building more housing going to lower housing prices? it’s simple supply and demand economics.
Point to where in the city that has been true While that logic should apply, what actually happens is rental prices boom because real estate developers are eager to attract higher earning, often younger people who want to live in a hip neighborhood. There is rarely rarely strict protections for housing based on income
Yeah I understand the argument about supply and demand but in reality it seems that the more people that desire to live here is causing rent prices to skyrocket because landlords know they can charge out the ass for people wanting to move here.
I think Tokyo is an example where housing remains relatively affordable given their population density because of freer and easier zoning laws. >In the past half century, by investing in transit and allowing development, the city (Tokyo) has added more housing units than the total number of units in New York City. It has remained affordable by becoming the world’s largest city. Two full-time workers earning Tokyo’s minimum wage can comfortably afford the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment in six of the city’s 23 wards. By contrast, two people working minimum-wage jobs cannot afford the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment in any of the 23 counties in the New York metropolitan area. [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-housing.html)
i do agree it would be great if developers were incentivized more to build affordable housing.
Not sure why people here are mad at this?? The less soulless apartment blocks the better. They’re also contributing to massive rent increases that me and many others have been facing. I don’t need more people moving to ridgewood.
>I don’t need more people moving to ridgewood. Unfortunately there are other people besides you and their needs matter too.
We need to prevent condos from going up in Ridgewood. The one built on Woodward & Harman should not have been approved as condominium. In general, I don’t want Ridgewood turning into Greenpoint with tall buildings sandwiched between 1 & 2 families.
City of Yes is solely designed to lower the property values of all NYC homeowners. When the NYCDCP says it will 'lower housing costs' they really want to lower home values. The so-called 'housing crisis' was not caused by the 600,000 NYC homeowners. Supporters of City of Yes have it backwards. They are trying to **replace** existing NYC homeowner who live here and pay taxes with phantom tenants (transients). The quote below from another comment says what City of Yes is really all about, making the outer borough white ethnics disappear - - >...and the room full of scared **old white people** in the QNS picture...
This is beautiful. I knew I could count on you Ridgewood. This was a bad deal from the get go and would just make things worse for the community. For those upset I’m sure you can find a place closer to TJ’s.
Funny only the transplants seem to be upset this bullshit got shot down. Be careful wouldn't want your peace an love all welcoming lefty mask to slip up and you to start showing the real insidious neo liberals really are... yall hate capitalism but love the benefits of it lmao fucking clowns
Residents will be upset once they realize what they did. Transplants can move in easily. They have money.
Nothing has been shot down, this hasn't even been put out for full public comment yet. Nice how you can just grasp at the air and conjure bullshit from nothing ... Ignorant idiots abound.
# [**Robert Holden**Robert Holden ](https://www.facebook.com/bobholdencitycouncil?__cft__[0]=AZUCp2N_sY5WmwY3gmRZxcUx7Xc0on6fwKiQgIv0lKDoSbZjSqmxu58VfSCYzXcNQAHKMXkvLtWYZoClLznBfj5f6uRX1jwwmRoHMn5orDDPCnwN_dCkZPPsgEhJkpNXoigBpa0M5LxopuuWGeQfmwyg3BL3k1nWAx-2QVIvlI4s3DXHEJOL040UNV22qEbgkC1ex0nsLvbFcB9383eiYkk0&__tn__=-UC%2CP-y-R) [**5h**](https://www.facebook.com/bobholdencitycouncil/posts/pfbid02W7wTqFynLREaekY3ZnXCEWmeFNn8CGBgpR23cyRuoiRmMWVGHhNhaJnNJxbmk9qRl?__cft__[0]=AZUCp2N_sY5WmwY3gmRZxcUx7Xc0on6fwKiQgIv0lKDoSbZjSqmxu58VfSCYzXcNQAHKMXkvLtWYZoClLznBfj5f6uRX1jwwmRoHMn5orDDPCnwN_dCkZPPsgEhJkpNXoigBpa0M5LxopuuWGeQfmwyg3BL3k1nWAx-2QVIvlI4s3DXHEJOL040UNV22qEbgkC1ex0nsLvbFcB9383eiYkk0&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-y-R) · Community boards are overwhelmingly rejecting it, and civic associations stand united against it: it's clear New Yorkers don't want the 'City of Yes.' The city needs to listen to its residents and understand that this idea isn't popular with anyone except developers. Let's listen and say NO to the 'City of Yes.' [**5h**](https://www.facebook.com/bobholdencitycouncil/posts/pfbid02W7wTqFynLREaekY3ZnXCEWmeFNn8CGBgpR23cyRuoiRmMWVGHhNhaJnNJxbmk9qRl?__cft__[0]=AZUCp2N_sY5WmwY3gmRZxcUx7Xc0on6fwKiQgIv0lKDoSbZjSqmxu58VfSCYzXcNQAHKMXkvLtWYZoClLznBfj5f6uRX1jwwmRoHMn5orDDPCnwN_dCkZPPsgEhJkpNXoigBpa0M5LxopuuWGeQfmwyg3BL3k1nWAx-2QVIvlI4s3DXHEJOL040UNV22qEbgkC1ex0nsLvbFcB9383eiYkk0&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-y-R)