The New York Times takes a look at the Kalahari and the differences in living in a mixed income development. The building on 116th Street, between 5th and Lenox, has a total of 249 units all together and 120 of them are under the affordable category. Along with the bankers that have moved in, there apparently are people making average salaries, such as teachers and policemen, living in the building. The article states that roughly half the building is white and the other half are a black, hispanic and asian. Sound like things are working out with the new neighbors and the only major shocking thing about the affordable apartments are the wall-to-wall carpet and the popcorn ceiling. The market rate units all have bamboo floors and smooth finishes. Read more in the NY Times: LINK. Photo by Ulysses
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
☞ READ: The Kalahari Mixes Things Up
The New York Times takes a look at the Kalahari and the differences in living in a mixed income development. The building on 116th Street, between 5th and Lenox, has a total of 249 units all together and 120 of them are under the affordable category. Along with the bankers that have moved in, there apparently are people making average salaries, such as teachers and policemen, living in the building. The article states that roughly half the building is white and the other half are a black, hispanic and asian. Sound like things are working out with the new neighbors and the only major shocking thing about the affordable apartments are the wall-to-wall carpet and the popcorn ceiling. The market rate units all have bamboo floors and smooth finishes. Read more in the NY Times: LINK. Photo by Ulysses
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So...the one lottery winner gets a steal of a deal on a two bedroom and rents out the 'spare' room at market rate. Doesn't seem right to me. That aside, I'm all for the mixed income buildings.
ReplyDeleteI would never buy at market in a development where 50% of the units were sold below market. Expecially a project like this with lots of Federal and State (tax payer) money supporting it. Down the line when when people sell, those that bought in below market are agreeable to selling at a price point that's less than what the market rate buyers might accept. The lucky lottery winners can afford to sell a lower prices, they have less skin in the game from the start. The real ppsf value is not what those that paid market is, it's the 50% of those that bought in the rigged system.
ReplyDeleteCan you imaging walking into Macy's and a clothing item had two prices, one for those making less than $100K another and far more expensive for those making over $100K? Would you go to a restaurant that had menus with 2 different prices for the same dish? One for those making less than $100K another for those making more than $100K?
If this is such a wonderful and noble model and concept why should it not be extended to every sector where consumers make purchases? I'm sure those making $40K / yr would love to sit down at Nobu next to iBankers, all subsidized by tax payers. We can have vouchers issued to modest income earners allowing them to shop at Barney's for example. You don't expect those making $40K or so to shop and dine where they can afford, do you?
I had a friend who won in one of these HPD lotteries for a condo in a converted Brownstone. The process took a while and to keep her income under the limit, she successfully got her employer to defer her salary for 3 months, until she closed.
ReplyDeleteThese "giveaways" are bones society tosses to the middle class and lower income earners to feel good about itself and create the appearance the middle class and lower income class is being served. Window dressing you might say. Well yeah, about 0.2% is being served, 99.8% of the other teachers, social workers, and civil servants still can't find housing.
The Renaissance bldg across the street was a giveaway like this, over 8,000 applications were received for 1 of 291 apartments. Bones tossed to the public to fight over.
I disagree that the lotteries serve just a few. There are numereous lotteries every year, in every borough. Additionally there are numereous HDFC apartments around. I bought an HDFC apartment and I can tell you that I never would have been able to afford to buy otherwise. Entering the lotteries and searching for HDFC apartments does take time and energy but it is worth it.
ReplyDeleteIn many ways, there are similar set-ups in housing all over the city. Consider buildings where some apartments are rent-controlled and others aren't, or situations where residents bought into a co-op or condo at an insider's price when the building converted, thereby paying considerably less than all later buyers. A different purchasing scenario but with the same effect as to the amount of "skin in the game" referred to above.
ReplyDeleteI suspect, also, that below market buyers are restricted from realizing full market price on resale.
ReplyDeleteIn HDFC buildings the owner of a unit can sell for what he or she wants to but there are stringent income limits for the buyer, so the prices never get too high. Also most HDFCs have a 30% flip tax on the profit over what the person originally paid.
ReplyDeleteClearly 11:04 is either jealous or delusional. Housing is not just a "consumer purchase." Without housing, people are homeless. Without a suit from Barneys, you are not naked. You are wearing a suit from Daffys. Macys, Barneys and Nobu are not the only options to consumers in NYC. That's what this program provides. Options for people of all income levels. Through this program, NYC simply helps teachers, artists, janitors... afford to live in the city that they work in.
ReplyDelete11:04 is 100% correct. It is an unfair setup where the subsidized units actually make it more expensive for everyone else. Let the free market do its thing, and you will have more affordable housing for everyone. Don't believe me? See florida, las vegas, arizona. The housing bust translates into cheaper housing for the end user. That said, there is no obligation for New York taxpayers to subsidize people who cannot afford to live here. The left wing sense of entitlement in this City knows no bounds. they also want more. Just look at the Domino factory in Williamsburg where they are demanding more affordable - housing development is risky - we should be happy that people want to invest here. We just left a 50 year period where they did not.
ReplyDeleteI am all for affordable housing, but this building is so UGLY!!! I wish these developers would develop quality constructed buildings.
ReplyDeleteI've never heard of lotteries for condos...I've seen them for rentals. Interesting!
ReplyDelete