From The Real Deal:While New York City has grown in the past decade, some areas have grown more than others. Staten Island posted the greatest increase in population among the five boroughs from 2000 to 2009, while Queens showed the slowest growth. In the suburbs, Long Island's Nassau County took the lead in a number of categories -- including the oldest population and the greatest percentage of homeowners -- as well as finishing second highest in household income. But perhaps the most notable change is that while the city's population grew by 3.2 percent, its total number of housing units jumped 4.6 percent.
7 comments:
The population of the city is undoubtedly higher than showed. I'm sure as much as anyone else that the population grew more than 3.2 percent. NYC still has the lowest vacancy rates in the nation, housing has not kept pace with population.
And I bet my life that Queens is really not the slowest in growth. Queens has been severely undercounted.
Just look at all those empty residential units in Flushing!
I thought it was supposed to be a bustling success.
And they're going to build more?
For who....Chinese farmers that a year ago were tending manure piles in a remote province?
Hardly the class of people to fill all those "luxury" apartments!
Your taxes at work people.
No one has ever answered the two simple questions:
1. how is my life better with another million people in my city?
2. why do I need a 40 building in my back yard?
you mean a 40 story building in your backyard.
Most of the units are purchased on speculation.
When the crash hits are far as the developer is concerned, one asshole hipster moves out they could put in an extended family that was digging up potatoes in the Andes last winter.
It'
s too expensive to live here
There are too many people.
The infrastructure is overloaded and under maintaned.
Cool, that means rent control will finally lapse!
Post a Comment