Wednesday, June 18, 2014

DeBlasio likes things dense

From Crains:

The city Department of City Planning has been studying 12 to 15 neighborhoods across the five boroughs that are "ripe for increased density," said Alicia Glen, New York City's deputy mayor for housing and economic development at a Crain's real estate conference on Tuesday. She also noted that she expects to see buildings to start stemming from the administration's rezonings by the end of 2015. Each neighborhood development will be extensively studied, and each will take four or five years to complete, according to Ms. Glen.

In terms of how much of the new developments will be required to be affordable under the city's new mandatory inclusive zoning plan, she predicted there would be no hard and fast rule.

"It's going to be neighborhood by neighborhood," Ms. Glen said. "There is no magic wand that we'll wave and everybody has to build 20% or 30% affordable housing."

She pointed to East New York and central Brooklyn as two areas that would likely be targeted for heightened development. In the case of Central Brooklyn the deputy mayor pointed out that it is significantly less dense today than it was for most of the 20th century, which means that it already has the transit capabilities and infrastructure in place to support increased numbers of residents. The administration's mandatory inclusionary zoning rules will also be driven by neighborhood needs, she said.


Anonymous said...

So DiBlasio is for overdevelopment for over development sake? Enough already! How about developing parks and green spaces instead. And I don't mean a little triangle with some planters and chairs.

Anonymous said...

The problem here is that developers really get to do whatever the hell they want. Adhering to any sort of standard whether it be a design standard or a zoning regulation is pretty much a joke in this city. Thank you, DOB.

New development doesn't HAVE to be bad but if the city lets it be crap then it's going to be crap. This is true for any degree of density or for anything intended to be either market rate or affordable.

The city doesn't need developers. Developers need the city. Any politician saying otherwise should be investigated to see if they're accepting $ from the powerful real estate interests.

Anonymous said...

We don't need more building, we need more deporting to free up space!

Anonymous said...

Yes because more development is exactly what we need. Who cares that we have mini blackouts in the summer because there is not enough power or our roads are constantly jammed with traffic. Lets jam more people in. Its OK because it will be affordable.

Anonymous said...

Where are those 12-15 neighborhoods that the city is studying? The article only mentions 3 sites.

Anonymous said...

Fewer buildings, fewer immigrants, fewer babies!!!!!!

This man is expert at making enemies!

Anonymous said...

Crains has really been putting out some good articles these days. Keep a steady eye on 'em, Crappy.

Anonymous said...

Cant just blame this on DiBlazio - the LIC Partnership had a developer love fest recently and it truly turned ones stomach.

This issue of dense development came up in the context of extending development to communities of 1 and 2 family homes (so be forewarned Queens!)

The needs of developers and hipsters in LIC are going to take over the borough's resources.

For example: the hipster kids and tourists from the overbuilt and half empty 23 hotels (thanks George of Dutch Kills) are afraid to walk around LIC and Queens, so millions will be spent repaving already fine streets ... just to make them pretty. Maps will be put up even through everyone has map apps in their phone! Nothing like catering to those whose phones were not recharged. When it comes to development leave no stone unturned!

Transportation resources are not going to be used for potholes and your neighborhood but will be diverted to making access up and down the East River (who knew that was an issue?) great for the hipsters that aren't even living there yet.

The local community was almost invisible on the stage, in the discussion, and certainly in the audience.

Their concerns (and existence) hardly mentioned.

Displacement anyone?

Gets better.

They want manufacturing and residential in the same building!

Yes, my friends, the sweatshop will soon be legal so that the 3rd world types can move right in to something that makes them comfortable and feel like home.

Considering that a significant portion of the buyers are from Flushing with cash augers well for the community, eh?

The event was hosted and attended by ... mostly white people!!! - nary a comment about Queens diversity anywhere!!!

The really cute thing was Jimmy all but prancing on the stage exchanging kisses with the LIC cultural elite who thought the entire pageant was just peachy.

I am looking forward to the coverage by the press where the event will be whispered in hallowed tones.

Did I say our lovely borough president was in attendance and she mentioned that she has two lovely children .... yet again?

Final note: someone from Partnership for NYC said that Queens "did not need community benefit dimensions" when it comes to development.

Anonymous said...

Hunters Point Resident:

The previous poster pretty much summarizes that we have become invisible and our community is being pushed out.

Neighbors don't talk to each other anymore. We have all become suspicious of each other as people are ringing our bells trying to pay us cash for our properties as they try to entice us to move out.

Who knows if something gets built next door. No one wants a 20 story building a few feet from their kitchen window.

Its nice Manducatis is doing well and they mean well but we all know in the long run there is no future for our community.

Astoria had better learn from our experience. High rises blocking your view of the city is only the first step. You have no idea what they have planned for you. Do not trust your politicians.

They only care about one thing and its not you or your family.

JQ said...

Vision Zero Personal Space

Anonymous said...

Cowboy development and incompetent political and cultural leadership.