If you’re a developer of real estate, someone somewhere will ALWAYS find a reason to oppose your project. Today’s evidence of this comes from the Times, where they wrote about four proposed high-rise towers in Washington Heights.
If you’ve ever followed any sort of local zoning controversy where you live, you’ll know that the status quo-loving NIMBYs always manage to come up with the loopiest arguments against building anything ever. You could turn a half-burning crack house into an orphanage and these people will complain that your orphanage “doesn’t fit with the existing character of the neighborhood.” You can’t help but wonder what world the NIMBY mindset comes from.
A neighborhood known during the 1990s for its epidemic of crack cocaine and the resulting gunplay has seen an influx of more moneyed newcomers drawn by streets that mingle corner papaya stands with newer, more upscale shops and restaurants.
Seriously. This influx of non-crack dealers is ruining the neighborhood!
The proposed complex has also aggravated persistent worries that progressive gentrification in Washington Heights is eroding the neighborhood’s role as the heart of the nation’s Dominican community, most of whose members are working class and cannot afford the rents the planned apartments will carry or those that nearby landlords might imitate.
“I definitely think we have to create conditions for Dominicans to be able to hold onto their apartments and not get pushed out of their apartments because they cannot afford the rent,” said Ydanis Rodriguez, a local councilman and a Dominican native.
I’m sorry but this completely in-fucking-sane. Refusing to build more housing units will only limit the housing supply in Washington Heights and put more pressure on working-class Dominican folks to move elsewhere, not less.
The bottom line is this: Limiting the housing stock has disastrous results for working people. Ok, so maybe not many teachers and firefighters could afford to move into these specific buildings in Washington Heights. Well if you do build them, someone will move up into them, freeing up a rowhouse or tenement for a less well-heeled tenant to occupy. If you don’t allow supply to keep up with demand, you just end up pricing more people out. How is that liberal?
