A war erupts on the left between YIMBYs and NIMBYs

Image caption: Intelligence. Images: Getty Images

Most ideological factions, left and right, agree that New York exists fist housing crisis. After a pandemic lull, rents are up again, and brokers are up Charge exorbitant fees, Eviction cases clog housing courts. What to do about it, of course, invites all kinds of discussions — and none of them could be more ferocious than YIMBY vs. NIMBY.

There is no agreement on Exact meaning of both terms, but each group can be plotted with strokes wide enough. NIMBYs prefer less development, either from the lens of preservation — keeping low-lying rural neighborhoods as they are — or in the belief, ultimately wrong, that building market-rate housing will drive up rents nearby. Many conservatives, who protect suburbia, are NIMBYs, as they are Ordinary Democrats And enough progressives, although they wouldn’t categorize themselves that way. YIMBY favors more flexible rules and changes to stimulate housing construction and increase the density of designated towns and cities.

For the left, this fight has special significance and real-world implications. Progressives and outspoken socialists find themselves in all aspects.

Resistance to YIMBYism is natural because a large number of pro-development voices ignore the goals of the working-class housing movement. They believe rent stability and rent control should be destroyed, not expanded, and they have nothing to say about groundbreaking laws like New York City’s Right to a Lawyer, which gives low-income tenants legal representation in housing court. They do not publicly support ambition social housing proposals It was embraced by left-wing urban planners. The Bloomberg years were marked by rapid development of renovated neighborhoods, with sweeping redistricting against bitter community opposition. Bloomberg was right in wanting to build, especially in dense and transit-rich areas. His real sin was to target communities of color while largely leaving the lush and wealthier neighborhoods alone. Bloomberg Management selectively Parts of the outer boroughs that were supposed to undergo further development.

But the YIMBYs are right, basically, that New York and other cities have to build a lot more housing than they currently do. Socialists – those with the power to make decisions about the future of housing – are increasingly in agreement. Tiffany Caban, a Queens City Council member who belongs to Democratic Socialists in AmericaAnd the Recently lit up in green Re-zoning in its own Astoria area which includes a large majority of market price units and some of them are very affordable. The project, Halletts North, will consist of three towers, and 1,300 residential units with a quarter of its units allocated at affordable prices. Ten percent of the units will be reserved for renters who make 30 percent or less of the median income in the city area, or $35,790 for a family of four. The development will nearly double the number of local units available to tenants who make less than 50 percent of the median income in the area, according to Caban. It sends a message to the residents of the Astoria Houses in the next building that they do not deserve a safe and comfortable neighborhood. It also limits the supply of housing amid a severe housing shortage.” chirp.

It will be built on a vacant former industrial site opposite a public housing complex, Astoria Homes, and developers will pay $16 million to clean up the site. They will also contribute $1 million to Astoria Houses, build a community space that local nonprofits can use free of charge, and include a public waterfront green space.

The Queens DSA Residence Action Group opposed the project, describing it as an “insult” For residents of Astoria Homes who couldn’t rent there. But Kaban was not upset in the end. This was because there was no viable alternative. If housing isn’t built on the site, it will remain vacant or put to other industrial uses – Kaban has raised the possibility that an Amazon warehouse can be located there instead. Most notable in its public statement was the reference to “supply” and “a severe housing shortage,” a direct acknowledgment that more housing must be built in the city, not less, and that market-price units should be part of that equation. Another socialist, State Senator Aljabri Pressport of Brooklyn, Tweet recently He spoke with New York University’s Furman Center about a study that found that building market-priced units did not force rent increases nearby. This was, for many years, gospel of the socialist and progressive left.

There is some evidence of the growing divide between socialists and model progressive and center-left lawmakers on the housing issue. DSA member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez spoke candidly about Need more housing constructionand, next year, her home area will include Halletts North. Although she has not commented on the project publicly, she is more likely to be a supporter than a opponent. Other progressives who are friendly with the AOC but not allied with the DSA have taken a more skeptical approach to the new construction.

The most prominent example is Yoh Line New, a state councilor who recently became a big issue on the left when she ran for Congress in a crowded primaries that included Dan Goldman, a former multimillionaire attorney general. New goodwill has obscured her troubling housing record: she is one of several politicians, including Goldman, who oppose an affordable housing development project in lower Manhattan called Haven Green. The seven-story Habitat for Humanity project located in Soho will provide 123 housing units, with some for the formerly homeless. The units are for seniors who earn between $18,774 to $37,548 annually. If constructed, the project will also include retail and public green spaces. Niu, however, has joined a lawsuit tangled up the project indefinitely. Many opponents of Haven Green are angry that it will be built on top of Elizabeth Street Garden, a Sometimes closed Public garden. she has Haven Green slammed Because it cannot be sustained permanently because the housing will go to market price after 60 years. But six decades is a very long time. If Haven Green is built tomorrow, Neo will be 99 years old when affordability runs out.

Green spaces are important, but Soho residents can still go to Washington Square Park. Housing development for low-income seniors who cannot normally live in an expensive part of the city should be given priority. She likely won’t sue Caban, given her recent letter, to stop Haven Green. The potential for housing loss – housing, unlike most projects, is 100 percent affordable – remains insufficient to move NEO.

In this very way, Mehboob of the left behaved as an exemplary politician. So did Kristen Richardson Jordan, a socialist city councilwoman (the DSA did not support her campaign) who blocked a proposed development that would have built more than 900 housing units in central Harlem. Half of the affordable housing project was to be allocated, but not quite in the deep levels that Caban won in Astoria. Richardson Jordan described this development as “nothing short of white supremacy,” in a statement That was redundant and ridiculous The development of mixed-use housing has nothing to do with racial terrorism. But perhaps most telling was another council member’s comment made for a local publication. “I’d rather have a lot of empty seats than fill it with more improvement,” she said. NIMBY couldn’t be better.

Leave a Comment