New York Condo Will Have A 'Poor Door' For Lower-Income Residents

[KB]

OMG, people paying smaller rents cant use the Gym and amenities! And they have to use a door without a concierage and doorman! Its just not fair. Whats next, not everyone gets to eat Filet Mignon?

It makes sense to me. When I go to a sporting event and I don't spend all that money to buy box seats, I don't expect to use the VIP entrance. Want the GYM and amentities pay full price. Now if this "poor door" were perhaps through a back-alley and strewn with trash and homeless, then maybe there would be right to complain.

 

[fskimospy]

Why are they building so many low income units? It used to be that a developer just needed one or a handful.

First, they aren't low income. Second, that was the deal they made.

 

[fskimospy]

OMG, people paying smaller rents cant use the Gym and amenities! And they have to use a door without a concierage and doorman! Its just not fair. Whats next, not everyone gets to eat Filet Mignon?

It makes sense to me. When I go to a sporting event and I don't spend all that money to buy box seats, I don't expect to use the VIP entrance. Want the GYM and amentities pay full price. Now if this "poor door" were perhaps through a back-alley and strewn with trash and homeless, then maybe there would be right to complain.

What part of this being done in order to get city tax breaks is so complicated?

If the city is giving tax breaks, they should bar this practice. If you don't want the tax breaks, don't take them.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Wait - since this is OK for poor people, who get subsidized apartments, to walk through a different entrance, does this mean that corporations that get government subsidies have to be branded in a certain manner, to clearly show they are getting government hand outs?

Koch Industries; A Government Subsidized Private Company That Makes A Shit Load Of Money And Still Takes Your Tax Payer Dollars.

I am going to have to say NO - because the filth on these forums that want to humiliate and abuse the poor, would never dare apply the same treatment to the rich.

Disgusting.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

If you only knew how much money you've already given to the Koch brothers and will continue to do so for the rest of your life.

 

[soulcougher73]

Lets bring back segregation while were on a roll....nah fuck it..full slavery.

 

[Exterous]

The city can, and should, demand that in exchange for their money the affordable residents aren't treated like second class citizens.

Perhaps I missed it somewhere in the article but does the low income part of the building have rules that restrict the rights enumerated for US citizens?

Frankly I don't see this much more of an issue than the thousands of other intra-building divisions that already exist. Its fairly common for certain parts of a city building to be sectioned off from others and charged higher rents\prices for amenities\location. I've seen plenty of structures where if you are staying\working\living in one section you go to this entrance but if you stay\work\live in another you use another entrance. Not sure why a practice at least some 50 years old is suddenly making these types of headlines now

 

[Newell Steamer]

If you only knew how much money you've already given to the Koch brothers and will continue to do so for the rest of your life.

Buying a good or service from them is not the same as them taking $$$ from the tax coffers.

And, if you are a corporation, you should receive no benefit(s) from the government. You either know how to run the business, or you don't. If you don't, you sink and let someone else capture that market share. I am not sure how someone who preaches the ideals of capitalism would even think about sucking on Uncle Sam's teat.

 

[bshole]

Awesome; who wants to see the dmcowen674s of the world that early in the morning?

Those people were literally starving; not wheezing heavily as their diaphragm strains against their 300lb bulk as they post about the coming revolution in an internet browser.

Hey now wait a second, you do realize that Herman Goring was 300 lbs don't you? Fat middle aged guys LEAD revolutions, little people do the actual fighting. So in fact when the revolution comes, the leader of it will most be likely some fat dude who posts on internet forums.

 

[fskimospy]

Perhaps I missed it somewhere in the article but does the low income part of the building have rules that restrict the rights enumerated for US citizens?

Frankly I don't see this much more of an issue than the thousands of other intra-building divisions that already exist. Its fairly common for certain parts of a city building to be sectioned off from others and charged higher rents\prices for amenities\location. I've seen plenty of structures where if you are staying\working\living in one section you go to this entrance but if you stay\work\live in another you use another entrance. Not sure why a practice at least some 50 years old is suddenly making these types of headlines now

Because income inequality has become bad enough that it affects the upper middle class and because the developers are doing this sort of thing while getting tax breaks from the city to do it.

If you're using your own money I don't care if you make a monocle and cigar smoking lounge that you use to laugh at all the poors. Once you start asking for special tax breaks it becomes everyone's business. Don't like it? You don't have to take them.

 

[FDF12389]

What part of this being done in order to get city tax breaks is so complicated?

If the city is giving tax breaks, they should bar this practice. If you don't want the tax breaks, don't take them.

So if they would have gotten those same tax breaks and built no luxury condos or amenities, only the affordable units, would that still be a problem?

 

[Angry Irishman]

It's time for the Russian revolution! Take from the rich and distribute to the collective comrades.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Look at the brightside, the commute for low income workers just lessened.

 

[fskimospy]

So if they would have gotten those same tax breaks and built no luxury condos or amenities, only the affordable units, would that still be a problem?

This seems like a non-sequitur. I don't see how it relates to my point.

If you take special tax breaks and building exemptions from the city the city has a right to impose conditions upon those. I think those conditions should include no separate side entrance for less desired residents regardless of the reason. It's demeaning and it attacks the purpose of including those units to begin with.

If you want to make a building with all affordable units or no affordable units I couldn't care less.

 

[soulcougher73]

Look at the brightside, the commute for low income workers just lessened.

I LOL'ed..i feel bad now.

 

[FDF12389]

This seems like a non-sequitur. I don't see how it relates to my point.

If you take special tax breaks and building exemptions from the city the city has a right to impose conditions upon those. I think those conditions should include no separate side entrance for less desired residents regardless of the reason. It's demeaning and it attacks the purpose of including those units to begin with.

If you want to make a building with all affordable units or no affordable units I couldn't care less.

No one is arguing that, but the fact remains that the city did not impose conditions. So what's the problem now?

And it's not demeaning. I can't get on club level at the baseball game when I purchase general admission tickets. At a lot of condos valet is only available to certain units and their guests. Some condos do the same thing with pools and fitness centers. The idea that sometimes nicer things cost more money is not new, shocking, or demeaning anyone.

 

[Exterous]

Because income inequality has become bad enough that it affects the upper middle class and because the developers are doing this sort of thing while getting tax breaks from the city to do it.

What does any of that have to do with second class citizenship? Is access to a specific entrance or a pool a right guaranteed by citizenship?

If you take special tax breaks and building exemptions from the city the city has a right to impose conditions upon those.

I don't disagree but do you apply this methodology to everyone getting special tax breaks?

It's demeaning

I disagree. There are lots of businesses that received tax money\breaks that still have restrictions on the basis of money or customer frequency and there doesn't seem to be a huge pushback on those which have existed for decades

 

[fskimospy]

What does any of that have to do with second class citizenship? Is access to a specific entrance or a pool a right guaranteed by citizenship?

"Second class citizen" is used in this case as an idiom that is defined as follows:

someone who is treated as if they are less important than other people in society

Source:http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/citizen

Hope that clears up any confusion.

I don't disagree but do you apply this methodology to everyone getting special tax breaks?

All special tax breaks can come with strings attached to them, of course. It doesn't mean all conditions attached to tax breaks would be good ones.

 

[realibrad]

That's not what is happening here though. Here's what it is:

1. Developer wants to make building that exceeds various NYC regulations.
2. Developer wants tax breaks, etc from city.

3. In response city grants exemptions and tax breaks in exchange for the inclusion of some lower priced units.

This has nothing to do with the expense of multiple buildings, this has to do with the developers taking city money to do something and then doing it in a shitty way. The city should, at a minimum, eliminate this practice going forward in buildings that get city tax breaks, etc.

I was responding to Old Gamer who wanted to have 2 different buildings.

So is the fear that people will feel bad having to go through a different door?
Also, if the city did away with the tax breaks, how would the poor get housing?

Its almost impossible to build something new that the poor in those areas can afford. Why would any private company build something for a demo that cannot buy the good?

 

[fskimospy]

I was responding to Old Gamer who wanted to have 2 different buildings.

So is the fear that people will feel bad having to go through a different door?
Also, if the city did away with the tax breaks, how would the poor get housing?

Its almost impossible to build something new that the poor in those areas can afford. Why would any private company build something for a demo that cannot buy the good?

You may be letting the name confuse you. The poor aren't getting these "affordable" units anyway, it's the upper middle class.

Regardless, there's no need to do away with these tax breaks, you can just add the requirement for no separate entrance. The demand for developing land in Manhattan is so high that if one developer won't do it another one certainly will. Simple.

 

[realibrad]

You may be letting the name confuse you. The poor aren't getting these "affordable" units anyway, it's the upper middle class.

Regardless, there's no need to do away with these tax breaks, you can just add the requirement for no separate entrance. The demand for developing land in Manhattan is so high that if one developer won't do it another one certainly will. Simple.

So if demand is super high, I would assume there is no shortage of housing. But, if there as enough housing to meet demand, there would not be high demand.

So if private companies want to build, and its a profitable market, why are they not building? Or are they only building in areas the city allows and that is holding back supply?

 

[Newell Steamer]

It's time for the Russian revolution! Take from the rich and distribute to the collective comrades.

Way ahead of you fella,...

 

[fskimospy]

So if demand is super high, I would assume there is no shortage of housing. But, if there as enough housing to meet demand, there would not be high demand.

Demand is super high and there is a shortage of housing. This is because manhattan is a relatively small island. There is literally not enough space for everyone who wants to live there to do so.

So if private companies want to build, and its a profitable market, why are they not building? Or are they only building in areas the city allows and that is holding back supply?

There is massive housing construction all over the city at all times. Insofar as why there are fewer affordable units it is because demand is so high that they can simply charge more. The people who actually live in the city don't want it to become a place for only multimillionaires, however, so they do things like this.

The city, like all cities, regulates buildings. This is particularly important in an area as dense as manhattan. If you want to build there you accept it. If you want city money you accept more restrictions. Again, it's pretty simple.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Rent has gone up ~$500 in the past 3 years in NYC.

I was able to only get a $100 increase in that time span, but the same apartment I pay for now is about $1,500,.. and it is just a freaking studio!

 

[Oldgamer]

Yep, look at all the smug America hating bastards in here that basically just calling us "Steerage" because we're not rich like them.

Let em be smug.

The rich in France got smug and look what happened to them.

History always repeats itself because humans suck, especially to each other.

It may not be in our time, maybe not now, but if we keep going down this path our children or their children will end up with a 1900s era where the rich have divided the poor and there will not be a middle class anymore because the rich will have seen to that. They build a wall, divide the people and the poor eventually will be forced to rise up against the rich, and you bet your ass when people are dying and desperate enough there will be a reckoning. The people in this country aren't desperate enough yet. But in answer to your question yes, history does repeat itself.