Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MysteriousHedgehog23 t1_ixd6hpe wrote

The city desperately needs more apartments. While we need to force developers to include a good amount of apartments affordable to local residents, we can’t expect anybody to invest in too many below market rentals. We’d never get any private development. Only the feds can afford to build that - it’s called the Housing Authority aka the projects. City should pull tax incentives unless things meet a minimum standard of affordable tho.

13

Tyrtle-Bikeoff t1_ixev7a8 wrote

I agree 100%... but can they just be like... normal buildings with normal apartments? Like this instead of this?

They're both roughly the same size with the same number of beds and baths, both condo units, but the new one with nicer finishes (and, tbf, a rooftop terrace) 14 minutes away from the last stop on the Astoria line (N, W) is $1.25m, while the one built in 2005 (not even old enough to vote!) with less nice finishes located one stop outside the city, within 5 minutes of 3 different stations with seven services (7, N, W, E, F, M, R) is $880k, 29% less.

3

MysteriousHedgehog23 t1_ixevj0m wrote

I feel you but even that 800k price is crazy 😳. I feel like if you can afford this for a condo, you probably can work remotely and so don’t need to be close to the city lol

2

Tyrtle-Bikeoff t1_ixf5cml wrote

Yep :/ it is in a condominium not a cooperative though, so whoever buys it can rent the apartment out whenever they want and sell it to whoever they want for however much they can get.

I mostly just like that its simply a regular old modest building that was built for normal people. You don't really see that anymore with new buildings, its all ostentatious luxury (or luxury appearing) buildings almost exclusively aimed toward highly-educated childless professionals and not a broader mix of people, often with unnecessary amenities and units that are over-sized and under-bedroomed.

3