Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Sad-Principle3781 t1_j5m85rz wrote

Reply to comment by George4Mayor86 in Opinion: NYC’s residential floor area ratio cap must go by ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

then go build the transit. what'll likely happen is the housing development gets built and there's no more new transit. The investment in transit in the form of capital projects of tunnels is going to cost more than the building. Nobody is falling over themselves to build housing or it'd already be built with exemptions. The higher it goes the more likely it'll be unaffordable luxury. The types of housing that needs to be built, capital efficient affordable housing isn't being limited by the ratio cap, it's just a dumb opinion piece.

−3

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_j5mvz4v wrote

What is "capital efficient affordable housing". Do you have a way of building housing for 300k per unit in the middle of NYC? I suggest you go to a bank and get some capital to make it a reality if you do, because you would become a millionaire very quickly.

By the way if you don't build luxury housing the rich people who would live in it don't just disappear. They come to your landlord, make a high offer for your unit, and gut renovate it. If "don't build and the rich won't exist" theory was true, San Francisco's outer districts would have very cheap rents.

0

Sad-Principle3781 t1_j5n2evf wrote

constructing a twenty story two hundred unit building for 700 million vs four hundred forty story for two billion. exactly as it sounds. I don't know why you'd assume rich would disappear, I'm not saying it. I'm just saying building taller would require you to build more expensive and it's not the ratio that's holding it back. IT's good to hear you know how economics works for supply in a free market. Now apply it to the constraints of building taller. There's no way you'd get more more taller without dedicating more space to making your building work and make it less efficient.

1