October 3 - 16, 2012
17
Who can afford affordable housing? Continued from page 5
the remaining $12,663,000 to the High Line to support the long-term upkeep and maintenance of the park.” On June 23, 2005, the City Council approved the three ULURP applications for the West Chelsea/High Line proposal. “After 90 percent of the High Line Transfer Corridor floor area is transferred to the receiving sites or is otherwise used, as an alternative to the High Line transfer, an increase in floor area would be permitted in exchange for contributions to an Affordable Housing Fund. The contribution amount per square foot would be determined by the City Planning Commission at the time that the fund is established,” the agreement stated. At that point, a projected $10 million of the High Line money could become available for land acquisitions for affordable housing and placed in the AHT, along with the money already in the pot. “Also, keep in mind that the formula used in the zoning context is adjusted annually per the Consumer Price Index, so this number is likely to increase over time,” said Marino.
BUYER’S REMORSE FOLLOWS CB4 VOTE CPC’s September 5 approval of the Jamestown plan came about from a June 6 CB4 resolution, passed by the full board in the form of a 24 to 17 “No Unless” vote denying the expansion/rezoning unless Jamestown agreed to fund affordable housing. The CB4 resolution was initiated by the Chelsea Planning & Preservation Committee (CPP), also known as the Chelsea Land Use Committee, which heard Jamestown’s proposal. Co-chair Lee Compton and Joe Restuccia, co-chair of the Housing, Health & Human Resources (HHHS) Committee, put together the last-minute housing deal that convinced CPP to approve the deal (Compton was on vacation at press time, and Restuccia did not return Chelsea Now’s phone calls). “Some new members didn’t even realize that Joe was not a committee member when Lee asked him to come and present his case,” said an anonymous source. “If not for the housing component, the plan would have been rejected outright.” Mary Swartz, who has since resigned from the committee (for other reasons), apologized in front of the full board for her vote in favor. “I was surprised that it even came up in committee,” she said to Chelsea Now in a phone interview. “Affordable housing made this wrong plan conceivable. It was a bad vote, a bad idea and a bad precedent, more wrong than could be cured by even 27 percent — if it ever gets built.” At the full board meeting, Pamela
Wolff, co-chair of the Landmarks Committee, proposed a substitute “No Because” resolution to CPP’s letter in support of the affordable housing concession. Her resolution was narrowly defeated by four votes out of 47. For details, access the Chelsea Now web-
Said a skeptical Michael McKee, treasurer of Tenant PAC, ‘Even if it were not a fraud, 45 or 100 units of housing, which may or may not be built, which may or may not be affordable housing, is not worth swallowing this hideous development.’ site (chelseanow.com) and search for the June 15, 2012 article: “CB4 gives tepid green light to Chelsea Market expansion.”
LIKELY HOUSING LOCATION RECALLS 2005 PREMISE, PROMISE Miguel Acevedo, president of the Fulton Houses Tenants Association, director of Fulton Youth of the Future and member of CB4’s CPP and HHHS committees, told Chelsea Now that he was the first person to propose creating an Affordable Housing Trust Fund. “Why not take the money from the High Line bonus?” he asked. “This was commercial real estate and had never been done this way. It gives us money to put into a fund for a future project in the community.” Acevedo pointed out that Irwin Cohen, former owner of Chelsea Market, proposed it himself in 2005. “He said maybe we could create affordable housing with the High Line bonus with the redevelopment on top of Chelsea Market.” CB4 cannot request a site where the money is going, acknowledged Acevedo, but it can make a recommendation — or the City Council and city can. “That’s why we came up with the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. “Of course,” he admitted, “I am going to advocate for Fulton Houses.” Acevedo is also anticipating Jamestown’s commitment to creating job opportunities and training for people in the community at the proposed hightech center that will sit atop the Chelsea Market. While the housing fund money cannot
be earmarked for a particular site, HPD sent a letter to CPC saying they have the need for the money at the Fulton location, “suggesting they’re going to use it there when they get it,” said Bob Benfatto, district manager of CB4. “Technically, we can’t ask for money,” he admitted. The funds will go towards the city’s purchase of the West 18th Street NYCHA property; in essence, one city agency is paying another. The original monetary promise in the first rezoning was around $8 million, but there was no mention of finding the money to purchase land, stated Berman. “They just said they were going to build it. We don’t blame NYCHA, but the city.” Artimus, the construction company that had previously won the Request for Proposal (RFP) for West 18th Street has already built an Elliott Chelsea building, ostensibly for low– to medium-income families at 401 West 25th Street near Ninth Avenue on NYCHA-owned land, which opened this April. The 22-story, 168-unit development cost $65 million, funded through a mix of private and public sources. Berman, however, alleged that since the construction cost more than anticipated, the developer paid for it “by stuffing more market rate housing into it, which was not supposed to be part of the deal.”
WHO CAN AFFORD ‘AFFORDABLE HOUSING?’ One-third of the units were slated for “affordable housing,” but “It’s for people who make 195 percent of AMI [Average Median Income],” he said. According to
See Page 26
CB4’s own data, for a single individual, annual income comes in at $113,000. “It’s another series of broken promises,” Berman asserted. Artimus did not return phone calls or email requests for a response. Acevedo, too, questioned AMI figures for low- to moderate- and middle-income — that is, from $30,000 to $150,000. “How does a family of four survive on $30,000?” he asked. “When they created AMI, it was supposed to be 30 percent of income for rent, but that’s gross not net. When you break down taxes, it becomes 40 percent.” He added,“but that’s another conversation.” As Norma Aviles commented at the rally, “The developers say they are going to build affordable housing, but it’s not for people who look like me.” Aviles of Chelsea Coalition on Housing, a grassroots tenants organization, and a fourthgeneration Chelsea resident of Puerto Rican descent, added, “Including a contribution to a so-called ‘Affordable Housing Fund’ doesn’t make the plan any more palatable.” While there seems to be general support for Chelsea Market expansion, Berman and company have vowed to keep up the fight — asking people to write to Speaker Quinn and the City Council and tell them to vote no, preserve the market and stop overdevelopment. Said a skeptical Michael McKee, treasurer of Tenant PAC, “Even if it were not a fraud, 45 or 100 units of housing, which may or may not be built, which may or may not be affordable housing, is not worth swallowing this hideous development.”