rpa.org
Open in
urlscan Pro
2606:4700:3030::ac43:d667
Public Scan
URL:
https://rpa.org/work/reports/nychas-crisis
Submission: On January 29 via manual from US — Scanned from US
Submission: On January 29 via manual from US — Scanned from US
Form analysis 1 forms found in the DOM
https://rpa.org/work/reports
<form class="search js-search search--absolute-filters" action="https://rpa.org/work/reports">
<div class="search__inner">
<header class="search__header">
<button class="search__submit js-search-submit" type="submit" aria-label="Search">
<svg>
<title></title>
<use xlink:href="#search"></use>
</svg>
</button>
<label for="search-site" class="h-hide-visually">Search</label>
<input class="search__search js-search-query" type="text" name="q" id="search-site" value="" autocorrect="off" autocapitalize="off" autocomplete="off" placeholder="Search Reports">
<div class="search__filter-toggle h-trigger-child-events js-search-filter-toggle">
<span class="search__filter-toggle-icon"> <svg>
<title></title>
<use xlink:href="#filters"></use>
</svg>
</span>
<span class="search__filter-toggle-text">Filters</span>
</div>
</header>
<div class="search__filters js-search-filters" style="max-height: 230px;">
<div class="search__filters-inner">
<div class="search__filters-section">
<h4 class="search__subhead">Research Areas</h4>
<div class="selectable">
<input name="researchAreas[]" id="housing-neighborhood-planning" type="checkbox" class="selectable__input" value="housing-neighborhood-planning" data-cache-researchareas="housing-neighborhood-planning">
<label class="selectable__label" for="housing-neighborhood-planning">
<span class="selectable__label-unselected"> <svg>
<title></title>
<use xlink:href="#filter-checkbox-unselected"></use>
</svg>
</span>
<span class="selectable__label-selected"> <svg>
<title></title>
<use xlink:href="#filter-checkbox-selected"></use>
</svg>
</span> Housing & Neighborhood Planning </label>
</div>
<div class="selectable">
<input name="researchAreas[]" id="transportation" type="checkbox" class="selectable__input" value="transportation" data-cache-researchareas="transportation">
<label class="selectable__label" for="transportation">
<span class="selectable__label-unselected"> <svg>
<title></title>
<use xlink:href="#filter-checkbox-unselected"></use>
</svg>
</span>
<span class="selectable__label-selected"> <svg>
<title></title>
<use xlink:href="#filter-checkbox-selected"></use>
</svg>
</span> Transportation </label>
</div>
<div class="selectable">
<input name="researchAreas[]" id="energy-environment" type="checkbox" class="selectable__input" value="energy-environment" data-cache-researchareas="energy-environment">
<label class="selectable__label" for="energy-environment">
<span class="selectable__label-unselected"> <svg>
<title></title>
<use xlink:href="#filter-checkbox-unselected"></use>
</svg>
</span>
<span class="selectable__label-selected"> <svg>
<title></title>
<use xlink:href="#filter-checkbox-selected"></use>
</svg>
</span> Energy & Environment </label>
</div>
<div class="selectable">
<input name="researchAreas[]" id="governance" type="checkbox" class="selectable__input" value="governance" data-cache-researchareas="governance">
<label class="selectable__label" for="governance">
<span class="selectable__label-unselected"> <svg>
<title></title>
<use xlink:href="#filter-checkbox-unselected"></use>
</svg>
</span>
<span class="selectable__label-selected"> <svg>
<title></title>
<use xlink:href="#filter-checkbox-selected"></use>
</svg>
</span> Governance </label>
</div>
</div>
<div class="search__filters-section">
<h4 class="search__subhead"><label for="location">Location</label></h4>
<select class="select" name="location" id="location">
<option value="">All Locations</option>
<option value="connecticut" data-cache-location="connecticut">Connecticut</option>
<option value="new-jersey" data-cache-location="new-jersey">New Jersey</option>
<option value="new-york-state" data-cache-location="new-york-state">New York</option>
<option value="international" data-cache-location="international">International</option>
<option value="national" data-cache-location="national">National</option>
</select>
<label>
</label>
</div>
<div class="search__filters-section">
<h4 class="search__subhead"><label for="author">Author</label></h4>
<select class="select" name="author" id="author">
<option value="">All Authors</option>
<option value="brian-fritsch" data-cache-author="brian-fritsch">Brian Fritsch</option>
<option value="christina-kata" data-cache-author="christina-kata">Christina Kata</option>
<option value="christopher-jones" data-cache-author="christopher-jones">Christopher Jones</option>
<option value="dave-zackin" data-cache-author="dave-zackin">Dave Zackin</option>
<option value="ellis-calvin" data-cache-author="ellis-calvin">Ellis Calvin</option>
<option value="jeffrey-zupan" data-cache-author="jeffrey-zupan">Jeff Zupan</option>
<option value="kate-slevin" data-cache-author="kate-slevin">Kate Slevin</option>
<option value="lacey-cotter" data-cache-author="lacey-cotter">Lacey Cotter</option>
<option value="marcel-negret" data-cache-author="marcel-negret">Marcel Negret</option>
<option value="maulin-mehta" data-cache-author="maulin-mehta">Maulin Mehta</option>
<option value="moses-gates" data-cache-author="moses-gates">Moses Gates</option>
<option value="rachel-weinberger" data-cache-author="rachel-weinberger">Rachel Weinberger</option>
<option value="ravena-pernanand" data-cache-author="ravena-pernanand">Ravena Pernanand</option>
<option value="robert-freudenberg" data-cache-author="robert-freudenberg">Robert Freudenberg</option>
<option value="robert-lane" data-cache-author="robert-lane">Robert Lane</option>
<option value="sophie-cappello" data-cache-author="sophie-cappello">Sophie Cappello</option>
<option value="tiffany-ann-taylor" data-cache-author="tiffany-ann-taylor">Tiffany-Ann Taylor</option>
<option value="tom-wright" data-cache-author="tom-wright">Tom Wright</option>
<option value="vanessa-barrios" data-cache-author="vanessa-barrios">Vanessa Barrios</option>
<option value="zoe-baldwin" data-cache-author="zoe-baldwin">Zoe Baldwin</option>
</select>
</div>
<div class="search__filters-section search__filters-section--date">
<h4 class="search__subhead">Date</h4>
<div class="date-slider js-search-date-slider noUi-target noUi-ltr noUi-horizontal noUi-txt-dir-ltr" data-date-year-start="1922" data-date-year-end="2023">
<div class="noUi-base">
<div class="noUi-connects">
<div class="noUi-connect" style="transform: translate(0%, 0px) scale(1, 1);"></div>
</div>
<div class="noUi-origin" style="transform: translate(-1000%, 0px); z-index: 5;">
<div class="noUi-handle noUi-handle-lower" data-handle="0" tabindex="0" role="slider" aria-orientation="horizontal" aria-valuemin="1922.0" aria-valuemax="2023.0" aria-valuenow="1922.0" aria-valuetext="1922">
<div class="noUi-touch-area"></div>
<div class="noUi-tooltip">1922</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="noUi-origin" style="transform: translate(0%, 0px); z-index: 4;">
<div class="noUi-handle noUi-handle-upper" data-handle="1" tabindex="0" role="slider" aria-orientation="horizontal" aria-valuemin="1922.0" aria-valuemax="2023.0" aria-valuenow="2023.0" aria-valuetext="2023">
<div class="noUi-touch-area"></div>
<div class="noUi-tooltip">2023</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<input class="js-search-year-start" type="hidden" name="yearStart" data-cache-yearstart="">
<input class="js-search-year-end" type="hidden" name="yearEnd" data-cache-yearend="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</form>Text Content
Regional Plan Association works toward a better future for the tri-state region.
* about
* Who We Are
* About RPA
* Our Region
* Our Staff
* Board of Directors
* Committees
* Join Our Team
* Financials
* Research Areas
* Energy & Environment
* Housing & Neighborhood Planning
* Transportation
* Governance
* campaigns
* history
* Regional Plans
* Timeline
* Centennial
* Film/Video
* contact
*
* * Twitter
* Instagram
* LinkedIn
* Facebook
* TikTok
* Reports
* The Latest
* Events
Upcoming Events
Discover upcoming events.
View All
Assembly
April 29-May 2: Virtual sessions, May 3: In person at Pier 60 in Manhattan
* 2024 Assembly
* Past Assemblies
Benefit
Celebrate the Tri-State with RPA
View
* Support
* Reports
* The Latest
* Events
* Upcoming Events
* 2024 Assembly
*
* Benefit
* Support
* about
* Who We Are
* About RPA
* Our Region
* Our Staff
* Board of Directors
* Committees
* Join Our Team
* Financials
* Research Areas
* Energy & Environment
* Housing & Neighborhood Planning
* Transportation
* Governance
* campaigns
* history
* Regional Plans
* Timeline
* Centennial
* Film/Video
* contact
* search
* Twitter
* Instagram
* LinkedIn
* Facebook
* TikTok
Dec 2018
NYCHA
NYCHA’S CRISIS
A Matter For All New Yorkers
Decades of neglect and underinvestment by all levels of government—federal,
state and city—have led to the current crisis facing the New York City Housing
Authority (NYCHA).
Table of Contents
Overview
1. The Value of NYCHA
2. A Deteriorating Portfolio
3. The Cost of Doing Nothing
The Challenge Ahead
view report pdf
view fact sheet
share
Decades of neglect and underinvestment by all levels of government—federal,
state and city—have led to the current crisis facing the New York City Housing
Authority (NYCHA).
Despite the promise of ongoing federal support, our public housing instead has
had to absorb ongoing federal cuts since the 1980s, leaving the physical
condition of NYCHA housing to steadily deteriorate over the tenures of several
mayors and governors and through multiple federal administrations. Our public
housing has now reached an unprecedented state of crisis. While both the city
and the state have recognized the seriousness of the situation and begun taking
real and meaningful steps to address it, especially New York City’s announced
NYCHA 2.0 plan, all stakeholders have recognized that much more will be needed
to return and keep New York’s public housing in a safe, healthy, and stable
condition.
None of this has gone unnoticed by the over 400,000 New Yorkers living in public
housing, who have lived this growing catastrophe on a daily basis. Yet only
recently have the human and financial costs started to receive the public
attention they deserve and need. The devastation brought by Superstorm Sandy
demonstrated the physical vulnerability of much of the city’s public housing.
Since then, stories of the nearly uninhabitable conditions our neighbors have
had to endure have increasingly pierced public consciousness—buildings going for
months without heat or hot water, elderly and disabled residents often trapped
in their apartments when elevators aren’t repaired, vermin infestations which go
ignored, and broken apartment plumbing, ceilings and walls taking months,
sometimes years, to get fixed.
The crisis was able to build in part because, unlike the conditions within our
subways, schools or parks, most New Yorkers don’t experience the conditions
within public housing. While many of us may recognize the problems facing NYCHA
residents on a humanitarian level, there is far less understanding of how the
decline of this essential part of the city’s housing stock and public
infrastructure will affect all New Yorkers, whether we live in public housing or
not. The magnitude of the actions that will be needed to restore these homes and
return NYCHA to stability will be costly, and require enormous political will
and contributions from everyone with a stake in its success. But doing nothing
will be even more costly – and all New Yorkers will suffer greatly in the city
we would become if we let our public housing continue to crumble.
This report demonstrates how the state of crisis in NYCHA impacts all New
Yorkers and the implications of continued deterioration. It is a first step in
an effort to develop the practical solutions necessary to restore our public
housing to a source of healthy, quality homes for New Yorkers in need of stable
and truly affordable housing along with the civic will necessary to implement
them.
Related Report
Oct 2019
Time to Act
Restoring the Promise of NYC's Public Housing
RELATED NEWS
Letter to City Planning Commission on Expanded Transferability of New York
Housing Development Air Rights
Jan 12 2024
in Testimony
Testimony on NYCHA’s “Blueprint for Change” Proposal to Streamline Operations
and Address Capital Needs
Dec 8 2020
in Testimony
Politico NY
New York has a plan to fix its broken public housing — it just needs to convince
Congress
Aug 14 2020
in Media
NY1
Moses Gates with Courtney Gross on NYCHA
Mar 5 2019
in Media
Gotham Gazette
Private Sector Failure Requires NYCHA’s Preservation,
Jan 23 2019
in Media
Connect
RPA Sees “State of Crisis” in NYC Public Housing
Dec 18 2018
in Media
Crain's New York Business
Public housing’s failure would be ruinous to NYC, report warns
Dec 17 2018
in Media
NYCHA RESIDENTS AND FACILITIES MAKE VITAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO NEW YORK’S ECONOMY
AND QUALITY OF LIFE
NYCHA housing is found throughout the five boroughs, and NYCHA residents help
make New York one of the most successful, diverse and dynamic cities in the
world. Almost half of New York City’s 189 neighborhoods have at least some NYCHA
homes, ranging from small buildings taken on by the authority to traditional
developments like the Queensbridge Houses, the largest public housing
development in the country. In many of these neighborhoods, NYCHA is the only
housing contributing to the economic diversity of the community.
NYCHA residents are also a critical part of the workforce of industries ranging
from health care and education to manufacturing and transportation, and support
local businesses with discretionary income that they wouldn’t have if they lived
in private housing. NYCHA residents are especially an integral part of the
workforce of our city agencies – educating our children, protecting our
communities, and helping our neighbors. The largest employer of NYCHA residents
is the NYC Department of Education, with the NYPD the third-largest. When
looking proportionally, some agencies reliance on NYCHA residents is even more
pronounced. In 2012, for example, there were over 500 employees of both the City
University of New York and the Administration for Children’s Services who were
NYCHA residents, a significant number in agencies having just 7,600 and 6,500
full-time equivalent employees respectively.
The sheer scale of NYCHA housing means that its success or failure ripples
through the city and the larger New York region. It is home to almost 5% of the
city’s population. That’s more people than live in Jersey City and Stamford
combined, and more than live in Cleveland, New Orleans or Honolulu. NYCHA is the
largest residential landlord in the United States, is bigger than the next 10
largest public housing agencies combined, and houses nearly 15% of low-income
renters in New York City.
New York City operating subsidy per agency, FY 2018
Bar chart with 12 bars.
Source: NYC Department of Finance Reports to New York City Council, 2018. NYC
Ferry from 2017 Borough Budget Consultation Notes
View as data table, New York City operating subsidy per agency, FY 2018
The chart has 1 X axis displaying categories.
The chart has 1 Y axis displaying values. Data ranges from 30000 to 5185149000.
Created with Highcharts 11.3.0Chart context menuNew York City operating subsidy
per agency, FY 2018Source: NYC Department of Finance Reports to New York City
Council, 2018. NYC Ferry from 2017 Borough Budget Consultation
Notes$30,000$57,479,000$143,700,000$188,087,000$372,700,000$379,600,000$1,052,505,000$1,434,181,000$1,661,960,000$1,732,148,000$2,055,300,000$5,185,149,0000500M1,000M1,500M2,000M2,500M3,000M3,500M4,000M4,500M5,000M5,500M5,5…NYC
FerryTaxi & Limousine CommissionNYCHACultural AffairsLibrariesParksHomeless
ServicesCorrectionSanitationFireHealth + HospitalsPolice
End of interactive chart.
The annual city operating subsidy for NYCHA is a fraction of what the city
spends on other city agencies and represents only 0.2% of city tax-levy
expenditures.
By contrast, NYC currently spends over a billion dollars in city money a year
for the Department of Homeless Services, which provides shelter to a population
that is just 15% of the population that lives in public housing.
This size, as well as the characteristics of its residents, gives NYCHA a
substantial and largely unrecognized role in the life and vibrancy of the city.
For example, whether measured by jobs, consumption or business activity,
contributions by NYCHA residents to New York’s economy are both substantial and
widespread:
* NYCHA residents are critical participants of our workforce, holding jobs at
roughly the same rate as working-age New York City residents as a whole.
* These workers hold over 137,000 jobs in total and form a disproportionate
share of the city’s employees in the transportation, education,
manufacturing, retail trade and health care sectors. They hold over 30,000
health care jobs and 5% of the city’s education jobs. The residents work
throughout the city, with almost 25,000 working in the Manhattan central
business districts – the economic engine powering the region.
* NYCHA residents spend over $2 billion per year, much of it supporting
businesses in their local neighborhoods.
* NYCHA residents are also entrepreneurs, owning over 650 local businesses
themselves.
* NYCHA itself is also a major employer and job generator. A 2012 study by HR&A
Advisors found that agency operating and capital expenditures support 30,000
jobs and $6 billion in economic activity in New York State annually.
The 322 NYCHA developments are also centers of community life in their
neighborhoods, providing a wide range of facilities and services used by young
and old, whether they live in NYCHA housing or not. These facilities include the
following:
* 121 senior centers, nearly half of all the senior centers in New York City.
* 126 pre-schools and childcare facilities.
* 189 acres of recreational open space, with at least 110 basketball and
handball courts and over 1,200 other parks, fields, playgrounds, and plazas.
It should be noted that many more community amenities and facilities could be
provided but for the neglected capital needs of NYCHA, which is currently
leaving vacant dozens of unoccupied spaces which could be renovated for
community or retail uses.
Because NYCHA obtains almost all of its operating budget from the federal
government and rent paid by tenants, its over 170,000 affordable homes and the
many neighborhood amenities fit provides are provided at a very low ongoing cost
to city taxpayers – as per the original intent of public housing. The annual
city operating subsidy for NYCHA, $143 million in FY 2019, is a fraction of what
the city spends on other city agencies and represents only 0.2% of city tax-levy
expenditures. By contrast, the city currently spends over a billion dollars in
city money a year for the Department of Homeless Services, which provides
nightly shelter to a population that is just 15% of the population that lives in
public housing.
Major capital infrastructure projects
Bar chart with 6 bars.
Sources: NYCHA, MTA, NYC DEP, NY State Comptroller (Local Bridge Repair), Center
for an Urban Future ( Parks Repair)
View as data table, Major capital infrastructure projects
The chart has 1 X axis displaying categories.
The chart has 1 Y axis displaying values. Data ranges from 2100000000 to
45200000000.
Created with Highcharts 11.3.0Chart context menuMajor capital infrastructure
projectsSources: NYCHA, MTA, NYC DEP, NY State Comptroller (Local Bridge
Repair), Center for an Urban Future ( Parks
Repair)$2,100,000,000$5,800,000,000$20,400,000,000$30,000,000,000$37,000,000,000$45,200,000,00005G10G15G20G25G30G35G40G45G50GDelaware
Aquaduct RepairNYC Parks RepairNYCT Local Bridge RepairGateway ProjectMTA Fast
ForwardNYCHA
End of interactive chart.
By not adequately fixing problems in our public housing now, we estimate the
cost of fixing them later grows by approximately 700 million dollars every year.
THE COST OF INACTION
As important as NYCHA and its residents are to New York City, the physical
condition of many of its buildings are now a disgrace. The staggering projected
financial costs of returning public housing to a state of good repair now exceed
even what is needed to fix New York’s aging subway system and have reached a
point where the problem can no longer be pushed down the road. But just as the
effects of not repairing our subway system are far worse than the alternative,
not repairing our public housing will also have far greater consequences, both
social and financial, than the cost of addressing the problem today.
The reason for this is simple. As is true of all buildings, NYCHA’s buildings
need proper maintenance or they eventually become not just unsafe and unhealthy
places to live, but legally uninhabitable. A building left to deteriorate long
enough will eventually be in imminent danger of failure or collapse, rendering
it unfit for human occupancy. While a timeframe for when this might happen for
any specific building is unknown, what is certain is that if NYCHA continues on
the current trajectory of endlessly deferred maintenance and compounding
deterioration there will eventually be the need to evacuate significant portions
of our public housing.
This is far from unprecedented in the United States, and an increasing worry
among housing experts and elected officials. Speaking recently to the New York
Times about NYCHA, Mayor de Blasio said he “worried that if buildings continued
to deteriorate, they would eventually be torn down, as in Chicago and St.
Louis.”
The cost of deferred maintenance is coming due now.
Bar chart with 2 data series.
sources: 2011 and 2017 NYCHA Physical Needs Assessments
View as data table, The cost of deferred maintenance is coming due now.
The chart has 1 X axis displaying categories.
The chart has 1 Y axis displaying values. Data ranges from 1.6 to 25.4.
Created with Highcharts 11.3.0Chart context menusources: 2011 and 2017 NYCHA
Physical Needs Assessments$1.6 Billion$16 Billion$3.8 Billion$3.8 Billion$6.4
Billion$25.4 Billion$6.4 Billion$6.6 Billion$1.9 Billion$4.9 Billion2011
Projections2017 Projections0 B2 B4 B6 B8 B10 B12 B14 B16 B18 B20 B22 B24 B26 B28
B2…Year 1Years 2-5Years 6-10Years 11-15Years 16-20
*
*
The cost of deferred maintenance is coming due now.
End of interactive chart.
COULD THIS HAPPEN HERE?
Our public housing has been a constant for New York City since the construction
of the First Houses on the Lower East Side in 1935 a development which is still
occupied as public housing to this day. Since then, we have added public housing
steadily, and for decades it has been a consistent part of the fabric of the
city. Even in the 1970s, when our private housing underwent large-scale
disinvestment, the vast majority of our public housing remained in good repair.
In many ways, it is as unthinkable to conceive of a New York City where large
amounts of its public housing is gone from the landscape as it is a New York
City in which large amounts of its roads, subways, parks, or other parts of our
infrastructure is gone. But once infrastructure, of any sort, is neglected it
starts to rapidly deteriorate, and there are several examples public and private
housing, buildings and other infrastructure, in New York and in other cities in
which neglect has led directly to deterioration and unavoidable demolition.
PUBLIC HOUSING
The Brewster-Douglass houses in Detroit was a large and varied public housing
complex, and the former home to Motown legends Diana Ross and Smokey Robinson,
as well as actress Lily Tomlin. The first buildings started construction in the
in the 1930s, and by the 1950s it had become community of 10,000 people living
in rowhouses, small 6-story apartment buildings, and larger 14-story towers.
However by the 1990s, the complex was in such disrepair that the Detroit housing
authority slowly started to evacuate and demolish them. By 2008 the entire
development had been evacuated and, by 2013, demolished.
While there were many reasons for the decline of the complex, the reason why it
was ultimately evacuated and demolished was simple. According to then-Detroit
Housing Commission chief Eugene Jones “The reason why we moved everyone out is
because we could not maintain this property in decent, safe and sanitary
condition.”
There are several other examples, from different eras of public housing, of
developments being neglected to the point of needing to be evacuated and
demolished. Pruitt-Igoe houses in St. Louis took only 20 years to go from being
a state-of-the-art new public development in the 1950s to being so neglected and
dilapidated that it was completely demolished in the 1970s.
Thousands of “extremely distressed” public housing buildings were demolished as
part of HOPE VI redevelopments since the 1990s – including Prospect Plaza, a
NYCHA development in Ocean Hill which was evacuated in 2000 and then sat vacant
for 14 years until finally being demolished in 2014. And just this year, in
Cairo Illinois, HUD has approved the demolition of 278 units of public housing,
citing the lack of funding from the local housing authority as contributing to
“an unpreventable emergency endangering the lives and safety of the residents at
the site.”
If NYC lost just 10% of its public housing, almost 40,000 people would need to
find another home. For most, finding an affordable home within the city’s
private housing market would be next to impossible.
NEW YORK’S OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE
We have deferred maintenance on critical pieces of our infrastructure before,
especially parts of our transportation system. Our subway system was on its last
legs in the 1970s Both the Williamsburg and Manhattan bridges were near the
point of needing to be shut down due to deterioration in the 1980s.
The fact that we have managed to rebound from these situations and, at enormous
cost, repair most of this this infrastructure can make us forget the times when
we did not. In 1973 a section of the Miller Highway on the West Side of
Manhattan collapsed, the result of deferred maintenance and capital needs which
dated back to the 1950s, with five miles of this elevated highway eventually
needing to be demolished. In the 1990s, the Franklin Avenue subway shuttle was
in such disrepair it was almost completely decommissioned, with one of its five
stations being demolished before the line was rehabilitated.
NEW YORK’S PRIVATE HOUSING STOCK
The danger of dilapidation and collapse is not just reserved for public housing.
In 1975, at the height of our era of severe disinvestment in much of the private
housing stock in New York, there were 110,000 dilapidated apartments defined as
being “in such poor physical condition that they pose a serious threat to the
health and well-being of their occupants.” This comprised over 5% of all rental
housing at the time, and was a severe contributor to the neighborhood blight of
the 1970s.
Many of these buildings ultimately needed to be demolished, leaving large parts
of several neighborhoods vacant for decades. But there is also good news from
this era it demonstrates that dilapidated housing can be turned around, and in
relatively short order as well. In 1984 the Housing and Vacancy Survey found
that between 1978 and 1984 more than 37,000 housing units had “made the
transition from standard to dilapidated and back to standard” within the 6 years
time period. While deterioration of buildings can be rapid when capital needs
are ignored, with proper investment they can once again become safe and stable
places to live.
It’s important for New Yorkers to understand what it would mean for our city to
lose significant portions of our public housing. Examining two hypothetical
scenarios shows the impacts of this would cause permanent damage to our city.
Without change in the way we fund, manage, and maintain our public housing,
these hypothetical scenarios will come closer and closer to being a reality.
If the city lost just 10% of its public housing, almost 40,000 people would need
to find another home. For most, finding an affordable home within the city’s
private housing market would be next to impossible. And more drastic scenarios
are also possible, especially when considering vulnerability to storm surge and
sea level rise. If we lost 1⁄3 of our NYCHA housing, we would displace 130,000
people – a population the size of New Haven.
Depending on how quickly this loss occurred, some of these people could be able
to be relocated to other NYCHA apartments which become vacant, greatly slowing
or even permanently foreclosing the ability of other families, many of whom are
experiencing homelessness, to obtain apartments themselves. Others would crowd
into apartments with friends or relatives, but for most that would only be a
temporary solution. Some, especially working age residents with the ability to
find work elsewhere, would likely leave the city for less expensive locations
costing New York a critical part of its workforce. Without changes to city
policies many, if not most, would need emergency shelter. Meanwhile, even for
those residents whose homes may not reach the level of being legally
uninhabitable, the already poor condition of their homes will continue
deteriorate and become even greater health hazards. This would mean more
families without heat for weeks on end, more children suffering from asthma,
more senior citizens living in unforgivable and isolated conditions. No matter
what, the damage to the city’s civic and fiscal health would be severe.
And these scenarios are becoming ever more likely. In spite of spending
approximately $2 billion on capital repairs from 2011 2017, during this time the
cost of addressing NYCHA’s physical needs grew from $32 billion to $45 billion,
according to NYCHA’s own assessments. Even more striking, during the same
period, the portfolio’s immediate needs increased from $1.6 billion to almost
$25 billion in 2017. While part of this increase is due to inflation and market
conditions, a large chunk is simply a result of what happens when maintenance is
deferred. Maintenance, though, cannot be deferred forever. Not only are new
needs added on to unaddressed prior needs, but conditions become worse and more
expensive to fix. According to the 2017 Physical Needs Assessment 35% of the
added cost of maintenance and repair needs in NYCHA buildings was due to this
added deterioration. The costs of this approach compound rapidly. By not
adequately fixing problems in our public housing now, we estimate that the cost
of fixing these same problems later grows by approximately 700 million dollars
every year. And even these costs do not include a full accounting of what will
be needed to adapt public housing to sea level rise and the increased risk of
future storms like Superstorm Sandy that will come with climate change.
OTHER AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS ARE SCARCE
Many low- or moderate-income families in New York City have existing affordable
housing: through rent stabilization, home- ownership, or residing in subsidized
housing already. But opportunities to move into an affordable home are extremely
scarce for low- and moderate-income families. Rent stabilized apartments
increase rents dramatically when they become vacant, and buying a home is now
well out of reach for almost all low- and moderate-income families.
Increasingly, low- and moderate- income households are being priced out of the
unregulated rental market as well. According to Furman Center’s latest “State of
New York City Neighborhoods” report, the median asking rent for an apartment is
at least $1,500/month in every community district in the city, and at least
$1,750 a month in every community district outside the Bronx. A family needs to
make at least $60,000 a year to afford a $1,500/month apartment, putting this
out of range for half of New York City households. Market rate housing also
often has high entry costs in form of brokers fees, security deposits, and other
upfront costs which require savings that many low- and moderate-income families
simply do not have. All of these pressures can be expected to increase as New
York City’s population continues to grow faster than new homes are created and
rents continue to outpace wages, especially for lower income households.
What is left is subsidized housing. There are three main options currently for
low- and moderate-income households to find affordable housing. The first is
public housing, which lets tenants pay an affordable rent no matter their
income. The current waiting list for public housing has over 200,000 people on
it. The second is Section 8 Housing, which also lets tenants pay 30% of their
income in rent. Section 8 can either be voucher-based (Housing Choice Vouchers)
or building-based, and both also have extensive waiting lists – the Housing
Choice Voucher waiting list is over 100,000 people long and has been closed for
9 years.
The third is the new affordable housing built through city and state programs,
like the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Pro- gram (LIHTC), which conduct
lotteries for most new housing. These apartments are used as workforce housing
which rent for below-market rents and have income caps for new residents.
However, unlike public housing and Section 8 these apartments have consistent
rents which don’t change with income, and almost all rent for much more than the
average Section 8 or NYCHA apartment. Competition for these apartments is still
incredibly fierce, however, with tens of thousands of applications received for
each development.
Even with a currently stable and affordable living situation, without new
opportunities to find affordable housing low- and moderate-income people can
simply not afford to go through life – leave a parent’s house, start a family,
or escape a bad or abusive housing situation. This failure to have sufficient
new affordable housing options leads to overcrowding, rent burdening,
homelessness, and is a huge drag on our economy and quality of life.
More than 400,000 New Yorkers live in over 300 NYCHA developments across the
city.
SMALL HOUSING LOSSES LEAD TO LARGE IMPACTS
To understand what NYCHA’s current deferred maintenance crisis means to NYCHA,
its residents and our city and region, examine the implications of just 10% of
its units becoming uninhabitable.
One scenario is what would happen absent any changes in city policies. Under
this scenario we would see a rapid rise in the population of people experiencing
homelessness and the loss of an important part of the city’s workforce. The
implications for the city’s fiscal conditions would be equally dramatic.
If every displaced NYCHA household were unable to find other housing, the city’s
population of people experiencing homelessness would increase by 62% to over
100,000 people. Given that the average income of NYCHA residents is just under
$25,000, well under what is needed on the open market to afford even the most
modest apartment the city, this is unfortunately a realistic scenario.
What happens if 1 out of every 10 NYCHA units becomes uninhabitable?
IF CITY POLICIES ARE NOT CHANGED:
* The number of New Yorkers experiencing Homelessness will rise by 62%.
* Shelter costs will rise by $700 million.
IF DISPLACED RESIDENTS ARE MOVED TO OTHER SUBSIDIZED HOUSING:
* They will need half of all new affordable units and $142 million a year in
vouchers for rent.
* Affordable housing units won’t be available for other workers and they will
leave the region.
Addressing this growing population of people needing emergency shelter would
cost the city and state almost $700 million each year in ongoing shelter costs,
and require the construction of almost 200 additional homeless shelters.
Like every complex, NYCHA does have some apartments which become available for
others when people move out, which could be used to house some of these
potentially displaced residents. However, these turnover rates about 1 apartment
in 40 every year are very low. Depending on how fast other NYCHA apartments
deteriorate and the rate at which people need to be rehoused, these vacancies
could be quickly overwhelmed.
And even if they were not, the practical result is the same: every NYCHA
apartment that would have to house another public housing resident whose home
has fallen apart is one less apartment that can be used to help stem the tide of
homelessness and or provide stable and affordable housing for lower income New
Yorkers. 46% of low-income renters currently pay half their income in rent, and
the low-income housing market is extremely tight. Each public housing unit which
becomes available is either directly used to provide housing for someone
experiencing homelessness or relieves the pressure on the tightest segment of
the housing market, one where people often find themselves without any other
options but to enter the emergency shelter system. Considering New York’s severe
and ongoing housing crisis, each NYCHA apartment lost will represent one more
household, either directly or indirectly, who will have run out of housing
options and likely need emergency shelter.
What happens if 1/3 of NYCHA units become uninhabitable…
THE CITY WILL SPEND:
* $3 billion more in city money will need to be spent per year sheltering
former NYCHA residents experiencing homelessness.
THE CITY WILL LOSE
* 20,000 members of the workforce
* A billion dollars in local spending
* Affordable housing options for almost every household making under $75,000
* Another billion dollars to added voucher and shelter costs
Alternatively, in response to this potential crisis, the city might adjust its
housing policies and give displaced NYCHA residents preference for other
available subsidized housing along with vouchers so that they would be able to
afford this housing. But this too, would have enormous implications for the
city’s budget and citizens, especially other lowand moderate-income residents
seeking affordable housing.
This same 10% loss in NYCHA housing would mean half of all newly constructed
workforce housing – that is, housing affordable for families of three making
less than $75,000 – would need to be reserved for displaced NYCHA residents,
cutting our ability to attract and keep other working households. This would
likely include all new studio apartment and 3-bedroom apartments as well as all
supportive and senior housing. Because this housing is significantly more
expensive than what the average NYCHA resident can afford, the city and state
would also need to spend $142 million a year in housing voucher costs in order
to make sure these displaced residents could afford the new apartments, which is
the same amount they currently spend on operations for the entire NYCHA
portfolio currently. In addition, the economic effects from the loss of working
residents both from the lost NYCHA housing and the lost workforce housing would
ripple from the loss of the $312 million that these families spend every year,
much of it supporting local businesses.
But what if a 10% loss of units proved to be too optimistic? Though dramatic,
this is not beyond the realm of possibility. Today there are over 42,000 public
housing units which need $200,000 or more in repairs. And there are also over
500 NYCHA buildings in the projected 2050 floodplain. Without proper maintenance
and resiliency measures, continued neglect plus the impact of a major storm or
catastrophe could take out a huge number of public housing units overnight. If
such a scenario were to come to pass and, by way of example, one-third of NYCHA
housing became uninhabitable we could see truly drastic impacts.
If all of the residents displaced in such a scenario were unable to find other
homes and stayed in New York the number of New Yorkers experiencing homelessness
would be equivalent to the population of Salt Lake City. To house this
population, we would need a minimum of three additional shelters in every
neighborhood in the city, and New York City would need to spend three billion
dollars each year on sheltering people – more than it does on Libraries, Parks,
and the Fire Department combined.
Alternatively, we could assume those among this population with other options
would find them outside the city, and the city would attempt to house the rest
of the displaced population in the subsidized workforce housing we build instead
of through the shelter system. This would require using every unit of this
housing for displaced NYCHA residents, meaning that new housing options for
other families making less than $75,000, would completely disappear from every
corner of the five boroughs. And because the number of newly constructed
workforce apartments would still be insufficient to house all of this displaced
NYCHA population, we would still see a 12% increase in people experiencing
homelessness. On top of this, we would lose over a billion dollars in local
spending annually and need to more than double what we currently spend on
housing voucher and emergency shelter costs.
THE NEED TO ACT
While this will not be easy, we have no other option. Right now we are on an
unacceptable course – one where more and more of our neighbors find themselves
living in deplorable conditions because there are no other choices available for
them. However, even this course will soon take a turn for the worse.
Without public housing, we have no ability to make a dent in the housing crisis
that exists in the rest of the city. If we want to preserve New York City as a
place where a broad and diverse range of people can afford to live, the place to
start is with preserving our public housing, returning it to a state of good
repair, and ending the crisis in NYCHA.
We have two very simple choices. We can do what is needed in terms of the added
investments and reforms needed to reverse this situation. This will be costly
and involve difficult decisions. But we can do it – and have before with other
city infrastructure. We have restored our subways in the 1980s, repaired the
East River Bridges in the 1990s, and are fixing our water system in the current
day. We have renovated over 100,000 city-owned apartments taken through tax
foreclosure in the 1970s and 80s, and restored entire neighborhoods. While this
will take concerted and coordinated action from all levels of government –
federal, state, and city – with the right plan we can also bring our public
housing back to a state of good repair and a source of civic pride.
The other choice is both more costly, and much more shameful. If we do not
restore our public housing we will pay the price in other ways – through added
costs for shelters, lost workforce and economic activity, and losing the
amenities and services which contribute not just to residents but to
neighborhoods, and make New York City a great place to live and give its unique
sense of community. And unlike a capital repair program which, while costly,
eventually comes to an end and results in a positive impact, these additional
costs will be ongoing, permanent, and irrevocably change our city for the worse.
1
THE VALUE OF NYCHA
OUR LARGEST SOURCE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
One of the challenges of implementing a comprehensive solution for our public
housing is its sheer scale. The population of NYCHA developments is the size of
some small countries, and larger than major cities like New Orleans and
Cincinnati. It’s larger than the next 10 Public Housing Agencies combined, and
makes up 75% of the public housing in the region, and more than 15% of the
public housing in the entire country – to put that in perspective, New York City
makes up about 2.6% of the population of the country.
Other cities like New York have public housing, but not nearly on the same
scale. This is especially true of other high-cost, coastal cities. San
Francisco, which recently converted its entire public housing portfolio through
the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program, has approximately 2% of the
public housing units of New York City despite being 11% of the size of New York
City. Los Angeles, at a little under half the population of New York City, has
just 4% of the public housing units of New York City. On the East Coast, smaller
high-cost cities like Boston and Washington, DC have proportions of public
housing that come close to matching New York City’s, but still manage just a
fraction of the units managed by NYCHA.
NYCHA developments are in 89 of the city’s 189 neighborhoods.
Manhattan
19 of 28 neighborhoods have NYCHA developments
Bronx
25 of 37 neighborhoods have NYCHA developments
Staten Island
19 of 28 neighborhoods have NYCHA developments
Queens
25 of 37 neighborhoods have NYCHA developments
Brooklyn
25 of 37 neighborhoods have NYCHA developments
A PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS
Public Housing Developments are not confined to just a few neighborhoods or
areas. While there are significant concentrations in the Bronx, Central
Brooklyn, Upper Manhattan, and the Lower East Side, 89 out of 189 Neighborhood
Tabulation Areas (NTAs) have at least one development.
Of all the boroughs, NYCHA is most widespread in Manhattan, with over two-thirds
of Manhattan neighborhoods, from Marble Hill to Murray Hill, having at least one
NYCHA development. Even in the borough with the least widespread public housing,
Queens, over a quarter of the neighborhood have at least one NYCHA development.
NYCHA Developments provide more than just housing. They’re an integral part of
many of our neighborhoods, providing space and services for children, senior
citizens, and other neighborhood residents. Without NYCHA we would lose more
than just housing, we would lose many of the things we need to make our
neighborhoods work.
HELPING OUR CHILDREN
Our pre-K program needs more than just money – it needs space. NYCHA provides
126 Childcare facilities in the five boroughs, including 96 preschools. In areas
with extremely high costs of commercial rental space, NYCHA is an invaluable
resource for this program. 14% of Manhattan’s Pre-K facilities are in NYCHA
developments, even though NYCHA contains just 6% of children less than 5 years
old in the borough.
HELPING OUR SENIORS
NYCHA also houses 121 Senior Centers through the New York City Department of
Aging, providing classes, activities meals, benefits screenings, and community -
all of which free of charge to anyone 60 years of age or older. Almost half
(47.5%) of the New York City Senior Centers are in NYCHA developments.
PROVIDING OPEN SPACE
Many NYCHA developments contribute greatly to the open space and recreation in
neighborhoods, and with changes to landscaping and design many others could as
well. There are a total of 189 Acres of open space for recreational use on NYCHA
developments throughout the five boroughs.
NYCHA houses both New York City Parks Department facilities, as well as its own
open space and recreation areas. New York’s Open Datasets provide detailed
information about the types of facilities run by the NYC Parks department. In
NYCHA developments NYC Parks runs:
* 66 handball courts
* 44 basketball courts
* 10 baseball fields
* 47 playgrounds, parks, and other recreation areas
To put this in perspective, this is 8% of the total handball courts and 9% of
the total Basketball Courts in NYC Parks portfolio.
NYCHA’s own recreation areas number many more, with 1,141 separate recreational
areas. While Open Data does not provide the same detail as for NYC Parks owned
properties, these open spaces include many of the same types of recreation uses
provided by NYC Parks.
There are a total of 189 acres of open space for recreational use on NYCHA
developments throughout the five boroughs.
RESIDENTS’ CONTRIBUTION TO THE ECONOMY
EMPLOYMENT
NYCHA residents work all sorts of jobs throughout the city. In 2012, NYCHA and
HR&A Associates found there were 88,000 working resident of NYCHA developments,
with New York City Department of Education as the largest employer. Other large
employers included private companies like Partners in Care, which provides home
health care assistance, but were mainly governmental or other public agencies
like the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), United States Postal Service and
NYPD.
In 2018 RPA conducted our own analysis based on 2015 data from the United States
Census Bureau’s LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics dataset and found
a total of 125,488 workers in NYCHA developments holding 137,506 jobs, meaning
almost 10% of NYCHA residents work more than one job. These jobs area spread all
over the city, including 5,054 in Downtown New York and 18,724 in Midtown New
York.
NYCHA has 208,277 residents ages 18-61, and 125,488 employed individuals, for a
ratio of 60%. New York City as a whole has 5,306,997 residents age 18-61 and
3,278,982 employed individuals for a ratio of 62%.
Since the overall economic profile of NYCHA residents is necessarily different
than NYC as a whole, we also looked at Census tracts with similar economic
profiles to NYCHA as a whole, but which did not contain NYCHA developments. Here
we found 670,678 people aged 18-61 and 372,586 employed individuals, for a ratio
of 56%.
Employed NYCHA residents were more likely to work more than one job than New
Yorkers as a whole, but less likely than residents in other low-income areas to
work more than one job, perhaps because of the housing stability that public
housing brings.
NYCHA residents are employed at similar rates as other New York City residents
Bar chart with 3 bars.
source: US Census Bureau 2015 LEHD data/RPA analysis
View as data table, NYCHA residents are employed at similar rates as other New
York City residents
The chart has 1 X axis displaying categories.
The chart has 1 Y axis displaying Employment Rate. Data ranges from 56 to 62.
Created with Highcharts 11.3.0Employment RateChart context menusource: US Census
Bureau 2015 LEHD data/RPA analysis56%60%62%Non NYCHA Low-Income AreasNYCHA
ResidentsNew York City Residents
NYCHA residents are employed at similar rates as other New York City residents
End of interactive chart.
ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
NYCHA Residents spend over 2 billion dollars a year, much of it in the local
neighborhoods, contributing to the economy and supporting local businesses. Many
of these businesses are run by NYCHA residents themselves. In an analysis of
ESRI’s from Reference USA data, RPA found 676 business which are registered at
NYCHA addresses, and which are not NYCHA-related businesses themselves. Because
of the demographic makeup of NYCHA housing, these businesses are likely in the
realm of 95% minority-owned. NYCHA currently runs two programs aimed at
increasing business opportunities for residents, the Food Business Pathways and
Childcare Business Pathways programs.
INDUSTRY CONCENTRATION
NYCHA residents are vital to certain sectors of our economy. A NYCHA resident is
30% more likely to work in transportation or warehousing than an average New
Yorker, and 15% more likely to work in education or manufacturing. And some of
our largest industries, most notably our health care industry, benefit from a
large employee base in public housing.
The education sector is particularly reliant on NYCHA residents. Not only are
NYCHA residents 15% more likely to work in the sector, the Department of
Education is the largest single employer of NYCHA residents. This reliance
extends into the higher education sector. In 2012 the NYCHA/HR&A study found 506
NYCHA residents working at the City University of New York, which in 2012 only
had a total of 7,635 total full-time equivalent jobs.
NYCHA residents are employed in a wide variety of industries.
Bar chart with 11 bars.
source: US Census Bureau 2015 LEHD data/RPA analysis
View as data table, NYCHA residents are employed in a wide variety of
industries.
The chart has 1 X axis displaying categories.
The chart has 1 Y axis displaying Number of NYCHA residents employed. Data
ranges from 5313 to 30752.
Created with Highcharts 11.3.0Number of NYCHA residents employedChart context
menusource: US Census Bureau 2015 LEHD data/RPA
analysis30,75215,19012,37010,69310,6937,5097,0966,9215,3425,3285,31302500500075001000012500150001750020000225002500027500300003250032…HealthRetail
TradeAccomodation & FoodAdministrative Support & Waste
ManagementEducationProfessional Sci & TechnicalTransportation &
WarehousingPublic AdministrationFinance & InsuranceReal EstateOther Services
NYCHA residents are employed in a wide variety of industries.
End of interactive chart.
NYCHA residents are a critical component of the workforce in certain industries.
Bar chart with 2 data series.
source: US Census Bureau 2015 LEHD data/RPA analysis
View as data table, NYCHA residents are a critical component of the workforce in
certain industries.
The chart has 1 X axis displaying categories.
The chart has 1 Y axis displaying values. Data ranges from 5.04 to 22.37.
Created with Highcharts 11.3.0Chart context menusource: US Census Bureau 2015
LEHD data/RPA analysisPercentage of NYCHA residents employed in the
industryPercentage of NYC residents employed in the
industry0%2%4%6%8%10%12%14%16%18%20%22%24%HealthRetail TradeAccomodation & Food
ServicesAdministrative Support & Waste ManagementEducation
*
*
NYCHA residents are a critical component of the workforce in certain industries.
End of interactive chart.
NYCHA Residents spend over 2 billion dollars a year, much of it in the local
neighborhoods, contributing to the economy and supporting local businesses.
2
A DETERIORATING PORTFOLIO
All buildings need proper maintenance or they eventually become not just unsafe
and unhealthy places to live, but legally uninhabitable. A building left to
deteriorate long enough will eventually be in imminent danger of failure or
collapse.
While a timeframe for when a building’s physical condition might deteriorate to
the point where it cannot be legally inhabited for any specific NYCHA building
is unknown, what is certain is that continuing the current trajectory of
deferred maintenance and compounding deterioration will eventually lead to this
outcome. This is far from unprecedented. According to UC-Berkeley’s Terner
Center for Housing Innovation “The lack of maintenance is directly tied to the
loss of public housing units: approximately 300,000 units— more than 20 percent
of the total public housing stock—have been demolished over the past 20 years
due exclusively to units being uninhabitable.” For instance, the Hope VI
program, which is responsible for much of this public housing unit loss,
requires that only physically distressed buildings be demolished.
Like our other infrastructure, deferring repair costs now simply leads to more
costs in the future. We experienced this with the subway system in the 1970s,
with the East River Bridges in the 1980s, and currently with our public housing.
Often times we have managed to turn the corner in time to save our public
infrastructure, each time at considerably more cost and inconvenience to the
city than if the problem had been addressed earlier, but other times we have
not. For instance, deferred maintenance led directly to the collapse of the West
Side Highway in 1973, resulting it its demolition. The failure to maintain
multifamily housing in the 1970s also led directly to the collapse and
demolition of hundreds of privately owned rental buildings.
NYCHA’s 2017 Physical Needs Assessment (PNA) found that even though NYCHA has
spent about 335 million dollars a year on its capital plan from 2012-2016, the
total cost of work which needs to be done by 2018 actually increased by 37%.
While this is partially due to changing market conditions and differences in the
methodologies between this and the previous PNAs, a large part is due to the
added deterioration costs which accompany underinvestment in capital repairs. By
simply continuing on the same path, we are adding hundreds of millions of
dollars a year of cost through deterioration.
NYCHA’s 2017 Physical Needs Assessment came to a similar conclusion, and found
that while market conditions and inflation also added cost, added deterioration
accounted for 35% of the total increase for the 5-year repair and replacement
schedule – about 5.2 billion dollars.
Capital repair costs will not be minor, and finding new capital funding streams
will need to be a large part of any solution to repair public housing. Already,
there are 45 billion dollars of repair work needed – a comparable investment to
bringing our subway system into the modern age. And this number is likely to
increase due to the added deterioration costs outlined above.
CLIMATE VULNERABILITY
In addition to the general deteriorating state of public housing, 210 NYCHA
Buildings in 33 separate developments were damaged during Superstorm Sandy, with
an estimated 3 billion dollars in resulting damages. In 2050, 506 NYCHA
buildings are projected to be within the 100-year floodplain, with almost a
quarter of all units vulnerable to flooding. While pre-war developments
especially can be very structurally resilient, without proper maintenance and
upkeep even well-built buildings with resiliency measures in place can be
damaged to point of needing emergency evacuation or demolition, especially if
necessary repairs are not made before another storm event happens. One key to
making sure this doesn’t happen is the ability to combine resiliency measures,
storm repair, and general renovation into one funding stream and scope of work.
In 2050, 506 NYCHA buildings are projected to be within the 100-year floodplain,
with almost a quarter of all units vulnerable to flooding.
3
THE COST OF DOING NOTHING
While capital needs loom large, NYCHA provides a huge operating benefit to New
York City. While the city does subsidize NYCHA operations, this is a very small
amount of the total budget – 143 million dollars for FY 2018, about the same
amount that we spend of the Department of Cultural Affairs. This city
contribution amounts to about 70 dollars a month for each NYCHA apartment.
The City of New York spends 7 times this amount of operation funding on the
Department of Homeless Services, 10 times this amount on the Department of
Correction, and 36 times this amount on the NYPD every year.
This 143 million dollars leverages 885 million dollars in annual federal subsidy
for public housing (tenant rent payments amount to over 1 billion dollars, and
make up the plurality of the operating budget). Other programs which help house
or shelter predominantly low-income households – such as vouchers or our
emergency shelter system – would cost the city several times this amount of
money, even with accompanying federal and state aid.
Alternatives to public housing are far more costly for New York.
Bar chart with 4 bars.
source: RPA analysis from NYC Mayor’s Management Report, and Departments of HPD,
Finance, and HRA
View as data table, Alternatives to public housing are far more costly for New
York.
The chart has 1 X axis displaying categories.
The chart has 1 Y axis displaying $ per household per month. Data ranges from 70
to 3272.
Created with Highcharts 11.3.0$ per household per monthChart context menusource:
RPA analysis from NYC Mayor’s Management Report, and Departments of HPD,
Finance, and HRA$70$758$1,012$3,272Public Housing (NYCHA)City Vouchers (LIHTC
Housing)City vouchers (Private Market)New York City Shelter System
Alternatives to public housing are far more costly for New York.
End of interactive chart.
ALTERNATIVES
VOUCHERS
The federal government provides over 100,000 Housing Choice Vouchers for
low-income residents, administered through both NYCHA and HPD. This subsidizes
rent at privately owned housing, and enables tenants to pay 30% of their income
in rent, the same as public housing (there is also a Section 8 program which is
project-based, meaning the vouchers stay with a specific apartment of building,
rather than being transferable with the tenants). These Section 8 vouchers,
however, are capped and would not necessarily be provided for displaced NYCHA
residents, leaving the City and State to fund these housing vouchers. The City
and State already collaborate on providing other sources of vouchers – assuming
that displaced NYCHA residents would pay the same average amount of rent and
would need to be subsidized at the same rate, these vouchers would likely cost
the City and State $1,012 a month on the private market to house a family of
three, according to current standards. If the City & State chose only to use
these vouchers to place families in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit housing
(LIHTC), which has rents slightly lower than the full subsidy amount, this would
likely amount to $758 in City and State subsidy a month to house a family of
three.
EMERGENCY SHELTER
The federal government also provides approximately 33% of the Department of
Homeless Services Budget. However, the costs of providing emergency shelter are
enormous. The latest Mayor’s management report puts the per-night costs at
$117.43 for single adults, $147.48 for adult families, and $192.10 for families
with children. Prorated for the current family compositions of NYCHA households,
this amounts to $4,884 a month in subsidy in total. Discounting the likely
federal contribution, this still amounts to $3,272 in city and state subsidy per
household per month. This is not counting other costs which would likely be
incurred from rising homelessness, most notably acquisition and construction
costs for new shelters.
THE HIGH COST OF LOSING PUBLIC HOUSING
In order to see what the financial and social costs to the city would be if we
lost our NYCHA housing, we set up a model in which NYCHA housing deteriorates at
varying rates. Because New York State is legally obligated to provide shelter to
those who need it, a decline in public housing would mean some other form of
shelter would need to be found for those who are displaced.
NYCHA itself has a minor amount of vacancies, about 1% of the total unit count.
We assumed these would be filled first. NYCHA also has some turnover every year,
usually a little over 5,000 units. These vacancies are filled with a combination
of emergency preference applications, mainly people from the New York City
Shelter System from whom NYCHA has committed to filling 2,000 vacancies a year,
and working households on the waiting list which provides an economic mix and
diversity to NYCHA. While losing these turnover units are not direct
displacement, each of these vacancies which are filled with residents displaced
from other developments cannot be filled with other families, who either are
currently experiencing homelessness, or would likely otherwise. As such, we
assumed that any displaced NYCHA residents who might be relocated to one of
these turnover units would necessarily displace another household and equally
contribute to crisis. In addition, an entire development or large building which
needs emergency evacuation will overwhelm any current vacant units which have
turned over, necessitating emergency placement.
THE COST OF EMERGENCY SHELTER
Because emergency shelter is a legal obligation of the City, we constructed a
scenario in which the City did not create any preferences or plans and simply
treated displaced NYCHA residents the same as others who have lost their home
and need to access emergency shelter.
Even with just a 10% loss in public housing, over 17,000 apartments would be
lost. At the average NYCHA household size, this would result in an additional
38,768 people who would need shelter. 3,700 single senior citizens would
experience homelessness, as would 4,800 single-parent households. With the
current population of the shelter system at 62,166, this would result in 100,934
people experiencing homelessness. Prorated for the family composition of NYCHA,
this means that it would be slightly over 1 billion dollars a year in direct
operating costs to emergency shelter for these potentially displaced households.
Federal support currently provides approximately 33% of the DHS operating
budget, with the city providing 58% and the state 9%, meaning an additional 581
million dollars in direct city spending will be needed – over 4 times the 143
million the city currently spends on the entirety of NYCHA’s annual operating
budget.
Emergency shelters are limited to 200 beds as per state law. If each shelter
were built to the maximum size, another 194 emergency shelters would be needed,
more than one for each of the 189 Neighborhood Tabulation Areas in New York. In
reality, more would be needed as shelters range in size with many not reaching
the maximum of 200 beds. These shelters would be in addition to the 90 new
emergency shelters due to open by 2022.
Under a scenario in which a larger loss, 1/3 of NYCHA apartments, occurs the
situation becomes much more drastic. Here we would see a total of almost 200,000
people experiencing homelessness, including over 12,000 single senior citizens
and almost 16,000 single-parent households. Another 3.3 billion dollars a year
would be required to provide emergency shelter, including 1.9 billion each year
from the city – or another $225 from every person in New York City every year.
At least 672 new shelters would be needed, or 3-4 for each Neighborhood
Tabulation Area.
THE COST OF A LIKELY RELOCATION PLAN
Unless there is a sudden and catastrophic collapse, however, it is likely that a
plan for housing NYCHA residents displaced from uninhabitable homes will be put
in place if housing losses are seen. It is also likely that some portion of
NYCHA residents themselves will relocate out of New York City, in pursuit of
lower housing costs elsewhere.
These residents most likely to relocate, however, are working-age residents with
decent job prospects, meaning they would take skills and economic activity with
them as they relocate. Residents most likely to stay would be ones without easy
job opportunities elsewhere – especially senior citizens who would likely be
most in need of social services and housing assistance.
In this scenario, we assumed that 15% of the residents displaced from NYCHA
housing would, in fact, leave the city, and that these residents would be
overwhelmingly working households. The remaining 85% of residents we assumed
would be placed by the city into another source of affordable housing – the new
affordable rental housing produced by the City of New York’s housing plan,
mainly with Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC).
While often called “low-income” housing, LIHTC is better thought of mainly as
workforce housing for lower middle-class working families. Unlike public housing
or Section 8, rent payments are steady and don’t fluctuate depending on income.
In order to qualify, residents must have a steady source of income (this can be
employment, a housing voucher, or any other legal income source) and meet credit
standards and background checks. Rents are significantly higher than the average
NYCHA or Section 8 rent. The current average NYCHA rent is $522 a month, while
the typical LIHTC rent is $1,408 for a 2-bedroom apartment. It is also allocated
mainly through a lottery system for each development, as opposed to a curated
overall waiting list.
Since fiscal year 2004, the beginning of former Mayor Bloomberg’s New Housing
Marketplace, there has been a commitment by the City of New York to heavily
subsidize new affordable housing production through LIHTC and other programs.
Much of this is rehabilitation projects, and some are also homeownership
projects or higher-income rental housing. Discounting these, the city has
subsidized an average of 4,125 newly constructed apartments renting for 80% of
Area Median Income (AMI) or less each year since FY 2004. 80% AMI apartments are
currently available for households making up to $75,120 for a family of three,
and 2-bedroom apartments rent for $1,820 a month. The city does not provide
detailed breakdowns of income requirements and rent for this cohort, which range
from 30% of AMI to 80% of AMI. However, the most typical program is the LIHTC
program requiring a maximum of 60% AMI, which is the rent we assumed when
calculating needed voucher subsidy.
Although this is privately developed and managed housing, the city has a strong
say over tenanting requirements because of the subsidy they provide. As such,
this is the housing that displaced NYCHA residents could conceivably be
relocated to. However, because the rents are higher than most public housing
residents can afford, the city would also need to provide a voucher to subsidize
the costs of these rental units on an ongoing basis as well. These rents vary by
bedroom size, so we calculated the likely mix of units sizes needed based on
NYCHA’s household size demographics in order to come up with an average rent,
which was $1,338 per month. From here, we calculated the needed voucher cost for
each household by deducting the current rent paid by a NYCHA household on
average ($522) from the total rent. This resulted in an average $816 voucher
subsidy per month.
Every displaced NYCHA household which is placed in a newly constructed LIHTC
unit necessarily will displace one of these working households, leading to a
loss of affordable workforce housing. We assumed these households would either
leave the city themselves, or displace another similar household through a
ripple effect. This resulting loss of working households further affects the
city by depriving it of needed workforce and economic activity. In order to
calculate how much economic activity might be lost, we subtracted the
discretionary income spent by a typical NYCHA household from that spent by a
typical LIHTC household. However, not all LIHTC housing is occupied by steadily
employed households. Some is reserved for residents, usually people in the
shelter system, who pay through a Section 8 voucher. We assumed 10% of the units
would be reserved for these households, with 90% occupied through the lottery
system.
In this scenario, by losing approximately 10% of NYCHA housing over 7 years, the
approximately 12,750 displaced households will need to occupy 50% of the newly
constructed housing built for households making 80% AMI or less by the city each
year, pushing other workforce households out of the housing market and likely
the city. While most NYCHA households have at least one working member, this
proportion is less than that in LIHTC housing, and earnings are also typically
lower. As such, the combination of NYCHA residents who would leave, and these
workforce households who would be unable to find housing would drain
approximately 312 million dollars in discretionary spending from the city each
year, and drain the workforce of about 5,000 participants. In addition, the
subsidies needed to house these 12,750 displaced NYCHA households would total
about 142 million dollars a year – approximately the same amount of funding the
City of New York currently invests in NYCHA operation to house over 170,000
households.
2018 INCOME LIMITS AND RENTS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
60% of Area Median Income (AMI) is the most common income level for Low-Income
Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) housing. The average family income for NYCHA
residents is $24,423
Family Size30% of AMI40% of AMI50% of AMI60% of AMI70% of AMI80% of AMI100% of
AMI120% of AMI130% of AMI
1$21,930$29,240$36,550$43,860$58,480$73,100$87,720$95,030$120,6152$25,050$33,400$41,750$50,100$66,800$83,500$100,200$108,550$137,7753$28,170$37,560$46,950$56,340$75,120$93,900$112,680$122,070$154,9354$31,290$41,720$52,150$62,580$83,440$104,300$125,160$135,590$172,0955$33,810$45,080$56,350$67,620$90,160$112,700$135,240$146,510$185,9556$36,300$48,400$60,500$72,600$96,800$121,000$145,200$157,300$199,650
The chart below shows how much rent is considered affordable for each apartment
size. The average NYCHA rent is $522.
Unit Size30% of AMI40% of AMI50% of AMI60% of AMI70% of AMI80% of AMI100% of
AMI120% of AMI130% of AMI
Studio$367$524$680$837$1,040$1,197$1,510$1,823$1,979One-bedroom$471$667$863$1,058$1,313$1,509$1,900$2,292$2,487Two-bedroom$575$810$1,045$1,280$1,585$1,820$2,289$2,759$2,993Three-bedroom$658$929$1,200$1,472$1,824$2,096$2,638$3,181$3,452
source: NYC Housing Preservation and Development and NYCHA 2018 Fact Sheet
Again, with a higher loss of NYCHA housing, the situation becomes exponentially
more drastic. A 33% loss over the same 7 years would overwhelm the new housing
constructed for less than 80% of AMI to the extent that displaced NYCHA
residents would occupy every one of these units. While there are still some
neighborhoods in New York in which an $1,820 2-bedroom apartment might be found
on the open market, the latest available Furman Center “State of New York City
Housing and Neighborhoods” report found that in 2017, the median asking rent for
all apartments is lower than $1,820 in just 16 out of 59 community boards in the
city, and just 4 of 47 outside of the Bronx. And most of this lost housing can
be assumed to be 60% AMI housing or less. A 2-bedroom apartment at 60% of AMI
currently rents for $1,280 dollars, well lower than the median asking rent for
even the cheapest neighborhood in New York. Therefore, under this scenario,
working families making less than $60,000 a year who are looking for affordable
housing would have no options anywhere in the five boroughs, and families making
up to $75,000 would likely have few to no options as well.
There would be more than 1 billion in discretionary spending lost in this
scenario, along with over 20,000 members of the workforce. In addition, many
residents would still have to go in to the emergency shelter system in this
scenario, with 6,854 displaced households each year, and only 4,125 apartments.
Between the housing voucher costs needed for the 4,125 households placed in
LIHTC housing each year, and the emergency shelter costs for the 2,729
additional displaced residents who will be unable to access these apartments,
the total annual subsidy needed from the city and state would amount to over a
billion dollars a year. This also discounts the significant amount of city and
state subsidy already put into funding the construction of these new apartments.
THE CHALLENGE AHEAD
There are no easy answers to this crisis. But it is clear we must act instead of
letting a critical piece of our public infrastructure – one which provides such
clear value to New York City – continue to crumble. In doing so, it is
critically important that the residents of New York City Housing Authority
buildings be the priority. No resident of our city should continue to live in
the type of conditions now experienced in many NYCHA buildings, either those
residing in publically- or privately-owned homes.
All New Yorkers have a stake in the success of NYCHA. Federal, state, and city
governments must all be part of the solution. And so too must NYCHA itself.
Repairing our public housing will not only need significant additional funding,
it will also need reforms to make sure this results in a true turnaround for our
public housing and significantly improved conditions for tenants.
There is no comparison for much of the public infrastructure of New York City.
Just like our subway, bridges and parks are without peers in the United States,
so our public housing is at a different scale than that found in other cities.
But this does not mean there are no lessons to be found. Many other cities, both
in the United States and elsewhere, have found ways to restore, expand and
improve their publicly-owned housing. If it can be done elsewhere, it can be
done in New York City.
share
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RESEARCH AREAS
Housing & Neighborhood Planning
LOCATION
New York
TOPICS
NYCHAAffordable HousingPublic Housing
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
AUTHORED BY
* Moses Gates
Vice President, Housing & Neighborhood Planning
* Christopher Jones
Senior Research Fellow
* Mandu Sen
Former Program Manager
* Carlos Mandeville
Former Associate Planner
* Ellis Calvin
Data Research Manager
* Manuela Uribe
Former Community Resilience Intern
GRAPHICS AND LAYOUT BY
Dave Zackin Graphic Designer, RPA
PRODUCED WITH
Vic Bach Community Service Society Ingrid Gould Ellen Furman Center Rachel Fee
New York Housing Conference Maxine Griffith* Columbia University David Jones
Community Service Society Anaita Kasad* Guidehouse Jill Lerner* KPF Michelle
Mulcahy Enterprise Jeff Nelson RxR Seth Pinsky* RxR Marc Ricks* Vornado Paula
Segal Urban Justice Center Anthony Shorris* Princeton University *RPA Board
Members
OTHER REPORTS IN THIS SERIES
Aug 2020
in NYCHA
Scalable Design Solutions for NYCHA Creating better living conditions for
residents while ensuring NYCHA’s future
Jul 2020
in NYCHA
The Impacts of Living in NYCHA Needs for resident health in the Rockaways and
beyond
Oct 2019
in NYCHA
Time to Act Restoring the Promise of NYC’s Public Housing
Jul 2023
in NYCHA
Parking and Curbside Management Toolkit
TOTAL REPORTS
449
SEARCH OUR REPORTS
Search
Filters
RESEARCH AREAS
Housing & Neighborhood Planning
Transportation
Energy & Environment
Governance
LOCATION
All Locations Connecticut New Jersey New York International National
AUTHOR
All Authors Brian Fritsch Christina Kata Christopher Jones Dave Zackin Ellis
Calvin Jeff Zupan Kate Slevin Lacey Cotter Marcel Negret Maulin Mehta Moses
Gates Rachel Weinberger Ravena Pernanand Robert Freudenberg Robert Lane Sophie
Cappello Tiffany-Ann Taylor Tom Wright Vanessa Barrios Zoe Baldwin
DATE
1922
2023
Search the entire site
Overview
1. The Value of NYCHA
2. A Deteriorating Portfolio
3. The Cost of Doing Nothing
The Challenge Ahead
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York
One Whitehall St
16th Floor
New York, NY 10004
New Jersey
179 Nassau Street
3rd Floor
Princeton, NJ 08542
60 Union Street
Suite 1-N
Newark, NJ 07105
Connecticut
2 Landmark Square
Suite 108
Stamford, CT 06901
Connect
* 212.253.2727
* info@rpa.org
* Twitter
* Instagram
* LinkedIn
* Facebook
* TikTok
Want to get involved?
Sign up for our newsletter to hear about the latest reports and events.
sign up
All content 2024. All rights reserved. Site Credits.