These groups are a minority in JC but have much higher turnout than working-class black residents and especially working class Hispanic residents and outvote them. We're likely to have a council with no Hispanic representation here next year despite 25% of JC being Hispanic.

Mostly no because most aren't eligible to vote, but when they do, they vote for the progs who will the throttle development. Residents of the shorter new infill have very high turnout and vote the same way. As do the white-collar homeowners.

Development politics in JC are now dominated by progressive upper middle class transplants who are taking things radically in a SF/Boston direction and will unintentionally hollow out the working class.

I honestly think lenders and developers would be foolish to invest in any big project in JC.

And the site has sat empty for 20 years with its 830-unit zoned capacity and no IZ requirements.

These tax credits and abatements are discretionary, and the tax credits are competitive and limited. And the mayoral frontrunner is pushing a universal 20% IZO that would pit every project in the city in competition for these limited funds.

It's going to need tens of millions of dollars in subsidies in the form of tax credits and abatements. Probably well north of a $100M financing gap.

It also needs a rezoning. The site is only zoned for 830 units. I am not sure it will happen.

Jersey Ave at Van Vorst Park

Coles St (closed off to traffic!) 👍

York St between Jersey Ave and Varick St

Eighth St at Coles St

www.nytimes.com/1909/01/23/a...

part of what gets me is the particular double-think involved in left-nimbyism. left nimbyism has been the dominant mode of thinking in urban governance for like fifty years, they won the war and achieved total control of policy, and they *still* think they're the plucky upstarts fighting The Man

i have watched cities across this country get destroyed neither by capitalism nor greed but by well-meaning progressives convinced at every step of the way they're making their world better

www.liberalcurrents.com/the-crisis-o...

The project is only 5% affordable, so it violates the IZO in exactly the same way that Solomon attacked the original 2021 IZO for having "loopholes." That provision of the IZO, which allowed as little as 5% affordable in exchange for parks and infra, was written with the Embankment in mind.

If Solomon wants to say something that could be possibly grounded in reality, he could say they gave McGreevey money hoping to get an upzoning from him in the future in exchange for keeping the hospital open. That's speculative, but at least not a lie.

What Christ Hospital asked for in their letter to Planning is an upzoning that would *avoid* the demolition+senior housing plan that was presented.