Originally posted by Femme Folle
View Post
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...rks-super-rich
One paragraph reads:
"New York's inclusionary housing policy goes a small way to redressing the balance: developers can build taller in exchange for funding affordable housing elsewhere. Like the UK's Section 106 agreements, the policy allows at least some bounty to be creamed off from these steroidal totems for the public good. Central Park Tower, for example, gained 90,000 sq feet after it bought the rights from another developer's affordable housing scheme, while JDS contributed $9m to affordable housing in return for a bonus of 20,000 sq ft at 111 West 57th Street.G"
I could also add, playing devil's advocate, that the construction of such admittedly ugly buildings does create a lot of work for construction and other companies, not to mention labour for anyone skilled or semi-skilled in the various fields of work involved, not to mention other service industries and those who work in the completed structures themselves.
Comment