2,000 NYCHA apartments in Manhattan to be torn down under controversial redevelopment plan A worker is seen cleaning the sidewalk outside the Chelsea Houses in Manhattan on Aug. 4, 2022. John Smith / By David Brand Published Oct 30, 2024

A controversial plan to tear down and replace thousands of public housing apartments in Manhattan is one step closer to reality following a key vote on Wednesday. The New York City Housing Authority's board approved the proposal to replace 18 buildings across the Fulton and Chelsea-Elliott Houses — where around 4,500 people live — and also allow for thousands of additional market-rate units on the two campuses. The plan would be the largest such replacement project in the history of NYCHA, which runs the nation’s largest public housing system but has faced decades of disinvestment compounded by mismanagement and scandals. The agency has turned to private developers and managers to take over building operations through a program that changes the source of federal funding for the apartments. The demolition-and-replacement proposal has earned support from Mayor Eric Adams and members of NYCHA’s board. It represents a major change in how the city’s public housing is managed and developed, with tenants set to move into new apartments once construction is completed in phases over the next seven years. “While it’s taken a long time to get here and it’s going to take a long time to move on, this is a really important moment in the history of NYCHA’s transformation,” said Jamie Rubin, the board's chair, at the board’s meeting on Wednesday morning. “The only way to restore NYCHA to the status that it once had, which is the glory of the United States public housing system, is to reinvest in the buildings at scale.” Under the plan, two private developers — Related Companies and Essence — would erect six new apartment buildings and move most of the existing tenants into them in phases over the next seven years. The current structures, which contain more than 2,000 units, would then be torn down. About 120 tenants, including residents of a building specifically for seniors, would have to move out before the new apartments are constructed. Construction on the first two NYCHA buildings, which can be built within current zoning regulations, is expected to begin after the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development approves a required environmental review next year, according to the housing authority. The agreement between NYCHA and the developers outlines key milestones and phasing timelines for the project. Tenant association leaders support the plan and say it’s necessary to address their aging homes. “I invite anyone who doesn’t live in Fulton: Come stay in Fulton and you’ll see how we’re living, how disgusting it is,” said Miguel Acevedo, president of the Fulton Houses Tenant Association. But concerns about potential displacement have fueled some of the opposition to the plan, as residents and their allies worry the tenants won’t be able to return. Other opponents say they fear losing their current rights to pay a percentage of their income toward rent and pass on apartments to family members. They presented the board with a petition signed by 939 residents opposing the demolition plan. “The demolition proposal is being forced on us. It’s what you want,” Elliott Houses tenant Celines Miranda told the board. “It’s obvious what the true motive is for this demolition: It’s a land grab.” Officials from NYCHA, Essence and Related have sought to allay residents’ concerns by promising that the tenants will retain their same lease rights throughout the project, though the tenants may be forced to move into units that are smaller than their current apartments. Many of the tenants who end up displaced from the buildings before the new ones are ready would have the opportunity to move into vacant apartments on the two campuses, NYCHA Vice President Jonathan Gouveia told the board on Wednesday. “Any household that is temporarily relocated off site will have the right to return to their development once the associated NYCHA replacement building is complete,” he said. The proposal would also allow the two developers to construct around 3,500 additional apartments on the sites. A portion of the units would be reserved for low- and middle-income tenants, according to the plan. Any new market-rate housing in one of the nation’s most expensive ZIP codes could be a bonanza for the developers, as some of the plan's opponents have pointed out. But its supporters say the additional proposed apartments are crucial for addressing the city’s housing shortage. The replacement plan re-emerged last year after a tenant-led task force initially rejected the demolition concept in 2021. Essence CEO Jamar Adams told Gothamist last year that his company began calculating the cost of renovations and determined they would roughly equal the cost of building from scratch. NYCHA surveyed residents of the Fulton and Chelsea-Elliott Houses last year about whether they would support replacing the current units. Most of the 950 respondents said they did. The housing agency estimates it needs $78 billion for repairs and renovations across its hundreds of developments, according to its most recent budget estimate. NYCHA campuses are officially home to more than 360,000 New Yorkers, though housing experts say the true number of residents who are not listed on leases is likely far higher. This story has been updated with additional information from NYCHA. Related stories NYC public housing tenants make last-ditch push to stop demolition in Chelsea Report: NYCHA 'mishandled' water issues at East Village public housing complex in 2022 About 70 NYC public housing employees arrested in bribery probe, federal officials say Tagged David Brand David is a reporter covering housing for Gothamist and WNYC. Got a tip? Email dbrand@nypublicradio.org or Signal 908-310-3960. Read more Conversation56 Comments 35 Viewing Commenting on this article has ended Log in Sign up Sort by Best StopFECDemolition 1 day ago It is disappointing that this article lacks critical thinking. These are the numbers that should be reviewed. According to the official survey results: 969 residents participated, representing just 29% of the eligible population. 37% of all households took part of the total households. 57% of responde... See more 8 Share 1 reply DC 2 days ago What should be controversial is NYCHA continuing to exist when the Section 9 model of public housing has been largely abandoned nationally. Hopefully this is the start to the long process of a full department phaseout. NYC should work to redevelop every NYCHA site with increased density and mixed i... See more 10 5 Share J C 2 days ago What's controversial is that Ronny Reagan's policies are still in place. The "market" is a failure except for the very well off or the very well connected. 11 5 Share Joe Gonzalez 1 day ago MEMO TO DC: Where are the 650,000 NYCHA Residents going to move to if NYCHA is phased out? 9 3 Share 1 reply Show 1 more reply suzanne jablonski 1 day ago Is anybody asking what these developers are getting out of this they're getting land to put in mixed use departments mostly Market rent and retail space they're not doing this out of the kindness of their hearts or because they care about these tenants they're going to make an unbelievable amount o... See more 8 1 Share Stacy Stac (Sexy one) 22 hours ago Yup,and those poor ppl won't be able to move bk to whr they called home. Those developers are gonna do em dirty. Market rate apts are gonna b out up. Watch. Apts ppl just can't afford. Gentrification is whts it's called. Once they get their foot in the door,the plans gonna change. That's hw they go... See more 2 Share BoFiS 1 day ago Bet you the plan will include cutting down tons of large, old trees in order to make room for these new buildings...many of which will be full of very overpriced "market-rate" apartments no one can afford. Any new buildings built on NYCHA property should have to be fully affordable, and should not... See more 3 Share 1 reply MIKE Scandif 1 day ago These are well constructed buildings isn't there any other way to redo them at a cheaper price? 9 1 Share StopFECDemolition 1 day ago Though asked repeatedly they have not shown how the price tag has from 366 million to 1.2 billion. Everyone is taking the word of Related/Essence. 8 Share Sheila Reveala 1 day ago If you understand anything about buildings, sure they can be well constructed, but they have to be maintained, including the roofs and the bricks. You learn this when you become a homeowner. When NYCHA can't repair and replace the roofs and point all the bricks periodically, it leads to the buildin... See more 2 3 Share 1 reply A Lady 1 day ago Exactly! 3 Share Show 1 more reply Carl Lutz III 1 day ago Once you see the name "Related Companies", you know this won't bode well for these tenants. My guess is that they will be shipped out, but not shipped back in again. 6 Share 1 reply A Lady 1 day ago What a absolutely terrible idea. Why destroy buildings that are sturdy and have withstood the tests of time for some new building that will be built with sub par materials? If anything they should just be renovated. Those two private entities that are taking over are ruthless. Just do the research.... See more 5 1 Share Alicia Wang 2 days ago I thought they had agreed for this to happened already. The residents get temporary housing while that project area gets leveled and rebuild as new. The residents complaining none stop it’s falling apart now it’s finally steps to start doing it they getting cold feet? 6 3 Share S. 1 day ago I think the reason for this is because they are afraid, they will come out with something at the last second as to why they can't move back. I totally understand their apprehension. 7 Share Lee Laurie 1 day ago The issue with temp housing is location. Where are the tenants going? Staten Island was a suggestion. People would need to travel very far to go to their doctor/school/jobs. Build 1 building move tenants in knock down old building. Buildon top of old building. Move the next group over. Repeat 3 Share Show 1 more reply Joe Gonzalez 1 day ago Pure and simple this is a naked land grab. Who really voted for this mouthpiece Miguel Acevedo to be a "tenant leader"? Real estate fat cats who are plotting to build a casino directly behind Fulton Houses are the straw that stirs the stench. Where are the NYCHA tenants suppose to reside while the ... See more 9 2 Share Justin at jtsphotographer 1 day ago I wish this article had more input from tenants, I'm not sure what to think i never lived in these houses. Adams is corrupt and should be impeached. He's on trial and i don't trust him. He allegedly has greed issues why should i trust this project? Why should anyone trust him with money? 4 Share OnePersonOrAnother 2 days ago That is a truly terrible headline. They're being replaced with new apartments, not just torn down. 12 3 Share J C 2 days ago Replaced with substandard construction and gifts to taxpayer backed developers. 13 3 Share Erin Dolak 2 days ago Came here to say this! 8 1 Share Downtown_Pete 1 day ago The majority of the tenants seem to be in favor of this plan; after all, they voted on it. Also, even if the alternative (gut renovations while the tenants somehow stay in place) would be financially possible, staying in a building that undergoes a gut renovation? That is a really bad idea. Highl... See more 2 3 Share StopFECDemolition 1 day ago The majority of tenants are not in favor. A survey isn't a legally binding document. It is being used as justification. 550 is the survey number for new construction and 939 signed petitions against demolition. 3 Share This comment violated our policy. J C 2 days ago I don't understand why taxpayers are forced to pay for illegal wars (Iraq), Wall Street bailouts, and things like underwriting Hudson Yards. You see only the surface, and have no idea of where things come from, that's why "it" makes no sense to you. 5 2 Share S. 1 day ago I'm probably going to get a lot of flak for saying this, but I'm going to say it anyway. IMO, there is no reason why some (perhaps more) NYCHA projects need to look the way you do. Being of a lower income is no excuse for not taking pride where you live. If you can't pick up after your dog, you sh... See more 3 5 Share Pablo Honey 1 day ago It's not their fault that they keep their buildings and dwellings filthy and violence-ridden. It's society's fault for not providing enough "programs" and "education." At least according to the majority of commenters here. 2 Share Show 3 more replies Nicole 18 hours ago So here's the problems I see. I think that There are many generations of people that live in nycha and they don't want to lose that. There are people in nycha who don't want to pay market rate. Secondly, The moderate income apartments that they want to build would kind of be like the lotteries and ... See more Share Vanyali 7 hours ago Buildings have limited lifespans. People prop up old buildings with extreme efforts — they don’t just stand there forever on their own. If you aren’t going to go through these extreme efforts, then tearing the buildings down and replacing them is the only sensible option. Letting the buildings c... See more Share stillDrLoosen 2 days ago time to move on this 3 Share joe 1 day ago all the NYCHA buildings in every borough needs to be torn down and rebuilt, for the better, and get real tuff on crime in these NYCHA buildings 4 4 Share John_Dortmunder 1 day ago How would Henry George respond to this article? I ask you. Has anyone contacted the Henry George School of Social Science? It's located on E. 38th & Lexington. Just sayin'... 1 Share DJ 1 day ago As public housing has been proven to be a complete failure, the only reason I can think of to maintain it is to warehouse reliable Democratic voters. 2 4 Share 1 reply B-Spider Cherry 1 day ago Instead of donating 100s of billions of dollars to foreign bloodbaths please Washington DC give federal tax dollars to NYCHA 88 billion dollars! That's the 78 they require plus 10 more. Also ban "luxury" housing housing and "AirBNB". 1 2 Share Ellaina Dreifach 1 day ago Where the hell are these seniors going for 7 years??? Who's paying the rent?? 1 Share 1 reply hostiliscivitas 1 day ago If you can't afford to live in NYC, please move 3 5 Share Joe DaLathe 10 hours ago They should add electric and gas meters for each unit. Share meesalikeu 1 day ago they can build them swimming pools too and fill them with yankee fan tears. 1 Share DKR 1 day ago As if we don't have enough homeless already. Share John_Dortmunder 1 day ago I wanna hear ACDC played at max volume during any scheduled demolition Share