A 983-unit 3-Building Development containing a Community Pool has been announced for Parcel E in Hunters Point South. Located at 54-42 2nd Street, this city-owned land has been the subject of debate and speculation for several years. Now the discussion is over and the details and renderings have been revealed. Local pols all shared their thoughts at the press conference; as did the city, and the anointed developers and non-profit partners for the undertaking. And the city press duly noted those thoughts. But the big question everyone is still anxiously waiting to have answered is ‘What does the Editorial Board of LICtalk think of this project?’
Let’s start with the main differentiator between this and most other developments in NYC: 658 of the 983 units, or 67% – aka two-thirds, will be ‘affordable,’ aka non-market rent. Differentiator yes, as the typical allotment is 20-25% affordable in the 21st century in NYC. Surprising no, as this is city-owned land, and affordable housing is a focal point of recent administrations, none more so than the most current, as well as most other NYC pols, none more so than those overseeing our own district.
While I fully recognize that these leaders were fairly elected by the people, to some extent overwhelmingly so, I do think it’s important to ask the following question: What is the cost? More specifically, given the reduced rent roll from both the high percentage of below market rate rents, and the large discount on those rents given the income bands (for households earning 20 to 120 percent of the area median income (AMI)): How much will NYC taxpayers have to pay, out of their pockets, to support this endeavor? Even if we threw the land in for free, will the rent be enough to cover operating costs alone? Between labor (union I assume, unlike building employees at TF Cornerstone, Rockrose, and Avalon Bay towers nearby), utilities, maintenance cap-ex, an honest reserve for non-maintenance cap-ex, and an honest accounting of what real estate taxes should be, I wonder if even this low threshold is breakeven? As for the enormous cost of actually building the tower, even with subsidized financing, I’m hard-pressed to believe most of this won’t bleed out into the city budget, err deficit.
Alas, I am beating a dead horse, the terms are the terms. Of greater interest are the “145 supportive housing units” that are part of the 658. Or maybe it’s “149 high-quality apartments for formerly homeless individuals with lifesaving, trauma-informed support services” as expressed further down in the press release. 145 or 149, I’m actually fine with this. This is a very difficult but important role of government, and I believe every neighborhood needs to take in its share. For what it’s worth, my read, and per the 145/149 there is some ambiguity in said press release, is that this apportionment will be housed fully contained in one of the three buildings.
Finally we get to the Community Pool, with an asterisk. As long time readers know, I have been advocating for a Rec Center with a pool for time immemorial. Well actually since 2014, and then in many, many additional posts too numerous to list but here’s one from 2018, and another from 2020, and finally one from 2025.
Why is there an asterisk for the pool? Well there doesn’t seem to be much ambiguity in this part of the press release: “An indoor community pool located on the ground floor that will primarily serve residents but will also be accessible to the wider community through programming provided by Commonpoint.” I am very curious to know what the definition of ‘primarily’ is in this very specific situation? I am also very curious to know what the rationale is for there to be any type of exclusionary access to this pool. Maybe it’s a really small pool, and there’s just not enough capacity for the whole community? If it’s not a small pool, then back to the prior question. As well as additional bewilderment as to why they didn’t just go ahead and build a full Rec Center around this pool, incorporating the space from the three different gyms in each of the three buildings (yes they will each have their own), and maybe pushing the buildings 3-4 stories higher for any additional room needed? Why can’t logic prevail? Is there still time to go back to the drawing board? Where are our leaders? Are we the people of Long Island City asking too much?
Mamdani Administration to Transform Long-Vacant Queens Site with Nearly 1,000 New Homes and New Community Amenities – oh c’mon, it’s not long vacant, it’s part of a 20-year, 30-acre Master Plan with the RFP issued in July 2025 and completed in September 2025, months before this administration came into office
Slate, Hudson to bring LIC 658 affordable waterfront units — plus a pool
Seems like a lot of “just asking questions” for something that will probably be an overall good thing for our community or at least not a net negative (more housing, fewer abandoned parcels of land, etc.).