Data: PLUTO datasets 2018 and 2024

Restricting to lots with year_built >= 2018 and positive units and units in both years.

Counts:
858K lots
8,059 with year_built >= 2018
2,286 satisfying the other conditions

Median give similar direction (but single-fam houses drive numbers)

Good to know, that wasn't clear to me at all even with many hours of reading.

So I feel like we can say:
115,000 if we don't up-zone
Much, more if we up-zone (with many other benefits).

Which makes all forecasts much more positive.

I've read through much of an 1,077 page report, and couldn't find basic breakdowns.

www.mta.info/project/inte... (see bottom)

Lots of important questions are unclear, e.g.: Does this ridership estimate include upzoning? No idea!

A well-intentioned person might ask "Are there really enough people going from Queens to Brooklyn"?

Simple data could convince them! Something like:

"X people go Brooklyn-Queens each day by bus.
With IBX, we expect this to increase by Y%"

Interesting. These types of results give us a hint of how the city could actually operate if we were serious about giving everyone opportunities, with 20-story buildings with ample subsidized housing right next to subway stations, per right.

i'm not a lawyer, but it's not even clear to me this includes only rentals.

If it includes owner-occupied condos, this would apply to 432 park too.

Yes I'm skeptical this drives a good bargain in terms of (number of beneficiaries) / (number of units affected), even if we believe that land trusts (LT) can provide great value.

It's affecting 100% of multi-family sales with rentals, even those where LT don't even remotely make sense.

Key quotes from proposal:

26-853 Notice of sale. a. An owner of a residential building shall provide notice..." => this applies to all sales of multi-fam (3+ units, defined on page 3)

26-853 The owner shall provide such notice of sale no less than 180 days before taking such action [the sale]

Correction: I think it's called COPA here. I've seen an article describing support as veto-proof but I'm not at all an expert on the legislative process. I just read the legal text.

(www.neweconomynyc.org/2025/11/comm...)

And another funny case is that this would also apply to something like selling 432 Park, with average sales price of $50M/unit.

Want to form a land trust to buy this?

Indeed. We can discuss the most sympathetic cases, but the real outcomes will depend on the law as it's written. And I read this:

"26-853 Notice of sale. a. An owner of a residential building shall provide notice"

without restriction on which owners it applies to (beyond 3+ units).

Ah sorry that link just worked for me.

This should work for everyone: legistar.council.nyc.gov/LegislationD...

Attachement 2

For many thieves who like stealing stuff (just a little bit tho), it’s not fun to be stopped by a lock.

After some thought: 10 years feels very fast, I’d think 20-30 is more realistic, I’ll see more what people estimate in the literature.

There are existing analysis in the same range, e.g. buildingcongress.com/report/2025-...

I've also taken the 50% usage over 10-year assumption from their report.

A common complaint is "this is too expensive at $5B"/

I'd frame this as: To be worth it, just due to the new housing, one unit of housing needs to be worth >$25,000

Over coming posts, I'll provide more data on whether that's likely true.

Ah that would've come in useful when I was arguing with someone about decongestion pricing in NYC and they said something like "We're just shifting congestion from roads to transit".

People do believe the opposite of this theory sometimes!

And you might ask, why does this matter?

These estimates often end up being very wrong. Lots of cases of highway expansions not meeting the expected ridership demand.

And there's a reason stuff doesn't get checked: No on earns money from being correct on public projects, ten years in the future.