Legal Aid and CSS Rip NYCHA’s $1.5 Billion Tear Down Plans for Chelsea Public Housing Projects

Controversy heats up over plans by the New York Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD)’s to move forward with the $1.5 billion plan to demolish and rebuild the Fulton and Elliot- Chelsea (FEC) public housing projects. The Legal Aid Society says the city’s survey which said residents overwhelming supported the plan was flawed, backing up previous resident concerns. The Legal Aid Society on March 8 was joined by Community Service Society of New York (CSS) in pushing back against the NYCHA plan.

NYCHA, with the endorsement of Mayor Eric Adams, has partnered with Essence Development and real estate giant Related Companies, who said in the public announcement that they planned to work closely with residents and tenant associations on the project.

The Proposed Action will demolish all 2,056 units and seek to rebuild and eventually re-house all Fulton and Elliot-Chelsea residents in two new high-rise towers.

Legal and Aid and CSS argue that NYCHA has turned what was designated as a “no demolition” plan to rehabilitate the historic public housing units at Fulton and Elliot-Chelsea into a campaign for the full demolition of all the public housing units and the addition of over 2,500 market rate and approximately 900 allegedly affordable units. The city maintained that trying to repair and renovate the run down projects would be as costly as building new units because of the severity of the conditions in the aging developments. Residents have long complained that they regularly encounter leaks, mold, broken elevators and heating problems, as reported by the NYT.

Mayor Adams has said he hopes the so-called “Chelsea Plan” of privatizing public housing will serve as model for the city going forward so it can get out of the landlord business.

But critics abound. “We are appalled by this demolition plan,” Alex MacDougall, staff attorney at the Legal Aid Society, told Straus News. “It is a bait-and-switch that threatens to permanently displace FEC senior and disabled residents, accelerate gentrification and leave residents living in a construction site for decades.”

Previously, residents voiced their concerns over the anonymous survey taken that allegedly showed that residents opted for demolition. But LAS and CSS say otherwise, mentioning that the survey was not conducted correctly.

“The plan fails to accurately portray the Working Group’s efforts and claims that the full demolition, is a “resident-led” change driven by a “resident survey.” Residents only had a week to fill out the survey, and it did not adequately inform or educate residents about the proposals in front of them,” LAS and CSS commented.

“None of the materials mention new infill residential units, including 2,500 market rate units, which would more than double the total number of apartments on the FEC sites. The informational packet that accompanied the survey only references temporary relocation when describing the rehabilitation option. There is no mention of temporary relocation in the packet sections describing the two demolition options (new construction with and without rezoning).”

“The layout of the survey strongly favors “new construction,”’ LAS and CSS commented.

“None of the three options included on the survey— “1A. New Construction with Rezoning,” “1B. New Construction with Existing Zoning,” or “2. Rehabilitation of existing units”— mentions “demolition,” despite both of the first two options requiring complete demolition. Instead, its three options, including rehabilitation, are listed under the heading “new construction/full replacement.”

Additionally, the survey provided no verification on who participated, and none of the survey results were shared, to date, to those who requested access (i.e., government officials, advocates and NYCHA residents), according to LAS and CSS.

For those Spanish speaking residents that make up a good number of FEC residents, it is unknown whether the survey was offered in any language other than English, according to LAS and CSS.

Those FEC residents, the plan is going to displace, make up the fabric of the neighborhood. The plan argues that it won’t damage the community, however, because it is less than 500 seniors that will be displaced. Although, losing 110 senior will still make an impact to the neighborhood, according to LAS and CSS.

Several residents voiced their concerns on where they will be sent to be displaced, the answer to that question still seems to be unanswered. “How many vacant units are on site? And how many of them are accessible? Will repairs and modifications be made to them to ensure that they meet the seniors’ needs?,” are only some of the many questions from LAS and CSS, and residents.

“NYCHA has not provided a concrete, substantive explanation for how the estimated total cost of rehabilitation went from $366 million to over one billion dollars,” LAS and CSS commented.

“It is not mentioned in the plan what NYCHA would do over the next 16 years to remedy the myriad other serious conditions that residents currently face, including leaking roofs, mold, defective plumbing, crumbling facades, elevator outages, inadequate heat, and lead paint exposure.”

And LAS and CSS said the project is likely to take years and that could wipe out a generation of neighborhood bonds. “Even assuming the project remains on schedule, infants born to current residents will nearly reach adulthood before the development is complete,” FEC and CSS commented.

“Unless an adequate plan is put in place, these children will spend their entire childhood living in hazardous conditions, with a demonstrated adverse effect on their health, while a multi-billion-dollar development is constructed next door.”

“Across the country, Rental Assistance Demonstration (“RAD”) and similar projects have resulted in unfulfilled promises, stalled or nonexistent replacement construction, and the expulsion of communities,” LAS and CSS commented.

The plan should be re-thought and resident-led, like what NYCHA claims they have done, according to LAS and CSS.

“The plan should lead to the rejection of the Proposed Action and a return to the Working Group’s recommendations—a plan focused on rehabilitating current FEC buildings in a timely manner and the construction, if any, of deeply affordable units, not luxury towers,” LAS and CSS concluded.