NY Times Comment, Ron Shiffman, July 14, 2026

The proposal by NYCHA and the Related Company to demolish public housing in Chelsea is being sold as necessary reinvestment. It is neither. It is a troubling convergence of flawed public policy, environmental harm, and the privatization of public land and public housing.

Rehabilitation should be the starting point. Demolition generates enormous waste, requires carbon-intensive new construction, and erases one of Chelsea’s most valuable assets: its mature trees and open spaces. These are not empty lots—they absorb stormwater, clean the air, and preserve access to light and sky in a dense neighborhood increasingly starved of all three. Once lost, they are gone for good.

Even more concerning is the displacement of long-standing communities. Residents are promised relocation and return, but experience tells us otherwise. Long timelines and upheaval scatter communities that took decades to build and cannot be easily restored.

The financial justification for demolition is also suspect. NYCHA and Related now claim it is more cost-effective than rehabilitation, yet their own earlier submissions projected far lower rehabilitation costs. The shift raises serious questions about whether the numbers are being used to rationalize a predetermined outcome.

Finally, the promise of new “affordable” housing should be viewed with caution. Too often, these units are priced beyond the reach of current residents. What is far more certain is that the plan will generate significant private profit while setting a dangerous precedent: the erosion of public housing through privatization.

Chelsea is not a blank slate. It is a living community with environmental assets and social networks that deserve investment—not erasure. We can—and must—choose rehabilitation over demolition, and public stewardship over private gain.

—Ron Shiffman, FAICP, Hon.AIA, Professor Emeritus, Pratt Graduate Center for Planning and the Environment. Member,New York City Planning Commission 1990 to 1996.