NY Times Comment, David Burney, July 14, 2026

Zaveri misses several important facts. First, rehabilitation is ALWAYS preferable to demolition as it avoids the environmental cost of all the construction waste and the carbon and energy footprint of the new steel and concrete. Demolition also disrupts existing communities that cannot be easily restored. NYCHA and Related argue that the cost of demolition exceeds the cost of new construction, but this argument is undermined by their own RFP submission in 2021, in which they give MUCH lower cost estimates for the rehabilitation. It is clear that these numbers were inflated to serve the recent proposal. It is claimed that the current residents will be relocated to new buildings, but we know that rarely happens because of the time taken for the project and the decimation of the community. It is claimed that the project will deliver new “affordable” housing, but we all know that “affordable” rarely means rent that local working people can afford. What the project as proposed WILL deliver is profits for the developers and a bad precedent for public housing everywhere.

David Burney | Visiting Professor, MS – Urban Placemaking and Management