The numbers are not good.
The M35 has only got an average weekday ridership of 176 people per day:
The worst in Manhattan.
Not only that, the drop in ridership, from 2016 to 2021 is also the most precipitous. The M35 lost 83% of its ridership between 2016 to 2021. Again, the worst in Manhattan:
The M35 is a ghost bus.
The Intelligencer Reports on NIMBYs and YIMBYs
The Intelligencer has an article on how a few of New York’s socialists are coming to terms with the data analysis from NYU’s Furman Institute that building market-rate housing does not increase nearby rents.
The author of the Furman Institute’s article notes that market-rate development actually slightly decreases nearby rents:
Abstract
There is a growing debate about whether new housing units increase rents for immediately surrounding apartments. Some argue new market-rate development produces a supply effect, which should alleviate the demand pressure on existing housing units and decrease their rents. Others contend that new development will attract high-income households and new amenities, generating an amenity effect and driving up rents. I contribute to this debate by estimating the impact of new high-rises on nearby residential rents, residential property sales prices and restaurant openings in New York City. To address the selection bias that developers are more likely to build new high-rises in fast-appreciating areas, I restrict the sample to residential properties near approved new high-rises and exploit the plausibly exogenous timing of completion conditional upon the timing of approval. I provide event study evidence that within 500 ft, for every 10% increase in the housing stock, rents decrease by 1%; and for every 10% increase in the condo stock, condo sales prices decrease by 0.9%. In addition, I show that new high-rises attract new restaurants, which is consistent with the hypothesis about amenity effects. However, I find that the supply effect dominates the amenity effect, causing net reductions in the rents and sales prices of nearby residential properties.
You can read the full article here:
Harlem’s City Council member is mentioned in the Intelligencer article and is contrasted with Council Member Caban:
In this particular manner, a darling of the left behaved like a typical politician. And so did Kristin Richardson Jordan, a self-identified socialist city councilmember (the DSA did not support her campaign) who blocked a proposed development that would have built over 900 units of housing in Central Harlem. Half of the development would have been designated affordable housing, though not quite at the deep levels Cabán won in Astoria. Richardson Jordan called the development “nothing less than white supremacy,” a statement that was hyperbolic and absurd — a mixed-use housing development has nothing to do with racial terror. But more telling, perhaps, was another comment the councilmember made to a local publication. “I would rather have lots sit empty than have them filled with further gentrification,” she said. A NIMBY couldn’t have put it better.