becca, get off your soap box.  The government shouldn't be putting controls on who can live where.  This is a highly desirable location and people should be free to live there if they want.  This means that some people will not be able to while others can.  Welcome to a free, democratic society.  If you want government to control housing and you want handouts for everything, there are other socialist countries you can look at.

PEP, get off your soap box!! If you had gone to any of the meetings regarding  Hunters Point South you would know that it is not a private developer but the NY City Economic Development Corporation who will be building and mangaing this project not a private developer. So then you would agree that Wall street shouldn't be bailed out? After all that is one huge Governmet handout. For some reason it isn't call socialism when this country bails out big business beacause they screw up. If big business can get a handout for screwing up then why can't we do the same for hard working people who want live in decent housing.  No one said handout, just an opportunity to live in this city, since those who work for this city should be able to live in it also not just the wealthy.

For the record, I do not own.  I rent and live on a tight budget and I do not make a hefty salary. Yes, I did settle for Hunts Point as opposed to Manhattan which is how I would define living withine ones means.  I am perfectly fine with this and would rather live in Hunters Point paycheck to paycheck than live in Manhattan in a government stabilized rental unit as I do not feel as though I am entitled to anything other than what I can afford.

Now to your above posting.  How do you differentiate between a bail out and an opportunity to have something you other wise would not have.  AIG was bailed out so that it would not have to file for bankruptcy.  You want a bailout so that you dont have to go live in Sunnyside.  It is the same concept.  No one has a right to live where they work, it is a simply a privieledge that most have.  Your lucky to have a job and a place to live regardless of where it is. 

nc1981,

For the record, I have no choice but to live in the city as I am employed by NYC and have a residency requirement for my job as do all city workers except for the police and fire department. So saying that I don't have a right to live where I work is wrong. I have no choice if I want to keep my job. And for the record, I as a single person would not qualify for the Hunters Point South development because I make too much money to qualifiy for the "affordable" rent that they think a single person should be able to pay on my salary, which is more than I currently pay. I too live on a tight budget and now pay almost a full paycheck to rent an apartment in a building that is 100 years old. So based on what you said when you can no longer afford to live in NYC you would leave rather than move into "affordable housing" that would allow you to live and work in NYC?  You would never have considered living in Sty Town or Peter Cooper Village prior to being bought out? Look how those rents rose. No more teachers, firemen, police living there!! Regardless, I support the development of this project. As for the bail out for AIG, and all of wall street that is in the works, if it were you or I in that situation the government would say tough luck and we would go bankrupt. Think of all the great things 700 billion dollars could fund for the people of this country instead of bailing out a bunch of rich men who  were greedy and made poor business choices. I have nothing else to say about this.

becca, there are plenty of great neighborhoods in Queens and Brooklyn that are quite affordable for those with incomes of cops, firefighters, sanitation, etc.  It is insulting to people who live in those neighborhoods to take the attitude that the government should provide housing to you so you can live somewhere that you think is better.