Tuesday

07-29-2025 Vol 2036

Harnessing the SCYTHE: A Potential Path for Housing Development in New York City

Amid New York City’s ongoing housing crisis, the next mayor could significantly alter the landscape by embracing the Streetsblog’s SCYTHE initiative.

The Adams administration’s recent City of Yes zoning change, which was implemented late last year, offered developers greater flexibility by lifting parking mandates and allowing for taller buildings near transit hubs.

Nonetheless, the change fell short in some areas due to a last-minute compromise that restricted growth in certain low-density zones close to transit, prompting the need for Streetsblog’s SCYTHE — or City of Yes Transit and Housing Evaluation.

Streetsblog’s analysis aims to identify opportunities for transit-oriented development around underutilized outer borough stations that could benefit from increased neighborhood density.

The SCYTHE evaluation is constructed around three core factors:
1. The population surrounding the station,
2. The subway travel time to Times Square-42nd Street, and
3. The presence of low-density zoning (R1, R2, R3) nearby.

Each of these factors holds equal weight and is scored out of 100, helping to highlight areas with the greatest potential for housing development.

Interestingly, stations with lower populations rank higher, as shifting density to these localities could mitigate congestion and reduce vehicular crashes across the city.

Next, stations with shorter travel times to Midtown also score better.

Building homes far from job centers often forces residents to grapple with the trade-off between affordability and efficient commuting, making it crucial to prioritize development near areas with convenient transit access.

Lastly, stations near low-density zoning rank higher in the SCYTHE system.

In recent years, much of the city’s housing development has focused on formerly industrial sites, posing various health concerns and compelling many people to inhabit areas that lack residential amenities.

By promoting growth in neighborhoods with existing low-density housing, the city can encourage living spaces in already desirable locations.

The SCYTHE initiative thrives on the foundation laid by the City of Yes, which eased parking requirements and relaxed height restrictions near transit and along commercial corridors.

This more permissive environment for developers aims to stimulate the construction of larger apartment complexes in areas where auto-dependency can be minimized, ultimately fostering walkable, community-centric neighborhoods.

New York City has experienced a surge in exorbitant rental prices, a situation exacerbated by a scarcity of housing supply predominantly linked to stringent zoning regulations.

Parking mandates have historically forced developers to allocate funds for expensive parking spaces, but the City of Yes has eliminated such requirements in transit-rich locales.

Currently, the majority of new housing in the city is concentrated in a select few neighborhoods such as Williamsburg and Long Island City, placing immense pressure on these areas to self-sustain the city’s significant housing deficit.

Affordable housing initiatives, like the 421-a program, have frequently yielded little encouragement for constructing residences outside of North Brooklyn and western Queens.

One of the pivotal objectives of the City of Yes is to facilitate increased housing in low and medium-density neighborhoods, permitting modest apartment buildings and accessory dwelling units (ADUs), commonly referred to as “granny flats.”

The proposed allowances for three to five-story apartment buildings near rail transit aim to promote transit-oriented development.

Unfortunately, the City Council made last-minute adjustments, excluding areas zoned for single-family housing from the zoning amendments intended to support transit-oriented development initiatives.

The SCYTHE initiative highlights specific stations that stand out for their potential for increased housing density.

Here is a look at the top 10 stations identified by Streetsblog’s SCYTHE:

1. **Van Cortlandt Park – 242 Street**
This station boasts the lowest nearby population (2,419), largely due to geographic factors.

The housing situation is compounded by low-density commercial structures and a significant parking area in the vicinity.

Although the historic neighborhood of Fieldston is situated nearby, it does little to bolster local density and faces challenges in terms of change due to its landmark status.

2. **Forest Hills – 71 Avenue**
With its distinctive Tudor architecture, Forest Hills is served by four subway lines as well as a Long Island Rail Road stop, highlighting the potential for increased population density.

However, changes may be difficult due to the area’s designation as a historic district, which often leads to contentious public discourse surrounding any development proposals.

3. **Newkirk Plaza**
As the first of several Brooklyn stations on the B and Q lines, Newkirk Plaza is located within the Ditmas Park community, predominantly filled with single-family homes.

The relatively sparse population is not aligned with its proximity to Midtown, clocking in at around 30 minutes by train.

4. **Cortelyou Road**
While surrounding neighborhoods have embraced density, Ditmas Park’s lower utilization of its subway corridor is evident, given its expeditious access to Downtown Brooklyn and Manhattan.

As previously mentioned, the recent revisions to the City of Yes have limited development in single-family (R1) zones, yet the commercial blocks in the area still deserve attention for future housing prospects.

5. **174 Street**
Located in the Bronx, the Charlotte Gardens neighborhood leaves potential housing development underutilized given its proximity to a subway station.

Indeed, while much of the borough maintains high-density areas, pockets such as these, close to parks and well-serviced by public transportation, merit residential growth.

6. **Freeman Street**
Similar to the 174 Street station nearby, Freeman Street reveals a blend of residential options with smaller duplexes and a sprinkling of three-story apartment buildings.

Given the station’s coveted location just steps from the subway system, there’s ample opportunity to expand housing options in this vicinity.

7. **Beverley Road**
Returning to Ditmas Park, the tree-lined streets around the Beverley Road subway stop feature lower-density homes compared to the denser northeast area.

Constructing additional apartment buildings near this station would serve the city’s broader housing demands effectively.

8. **Church Ave**
As the subway approaches Prospect Park, Church Ave benefits from nearby open space, giving it a higher score in the SCYTHE evaluation.

Although low-density housing remains prevalent in the area, there is opportunity to capitalize on building homes near existing parks, enhancing community livability.

9. **Prospect Park**
While it’s essential to clarify that housing construction within the park itself is not proposed, the adjacent Prospect Lefferts Gardens neighborhood could capitalize on growth opportunities given its historical tendencies to resist development.

10. **Kew Gardens – Union Turnpike**
Kew Gardens ranks on the SCYTHE list largely due to the extensive highway interchange to the northeast, alongside the low-density housing options to the south and west.

With innovative urban planning, there could be potential for capping the Jackie Robinson Parkway, enabling the construction of modern apartment buildings above it.

To compile the SCYTHE analysis, population figures were drawn from the American Community Survey spanning 2019-2023.

Subway travel time information was sourced from the MTA’s GFTS database.

Despite its strengths, the SCYTHE analysis does have its limitations.

One drawback is that stations situated near parks frequently receive higher scores, even if they possess relatively dense populations, as the assessment does not quantify the types of nearby uses.

This perspective could emphasize the necessity for increasing densities in areas close to parks since a considerable segment of the city’s populace resides in neighborhoods with limited access to green spaces.

Additionally, the emphasis on low-density zoning nearby inflates station scores due to weighting in SCYTHE, prompting a need for affordable housing in less-gentrified areas beyond the familiar hubs of Bushwick and Astoria.

The focust of this analysis zeroes in on Brooklyn, Queens, and The Bronx, deliberately excluding Manhattan due to its density and proximity to Midtown.

For context, the station with the highest population density is 72nd Street on the 1, 2, and 3 trains, serving 33,528 residents in its catchment area while being just minutes away from Times Square via subway.

Staten Island was sidelined for comparison due to its distinct transportation dynamics, as trips to Manhattan necessitate either a ferry or express bus connection.

Lastly, it’s essential to consider the overarching challenge that any housing development endeavor tends to encounter: strong community opposition.

Many neighborhoods pinpointed in this SCYTHE analysis carry histories of resisting new development efforts.

With the adoption of the City of Yes, there lies hope that these communities will begin to align with the city’s goal of achieving equitable growth and density.

image source from:nyc

Abigail Harper