Upzone the Village Waterfront

[finddave]

Rally Cancelled due to Inclement Weather

Save the date: Monday, Dec. 20th, at 1 PM
Location: City Hall Park (south of City Hall and on north end of the park)
Event: Rally to upzone Riverside West (the west village waterfront)

Please join me to rally for an upzoning of Riverside West! This is the area that is south of the Meat Packing District and west of Greenwich Village. The rabid preservationists call it the Far West Village. Others call it Miami on Hudson. Right now I'm calling it Riverside West!

Call it whatever you want, just help me and others upzone the area so thousands of people can enjoy living in the city AND on the new waterfront. Doesn't that sound nice? I may never live there and you may never live there but I can assure you that everyone will have a better chance of living there if the city upzones the area to allow larger buildings with new apartments for thousands of people.

The out-of-control preservationists from Greenwich Village are trying to seize the land with downzoning and a bogus landmark overlay. We need to rally for an upzoning of the area and the freedom to live in modern buildings with rooftop pools and indoor gyms!

Please join me next Monday at 1 PM for a short rally that will bring attention to the blossoming waterfront and celebrate city living!

Take a long lunch and join us.

RELATED INFO
PDF flyer of fascist preservationists:
http://www.gvshp.org/FarWestVillageHolidayCityHallflyer.pdf
Map of City Hall Park
http://maps.yahoo.com/maps_result?ed=oXRBTup_0Tq2fCQjr83ebVoiKWg-&csz=New+York%2C+NY+10038&country=us&new=1&name=&q ty=

[BrooklynRider]

I thought you had already started a thread on the subject of protesting Far West Village zoning. Will we get threads on every protest you plan on attending? Maybe threads on each movie you see? Perhaps a thread for each new person you date? Maybe a new thread for each new restaurant you patronize?

[ZippyTheChimp]

Both sides are a joke.

[Stern]

Both sides are a joke.

What makes you say that?

[ZippyTheChimp]

One side wants New York to be a museum. The other wants it to be Houston.

The irony is that this narrow strip of real estate (it's hardly big enough to warrant a name) is doing just fine the way it is. The three Meier buildings demonstrate that modern architecture can coexist with historic neighborhoods.

[billyblancoNYC]

While I support Historic Districts 100%, I do think that the waterfront should be developed in a big way. Increase the heights, knock down all the crap that should be, build on all the lots, and make the West Side skyline a showpiece and a new postcard. Allow people to enjoy living by the park and the water.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Do you like what is happening now in the area - Superior Ink and UPS sites will be developed, or would you prefer a replication of Trump Place?

[ryan]

Hopefully the "starchitect" trend will give the FWV a better quality of architecture than Trump place. Blech.

[TLOZ Link5]

Hopefully the "starchitect" trend will give the FWV a better quality of architecture than Trump place. Blech.

::sarcasm:: Give Trump Place a chance. Now that Kelly Perdew from The Apprentice is working there, all its problems will be solved!!!!!11 ::sarcasm::

[NewYorkYankee]

I really liked that show.

[TLOZ Link5]

I really liked that show.

Me too, but the opportunity for a quick poking fun-at was just irresistable.

[finddave]

The rally scheduled for Monday at 1 PM has been cancelled due to forcasts of severe weather conditions.

We'll get them next time! Hopefully the snow and wind will disrupt the Greenwich Village criminals who are trying to prevent people from living on the waterfront.

If you'd like to help out by sending a letter, please send one to Amanda Burden of the City Planning Commission:


Hon. Amanda Burden
Chair, New York City Planning Commission
22 Reade Street
New York, NY 10007

Dear Chair Burden,

Please upzone the Village Waterfront. The new pier has made the area a great place to live. Thousands of people want to move to the area and developers have the resources to build apartments. Please upzone the area so that the new developments can house as many new residents as possible.

I know you're getting pressure from the rabid preservationists/criminals of Greenwich Village. They are trying to keep the waterfront to themselves and maintain their views. They are trying to hold back me and everyone else. I urge you to ignore their unfair demands by opening the area to as many people as possible.

The Village Waterfront could be one of the most amazing neighborhoods in the best city of the world.

Sincerely,

[ryan]

So are you like a PR (fl)hack for some developer with an eye on the area? I don't think your post headline-writer vibe is going to drum up a lot of support on this forum. "rabid" and "criminal" did give me a good laugh though...

[BrooklynRider]

I agree. Finddave wants us all the "join the fight" for developers to develop, just so they can create buildings that will price people even further out of the market. I like to see the struggle and I think it produces the best results.

Finddave never did come clean in his earlkier posts about exactly who he represents. Her is a shill for someone out there. His one-note posts show he really has no interest in dialoague on this board or any idea of the diverse viewpoints and evolving perspectives.

One-note
One-note
One-note

And, not at all interesting or engaging.

[ZippyTheChimp]

The illogic of his financial argument was brought out in the other thread.

What is most puzzling to me is his narrow focus on the Greenwich Village area, when there are other areas that can more easily (and less destructively, from a neighborhood viewpont) benefit from zoning changes.

What about Tribeca North (http://forums.wirednewyork.com/viewtopic.php?t=3675)?

Just like GV...
It is on the waterfront.
It has the same park across the street.
Near transportation.
Engaged in a battle over building heights.

It is closer to the financial district.
The neighborhood can more easily integrate with tall buildings.
There are many more potential development sites than the West Village.

[Schadenfrau]

BrooklynRider, I think the sad fact is that Finddave likely represents nothing but his own selfish interests.

The fact that he's attempting to rally the troops to battle for "the freedom to live in modern buildings with rooftop pools and indoor gyms" gives that away.

[ZippyTheChimp]

There are many paths to sltruism.

:P

[finddave]

So are you like a PR (fl)hack for some developer with an eye on the area? I don't think your post headline-writer vibe is going to drum up a lot of support on this forum. "rabid" and "criminal" did give me a good laugh though...

I'm not a PR person for a developer. I simply feel that neighborhoods should be directed by transactions between property owners not by a soviet-style central planner. I think neighborhoods should grow and shrink naturally based on interest in the neighborhood. Right now growth is restricted on Park Avenue but we are free to move to "growth zones" in undesirable upstate areas of the state.

Finddave wants us all the "join the fight" for developers to develop, just so they can create buildings that will price people even further out of the market.

Building more apartments anywhere in the city will reduce the overall price of apartments in the city. I base this on fundamental economics. If the supply of a commodity is increased, the price will fall. Due to the pent-up demand for apartments in Manhattan, the price will fall only after a dramatic increase in supply.

I don't understand why you think developments will price people out of the market. There is indirect pricing out for someone with a rent-control apt in an upcoming neigbhorhood since prices for goods in the neighborhood will rise. But other than that, prices for apartments will eventually fall. There is no other way to get lower prices. We must increase the supply of housing.

His one-note posts show he really has no interest in dialoague on this board or any idea of the diverse viewpoints and evolving perspectives.

I regularly engage in a dialogue on this board. If evolving perspectives includes fascism, I'm not going to evolve in your eyes.

What is most puzzling to me is his narrow focus on the Greenwich Village area, when there are other areas that can more easily (and less destructively, from a neighborhood viewpont) benefit from zoning changes.

I have chosen the West Village Waterfront b/c of the new piers. I would like to live there and I know many other would like to live there as well. If I had more time, I might get involved with the Tribeca North discussion.

I think the sad fact is that Finddave likely represents nothing but his own selfish interests.

We all represent our selfish interests. I think those who deny this are either fooling themselves or lying.

.

[ZippyTheChimp]

So why should we support your selfish interests, rather than the selfish interests of your opponents?

[BrooklynRider]

FindDave-

I just can not understand your enthusiastic, energetic support something you have no obvious investment in. You present such a determined course to overturn the West Village Zoning as if overturning those laws will directly result in an apartment for yourself.

Apartments exist there. Available apartments. From West Little 12th Street to The Lofts in Tribeca, there are existing buildings with vacancies and new buildings going up. You might want to PM BillyBlanco to see if he has listings.

Anyway, the fact that ready-to-move-into residences exist makes your argument suspicious at best and disingenuous at worst.

Sorry. We all entertained this cyclical nowhere argument from you before. You are most certainly withholding facts from the scenario presented. If not, pick a building along Hudson River Park and move in.

(BTW, "Fascist" wouldn't be the word. No one is dictating anything or any view here, but the needle on the B.S. detector is pulsing at "extreme". You told us where you want to live. Do want us to give you the addresses of condo, co-op and rental vacancies?)

[Stern]

I agree with finddave that if we build ultra-luxury apartments here, older buildings in other parts of the city that are now charging exorbitant rents, will respond to market changes and ever so slightly creep down.

[jiw40]

finddave,you should have had plenty of time to discuss Tribeca North considering the rally was cancelled.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Yeah, but Tribeca North doesn't have those nice piers.

Well, actually it does. They just won't be nice for about two years. I guess that's too long to wait.

[finddave]

FindDave-

I just can not understand your enthusiastic, energetic support something you have no obvious investment in. You present such a determined course to overturn the West Village Zoning as if overturning those laws will directly result in an apartment for yourself.

I'm not doing this just for myself. In fact, I may never be able to afford an apartment on the waterfront. I am doing this because the government and dictatorial citizens should not be allowed to prevent people from moving to neighborhoods and building the apartments to make that possible. My view on the freedom to live in a neighborhood is similar to my views about free speech or self defense. I expect you agree with me about free speech. Even though you may not like what everyone has to say, you know that people have the right to speak their mind. Apply that line of thinking to real estate and you'll see where I'm coming from.

Anyway, the fact that ready-to-move-into residences exist makes your argument suspicious at best and disingenuous at worst. Sorry. We all entertained this cyclical nowhere argument from you before. You are most certainly withholding facts from the scenario presented. If not, pick a building along Hudson River Park and move in.

As for my argument, I don't see how it's "cyclical." We may be going around a few times on this discussion, but that's primarily due to your skepticism. Instead of questioning my sincerity or resorting to ad hominem attacks, I encourage you to argue the issues. I'm getting the feeling you don't want to "own up" to your belief that you have the right to dictate where people are allowed to live and whether they live in modern structures or converted factories.

(BTW, "Fascist" wouldn't be the word. No one is dictating anything or any view here, but the needle on the B.S. detector is pulsing at "extreme". You told us where you want to live. Do want us to give you the addresses of condo, co-op and rental vacancies?)

I define fascism as a political system in which people can own property but the government or dictator (or one's neighbor) controls the property. In a capitalist society, there would still be limits to development but they likely would only be to prevent nuisances (odor, sound) not river views or architectural preferences.

[finddave]

I agree with finddave that if we build ultra-luxury apartments here, older buildings in other parts of the city that are now charging exorbitant rents, will respond to market changes and ever so slightly creep down.

I'd like to add to this point. If the ultra-rich can't build ultra-luxury apartments, they will price lower-income people out of the current apartments.

[ManhattanKnight]

Oops, Davy. Yesterday's City Hall "rally" (as you call it) was not "cancelled due to inclement weather." The press conference organized by GVSHP and others took place as scheduled and got Mayor Mike's attention. See http://gvshp.org/cityhallpressconference12.20.04.htm. Tiny mind, big lie.

[finddave]

Oops, Davy. Yesterday's City Hall "rally" (as you call it) was not "cancelled due to inclement weather." The press conference organized by GVSHP and others took place as scheduled and got Mayor Mike's attention. See http://gvshp.org/cityhallpressconference12.20.04.htm. Tiny mind, big lie.

I had said that the rally to upzone was cancelled.

[billyblancoNYC]

While I do support preserving beautiful, historical structures, I do think it's rather humorous that all the people figting development try to make it into some altruistic crusade. They are just as selfish, if not more so, than the people that want to develop. They don't want more people in the area...they don't want more, nicer, apartments in the area for who knows why...they want to make it so that less people can even FIND a place to live in their area.

So what if the waterfront is developed? Sure, you can protect the "inside" blocks, but will a row of apartments on the far west end of your area make that big a difference? I don't think so. Does it now? Do the buildings in Queens West make LIC a horror? Nope.

The city needs to grow, in a responsible manner. Developing lots and delapidated buildings is a great way to do this. Sure, protect your 1850 townhouse, without a doubt, but there has to be some give and take.

[krulltime]

I agree! Sure I like to see the old buildings and town houses and stuff... I also think that the owners of these buildings should have the right to fight for their own properties if they are being develop. But they are not.

These other properties and lots are own by other individuals who want to sell to a developer. Why would others complaint? Because they want to control everything. They want to control not only their properties but the surroudings aswell. Well if they want to control their surroundings then find some money and buy those lots.

You know what. There are homes outside of the city where you can buy not only a place but also alot of land that surrounds your property for a cheaper price. So they want to live in the city well deal with development!!! :x

[ryan]

[quote=BrooklynRider]FindDave-

I define fascism as a political system in which people can own property but the government or dictator (or one's neighbor) controls the property. In a capitalist society, there would still be limits to development but they likely would only be to prevent nuisances (odor, sound) not river views or architectural preferences.

So you would have supported the demolition of Grand Central? Think Penn Station was no great loss?

[BrooklynRider]

The above quote is actually finddaves words - not mine. The quote editing seems to have presented it as mine. Althought, I don't think that was the intention.

I agree with finddave that if we build ultra-luxury apartments here, older buildings in other parts of the city that are now charging exorbitant rents, will respond to market changes and ever so slightly creep down.

Stern, this is a widely espoused theory that has defied evidence in NYC. With the exception of the devastation of 9/11, prices have not and do not go down in NYC. The only thing that fluctuates is the "profit" margin on sales - but never to a point where it becomes a deficit. I fully understand the theory, it is logical. It just is unproven in NYC.

[debris]

Of course its unproven in NYC, nobody ever builds anything. Its true all over the east coast. Let's compare this year's housing starts from the census bureau:

http://censtats.census.gov/cgi-bin/bldgprmt/bldgsel.pl

Maricopa County (Phoenix): 45931
Clark County (Las Vegas): 32486

vs.

New York County: 2667
Kings County: 5241
Bronx County: 4090
Queens County: 5926
Richmond County: 1909

So there you have it, Phoenix and Las Vegas are doubling the five boroughs in permits, and NYC is about 5X the size of Phoenix, 10X the size of Vegas. It really is as simple as FindDave says: if you build more homes, you keep prices down. That's why homes in Phoenix and Vegas are not averaging $1 million, even though everyone is moving there!

I mean just think about it for a second. Places with loose zoning laws, places that are still developing and have open land (Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, etc.), house prices never rise there. You can buy a home in Phoenix for nothing. But everywhere the land is developed, and people still want to live there (Bay Area, NYC, Boston, etc.), prices are skyrocketing. Its simple supply and demand.

Of course, we can't build as much as Vegas, because we already have 8 million people, and land is scarce. There are trade-offs between keeping house prices low versus quality-of-life issues. If NYC had 12 million people the subway system would collapse. But the answers to house prices are right there in the census figures. Demand is outstripping supply, its that simple. There's no need to make elaborate gentrification arguments. Prices always go up in NYC because we are *not even close* to building enough homes to keep prices flat. We'd probably need 3X as many housing starts to do that right now (although if demand falls off during a recession, things could change).

[BrooklynRider]

Thank you.

[Derek2k3]

http://thevillager.com/villager_86/mayorsayshefundamentally.html

If this neighborhood is downzoned I'd be really upset. I'd support specific historic buildings getting landmarked though.

[Brandon McEveety]

This neighborhood is not worthy of historic district designation. Most of the buildings contained within the proposed historic district would be considered of "no style." Such buildings, even when within the boundaries of a historic district, are not granted protection from demolition or alteration by the Landmarks Commission. Therefore the proposed historic district would be, for the most part, worthless.
The Far West Village will not be protected as a historic district because the Landmarks Commission will not be able to legitimize doing so. However, the South Village, still has some good, raw, unaltered architecture so most of the buildings in that district could be considered “of style” by the Landmarks Commission if it were designated a historic district. For this reason preservationists should focus their attention on the South Village instead.
With the West Village not having much from architectural standpoint to offer, I tend to believe that it should be up zoned to help solve the current housing crises. In doing so, perhaps the city can at least take advantage of ONE of its waterfronts on Manhattan.

[Deimos]

So there you have it, Phoenix and Las Vegas are doubling the five boroughs in permits, and NYC is about 5X the size of Phoenix, 10X the size of Vegas.

In those stats, how would a 100 unit building be noted.... is that 100 housing starts, or just 1?

[ZippyTheChimp]

They are building permits.

The data is also broken down into housing units. If you look at it that way, the percentage of the total number of units that are single family homes:

Las Vegas - 85%
Phoenix - 88%
NYC - 4%

Land is cheap in both municipalities, and they are sprawling. What may end this is not the rising cost of real estate, but the rising cost of water. Both cities have serious water supply problems. Las Vegas is now paying residents to remove their lawns.

http://www.waterconserve.info/articles/reader.asp?linkid=34613


5,000 people per month move to Las Vagas, and housing starts are demand driven. That is generally the case wherever there is growth. Developers do not just build housing stock, and let the laws of supply and demand set the price. That happens with existing resales and rentals, but when demand for these units eases and prices fall, developers stop building - so the system is self correcting.

When demand is high, as it is in all three cities, housing prices are set by the value of the real estate and construction costs. In Las Vegas, both are much lower than NYC.

Building in the West Village would remain expensive, so prices there would be high. The people that buy these units are not in the demographic of those seeking affordable housing, so demand for affordable housing would not change.

[krulltime]

W. Villagers blast apt. tower plans


BY LORE CROGHAN
DAILY NEWS BUSINESS WRITER

Artist and directer Julian Schnabel is building a 167-foot apartment tower atop his West Village studio and home with a Washington developer - a plan his neighbors protested vehemently yesterday.

Thirty people marched in front of 360 W. 11th St., a wine-colored brick building that was once a stable. Their signs said, "Julian Schnabel: Please don't sell us out" and "Art Is Beautiful - Greed Is Ugly." They called on him to scrap the project - which will be taller than a 16- story residential building, and loom over nearby properties.

"This neighborhood's history goes back 200 years - and it is slowly being destroyed," said Andrew Berman of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation.

His group is campaigning to change the zoning of the West Village waterfront - where historic buildings are being razed for high-rises - and win it landmark designation.

Schnabel, a key figure in the revival of American painting in the 1980s and a director of films like "When Night Falls," may not have been home. He didn't respond when reporters rang his doorbells. Nor did he answer a call made later to his studio.

City records indicate he's working with Telesis - a Washington builder known for low- and middle-income housing development. But there's nothing low-rent about Schnabel's project. It will have a swimming pool and full-floor, duplex and triplex apartments.

Through a technicality, Schnabel's plan won rapid-fire approval from the city buildings department - though zoning and landmarking changes that would curtail developments like his are being sought.

"We're obliged to enforce zoning as it exists today," department spokeswoman Jennifer Givner said.

Originally published on January 26, 2005


All contents © 2005 Daily News, L.P.

[krulltime]

Greenwich Village 'Down-Zoned'


http://realestate.observer.com/SuperiorInk.jpg


Greenwich Village dwellers and preservationists won a battle today when the City Planning Commission voted to limit the height and scale of new developments in the far West Village, a haven of luxury real-estate speculation since the infamous Perry Street celebridorm by Richard Meier, overexposed both literally and figuratively, went up along the Hudson River.

The City Planning Commission voted unanimously today to approve a down-zoning of the Far West Village that imposes strict regulations on developers for quite some time into the future.

Developers interested in the neighborhood are not pleased.

During a hearing last week, proponents of the rezoning pleaded with commission chair Amanda Burden to take action quickly, as developers were gearing up to start their projects before the rezoning could take effect; apparently, she listened.

Two glaring exceptions to the rezoning remain: the Superior Ink Factory (pictured), at 70 Bethune Street, where Related Companies plans to build a 120-foot residential tower, and the Whitehall Storage site, at Charles and West streets, where the Witkoff Group is planning a 175-foot tower.

Now, the City Council has to vote on the rezoning, which should happen before Thanksgiving, according to the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation.


- Matthew Grace
Posted by Tom 9/26/2005


The New York Observer

[krulltime]

http://i.pbase.com/v3/55/435155/2/50662933.WVDown.jpg

Council approves far West Village downzoning


Today, in the culmination of a year-and-a-half-long struggle by neighborhood residents and preservation groups, the City Council voted to approve the Far West Side down-zoning, effectively putting the kibosh on developers’ plans to immediately erect large-scale buildings in the area.

Spearheaded by the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, the rezoning takes effect immediately in the neighborhood bounded by Hortatio Street to the north, Washington Street to the east, Morton Street to the south, and West Street to the, err, west.

The rezoning will put a stop to the ongoing erection of high-rise towers the Village has been seeing more of in the last few years, allowing only construction that is on the same scale as the existing neighborhood. (For an interesting read on down-zoning, check out this article in today's New York Times.

Two exceptions to the rezoning remain: the Superior Ink Factory, at Bethune and West streets, where Related Companies is slated to build a residential high-rise; and the Whitehall Storage building, at 150 Charles Street, where the Witkoff Group is planning a 175-foot-tall residential building.

The city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission has also set a hearing for discussion of expanding the nearby historic district for Oct. 18.


-Matthew Grace
10/11/2005

copyright © 2005 the new york observer, L.P.