A coalition of community groups and preservationists hosted a rally last evening titled "Don't Turn Our Neighborhood Into Silicon Alley" on on Third Avenue outside 51 Astor Place/the IBM Watson Building/Death Star ... and across the street from where a 7-story office building is in the works for the northeast corner of the Avenue at St. Mark's Place...
An estimated 50-75 residents turned out... as well as several elected local officials, such as State Sen. Brad Hoylman.
EVG contributor Peter Brownscombe shared these photos... Curbed has a recap of the rally here, which the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation (GVSHP) organized ...
It’s the latest new development that’s destroying the fabric of these neighborhoods, local residents argued at the rally on Wednesday. While Greenwich and East Villagers, along with their outgoing City Council member, Rosie Mendez, have been demanding protections for this area for years, this latest push for rezoning was prompted by Mayor Bill de Blasio’s announcement of a new tech hub at the old P.C. Richard & Son on East 14th Street.
And...
GVSHP is encouraging the mayor to create height restrictions in the area, that would limit building heights to between 80 to 145 feet, and would have incentives for creating affordable housing. [GVSHP Executive Director Andrew] Berman said he wasn’t opposed to the tech hub per se, but was unable to get behind it without all the other neighborhood protections in place. The tech hub can only be approved through a Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP), and will ultimately come before the City Council for final approval. The incoming City Council member from the area, Carlina Rivera, also backs the zoning protections, so it remains to be seen how the Mayor’s project will fare.
Bedford + Bowery has coverage here.
State Assembly member Deborah Glick said preserving the residential, mixed-use character of the neighborhood was important to maintaining the vibrancy of the East Village and that she was disappointed in the proposed developments. “Seeing New York homogenized during the Bloomberg administration – we thought it would come to an end but it’s only getting worse,” she said. “I want to say to Bill de Blasio: Don’t turn yourself into Bloomberg 2.0. We deserve to keep our open skies, air and light – don’t suffocate us just for a quick buck from developer.”
27 comments:
NYC progressives, supporting the same retrograde policies that have made housing so unaffordable in the first place...
we need a progressive YIMBY movement to start educating people around here.
I have to laugh at Glick's statement. Mayor Bill is worse than Bloomberg ever was. But then again she's also part of the one party rule problem.
Sadly, I don't think De Blasio gives a rat's rear end about suffocating us for a quick buck from a developer (given that developers are his donor base), and I think he'd be pleased to be seen as "Bloomberg 2.0".
If they want to create a "tech hub" how about doing that in the south Bronx?
Let's face it, the tax base in this city is supported by tourism and business. This type of protest totally ignores this reality. The silliness of our elected officials like Deborah Glick and others quoted here is made from their perches of life-time jobs.
All across the country evidence abounds of the displacement impacts of the tech industry. To not plan properly and secure what seems to be the sensible zoning modifications for the surrounding residential community that prioritizes the creation of affordable housing is irresponsible.
All across the country evidence abounds of the displacement impacts of the tech industry. To not plan properly and secure what seems to be the sensible zoning modifications for the surrounding residential community that prioritizes the creation of affordable housing is irresponsible.
Deblasio’s Utopia
Amazon changed Seattle radically and mostly for the worse unless you either own stock in Amazon or have one of their better code jockey positions. If DeBlasio was more than talk there are steps the city could take to integrate new business development with various neighborhoods. He's not.
As for "seeing New York homogenized"? The kids aren't going to get off our lawn. The good ship bohemian East Village already sailed. And the younger bohemians are off colonizing - and there's a loaded phrase! - Bushwick etc ...
As for the poster that wonders: What about the South Bronx. What about the South Bronx? The locals there would have the same concerns we do. DeBlasio has been a creature of big real estate since he first entered politics. Why would he change now?
Here's hoping the geriatric demonstration was at least fun. There sure aren't going to be significant 20 or 30 somethings in that crowd. Of course on this blog we don't like the younger generation because they're all boring loud entitled tech bros and betties.(which they are) But I seem to remember a previous era not liking the armies of hippies with our acid fueled trash can parties to greet the dawn in the park or the dope fiends and hustlers that came to prey and stayed after the hippies moved on.
@8:44pm: I agree, but NYC never prioritizes affordable housing until the situation is BEYOND extreme. De Blasio doesn't know or care what this "tech hub" shit is going to do to wreck a perfectly nice low-rise nabe.
If De Blasio thinks this is such a grand idea, he should make PARK SLOPE, where HE basically lives (and will return to in 4 more long years, when he's out of office), into the "tech hub." According to HIM, he'd be going back to a much better neighborhood in that case.
But you'll notice that progress only comes at the expense of those of use regular people who've lived here long enough to remember when you couldn't give this neighborhood away. I've aways prized the low-rise nature of this area & the light and air we get - but those are EXACTLY what De Blasio's developer-donors (who won't live anywhere near here) are going to take away. Because apparently the powers that be have decided for us that we simply don't deserve to live in decent conditions here. We're going to be the alcohol-ghetto, and tech-bro ghetto, and a center for transients who want to check into "millennial" hotels to trash our quality of life before walking away from the damage they do. We're not "midtown south" we're going to be "Times Square South" by the time De Blasio finishes with us.
Taxpaying long-term residents count for ZERO in this city, and I am beyond disgusted.
Deborah Glick said:
I want to say to Bill de Blasio: Don’t turn yourself into Bloomberg 2.0. We deserve to keep our open skies, air and light – don’t suffocate us just for a quick buck from developer.
Well, it's too late, baby, yeah, it's too late…but we really did try to make it. (Something inside has died and I can't hide and I just can't fake it.)
YIMBY! Tech folk are good community members, tech industry is good for New York, and south of union square is the logical expansion zone for this growing sector of the economy. Hopefully the build out can be more tasteful than the death star, but east villagers need to look at the big picture here and welcome the newcomers.
Remember. The mayor has vociferously and repeatedly claimed he has a mandate. The problem is that it's for the benefit of the parties involved in hyper-development and their target demos of transients and tourists at the expense and continued misery of his constituency, the 93 percent that didn't vote for him (meaning the ones who showed up to vote and the vast majority who didn't bother).
de Faustio, this betraying scumbag, acknowledges but doesn't give a damn about the poor. He is the worst of the limousine neoliberals.
Why wasn't the tech hub and its proposed offshoots built in the Hudson yards or far midtown west? Why do tech workers need to work in glass boxes in one of the last human scaled neighborhoods in Manhattan? If we want to see our future look into the recent past of cities like San Francisco and Seattle. Mostly young tech nerds have money to burn on rent, restaurants, services all of which generate huge loads of tax money they are any 21st century cities ideal residents, the rest of us, well.....
Any rezoning must have mandatory inclusionary housing (MIH), and at a minimum of 60% of the units going to low or very low income. The risk of the current proposal to rezone as residential w/o (MIH) is that developers will not build affordable housing but instead additional market rate housing. Which we definitely don't need. Any additional market rate housing will put pressure on landlords who currently own buildings to convert them to market rate housing if they haven't done so already. No one wants a bunch of high rises, however, it is more crucial for us to gain affordable units of housing rather than 100% market rate. Better to go a little higher with a lot of affordable housing than smaller housing that is 100% lux. In the past, inclusionary housing breaks for developers ended up with very few units of affordable housing with the allowance height. In many cases, like the Steiner condos, they just ignored that and built lux condos. This seems to be the norm in the East Village.
At the rate this is going, "affordable housing" in the East Village will be looked on by our tech-overlord "betters" as if it were Section 8 housing. They'll grudgingly let SOME of the "little people" live here in reduced circumstances and in the shadow of their tall buildings - the tallness serves to confirm how important all of them are, right?
BTW, @Brian: "Hopefully the build out can be more tasteful than the death star, but east villagers need to look at the big picture here and welcome the newcomers." Sorry, but NEITHER of those things is going to happen. De Blasio's "tech hub" will basically make the Santa Con-ning of our neighborhood a permanent, year-round situation. It's all about the young techies, the hip, and the moneyed. Whereas REAL neighborhoods have a healthy mix of age groups and incomes. That healthy mix is what De Blasio (and Bloomberg before him) apparently abhor.
The rezoning proposed by GVSHP and others may have stopped the development of the Moxy Hotel, but would it have resulted in the preservation of affordable housing at this location, the answer is No!. Using the Moxy Hotel as an example of what will happen if the Tech Hub is built is just not a real argument. The landlord had already pushed out most rent regulated tenants and would have continued to do that and converted those units into market-rate housing as we have seen time and time again in the EV. Pretty building don't define the character of a community, the people who live there do. While the rezoning of the EV prevented out of scale development it did not really do much to preserve affordable housing as landlords just forced out residents and either tore the buildings down and built lux condos or kept the buildings and turned them into market rate housing for transient young adults. So now we have a pretty neighborhood where the monied want to live, is that the answer? A rezoning to prevent boxy office buildings in exchange for boxy lux housing is not the answer to preserving the character of the community, it is forcing developers to preserve affordable housing or build new affordable housing. That will preserve the character of our community. So any rezoning must include MIH, if not developers will figure out a way around the rezoning and the result will be instead of ugly office buildings, ugly market rate housing. The addition of any market rate housing in our community is not a good thing and will put pressure on existing landlords to force out rent regulated tenants and replace them with market rate tenants. At least the Tech Hub has proposed things that will benefit the community in terms of affordable office space for new small businesses and tech training for our neighbors so they can get decent paying jobs. Jobs that pay 60 to 70k can really have a positive impact on the lives of our neighbors, isn't that something we should support? If people would just take some time to think these through instead of being purely reactionary they would understand we can have both, training opportunities that will result in good jobs in a growing sector of our economy for the residents of our community who need it and secure real affordable housing at the same time. That's something I can get behind.
Jobs that pay $60-$70K? For who? In an industry that considers anyone over 35 a dinosaur? You're dreaming if you think that these "tech hub" companies are going to invest in any kind of training or job creation for people who aren't young, upper class, with a high end college degree. With outsourcing, working remotely, and meetings being conducted over skype, webex, etc. it wouldn't surprise me if all of these tech hub cities turn into newer versions of Detroit in a few years.
@11:08am: I think you're delusional, and your train of thought makes no sense to me.
Landlords require you to earn 40x the monthly cost of rent - so for someone earning $70K/year, that means they can afford monthly rent of $1,750. Do you see a lot of apartments around here for that amount of money? I don't!
@anonymous 12:48 - Civic Hall will provide the training and it will be for people of all ages, but what if it is for young people, what have you got against our young people having access to digital training and job placement? It will also provide below market office space for small companies that want to grow, but can't afford to be locked into a large space, with an expensive long-lease. If you attended any of the numerous hearings on the tech hub, you might have heard these things.
@anonymous 5:00pm. So you think that the possibility of getting a job making 70k per year (about $38 bucks an hour) versus perhaps a job that pays 27k per hour ($15 bucks an hour) won't change someone's circumstances?
I’m opposed to tall glass buildings regardless of inclusionary / affordable housing. Developers should not be allowed to build higher If they provide this. There is only so much our infrastructure can handle. The mayor then wonders why the streets are crowded and there is so much traffic ? I’m not opposed to a tech hub as long as the buildings fit into the current neighborhood. These would b good paying jobs with benefits. You can’t be a bartender your whole life.
DeBlasio said that if the Tech Hub wasn't supported then the building would be a market rate office building. GVHSP said that they wouldn't support the Tech Hub unless Third and Fourth Avenues are rezoned for residential. This will result in 100% market rate housing which is the worst case scenario. People don't care about affordable housing just pretty smaller buildings, for who? the mega rich. Why should they get it all. Look at the brownstones in the West Village. At the town hall DeBlasio said that he would consider at least 50% (MIH) but not rezoning as residential without it.
I think that there should not be anymore market rate housing period. As far as I'm concerned they should rezone as entirely commercial for whatever is left. It's the luxury housing that is destroying the neighborhood. Commercial will not be housing. As it stands now the zoning is for both residential and commercial. The residential is under the Bloomberg "voluntary" inclusionary housing, which is what GVHC would like to rezone as. If they do it that way for additional floors it's still mostly market rate housing anyway. It's a failure. Not worth it. If developers don't opt-in for the "voluntary" affordable inclusionary housing, which is likely, then they can do 100% lux condos. Bad. Question: How many buildings on Third and Fourth are left and how many commercial and residential?
There is nothing wrong with market rate housing as long as the building is contextually appropriate within the neighborhood. Growing up outside of Manhattan I did not dream that someday the city would create affordable housing and I would have my name picked out of a hat so I could live here. I worked very hard so that I could someday afford to put a down payment on a apartment and live here. And no, my parents did not help my financially nor did they ever earn a lot of money. There is an income disparity in America but if the people that whine so much on this blog put as much time into building a career as they did complaining and attending rallies ten perhaps you could afford to love in a decent apartment and not expect handouts.
Let's the grieving begin...
Why not put a tech hub in the financial district? They are converting many commercial highrises down there to residential units, which makes no sense. Keep the residential neighborhood (the EV) in place and use the existing commercial highrises for this sort of thing. I just don't get the backwards logic.
Anonymous @ 2:29 PM
I wonder if you’ve ever spoken with the people who are out protesting the Tech Hub in our neighborhood. If you had, you would learn that many are lawyers, small business owners and other professionals. Many own their apartments and sometimes whole buildings.
Your assumption that people who see the need for concessions such as height restrictions and affordable housing are people who don’t work hard and are “looking for a handout” is way off base.
You should look up the history of Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village. This was affordable housing that allowed returning vets, teachers, firemen, nurses and others who serve the community LIVE in the community they serve.
The luxury apartments being built here means that only the highly paid tech and banking employees can live here. What about the people who have lived here for years and years who have lost an apartment to fire, a greedy new landlord pushing them out, those who want to age in place, who have defaulted on a mortgage due to catastrophic illness or a divorcée who doesn’t want to displace a child during a traumatic period or a man who has been working up the ladder and now has child support payments and college tuition? Or people who have had good paying jobs in industries that have been decimated by Amazon and the internet?
Do you believe that these people should no longer be a part of our neighborhood? People who have built community gardens, supported local churches, served on school committees and generally made for a stable neighborhood?
I wonder how your parents, who are apparently good people, would feel if their circumstances changed and they had to rent an apartment and they were forced to leave a community they had been a part of for years because only high priced apartments existed? Would you say they were just lazy, poor money managers and were looking for handouts?
I don't support the tech hub. DeBlasio said that there will be a tech hub at this site though. The EDC said that if it wasn't supported then they would do a market rate office building. What that means I don't know. Their plan is offering some community benefits in exchange for additional FAR.
I would support the GVSHP rezoning plan only if the residential buildings were under a Mandatory Inclusionary Housing plan that offered at least 60% low and very low housing. As it stands now, Voluntary Inclusionary Housing hasn't worked. Recently the trend has moved to luxury condos as opposed to market rate rentals, so any rezoning that doesn't include MIH will most likely result in the development of more luxury condos. DeBlasio said that he would consider MIH rezoning for Third and Fourth with at least 50% MIH. We need affordable housing. That's the most important thing.
Downzone commercial, upzone residential with MIH for a majority of the units and let the City have the tech hub with the community benefits it offers.
Post a Comment