Pyrrhic Victory for Green-wood's Minerva
The New York Times is reporting (a few days after a local publication picked up the story) that Green-wood Cemetary has agreed to stand aside and not try to block the construction of a new condo building at 614 7th Avenue by developer Chaim Nussencweig and architect Robert Scarano after the two sides agreed on…
The New York Times is reporting (a few days after a local publication picked up the story) that Green-wood Cemetary has agreed to stand aside and not try to block the construction of a new condo building at 614 7th Avenue by developer Chaim Nussencweig and architect Robert Scarano after the two sides agreed on a compromise to the design that will preserve the line of site, if not much else, between Minerva and the Statue of Liberty. Neighborhood activists are upset by the news, arguing that the revised plan still largely destroys what has been one of the greated views in Brooklyn and that there are no guarantees that developer won’t fink out on his agreement later on. We have to agree. Being able to see a glimpse of Lady Liberty through a small set-back is a pyrrhic victory. Hopefully, the Bureau of Standards and Appeals will reject the plan outright after the developer failed to get his foundation poured before the down-zoning deadline despite racking up several DOB violations in the process. Why the Bureau would cut this crew any slack is beyond us, but you never know what’s at play behind the scenes when politics and money intersect.
No Condos Between Goddesses [NY Times]
614 7th Avenue [Courier Life] GMAP
A recent tear down in the sslope went for $900,000. 25’x100′ lot to a developer.
CrownHeightsProud,
Oy, I can see this becoming the Bed-Stuy vacant lots vs. eyesores argument all over again, but I’ll wade in anyway.
I think you have the best intentions, but some of your priorities are contradictory and you’d have to decide which is more important. It’s a lot to wish for to want housing that
– is affordable to working class people
– not hideous
– no higher than 6 stories
– doesn’t spoil any beautiful views
– and, presumably, doesn’t add to population density, so it’s still possible to park that car that your hypothetical person stepped out of.
How do we achieve this? The only answers I can think of involve
– some combination of massive government subsidy, combined with mass relocation of excess population to keep density down
– a time machine
In any case, I don’t see any answer to housing the adult children of the old residents that doesn’t involve building more and denser housing, in a city whose population is growing, and in neighborhoods that are becoming ever more popular. (And no, I am not saying luxury condos are going to help them.)
I own my house already. If we just pulled the ladder up and stifled any development higher or denser than what our neighborhoods have always had, I would be sitting pretty, cozy in my house, able to find a parking space and watching the value of my ever-rarer living space shoot through the roof. But I’m not sure that’s for the greater good either.
Lost,
I (and many others) wouldnt accuse you (or anyone else) for being ‘anti-everything’ if your position was simply to meaningfully preserve the vista between Minerva and Lady Liberty but your true agenda SEEMS to appear when you decry even the notion of condos being built and when you seem to stretch a reasonable position (honoring our history) of preserving the 2 statues links to one that appears to call for a prohibition on all development above 5 stories from Bay Ridge to the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel.
This is not about Aesthetics. What is the difference between Greenwood Heights homes being covered in aluminum siding and the new Scarano building covered with plastic stucco? As for BIG GOVERNMENT… What government forces are you talking about? The Dept. of Buildings? The local police precinct? That’s what is truly ridiculous. Let’s rely on the Police or the DOB to enforce the past and now the new present zoning rules…..that’s been proven pretty god damn ineffective. The down-zoning zeitgeist in the south slope, now spreading through out the boroughs, is in reaction to the violence inflicted upon it by slippery developers, hired gun architects, and ham-handed contractors. All your minimal statism theories are wonderful until you have to get your hands dirty. Who is going to protect my property from the developer who digs his foundation incorrectly causing my home to crack and shift? The courts? Where should I live for the next five to ten years as the case works it’s way through the system? Who is going to pay for the repairs until then? Not the developer. Want to know the filthy fucked up truth about these developers? Go talk to the 20 or so home owners on Windsor Place or on 15th Street or on 16th St who have damaged property and have not seen one penny in restitution as their homes slide into big holes. Don’t get our right to protect our property confused with the city’s need for more housing. Come to our neighborhood some Saturday morning or after 6pm and see the construction for yourself. You can’t practice non violence against someone who doesn’t recognize your right to exist. Downzoning or a shotgun blast to the balls? Choose your weapons.
David,
Where did the quote that the average Manhattan worker makes at $100K come from? Even if every worker was part of a 2 family income, which many (most) are not, that still hardly seems possible in a city where all workers are not white collar employees of large companies.
To all, I echo Oh Lord’s comments on who is supposed to buy all of this new lux housing? There are new developments being built all over Manhattan, including Harlem, downtown Bklyn has new construction going up practically on every corner, not to mention all of the developments being spoken of on this board in Wmsburg, FG, and elsewhere. Plus God knows what in Queens, the Bronx and Staten Island. Ratner expects an equally huge amount of monied people to flock into his development if/when it is built. Where are they now? Still in college? Out of town? Crowded into studios on the UES? Where is affordable housing in this equation? I’m not talking about the poor, or homeless, I’m talking about the working people who used to live in the area around Greenwood C, and in the South Slope, whose adult children can’t find housing for themselves and their families. I don’t think we as a society can just dismiss them and their concerns because of what some developer and real estate agency decides the market can bear.
One of the greatest parts of living in Brooklyn has always been coming up out of the subway, or out of your car, and being in a place where buildings are by and large no higher than 6 stories, trees shade your block, and life is not as hectic or as crowded. It would be a shame to have Bklyn turn into another Coop City. Development is not in of itself bad, why can’t it be thoughtful, affordable and aim for the greater good of the city, and the immediate neighborhood?
Lost, I don’t really have an opinion on the view or Battle Hill, but your last argument baffles me. Frame houses go for $800K-plus in this “working-class” neighborhood. Are the people buying them — or the longtimers selling to them — doing injury to the area? If not, then I don’t see how luxury condos are a bad thing per se.
Come on! The reduction of a specific issue (the ruining of the historic link between Minerva and the statue of liberty) to broad platitudes about property rights and housing shortages is sheer obfuscation. I think if you were to take half an hour sometime, go up to the cemetery, and look at the statue, and read the inscription, you might feel slightly differently. Every time I read the inscription and look over to the statue of liberty, it brings tears to my eyes. It’s just goddamn unpatriotic to ignore this.
Lord,
What other evidence besides tons of construction, high rents, and high sale prices would you expect to see demonstrating a housing shortage?
As to your point about who is buying these properties, I believe it was recently announced that the average Manhattan worker makes 100K a year; considering that many/most families are 2 wage earners – seems like there are tons of people who can afford these properties – (a $800,000 apt w/ 80% mortgage at 6% equals about $48,000 a year – if you assume 30% of income to housing (low in NYC) a family needs 150k a year)
Oh Lord!,
Either there is a shortage or there isn’t. If the apts are selling, then there is more money in more pockets than you suspect. And if there is a huge glut of $800-1000/sf apts, then they will cease to be $800-1000/sf apts, which will in turn put downward pressure on apts in the brackets below them.
Not saying this will trickle down to poor New Yorkers, but–the aesthetics of this building aside–you’re more likely to reduce prices by building apts than you are by not building them.