Building Boom Altering Neighborhood Landscapes
One part of today’s NY Times story on the housing boom that is reaching the farthest corners of the five boroughs is how it is changing the landscape of many neighborhoods–often for the worse. While building bonanza has done a lot to improve the housing stock in areas that developers would not have touched a…
One part of today’s NY Times story on the housing boom that is reaching the farthest corners of the five boroughs is how it is changing the landscape of many neighborhoods–often for the worse. While building bonanza has done a lot to improve the housing stock in areas that developers would not have touched a decade ago, the changing of zoning regulations and the squeezing out of every last drop of FAR has also resulted in buildings that look completely out of context, like the one in the photo above.
Housing Boom Echoes [NY Times]
If developers are building multi-family structures that tower over their neighbors, can’t they at least be not-ugly? Many rather humble tenements from the 19th century have facades that, if not attractive, are at least not aggressively ugly. Take a look at new construction in Greenpoint, the southern end of Williamsburg, Sunset Park: ugggggleee.
people just look at the photo and then look in your heart.
I haven’t had the time to read thru every post here but part of the problem aside from buildings being aesthetically out of context should be concern for building safety codes, population density and the supporting infrastructure in these communities. Uncontrolled development can create true problems for a community as well as purely visual blight. Yes, we need more housing to meet the demand. I’d like to find something I could afford, but a community should be within its rights to extert some control over development. It seems to me the question is who’s truly in control (developers with money? politicians? people who actually live there?) and how much control?
“The thing about landmarked neighborhoods though…”
It’s worth noting that the issue of “downzoning” is not just about landmarked neighborhoods. In Park Slope — to pick the one neiighborhoood I know much about — the recent rezoning extended beyond beyond the landmark area. Basically, the size of new buildings was curtailed in a zone extending from the park down to (but not including) 4th Avenue, and as far south as 15th street. (On 4th Avenue, went the tradeoff, you can now build 12 stories.)
So it’s not just landmarked blocks that enjoy these protections (or suffer restrictions on needed housing, take your pick). It’s also blocks like mine, and indeed much of Park Slope below 7th or 8th Avenue, whether or not our houses are as glorious as the mansions near the park. Whereas south of 15th Street it is, relatively, the wild wild west.
As I’ve said, I’m glad to enjoy the fruits of the zoning from a purely selfish NIMBY standpoint. But the fact that we do has less to do with the architectural value of our homes than the fact that our neighborhood, at large, has more money and pull than others.
I agree escap, don’t want to tell everyone what to do with their property… and the Bensonhurst people are silly for suggesting no more development in brkln. The thing about landmarked neighborhoods though, despite the fact that it is difficult to do things to the facade of your house, is that people pay a premium to live there because they know the aesthetics will not be altered by uncontrolled development.
I think we should have some say, but not much, in what other people do with their property. It’s their property, after all, not ours. And no, I’m not ranting about a non-concern. Yes, landmark areas are few in number, but not a day passes that I don’t hear someone complaining about development. I’m sure you saw that a group in Bensonhurst recently proposed a moratorium on ALL development in Brooklyn!!! hahahahaha, what a joke. So I wonder if they’d crucify me if I fix my front gate. After all, that might raise the surrounding land value and drive out renters….
I still get mad when I read about Penn Station being dismantled for Madision Sq. Garden, so it is not driven by NIMBYism for me. Of course people fight harder for their own area, but I don’t think that means they should not have an opinion on areas outside of where they live.
Linus, ok, I hear you. I wouldn’t feel that way though. I hate it when they destroy any historic neighborhood, not just mine.
Anon 3:04 p.m. — actually I don’t feel guilty at all. I’m as selfish a NIMBY as anyone. I just don’t try to pretend that my NIMBYism is actually selfless concern for New York’s architectural heritage.
In other words, when I say I would have a hard time saying that my pretty, exclusive neighborhood should be preserved, I mean that I would have a hard time saying it with a straight face — that is, saying that the justification is anything nobler than the self-interest of me and my neighbors.