Monday, October 30, 2006
Protecting public spaces of Stuy Town Part II
LOOKING AHEAD by Wally Dobelis
As we all know, Tishman-Speyer Properties has bought ST/PCV at a price of $482K per apartment, the approximate retail value of a one BR unit. There appears to be a scenario that makes the new owners’ acquisition a profitable venture even without the creation of a coop, by the gtadual transfer of the rent-controlled/stabilized apartments into market rate rentals as the old tenancy turns over with the passage of time, thereby not only obviating the need for a coop conversion but also for further construction on the property.
Concerns about ST/PCV’s protection against developers are not new, and some time ago the Historic Districts Council was asked to assess the situation . In a November 12, 2001 letter to the ST Tenants Association (TA) and CB6. copies to ESRA, the HDC stated that the ST complex deserves preservation and protection. It proposed a three-pronged approach, to be pursued concurrently: designation of the entire site as an individual landmark by the Landmarks Preservation Commission (as in Harlem River Houses); identification as a Special Planned. Community Preservation District (SPCPD) by the City Planning Commission, and downzoning, also by the CPC, i.e., reducing the FAR [this would inhibit reckless construction].
Last week we discussed protection via a NYS/ Federal Dept of Interior designation to the NYS Register and the Federal Resister of Historic Places, which is available to ST/PCV if the owner agrees. As to the NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission’s designation, pursued by Assembly member Sylvia Friedman, do not hold your breath – but it is not dead. Note that three East Side projects have been granted landmark status – the City and Suburban Homes Company Estates, the First Houses, and the Harlem River Houses Potential downzoning is a Garry Papush project, along with the thought that the threat of any new construction in SP/PCV can be countered with a move to reduce rents due to reduction of landlord services. This is not likely, since the City Planning Commission does not do spot zoning, but who knows…
Let us look at the least discussed suggestion, having ST/PCV identified by the City Planning Commission as a Special Planned Community Preservation District (SPCPD), an approach that the Tenants Association should pursue.
The Planning Resolution authorizing SPCPD dates back to 1974, and its intent is clear:
To protect and preserve the Special Districts as superior examples of town planning or large scale development; to preserve and protect the character and integrity of these unique communities which, by their existing site plan, balance between buildings and open space, harmonious scale of development, related commercial uses, open space arrangement, and landscaping, add to the quality of urban life; to preserve and protect the variety of neighborhoods..that contribute greatly to the livability of the City; to maintain and protect the environmental quality; to guide the future development within the “Special Districts” that is consistent with the existing character quality and amenity of the SD. Amen, say no more, doesn’t this seem written with ST/PCV in mind? (Ref: Article X: Special Purpose Districts, Chapter 3: SPCPD, Sect 103-00, 7/16/1974.)
SPCPD has been used extensively in the five boroughs to preserve neighborhood design (deliberate as well as fortuitous), and against destruction through greed. Among the recipients of the designation are Grand Concourse in the Bronx, Coney Island, Bay Ridge , and closer to home, Battery Park City, the Clinton District, the Garment District, the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center District, Little Italy, and, guess what, Union Square.
In the case of Union Square, it mandates ground floor for retail, off street locations for subway entrances, continuity of street walls, physical appearance, with ratio bonus for subway improvements (that’s why we can scream when Zeckendorf Towers cuts off the escalator service to 14th Street Lexington line, for which they are responsible).
Another hopeful note, on 10/23 the chief local leaders, led by Christina C. Quinn and Dan Garodnick, sent a letter to Tishman-Speyer, expressing the tenants’ fears about the future affordability of NYC’s middle class housing, beyond rent control, and the hope that T-S will continue to work with the ST/PCV tenants, discussing their plans and exploring the options of affordability. It was also signed by US Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton, NY Comptroller Wm C. Taylor, Public Advocate Betsy Gottbaum, BPs Scott Stringer and Marty Markowitz (Bklyn), US Congressmmbers Caroline Maloney, Jerold Nadler and Anthony Weiner, NYS Senators Thomas K. Duane and Liz Kruger, NYS Assembly members Sylvia Friedman, Jonathan Bing and NYCC Member Rosie Mendez. AG Eliot Spitzer is not of the group - he has expressed reservations, not because of the $21K contribuion from Tishman -Speyer over the years, small pickings unworthy of comment, but becaus he trusts T-S to do the right thing, and because of an alternative plan he has to put a COLA approach of cost of living indexing the $2K maximum rent permissible under the rent control/ stabilization laws (wow!)
A most impressive display of near unity, but I am still betting on the potential of the designations.
Wally Dobelis thanks Jack Taylor, Susan Steinberg, Gary Papush, Dan Garodnick & Sandra Levine for their contributions. This community service column has a word limit, you can find a version in his blog, sometimes longer, by googling Looking Ahead & Wally Dobelis.
As we all know, Tishman-Speyer Properties has bought ST/PCV at a price of $482K per apartment, the approximate retail value of a one BR unit. There appears to be a scenario that makes the new owners’ acquisition a profitable venture even without the creation of a coop, by the gtadual transfer of the rent-controlled/stabilized apartments into market rate rentals as the old tenancy turns over with the passage of time, thereby not only obviating the need for a coop conversion but also for further construction on the property.
Concerns about ST/PCV’s protection against developers are not new, and some time ago the Historic Districts Council was asked to assess the situation . In a November 12, 2001 letter to the ST Tenants Association (TA) and CB6. copies to ESRA, the HDC stated that the ST complex deserves preservation and protection. It proposed a three-pronged approach, to be pursued concurrently: designation of the entire site as an individual landmark by the Landmarks Preservation Commission (as in Harlem River Houses); identification as a Special Planned. Community Preservation District (SPCPD) by the City Planning Commission, and downzoning, also by the CPC, i.e., reducing the FAR [this would inhibit reckless construction].
Last week we discussed protection via a NYS/ Federal Dept of Interior designation to the NYS Register and the Federal Resister of Historic Places, which is available to ST/PCV if the owner agrees. As to the NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission’s designation, pursued by Assembly member Sylvia Friedman, do not hold your breath – but it is not dead. Note that three East Side projects have been granted landmark status – the City and Suburban Homes Company Estates, the First Houses, and the Harlem River Houses Potential downzoning is a Garry Papush project, along with the thought that the threat of any new construction in SP/PCV can be countered with a move to reduce rents due to reduction of landlord services. This is not likely, since the City Planning Commission does not do spot zoning, but who knows…
Let us look at the least discussed suggestion, having ST/PCV identified by the City Planning Commission as a Special Planned Community Preservation District (SPCPD), an approach that the Tenants Association should pursue.
The Planning Resolution authorizing SPCPD dates back to 1974, and its intent is clear:
To protect and preserve the Special Districts as superior examples of town planning or large scale development; to preserve and protect the character and integrity of these unique communities which, by their existing site plan, balance between buildings and open space, harmonious scale of development, related commercial uses, open space arrangement, and landscaping, add to the quality of urban life; to preserve and protect the variety of neighborhoods..that contribute greatly to the livability of the City; to maintain and protect the environmental quality; to guide the future development within the “Special Districts” that is consistent with the existing character quality and amenity of the SD. Amen, say no more, doesn’t this seem written with ST/PCV in mind? (Ref: Article X: Special Purpose Districts, Chapter 3: SPCPD, Sect 103-00, 7/16/1974.)
SPCPD has been used extensively in the five boroughs to preserve neighborhood design (deliberate as well as fortuitous), and against destruction through greed. Among the recipients of the designation are Grand Concourse in the Bronx, Coney Island, Bay Ridge , and closer to home, Battery Park City, the Clinton District, the Garment District, the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center District, Little Italy, and, guess what, Union Square.
In the case of Union Square, it mandates ground floor for retail, off street locations for subway entrances, continuity of street walls, physical appearance, with ratio bonus for subway improvements (that’s why we can scream when Zeckendorf Towers cuts off the escalator service to 14th Street Lexington line, for which they are responsible).
Another hopeful note, on 10/23 the chief local leaders, led by Christina C. Quinn and Dan Garodnick, sent a letter to Tishman-Speyer, expressing the tenants’ fears about the future affordability of NYC’s middle class housing, beyond rent control, and the hope that T-S will continue to work with the ST/PCV tenants, discussing their plans and exploring the options of affordability. It was also signed by US Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton, NY Comptroller Wm C. Taylor, Public Advocate Betsy Gottbaum, BPs Scott Stringer and Marty Markowitz (Bklyn), US Congressmmbers Caroline Maloney, Jerold Nadler and Anthony Weiner, NYS Senators Thomas K. Duane and Liz Kruger, NYS Assembly members Sylvia Friedman, Jonathan Bing and NYCC Member Rosie Mendez. AG Eliot Spitzer is not of the group - he has expressed reservations, not because of the $21K contribuion from Tishman -Speyer over the years, small pickings unworthy of comment, but becaus he trusts T-S to do the right thing, and because of an alternative plan he has to put a COLA approach of cost of living indexing the $2K maximum rent permissible under the rent control/ stabilization laws (wow!)
A most impressive display of near unity, but I am still betting on the potential of the designations.
Wally Dobelis thanks Jack Taylor, Susan Steinberg, Gary Papush, Dan Garodnick & Sandra Levine for their contributions. This community service column has a word limit, you can find a version in his blog, sometimes longer, by googling Looking Ahead & Wally Dobelis.
# posted by Wally Dobelis @ 3:27 PM 
