Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Landmarking advocates vs. real estate interests


From Crains:

Major players on both sides of the long-running debate over the future of landmarking in New York City repeatedly butted heads at a forum Tuesday morning, but on one thing they surprisingly agreed: The landmarking process itself is in sore need for reform and improvement.

For decades the city's development community has complained about a range of issues regarding the city Landmarks Preservation Commission's operations, including an extreme lack of certainty about timeframes of the decision-making process—some items have been under consideration for decades—as well as the commission's criteria for either designating a building or a district as historic. But since the election of Mayor Bill de Blasio, who has focused on increased housing development—particularly the affordable variety—that process has come under heightened scrutiny. It comes as the mayor's choice to chair the commission, Meenakshi Srinivan, is about to take over the commission, and perhaps suggest changes of her own.

But other than a common desire to make some fixes to the commission, including possibly paying its volunteer commissioners in order to bring a higher degree of professionalism, the forum was largely dominated by drastically different viewpoints.

Ms. Breen and the Municipal Art Society's Ronda Wist argued that far from hindering the city's economic advancement, landmarking is a plus not just for drawing tourists but also new hi-tech firms. Both noted that older, quirky buildings not modern glass-box office buildings are in high demand from young tech companies and their employees.

On the other side, Mr. Spinola along with Kenneth Jackson, a long-time professor of New York history and social science at Columbia University, as well as Nikolai Fedak, founder and editor of New York YIMBY (Yes In My Back Yard), argued that landmarking can stifle development and economic growth. Mr. Spinola also noted a recent REBNY-commissioned study that concluded that aggressive landmarking was hurting housing development. Among other things, that report found that in the last decade in Manhattan a total of just five units of affordable housing had been constructed in landmarked districts.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

"But since the election of Mayor Bill de Blasio, who has focused on increased housing development—particularly the affordable variety—that process has come under heightened scrutiny."

Right here you can smell the shenanigans.

Almost NONE of the areas with landmark-worthy properties will ever be considered for "affordable" housing.

This is just more landlord/developer deceit. A blatant attempt to get their hands on valuable real estate for more shitty condos.

Anonymous said...

Is that the same Mr. Spanola who was the NYC's realty arm? No surprise at his viewpoint. These same bad pennies keep on popping up again...or did they really ever go away?

Anonymous said...

There goes Di Mayor Blah-blah again...taking money from real estate interests...while pandering to his ghetto crowd for votes. How long has this confused bum been sitting in Gracie mansion and he's already campaigning for his second term?

Maybe we should bring back Bloomberg!
At least he had his own money and wasn't pandering to two sides.

Missing Foundation said...

This is just more landlord/developer deceit. A blatant attempt to get their hands on valuable real estate for more shitty condos.

You need to place the blame not on businessmen who are given the green light, but the people that installed the light: your elected representatives who wrote the law to ensure that they, and no one else, decide what is worthy and what is not - and since they are subject to making decisions based on campaign donations, the purpose of the law was pretty much neutered.

The second culprit is the preservation community who did nothing to educate the broader public in the merits of designation, making the constituents for this process to be rather narrow - a dangerous thing in the political process where you must sweep as many as possible into the tent.

We are in for some rough sledding here. Ninety percent of the city is now formally written off. The tiny 10% where the law is enforced now will face the full fury of development.

Some sacred cows will be sacrificed. Only then will we all wake up and craft a law that is fair and equitable.

But we must warn the law's advocates that they have a special danger in an administration like the current mayor: everyone pays to fund a system with public taxes that benefits a tiny elite something anathema to a person like DeBlaz.

Anonymous said...

LOL!
I'm not...uh...craning my neck to see which side wins this battle.

It's already won. Di Blasio will get his BSA LPC chair. It's over for you Manhattanites now too.

Welcome to Queens World where the LPC has been dumping on us for decades!

LOL!
Where's the Queensboro Preservation League? Where's the Queens Historical Society? Where are all those anemic hysterical societies scattered all over NYC?

They're twiddling their thumbs and praying for funding from their pols.

Anonymous said...

In this case it's Goliath who will win. No Davy here!

Anonymous said...

If everything is a landmark, where will we live?

Anonymous said...

If everything is a landmark, where will we live?

Talk to the people in cities around the world where there is pride in communities because they are protected from exploitation.

They are the happiest urban residents.

This might come as a shock in certain circles, but there are cities focused on the benefit of its residents, rather than the financing a politicians next election campaign.

Unknown said...

Anonymous said...

If everything is a landmark, where will we live?

Who is asking for everything to be landmarked? This is the same argument that conservatives use against a minimum wage increase...a completely nonsensical one!

Anonymous said...

I didn't realize that landmarking precluded one from living in the area. So once a home is landmarked, the people need to move out?

Anonymous said...

Remember where the new LPC Commissioner came from: she was Commissioner of the BSA!!!!! The Board of Standards and Apppeals, which allowes dome of the crappiest crap known to mankind...

Anonymous said...

Landmarking and preservation is making the news a lot lately! Which means people want and like landmarking and so do homeowners, renters and the new younger generation. Older architecture and details are making such a comeback and i for one and truly excited. NYC has a lot of history and buildings, neighborhoods that are waiting to be landmarked and restored. We need to preserve or history and character!

Anonymous said...

FYI...those who live in landmark districts get better services and see the value of their properties increase. Cut the bullshit, you real estate industry troll.

Compare prices in Douglas Manor to those in Flushing for the same styles of homes. DM is a historic district and the prices reflect it.

Post a Comment