|
|
Letters to the editor Neighborhoods under seige If the City, through a closed-door process that eliminates the required public review for major land-use decisions, decides to re-interpret restrictions in manufacturing zones to allow “condo-hotels” like Mr. Trump’s, we will see a flood of these high-rise second homes for the jet-set invade neighborhoods like West Chelsea, the Meatpacking District, the Garment District and Hudson Square, where they have never gone before. Affordable housing, small businesses and blue-collar industries such as those described in the article about the Garment District will be further squeezed out. And if General Theological Seminary is granted its exemption from zoning restrictions to build its 15-story luxury tower bloc, the protections for the one remaining area of Chelsea with such limits will be abrogated. Whether the developer is Donald Trump and partners, or the Brodsky Organization attaching itself to a progressive religious institution like General Theological Seminary, the results are still a substantial and permanent make-over of our neighborhoods for more luxury, high-rise housing. Reverend Ewing’s Talking Point in the March 2 issue of Chelsea Now was read with great interest by neighbors and friends of the General Theological Seminary as well as by many, many others, we’re sure. The directives of the Anglican Church at the recent meeting in Tanzania have been reported internationally, and we here in Chelsea are acutely aware of how these directives affect the G.T.S.. Your philosophy on how the Episcopalian Church here in the United States should evolve, and your obvious humanity in wanting to be an inclusive religion reaching out to all is clearly and happily the way G.T.S. has preached its theology in the past century and now into the 21st century. The ultimatum by the Anglican Convocation in Tanzania for all members to adhere to by September 2007 is clear and urgent. However, to limit your theological vision for G.T.S. in the future with real estate development of today is seen by many as short-sighted. The square block housing G.T.S. is your most precious asset, and the reason it is so precious is that it represents a continuum: the continuing spiritual development of broad-minded individuals through education at the Seminary and the very “real” place where that happens. To overturn the past and your mission of inclusiveness with an inappropriate real estate development hurts and baffles those closest to you, namely your neighbors. All this having been said, may we respectfully suggest another very successful model, a viable alternative to a major developer. There is a school here in Manhattan, housed in three side-by-side historic Fifth Avenue mansions. In the 1980s, it was insolvent, looking at bankruptcy, unable to maintain its property, and generally speaking, a rudderless ship. It has a small alumnae base, but out of that bleak picture, a few alumnae came forward, incorporated the school, elected an effective board of trustees, got a working business plan together, hired a consulting firm to provide direction, began serious fund-raising — and today, 20 years later, they have tripled enrollment in the school, managed to purchase and renovate a fourth building to house the middle school, and rent the site for activities such as weddings, conferences, a pre-K children’s school and myriad other uses. The institution is now viable and a constant work-in-progress, a real example of how a struggle to survive was won for now. You have the perfect site on which to go forward with a rich and active life for so many activities that would enhance the work of the Seminary. You’re in a position to bring life and vitality to the Church and the surrounding community, and if we may say, be the exciting and alive arm of the Episcopalian Church for all the world to see. You have it in your grasp to go forward with your philosophy of a religion of “inclusion for all” and to be the beacon for the rest of the church worldwide. Does not the prospect of a host of luxury condos—what is really an inappropriate and destructive development for the Chelsea Historic District—and an underground parking garage pale by comparison to what you might do at this crossroads so that you can continue your good work into the future? This is bad news for those supporting free enterprise and free speech. Owners of the Hotel Gansevoort already have to go head to head against the Municipal Art Society, local community Planning Boards, politicians like so-called liberal Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, and the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, all of whom want to increase outdoor advertising regulation. Perhaps all have forgotten about the Bill of Rights and First Amendment. If you don’t like the ad, don’t buy the product. Advertisers will get the message. If you are against the Hotel Gansevoort constructing these billboards, ask your out-of-town guests to stay at another hotel. How ironic that those who would defend public display of art work that some might consider pornographic are so quick to censor outdoor advertisers. There are many small business and building owners who struggle to survive because of excessive government regulations, property taxes and rent control. They need income from billboard advertisements to help pay these expenses. What’s next, more silly NYC Council legislation forcing all advertisers to first get a permit from the Municipal Arts Society and the creation of a new NYC Department of Visual Arts? Why no outcry when candidates for public office, every campaign season, litter neighborhoods with thousands of their own posters illegally attached to light posts all around town. Have you ever seen any losing or winning candidate taking down this visual garbage after election day? What constitutes illegal versus informative advertising should be in the eye of the beholder, not Big Brother!
|
View our previous issues >our latest family addition:
|
|
Chelsea Now is published by |
Written permission of the publisher must be obtainedbefore any of the contents |
