MTA hearing on fares and service cuts

MTA PUBLIC HEARING
Wed. January 14, 6pm
1335 6th Ave,
The Hilton, Trianon Ballroom
Fares and service cuts (including the M8 bus).

also...
ELECTRONICS RECYCLING
Sunday, January 4, from 10 am - 4 pm
Union Square Park, North Plaza
17th Street & Broadway
See the Lower East Side Ecology Center FAQ page to learn more about what to bring:
http://www.lesecologycenter.org/les_frames.html
Thanks to Councilmember Rosie Mendez and Parks for sponsoring the event

Upcoming local meetings

Of meetings in the new year, maybe the most important is the Chinatown Working Group's at which they will set their agenda for the future and elect their leadership. More urgent is the Chatham Square Redesign Task Force. It should bring a strong showing of community voices opposed to the plan the city is ready to implement.

Liquor license applications are down by about 30%, but there are still 20 applicants, many of them restaurants upgrading to a full liquor license, including European Union. See the complete list below.

CB3's Housing Committee will consider three properties south of Houston on Orchard and Rivington applying for construction renewals and extensions.

And CB3's zoning committee will revisit (?) the rezoning south of Houston (Essex to Chrystie), and will consider the Seward Park Renewal area.

1. Chinatown Working Group, Mon Jan 5, 4-6, 191-193 Canal @ Mott.
2. CB3 Zoning Committee, Mon Jan 5, 6:30, 184 Eldridge.
3. CB3 Liquor Licensing Committee, Mon Jan 12, 6:30, 200 E 5.
4. CB3 Chatham Redesign Task Force, Mon Jan 12, 6:30, 33 Bowery @ Bayard
5. CB3 Housing Committee, Tues Jan 20, 6:30, 333 Bowery.

Agenda for the liquor licensing and sidewalk cafe licensing committee:
Renewal with Complaint History
1. Kaleidoscope Restaurant, 212 E 10th St (rw)
2. Winebar, 65 2nd Ave (sidewalk cafe)
Applications within Resolution Areas
3. European Union, 235 E 4th St (up/op)
4. Eat Pisode, 123 Ludlow St (rw)
5. 171 Ave A Food, 171 Ave A (rw)
6. Bruno Jamais, 179 Ludlow St (op)
7. Kuma Inn, 113 Ludlow St (rw)
Alterations/Transfers/Upgrades
8. Castleblade, 17 Clinton St (up/op)
9. NY Restaurant Supplies, 29 3rd Ave (alt/reduction of size of restaurant)
10. Ford Grey, 175 Ludlow St (trans/op)
11. Maradona, 188 Allen St (up/op)
12. Ballaro, 77 2nd Ave (trans/rw)
New Liquor License Applications
13. Eastville Comedy Club, 85 E 4th St (op)
14. Sun Shine 27, 46 Bowery (rw)
15. Noodle King, 19 Henry St (rw)
16. Ken's Asian Taste, 40 Bowery (rw)
17. Cafe Khufu, 61 E 3rd St (rw)
18. Upright Citizens Brigade, 155 E 3rd St (tw)
19. Saigon NYC, 85 Orchard St (rw)
20. Thai Bodhi Tree, 58 3rd Ave (rw)

Updates

The New School students' occupation of 65 Fifth Ave has ended with, as I understand, only one arrest, but considerable stir and excitement among activists, several letters of support including one from Mexico. All at their new blog of resistance:
http://newschoolinexile.com

Meanwhile, CB3 voted to reject the city's plan to reroute the Bowery at Chatham Square, in a bizarrely written resolution: the chair of the committee wrote pages and pages of 'whereas' clauses with the intention of justifying and supporting the city's unpopular plan, but the committee and later the full board insisted on standing with the community and the local councilmember and the local assemblymember and the local state senator-elect and the comptroller who all rejected the city's plan.

So the full board added a few 'whereas' clauses of its own and rewrote the "resolved" section as a rejection . The final resolution reads like a series of lengthy, deep and repeated bows to the city followed by an abrupt kick to the shin. Well, it's the resolved section that matters. Three cheers for CB3, at last!

Reopen Park Row!!

Full text (and even a bit of the discussion) available at CCRC.

What the city won't tell you

The city's plan for Chatham Square follows the current model of post-9/11, Giuliani-style control, restricting flow and personal options in public space. It narrows, diverts, shunts, closes and detours, requires labyrinthine crossings, leaves large, useless, vacant spaces and adds bottlenecks with lights closely spaced where traffic volume is thickest.

The continuation of heavy-flow east-bound Worth between Park Row and St. James has two crossings within five car lengths which will back-up traffic all along Worth.

To cross the south side of St. James, a narrow street of a few paces, pedestrians in the reconfiguration have to cross Oliver, north St. James and Worth just to get to the other side of the street.

All just to close Park Row permanently.

Check out CCRC's informational on their site.

Protests abound

Depression's downer is only money-deep. Protests rise aflight defiance.

Saturday, downtowners protest the Department of Transportation's many failures and its indifference to local communities. 40 Worth Street, 1pm

Yesterday, New School students occupied the 65 Fifth Avenue building, calling for the resignation of university President Bob Kerrey who has compromised the great radical legacy of the University in Exile by adopting a profit-generating corporate model for the university and its governance, by participating in the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which promoted the current invasion and occupation of Iraq and, most recently, by appointing himself as interim Provost.

Here's their statement:

Dear Friends,

On 17 December 2008, students, staff, faculty, and supporters held protests and
occupied the 65 Fifth Avenue building of the New School. About 100 people have
remained in the building throughout the night. This is a call for solidarity
and support. Protests and support will continue on Thursday, December 18th, at
65 Fifth Avenue and other New School buildings.

As you may know, the full-time faculty of the New School, have taken a nearly
unanimous vote of no confidence [269 to 8 (with 10 abstentions)] in the
leadership of President Bob Kerrey and Executive Vice President Jim Murtha.
This followed the sudden departure of Provost Joe Westphal, the chief academic
officer of the university, after which the President appointed himself acting
Provost. (He has since admitted this was an error.)

It is UNACCEPTABLE for President Kerrey to appoint himself interim Provost. With
various budgetary and building changes, students face a serious lack of
resources, both technological and academic, directly due to Kerrey's leadership
and his attempt to make the New School a profit-making venture. There is also a
fundamental lack of democratic transparency concerning both the activities of
Bob Kerrey and the Board of Trustees, and not enough input from students,
staff, and faculty.

Bob Kerrey has consistently been completely out of alignment over the past seven
years as President with the history, community, and philosophy upon which the
New School was founded. Amongst other activities, he was a member of the
Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which promoted the current invasion and
occupation of Irag. His participation is the committee was highly contested by
the student, staff, and faculty.

Those protesting are calling for the resignation of Bob Kerrey and the
institution of a direct, democratic participation of the students, staff, and
faculty, in order to guarantee that decisions are made in our best interests
and so that we can once again live up to the legacy of the University in Exile.

Our grievances include:

· Five Provosts in less than eight years is a sign of no institutional
transparency, stability, and accountability. We need an institutional politics
with a system of checks and balances, not one that works at the whim of one
man.

· Kerrey's unilateral appointment of himself as "chief academic officer" is
unacceptable and emblematic of his inability to foster cooperative education.

· The university is being treated as a profit-making venture at whose altar the
requirements of scholarship are routinely sacrificed. We have been
systematically stripped of the most basic resources necessary for academic
excellence, including adequate funding, spaces in which to study and engage
with each other, and a working library. We demand more opportunities for
student funding, and we are willing to work for them. We need public spaces in
which to foster a public sphere and an academic community. The absence of a
serious library and its related resources for research is absolutely
unacceptable and should not even be an issue of contention in an academic
institution.

· Academic planning and budgeting should be directed by individuals with a deep
understanding and commitment to academic excellence and free inquiry.

· We have no hand and no say in our fates or the collective fate of our
institution.


Please come support the protests at the New School (65 Fifth Avenue) to put an
end to Kerrey's and the other administrator's autocratic approach and
bureaucratic, business model for education. Their activities have been becoming
commonplace at all of our educational institutions. Let's end it now!

Don't tred on me

Last week, at a Town Hall meeting in Chinatown, the Department of Transportation presented its plan for rerouting traffic at Chatham Square in the heart of Chinatown. In the course of the Q & A, DoT asserted that their plans would go ahead regardless what the community says, wants or does; the DoT will respond only to the "city administration." The DoT interprets "city adminstration" to mean the Mayor alone, not the City Council nor any Community Board, as was clear from the meeting: the City Councilmember who represents Chinatown, Alan Gerson, spoke out plainly critical of the plan and the process, as did the CB1 and CB2 members present.

The plan will close Park Row permanently. The community has been pressing the city to reopen Park Row, which was initially closed in the wake of 9/11. But when it comes to Chinatown, the "city administration" does not appear to care for community wants or needs.

Also last week, CB1 voted to reject the DoT plan. Residents of Chinatown have now drawn up a resolution which they will present to CB3. Here's the notice, thanks to Jan Lee of CCRC, with the text of the resolution, which is also available here at the CCRC blog:

Community organizers are collecting signatures in support of this community authored resolution to submit before CB3's full board on Dec. 16th at P.S. 20 at 166 Essex Street near East Houston and Stanton at 6:30 pm.

Please attend the CB3 hearing this Tues.! Let your voice be heard and voice your opinions on the Chatham Square

Here is the document:

We, as members of the Chinatown Community, respectfully request that the following resolution be passed by Community Boards One, Two and Three with regard to the Mayor’s and DOT’s proposed Chatham Square Reconfiguration Plan in order to:

1. Give the community time to access and review all details of the proposed Chatham Square reconfiguration, with special attention to pedestrian safety, potential negative economic impacts upon local businesses and cost-benefit analysis,

2. Allow full community input; and,
3. Mitigate the effects of any construction on the local economy and its character.
4. Ultimately have the City work with the community to develop a plan that works for the community.



Whereas, the Department of Transportation has stated a desire of improved pedestrian safety yet has proposed a plan that appears to decrease pedestrian safety; and

Whereas, the Department of Transportation has not done adequate research regarding the economic impact of three plus years of reconstruction at Chatham Square, nor has the D.O.T. provided a business mitigation plan to the Chinatown community prior to the reconstruction of Chatham Square; and

Whereas, the Department of Transportation did not give the public opportunity to view detailed plans of Chatham Square’s reconstruction until 6 days before the public hearing of December 2, 2008 ; and

Whereas, the Chinatown community has not had ample time to caucus and present alternative plans for the reconstruction with alternative construction schedule; and

Whereas, the unanimous opposition expressed at the December 2, 2008 public hearing regarding Chatham Square reconfiguration accurately reflects the vast majority of Chinatown groups comprised of residents, businesses, and nonprofits; and

Whereas, Councilman Alan J. Gerson testified on December 2nd that “I believe it is way too premature for this community and this community board to take a position. I believe it is even too premature for the City to, at this stage, to ask the community board to reach a position or to approve this plan at this stage.”, thereby reflecting the opinions of his constituents; and

Whereas, State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver submitted a letter to the December 2nd hearing in support of the community’s efforts to have a voice in the details of the plan; and

Whereas, the DOT’s plan currently does not provide details of the Park Row improvement portion of the plan. In particular, the artists images of the proposed pedestrian walkway does not even include provision for the current driveway of the Chatham Green Cooperative; nor does it address the existing problem of handicap ramp access at Chatham Towers. Despite many requests by Chatham Tower’s Board, it remains off limits to this day causing a great hardship to residents and visitors of that co-op.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Community Board will reject the most recent plan for Chatham Square’s reconstruction as presented by the Department of Transportation, and,

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Community Board will call for a moratorium on all construction work at Chatham Square pending further examination of the plans by concerned stakeholders and input from Community Boards 1, 2 and 3.


Respectfully submitted,
Jan Lee - Sinotique 19 Mott St. NYC 10013, Hamilton Madison House Board
Jeanie Chin , CCRC, Chatham Towers Board
Danny Chen Chatham Green, Board
Toby Turkel, Pres. of Chatham Towers

Chinatown Working Group

The Chinatown Working Group met last night. I attended with qualms but left mostly encouraged.

Rather than narrow its focus and hand-pick its membership to speed the process along, the CWG has opted for principles of openness, inclusion and breadth. Narrow focus and selectivity are conducive to speed but also to controversy, as we saw in the EV/LES rezoning. So far, the CWG has not been unwieldy or slow.

The Coalition to Protect Chinatown and the LES, the group that led the opposition to the EV/LES rezoning, is not attending the CWG meetings, but its influence is felt in the mission statement and the orientation of the Group and even the fact of its existence: I doubt this Working Group would have been convened at this time and in this way were it not for the Coalition's vigorous, organized and highly public opposition to the EV/LES rezoning.

Judging by their proposed mission and governance structure, the Chinatown Working Group is characterized by

Openness
All Chinatown groups are asked to participate. Organizations alone will be allowed a vote in the Group, but individuals are being encouraged to form organizations of their own in order to broaden the voting membership and representation at the ground level. My initial concern that developers' interests would insinuate themselves into the proceedings are somewhat allayed by this structure. And encouraging the formation of local grassroots organizations is a good idea in itself.

Outreach
Such openness requires broad and equitable outreach, which appears to be a Group priority. CB1 and CB2 have been advertising meetings for some time. I expect CB3 will soon join CB1 and CB2 in announcing the meetings, since most of Chinatown is in CB3.

Inclusive vision
The Group is looking at the broadest implications of its work. Whatever the final boundaries of the area of study, the Group is already looking beyond the narrowest confines of current Chinatown both geographically and temporally with a long-sighted view towards the future.

Breadth of scope
The Group will not confine itself to zoning alone, but will consider comprehensive planning. From their draft mission statement: "truly affordable housing, cultural and historic preservation, economic revitalization, open space. public infrastructure, residential and business displacement, and zoning."

(I expressed my concern that "economic revitalization" not be made a cover for outside commercial or development interests to displace Chinatown's existing commerce and residents. The words "commercial stability" may be added to the mission alongside "economic revitalization." The desire to bring manufacturing into Chinatown -- an important basis for community sustainability unfortunately disappearing from the city -- may also find more explicit expression in the mission statement.)

Participation
So far, I see a well-run Group with plenty of talent. All the local electeds have been participating even though they will not have a vote under the proposed governance structure. Community groups are being offered a voting voice in order to encourage broad and regular participation. But participation is a political commitment and many attending are still wary. I imagine they will want to see the Group's direction before throwing in their lot with this initiative. They may prefer to attend as critics than participate only to become targets of criticism. It'll be a challenge.

The Group leadership wants to begin working on real issues as soon as it can, attracting participation as it demonstrates is goals and effectiveness. It also hopes to attract participation by its openness. Both strategies are well taken.

The Group meets again Jan 5 to vote on its mission statement and governance structure. Meanwhile it is considering the boundaries of its "study area."

They are looking for a regular meeting place that can seat at least sixty. If you have any leads, let me know and I'll pass it on. Meetings are held on the first Monday of the month, 4-6pm.

Prevent an eviction

If you read Howard Hemsley's letter in the Villager, you know the irony of this case: squatters-turned-owners evicting their mentally handicapped neighbor to sell his apartment at a huge profit. Please take a moment to help out the defenseless by signing
this petition (http://www.petitiononline.com/barreto/petition.html).

Here are more details of Alfredo's case, courtesy of Paul Newell:

Please take a minute to sign this petition (http://www.petitiononline.com/barreto/petition.html) to prevent the impending eviction of Alfredo Barreto from his Lower East Side apartment.

Alfredo is a 47-year-old disabled lifelong Lower East Sider. His mother, Carmen Barreto, is a pillar of this community, longtime activist and personal friend. Alongside his mother, Alfredo has participated in most of the struggles for justice and decency in this neighborhood over the last decades.

The Lower East Side once was a haven for squatters who championed the rights of homeless and mentally handicapped individuals to occupy buildings. Today, however, those same squatters, made powerful by a City's generosity, pull the same stunts they formerly attributed to greedy landlords.

Such is the case with Alfredo Barreto. Barreto, who has lived quietly at the squat on 7 ½ Second Avenue for 7 years, now faces homelessness as his former comrades become property owners who stand to benefit from the sale of his apartment.

"This is the latest phase of gentrification on the Lower East Side," says Howard Hemsley, Alfredo's court-appointed guardian and community activist. "As a mentally handicapped man Alfredo was never a part of the clique at this squat, but we never expected he would be treated to this kind of hypocritical brutality. They've gone from embracing the rights of all to housing to forcing someone with just as much right as they under the law into homelessness."

In 2002, the City of New York transferred title for one dollar to 7 ½ Second Avenue to UHAB, a not-for-profit organization that creates tenant-owned cooperative apartments. One might think that would make the squatter-residents appreciate generosity. Unfortunately, that's not the case. As the holiday season begins, Alfredo Barreto, is being evicted by his neighbors and UHAB. UHAB's excuse for taking Mr. Barreto's apartment and selling it is a dispute with the apartment's previous tenant, a dispute that has nothing to do with Alfredo, who tended to his cats and caused no trouble. UHAB has refused to even consider giving Alfredo a rental apartment in one of the many units it manages.

"We were so proud and happy that Alfredo could live on his own," said his mother. "It's a dream our family has had - that Alfredo could be a functioning adult, living in his own place. I guess that doesn't mean anything to UHAB."

Please take one minute to sign this petition. We are fighting in court and in the streets. Last week we held a protest outside UHAB's Wall Street headquarters. Please join us in this fight.

http://www.petitiononline.com/barreto/petition.html

Thank you very much. Please also let me know if you would like to be more involved in this effort.

Happy Thanksgiving,

Paul Newell

Four PSA's

1. Public Hearing on Con Ed Air Pollution - Mon
2. LES Forum on Rodents - Wed
3. Visioning the Seward Park Renewal Area - Sat
4. Parks Department Survey

1. Public Hearing on Con Ed Air Pollution
Monday November 17 at 7 pm,
Campos Plaza, 611 East 13 Street
The expansion of production at the East 14th Street Con Ed power plant has significantly increased pollution levels since 2005. Con Ed has filed to renew an operating and air pollution permit under "Title V", the air pollution control program for New York State. This hearing is an opportunity for our community to urge the New York Department of Environmental Conservation to reduce the Con Ed pollution.
For more information:
http://www.dec.ny.gov/enb/20081015_not2.html

2. LES Forum on rodents
Wed, November 19th, 6:30pm-8:30pm
PS 63 - 121 East 3rd St
Presentation from City agencies
and open discussion

3. Seward Park Urban Renewal Area Matters!
Saturday, November 22, 2 to 4:30pm
227 E. 3rd Street Ground Floor
(wheelchair accessible)

4. Parks Department Public Survey
The Parks Department is now working on a plan for the future development of the park system and would like to hear from you. Please take the time to complete the Public Outreach Survey and help them shape the park system for the 21st century.

Click here to complete the survey.

"...just like he stole our democracy."

Great coverage of the shameless Willets Point land-grab from Vanishing New York. And don't miss his visit to Willets Point.

Closer to home, our own Bowery is being given away to developers. City Planning wants hotels all the way down the Bowery and into Chinatown. Check out the following blogpost and send an e-mail to Amanda Burden asap -- City Council votes on the rezoning this week.

Wanna save the Bowery? Send this e-mail real quick

At yesterday's hearing both Council Member Gerson and Council Member Mendez extended support for the rezoning of the Bowery through a Follow Up Corrective Action (FUCA).

The City Council Subcommittee will vote on it Monday. That means we have until tomorrow morning (Friday) to get through to the City Planning Commission. Without CPC consent, it won't happen.
Please send a quick email (text below) to:

aburden@planning.nyc.gov,avella@council.nyc.ny.us,gerson@council.nyc.ny.us,rmendez@council.nyc.gov


RE: FUCA to rezone the east side of the Bowery

Dear Chair Burden:

I write to request that, in conjunction with the current East Village/ Lower East Side Rezoning, a Follow-up Corrective Action (FUCA) be initiated immediately by the City Planning Commission to extend the Special Little Italy District (SLID) from the west side of the Bowery to the east side of the Bowery.

At the November 12, 2008 Subcommittee Hearing on Zoning and Franchises, Chair Tony Avella, Council Member Alan Gerson, and Council Member Rosie Mendez all stated their support for an immediate protective rezoning of the Bowery. In addition, we have the support of Community Board 3, the Greenwich Village Society For Historic Preservation, the Historic Districts Council, the Society for the Architecture of the City, the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and the Coalition To Save The East Village.

Although the Bowery has always had a unique place in the history of the City of New York, in recent years we have watched large, out-of -scale development going up on the east side of the Bowery, the result of which has been the destruction of the context, historic character and diversity of the community.

The City has recognized the historic significance of the Bowery by protecting the west side of the Bowery in the Special Little Italy District, and the NOHO Historic District. The East Village/ Lower East Side Rezoning will protect the area just east of the Bowery. However, the east side of the Bowery itself has been left out of all these rezonings.

The east side of the Bowery must be rezoned today to ensure that it is in context with the rest of the community -- the Special Little Italy District, the NOHO Historic District, and East Village/ Lower East Side. If a Follow-Up Corrective Action is not initiated as part of this current East Village/ Lower East Side rezoning the historic Bowery will be replaced with a wall of towers.

Mixed results at CB3's Liquor Licensing committee

Overall, the Committee respected community opposition to licenses:

There was community opposition to 8 applications.
The committee unconditionally denied 4 of these.
Under pressure from the committee, another 2 withdrew,
and the committee approved 2 (both transfers of existing licenses to new owners).

The 2 that were approved had only one resident speaking in opposition.

(As it happened, one of the approved licenses is owned and being sold by a member of the committee, but this was not the reason for their approval -- it's a bar on an avenue, it's had a license since the 1930's, and this was merely a transfer from one owner to another. The other approval went to an applicant opposed by the District Manager herself who lives across the street from it. So the Committee wasn't doing any favors for their District Manager.)

The committee even denied two applicants without any community opposition: one for being in a saturated area, the other for asking to upgrade with only a three month track record in the location.

All in all, responsible committee work, with the exception of Cake Shop:

The Committee approved a license for the street-level of Cake Shop, 152 Ludlow, which has been operating successfully for four years with its basement-only liquor license.

Cake Shop claims that they need the added revenue, but the Committee didn't ask for any evidence of their need. It's a troubling application. A fully active street-level bar transforms the character of the neighborhood far more than a basement bar, and this is in the heart of a seriously oversaturated nightlife destination area, Ludlow near Stanton. No residents showed up in opposition. The Committee did not even ask whether notices of their application had been properly posted.

You'd think the Committee would be more conscientious, especially since the applicant was a former employee of one of the Committee members. I don't think they showed favoritism here, just carelessness.

It may be that the applicant needs this license to stay open and continue running the artist space downstairs. But the Committee process didn't demonstrate that to this listener.

Here's the run down by address:

DENIED -- hard liquor

13 St. Mark's (applicant didn't show up)
90 Eldridge (community opposition)

DENIED -- beer/wine

441 E 12 (community opposition)
171 Ave A (oversaturated area)
40 Ave B (oversaturated & community opposition)

WITHDREW under threat of denial

46 Ave B (oversaturated area & community opposition)
60 3rd Ave (only 3 months in this location)
58 3rd Ave (community opposition & no signatures of support)

APPROVED

151 2nd Ave (no community opposition)
308 6th St (no community opposition)
152 Ludlow (no community opposition)
34 Ave A (despite one voice in opposition)
269 E Houston (despite one voice in opposition)

NEW LICENSES APPROVED

191 Houston (no community opposition)
250 Broome (no community opposition)
144 Division (with a community agreement)
77 E 10th (with a community agreement)
35 E B'way (no community opposition)

I arrived late at the meeting, so I missed
Bowery Hotel,
Katra (217 Bowery),
Spur Tree (76 Orchard),
Compas (86 Orchard),
Samburger (33 St. Mark's)

CITY COUNCIL HEARING: EAST VILLAGE/LOWER EAST SIDE

This is the final public hearing for the EV/LES Rezoning Plan. Please attend and give testimony to support protection for the east side of the Bowery, which the Department of City Planning has excluded from the Rezoning Plan. This exclusion will result in large, out-of-scale development, destroying the context, historic character and diversity of the Bowery and its surrounding Lower East Side and Chinatown communities. The Bowery Alliance of Neighbors (BAN) is recommending that City Council draft a Follow-up Corrective Action (FUCA) requesting that the City Planning Commission initiate an immediate rezoning of this area or an extension of the Special Little Italy District from the west side of the Bowery to the east side of the Bowery. BAN's position statement is included below. Please arrive early and bring a copy of your testimony for the record. Your attendance is appreciated. THE BOWERY NEEDS YOUR HELP!

Date:	Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Time:	9:30 AM
Location:	Council Chambers - City Hall

Zoning & Franchises Committee

Chair: Tony Avella

Brief: See Land Use Calendar Available in Room 5, City Hall

Item		Agenda Note
LU 0923-2008
	Zoning Reso., East Village/Lower East Side, Manhattan (C080397(A)ZMM)
LU 0924-2008
	Zoning Reso., East Village/Lower East Side, Manhattan (N080398(A)ZRM

BOWERY ALLIANCE OF NEIGHBORS - POSITION STATEMENT

Although the Bowery has always had a unique place in the history of the City of New York, in recent years we have watched large, out-of -scale development going up on the east side of the Bowery, the result of which has been the destruction of the context, historic character and diversity of the community.

The City has recognized the historic significance of the Bowery by protecting the west side of the Bowery in the Little Italy Special District and the NOHO Historic District. The East Village/ Lower East Side Rezoning will protect the area just east of the Bowery. However, the east side of the Bowery itself has been left out of all these rezonings. The attached map highlights the area we are concerned with, if nothing is done the result will be a wall of towers http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/evles/evles3.shtml.

The east side of the Bowery should be rezoned to ensure that it is in context to the rest of the community - the Little Italy Special District, the NOHO Historic District, and East Village/ Lower East Side.

We respectfully request that a Follow-up Corrective Action (FUCA) be drafted by City Council requesting that the City Planning Commission initiate an immediate rezoning of this area or an extension of the Little Italy Special District from the west side of the Bowery to the east side of the Bowery.

To fight a liquor license...

...requires more than getting a denial from the Community Board.

The State Liquor Authority awards licenses, not the Community Board. The Community Board's decision is merely advisory to the SLA.

Effectively opposing a license requires taking a Tuesday off, going up to the SLA on 125th Street -- preferably with letters from local elected officials -- and testifying in opposition to the license. (You can find the exact date of a hearing on the SLA website here.)

It takes a couple of hours. That's one more reason to organize block associations: not everyone can spare a Tuesday to testify.

We're putting together a database for block associations. If you have a block association contact, please send it to me or to
quinnraymond@gmail.com
along with the location of the block association (include the cross streets, e.g., "6th Street Block Association, from A to 1st Ave").

Let's have a voice.

Thanks to those who have already sent BA contact information.

Troubling developments

59 East 2nd Street
The Russian Orthodox Cathedral of the Holy Virgin Protection and Chapel of St. Innocent of Irkutsk, an impressive stone structure just across the street from the Marble Cemetery and down the street from Anthology Film Archives, is planning to add 8 residential stories to its current 60 foot height, 141 feet altogether. How will they add eight stories on top of an 1867 church without compromising the structure? It's a historic church on a historic block. DoB has approved their plan.

75 1st Avenue
Developer plans to build a 171-foot tall tower on a tiny 24-foot wide lot. It's illegal to build higher than 100 feet on such a narrow lot, but they are digging their foundation anyway.

226-228 Bowery
8-story hotel in the midst of the Bowery section of the Special Little Italy District, not far from the New Museum. Is this the future of the city's oldest road?

Hope for the LES?

Last night at CB3's SLA committee, 20 bars and restaurants applied for licenses. Residents showed up to protest four. All four of those license applicants were rejected by the committee. Two more were sent back to consult with the residents on their block. All the rest of the unopposed applicants were approved.

Moral:

100% of successfully opposing a liquor license at the CB is --

-- just showing up.

At least half of those residents who showed up were brought by block associations. They can be effective, those block associations. Maybe it's time to organize EV/LES block associations. A neighborhood friend is creating a website where block associations can share information with residents on their block and with other block associations, view community news alerts and, with virtually no effort, even create and manage their own webpage. All he needs are block association contacts.

Anyone want to contribute a block association contact?

(Could be the start of something big: community voice and network throughout the EV/LES.)

Yet more bars?

To take your mind off the credit crisis, below is this month's roster of new bars applying for liquor licenses in our neighborhood. Anyone wanna bet on how many withdraw or how long before the recession closes their doors?

Am I exhibiting too much glee over the financial meltdown? I can't hide it. Like many of the wishful-thinking, I'm eagerly scrutinizing the neighborhood for evidence of recession. Of course, it's a little early to see significant change, but rents are down 30% in my building and for the first time in fifteen years there were vacancies through September.

SLA & DCA Licensing Committee
Monday, October 20, 6:30pm, 200 East 5th Street at Bowery
1. FY'2010 Capital & Expense Priorities
Renewal with Complaint History
2. The Box, 189 Chrystie St (op)
3. Sidewalk Bar & Restaurant, 94 Ave A (sidewalk café)
4. Dallas BBQ, 132 2nd Ave (sidewalk café)
5. Supper, 156 E 2nd St (sidewalk café)
Sidewalk Café Renewal/ULURP
6. Sugar Café, 200 Allen St (sidewalk café)
7. Zerza, 304 E 6th St (sidewalk café)
Applications within Resolution Areas
8. Tuck Shop, 68 E 1st St (rw)
9. Caffe Pepe Rosso, 127 Ave C (up/op)
10. 146 Orchard Rest, 146 Orchard St (add/op)
11. 6AB Restaurant, 507 E 6th St (bw)
12. Café Partners, 72 E 1st St (tw)
Alterations/Transfers/Upgrades
13. Jing Star (currently Sunrise 27), 27-29 Division St (trans/rw)
14. Vicky's Gourmet (currently Yummy House), 76 3rd Ave (trans/op)
15. Xunta, 174 1st Ave (up/op)
16. Bourgeois Pig, 122 E 7th St (alt)
17. Sushi Park, 77 E 7th St (up/op)
18. Mornir Stojnovic (currently Kush Lounge), 191 Chrystie St (trans/op)
19. Corp to be Formed (currently Mo Pitkins), 34 Ave A (trans/op)
20. SJD Entertainment (currently Summers Bar), 49 Clinton St (trans/op)
21. A&S Organic (currently Russo's), 40 Ave B (trans/rw)
New Liquor License Applications
22. Betty Café, 256 E 3rd St (tw)
23. Fifty Fathoms, 86 Allen St (op)
24. 384 Grand St (op)
25. Tanaghrisson, 90 E 10th St (op)
26. 1 Essex LLC, 1 Essex St (op)
27. Compas Group, 86 Orchard St (op)
28. Fritz, 417 E 9th St (rw)
29. Stanton Restaurant, 82 Stanton St (op)
30. Spice Thai Hot & Cool, 77 E 10th St (op)
31. 144 Division LLC, 144 Division St (op)
32. Persimmon LLC, 277 E 10th St (rw)
33. Rivington Sushi, 151 Rivington St (rw)
34. Porchetta, 110 E 7th St (rw)

Financial crisis impact on renters

What happens to you if your landlord defaults on his mortgage?

GOLES is hosting a meeting on the impact of the financial crisis on NYC housing, this Thursday, Oct. 16, 7pm, 535 E 5th St. (between A&B), ground floor community room.
More info, call GOLES: 212-533-2541

Watch the SLA

Change may be swift there. Governor Paterson recently vetoed a bill that would have excluded some new bars from opening. Currently, bars cannot open within 200 feet of a school or church, measured from door to door. Marty Connor, who just lost re-election for State Senate and who regularly helped residents prevent new bars from opening, sponsored a bill that would have redefined the measurement as property line to property line, effectively eliminating many potential liquor licenses. Paterson didn't like it.

Tourism/nightlife and Wall Street are the big revenue generators in New York, and the former is going to sustain the state through the troubles of the latter. Only problem is, once bars have transformed your neighborhood into a vapid tourist trap, you can't get rid of them even when the state doesn't need them anymore. Tourist traps never seem to die. Maybe because they're already dead, sucking the blood out of their victim city.

Coming up at the Community Board

Extra Place is back on the agenda at the Housing and Land Use Committee, Tuesday, October 7, 6:30pm, 333 Bowery (btwn E 2nd & 3rd Sts).

As always, lots of bars and restaurants are requesting Community Board support for their liquor license application to the State Liquor Authority. Take a look at the list below to see if there's one near you.

Don't forget that the Community Board is just the first step in the process. It's the State Liquor Authority that decides whether to grant a license. Even if the CB rejects the bar, you still have to go up to the SLA hearing (preferably with letters from local electeds-- councilmember, State Senator and State Assemblymember) if you want to ensure denial. The SLA was responsive to community demands last year, but the economy has changed, and the SLA will change with it.

Here's the list of liquor license applicants on the agenda of the CB3 SLA committee Monday, October 20, 6:30pm, 200 East 5th Street (corner of the Bowery)
rw/tw=beer&wine license;
op=hard liquor license

1. FY'2010 Capital & Expense Priorities
Renewal with Complaint History
2. The Box, 189 Chrystie St (op)
3. Sidewalk Bar & Restaurant, 94 Ave A (sidewalk café)
4. Dallas BBQ, 132 2nd Ave (sidewalk café)
5. Supper, 156 E 2nd St (sidewalk café)
Sidewalk Café Renewal/ULURP
6. Sugar Café, 200 Allen St (sidewalk café)
7. Zerza, 304 E 6th St (sidewalk café)
Applications within Resolution Areas
8. Tuck Shop, 68 E 1st St (rw)
9. Caffe Pepe Rosso, 127 Ave C (up/op)
10. 146 Orchard Rest, 146 Orchard St (add/op)
11. 6AB Restaurant, 507 E 6th St (bw)
12. Café Partners, 72 E 1st St (tw)
Alterations/Transfers/Upgrades
13. Jing Star (currently Sunrise 27), 27-29 Division St (trans/rw)
14. Vicky's Gourmet (currently Yummy House), 76 3rd Ave (trans/op)
15. Xunta, 174 1st Ave (up/op)
16. Bourgeois Pig, 122 E 7th St (alt)
17. Sushi Park, 77 E 7th St (up/op)
18. Mornir Stojnovic (currently Kush Lounge), 191 Chrystie St (trans/op)
19. Corp to be Formed (currently Mo Pitkins), 34 Ave A (trans/op)
20. SJD Entertainment (currently Summers Bar), 49 Clinton St (trans/op)
21. A&S Organic (currently Russo's), 40 Ave B (trans/rw)
New Liquor License Applications
22. Betty Café, 256 E 3rd St (tw)
23. Fifty Fathoms, 86 Allen St (op)
24. 384 Grand St (op)
25. Tanaghrisson, 90 E 10th St (op)
26. 1 Essex LLC, 1 Essex St (op)
27. Compas Group, 86 Orchard St (op)
28. Fritz, 417 E 9th St (rw)
29. Stanton Restaurant, 82 Stanton St (op)
30. Spice Thai Hot & Cool, 77 E 10th St (op)
31. 144 Division LLC, 144 Division St (op)
32. Persimmon LLC, 277 E 10th St (rw)
33. Rivington Sushi, 151 Rivington St (rw)
34. Porchetta, 110 E 7th St (rw)