Margaret Chin, the developer's candidate

Margaret Chin is taking money from the Real Estate Board of New York's Political Action Committee. You'd want to ask, why would the founder of Asian Americans for Equality welcome large campaign support from real estate?

Affordable housing is built in NYC through incentives given to developers. So if you want to get any affordable housing here, you've got to welcome a market-rate developer, otherwise you get nothing.

Does that explain why Margaret voted for the NYU development (albeit curtailed)? Maybe. Does it explain why she voted for the Chinatown BID against widespread opposition within Chinatown? Maybe. Why she voted to help First American International Bank, the promoter of the BID, demolish and redevelop 135 Bowery?

The BID benefits larger property owners, larger businesses and developers and banks. But the small property owners and the small businesses are the anchor of Chinatown. At what point does a commitment to building new affordable housing sacrifice community entirely?

The city has shoved a wedge between affordable housing and community, turning affordable housing into a tool of gentrification and displacement. Look at Williamsburg. Chinatown next? The BID is a step towards the new Downtown Hotel District (DoHo?) formerly known as Chinatown.

From Crain's http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20130729/BLOGS04/130729878 about REBNY's funding of Chin's campaign

From City Council Watch, Seth Barron (writer for City & State) "Margaret Chin Progressively Awful"

Sean Sweeney in The Villager "The billionaires back Margaret Chin for City Council"

Demand for luxury apartments is higher than ever

Luxury apartments are rising higher now to meet increased demand. But "demand" is a gloss for at least three independent economic functions: 1) the quantity of those seeking an apartment relative to the availability of supply, 2) their willingness to part with their disposable income for living space (the "opportunity cost" of space), 3) the sheer quantity of their disposable income. There's a fourth function: a decline in use value that increases the exchange demand -- the willingness of apartment seekers to double up and share a space. Even if that doesn't directly raise prices of luxury apartments, it raises them indirectly. Raising prices down the ladder raises up top as the options narrow. 

The 19th century argument that the cost of living space would always rise as capital expands was definitively disproved in the 1960's and '70's when large swaths of Manhattan saw rental declines, in some places precipitous declines to zero and even below (landlord abandonment or arson, the city giving properties away to residents). This wasn't a shift of capital as with Detroit -- Detroit's experience gave support for Engels' warning that the immobility and economic inflexibility of home ownership for labor would be a curse as capital shifted locations, although in Engels' case he thought it wasn't so much capital shifting as that labor needed mobility to shift so it could sustain a strike by seeking work elsewhere. 

In New York it was a cultural shift to the suburbs partly encouraged by government both by construction of suburbs and of infrastructure to take residents to and from the suburbs. That's why Robert Moses is so much blamed for the bankrupting of NYC. Capital did not shift to the suburbs, leading urban dwellers out of the city; capital was still in the urban center when Moses allowed the tax base to shift to the suburbs, and capital followed. It can't be blamed on the loss of manufacturing base: New York is growing in population and in wealth and tax base, but not in manufacturing. The move to the suburbs was a government-facilitated cultural shift that eventually spiraled the city downward as the eroded tax base undermined services, and middle class flight undermined public education. Explicit race-based programs like red lining and slum clearance closed the coffin. 

The new demand for upscale housing shows distinct reflexes of its distinct functions. The quantity of apartment seekers will gentrify outer boroughs as long as central upscale development lags demand. The price of space will rise as long as the willingness and wealth is there. The draw in New York seems to be its density, safety and convenience. It's a party for the rich. 

So why do all these rich folks come here and why are they willing to pay ever more? Is it the nightlife here? Or that NYC is the chain store capital of the US? Maybe it's just NYU. 

Neighborhood for locals or non-locals?

As upscale money moves into our neighborhood it draws upscale commerce which easily pushes out services to low-income and long-term residents. One sign is the loss of affordable supermarkets. The LES is losing its Pathmark and the EV's Met Foods is threatened by NYU.

Supermarkets may not be sexy, they may not be chic, they may not make anyone rich, but they do serve the elderly and ordinary working people and families. Before everything in our neighborhood serves non-locals and those who profit hugely from them consider the actions in the forward I received below:

PLEASE FORWARD:
MIKE IS OPTIMISTIC!!! but needs OUR HELP

Mike Schumacher, owner of Met Food Grocery Store at 107 Second Avenue, says NYSS Duane is working hard at lease renewal negotiations with NYU for his store. He expects a settlement early next week. This is very good news for our community. To support this progress please do the following:

If you have time for a call, an email or both then contact NYU President Sexton. Tell him that this community needs Met Food and Met Food needs an affordable, long term lease. In one lease, NYU could save a Second Avenue mainstay and a community service and make alot of friends.
His number is: 212 998 2345
His email is: John.Sexton@nyu.edu


If you have time for two calls, two emails or both then contact Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer. He got NYU to sign an Agreement on Principles for Future NYU Campus Development. "Community Sustainability" is one of NYU's new goal. The Met Food lease renewal is the perfect opportunity to sustain the Second Avenue community.Tell MBP Stringer that this community needs him to support NYSS Duane's efforts with NYU.
His number is: 212 669 8300
His email is: bp@manhattanbp.org

In both contacts, you should mention your connection to Met Food and/or community, e.g., teacher, caretaker, activist, chamber of commerce member, cat rescuer, NYU alum, CB member, foodie, conservative, liberal, whatever, etc. The community was not directly included in any of these negotiations so we want NYU to know what we think:that this community considers Met Food a distinct and necessary part of our lives that Met Food is one of a handful of businesses left on Second Avenue that serve the community residents and members.That Mike, his brother and his staff give back to this community every day and that NYU will benefit from a renewal of their lease.

NYU expansion open house

NYU will hold another open house on its expansion plans, presenting the "final recommendations based on nine months of planning, analysis, and outreach. New York University will examine these refined options over the coming months as we move towards a comprehensive space-planning strategy for the next 25 years. Your continued input and feedback is [sic] critical."
Wednesday, April 23, 5-7pm
100 Washington Square East
Refreshments will be served and children's activities will be provided.

-- That's fruit and cookies. They're not bad. They've got some knowledgeable planners there who talk intelligently, and their posters are full of important information. With amusing but distractingly seductive suggestion, they always include a poster about Governor's Island, as if they just might-could expand there. You may skip that one. The likelihood of their moving to Governor's Island, earnest posters notwithstanding, is nil. Alas. Have a cookie. -- RH

Save Met Foods from NYU

NYU's rent negotiations may oust Met Foods from its location on 2nd Avenue. Met Foods is the only supermarket from 3rd Avenue to 1st Avenue, 11th Street to Houston Street. It provides affordable goods for local residents including older, mobility-challenged, and fixed-income residents. An upscale replacement would further marginalize the stable core community of the East Village.

Please sign the petition to save Met Foods. Kindly forward this to all your email lists.

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/MetFoods/petition.html

More NYU expansion

Two concerns about NYU's latest expansion presentation:

1) Their core campus will absorb at most only half of the 6 million square foot planned expansion

2) The 6 million square foot expansion does not include the 3 million additional square feet of currently leased space that could become unplanned expansion when those leases come due.

They will also add commercial uses to their ground floors, which looks like sound urban design but scares me: given NYU student spending habits, the area and environs could become a luxury shopping center to rival Fifth Avenue -- maybe even rival Columbus Avenue.

There was good news too. Their plans to expand within the core campus are encouraging. They seem to have made the tough decision to build in the plaza spaces between their faculty housing. They've decided, in other words, that angry employees are easier to abuse and placate than angry Villagers.
;-)

Two concerns remain. Their core campus can absorb only about half of the 6 million expansion. The rest could go anywhere. They recently bought Brooklyn Polytechnic and have a dorm nearby, but it's not clear how the development of that remote NYU location will alleviate their housing needs here.

There's also a hidden concern, not adequately dealt with in their presentations or in any of the responses I've seen. In addition to the 6 million sq.ft. of expansion they are planning, there's an additional 3 million sq. ft. they are currently renting -- a third of their students live in leased dormitories.

Universities don't like relying on so much leased space. Rent is money down the drain; leases are not permanent; the space is not theirs to alter or redevelop. The loss of a lease is what pushed NYU to build on St. Ann's, a decision they might have reconsidered in the light of community protest had they not been under the rental gun. Heavily committed in leased space, the university is vulnerable to pressures to shift out of it into owned space, either newly constructed or newly bought.

The role of leased space has been underplayed in these NYU presentations because it doesn't represent an expansion of their student body. Nevertheless, it could entail an expansion of their construction and purchasing plans.

Think of it: a third of their student body in 3 million sq. ft. is not represented in these plans for the 6 million sq. ft. expansion. That's half again the size of the presented expansion.

The situation may not be dire, or it may. Many of their leases do not come due until 2015 and conceivably all could be renewed. But if luxury rents continue to rise in NYC and money continues to pour in, there'll be even more pressure on owners to opt out of dormitory use and into condo or hotel use. That will leave New York City with possibly another 3 million sq. ft. of NYU new construction or new purchases to absorb.

Something to keep an eye on.

View the presentation here:

www.nyu.edu/nyu.plans.2031/pdf/OpenHousePresentation.jan30.pdf