Hell's Kitchen Online 4/18/98

[Hellskitchen]

Hell's Kitchen Online                                    4/18/98
                 "All the News the Times Won't Print"
-----------------------------------------------------------------

In this issue...

* Borough Board update
* Reader mail & stuff
* Broadway boom: Attendance will set record 
* CCN Editorial: Virginia and the Wolf 
* Clinton Residents Call Rezoning Plan Old Hat (4/2)
* NY Times: Manhattan Lawmakers Resist Theater Plan (4/17)

=================================================================

FLASH: Borough Board Rejects Rezoning Plan 11-0 (with one abstention).

We'll try to get a more complete update by Monday. But go ahead and continue
to call Borough President C. Virginia Fields (see the Chelsea Clinton
News Editorial below) at 669-8300. Fax her the editorial at 669-3380 
or 669-4305. Fields has yet to make her statement on the rezoning 
and gave every indication she would side with developers. 
So much for campaign promises.

=================================================================

>>>>>one reader writes...

For what it's worth, when I called Virginia Fields they were confused, had
me on hold like 10 minutes, and wouldn't even take my name as being
against it.  I had faxed her earlier, but they said they weren't taking
any phone comments.


>>>>>another comment we received...

Once again, congrats on your efforts.  I noted that the Chairman of the City
Planning Commission, Joseph B. Rose, was quoted in today's Times p. B3, that
the Borough Board was "a forum that plays to the most reactionary and
obstructionist elements of the Manhattan political spectrum."
So, he knows you, right?


>>>>>You know you've arrived dept.....

When a reader (the one who thinks a fax at 8:45 am is in the middle of the
night) calls you at 8 AM to congratulate you for being called a reactionary
by City Planning's Joe Rose. Rose must be the new Dan Quayle. At the BP
Public Hearing on 3/25 he stated the air rights would "inducify" his
anti-hodgepodge "appropriate" development crusade. He also said the current
zoning allows 56 stories on 8th Avenue's west side and that his plan
was actually doing the neighborhood a favor. Joe, it's not "potatoe."


>>>>>Question:

Which high-ranking official of the Department of City Planning stated
that Hell's Kitchen Online was "full of substantive content" and was
also seen wearing a "Save Hell's Kitchen" button?


>>>>>>Memorable statements from the Municipal Art Society forum...

* "Air Rights, the movie... coming to a neighborhood near you."

* "Harassment happens anyway" (referring to Joe Rose's wierd rational
  for Air Rights that "development happens anyway")

* "Clinton/Hell's Kitchen is the neighborhood that takes in Mayors,
  chews them up and spits them out" -- respected zoning attorney


>>>>>>"Oscar is my first name" dept.....

* "We're not concerned about lost development rights" -- Rebecca Robertson,
  Real Estate Director, Shubert Organization

=================================================================

from Crains New York Business, April 18, 1998
Broadway boom: Attendance will set record 

The League of American Theatres and Producers Inc. projects that the
current Broadway season will be the best-attended ever, breaking the record
1980-81 season. The League estimates 11.3 million people will seen a show
by the season end on June 7-up 7.4% from 1996/1997. Box office reciepts
will reach $545 million, an increase of 9.2%. 

=================================================================

Editorial from Chelsea Clinton News
Virginia and the Wolf

The next judgment on the rezoning of Eighth Avenue and the theater district
lies in the hands of Manhattan Borough President C. Virginia Fields and the
Borough Board of which she sits at the helm. Residents of Hell's Kitchen
are looking to her to convey their concerns to the city that the proposal
could change, for the worse, the face of their neighborhood. The
anti-proposal flyers that the Clinton Special District Coalition has been
circulating include a statement by Fields dating back to last August, when
she was on the BP campaign trail. She said that neighborhood residents are
"understandably concerned about this intrusion to their neighborhood," and
that "it is hard to believe that this district will not suffer in many ways
from the rezoning." She has not uttered a statement this strong since she
moved into her new office in January. 

Fields seems to have greater access to the ears of the city than many other
officials and community members. In February, City Planning presented the
proposal to her and other members of the Borough Board in what some local
officials called more detail than has been made for any other officials to
date. 

Fields should use her power to the advantage of the Manhattan constituents
who elected her and oppose the City Planning proposal as it now stands. She
should remember what she said as BP-hopeful, and not hinge decisions on her
sights as mayor, a common jumping-place for borough presidents. Former-BP
and mayoral hopeful Ruth Messinger lost the support of some of her corps
constituents by supporting Trump's Riverside South project a couple of
years ago. 

Ten years ago, the city saw legitimate reason to reject a rezoning proposal
similar to the plan now on the table. Hiding this wolf behind the curtains
of the beloved theater does not make it any better.

Fields should not fall prey to the temptations of bigger business just
because they may one day feed bigger campaigns. 

=================================================================

Clinton Residents Call Rezoning Plan Old Hat
City Rejected Similar Proposal 10 Years Ago 
from Chelsea Clinton News, April 2, 1998
by SAM BRUCHEY

As the Eighth Avenue rezoning/Broadway Initiative effort presses on, area
residents hoping to squash the proposal have discovered an interesting
tidbit about the plan itself: it isn't new, and in fact could very well be
a glossed-up repackaged version of the same plan that was rejected 10 years
ago.

At a hearing last week at the office of Manhattan Borough President C.
Virginia Fields, representatives of the Department of City Planning
described its plan - the transference of unused air rights of landmarked
Broadway theaters - as an effective way to generate revenue for theaters.
Clinton residents, on the other hand, contended that in saving the theater,
the plan will destroy the neighborhood. At least seven times during the
meeting, individual speakers separately questioned why a second-hand plan
that was rejected in 1988 by the City Planning Commission for reasons that
still apply today, should be considered anew.

According to Kevin Finnegan, Chair of the Community Board 5 Task Force on
Theater Subdistrict/Eighth Avenue Rezoning, who discovered the plan's
rather extensive history, the plan was first born in 1982. It was designed
to relieve pressure from rapid East Side development by channeling some of
that development toward the West Side, particularly Eighth Avenue. In 1988,
the rezoning initiative was about to expire, when a proposal was introduced
to extend its term.

The City Planning Commission rejected the effort, however, because it was
believed that the sale of unused air rights from theaters set a dangerous
precedent for rapid, unpredictable commercial development. A resolution
passed by the Planning Commission in March 1988 read, "It is inappropriate
to proceed in this direction due in part to the unpredictability of its
results, the negative implication for density in the area and for existing
landmarks regulations, and the precedent that could be set."

According to Richard Barth, director of the Manhattan office of the
Department of City Planning, the plan now on the table has not simply been
dug up and dusted off. "The plan contains certain elements that have been
considered in the past," said Barth, "but it is the first time that these
elements have been incorporated into a comprehensive, well thought-out
proposal."

But, said Finnegan, there is little doubt that residents are seeing a
recycled plan. "I've gone out on a limb at a variety of public hearings, in
front of City Planning officials, and said that this plan was the same one
from 10 years ago," he said. "And never once have they bothered to deny it."

A fixed percentage of the revenue generated from the sale of transferred
air rights in this year's rezoning proposal, will benefit a "Theater
Subdistrict Fund" intended by City Planning to promote theater use and
preserve the district. But Clinton residents fear that selling these air
rights will strip the area of its character and drive the cost of living up
to the point where the neighborhood will no longer be able to provide
affordable housing to those who work in the theater industry and support
themselves on modest incomes.

"If this proposal passes," said Marilyn Rockafellow, a long time resident
of Clinton, "and you have to wonder how a proposal that was rejected 10
years ago could even be considered today, it will destroy one of the few
remaining neighborhoods left in the city where people who don't make a
hundred thousand dollars a year can live in a nice community."

"The underlying villain here is the free floating air rights," said John
Fisher, of the Clinton Special District Coalition. "You can't be against
the impact on the neighborhood of over commercialization without being
against its underlying cause, free floating air rights," said Fisher, who
is looking to the Borough President to take a leadership role on the issue. 

Fields has yet to come out for or against the proposal. "The transfer of
air rights for the theaters has important implications for the long-term
financial viability of the theater district," she said, but also noted the
concerns of Clinton residents.

According to Joe Rose, chair of the Department of City Planning, Eighth
Avenue is going to be developed regardless of whether this rezoning
proposal passes. Passing the rezoning laws, he said, will create a uniform
look to the avenue, by restricting the dimensions of any new buildings.

The Manhattan Borough Board is scheduled to vote on the rezoning proposal
on April 16. The board consists of 23 members, 10 from the city council, 12
Community Board chairs, and a final deciding vote - in the case of a tie -
by the Borough President.

=================================================================

from the New York Times, April 17, 1998
Manhattan Lawmakers Resist Theater Plan
By DAVID W. DUNLAP

If planning reviews had the impact of drama reviews, a show doctor
would be needed about now for the Giuliani administration's proposal
to liberalize the use of development rights from Broadway theaters.

Yesterday, coming as close as they could to unanimity, all but one
of Manhattan's City Council members voted to oppose the zoning plan
as drafted, urging instead a measure with greater public review and
tighter geographical limits to protect the Clinton neighborhood to
the west of the theater district.

The proposal has already been overwhelmingly opposed by the
mid-Manhattan and Clinton community boards as well as neighborhood
groups like the Clinton Special District Coalition and civic
organizations like the Municipal Art Society.

"In general, there is no support for the proposal in its current
presentation," said the Manhattan Borough President, C. Virginia
Fields, as she opened yesterday's meeting of the Manhattan Borough
Board, where Council members and community boards consider land-use
matters.

The Borough Board plays only an advisory role in the land-use review
procedure, but yesterday's vote indicated an unusual degree of
agreement among Manhattan's members of the City Council, which will
eventually vote on the zoning proposal.

Joseph B. Rose, the chairman of the City Planning Commission, said
in an interview after the vote that the Borough Board was "a forum
that plays to the most reactionary and obstructionist elements of
the Manhattan political spectrum."

But Rose added that there were "certainly refinements and issues
that have been raised that could warrant further deliberation"
before a vote next month by the Planning Commission.

The measure, which Rose said was intended "to address the
longstanding problems of the Broadway theaters," would then go to
the Council in June.

The zoning proposal would allow the owners of 25 Broadway theaters
to transfer their unused development rights to an area of
mid-Manhattan from the west side of the Avenue of the Americas to
the west side of Eighth Avenue, between 40th and 57th Streets.

The Borough Board called for eliminating the west side of Eighth
Avenue from the proposal, and Rose said that the boundaries were
open to discussion.

Unused development rights, also known as "air rights," represent the
difference between the actual size of a building and the maximum
size that would be allowed by zoning rules. As low-rise buildings in
a high-rise district, Broadway theaters typically have an abundance
of air rights.

As it is, such rights generally cannot be transferred any farther
than an adjacent lot or a site across the street. Under the
proposal, a theater at 41st Street and Seventh Avenue could sell its
air rights to the owner of a construction site at 56th Street and
Eighth Avenue. Resulting buildings could be 20 percent to 44 percent
larger than would ordinarily be permitted by zoning rules.

In return for this more liberal transfer, which would be allowed to
occur automatically and without public review, a theater owner would
have to enter into a covenant to maintain the building as a
playhouse rather than converting it.

The owner would also have to make a payment into a fund that is
meant to insure that the theater maintenance obligations are met,
that new plays are developed and that new audiences are cultivated.

As city planners see it, this approach would strengthen the theater
industry and preserve legitimate playhouses by redistributing
development through the surrounding district. It would also impose
design controls on Eighth Avenue, the boundary between the dense,
commercial blocks of midtown and the lower-rise Clinton
neighborhood.

Opponents, whose numbers seem to be growing, see the proposal as a
forerunner of more liberalized distribution of air rights citywide,
as an attempt to limit public scrutiny of significant construction
projects and as a spur to more luxury apartment towers on the edge
of Clinton.

Critics also worry that theater owners could escape from the
maintenance obligation after 25 years and fear that the fund will be
insufficient for its purposes.

The Manhattan Borough Board stopped short of a resolution proposed
by Community Board 4 in Clinton and Community Board 5 in
mid-Manhattan, which declared that the use of development rights
over a 50-square-block area called for in the zoning proposal was
"inappropriate," in part because it might set a precedent.

Fields said that she generally would support the use of air rights
to help the theater industry, if it were done in a way more
sensitive to neighborhood concerns.

The Board urged that "any transfer of development rights be through
a special permit process," but Rose said he would not even consider
that approach.

Both Pamela Frederick, the chairwoman of Board 4, and Lola
Finkelstein, the chairwoman of Board 5, expressed dismay that the
resolution failed to take a stronger stand against the transfer of
development rights, but they joined the majority.

At a Manhattan Borough Board meeting, measures are voted on by all
10 of the borough's Council members and the heads of the affected
community boards. The resolution passed yesterday, 11-0, with
Councilman Andrew S. Eristoff, the lone Republican in the
delegation, abstaining.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hell's Kitchen Online -- NYC's West Side Wonderland
  web:     http://hellskitchen.net
  email:   kitchen@hellskitchen.net
TenantNet, for Residential Tenants: http://tenant.net