Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How do you know it's not zero? The same redevelopments would have taken place even if there was no change in zoning.
Okay, so how's that different from what I said?
This has nothing to do with FAR allowances. You don't know what you are talking about. Stop pretending to be a know-it-all.
You may be misunderstanding. Of course there would be a net gain overall in the city (but still far below what is required) but I'm talking about on an individual neighborhood level, the net gain is minimal. For instance, the Fourth Ave area of Park Slope. Before Bloomsberg's rezonings there, you would have developers building new buildings on the side streets but after the rezoning, the side streets were downzoned and the large thoroughfare there, Fourth Ave, was upzoned but with a height limit of 120 feet (approximately 12 floors). So now, pretty much all new developments in that neighborhood is on Fourth Ave and none on the sidestreets, i.e. net zero gain.
As for rezoning the industrial areas, while manufacturing did decline in the city, there is still many businesses that need that type of space, from food makers, restaurant suppliers, light manufacturing, etc. What that rezoning did was forced those businesses out of the city all just so they can build four or five stories of condos. What a waste of land. (Yes, I know there are taller towers right on the waterfront but again that was a give-take with the local NIMBY's and politicians in order to allow the rezoning to go thru. One or two blocks away from the waterfront in Williamsburg/Greenpoint and the new buildings are only about four or five stories).
I never claimed to be a know it all. That's your insecurity and projection, not mine.
That industrial space was extremely underutilized. But to answer your question there is indeed a net gain in residential units in the city because of rezoning. Not what you were looking for perhaps, but a net gain nonetheless.
Back to neighbors and their concern about developments, things such as light in windows or views do affect property values and community boards do have their concerns about things that will affect their property values. New construction can have either positive or negative influences concerning existing real estate and that is a fact. So of course communities will defend their own interests in that regard.
I never claimed to be a know it all. That's your insecurity and projection, not mine.
You literally post on every subject and argue like you are an expert on everything. I don't have a problem with that but just calling you out on something you clearly know little about. By saying things like haphazard construction lets me know you know nothing about zoning and more specifically, what I was talking about as far as higher/lower densities.
Quote:
That industrial space was extremely underutilized.
Like I said, there is definitely demand for industrial space in this city. It's just that residential demand is so much more so that is what is always gear towards. That does not mean that land was fallow. Far from it. There were companies occupying most of those buildings employing many people.
Quote:
But to answer your question there is indeed a net gain in residential units in the city because of rezoning. Not what you were looking for perhaps, but a net gain nonetheless.
It's pointless to argue with you when it was already explained to you that on a neighborhood level (my Park Slope example) the new rezonings won't result in that much of a gain but just redistributes where the development goes. On a city level, there is gain but at a cost because you are using land that was once used for industrial and light manufacturing for new residentials that could have been built in residential areas. Obviously if there were no residential units before and now you build new residential units, there will be a gain but you are not using the very limited amount of land efficiently.
Quote:
Back to neighbors and their concern about developments, things such as light in windows or views do affect property values and community boards do have their concerns about things that will affect their property values. New construction can have either positive or negative influences concerning existing real estate and that is a fact. So of course communities will defend their own interests in that regard.
Obviously, you just want to argue for the sake for arguing or for some crazy reason to show that you know everything.
Whoever said that residents don't have their reasons for being against developments in their backyards? The problem like I said is that you can't base zoning on individuals, you have to look at the city's overall good, not some lady who's going to lose their view for example.
You literally post on every subject and argue like you are an expert on everything. I don't have a problem with that but just calling you out on something you clearly know little about. By saying things like haphazard construction lets me know you know nothing about zoning and more specifically, what I was talking about as far as higher/lower densities.
Like I said, there is definitely demand for industrial space in this city. It's just that residential demand is so much more so that is what is always gear towards. That does not mean that land was fallow. Far from it. There were companies occupying most of those buildings employing many people.
It's pointless to argue with you when it was already explained to you that on a neighborhood level (my Park Slope example) the new rezonings won't result in that much of a gain but just redistributes where the development goes. On a city level, there is gain but at a cost because you are using land that was once used for industrial and light manufacturing for new residentials that could have been built in residential areas. Obviously if there were no residential units before and now you build new residential units, there will be a gain but you are not using the very limited amount of land efficiently.
Obviously, you just want to argue for the sake for arguing or for some crazy reason to show that you know everything.
Whoever said that residents don't have their reasons for being against developments in their backyards? The problem like I said is that you can't base zoning on individuals, you have to look at the city's overall good, not some lady who's going to lose their view for example.
I can post on whatever subject I want to. If you feel uncomfortable posting on many subjects that is your problem not mine.
Those industrial buildings were EMPTY and they were not USED for light manufacturing by the time Bloomberg rezoned them. Industry has mostly LEFT NYC long ago, and much of the remaining industry capacity left NYC in the early 2000s (closing of pharmaceutical factors, of Domino sugar, etc). Those areas were never going to have any serious industrial use again, and that's why they got rezoned for residential and office buildings.
In fact as far as the West Side of Manhattan was concerned, freight ships used to dock there and there used to be a freight line. North of 34th Street the freight line became Amtrak tracks (Amtrak can access Penn Station this way) and South of 34th Street these tracks were abandoned and later became the high line as the West Side was rezoned and redeveloped.
I don't mind people from Iowa migrating to NYC. In fact, these people from Iowa make better residents than the hood people they are supposedly displacing. They're more civilized. Anything to get rid of the hood demographics in NYC I am 100% in favor for. These people gotta go if they can't act right.
I agree as well. I moved into a nice quiet area myself to get away from "those" type of people you speak of. I just don't understand the appeal of grown adults living 3-4 crammed to an apt and splitting ridiculously inflated rent prices just to live in these areas.
I agree as well. I moved into a nice quiet area myself to get away from "those" type of people you speak of. I just don't understand the appeal of grown adults living 3-4 crammed to an apt and splitting ridiculously inflated rent prices just to live in these areas.
Perhaps they like companionship?
You don't have to live in big cities to live with other people.
Once de Boob as one person has put the oaf as here comes to an agreement with the city's plumbers they can finally fix bushwhicks backed up toilet and flush all the brown people, places, and/or things down 2016's luxury white toilets. I love the dying dynamism that these people move and ruin here for.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
