January 23, 2007

  • i
    am confronted with a dilemma.  GTS (General Theological Seminary) is
    facing severe financial issues - i think i've mentioned that before on
    here.  we also have a very serious architectural maintenance problem with
    the building that houses our administration and library facilities.  built
    in 1960, the building is not only undistinguished, but it is of that sad
    architectural trend towards flat roofs (which leak badly) and the awful
    acoustical tile dropped ceilings that sag and fall as a result of those leaks. 
    even where there are 'real' ceilings in that building, due to the moisture and
    settling, the paint is falling off the ceilings.  in the library where i
    did all that research, the 4th floor where i was 'living' is a disaster zone,
    with buckets and pails out to catch water from the ceilings which are also
    dripping on these old volumes.  obviously, we need a new building.

    so,
    there apparently have been several conversations over 8 years with the local
    community board and with architects to come up with a design that fits in with the neighborhood, since Chelsea is an historic district and GTS has been designated an historical landmark. the zoning regs for our historic district require that new construction be no more than 75feet high, and be in character (materials as well as design) with the surrounding buildings. 

    so tonight i went to a community board meeting at the request of the seminary to show support for their building proposal.  my dilemma is > i agree with the community.  the design plan is fugly, an all glass and brick tower that is two times the legal height limit.  not only does it violate the legal designation for the historical district but there is a moral issue with it as well...

    the new building that would replace our current library/administration building would still house the library, but the administration would be moved onto a new building built on the side street.  the frontage on ninth avenue would be for (get this) retail space!  and in the tower? high income condominiums!!!
    this is in a neighborhood that has been fighting gentrification since families that have been there for generations are seeing their children forced to leave because the rents are getting sky high... 

    the seminary says that this type of building is needed to generate the monies for preserving the historic buildings on our campus, but honestly!  what about the impact on the larger community?  why not include some low-income (or at least moderate-income) housing in the plans?  why not have a design that falls within the legal restrictions?  and when a high-income property like this goes up, the pressure on the neighboring rental properties is to raise rents.  this would not be helping people to stay here, but would be forcing more of them out.

    if i lived in this neighborhood i would be so in support of GTS itself, but so against this proposal.  plus, i thought it incredibly rude of most of the GTS community that attended the meeting to leave before all of the speakers for the opposition had their say.  they made some good points that we really need to address, but i am afraid the majority of people didn't get to hear it all.  or even enough of it.

Comments (9)

  • Er.... somehow I really fail to see how they plan on building something that's illegal. That sounds right there like an exercise in stupidity, and their architects should be fired. A good architect should be able to make something that fits in with the community and meet their clients specifications (unless their clients are insane).

    *shrug* Eh. If I was in your position, I'd send an annonymous letter to your local zoning committee and point out this egregious infraction-in-progress, and especially talk to whoever does the historical district management. Because seriously, there's a better way. There always is- you just need to take the time to find it.

  • RYC---Indy is probably the surest bet of the century :mad:

    Chelsea...Ninth Ave...KNOW you're talking NYC now :love:

    It's hard to believe somethang built in 1960 is already falling apart, yet something built in the 50's and before is STILL rocking...must be all those architects who graduated from Ayn Rand U :lol:

    i remember how they used to sneak MTA community meetings whenever they wanted to push things thru...you gotta face a simple fact of life---PEOPLE don't count on the bottom line :wha:

  • RYC ~ Naw, other than the fact that I was one of them...

  • well it was not your plan was it? Did you have to be an advocate for the GTS just because you work for them?...

  • just popped by to say 'hi'.  I liked your comment on ER!  Didn't see O'Reilly yesterday, but I don't remember him even mentioning the Smart case.  (I watch his show because it is so ridiculous - and I get to yell at the TV!!! very cathartic)

  • Wanna Guess What?! Check out the site!

  • I agree with Archangel_locke; how do they plan to build something illegal in the first place?

  • Thanks for your comments on my last two entries.

    Depression changes ones outlook on life, both while you are depressed and after you recover. I was on medication for depression, which does exactly what you've heard it does, stabilizes the chemical situation while the person deals with the life issues that caused the depression. I don't see or respond to the world in the same way as I did before depression. I think I handle it better these days.

    I hope that the video is of use to your friend, Ces.

    Shalom!

  • RYC---Ever heard Howard Stern play the NAMBLA phone message??? HOPE that your school don't have some auto progamme that picks up words like that...college OUGHT to be teaching you to think freely instead of constantly looking over your shoulders :mad:

Comments are closed.

Post a Comment