Reyna Opposition Puts Loft Conversions in Limbo
A few months ago, I wrote about a well-maintained loft building at 70 Wyckoff Avenue whose landlord was trying to rezone the property and the surrounding area to prevent its tenants from being evicted. The building has fifty-one units, many of whose tenants have been living there for several years and working in local schools and the nearby Wyckoff Hospital. This spring, after strong objections from Councilwoman Diana Reyna, that rezoning application was rejected by City Council.
Tenants of the building who spoke at the Council hearing are now wondering what will happen to their building while anxiety is slowly increasing among residents living in similar loft-style buildings that are zoned for manufacturing or commercial on either side of Flushing Avenue.
According to Richard Bass, a planner with Herrick Feinstein LLP who is representing the landlord at 70 Wyckoff Avenue, the Department of Buildings will not evict people from the building unless it is in an unsafe condition — and 70 Wyckoff is up to code. Recent upheaval in the DOB leadership may also prevent other vacate orders from being carried out in Bushwick, Ridgewood, or Williamsburg.
The building is in the crosshairs of a political fight that reaches back not only to the death of a firefighter in Greenpoint following an episode of arson and the Greenpoint-Williamsburg waterfront rezoning three years ago but arguably decades earlier when factories throughout North Brooklyn closed down, becoming vacant spaces on the urban landscape.
Councilwoman Diana Reyna argues that illegal occupancies of loft buildings should not be tolerated and landlords should not be rewarded by granting applications for a change of use. Their office believes that a conversion could set a detrimental precedent for commercial buildings, that the landlord knew what he was doing and that tenants knew they were signing commercial leases. Sound familiar?
Except it may not be. Landlord Alan Goldman appeared before Community Board Four earlier this year in his application to rezone several blocks surrounding his building. Goldman is one of the few landlords who have taken the legal steps to convert his building from manufacturing to residential use. It has been a five-year process of clearing hurdles at the Department of City Planning, which advised Goldman and Bass to pursue the larger rezoning, before seeking approval from the Community Board, Borough President Marty Markowitz’s office, and City Council, which rejected the application.
Over the coming weeks, Bass will be preparing a variance, which will only change the use of the specific site. Councilwoman Reyna can weigh in on the matter, but she will not be able to vote on the matter, as the application will instead appear before the Board of Standards and Appeals.
Bass thinks the tenants will be all right in the end, but it may take a while.
“This particular building, this site, is where a change of use is the most appropriate thing,” Bass said. “There are lots of buildings that should not be converted. This one should be converted. It should have been converted twenty years ago.”
I lived in that building for several years before moving deeper in the neighborhood. It’s a great place with good staff and owners. Reyna just wants to keep her constituency poor and uneducated, so they will keep voting for her. The whole area should be rezoned.
I lived near that building for several decades before staying in the neighborhood. It’s a normal place with average staff and owners. Hipsters just wants to keep the constituency rich and educated, so they will keep voting for themselves. The whole area should not be rezoned.
Yeah, education and wealth are horrible menaces. Anyway, please advise as to which city officials recognize hipsters as their constituents.
yeah…right! “Reyna” wants to use the building for her constituency (i.e., the self-indulced homeless, albe body unemployed, current & former drug addicts & lowlifes). I can go on…but I’ll be here all day! you get the point.
Yep, these new hipsters are really rich. That’s why they move to Bushwick.
The whole area will be rezoned, or eventual variances will be given. It’s ridiculous to think otherwise. We make everything in China now. Not East Williamsburg. Do people really think all these buildings, hundreds of thousands of SF, are going to keep manufacturing?
I have news for you, there aren’t enough DOB and DOH enforcers out there to stop illegal residential use and straight-up illegal conversion. Not with cranes falling on people.
Actually, the manufacturing that goes on in that general area usually has to do with food services, etc., a use that will not be globalized any time soon.
As for the argument for legalizing these specific buildings, as long as the building meet the building codes, then they should be converted to residential use. The problem with commercial spaces here is that the loft law doesn’t protect buildings in this area, because the real estate lobby doesn’t want to extend the protections that were created in the ’70s to protect tenants in former warehouse space in SOHO, etc. Blame them. Really.
The gears of government grind slowly - but there is, for instance, odd-ball uses in a lot of these buildings. Like Stan’s building over on Ingraham -
Stan used to make garments until Bush gave Chinese imports a tax breaks; he lost every single major department store account in about a week. Now with his business literally dead, he has a building he can turn into offices, a hotel, a halfway house, a rehabilitation center… but not rental units. Bizarre.
http://eastwilliamsburglofts.com/
If anyone has a minute, he’s a great landlord, takes great care of his building and is building out nice offices.
China did not get Tax breaks. In 2006 the US (along with every other nation in the WTO) elimated quotas in most goods. A share in quota authorizes the holder (typically an import company) to ship their product to another country. These quotas cost somehere between $1 - 2 per unit. It effectively raised the retail prices between 5 - 10 dollars. The elimination of quota actually lowered retail prices. We still pay import taxes between 12 - 30%!! Think about this…. you still pay the same price for a basic tee shirt ($10 - 12) that you did 10 - 15 years ago even though inflation has been steadily 2 - 4%.
Okay - whatever happened, it shut Stan down.
Taking a contrarian view, for the sake of argument, if a landlord spends five years pursuing a rezoning and another year or two pursuing a variance, what’s in it for him? After spending six or seven years paying for attorneys, lobbyists and consultants, maybe the landlord wants to recoup some of that money? Maybe by legalizing the building and charging real residential rents? Having thrown out businesses (and there are plenty of businesses that would rent here if they could) in favor of illegal residences, what makes us think the landlord has the interests of his tenants at heart?
Maybe in this case, he does. But this is a pattern that has played out throughout Williamsburg, and usually it is not the existing tenants who get to reap the benefits of legalization. Under the status quo, the owner is not rewarded, but neither are the tenants penalized.
Clearly this landlord wants his investment to pay off. Was this ever debated? Only in New York City do people think landlords get into the property business for any reason other than to make money. From that kind of thinking comes the idea that property owners exist to provide the conditions by which whatever groups’ preferred civic landscape can come about.
Like the adults they are, industrial property users should be responsible for securing their own space on the market’s terms (in which they in turn may turn a profit). If they can’t, why should I care about them any more than the disappearance of the milk man? Or are we moving toward a bizarro socialism that aims to benefit factory owners? I thought liberals scoffed at “trickle-down” economics.
The landlord bought a building that was zoned for industrial use. That use is still viable (even if other uses will pay more). Presumably the zoning exists for a reason? By your reasoning, the illegal loft dwellers should be responsible for securing their own space on the market’s terms, and screw ‘em if the building gets legalized.
Yes, everyone is operating in a free market here, but why is the property owner the only one who gets to change the rules?
Wow, I wish I had known about this effort to rezone this corner of the neighborhood. My building is a legal non-conforming residential use and I certainly would have been willing to go down to City Planning and testify in favor or rezoning. I wonder if Goldman or his consultants reached out to nearby owners who would have supported his efforts.
#14, yes, the zoning exists for a reason — what is up for debate is that it is a good reason. You seem to be implying that because zoning bureaucrats decided it should be industrial forever more, that this is the correct use of the land. But that doesn’t follow. IF people are willing to pay more for other uses than industrial users are, THEN those other uses are the most efficient. That’s how resources are allocated in a world of scarcity.
You seem to have some confusion about what the “free” in “free market” constitutes. Your attempt to explain my reasoning results in statements so bizarre I can’t even parse them.
Joseph - the applicant is required to notify other property owners within a certain radius of the rezoning area, but not beyond.
Jeremy - agreed, the zoning should not be set in stone. But zoning does have a larger public purpose beyond whatever the highest and best use of the property may be. Industrial zones segregate unpleasant uses, provide jobs (usually better paying and with better benefits than the service sector jobs that replace them), and provide goods to the city as a whole. We can’t send all of our manufacturing offshore - food processing and many other businesses rely on proximity to the market. If we eliminate manufacturing zones, costs for everyone will rise, and good jobs will disappear. These are larger issues of the public good that may (emphasis on may) outweigh an individual owners inherent rights to use a property as they see fit. Sometimes it is a good thing to have government step in and allocate or regulate in a world of scarcity, otherwise the market will create imbalances that hurt everyone.
(As a sidebar - as important as a free market is a transparent market. Business owners need to know that they are investing in something stable when they set up shop. Loft dwellers too.)
It boils down to a question of balancing the public good with the good of the individual. (I don’t know the specifics of this case, or the merits of the councilperson’s actions, though I don’t generally agree with the “no rewarding bad actions” stance. As I said in my original comment, I’m responding more to the issues than the case at hand.)
Duh..”WTF”! what’s all this bullsh!t about rezoning!??? everybody on this forum have their heads stuck-up in their A$$es. As i stated prior…“Reyna” wants to use this building for her constituency based (i.e., the self-indulced homeless, albe body unemployed, current & former drug addicts lowlifes & fv<kups); plus all types of social programs & free gov’t/city handouts; inexchange for keeping her nice sweet paying gig @ the expense of vacating all working rent paying ppl mostly (so-called Hipsters); from the loft bldg.
You mofu’s better wake up & small the Fv<king “Latte”…before you all find yourself’s all over “Bklyn”, looking for a place to rest your little heads on tonight!!! “Dear Renya” wants all your asses vacated out of the bldg asap!
911NewYorker
1. This is not a forum it’s a post/comment area.
2. If you don’t have a website then leave the space blank.
3. This is not a Bugs Bunny Cartoon*^%^*(.
4. Hipsters are temporary, none will raise their kids here the landlord knows this and must find Section8 losers.
5. Not every non-white person living is “the self-indulced homeless, albe body unemployed, current & former drug addicts lowlifes & fv<kups”.
6 Yes I called out racism when none was mentioned.
Halden: industry existed before governments created industrial zoning. In fact, one of the main reasons NY instituted zoning was to keep factories out of the sight of the rich women who shopped on the Ladies’ Mile and Fifth Avenue — wouldn’t it be just awful if they had to see the lower classes toiling to make the goods they purchased?
While I do have sympathy for people whose homes are encroached upon by industrial areas, what we are talking about here is the opposite — formerly industrial areas reverting to residential use (as many of the blocks in Bushwick actually once were).
If I understand your concern correctly, you think that the market will price out food service to such an extent that, what, there will be no market for feeding New Yorkers? Sorry, I don’t see it.
911NYer, go hose down some other site with your gibberish.
Man:
Yes…you are partly right; about section 8 losers; but wrong about so-called hipsters (Americans)! who relocate
To all parts of NYC, including Bushwick, Bklyn; are also getting married, having children & staying right here in NYC;
Including myself…right here in Bed-Stuy!!! So what’s the big deal about ppl who “temporary” move out from Bushwick &
Relocate to, for example Bed-Stuy for what ever reason? Americans have that right & have been doing this from day one. There’s no law in the
books stating ppl have to reside in Bushwick forever. Again…what’s the point about “temporary”??? you scored no points
So far w/that argument. About racism, not one time I mentioned anything about it; you are the one who brought up the race
card. Just that alone speaks volumes.
Yes, I sticking to my guns about Dear “Reyna” wants to use this building for her constituency based (i.e., the self-induced homeless, able body unemployed, current & former drug addicts lowlifes & fv<kups); plus all types of social programs & free gov’t/city handouts; in exchange for keeping her nice sweet paying gig @ the expense of vacating all working rent paying ppl mostly (so-called Hipsters); from the loft bldg. Not once you stating anything about
About the real issue to my posting. Inquiring minds want to know.
Jeremy Sapienza:
What a cop-out answer (gibberish)! Again…avoiding the issue of my post comments. Dear “Reyna” & her real plans
About vacating rent paying so-called hipsters (Americans) in her opposition of the loft bldg.
Cop-out? No. If you do not write in complete, legible sentences, you will be ridiculed and/or ignored. That’s how we do on the big-boy internets. You are not a hipster; hipsters can piece a sentence together.
Jeremy Sapienza:
Yikes…another “COP-OUT” answer(incomplete, legible sentences)! you sure make it so totally obvious for everyone reading your evasive reply to my posting, Dear”Reyna” remarks! so now you snake your way out…by using the so-called big-boy internet(s) excuse; by ridiculed and/or ignored. I didn’t know you had to be a grammer major to post a comment here!???
But…it must be good to hide behind it; from answering the real issue @ hand!!!
I cannot evade something I cannot parse. I am being literal here. I think I might agree with some of what you are saying, but I’m not really sure. It is not a matter of being a grammar (English?) major, but simply of using language at a high enough level that people can understand you. If you cannot bring yourself to type legibly or coherently, do not type at all.
Look, there are many examples of unnecessary things you do that make it difficult to understand what you are saying. “COP-OUT” needs neither allcaps nor quotes. Dear “Reyna” needs neither the “Dear” part (it’s not clear why it’s included) nor the quotes on Reyna, since that is her actual name. Furthermore, you brought up no “issue” to “answer” — at least not that I can see. The only thing I can glean from your babbling is that you think Reyna wants to keep the uneducated and lazy in residence in her district so that they can continue to elect her and her cronies — but since it’s clear to anyone here that of course I AGREE (at least in spirit) with such a statement, your charges of “evading,” “snaking,” and “hiding” from your arguments, such as they are, are completely ridiculous.
I once again ask you to please type in complete sentences like EVERYONE ELSE on this website does, or move along. If you cannot do that, you have filtered yourself out from participating in the world of ideas.
Jeremy - you’re not missing anything. 911 is unintelligible, and factually wrong. Even if “Dear Reyna” wanted this building for “her” constituents, she can’t have it. Councilmembers do not have powers of eminent domain, they can’t forcible acquire a property, and they can’t force a property owner to sell. The likely worse case scenario here is that the status quo continues, which honestly is probably the best case scenario for the existing tenants - they are unlikely to priced out by a market rate conversion - while the owner will continue to earn rents in excess of what the building could earn with manufacturing tenants. Contrary to Reyna’s aims, the owner will continue to benefit from an illegal conversion, just not as much as he’d like to.
As for our discussion, I still believe that the city needs a healthy mix of uses and that government has a valid role in defining land use to that end. Without manufacturing, we lose good-paying jobs and goods and services become that much more expensive. Simply because an owner can earn a higher rent is not reason enough to rezone; there should be a net public benefit to the rezoning.
That said, our current zoning code and zoning boundaries are almost 50 years old. They are in sore need of revamping and revisiting. One change that could make a huge difference is real mixed-use zoning - allow light industry on the ground floor and residential above. 90% of manufacturing wants to be on the ground floor, and it would protect jobs and provide a needed flow of goods, while allowing much higher rents on the upper floors. Unfortunately, NY City Planning does not believe in this kind of mixed use zoning, as we learned in the waterfront rezoning.
(And a couple of historical corrections - when zoning was instituted in 1916, it was largely to separate noxious industries from *all* residential areas, in particular poorer neighborhoods. Much of Ladies’ Mile (with all its manufacturing loft buildings just off Fifth Avenue) developed *after* 1916. So it was not to protect the sensibilities of the ladies shopping on the avenues. And Bushwick has historically been mixed use, with much of the heavy manufacturing predating the urban residential development.)
Jeremy Sapienza:
About time you crawled out of your mouse hole! I knew I’ll Flush you out by my comments (e.g., “COP-OUT”, evasive, snake & hiding). Now that you have been Einstening my English grammar; I’ll try to save you from some sleepless nights…I’m not impressed!!! Maybe you can impress your hoodie friends with the use of parsing. Also please note: comments such…evasive, snake, hiding, dear “Reyna”, “COP OUT”,
Using caps, or quotes; are used by me as being cute, smug & full of sarcasm. I’m surprised you didn’t notice this a mile away!??? It just speaks volumes.
As I stated prior…my comments speak for themselves in reference to Dear “Reyna” & her real reasons about rezoning; which has nothing to do about bringing jobs to Bushwick.
My comments were right to the point without all the bullsh!t about rezoning; which is really a red herring issue!
I’m glad you were able to glean the gist of some my comments. I’ll restate again…Reyna, wants to continue the status quo…of tying to prevent the somewhat gentrification of Bushwick by voting no to the rezoning issue of said “Loft bldg” & basically wants all the rent paying tenants (American/Hipsters) vacated from the loft bldg for her own personal agenda (stop gentrification dead on its tracks).
Halden: you stated, Dear Reyna, can’t have the bldg because “councilmember’s do not have powers of eminent domain”, have you any idea or clue…that most of the inner city councilmember’s have no idea of NYC planning issues!!! Most are just voted in because they promise the world to their so-called constituents. This is what is called keeping your voting power base in check; by throwing some social program crumbs there way.
Anyway…thank you both for reply!
911NY I think your confused about the impact your comments aremaking here. You look like a moron.
I feel the grammar and garbled syntax are reminiscent of letters that serial killers send newspapers. Did 911’s comments come via clipped out block letters in different fonts from magazines?
Ingo Hart & Armstrong:
Plain & simple, Reyna wants rent paying Americans vacated out of loft bldg!