420-42nd-reduction.jpg
In a surprising turn of events, the developers of the planned 12-story building at 420 42nd Street on Saturday revealed their intention to play ball with the politicians and neighborhood activists who have been calling for a more contextual proposal. At a ceremony hosted by Councilwoman Sara Gonzalez (at left), William Chiu (at center, with pen), a spokesman for the developer, agreed to cap the building at six stories or 60 feet and to consult with the Councilwoman on any future projects. (Complete text of agreement on the jump.) I am pleased to see that the developers listened to the community message and brought down the size of the building, proving that responsible development can also be profitable, said Randy Peers, Chair of CB 7. Members of the Sunset Park Alliance of Neighbors (SPAN), clearly gratified at the success of their first cause, annouced that the planned protest on Sunday (yesterday) would be turned into a celebration instead. Ivette Cabrera, the leader of SPAN, also made reference to working with Gonzalez to rezone Sunset Park. Anyone know any details about this plan? This obviously sounds like good news, but we wish we knew what Gonzalez had to give up in the back-room horse-trading. From the bullet points of the agreement, it sounds like she’s going to throw the developers a few fat bones to build affordable housing in the area. It had to be something attractive because you can be sure these guys aren’t cutting this project in half out of the goodness of their hearts.
420 42nd Street and the Rule of Law [Brownstoner]
420 42nd Street: This One Could Get Ugly [Brownstoner]

In the interest of being good neighbors and fostering good will in the neighborhood, the following memo outlines the commitments of the 420 42nd Street LLC to the community of Sunset Park:

* The structure at 420 42nd Street will now be downsized to no higher than 6 stories – not more than 60 feet.
* There will be a parking garage on premises
* Residential units will be made available to all eligible applicants
* The first floor will be designated for community use facilities
* We commit to working inthe future with Council Member Sara M. Gonzalez to examine affordable housing in Council District 38, in conjunction with the City of New York.
* It is agreed the developers and their representatives will consult with Councilwoman Gonzalez and the community on any future projects envisioned in Council District 38.


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

  1. Crawford — and what exactly is this premise of mine that you object to so strongly? I objected to your assertion that a beautiful park is nothing to care about or protect. I assert that, as tommurphy has so helpfully pointed out, there is good and welcome development and there is crappy and unwelcome development, and that the community should have a say in which they get. Is that really very difficult for you to understand?

    Thank you, tommurphy, for your rundown of welcome new housing in SP. I was thinking about this on my bike ride home from work along 5th Ave and the cemetary, where I noticed new construction underway and recently completed construction that no one objected to.

    Developers and those who think they can do no wrong seem always to use all or noting rhetoric. It’s just plain false.

  2. Just for the record. When Mr. Tepadino bought the vacant land located at 44th Street & 4th Avenue at auction from the City and built two three-family houses no one complained. We cheered. It had been a gas station. When Lutheran Medical Center finishes the 81-unit apartment house at 405 44th Street we will applaud. It was a vacant garage. Someone is finishing a three-family down 43rd Street near Third Avenue on the site of Sadie Murphy’s store. If housing finally comes to the 68th Precinct at 4302 4th Avenue which has been vacant for 35 years and falling down we will all be relieved. The proposed building on 42nd Street will add another 15-20 units, maybe. Sure the neighborhood will be really crowded but “for a growing New York” what else do you expect to happen? It should all look nice, I think. At the very least Sunset Park is doing its part in providing housing for all.
    I think people commenting on 420 42nd Street should first ascertain the truth about the area and its people. St. Michael’s Church tower is art, like the Statue of Liberty is art. Both were here long before the housing was even two stories high. We all moved here because we like it. It was affordable too. Also, you might want walk around and meet the people and ask where they came from before you assign a stereotype to them all. It shows ignorance. It’s disrespectful.

  3. Anyone think Crawford ever been to Sunset Park? I don’t. We have one park with green grass and the most children under the age of 18 anywhere in the city.

    How does it go the more people the more services or the more housing the more service? Or more housing more people? Or more services more people? I get mixed up.

    Haven’t seen any new parks springing up taking the place of all the community gardens that were ripped out as Bloomberg sold all city property! Has anyone? Anyone? AND I’M IGNORANT!???? I may be ignorant of alot of things, but not of your kind!

    I would love for you to find someone in at the gowanus project to tell you they don’t want to get the hell out. Go ahead. You and the other Roberto Moses type have no respect for the integrity of communities. As for me being established…never been called that before…thank you?….

    Finally….Never said I oppose development, just things that don’t match…like my socks. If they don’t match I won’t put them on. Even us Sunset Parkers like pretty things you know. Rezoning means just that…resoning some up and some down.

    And Crawford, I am the community. I don’t represent it.

  4. SPer, you are a caricture of gentrifiers everywhere. Your “idiot” comment is hilarious considering your premise.

    Since you think that Sunset Park residents prefer park views over tall structures, you should immeditely call for the demolition of the beautiful church on 42nd. It’s even taller than the proposed apartment building and blocks views to the harbor. We wouldn’t want your views to be compromised.

    Xiaanais, so ironic that you now claim that pro-housing advocates are anti- park. Apparently you are ignorant as to how city parks are funded. Your opposition to new development starves parks of funding, lessening the quality of life for New Yorkers. Pretty selfish for someone claiming to represent the “community.”

  5. Let’s not get to upset at Eryximachus…

    He’s just a troll who thinks anything older in South Park Slope, Greenwood Hts. Sunset Park, “Billburgh/Greenpoint (shall I stop?) than a Scarano project built in 2005 is “squalor” (did I get that quote right?) and should be torn down in the name of progress…

    How dare we stand in the way of Eryximachus’ viewpoint of progress!

    Onward, ho! Demo we go!

  6. Erxy —

    1. You don’t know me, and you don’t know how I may or may not have benefitted from “the system” as you call it, so STFU on that score.

    2. The choice isn’t, as I pointed out above, “12 story buildings or squalor.” This is the usual rhetorical idiocy that people like yourself employ. Please stop it.

    3. You clearly don’t know the park or you would know that a wide and tall building at that location would substantially impact the view. Moreover, it could easily lead to other, similar buildings that would, indeed, completely block the view. And this is a view that is shared by all, not something available solely to those who can afford desirable apartments.

    4. Please STFU about my neighborhood. “The whole neighborhood is a dump and should be redeveoped.” Really? Well, if you feel that way, please keep the F out of the neighborhood.

  7. LOL….I see we have some real estate agents and developers posting. My bad! Hey! “Who needs a damned park anyway! What have green grass and trees ever done for anyone anyway? Damn tree huggers!” LOL!

1 2