New York Shitty Videos Du Jour: And The Vote Is In!

Greenpoint Landing

• Note the Community Board 1 members who trickle in as the proceedings commence. Rabbi Neiderman is one of them.
• One board member (whose name eludes me) asked about “density”. A very good question— one which was not answered in any meaningful fashion whatsoever.
• Esteban Duran, Education and Youth chair, asks about the school which will be built. It will be pre-K – eighth grade, but it is ultimately the city’s call.
• The motion is carried with 4 votes against and 1 abstention.

77 Commercial Street

• Ms. Teague noted that Jay Segal (of Greenberg Taurig, speaking on the behalf of 77 Commercial— he had signed up to speak but when called elected not too) spoke to her on the phone about the developer’s willingness to “work with us” moving forward. Um, he is a lobbyist. Making phone calls and promises is what he is paid to do.
• To answer Mr. Neiderman’s question, there are no solid commitments (from either Greenpoint Landing or 77 Commercial Street).
• The height for the market rate buildings will be (and I quote) “30-40 stories”.
• The motion is carried with 29 votes for, 8 votes against and no abstentions.

In news of not the terribly surprising variety, the Community Board (at least the majority of the 37-ish members* who elected to show up) voted in favor of the Land Use Committee’s recommendations. This is not to suggest no one had anything to say. Estaban Duran certainly did. In fact, I’d go so far as to say he asked the question which was on the minds of a fair number of citizens in the room:

Why aren’t we rejecting it outright?

Ms. Teague’s answer was as follows:

I believe if we reject them outright the city will give them what they want.

Conclusion: As is usually the case, much was made about affordable housing. Let’s put it this way, gentle readers: the reason I film this stuff is 1, 2, 5, 10 years down the line folks can go back and watch it. Speaking for myself, I will be very, very interested to see who ends up administering said affordable housing. Especially that at 77 Commercial Street.

If I was a betting woman (and I am not) I’d place my money on Peoples’ Firehouse. As some of you might recall, they were among the neighborhood organizations of whom Ms. Teague mentions as attesting to the need for affordable housing (at the prior Land Use meeting, which can be viewed here). I suppose it is sad that I harbor this level of cynicism— but history lends my prognostication some credence. A great many of the community organizations here, while certainly founded for laudable reasons, seem use these proceedings not so much to reflect the sentiments/interests/needs of the community they represent. Rather, they are a means of getting a “cut” of the action. Thus time is spent debating how many angels can sit on the head of a pin instead of examining “the larger picture” in any meaningful fashion.

And that’s exactly how they want it.

*As opposed to the twenty who answered roll call at the beginning of the meeting. If my memory serves me correctly, this is a new low. For those of you who are wondering, Community Board 1 has 49 members. Yup, we have a chronic absenteeism problem. Perhaps this should be brought to the attention of the:

• Attendance and/or
• By-laws, Attendance Procedures (Parliamentary), Service Delivery (whatever the hell that is) Committee?

You can always leave it to good ol’ Community Board 1 for a healthy dose of Kafka— with an Orwell chaser.

P.S.: You can view the Oh-Es-Aye minute by clicking here. It would appear the monetization bubble for the McCarren Park Tennis Courts has been tabled until next year.