New York City Development Freeze

There's a really interesting article in Saturday's New York Times, chronicling the freeze on building development in NYC. It mirrors the earlier post I did about hard times coming to New York town in the next few years. The numbers are pretty staggering:

Nearly $5 billion in development projects in New York City have been delayed or canceled because of the economic crisis, an extraordinary body blow to an industry that last year provided 130,000 unionized jobs, according to numbers tracked by a local trade group.

I'm not sure which number is more depressing. That's an enormous amount of well-paying jobs that will be lost in the city, ones that may not be as glamorous or as high-spending as the investment bankers, but just as horrible for the local economy. Like I've been saying for more than a year and a half, this city is in for some tough times, still not sure people have come to accept how bleak the next few years could be and how fundamentally different NYC is going to be.

I am the furthest thing from an optimist, but I do see a real silver lining to this halt. There has been so much shitty development in this city over the past decade, so many pre-fab debacles that were built to capitalize on the market, such a feel of an unstoppable momentum with it all, this marks a moment when the pendulum has to swing back. The insane amounts of capital available are not anymore, which should limit the scope of projects, putting big ones like the Atlantic Yards one on the rocks. This break provides an opportunity for citizen and neighborhood groups to mobilize without that feeling of hopelessness. If I were an optimist, I would hope that local leaders would stand up and take this opportunity to challenge the last three decades of neo-capitalist development and question what it has done for New York City and its residents.

Perhaps more importantly, the real estate bubble bursting and the economy tanking means you will have a lot less speculation and people buying properties purely to flip. Does this mean that the city can once again be a place where you don't have to be super-rich to live here? Will buying prices return to Earth? I can't say that for sure, but it's hard for me to believe that huge hits that the banking and legal industries are taking, along with European and Asian economies, that the money will be thrown around in the same sky's the limit manner.

New SEPTA Signs

We've been slow to discuss my favorite city and birthland, Philadelphia; I'm looking forward to remedying that over the coming weeks, no better time than now to start.

It's nice to start off discussing some good news, as I caught word that SEPTA (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority) is introducing new signs around the city to make the transit system easier to navigate. As the ones who run the city's trains, buses and trolleys, this is a long overdue initiative and great news for anyone who has ever been confused as to what lines run out of which stops. Check out some photos from the unveiling ceremony in front of the clothespin building at 15th and Market Streets to get a sense of what you will see around the city in the near future. It's nice to see the Center City District, the city and SEPTA come together to make the city more appealing. Check out the Center City District site for more info and plans on this initiative.

It wouldn't be a SEPTA initiative if there wasn't some criticism. I don't understand why they went with this green T on top instead of going with the regular SEPTA S or even a redesigned version of that logo. It's pretty iconic image for the people of Philadelphia, no reason it needed to be changed so radically.

That's minor quibbling in the scope of things, as any thing that SEPTA does to make Philly's public transit better and more manageable deserves support. Especially nice to see the transit agency come together with other entities to make improvements, as SEPTA needs all the help it can get. I cannot stress enough how vital improvements to the city's transit system are, as it's such a glaring weakness for Philly. As a lifelong resident, it saddens me that I thought of the system as more of a hindrance than anything. It's unpredicatable and antiquated, as customer un-friendly as it could be. Here in NYC, I use the subway and buses everyday, it's an essential part of my day and let's me enjoy more of the city. In Philly, there isn't that same sense of interconnectedness, whole neighbors are cut off and inaccessible by transit. It's so sad, as I feel like it leaves residents more in tune with their neighborhoods than the city as a whole. Without major improvements in the extent and quality of transit offerings, the city will never feel like a great, complete city.

Gateway To Williamsburg

Ugh, this post at Curbed is depressing. Another development in Williamsburg, another hideous structure going up that adds nothing to the neighborhood. This one is being brought to us by the Chetrit Group at the site of the Kellog's Diner on Metropolitan, I mean, there's a part of me that thinks this must be some sort of architecture-related Punk'd show set in New York City for the past decade. I mean, a Duane Reade??? Seriously? If there's a Citibank in the remaining space, I will shoot myself. [For the record, I will not shoot myself and will probably use the ATM there at some point.]

This one encapsulates an entire decade of NYC residential development: hideous design, major corporate chain that already has a million stores in the city as anchor, height that does not fit the neighborhood. But, on the other hand, this one seems like the a perfect gateway for those who want to see what New York looks like today - monontous, phallic and ugly. Come and see what decades of pro-developer policies have given us. I am thinking of starting a tour to bring it all together, show the half-built crap in Williamsburg, the hideous pre-fabs in Park Slope. Next stop: the blue building on Norfolk Street!

P.S. The comments for the post are hilarious. Nothing funnier than anonymous posters fighting over how real Brooklyn they are.

Thanks to RM for the link and the info about the sample sales blog! We love links!

City Pride

I mentioned parking before, so it seems like a good time to discuss the issue more. Matt Yglesias has been hammering at the decision by Washington D.C. to offer free parking every Saturday afternoon and for the inauguration. He does an excellent job exposing the irrationality behind this system, which only increases traffic while simultaneously not achieving its goal, increasing shopping.

It gives me a chance to stress one of my core tenets - cities need to be proud and confident; they aren't suburbs, so don't try to emulate them. It's sickening to me to see ideas like free parking, parking lots, driveways, big box stores catch on in urban centers. Cities can't compete with the suburbs on these concepts; you can't plunk down these massive malls and parking lot islands into the city without killing everything that makes cities perfect. These things destroy walkability, they destroy small stores and economic diversity and lead to the homogenization that makes every suburb look the like every other one.

Cities need to go the opposite direction and stress the things that make them unique. Density! Pedestrians! Bike paths! Public transportation! Sidewalks! I think after decades of disinvestment and flight, cities developed a shook personality, like a great fighter who's taken a few bad beatings in a row and he's lost all confidence and sense of what made him successful. No one knew how to stop the decline nor stop the suburban ascension, so many people assumed, if we can't beat them, let's join them. This mentality is a disaster, at best bringing in people who don't really appreciate urban living, at worst destroying the fabric of the city.

Cities are great and need to believe that finally, especially as the flaws of suburbia become more and more obvious (and these communities begin to adopt more urban planning strategies). The time for acting apologetic about our cities and what they bring are past; those days were for our parent's generation, the ones who ran, this is a new day. I hope that we can be a leading voice on this front, as I have no intention of apologizing. Let's do this city people!

Adolfo Carrion

It appears that Barack Obama has finally chosen someone to head the White Office of Urban Policy. That someone is Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion, who had been mentioned as a potential head of HUD. Here's some pros and cons to the decision:

Pros

1) has promoted and advocated for green building in cities, especially for lower income housing as a means of saving money on bills. He has deftly connected environmentalism with affordability to allow these ideas to gain traction in lower income neighborhoods who have traditionally not taken much interest in these issues. Check out Dayo Olapade's New Republic piece on Carrion's green ideas, including an interview with the man himself.

2) acted as the liason between the community and developers with regards to the Melrose Court complex, bringing the project down in scale and winning community approval.

3) supports congestion pricing.

Cons

1) the Melrose Court development notwithstanding, he has not been one to take the community's considerations into account. Read Streetsblog and Dana Goldstein discussing the ridiculous parking lot and traffic situation at the new Yankees stadium.

2) he was one of the key players in getting the Yankees stadium built!!! Ugh. As I've written, this is a ridiculous expenditure of city money and shame on Carrion for not only allowing it to happen but fostering the deal with little info about the costs.

3) when the community voted against using park land to build the stadium, Carrion fired or demoted the dissenting voices, allowing the plan to go through.

3) he is a developer's best friend, taking nearly two-thirds of his campaign funds from the real estate industry.

4) a big fan of big box buildings, which led to him championing a mini-mall to take the place of the Bronx Fish Market.

Tom Robbins has 5 sarcastic reasons why Carrion would make an excellent HUD Secretary. They seem to apply easily to him running the Office of Urban Policy. Brooklyn Boy at dailykos is even more disparaging, suggesting that even a 10 foot pole wouldn't make this a good pick.

All in all, it's a disappointing pick. Carrion clearly has some excellent ideas on the green front, but beyond that, he doesn't really seem to offer much beyond the typical city pol obsessed with development, development, development at any cost. He hasn't enjoyed a whole lot of love in the Bronx, as people haven't seen him standing up for the community over the interests of big money. He hasn't been at the forefront of public transportation. Maybe I'm missing something, but I expected a lot more.

Beauty In Blight

This one's a follow-up to the Detroit post, as I really wanted to touch on the aspect of urban decay and blight. Take a look at this photo from the amazing site Motorless City, which chronicles via photographs the physical decay of the city. How beautiful this house must have been back in the day, a stately mansion that probably had some rich family living it in, raising their children. Now, it is broken down version, surrounded by an open field and an another architectural skeleton. Perversely, I find the current image more appealing. In fact, I've always found these one of the most enticing aspects of urban space. I know, I know, what kind of an urbanist am I?

I don't have a great explanation, as my head knows that these foreboding conditions are what provide fodder for the haters and keep people from moving to them. But, having grown up in Philly in the 80s, it was a big part of my visual language. Burnt-out houses on Green Street and all over North Philly. Tags everywhere. Weeded lots. There was something beautiful in it, that ugliness held a power that a manicured lawn and flower bed never could. It has extended to my artistic aesthetics as well, fueling my love for film noir, Mean Streets, Hubert Selby Jr.'s books, Mobb Deep's The Infamous, graffiti, etc.

I've tried to think about why and think I've come up with some thoughts. For me, this ominous look provides the grit and ugliness that I associate with the urban; it's the complete opposite of the sanitized, "pretty" surburban look and in some ways I always define the urban as anti-suburban. In fact, I would suggest that our entire pop culture is obsessed with perfection, ashamed of anything that doesn't fit this norm. That attitude definitely explains why the cities are looked at with hostility in this country, as you can't hide from poverty, violence and blight within those limits. In the land of studio pop stars, Dr. 90210 and US Weekly, it's a radical choice to exalt decaying buildings.

Or perhaps it's that sense that in a city, nothing remains dead for long. There is always a chance for rebirth, there's always a chance to re-use or restore an old building, as evidenced by the many people living in former factory buildings. Even in a decrepit house like the above, there's still a hopefulness to me, a sense that someday that place could be restored to its former grandeur or it could become a boutique hotel or a community center or who knows what.

All of which leads to my greater point which is that there is a real urban aesthetic, a way of seeing the world differently. I hope to pursue this more and more as I write here, but this seemed like a good chance to establish these ideas. These buildings serve as a sort of shibboleth for me, a test of whether or not you really feel comfortable in this world, whether you can see the hope in a rundown house or the conversation behind the scrawlings on walls.

Shaun Donavan at HUD

Okay, let's start this week off with some good news. Last week, in one of the few appointments that hasn't been the topic of endless speculation and media attention, Barack Obama selected Shaun Donovan to be the next Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Why is this such good news? Because Donavan currently is the New York City Housing Commissioner and has used that position to advocate for and experiment with ways of building affordable housing. This New York Times profile gives a good sense of Donovan's history in the housing world, including his recent accomplishments:

Under Mr. Donovan, the Bloomberg administration has promoted “inclusionary zoning” that allows developers to build multifamily structures of more density — that is, more units for the space — in return for setting aside a portion of their projects for lower-income residents.

He helped to create a $200 million fund with contributions from the city, seven major foundations and financial institutions, to help nonprofit housing groups and small developers compete for private land sales. Working more closely with HUD than local officials have in the past, he has encouraged the department to help nonprofit groups or tenants take over HUD-assisted apartment buildings that are in foreclosure; typically, the federal government put such properties up for bids.

This doesn't even include his and Bloomberg's biggest plan, the $7.5 billion New Housing Marketplace Plan to build 165,000 units for low-to-moderate income by 2o13. He's well-respected in NYC housing and academic circles as innovator, which will be essential as we head to one of the worst housing crises ever. It'll be nice to have someone who has cut his teeth in New York City, the craziest real estate market in the country where affordability has been an issue for eternity. He will also bring a decidedly urban perspective on housing, understanding that white picket fences are not the end-all-be-all. Most of all, as Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings notes, it'll be nice to have someone who has worked at HUD leading that department, someone who believes in its mission and the power of the government to enact meaningful change.