Letters to the editor

Volume Number 1 Issue Number 8 / November 17 - 23, 2006

Hungering for Trader Joe’s

To The Editor:
I’ve been a resident of Chelsea since I first moved into the city. I went to the School of Visual Arts and as a child had an older cousin who attended F.I.T. (when it was actually just for fashion). Needless to say, I’ve always been a Chelsea girl. Having a paper that’s just for “us” is great, informative and about time! Thank you!

With that said, is there any way we can start a petition to open a Trader Joe’s in our neighborhood? Granted, Union Square isn’t far, but I do feel for those who travel from the Upper East Side to get some discount groceries and cheap, delicious wine. Wouldn’t it be great to have a T.J.’s of our own?

Every day I see a new high-rise apartment building shoot up on our former weekend flea market property and wonder what will open below it. Another Starbucks, bank or eyebrow-threading salon? Why not something people want and need? Have you ever gone to T.J.’s after work? Holy hell, the line goes out the door. And that’s just to get in!

I’m thinking of picketing out front to suggest opening another store in Chelsea. I could use Chelsea Now to get the ball rolling.

Lia Gatanis

Related works the zoning

To The Editor:
Re “Inclusionary housing project segregates, advocates say” (news article, Nov. 10):

The possibility of segregated housing is only one of several disturbing aspects of mega-developer Related Companies’ project at 450 W. 17th St. This well-connected developer got a massive upzoning of this site by the city at the last minute as part of the West Chelsea rezoning, with no community consultation and no affordable housing requirements or incentives attached whatsoever.

In general, it seems questionable whether much of the promised affordable housing from the West Chelsea rezoning will appear at all, given the way the city structured incentive packages for developers in this rezoning. And it appears that the small number of segregated affordable housing units at the Related development are going to be used to grant the “affordable housing bonus” to another site in West Chelsea, increasing the size of and number of luxury units in some future development without any affordable units necessarily having to be included on site at all.

Many promises were made when the West Chelsea rezoning was approved — that this massive upzoning and the flood of new luxury housing it produces would also create a significant amount of integrated, affordable housing. We clearly have a long way to go to ensure that those promises are kept.

Andrew Berman
Berman is a public member of the Community Board 4 Affordable Housing Task Force

The seminary shuffle

To The Editor:
Re “Dean: Right back at you” (letter, by Ward B. Ewing, Nov. 10):

Ever since the first public meeting a year ago when several hundred Chelseaites came out on a rainy night to Fulton Center to protest the building of a 17-story, luxury co-op in the Chelsea Historic District, the General Theological Seminary has gone to all lengths to limit the size of and to control every meeting with the public. All meetings were held at the seminary in the afternoon and were by invitation only. The first several meetings dealt with finances and then alternatives. At first, public attendance was limited to two or three individuals. The agenda was closely controlled and the meetings were run with a tight grip by Maureen Burnley, the seminary’s C.F.O. The elected representatives attempted to open up the process, but had very limited results. At the last meeting dealing with the tower and held at Seabury Hall, people were turned away because there was not enough room, even though this was in the summer and in the afternoon.

The seminary had first wanted to have a large public meeting in the summer at Seabury Hall to show its new model, but was persuaded to wait until the fall. The date chosen was Oct. 25 and the seminary stated that it would submit its changed application to the Landmarks Preservation Commission several days later. This is an important date, because it sets in motion the timing of Community Board 4 hearings, including at least one public meeting. All meetings are to be held within an approximately 30-day period. State Senator Tom Duane, speaking for the other elected representatives, members of Save Chelsea Historic District, and Save Chelsea, urged that the meeting be held at a large public facility, have a neutral chairperson and that he have the opportunity to speak on preserving the integrity of the historic district prior to the meeting.

Duane placed more than one unanswered call to Dean Ewing, who after more than two weeks, finally returned the call.

The meeting was finally held at Holy Apostles Church on Oct. 25. I did not know about the meeting at Holy Apostles until Oct. 19. S.C.H.D. sent out an e-mail on Oct. 23 announcing that the seminary was having a meeting open to the public. We did say that it was not a public meeting, and that there would be public meetings in the near future, which we would encourage them to attend. S.C.H.D. said that it would send out a report of the design but that people could attend the meeting if they wished.

I don’t believe that the seminary put up any fliers prior to the meeting, in spite of Dean Ewing’s claims to the contrary. Anyone who claims to have posted fliers on three different days that no one in Chelsea had ever seen never posted fliers. I am on the seminary e-mail list, and I did not get notice of the meeting at Holy Apostles. The seminary had claimed it would file with Landmarks a few days after its meeting, but now says that it will file at the end of November. Wouldn’t that put the public meeting run by C.B. 4 in the middle of the Christmas and Chanukah holidays when public attendance would be lowest?

Robert Trentlyon
Trentlyon is president, Save Chelsea Historic District