Deutsche deja vu
To The Editor: I am not too surprised to hear that there is another violation at Deutsche Bank (news article, Nov. 2 – 8, “New fire safety violations at Deutsche”). As usual, the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation continues to cut corners while demolishing this building despite what dangers can be faced while doing it. The reason they will continue without taking safety precautions is because they feel that they have a schedule to keep, and delaying their demolitions can throw a wrench into the official plans through a chain reaction. You cannot put a price on safety, but I take it some just never learn from their mistakes
Tal Barzilai
Southbridge democracy
To The Editor: Geraldine Lipschutz writes in a letter to the editor (Nov. 2 – 8, “Southbridge vote”): “For the restless ones and the speculators who are willing to gamble and look for the greener pastures the world is an open arena and they can leave S.B.T. anytime.”
Lets analyze. With a vote of over 1000 for to 200 against — if we all took Lipschutz up on this she would be very lonely here as her friends and neighbors who made her “comfortable” at Southbridge Towers looked for these “greener pastures.” Maybe it’s Lipschutz who should move.
Contrary to Lipschutz thinking, S.B.T. is no longer middle class. For years, income caps have not kept up with ever-increasing incomes. More than half the residents here could not get in now due to their incomes.
Michael Wishner
To The Editor: I feel that a response should be made to Michael Wishner’s letter (Letters, “Southbridge vote,” Nov. 2 – 8). Michael, do you mean to say that minorities, not representing the will of all the people, should not have the right to be heard? Do you mean that if one lives in a Democrat area, he/she should either vote Democrat, not vote, or move to a different area? I believe that in a democratic republic, such as ours, all parties have the right to vote, object or to approve whatever is brought before them. In no way do I think that those who disagree with a decision should either “resign or be expelled” from office, not here and not in any government office. How dare you make such a statement.
Walter H. Morton Hospital plan
To The Editor: I write to express my concerns about the recently announced plans by St. Vincent’s Hospital and the Rudin family to demolish and redevelop eight sites in the Greenwich Village Historic District (news article, Oct. 26 – Nov. 1, “St. Vincent’s and Rudin unveil hospital, condo plans”).
I am very concerned about the size and height of the new proposed hospital building. At more than 300 feet in height and nearly a half million square feet, this would be by far the largest building built since the designation of the Greenwich Village Historic District and one of the tallest ever in all of Greenwich Village.
I am very concerned about the size and height of the proposed new apartment block on the east side of Seventh Ave. Both buildings will be substantially bigger and taller than St. Vincent’s Coleman building, a substantially out-of-context building already.
I am very concerned that the plan includes demolition of every one of the hospital’s current buildings, including those which are as much as 85 years old. Historic districts are supposed to protect all but the newest or most out-of-context or most architecturally undistinguished buildings from demolition, which is not the case for several of the hospital’s buildings. Those buildings could easily be preserved and reused.
While I am glad that St. Vincent’s has said they will work with the community to create a more appropriate and useable green space on the “triangle” site (bounded by Greenwich and Seventh Aves. and 12th St.), I believe it is imperative that the hospital commit to a definite plan for the renovation of this site with the community before it goes through the approval process for the remainder of the plan. Laurie Graff
To The Editor: Who is paying attention to the infrastructure necessary to accommodate an additional 500 luxury apartments on the Rudin site of the St Vincent’s development? The public schools in Downtown Manhattan are already maxed out. The Chelsea Day School has had to move Uptown to find adequate space. And there is an increasing number of applicants to independent schools for a fixed number of spots.
City Hall appears to support new construction in Manhattan, but they are not dealing with the attendant overcrowding in both public and private schools.
I fully support a state-of-the-art hospital as a necessary part of our community. But I am equally sure that we cannot shuttle our children through overcrowded classrooms and expect them to be successful and involved members of this community.
It is imperative that the size of these developments be limited, and that the issue of infrastructure be addressed now.
Naomi Usher
Clinton money
To The Editor: “Two Clubs Endorse Clinton for President” (news article, Nov. 2 – 8) reminds me of the old saying, “you can judge someone by the company they keep.” Of all the candidates, Senator Clinton is the No. 1 recipient in campaign contributions from the famous Washington K Street lobbyists. Many of her contributors are betting to ensure White House access should she win.
Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton recently attempted to honor the Woodstock generation by supporting a $1 million member item pork barrel earmark for construction of a museum at Bethel Woods. Was it coincidence that supporters of this project were also campaign contributors to both Schumer and Clinton?
Worse still was Sen. Clinton’s proposal that Uncle Sam send the parents of every new born baby a check for $5,000 to be saved for college. Ms. Clinton has finally come out of the closet to reveal her true liberal philosophy of supporting continued growth of big government including increasing taxes and spending for all sorts of new programs. What’s next, Uncle Sam becoming the tooth fairy and offering every child $100 each time they leave a tooth under the pillow?
Larry Penner Great Neck, N.Y.
