Greetings neighbors!

Below is a note from some of our neighbors on the Upper East Side that I think is important to share. Anyone who lives in this city can see that the real estate industry is controlling too much in our city.

Our neighborhood has had to put up with “ Billionaires Row” - empty towers owned by people who don’t live here…ever.

Anyone who has walked through Central Park recently has seen the eyesore that is 50 West 65th Street (images below), built by Extell, a company that built 157 West 57th with vacant retail space after more than 10 years. I wonder how many units in this new tower are affordable to people who live here?

You have probably heard about the "City of Yes” mentioned below. It’s time to say “Yes” to the real New Yorkers who live, work, shop, dine and send their children to school here in the city. 

At 1386 pages, the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity is difficult to summarize and critique. But Friends of the Upper East Side’s board member George Calderaro does exactly that in 334 words delivered at the one City Planning Commission hearing on this major zoning proposal:

Some of the proposals in the thousands of pages of proposed City of Yes zoning text amendments positively update zoning related to old uses no longer relevant in New York City in 2024. However, many of the proposed changes would negatively impact communities in all five boroughs and flout the City’s zoning regulations in favor of business interests, notably including the powerful real estate industry which supports the City of Yes and other current efforts to deregulate the city.

City of Yes is part of a multi-pronged offensive to deregulate development in New York City, often using the disingenuous, empty promise of affordable housing. These coordinated efforts include: City of Yes, Open New York and its infiltration and overthrow of Manhattan Community Board 5 among others, and Abundant New York, a PAC created to support pro-development elected officials, as well as other overt and covert tactics to quote “streamline” development and regulation. What these pro-development/developer have in common is that they no longer prioritize affordable housing, but rather argue that we need more units period, including market rate and luxury units despite the fact that there are many empty market rate and luxury units, not to mention the thousands of units that landlords are sitting on because current rents are not high enough due to rent regulations to create affordable housing. I urge all elected officials, agencies and community boards to recognize this gambit for what it is: an obvious developer-driven plot to deregulate the city for private real-estate development. I must emphasize that preservation generally and the city’s historic districts specifically preserve thousands of businesses and affordable housing units.

Finally, I must ask that my and others' criticism of parts of City of Yes not be branded and dismissed simply as “NIMBY.” Our concerns for our communities and how they look and function are major concerns, and they should be yours too. NIMBY is an insult developed, promulgated and abused by the real estate and business community abetted by the media and politicians.



Despite so much public interest in the proposal that testimonies at a July hearing went on for 15 hours, the City Planning Commission has no further hearings planned.