Congregation Shaare Zedek on West 93rd Street.
By Joy Bergmann
Community Board 7 addressed concerns about two development projects on property owned by Upper West Side synagogues on Tuesday night. One of those projects, a plan for a new community house and condos by Congregation Shearith Israel on 70th Street, has been in the works for years. But another one by Congregation Shaare Zedek on 93rd is still a hypothetical.
A community group called the West 90s Neighborhood Coalition expressed alarm about a possible purchase, demolition and reconstruction as a mixed-use “high rise” of Congregation Shaare Zedek at 212 West 93rd Street. During the meeting they discussed the potential of landmarking the building to protect the area from a new development.
To date, there has been no sale of the property. But synagogue president Michael Firestone said it was pursuing the option to ensure the congregation’s survival. “The sale of the building is the only way for us to be solvent.”
“If you landmark the building the synagogue will be dissolved,” he said. “That is our sole asset.”
As for Congregation Shearith Israel, Community Board 7 disapproved the synagogue’s application to the Board of Standards and Appeals [BSA] for an extension of time and amended plans to construct new common house facilities and luxury condos at 8 West 70th Street. The Tuesday evening full board vote was 31 to 2 with 8 abstentions and was a denial “without prejudice” leaving the door open for CSI to continue advocating for CB7’s blessing of a project that’s been under review for at least nine years.
The Board followed the recommendations of CB7’s Land Use Committee. “BSA sent the developer a list of 40 questions. We feel that we can’t approve it without answers to those questions,” said Committee Co-Chair Richard Asche. “We would’ve deferred our decision, but the congregation wanted an up or down vote.”
Zachary Bernstein, attorney for CSI, expressed his disappointment, but vowed to press on with the project, characterizing the 40 questions as “very standard BSA comments.” CSI will next seek a public hearing at BSA where the public – including vocal opponents like Landmarks West! – can review and comment on the synagogue’s responses.
These old synagogues might look pretty but they’re usually too large for their current congregations. They also cost a fortune in maintenance every year – money the congregation likely struggles to pay.
Congregation Habonim on West 66th had the same dilemma. They decided to tear down their building, have a high rise built in its place and eventually reopen the synagogue on the ground floor of this high rise.
The synagogue on 93rd street is an old building and not up to code (ADA non-compliance is a huge problem). I’ve gone to services there and it needs a lot of expensive work.
So if the building is landmarked and doubtlessly abandoned — then what? It will become a crumbling mess and a haven for rats and junkies. I don’t care how well it is supposedly secured, there are always places to break in. It will sit there and decay until it’s torn down after someone’s kid gets hit with a piece of falling masonry.
Maybe landmarking the place I s a romantic ideal, but in my estimation t will create a derelict eyesore and cause a congregation to dissolve,
why don’t they do like the church at 86th and Amst put scaffolding up and leave it there indefinitely
I love the Shaare Zedek building and I’m really hoping they can find a way to save it. It’s a classic, along with Ohav Zedek, B’nai Jeshurun, Anche Chesed, and some of the others in the ‘hood. We’ve considered joining the shul over the years but it’s felt a bit fractured there, with revolving rabbis, no cantor, etc. If they were able to get their act together and build a stronger congregation, I think their problems would be solved.
Can they save the gorgeous facade and thus protect the streets cape, while erecting a new multi-use building behind and above? That was done recently with a Broadway theater and it seems to have worked. The developer would incur the additional costs as a condition! Does anybody know anything about this sort of plan?
NYU did this with St. Ann’s RC church on East 12th Street, and have had mostly nothing but grief from the local community and others ever since.
https://www.scoutingny.com/nobody-steps-on-a-church-in-my-town-or-do-they/
You cannot make everyone happy in such instances. Keep the façade and build something modern behind/around it and people moan. Tear the thing down totally and other people moan. Leave or force current owners to leave the thing up as is (via landmark status) and the current owner moans.
As the population of USA becomes more and more secular many faiths are finding themselves saddled with houses of worship both large and small that really are surplus to requirements. The Catholic Church both in NYC and elsewhere is shutting places down and selling off property at a decent pace.
On Park Avenue even Protestant churches are scrambling to sell off unused or whatever property in order to raise funds.
https://ny.curbed.com/2015/1/14/10002742/extells-contested-tower-next-to-park-ave-church-is-a-go
Like it or not we are likely to see more and more of above such actions and or religious structures just torn down in future. Unless this country experiences a vast upsurge in religious observance with active congregants there just isn’t enough money to keep many of these places open and or even standing.
“As the population of USA becomes more and more secular many faiths are finding themselves saddled with houses of worship both large and small that really are surplus to requirements.”
this explanation makes sense.But why condos? I would think that as a neighborhood became more secular, they would transition towards less religious but still cultural values. How’d we jump from religion to money, money, money?
Condos are a quick way for a developer to make their money. Once units or majority are sold the building is turned over to the board and developer walks away with his money. Rentals involves a long term commitment that many RE developers aren’t interested in today. Much of this has to do with the pro-tenant laws/rules of NYC and NYS.
On a more practical note building any sort of housing in NYC is very expensive. Rental housing simply may not work far as the numbers play out after all costs. With the 421a scheme gone (and not likely to return anytime soon), building rental housing for all but luxury has become more expensive. The way around this of course is to go with “affordable 80/20” housing. But that means getting into bed with the City and RS laws, something some developers just don’t want.
I was thinking more along the lines of performance space.
If you knew me better, you would know that i wouldn’t be lobbying for condos to enable investors to get a faster return.
B.B you consistently make your strongest rationale for MOAR CONDOS. I hope you enjoy the future that you are wishing for.
Again, a performance space just won’t cover the costs of acquiring the building, restoration/repair and future maintenance. Nor will it really help the current owners with the last two.
The congregation is basically saying they are very hard up and the sensible solution would be to realize the monetary value in the one asset they have, the property.
Things aren’t good financially for many performing arts in NYC at the moment. So doubt there would be a number willing to pay anywhere near what the congregation would need in rents to cover expenses.
Amen to that! (Atheist here)
“B.B you consistently make your strongest rationale for MOAR CONDOS”
Am not arguing in favor of any such thing; however current situation on the ground means things are what they are when it comes to real estate.
Just look how well “saving” West-Park Presbyterian Church has gone. Local “friends” of UWS/preservationists got what they wanted, but the congregation is saddled with a crumbling and decaying structure they have no where near the funds to keep it up.
“however current situation on the ground means things are what they are when it comes to real estate.”
B.B. this is exactly where we disagree. I want something better for our neighborhood. There is way too much resignation, we need resolve.