PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Testimony by George Janes, Principal of George M. Janes & Associates, on MSK Pavilion Project
1:29:26
·
116 sec
George Janes, a planner assisting neighbors in reviewing the MSK Pavilion proposal, argues that the project is exceptional and unreasonable due to its lack of setbacks and excessive height. He suggests exploring alternative, phased approaches to address potential future needs while maintaining flexibility.
- Compares the proposal to the 1915 Equitable Building, which led to the adoption of zoning laws in NYC
- Questions MSK's projections for cancer treatment needs and suggests a more adaptable approach
- Mentions that he will submit more detailed alternative drawings in the coming days
- Calls for the City Council to broker a compromise that protects the interests of all parties involved
George Janes
1:29:26
Thank you.
1:29:26
My name is George James.
1:29:28
I'm the planner who's been helping the neighbors in their review of the application.
1:29:32
As to the sub committee on zoning, I think you should realize how exceptional this proposal is.
1:29:38
A 108 years ago, we adopted zoning after we saw the equitable building rise 500 feet without any setback.
1:29:45
And since that time, New York City has welcomed all kinds of tall buildings.
1:29:51
As long as there was some kind of setback or open space as they got taller, it's the New York City building form.
1:29:58
The MSK proposal rises higher than the equitable building without any setback, and it's exceptional, and it's not New York.
1:30:06
MSK justifies the form, as you've heard, by saying that cancer recurrences are expected to rise 50% by 2050.
1:30:14
What if they're wrong?
1:30:16
Or what if affect of nonsurgical treatments are developed over the next 25 years.
1:30:22
Wouldn't a phased approach make more sense, one that can be easily adapted and modified as the future needs unfold?
1:30:31
We've been exploring a number of alternatives, including phase approaches that show substantial development on this site that connect to the existing hospital, but we should also permit a future application should to protect projected needs actually materialize.
1:30:47
And I've I've handouts that I provided that explore a few of these scenarios we've developed for the neighbors.
1:30:54
And I'm not sure, actually, we have consensus on any single scenario.
1:30:58
But there is an absolute consensus that the MSK proposal is not reasonable.
1:31:03
It is an exceptional ask and needs to be scaled back.
1:31:07
And I'm hoping that counsel can step up here and broker a compromise that protects the needs and interests of everyone.
1:31:17
I'll be submitting more detailed drawings over the next 3 days, but I'm happy to answer questions.
1:31:21
Thank you.
