Doing nothing is better, right?

My point is that Manhattan is on the right track, it has a high population density and amount of apartment units per square foot.

There are many other areas that are prime for development, where it would be much easier, faster and cheaper to do it. Keep doing it in Manhattan, but do it elsewhere too. There are areas within 40 minutes of Midtown with the train that are basically ghost towns throughout, and instead people would push hard to put something up in Soho, which as-is is already overcrowded, dirty where the infrastructure cannot keep up with all of it.

Manhattan is already the most densely populated borough, and this is without even factoring tourists + people who commute to work: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/data-maps/nyc-population/census2010/m_pl_p2_nta.pdf

So it's not like it's not getting enough work.

What boggles my mind is why would you oppose more housing in the Bronx, since this will increase diversity? You frequently post in /r/DemocratsforDiversity . Are you for or against making the Bronx more diverse?

No messing with the Greenwich village & West Village. We're not turning those into Midtown and have the city look like Dubai.

If they're intentionally deteriorating historical buildings in order to circumvent regulations and build something brand new for housing, then it has to be stopped. It is a loophole that could put in danger any landmark, not just this one.