Friday, February 3, 2012

NYU Releases Trove Of Historic Washington Square Park Photos


“Cars, Washington Square Park, Aerial View,” circa 1960-1969  (Photo: Bobst Library/NYU)

Manhattan

The NYU Archives in Bobst Library has just released the entire archive of its Washington Square Park and Washington Square Area Image Collection, which holds hundreds of fascinating photos of our neighborhood dating from 1850 to 1990, according to NYULOCAL.

We applaud NYU for digitizing the collection, as it is clear that computers are the way of the future. Use the photos to procrastinate at your leisure, or enjoy our annotated selection below.



This aerial view of the Greenwich Village looking south dates back to 1890, a decade of intense gentrification as some of America’s most notable literary figures like Henry James, Stephen Crane, Mark Twain, and Edith Wharton (the list goes on) started populating the area. Understandably uneventful at first glance, the photograph should strike the beholder that City Hall is the tallest standing architecture away in the distance. Refreshingly, the downtown Manhattan skyline appears relatively undisturbed, a stark contrast to the sight of FIDI nail-cushioning our skyline today.

In the middle of the frame is Thompson Street diagonally stretching into the distance, illuminating the formerly residential nature of the present NYU “superblocks.” Indeed the absence of towering landmarks like Bobst, Kimmel, Washington Square Village, and the backwater trash bars of Bleecker duly lends Greenwich Village a more village-like aura. In these treacherous times with the NYU 2031 expansion project currently under review by the Community Board and City Council, nostalgia can be an affordable fancy. 

This image serves as “a reminder of just how much could be lost,” said English Professor Patrick Deer who is co-teaching a new course on Modernism and the City, “how do you balance conserving the neighborhood with the pressures of modernization? As both an economic engine and a longtime resident in Greenwich Village, NYU has a responsibility to preserve what’s left of the historic low-rise part of the city we can see in this image. The proposed twenty year construction program of high rise towers on our doorstep seems to many in the faculty and community to threaten an already fragile ecosystem.”


This is the bird’s-eye view of Washington Square in 1919. The Park had gone through a century-long transformation. It ceased to be the potter’s field—the burial ground for the indigent casualties of the 19th-century yellow fever epidemic—as the 1820s saw society moving uptown with such function becoming increasingly unwanted. More than 20,000 bodies are said to be resting in peace under Washington Square. After a brief stint of serving as a Military Parade Ground, the Square came under the control of NYC Department of Parks in 1871, which paved the way for a more curvaceous design in an apparent attempt to grace the casual stroller with more thrill. Noticeably, the Park is penetrated by a roadway granting a leeway access to lazy drivers from Broadway to Fifth Avenue. Notice the horse-drawn carriage in the bottom left corner of the photograph: it’s probably serving a more practical function than today’s gaudy horsy carriages of Central Park that mystifyingly presses the urge for the pursuit of tasteless romance.

The Silver Center that replaced the very first home of NYU–the neo-Gothic University Building–in 1892 stands majestically, somewhat obscuring the inconsolable memories of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in 1911. The Brown Building went up in flames on a Saturday afternoon, and the workers of Triangle Shirtwaist Company were hemmed inside by flames, and locked doors. It caused the deaths of 146 workers—the oldest victim was 48 and the youngest were two fourteen-year-old girls, going down as one of the deadliest industrial disasters in the history of New York City. The incident called immediate attention to improving factory safety standards, and empowered the agenda of the International Ladies Garment Workers’ Union.


Another photograph from the 1950s shows a double-decker bus passing through the Washington Square Arch. During 1958, two plans were laid [PDF, subscription required] for a more established roadway through the park, extending 5th avenue to West Broadway. Robert Moses, then City Construction Coordinator, Slum Clearance Chairman, and Parks Commissioner, proposed four-lanes, forty-eight feet wide. A public hearing in May of that year drew passionate arguments against those plans and even against any automobile traffic in the park, including from the former first lady Eleanor Roosevelt. New York University also weighed in [PDF, subscription required] on the matter. “Dr. Caroll V. Newsom, president of N.Y.U., was hissed when he presented the university position favoring a road ‘somewhat wider’ than the present easterly roadway,” the New York Times then reported.


Beyond the conspicuous absences of numerous large buildings of questionable architectural merit such as Bobst Library, Kimmel Center, and the new Center for Academic and Spiritual Life, students during the 1950s experienced further deprivations. Horrible as it may seem, our impoverished ancestors encountered a park fountain that was not in line with the Washington Square Arch, likely irrepairably damaging their sense of spatial organization and perspective. This crisis was only alleviated in 2005, when as a part of a $16 million park redesign, the Landmarks Preservation Commission replaced the old fountain with our trusted, perfectly arch-aligned current fountain.

Read More:


Old Photos Of Washington Square: A Journey To The Analog Past
NYULOCAL - February 2, 2012  - By Harry Lee and Zach Halberg  


Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Four Shot In Bronx Playground - Including 12-Year-Old

Detectives gather on the sidewalk bordering Vidalia Park on Daly Ave where four youths were shot earlier in the day.  All suffered non-life threatening wounds.
Detectives gather on the sidewalk bordering Vidalia Park on Daly Ave where four youths were shot earlier in the day. All suffered non-life threatening wounds. On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at approximately 5:40pm, police responded to a report of shots fired inside of Vidalia Park in the vicinity of East 180 Street & Daly Avenue, located within the confines of the 48th Precinct according to the Police.

Upon arrival, responding officers discovered victim # 1 - male /black age 12 - with a gunshot wound to his back and victim # 2 - male black age 20 - with a gunshot wound to his leg, on the basketball courts of the location. Upon further investigation, victim # 3 - male Black age 18 - and victim # 4 male balck age 20 - were located inside of 922 Bronx Park South with gunshot wounds to their legs after they had ran from the basketball courts to the location. EMS also responded to both locations and transported victim # 2 to St. Barnabus Hospital and victim#1,3 and 4 to Jacobi Hospital, all in stable condition. There has been no arrest(s) made in regard to this incident and the investigation is ongoing.

Earlier this year an armed 15 -year-old boy - wanted for questioning in connection with shooting a man in Fordham - kept law enforcement and family at bay for hours in a drama that unfolded in a Parks Department bathroom in Vidalia Playground. And on March 22, 2010 two females were shot inside the park including a 15 year-old. (Photo: Samcostanza/NY DailyNews) - Geoffrey Croft

Bronx

Four Bronx youths, including a 12-year-old boy, were recovering Wednesday after a brazen playground shooting that erupted during a basketball game, according to the NY Daily News.

Bullets tore across the crowded courts in Vidalia Park at E. 180th St. and Daly Ave. in West Farms at about 5 p.m. Tuesday, scattering dozens of terrified bystanders and hitting the four victims, one of whom is believed to be the intended target, cops said.

A day after the mayhem, roundball players were out again at the park, where an NYPD mobile command center was stationed.

“Got nowhere else to play,” said Lincoln Dawson, 19, who has played hoops with two of the victims. “There are no gyms out here.”

Police officer at the entrance to Vidalia Park on Daly Ave where four youths were shot earlier in the day.  All suffered non-life threatening wounds.

SAMCOSTANZA/DAILYNEWS

Police officer at the entrance to Vidalia Park on Daly Ave where four youths were shot earlier in the day. All suffered non-life threatening wounds.

Police had made no arrests as of Wednesday afternoon and were hunting for a suspect wearing a green hooded sweatshirt.

Witnesses saw a man in a jeep watching the basketball game at the small park near the Bronx Zoo--which was crowded in the unseasonably warm weather-- before the suspect approached the court and opened fire.

The 12-year-old was hit in the back, cops said.

The gunman also wounded an 18-year-old and two 20-year-olds.

Cops believe he was gunning for one of the older victims.

"The shooter was aiming at somebody but sprayed," a source said.

Witnesses

said the gunman high-tailed it across the park and headed east toward Boston Road.

The victims’ injuries were not life-threatening, police said.

The shooting occurred just one block from where toddler Patience Boyd was hit by a stray bullet last August.

She and a 6-year-old were wounded in the crossfire of shooters settling a drug beef. City Councilman Joel Rivera held an anti-violence rally at E. 181st St. and Daly Ave. following the shooting.

Roselyn Herrera was at the park Wednesday with her 2-year-old son. She hadn’t heard about the previous day’s shooting.

DNAinfo

“I rarely bring my kids to this park because it’s dangerous,” she said. “The gunshot could have hit (my son). I’m not coming back.”

Tommy Galarza, 38, was outside the park when the bullets went flying.

"Two guys were carrying another kid who was shot in the leg," said Galarza. "Everyone was running and screaming. Everyone was getting out of there. It happened out of nowhere."

The 12-year-old was taken to Jacobi Medical Center and a 20-year-old hit in the leg was taken to St. Barnabas Hospital.

The older victim was slated to leave St. Barnabas for home Wednesday night, said a hospital spokesman.

The 18-year-old and the other 20-year-old were found with leg wounds after fleeing the park to a nearby building, cops said.

Neighbor Abelardo Figueroa manages a community garden near the park.

"I live two blocks away from the park and it scares me because my grandkids come here on the weekends," said Figueroa, 53.


Read More:

Bronx youths, including 12-year-old, hit in quadruple shooting
during basketball game at West Farms park
New York Daily News - February 2, 2012 - By Kerry Burke and Daniel Beekman

DNAinfo - January 31, 2012 - By

A Walk In The Park -February 14, 2011 - By Geoffrey Croft

A Walk In The Park - March 22, 2010 - By Geoffrey Croft






Saturday, January 28, 2012

Reliance On Self- Sustaining Hudson River Park "Model" Continues To Plague Project

Chelsea Piers, a tenant of the Hudson River Park Trust sued in November for at least $37.5 million to repair damage by marine borers to wood pilings supporting the piers. The park - which was created to be self-sustaining according to its by-laws - has run into a number of financial issues for both its daily operating expenses and capital needs. Douglas Durst, chairman of the Durst Organization and Co-Chair of Friends of Hudson River Park (FHRP) are spearheading a Park Improvement Area (PID) funding scheme where area residents and businesses would pay a special tax to fund Hudson River Park's upkeep. A similar proposal to benefit the Friends of the High Line was quickly quashed when area residents and businesses complained bitterly. A similar proposel for Broklyn Bridge Park also met the same fate. (Librado Romero/The New York Times)

Manhattan

It is supposed to be the model for New York City parks to come — built from dilapidated industrial structures, self-sustaining and financed by commercial ventures operating on parkland. And Hudson River Park, which stretches five miles along the Manhattan waterfront from Battery Place to 59th Street, has succeeded in drawing millions of visitors and billions of dollars in development to the West Side. But it now finds its future in doubt, according to the New York Times in a follow up from the NY Post's 2009 story.

Capital funds from the city and state have fallen to just $7 million from a high of $42 million in 2008, because of the recession. Meanwhile, two of the park’s planned revenue-producing commercial piers have yet to be developed, leaving the Hudson River Park Trust, which runs the park, short of the money it needs for routine maintenance.

Adding to its woes: A lawsuit filed in November by the owners of Chelsea Piers, the sports and entertainment complex, which leases three piers from 17th to 23rd Street from the trust. The suit seeks to force the trust, and by extension taxpayers, to spend “at least $37.5 million” repairing damage its piers have sustained over the past two decades from small marine borers known as gribbles and teredos.

This month, the trust fired back in court with a motion to dismiss, arguing that the lawsuit amounted to nothing more than a “for-profit commercial venture trying to secure a huge public bailout for longstanding problems of its own making and for which it bears the sole legal responsibility.”

The suit is a contest between the Bloomberg administration, state officials and the trust on one side and on the other, a well-connected group of investors led by Roland W. Betts, whose list of friends includes George E. Pataki, Michael R. Bloomberg and his Yale fraternity brother George W. Bush. The trust’s board chairwoman is Diana L. Taylor, Mayor Bloomberg’s live-in companion.

Hudson River Park grew out of the ill-fated proposal to build Westway, a superhighway, on 200 acres of landfill along the West Side.

State and city officials in 1998 estimated the park’s cost at $300 million — within a year, that had jumped to $370 million — and its completion date as 2003. The city and the state have already put in $340 million in capital funds, and the trust says another $200 million is needed to finish the public areas of the park. Fourteen years after it began, the park is 70 percent complete.

The cost of caring for structures built on or over water is enormous because they are constantly subjected to battering by tides, winds, fungi and marine borers, problems largely unknown at landlocked properties. Indeed, the biggest hurdle in the park’s development has been the piers themselves.

“It’s far more expensive to replace, repair and take care of these piers than anyone anticipated,” said Madelyn Wils, president and chief executive of the trust and a former executive vice president of the city’s Economic Development Corporation. Ms. Wils said demolishing and replacing Pier 54, at West 13th Street, where the wood pilings are severely deteriorated, would cost $33 million; constructing its planned amenities would cost an additional $30 million.

Pier 40, at Houston Street, is even more problematic. The 14-acre pier has thousands of steel pilings that are severely corroded; a recent estimate for their repair came in at $80 million to $90 million.

Pier 40 also happens to be one of the piers designated for commercial development, with revenues to cover park maintenance. The others include Chelsea Piers and Pier 57, at West 15th Street, where plans are moving ahead for an urban market fashioned from recycled shipping containers, as well as a rooftop park.

The annual budget for routine maintenance at the park is $15 million, a figure Ms. Wils says has not grown despite a doubling of the landscaped areas in recent years. Almost half of the $15 million comes from fees at the covered parking area on Pier 40 — revenue that is now threatened by a leaky roof.

“Part of the challenge is how to put together a plan for successful private investment and appropriate redevelopment when you’re basing that thinking on quicksand,” said Vin Cipolla, president of the Municipal Art Society, a nonprofit group dedicated to planning and preservation, and one of 29 members of a new Hudson River Park task force. “There has to be public investment, and the leadership will have to come from the governor. Otherwise we’ll just see more deterioration.”

The task force, formed by the trust in December, is charged with looking at the fiscal challenges confronting the park and considering possible amendments to the state law that established it.

That legislation was highly specific — some say restrictive — in terms of the sorts of commercial activity allowed in the park, with prohibitions on hotels, offices, housing and casinos, as well as limits on the length of leases.

“We want to make changes so we can move ahead and finish building this park,” Ms. Wils said. “This is not an impossible task, but we can no longer sit around and say, ‘What do we do with Pier 40?’ We need to take action.”

The trust also hopes to step up private fund-raising, taking a page from the successful campaign of the nearby High Line park. The Chelsea Piers lawsuit may make that task even more difficult.

The suit describes the dire state of Chelsea’s wood pilings, arguing that the company has already spent $16 million on “necessary emergency repair work.” It contends, as it has several times in the past, that the Hudson River Park Trust has a legal obligation to pay for the rehabilitation of the pilings.

Executives and officials of the piers and the trust were reluctant to discuss the issue because the lawsuit is pending. A spokesman for the trust would say only that it would vigorously defend itself.

The mayor’s office played down the dispute. “This is a good-faith disagreement between the two parties, which is what judges and courts are for,” Stu Loeser, a spokesman for Mr. Bloomberg, said.

Chelsea Piers, which currently pays $3.5 million a year in rent, opened in 1995, three years before the State Legislature created the Hudson River Park. In the late 1990s, Chelsea Piers asked for a rent rebate to pay for pier repairs.

After the trust rebuffed its demands, Mr. Betts went directly to Mr. Pataki, who was then the governor, and won a five-year rent rebate for pier repairs, beginning in 2004, that was worth $2.5 million. The trust insisted, however, that the rebate “should not be viewed as a waiver, modification or concession by the trust to any of the terms and conditions of your lease.” The lease states that Chelsea Piers is required “to make all repairs,” structural and nonstructural.

But the lease also contains an exception: The state will use its best efforts to include Chelsea Piers in any comprehensive, government-sponsored rehabilitation of the Hudson River piers.

Mr. Betts and Chelsea Piers Management contended in the suit that contrary to the lease, the complex had been wrongfully excluded from a multibillion-dollar effort by the city and the trust to rehabilitate the Hudson River waterfront.

To defend itself, the trust hired Randy M. Mastro, who was a deputy mayor in the Giuliani administration and over the past seven years has served as the go-to lawyer for companies suing the Bloomberg administration. He has a reputation as a fierce and combative litigator.

In his response to the lawsuit, Mr. Mastro argues that there is no “comprehensive plan” to repair all the piers on Manhattan’s Hudson River waterfront. Indeed, the trust’s motion states that only about one-third of all the piers on the river have been scheduled for construction work by the trust. The trust also says the cost of repairing the pilings at Chelsea Piers could reach $100 million.

“And now, unable to obtain any further subsidies from its public landlord,” the trust says in its brief, “Chelsea Piers belatedly sues as its ‘last gasp’ effort to avoid its contractual repair obligations, and in the process, threatens to bankrupt a public corporation charged with the development and stewardship of the most acclaimed public park in New York City since Central Park.”

Read More:

New York Times - January 27, 2012 - By Charles V. Bagli and Lisa W. Foderaro

December 15, 2009 - By Tom Topousis and Rich Calder

NYU's Mega-Expansion Plan Presses Forward With Park/Open Space Destruction

N.Y.U. is asking the city to lift development and open-space restrictions on its two superblocks south of Washington Square so that it can add 2.5 million square feet of space, with 1.5 million of that aboveground and 1 million underground.


"Villagers should feel absolutely no reticence in asserting their opposition to New York University’s monstrous, grandiose 2031 plan," writes former City Council Member Carol Greitzer in a very informative historical piece published in this week's Villager about NYU and the former Board of Estimate's past transgressions involving the original Washington Square Southeast Title I project.

Manhattan

In what opponents blasted as an “orchestrated” show of support for N.Y.U.’s 2031 large-scale development plan, union construction workers — along with university deans and even the women’s basketball team coach — testified on behalf of the ambitious development scheme at Community Board 2’s packed full board meeting last Thursday night, according to the Villager.

And, in a first, a lone local resident spoke in favor of the plan. But the crowd mockingly accused him of being paid off.

Meanwhile, local residents among the 300-person audience at P.S. 41 repeatedly told N.Y.U. and the construction workers to “Build it Downtown!” — meaning the university should develop its new space nearby in the Financial District where Community Board 1 has an open invitation for N.Y.U. to come grow.

Several N.Y.U. faculty members also spoke against the plan, saying it would disrupt both their classrooms and their families’ lives.

Brad Hoylman, C.B. 2 chairperson, said 1,000 people had turned out at the board’s previous five hearings on the N.Y.U. “Core Proposal” this month. He noted the board had “avoided a melee” after the first of these hearings, when the auditorium at the A.I.A. Center proved to be too small for the overcapacity crowd, and the meeting had to be quickly moved to Our Lady of Pompei Church’s basement.

Hoylman said, at this point, the board will send a formal letter to N.Y.U. regarding the plan, asking the university to respond to it in writing. Following that, there will be a second round of meetings on the 2031 plan by the C.B. 2 committees during February.

Then, on Mon., Feb. 20, the board’s N.Y.U. Working Group, co-chaired by David Gruber and Terri Cude, will take all the resolutions from the various committees and use them to draft a comprehensive “omnibus resolution” on the N.Y.U. plan.

On Thurs., Feb. 23, the full community board will vote on this resolution — which is sure to be a lengthy one — which will then be sent to the City Planning Commission as the board’s advisory recommendations as part of the ULURP (uniform land-use review procedure) for the proposed plan. It’s the same procedure that C.B. 2 followed in its ULURP review of Rudin Management’s residential redevelopment scheme for the former St. Vincent’s Hospital site — which was approved on Monday by the Planning Commission.

The board didn’t pass any resolutions on the N.Y.U. plan at last Thursday night’s meeting, since it’s only midway through its 60-day ULURP review for the university’s application.

N.Y.U. is asking the city to lift development and open-space restrictions on its two superblocks south of Washington Square so that it can add 2.5 million square feet of space, with 1.5 million of that aboveground and 1 million underground.

In total, four new buildings would be added on the superblocks, located between Houston and W. Third Sts., including a new dorm, a replacement gym and an N.Y.U hotel on the southern block, plus two academic “Boomerang Buildings” in the Washington Square Village courtyard on the northern block.

In addition, N.Y.U. will provide space for the city’s School Construction Authority to build a new public school at the southeast corner of Bleecker St. and LaGuardia Place. Initially, N.Y.U. had thought it would be constructing the “core and shell” for this public school, but now is only providing the land for free. In an e-mail, Alicia Hurley, the university’s vice president for government affairs and community engagement, explained that, at first, the university thought it might be putting the school in the planned, mixed-use “Zipper Building,” to be developed on the Coles Gym site on Mercer St., or possibly one of the new “Boomerang Buildings” in Washington Square Village, in either of which case it would have built the public school’s basic structure. But the situation changed, Hurley said, after N.Y.U. scrapped plans for adding a fourth slender tower (not well suited for a public school) within the landmarked Silver Towers complex and decided instead to build on the adjacent Morton Williams supermarket site, which is better configured for a public school; the revised proposal now calls for an S.C.A.-built public school in this planned building’s base, topped by an N.Y.U. dorm.

One of the building trades officials at last Thursday’s full board hearing noted that N.Y.U. is an “economic driver” for the city, generating $2.5 billion for the economy and providing 25,000 jobs. The 2031 plan, he added, would provide 2,400 construction jobs over the next 20 years. Hard hats in the audience, who were all wearing orange T-shirts, cheered and held up “Build It!” and “Build Now!” signs.

However, Steve Ashkinazy, a C.B. 2 member, said if N.Y.U. instead built in the Financial District it would still mean the same number of new construction jobs — only not in the Village. Local residents in the audience cheered their approval.

Dennis Lee, of Local 79 of the masons and carpenters union, said New York needs the educational power of N.Y.U. to keep pace with global competition.

“I think our thoughts really do have to go back to our kids,” said Lee, a hulking figure who looked like he could play for the football Giants. “This is a worldwide economy, and we’re getting left behind.”

Jennifer Falk, executive director of the Union Square Partnership business improvement district, similarly said that the area’s large institutions, N.Y.U., The New School and Beth Israel Hospital, “are all major economic drivers. The economic impact that N.Y.U. has had… . They shop in our shops, they use our services. I strongly urge everyone in the room to work to make this plan happen for the benefit of the entire city of New York.”

As she spoke, an opponent called out, “Downtown!” and someone else chided her, “Shame on you!”

Scott Dwyer, the lone Village resident — not counting N.Y.U.-affiliated employees — to testify in favor of the scheme, said, “The current superblocks are monolithic failures, and the city and N.Y.U. are to blame.” He said the superblocks’ main feature is “private, walled-off gardens.”

“How much did they pay you?” audience members called out derisively. No residents had spoken in favor of the plan at C.B. 2’s five previous N.Y.U. meetings in January.

Mary Brabeck, dean of N.Y.U.’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education and Human Development, said the new construction would allow Steinhardt to centralize its faculty, now scattered over four different spaces, in one location.

Mary Schmidt Campbell, dean of N.Y.U.’s Tisch School of the Arts, said, “Greenwich Village is one of the world’s great artistic centers. For the past 50 years, the Tisch School has been a part of that.” She added that there would be a new performing arts center at Houston and Mercer Sts.

“That’s the hotel!” one anti called out incredulously. Indeed, N.Y.U. has not mentioned an arts center being part of the planned “Zipper Building” up to this point.

Calling the 2031 plan “elegant,” Janice Quinn, the N.Y.U. women’s basketball team coach, stated, “I say this as a neighbor, and not as an employee… . I think it’s time for us [N.Y.U.] to improve.”

Also testifying in support of N.Y.U. were representatives of social-service organizations, including the Bowery Residents’ Committee and University Settlement House.

“N.Y.U. has been a really excellent partner in helping those in need,” said the University Settlement representative. She said the Lower East Side settlement house supports N.Y.U.’s “ability to grow and remain a resource.”

The pro-N.Y.U. speakers were weighted toward the first half of the meeting. Hoylman said one person had signed them all up — which is allowable. About midway through the meeting, some N.Y.U. officials, including Hurley and Senior Vice President Lynne Brown, and the construction workers left. The plan’s opponents angrily said they felt “disrespected” by the N.Y.U. officials for not staying to hear all the criticisms of the plan. However, John Beckman, the university’s spokesperson, did stay for most of the full 2½ hours of public testimony. He later noted that Hurley had already attended five meetings on N.Y.U. that month — plus, no resolution on N.Y.U. was being voted on that night.

Former Councilmember Carol Greitzer recalled how 50 years ago the community had fought N.Y.U.’s effort to obtain the two superblocks, which were part of a federal Title I urban renewal area. The original developer wanted to get out of the deal, and so the property should have gone to a bidding process — but the city wanted the university to get the blocks, Greitzer said. To appease the community, the university agreed to give one of the new Silver Towers — 504 LaGuardia Place — as a residential building for Villagers. In addition, the university promised to create an N.Y.U.-run, experimental public school on the present Coles Gym site, yet this was never built, Greitzer said.

“This is infill infamy, and we can’t let this happen again!” Greitzer declared as the crowd cheered.

Beth Gottlieb, president of the Mercer-Houston Dog Run, said, “The buildings and scale of this project do not belong in the Village. We do not want to be homogenized, overbuilt or Gap-ified.” Warning politicians who will vote on the plan as part of ULURP, Gottlieb said, “To Councilmember Chin, Borough President Stringer and all our elected officials who say you represent us — do it! If not, you’ll hear from us on Election Day.”

Matt Viggiano, Councilmember Chin’s land-use planning director, said he knows people are eager to know Chin’s position on N.Y.U. 2031. The superblocks are in her district, and her stance presumably would have a major influence on the Council’s vote on the ULURP.

“It’s a little early for us,” he said of Chin revealing her full position on the project. “Over the next few months, the councilmember will continue to meet with residents and the community board. We have serious concerns about the size and impact of the 2031 plan.”

Nina Hernandez, an N.Y.U. alumna who lives on Mercer St. across from the “Zipper Building” site, said, “I know we need the jobs. But we need our community, we need our light, we need our air. I don’t want to live in a canyon.”

Mary Johnson, a former C.B. 2 member who lives east of Washington Square Park, said recent N.Y.U. projects, like its co-generation plan upgrade, turned the neighborhood into a nonstop construction zone.

“N.Y.U. has been renovating buildings, putting things on top of roofs, digging holes, connecting the co-gen to every area — it ain’t fun,” she said. “Eighteen to 19 years of that would be hell.”

Also, she said, the residents of the so-called “loft blocks” east of the park don’t want N.Y.U.’s proposed rezoning to add commercial uses in this area.

“We have plenty of shops on Eighth St. and Broadway,” she said.

Fearing the construction’s fallout and its impact on air quality, Laurence Maslon, a professor at the Tisch School, said, “What happens in my classroom when I have to take my 6-year-old to the doctor because he has a lung infection? Faculty housing is a covenant between a university and its faculty,” said Maslon, who lives on the superblocks. He said if a project of this magnitude were proposed at a small liberal-arts college like Wesleyan or Oberlin, the faculty would revolt.

Gary Anderson, a Steinhardt professor, referred to Villagers’ past battles to beat back the neighborhood-destroying plans of Robert Moses.

“They know they’re on the wrong side of history,” he said of N.Y.U.

Read More:

N.Y.U. calls out the troops in support of its mega-plan

The Villager - January 26, 2012 - By Lincoln Anderson

The Villager - January 26, 2012 - By Carol Greitzer

A Walk In The Park - September 17, 2011

Friday, January 27, 2012

Friends of the High Line Sole Supporter At Chelsea Market Expansion Meeting

"The proposal's sole supporter to speak out at the meeting was from Friends of the High Line. The elevated park stands to reap huge financial benefits if Jamestown's expansion goes through."


The Jamestown Properties’ proposal for a massive expansion to the Chelsea Market got a resounding thumbs down from its neighbors Wednesday night — with only a single voice speaking in support, according to DNAinfo.


At the first of many public forums on Jamestown Properties’ proposal for a huge expansion to the historic building, dozens of community members wearing "Save Chelsea Market!" stickers took to the podium to voice their opposition to the plan.


The proposal's sole supporter to speak out at the meeting was from Friends of the High Line. The elevated park stands to reap huge financial benefits if Jamestown's expansion goes through.


Jamestown’s proposal for the market at 75 Ninth Ave. would add nine floors and 240,000 square feet of office space on top of the building’s 10th Avenue side, and a 90,000 square foot hotel on the Ninth Avenue side.


In order to do that, Jamestown needs to convince the City Council to approve a zoning change that would put Chelsea Market into the Special West Chelsea District, an area created largely to facilitate the construction of the High Line.


The tentative plan still needs to be certified by the city’s planning department — likely to happen on Feb. 27 — before undergoing a comprehensive and lengthy rezoning review process.


"Would the city really change its own zoning so that new office space can be built in a neighborhood that does not need it, and clearly does not want it?" asked Jim Jasper, head of the West 15th Street Block Association.


"What public good could possibly be created by Jamestown out of Chelsea Market? We’re choking on traffic along Ninth Avenue. The last thing we need is another hotel."


That sentiment was echoed by dozens of others, who said the expansion is out of character with the market and its surrounding buildings, that it would raise rents in the neighborhood and block light to the High Line.


Residents said zoning officials should not bend over backward to satisfy a single developer.


"We feel that this private investment scheme bonanza is not what our zoning regulations are intended for," said Lesley Doyel, who heads up Save Chelsea, a community group that’s led the charge against the market’s expansion.


If the development goes according to Jamestown’s plan, the developer would make a substantial one-time $17 million contribution to the city-run High Line Improvement Fund.


Jamestown would also add roughly 3,000 square feet of activity space and 1,000 square feet of storage space to the park — plus provide it with a freight elevator.


“We really see this as a unique opportunity to provide the High Line with infrastructure for the future,” said Peter Mullan, head of planning and design for Friends of the High Line. His comments were met with grumbles from many in the room.


Some members of Community Board 4’s Chelsea Preservation and Planning Committee, while not directly supporting the proposal, said they see an opportunity for the neighborhood to benefit from the market expansion.


This is the committee that will be first to weigh in on whether to support the rezoning application, and some members said they see it as a chance to improve upon the Special West Chelsea District.


Community members originally hoped the Special West Chelsea District, created in 2005, would include greater height and bulk limits, more affordable housing and additional open-space requirements. If Jamestown Properties does win the right to expand Chelsea Market, the community may have a chance to expand the boundaries of the Special West Chelsea District and sweeten the 2005 deal.


"I would like to use it as a spearhead to look at larger zone changes, larger configurations in Chelsea," said committee member Burt Lazarin. "And perhaps how we go about creating a Chelsea park fund and a Chelsea affordable housing fund."


Still, many residents said they disliked the idea of giving Jamestown special treatment.


"Why is just one block being singled out for this spot zoning?" asked Hilda Regier.


"If you truly want all those areas considered for rezoning, vote this down this time around — if you want the whole thing, then we have another fight."


Read More:


Neglected Conference House Pavilion Need $ 1.3 Mil In Repairs

Conference House Park Pavilion
A railing at the neglected pavilion at Conference House Park appears dislodged at the site that's been closed since the Summer months. According to a Parks Department inspection report, the pavilion would require $1.335 million in repairs, nearly the same amount of money that was spent to build it. The pavilion was built as part of a $14 million plan to unify the historic 225-acre Conference House Park.The city's Department of Parks and Recreation did not respond to requests for comment. (Staten Island Advance/Mark Stein)

Staten Island

Centuries ago, it was London Bridge that was falling down. Now, it's the Conference House Park Pavilion that's in danger of toppling over, according to the Staten Island Advance.

At the very least, it needs plenty of costly work to shore it up before it reopens to the public. According to an allegedly official city Parks Department inspection report received by the Advance, the structure at the end of the South Shore was inspected on Sept. 30, 2011, and needs extensive repairs to timber beams, planks, posts, and other parts.

The airy wooden structure stands in Conference House Park, Tottenville. According to the report, the pavilion would require $1.335 million in repairs, nearly the same amount of money that was spent to build it. The city's Department of Parks and Recreation did not respond to requests for comment.

The 3,000-square-foot pavilion, which cost $1.4 million when it opened in 2002, has been closed since last summer. It was inspected by "in-house engineers, architects, Five Boro & Borough M & O."

STUDY FINDINGS
The assessment claims all 2-inch by 12-inch timber beams showed considerable section loss wherever there is contact with accumulated water. In a few locations, total loss was noted. This condition is typical at all columns, stairs and the ramp area. The "heavy timber section" also revealed section loss, similar to the condition and location described above. "There was no total loss," the inspection reports.

"However, at every column location the top two to four of these members appear to be spongy, indicating deterioration of timber due to water accumulation." Timber planks, posts, beams and bracing at the stairs and ramps appear to be completely depleted, and will require reconstruction before re-opening the pavilion, says the report.

Additionally, all shim plates and bracing at the columns needs to be replaced, and all columns have deteriorated and also need to be replaced. The structure exhibits signs of lateral movement, the inspection reads. Additional lateral bracing and/or batter piles will be necessary to stabilize the structure against lateral movement.

SOME GOOD NEWS

On the bright side, the roof and piles appear to be in fairly good condition. The inspection's scope summary explains "This capital project involves the removal and replacement of all structural framing members, columns, deck planks, railings, railing posts, stairs and ramps."

The roof and piles will be retained, and additional piles (battered) or bracing will be installed to stabilize the structure against lateral movement. "I have expressed to Commissioner (Adena) Long the importance of the Pavilion at Conference House Park," said Assemblyman Lou Tobacco (R-South Shore.)

"I am confident that they are working to remedy the problems and I stand ready to assist Parks to expedite the process." An open-air structure, the Pavilion was part of a $14 million plan to unify the historic 225-acre Conference House Park.

The pavilion faces the Raritan Bay and affords a view of the surrounding waterways for visitors who used to come to take in the salty air and relax on the pavilion's long, green benches. It was the second such structure in that location.

Read More:

Conference House Pavilion needs a makeover, according to an
allegedly official engineering report
Staten Island Advance - January 25, 2012 - By Mark D. Stein

A Walk In The Park - October 13, 2011