Thursday, February 02, 2006
Parks Dept to air revised Union Square redesign plan at CB5
LOOKING AHEAD by Wally Dobelis
The contentious efforts for a renewal of Union Square, called the final phase of the 20-year effort on part of the Department of Parks and Recreation to revitalize the Union Square Park, have taken another turn, with the unveiling of a New Plan (dated 1/19/2006) for the North (Greenmarket) end of the park
The Plan is to increase the North end playground, from 5,100 sq. ft to 14,687 sq. ft., produce improved space for the Greenmarket and create a restored Pavillion. It will be officially unveiled at the meeting of the Parks Committee of the Community Board 5, a public meeting on Monday, January 30, at 6 P.M. at the Fashion Institute of Technology “A” Building, 227 W. 27th Street near 8th Avenue, too late for the deadline of this issue of T&V. The issues are covered here, the committee meeting will take evidence for presentation, with recommendations, to the full CB5, and the conclusions will appear in a subsequent issue of T&V.
Opponents of the Plan, which include six major local legislators, several local activist groups and their preservationist allies, are mainly opposing the use of the North end Pavilion for a restaurant. It is the feeling here that it would be important to subdivide the Plan and proceed with the playgrounds, letting the Pavillion issues play out through the review process.
To flesh out the Parks Department proposals, the two existing small playgrounds will become one large one, ranging from the one on the West of the Pavillion, across what is now the central, Luna area, to the East of the Pavillion, with varieties of equipment (there are names I have never seen) and its own bathrooms on the East side. A playground unlike any other in the city, a treasure for the neighborhood children is some of the Parks hype that takes me aback.
The general lack of restrooms has been a problem, and three new ones – one each for Greenmarket visitors, the restaurant patrons and the kids – are in the plan.
The Greenmarket plan has been redesigned in collaboration with the group's governing body. T the plaza will be repaved, and new water and electric hookups will assure the patrons of freshest produce. The map does not indicate whether the obstructive trees once intended along 17th Street side are still part of the plan.
The 80-year old Pavillion will be restored to have an unenclosed seasonal café, presumably upstairs, with reasonably priced takeout service, and a space for the Parks staff downstairs.
The predecessors of this Plan have run into severe criticisms, over the years, on part of local activist organizations and local legislators. The most recent major summary of objections on record, signed by State Senators Thomas K. Duane and Liz Krueger, Assemblymembers Steve Sanders (now retired), Richard N. Gottfried, Deborah J Glick and Scott Stringer (now Manhattan Borough President), addressed to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, was dated November 30, 2005. Some of the concerned associations include the Union Square Community Coalition, Citizens for Union Square, Save Union Square Coalition and Fifteen Street Block Association. These topics will be up for discussion at the CB5 meeting.
Most objected to was the use of the Pavillion for a seasonal café. As before, the Parks Department wants a private restaurant to help defray the costs of the park improvements. The opponents ask whether this treatment of parks as a burden, a resource that must pay for itself, is correct. Is a park not a creator of value for its neighborhood, whether it is well-being, health or recreation?
If, nevertheless, redesign for commercial use is desired, the new design needs to be approved by Community Board 5 (first step is the meeting on January 30) and the Art Commission of NYC, and the utilization should be subject to the Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP), and an approval by the State Legislature, since it involves park land use for non-park purposes.
The opponents also suspect that the $5M anonymous donation towards the plan creates an impression that apecial interests are involved, a suspicion that this column does not share, and would like to see cleared. Any donor for park purposes, particularly of this magnitude, is a rare person, to be honored and celebrated.
The opponents’ alternate use proposals include a public staging area, a children’s pavilion, a facility for programs and activities, or just more park space, and a small snack bar in conjunction with all of the above. As seen here, this argument could stand more depth.
Other concerns cover the Landmark status of the North end of the park, the historic site of the country’s first Labor Day rally, on September 5, 1882.
Finally, the opponents are concerned that the most desirable change, the construction of the playground space, is being held up pending the reviews of the restaurant matter, and should be prioritized.
Let us hope that this matter can be put to rest soon, with the least damage to our environment.
The contentious efforts for a renewal of Union Square, called the final phase of the 20-year effort on part of the Department of Parks and Recreation to revitalize the Union Square Park, have taken another turn, with the unveiling of a New Plan (dated 1/19/2006) for the North (Greenmarket) end of the park
The Plan is to increase the North end playground, from 5,100 sq. ft to 14,687 sq. ft., produce improved space for the Greenmarket and create a restored Pavillion. It will be officially unveiled at the meeting of the Parks Committee of the Community Board 5, a public meeting on Monday, January 30, at 6 P.M. at the Fashion Institute of Technology “A” Building, 227 W. 27th Street near 8th Avenue, too late for the deadline of this issue of T&V. The issues are covered here, the committee meeting will take evidence for presentation, with recommendations, to the full CB5, and the conclusions will appear in a subsequent issue of T&V.
Opponents of the Plan, which include six major local legislators, several local activist groups and their preservationist allies, are mainly opposing the use of the North end Pavilion for a restaurant. It is the feeling here that it would be important to subdivide the Plan and proceed with the playgrounds, letting the Pavillion issues play out through the review process.
To flesh out the Parks Department proposals, the two existing small playgrounds will become one large one, ranging from the one on the West of the Pavillion, across what is now the central, Luna area, to the East of the Pavillion, with varieties of equipment (there are names I have never seen) and its own bathrooms on the East side. A playground unlike any other in the city, a treasure for the neighborhood children is some of the Parks hype that takes me aback.
The general lack of restrooms has been a problem, and three new ones – one each for Greenmarket visitors, the restaurant patrons and the kids – are in the plan.
The Greenmarket plan has been redesigned in collaboration with the group's governing body. T the plaza will be repaved, and new water and electric hookups will assure the patrons of freshest produce. The map does not indicate whether the obstructive trees once intended along 17th Street side are still part of the plan.
The 80-year old Pavillion will be restored to have an unenclosed seasonal café, presumably upstairs, with reasonably priced takeout service, and a space for the Parks staff downstairs.
The predecessors of this Plan have run into severe criticisms, over the years, on part of local activist organizations and local legislators. The most recent major summary of objections on record, signed by State Senators Thomas K. Duane and Liz Krueger, Assemblymembers Steve Sanders (now retired), Richard N. Gottfried, Deborah J Glick and Scott Stringer (now Manhattan Borough President), addressed to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, was dated November 30, 2005. Some of the concerned associations include the Union Square Community Coalition, Citizens for Union Square, Save Union Square Coalition and Fifteen Street Block Association. These topics will be up for discussion at the CB5 meeting.
Most objected to was the use of the Pavillion for a seasonal café. As before, the Parks Department wants a private restaurant to help defray the costs of the park improvements. The opponents ask whether this treatment of parks as a burden, a resource that must pay for itself, is correct. Is a park not a creator of value for its neighborhood, whether it is well-being, health or recreation?
If, nevertheless, redesign for commercial use is desired, the new design needs to be approved by Community Board 5 (first step is the meeting on January 30) and the Art Commission of NYC, and the utilization should be subject to the Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP), and an approval by the State Legislature, since it involves park land use for non-park purposes.
The opponents also suspect that the $5M anonymous donation towards the plan creates an impression that apecial interests are involved, a suspicion that this column does not share, and would like to see cleared. Any donor for park purposes, particularly of this magnitude, is a rare person, to be honored and celebrated.
The opponents’ alternate use proposals include a public staging area, a children’s pavilion, a facility for programs and activities, or just more park space, and a small snack bar in conjunction with all of the above. As seen here, this argument could stand more depth.
Other concerns cover the Landmark status of the North end of the park, the historic site of the country’s first Labor Day rally, on September 5, 1882.
Finally, the opponents are concerned that the most desirable change, the construction of the playground space, is being held up pending the reviews of the restaurant matter, and should be prioritized.
Let us hope that this matter can be put to rest soon, with the least damage to our environment.
# posted by Wally Dobelis @ 6:21 PM 
