Thursday, April 13, 2006
CB5 approves the redesign of the northern end of Union Square Park
LOOKING AHEAD by Wally Dobelis
This is a partial update of recent Community Board activities.
First, Union Square, which has traditionally been a place for free speech and public assembly and is recognized in the State and National Registers of Historic Places because of this use, and any proposal for the redesign of the North end of the park and plaza must balance the many uses of the park’s constituents, including the Greenmarket. The recent CB5 resolution acknowledges that New York City Parks and Recreation Department has proposed to redesign the northern end of Union Square Park, with funding from public and private sources, including the Union Square Partnership, Councilmember Margarita Lopez, the City of New York and private donations.
After consultation, the Partnership contracted Michael Van Valkenberg Landscape Architects to develop potential design concepts. CB5, the NYCDPR and the Partnership sponsored numerous meetings with local residents, businesses, park users and interested community organizations to solicit input into the design. A final design was presented to Community Board Five at a public meeting on January 30, 2006. The elements:
The Playground consolidates two existing play spaces into one continuous, enlarged playground (enlarged from 5,100 square feet to 14,687 square feet) with distinct age-specific play areas that encourage creativity through landforms, play equipment and open spaces with child sized hills, and a planted perimeter. Sand, water and plants will be incorporated into the playground. Designed to be accessible to wheelchairs as well as baby strollers, it will have a unisex bathroom with changing table, accessible only from the playground for use by children and their guardians, located on the east side of the pavilion. Security will be ample.
The Northern Gateway Plaza, historic urban gathering space, will be repaved. Asphalt blocks are proposed to create an integration of the plaza perimeter with the park as a continuation of the southwest corner renovation. Along 17th street, 8 trees will be planted a minimum of 20 feet apart. A sidewalk will be built along 17th Street to provide protections for pedestrians by delineating park/sidewalk and the street. Additional shaded public seating as well as trees will be placed along the north façade of the pavilion. Public bathrooms accessible from the north side will be built along the east side of the pavilion for use by all park patrons as well as the greenmarket. Increased and historically sensitive lighting will be installed. Green Market does not object.
The Concession involves restoration of the pavilion with the main entrance on the north side. The concessionaire will be responsible for a full restoration of the pavilion. The proposed seasonal café will occupy less area than what is occupied currently by the existing concession. Access to the pavilion will be available to the public when the concession is closed.
Parks Storage A park maintenance yard will be added on to west of the new bathroom structure to increase storage for Parks Department staff. A new basement of the building will be excavated of approximately 1,000 square feet to create locker rooms, showers, and increased office space.
Since many in the community have expressed concern regarding a seasonal food concession with high prices and limited access, CB5 notes that the renovation of Union Square North and full restoration of the pavilion is not contingent on a concessionaire. CB5 will require the concessionaire to go through an RFP review process and it recommends that the RFP should be open to other entities such as cultural and community groups (to which the Parks Department has agreed).
Consequently, CB5 has resolved to support the overall design of the north end of Union Square Park and the plaza as described above except for the bathroom structure, the design of which has not been presented; and be it further and requests the Parks Department return to the Board with the specific design of the bathroom structure before the plan moves forward; also, it requests that the Parks Department increase the handicap accessibility of the playground as well as adding additional playground elements that are handicap accessible; and that the Parks Department include opportunities for other organizations, such as cultural institutions, community groups, etc. to submit proposals for the pavilion in addition to restaurateurs, and that the Board be given full opportunity to opine on the RFP prior to its release. [These items may be discussed at the April 11 CB5 meeting.] The above resolution passed with a vote of 29 in favor, 1 opposed, 1 abstention, 1 present not entitled to vote.
The next step will be a review by the Art Commission, with a public meeting scheduled for May 15, and the Citizens for Union Square, the coalition of residents opposing the redesign, have prepared a major portfolio of pictures, articles and letters documenting the historic significance of the open northern end of Union Square, New York’s traditional protest space. Keep your eye on this space.
A funny thing happened on the way to the printer. My March 30 article "Revisiting the murder of a neighborhood architect playboy " lost its subtitle, "The Stanford White - Harry. K. Thaw - Evelyn Nesbitt Story." In case you had trouble identifying the subjects of the murder mystery, those are their names.VRE: Looking Ahead, Wally Dobelis, "CB5 approves re-design of Union Square
Park's north end," April 13, 2006
Herewith a Letter to the Editor from Eadie Shanker, April 23, 2005. Mrs Shanker is the widow of Al Shanker, late head of the UFT.
The City and Parks Department with the help of local BIDs have targeted
local parkland for commercial use, namely the Brooklyn Waterfront Park for
condos, parks adjacent to Yankee Stadium for parking lots and Stuyvesant
Park and Union Square Park for unneeded and unwanted restaurants. It is
disappointing that, without critical comments, Mr. Dobelis simply reprints
items from CB5's Resolution which accepts the City and Parks Department plan
for the renovation of Union Square Park North.
Why didn't he let the public know that there were over eighty residents at
the February 9th meeting (it was not on January 30!)? The overwhelming
majority of those attending were opposed to the privatization plan for a
restaurant. CB5 approved the plan despite the community's fight, since 2004,
against a restaurant in the pavilion. CB5 paid no attention to 900 petitions
and letters presented at the meeting opposing any restaurant plan for the
pavilion from twenty elected officials, sixty block associations, eight
prestigious city and statewide organizations and four political clubs. CB5
members have forgotten that they were appointed to represent their
community-to be its voice. They did not do their job in Union Square Park.
Of significant public interest is that while the CB's resolution notes its
traditional concern has been about commercial concessions in the park, it
did not reject the proposal's commercializing intent for a restaurant.
Instead, it accepted a seeming compromise that the Parks Department not make
its Request for Proposal (RFP) contingent upon a concessionaire. It
"recommended" that the process be open to cultural and community groups. The
Parks Department agreed. But that is like putting the fox in the henhouse
since the three iterations of the plan, first and foremost have all clearly
been designed to privilege a restaurant. The latest plan, without regard to
aesthetics, would have balconies added to the south side of the pavilion
overlooking the playground, to accommodate the restaurant's need for
additional patron seating! Its plan designates restaurant specific details
regarding the entrance site, seating, internal exhaust placement and
garbage/storage units-none of which would be essential for cultural and
community groups.
Non-profit groups cannot afford to pay what businesses are willing to spend
for sole use of a prime Manhattan site during the seasons when the public
most needs it. Moreover, there is no indication that the Department has
reached out to non-profit organizations fro RFP submissions. If the City
really wants community groups to use the pavilion, it could make available
to them resources of its human services, education, cultural and other
divisions that are already funded through our tax dollars which would enable
small local groups to provide a myriad of programs and activities for
vibrant community involvement.
The pavilion was built during the Great Depression to be used by the
broadest cross-section of the public. Now after decades of neglect, it can
be brought back to its former Palladian beauty. Its need for repairs should
not be used as the excuse to take it away from the community for commercial
purposes. The pavilion should be returned to the community for a wide-range
of public activities. The loss of open and free access to the pavilion in
order to favor a for-profit business would be an irredeemable loss-a lost
opportunity to improve the quality of life in our neighborhood. CB5 and the
Parks Department merely give lip-service to the notion that our parks and
their facilities need to be protected from such commercial activity.
Newspaper columnist should not just provide bland reprints of official
documents such as CB5's Resolution. Mr. Dobelis ignores the real issue of
the potential loss to the community of yet another piece of precious
parkland.
Eadie Shanker
Campaign to Save Union Square Park
This is a partial update of recent Community Board activities.
First, Union Square, which has traditionally been a place for free speech and public assembly and is recognized in the State and National Registers of Historic Places because of this use, and any proposal for the redesign of the North end of the park and plaza must balance the many uses of the park’s constituents, including the Greenmarket. The recent CB5 resolution acknowledges that New York City Parks and Recreation Department has proposed to redesign the northern end of Union Square Park, with funding from public and private sources, including the Union Square Partnership, Councilmember Margarita Lopez, the City of New York and private donations.
After consultation, the Partnership contracted Michael Van Valkenberg Landscape Architects to develop potential design concepts. CB5, the NYCDPR and the Partnership sponsored numerous meetings with local residents, businesses, park users and interested community organizations to solicit input into the design. A final design was presented to Community Board Five at a public meeting on January 30, 2006. The elements:
The Playground consolidates two existing play spaces into one continuous, enlarged playground (enlarged from 5,100 square feet to 14,687 square feet) with distinct age-specific play areas that encourage creativity through landforms, play equipment and open spaces with child sized hills, and a planted perimeter. Sand, water and plants will be incorporated into the playground. Designed to be accessible to wheelchairs as well as baby strollers, it will have a unisex bathroom with changing table, accessible only from the playground for use by children and their guardians, located on the east side of the pavilion. Security will be ample.
The Northern Gateway Plaza, historic urban gathering space, will be repaved. Asphalt blocks are proposed to create an integration of the plaza perimeter with the park as a continuation of the southwest corner renovation. Along 17th street, 8 trees will be planted a minimum of 20 feet apart. A sidewalk will be built along 17th Street to provide protections for pedestrians by delineating park/sidewalk and the street. Additional shaded public seating as well as trees will be placed along the north façade of the pavilion. Public bathrooms accessible from the north side will be built along the east side of the pavilion for use by all park patrons as well as the greenmarket. Increased and historically sensitive lighting will be installed. Green Market does not object.
The Concession involves restoration of the pavilion with the main entrance on the north side. The concessionaire will be responsible for a full restoration of the pavilion. The proposed seasonal café will occupy less area than what is occupied currently by the existing concession. Access to the pavilion will be available to the public when the concession is closed.
Parks Storage A park maintenance yard will be added on to west of the new bathroom structure to increase storage for Parks Department staff. A new basement of the building will be excavated of approximately 1,000 square feet to create locker rooms, showers, and increased office space.
Since many in the community have expressed concern regarding a seasonal food concession with high prices and limited access, CB5 notes that the renovation of Union Square North and full restoration of the pavilion is not contingent on a concessionaire. CB5 will require the concessionaire to go through an RFP review process and it recommends that the RFP should be open to other entities such as cultural and community groups (to which the Parks Department has agreed).
Consequently, CB5 has resolved to support the overall design of the north end of Union Square Park and the plaza as described above except for the bathroom structure, the design of which has not been presented; and be it further and requests the Parks Department return to the Board with the specific design of the bathroom structure before the plan moves forward; also, it requests that the Parks Department increase the handicap accessibility of the playground as well as adding additional playground elements that are handicap accessible; and that the Parks Department include opportunities for other organizations, such as cultural institutions, community groups, etc. to submit proposals for the pavilion in addition to restaurateurs, and that the Board be given full opportunity to opine on the RFP prior to its release. [These items may be discussed at the April 11 CB5 meeting.] The above resolution passed with a vote of 29 in favor, 1 opposed, 1 abstention, 1 present not entitled to vote.
The next step will be a review by the Art Commission, with a public meeting scheduled for May 15, and the Citizens for Union Square, the coalition of residents opposing the redesign, have prepared a major portfolio of pictures, articles and letters documenting the historic significance of the open northern end of Union Square, New York’s traditional protest space. Keep your eye on this space.
A funny thing happened on the way to the printer. My March 30 article "Revisiting the murder of a neighborhood architect playboy " lost its subtitle, "The Stanford White - Harry. K. Thaw - Evelyn Nesbitt Story." In case you had trouble identifying the subjects of the murder mystery, those are their names.VRE: Looking Ahead, Wally Dobelis, "CB5 approves re-design of Union Square
Park's north end," April 13, 2006
Herewith a Letter to the Editor from Eadie Shanker, April 23, 2005. Mrs Shanker is the widow of Al Shanker, late head of the UFT.
The City and Parks Department with the help of local BIDs have targeted
local parkland for commercial use, namely the Brooklyn Waterfront Park for
condos, parks adjacent to Yankee Stadium for parking lots and Stuyvesant
Park and Union Square Park for unneeded and unwanted restaurants. It is
disappointing that, without critical comments, Mr. Dobelis simply reprints
items from CB5's Resolution which accepts the City and Parks Department plan
for the renovation of Union Square Park North.
Why didn't he let the public know that there were over eighty residents at
the February 9th meeting (it was not on January 30!)? The overwhelming
majority of those attending were opposed to the privatization plan for a
restaurant. CB5 approved the plan despite the community's fight, since 2004,
against a restaurant in the pavilion. CB5 paid no attention to 900 petitions
and letters presented at the meeting opposing any restaurant plan for the
pavilion from twenty elected officials, sixty block associations, eight
prestigious city and statewide organizations and four political clubs. CB5
members have forgotten that they were appointed to represent their
community-to be its voice. They did not do their job in Union Square Park.
Of significant public interest is that while the CB's resolution notes its
traditional concern has been about commercial concessions in the park, it
did not reject the proposal's commercializing intent for a restaurant.
Instead, it accepted a seeming compromise that the Parks Department not make
its Request for Proposal (RFP) contingent upon a concessionaire. It
"recommended" that the process be open to cultural and community groups. The
Parks Department agreed. But that is like putting the fox in the henhouse
since the three iterations of the plan, first and foremost have all clearly
been designed to privilege a restaurant. The latest plan, without regard to
aesthetics, would have balconies added to the south side of the pavilion
overlooking the playground, to accommodate the restaurant's need for
additional patron seating! Its plan designates restaurant specific details
regarding the entrance site, seating, internal exhaust placement and
garbage/storage units-none of which would be essential for cultural and
community groups.
Non-profit groups cannot afford to pay what businesses are willing to spend
for sole use of a prime Manhattan site during the seasons when the public
most needs it. Moreover, there is no indication that the Department has
reached out to non-profit organizations fro RFP submissions. If the City
really wants community groups to use the pavilion, it could make available
to them resources of its human services, education, cultural and other
divisions that are already funded through our tax dollars which would enable
small local groups to provide a myriad of programs and activities for
vibrant community involvement.
The pavilion was built during the Great Depression to be used by the
broadest cross-section of the public. Now after decades of neglect, it can
be brought back to its former Palladian beauty. Its need for repairs should
not be used as the excuse to take it away from the community for commercial
purposes. The pavilion should be returned to the community for a wide-range
of public activities. The loss of open and free access to the pavilion in
order to favor a for-profit business would be an irredeemable loss-a lost
opportunity to improve the quality of life in our neighborhood. CB5 and the
Parks Department merely give lip-service to the notion that our parks and
their facilities need to be protected from such commercial activity.
Newspaper columnist should not just provide bland reprints of official
documents such as CB5's Resolution. Mr. Dobelis ignores the real issue of
the potential loss to the community of yet another piece of precious
parkland.
Eadie Shanker
Campaign to Save Union Square Park
# posted by Wally Dobelis @ 5:38 PM 
