Thursday, February 15, 2007
Union Square design revisited - again
LOOKING AHEAD by Wally Dobelis
Herewith another chapter in the never-ending saga of the Union Square redesign, Phase III. Last time, on August 30, 2006, this column offered the conclusion that the Union Square Park can have either an extended playground area or an extended seasonal restaurant in the Pavilion, but not both. That was reached after absorbing the presentations brought out in the community meeting attended by over 100 activists on Tuesday August 22 at the Seafarers, called by the Union Square Community Coalition (USCC) and Citizens For Union Square.
Now cometh a sheaf of documents from USCC dated December 27, 2006, from Ernest L. Raab, Vice-Chair, to David M. Siesko, Chair of Parks Committee, Community Board 5, offering the criticism that the planning of US Phase III is done behind closed doors by the Parks Department and the BID/LDC and “their several corporate manifestations" such as Union Square Hospitality Group, the Corporate Campaign for the Completion of Union Square, the Union Square Partnership, Inc., etc. [USP is the renamed former 14th St/Union Square LDC/BID, whose new Executive Director is Jennifer Falk, former first deputy press secretary for Mayor Michael Bloomberg and spokesperson for Dan Doctoroff, Deputy Mayor of Economic Development and Rebuilding].
The letter indicates that the Phase III planners work behind closed doors and have not permitted significant participation by other community groups, and that CB5 has accepted their presentations without effecting any changes reflecting the significant requests of the concerned local community.
Included is a list of some such groups – particularly Community Boards 2, 3, 4 and 6. “Stretching from wall to wall,” CB2 and CB3 have actual responsibilities over Union Square Park and “must participate in the CB approval process.” A 20-entry log details the past events where CB5 recognized such joint responsibilities, and lists the February 8, 2006 submission to CB5 of some 40 letters from elected officials and neighboring community organizations , variously protesting against the privatization, commercialization and alienation of the landmarked park. This was not acknowledged in the Board’s resolution at the meeting on February 9 [not much reaction time there, people], although the Board requested that Parks Department include opportunities for other organizations such as cultural institutions, community groups, etc, to submit proposals for the pavilion, in addition to restaurateurs. USCC notes that Parks Department has not complied with such requests from community groups.
The conclusion suggests that CB5 has not appropriately represented the interests of the local park-starved community, or advocated its inclusion in the planning process, and asks for CB5’s help in restoring the Pavilion’s and the North Park’s use for children and as an open space.
In a same-day response, CB5 Chair David Diamond and Parks Committee Chair David Siesko claim some confusion regarding the Board’s position. First, they are very excited over the increased playground and want Parks to expedite its construction. As to the Pavillion, CB5 has not taken a position regarding its future use and is awaiting a draft RPF so that they can develop a position (to come in early spring 2007). They are looking forward to a spirited and open discussion then. As for accepting comments and suggestions, the general public, elected officials and others can speak before the appropriate committee as well as before the monthly Full Board meeting; suggesting an undermining of the public comment process is not factually accurate. The Board finds that CB5 and USCC positions are substantially aligned – both are looking forward to the construction of the new playground and a review of the use of the Pavilion, and that CB5 looks forward to continuing the long and fruitful relationship with the USCC.
This column’s file shows that the core basics of the current Parks /USP- sponsored $14M design are simple – the playground that will consist of the two current playgrounds at the park grade level, connected by a new lower-level “pit” playground area area now housing the Luna restaurant. That means caregivers moving between the three playgrounds with strollers will need ramps or stairways or both, a major complication and a first such experiment in the NYC park system of 1700 venues. The bathrooms will be built in a separate building in the NE corner; somewhat of an inconvenience and intrusion on a green area. The current dilapidated bathrooms, on the pit level in the Pavilion, are to be converted to the kitchens of the seasonal restaurant, while the dining area will be constructed at the park level.A less disturbing approach would be to fill in the pit, have the entire expanded playground on park grade level, and restore the Pavilion restrooms for year-round use, with access from the Greenmarket level and with a staircase connecting to the park level.. This is more or less the USCC Alternate Plan, as expressed by Barry Benepe, the nationally recognized designer of the Greenmarket system. As a restaurant compromise, one might construct a year-round food stand upstairs in the Pavilion, at popular prices, on the model of the Shake Shack in Madison Square Park.
To be continued, no doubt.
Herewith another chapter in the never-ending saga of the Union Square redesign, Phase III. Last time, on August 30, 2006, this column offered the conclusion that the Union Square Park can have either an extended playground area or an extended seasonal restaurant in the Pavilion, but not both. That was reached after absorbing the presentations brought out in the community meeting attended by over 100 activists on Tuesday August 22 at the Seafarers, called by the Union Square Community Coalition (USCC) and Citizens For Union Square.
Now cometh a sheaf of documents from USCC dated December 27, 2006, from Ernest L. Raab, Vice-Chair, to David M. Siesko, Chair of Parks Committee, Community Board 5, offering the criticism that the planning of US Phase III is done behind closed doors by the Parks Department and the BID/LDC and “their several corporate manifestations" such as Union Square Hospitality Group, the Corporate Campaign for the Completion of Union Square, the Union Square Partnership, Inc., etc. [USP is the renamed former 14th St/Union Square LDC/BID, whose new Executive Director is Jennifer Falk, former first deputy press secretary for Mayor Michael Bloomberg and spokesperson for Dan Doctoroff, Deputy Mayor of Economic Development and Rebuilding].
The letter indicates that the Phase III planners work behind closed doors and have not permitted significant participation by other community groups, and that CB5 has accepted their presentations without effecting any changes reflecting the significant requests of the concerned local community.
Included is a list of some such groups – particularly Community Boards 2, 3, 4 and 6. “Stretching from wall to wall,” CB2 and CB3 have actual responsibilities over Union Square Park and “must participate in the CB approval process.” A 20-entry log details the past events where CB5 recognized such joint responsibilities, and lists the February 8, 2006 submission to CB5 of some 40 letters from elected officials and neighboring community organizations , variously protesting against the privatization, commercialization and alienation of the landmarked park. This was not acknowledged in the Board’s resolution at the meeting on February 9 [not much reaction time there, people], although the Board requested that Parks Department include opportunities for other organizations such as cultural institutions, community groups, etc, to submit proposals for the pavilion, in addition to restaurateurs. USCC notes that Parks Department has not complied with such requests from community groups.
The conclusion suggests that CB5 has not appropriately represented the interests of the local park-starved community, or advocated its inclusion in the planning process, and asks for CB5’s help in restoring the Pavilion’s and the North Park’s use for children and as an open space.
In a same-day response, CB5 Chair David Diamond and Parks Committee Chair David Siesko claim some confusion regarding the Board’s position. First, they are very excited over the increased playground and want Parks to expedite its construction. As to the Pavillion, CB5 has not taken a position regarding its future use and is awaiting a draft RPF so that they can develop a position (to come in early spring 2007). They are looking forward to a spirited and open discussion then. As for accepting comments and suggestions, the general public, elected officials and others can speak before the appropriate committee as well as before the monthly Full Board meeting; suggesting an undermining of the public comment process is not factually accurate. The Board finds that CB5 and USCC positions are substantially aligned – both are looking forward to the construction of the new playground and a review of the use of the Pavilion, and that CB5 looks forward to continuing the long and fruitful relationship with the USCC.
This column’s file shows that the core basics of the current Parks /USP- sponsored $14M design are simple – the playground that will consist of the two current playgrounds at the park grade level, connected by a new lower-level “pit” playground area area now housing the Luna restaurant. That means caregivers moving between the three playgrounds with strollers will need ramps or stairways or both, a major complication and a first such experiment in the NYC park system of 1700 venues. The bathrooms will be built in a separate building in the NE corner; somewhat of an inconvenience and intrusion on a green area. The current dilapidated bathrooms, on the pit level in the Pavilion, are to be converted to the kitchens of the seasonal restaurant, while the dining area will be constructed at the park level.A less disturbing approach would be to fill in the pit, have the entire expanded playground on park grade level, and restore the Pavilion restrooms for year-round use, with access from the Greenmarket level and with a staircase connecting to the park level.. This is more or less the USCC Alternate Plan, as expressed by Barry Benepe, the nationally recognized designer of the Greenmarket system. As a restaurant compromise, one might construct a year-round food stand upstairs in the Pavilion, at popular prices, on the model of the Shake Shack in Madison Square Park.
To be continued, no doubt.
# posted by Wally Dobelis @ 6:41 AM 
