Hudson River Park

[BrooklynRider]

They simply need to bring in more concessions serving every economic stratus. It's iuncredible that along this whole park, there is nowhere to sit at water's edge and enjoy breakfast, lunch, dinner or cocktails. I think it is a major drawback for the park and one that significantly impactsthe bottom line. It can still be a wonderful park with this kind of amenity. Unfortunately, the folks in the neighborhoods adjoining the park feel that this is THEIR park and they'd like it to be locals only.

[Stroika]

Fully agree. Fully.

[Merry]

What could have been.


"Those who are responsible for its death," grieved Mayor Ed Koch, "carry a heavy burden."^ Don't think so, considering how well HRP has turned out.


The Westway

http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/12/02/alg_transportation_hennessy.jpg
The Before Picture: State Transportation Commissioner William Hennessy on proposed site of Westway Project;
there is no After since the project was canned 15 years later.

Large among the fabulous municipal projects that ultimately never saw the light of day was Westway, the most ambitious development in city history, a park-covered Hudson Riverfront superhighway from the Battery up to 42nd St that would have transformed the West Side and, as Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan grandly put it, done for New York in the 20th Century what Central Park had done in the 19th.

Hugely beloved by big business, big labor and big government from its first artist’s conception in 1971 - amid great fanfare, President Ronald Reagan presented the town with a start-up $85 million in 1981 - Westway was done in by a handful of environmental activists and a federal judge who bought their complaints that construction would annoy the Hudson fish.
In September 1985, after 14 years of planning and spending and litigating, Westway was officially pronounced dead.

"Those who are responsible for its death," grieved Mayor Ed Koch, "carry a heavy burden."


http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/12/02/2009-12-02_the_westway.html#ixzz0YWtAZoBg

[lofter1]

T'was a boondoggle and unnecessary.

Imagine had it come to pass how deep our debt would be. And how much work there'd be to do (not that they've finished up the alternative -- as of yet).

[Derek2k3]

You could say the same thing about many large projects. Great things take time and money. We're fortunate to be living in a city where the residents once had civic ambition. If the planning of our city was left up to its current residents, it'd be a place no more interesting than Staten Island.


Anyway, we're getting what we deserve, a fairly sterile strip next to a highway.

[lofter1]

Why would an additional 50' of green atop a multi-laned roadway -- with the requisite ventilation towers and entry & exit ramps -- be any less "sterile" than what we have now along the river (and which we got for a far lower cost and shorter construction timeframe)?

Had they been proposing a roadway below and a light rail through the greenway up top I might change my opinion. But that wasn't the plan.

[infoshare]

There are many well informed sources one can go to when re-considering the pros & cons of the failed Westway project: C.Whitaker has always (http://archrecord.construction.com/inTheCause/1002Whitaker/interview1.asp) been one of my favorites.

Excerpt:
Lerner: How do you get the public interested in things like real estate finance, construction, and engineering?

Whitaker: I think you have to do it partially as text, but partially as a picture show. You have to do it by letting the public know that this effort is going to go through a series of steps, and we’re going to bring the first problem to be solved within whatever period of time. Six weeks. And we will show you all the graphics with it, and then six weeks later, we’re going to bring you the next problem. And so on and so forth ....



And, commentary more relevant to the Westway project: here (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2895). Enjoy!

http://archrecord.construction.com/inTheCause/1002Whitaker/interview1.asp
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2895

[Merry]

Hudson River Park under pier pressure

By TOM TOPOUSIS and RICH CALDER

December 14, 2009

Hudson River Park, one of the city's newest green belts, is facing a serious shortage of greenbacks.

City Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe has warned that the five-mile strip — from Battery Park to 59th Street — is supposed to generate its own cash for operations.

"There will probably soon be a crisis at Hudson River Park," said Benepe. "They are so limited in what they can do that they will not have the money to maintain the park."

Connie Fishman, president of the Hudson River Park Trust, said one of the principal sources of cash is parking fees collected at Pier 40. They account for nearly half of the park's $15 million annual operating budget.

But the roof of the pier is crumbling, forcing officials to reduce the number of parking spots.

About 160 spaces were closed this year, costing the trust roughly $600,000 a year in operating funds. Fishman said further closings could be coming as the pier decays.

"Next year will be a tough year," she said of the expected openings of new sections that will increase the park's size by 25 percent. "We will have more park to operate and less money available."

State lawmakers had designed the park on the assumption that a major developer could be found for the massive Pier 40 at Houston Street, turning it into an even larger revenue generator and paying for the pier's costly overhaul.

However, the state law creating the park also placed tight restrictions on the types of development on the pier -- residential and big-box commercial stores are barred - and limits leases to no more than 30 years. Such limits have made it nearly impossible to develop the pier.

Geoffrey Croft, president of New York City Park Advocates, said Hudson River Park is falling victim to government refusal to pay for essential services (parks, among them), instead putting the cost on to risky development schemes.

"The problems at Hudson River Park are a perfect example of why these deals aren't in the best interest of the public," Croft said.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/hudson_river_park_under_pier_pressure_V9SLtw243B41 p7VQhwrvjN#ixzz0ZknNp13P

[brianac]

February 25, 2010

3 Questions for Connie Fishman, Hudson River Park

With so much construction active downtown, it’s sometimes easy to forget that river-to-river rebuilding also includes work over the rivers themselves. To the east, the city EDC is making steady progress on the East River Esplanade (http://www.lowermanhattan.info/construction/project_updates/east_river_waterfront_78637.aspx) project, and on the west side, Piers 25 and 26 (http://www.lowermanhattan.info/construction/project_updates/hudson_river_park_tribeca_23103.aspx) are being recreated as new park space.

The Hudson River Park Trust is the New York State and City partnership established in 1998 to restore and rebuild five miles of Manhattan’s western shoreline -- the borough’s largest open-space project since the completion of Central Park. Since 2006, the Trust has been developing new recreation areas to serve the Tribeca community and all of Lower Manhattan on those two piers, located just north of Battery Park City.

At the helm of the Trust is Connie Fishman, its president and CEO. Having served in the Department of City Planning and other local agencies, Ms. Fishman has been on the Trust’s executive team since 1999. Her charge is to complete Hudson River Park’s design and major construction by the end of this year, along with improving the estuarine habitat, providing free or low-cost public recreation, and ensuring the park’s future financial self-sufficiency -- goals that are now becoming reality.

We asked Ms. Fishman three questions about how the rebuilt Piers 25 and 26 will benefit both land and river dwellers, and where the construction stands now.

Where does the downtown Hudson River Park construction stand now?
Ms. Fishman: Tribeca construction of Pier 25 and the uplands from N. Moore to Chambers Street is expected to be complete in the fall of this year. The new piers and pilings are completely finished, and the three small buildings for utilities, mini-golf, and restrooms/maintenance are now under construction. The mini-golf course, sports field, skate park, and volleyball courts are being installed as well. Once completed they’ll be followed by pavement installation and landscaping. Trees should begin arriving for planting this spring.


How is HRPT working to preserve and protect Hudson River species during and after Pier construction?
Hudson River Park Trust only drives, pulls, or cuts piles in the Hudson River between May 1st and October 31st each year. The rest of the year there is no pile work allowed. This is to better protect the ‘over-wintering’ of juvenile striped bass.

Trees should be arriving to the park this spring

The finished park also includes what are referred to as “pile fields” which attract algae and barnacles to the old wooden piles and are enjoyed by fish and water fowl. All Hudson River Park piers were designed to be no larger that their historic footprints, and generally the platform coverage over the water has been reduced. This creates smaller shadows over the marine resources that inhabit the water and mud below the piers. The old wooden piles are also left below the new pier decks wherever possible to further enhance the marine habitat.

What do you think will be the greatest community benefit of the rebuilt Piers?
The return of Pier 25 and its family-friendly activities will be a great boon to the Tribeca community -- amenities will include a basketball court, skate park, playground, mini-golf, volleyball, jr. sports field, comfort station and landscaping. The programming of activities on the pier was actually developed by Community Board 1 in consultation with the pier’s designers. It will allow the park to be an intensively used community resource for active recreation for the park’s many neighbors.

http://www.lowermanhattan.info/news/3_questions_for_connie_17327.aspx

© 2009 Lower Manhattan Construction Command Center/LMDC

[Merry]

City seeks designs for Gansevoort transfer station

By Albert Amateau


http://www.thevillager.com/villager_358/gan.jpg

A rough schematic from the R.F.P. showing where
the elevated access road would run on Gansevoort Peninsula.

The Department of Sanitation’s hold on the Lower West Side’s Hudson River waterfront was flexed anew on Monday when the department issued a request for proposals, or R.F.P., to design a marine transfer station for recyclable trash on the Gansevoort Peninsula.

Prospective bidders on the design project are expected to tour the 8-acre peninsula between Gansevoort and Little W. 12 Sts. on March 31. Proposals will be due June 4. The department hopes to enter into a design contract on Sept. 6.

A Department of Sanitation spokesperson could not say when construction would begin, but the lags between a design contract, a contract for construction and the beginning of work on a project of this size could be a year or more.

The peninsula — where Sanitation has kept garbage trucks for two districts for many years, and which once had an incinerator and an earlier marine transfer station — was included in the founding 1998 state legislation for the 5-mile-long Hudson River Park.

In 2005, Friends of Hudson River Park, a civic group advocating for the park, filed a lawsuit to force Sanitation to get its current equipment off the peninsula. The action was settled with a court-approved agreement on a timetable for the department to remove its equipment from Gansevoort by 2013 or pay significant “rent” for violating the agreement.

The city’s plan for a three-district Sanitation garage on Spring St. between West and Washington Sts was driven by the need to comply with the provisions of the agreement to settle the Friends of Hudson River Park lawsuit.

The settlement, however, did not forbid the new marine transfer station, which the Bloomberg administration has long said was necessary as part of its Solid Waste Management Plan, or SWAMP, intended to reduce Sanitation truck traffic on city streets.

However, in August 2008 the state Legislature amended the Hudson River Park legislation to allow a new marine transfer station for recyclable paper, metal and glass on the peninsula after Mayor Bloomberg won the support of Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn for the project.

Nevertheless, local legislators, including Assembly-members Deborah Glick and Richard Gottfried, the latter a co-sponsor of the original park act, remained opposed to the project.

The city has insisted that the Gansevoort marine transfer station — from which the recyclable waste would be barged to points elsewhere — would be compatible with park use of the peninsula, and would include an educational component on the environment and recycling.

“It is the intent of DSNY that the design of the new Gansevoort MTS be as compatible as possible with the park plan,” says the R.F.P. issued Monday.

But opponents have ridiculed the notion that the transfer station would be appropriate for the park. In addition to a new, two-story barge facility at the facility’s west end, the transfer station would include a 25-foot-wide access road and ramp from the West Side Highway that would rise to a height of 20 feet and “generally run as an elevated roadway” along the peninsula’s northern edge. (The likely intent of the elevated roadway design is to separate the vehicles from park users.) The entire project would occupy 1.36 acres of the 8-acre peninsula, according to the design R.F.P.
The project calls for demolition of all other structures on the peninsula except for the Fire Department pier, which is being reconstructed north of the proposed barge facility.

The R.F.P. expects the steel-frame transfer station to have an upper-level “tipping floor,” accessible by trucks on the ramp, while the access road would accommodate 30 vehicles per hour. The lower level would accommodate a barge slip where two Sanitation open-hopper barges could be positioned to receive recyclables from collection trucks on the tipping floor above.

The facility would also include an enclosed area with a separate entrance that could serve as a lecture hall and a spot from which the public could observe the transfer operations.

However, on Tuesday, Friends of Hudson River Park issued a statement denouncing the city’s “soliciting design services proposals for a new marine transfer station on Gansevoort Peninsula…despite having only conditional authority to move forward on the project. Furthermore,” the Friends statement said, “state legislative requirements for supplemental environmental review of a proposed facility and alternative locations are not adequately addressed in the request for proposals. Consideration of such proposals would dramatically affect the scope of work for such a project.

It seems unwise for the city to commit resources at this time of fiscal hardship when so many variables are still unknown.”

http://www.thevillager.com/villager_358/cityseeks.html

[BrooklynRider]

But opponents have ridiculed the notion that the transfer station would be appropriate for the park. In addition to a new, two-story barge facility at the facility’s west end, the transfer station would include a 25-foot-wide access road and ramp from the West Side Highway that would rise to a height of 20 feet and “generally run as an elevated roadway” along the peninsula’s northern edge. (The likely intent of the elevated roadway design is to separate the vehicles from park users.) The entire project would occupy 1.36 acres of the 8-acre peninsula, according to the design R.F.P.

Of course, all of these people in their million dollar condos now think transfer stations belong in poorer, less affluent neighborhoods - not their percious little nook of the city.

The city & state just poured millions into their neighborhood to build a park. Now they want more, more, more. Talk about your elitist sense of entitlement.

[lofter1]

While it would be great for Gansevoort Peninsula to fully become open green space it's just not realistic to completely remove all needed infrastructure from the waterfront. There is absolutely no reason that a great design for that structure can't be put together in a way that works with surrounding open space on the remainder of the peninsula and incorporates the park area / transfer station into both the HRP and the neighborhoods on the other side of the west side highway.

[ZippyTheChimp]

What ever happened to the idea of a transfer station at Pier 76?

The proposed station at Gansevoort would handle recyclables that are shipped to a Sunset Park facility. The station at Pier 99 handles commercial waste.

[lofter1]

I bet if somebody dug through correspondence between Related <> NYC officials regarding the development of the Hudson Yards it would be found that the plans for a Pier 76 facility have gone the way of the previously planned Sanitation facility that was set for West 30th / Twelfth Avenue: into the shredder. The money guys don't want that dirty stuff anywhere near the big shiny stuff going in (one day, sometime in the unspecified future) at the Yards.

[ZippyTheChimp]

I forgot to add: The proposal for Pier 76 included an expanded facility to also handle commercial waste.

The HRP plan always set aside some of Pier 76 for municipal use. The NYPD horse stable is now there.

[Merry]

"Quiet Victory" Secured for Hudson River Park

March 25, 2010

by A.J. Pietrantone, Executive Director, Friends of Hudson River Park

In this era of both political and budget gridlock, it's important to recognize a truly "quiet victory" that has been won for all New Yorkers and for Hudson River Park, the City's largest new Park in 150 years, which stretches all the way from 59th Street to the Battery, along the Hudson River. Long troubled by loud and disruptive helicopter tourism from the 30th Street Heliport, on April first the Park will finally be free of these tourist flights.

Ever since Hudson River Park's creation, Park users have been continually assaulted by noise, fumes, wind, and dust from the Heliport. In fact, when the Park was formalized by the Hudson River Park Act of 1998, helicopter tourism was prohibited, but this ban was ignored by Air Pegasus Heliport, Inc., Liberty Helicopters, Inc., and their landlord, the Hudson River Park Trust.

In 2007, Friends of Hudson River Park filed legal action to stop the sightseeing flights operating out of the Park, to bring the Heliport into compliance with the Hudson River Park Act. After seven months of negotiations a 2008 agreement was reached to end the tourist flights on March 31st 2010. After April first, the Heliport can only be used for commercial, government, or emergency take‐offs and landings.

In addition, Friends' legal action also secured a cap on non-tourist flights at then-existing levels, and a commitment from the operators of the Heliport to cease all helicopter operations by December 31st, 2012 at 30th Street, provided a new location for helicopter operations has been established within the guidelines of the legislation.

The Hudson River Park Act defined the parameters for the development of a unique, urban oasis, along the formerly blighted West Side Waterfront after decades of community activism laid the groundwork for its creation.
Eliminating sightseeing flights from the Park will improve the experience of everyone that uses and enjoys the Park, as well as the quality of life of its surrounding neighborhoods.

Today the Park hosts 17 million visitors a year and has been shown by a 2008 study to add significant value to surrounding properties. The better the Park is built and maintained, the better it is for the City as a whole and for its adjacent communities in particular.

Ending loud, dirty, and dangerous sightseeing flights is a first step in delivering on the commitment of uninterrupted open space along the waterfront for midtown Manhattan. We need to pressure our elected officials to take the next steps of relocating the Heliport and fully financing the transformation of the blight in this area like they have in Chelsea, Tribeca, Upper Clinton, and Greenwich Village.

The Park, now nearly 80% complete requires approximately $200 million in additional funding to finish the job. During tough financial times, it is important to keep the project moving not only to save jobs, and to avoid putting the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars already invested in the Park at risk, but to deliver on the promise of a continuous, five-mile long waterfront park New Yorkers need now more than ever.

The end of helicopter tourism originating from Hudson River Park brings us closer to a new, and tranquil reality for Manhattan's West Side Waterfront, and reminds us just how precious its uninterrupted access and a quiet victory can be.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aj-pietrantone/quiet-victory-secured-for_b_513495.html

[Stroika]

^^ Good find, Merry. Mein Gott is that NIMBYish of them! I love watching the helicopters when I'm on the HRP -- they're a big plus. They can get loud after a while, but you go a few blocks north or south and you find all the peace and quiet you want. Unfortunately, this sort of whitewashing of the park was only to be expected, but it's sad that for every interesting happening, there's a NIMBY out to choke it.

[scumonkey]

Thank GODDESS!
If you lived anywhere near here you would be extremely happy
It's not as if you won't still get to watch the copters take off and land there anymore-
They still will do just that- albeit a little further out in
the river- on new barges made for just that purpose
(unless plans have changed since the last community board meeting).
This will free up the land itself to be opened up and integrated with the rest of the park.
No more giant blocked off chain link fence, and those awful trailers on the site.
You might actually get a BETTER view of those take offs, since
they won't be behind the wind barriers anymore! ;)

[Stroika]

the copters ... will do just that- albeit a little further out in the river- on new barges made for just that purpose ... You might actually get a BETTER view of those take offs, since they won't be behind the wind barriers anymore!

Ah, that changes things. That sounds pretty cool ... but expensive, no?

[lofter1]

At up to $995 per trip (http://www.libertyhelicopter.com/tours/tourinfo_details.php?id=8) no doubt the helicopter companies can afford it.

[ZippyTheChimp]

See post 166 (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=217746&postcount=166) for one proposal.

[MidtownGuy]

We need to pressure our elected officials to take the next steps of relocating the Heliport and fully financing the transformation of the blight in this area like they have in Chelsea, Tribeca, Upper Clinton, and Greenwich Village.Blight is the right word. Midtown along the river sucks. In fact, as a midtown resident, it is so anti-park that it's enough to keep me from utilizing the park much at all...because I have to go past so much ugliness and blight to reach the good part. Is there any hope for the midtown portion to ever be beautiful the way they've made it down in the Village for those people down there?
All the hideous infrastructure that according to Lofter has absolutely nowhere else to go is a big problem. As long as it remains there, this "park" will never feel right or complete.
I think it's really important not to neglect or shortchange the area where 34th Street and 42nd Street meet the water. To me this area is every bit as important as the manicured Valhalla they've created further downtown. The area around the Intrepid, a popular museum for visitors, is still a sea of asphalt with some half hearted planters plopped here and there. The area at 34th street is horrible near the convention center.
My friend and I skated through last week when the weather was good and the area is depressing and nothing of what you would expect where two of the main, centrally located streets (in one of the world's most prominent cities) meet the water. Arrival at the water happens in a neglected, depressing fashion. We kept thinking, in contrast, of the area in Barcelona where a main, central street (las ramblas) meets the water in grand style, wondering why importance here in NYC was not placed on getting this central area up to par earlier. The waterfront in Barcelona also used to be crappy and now look at it. It's the jewel of the city.
I can only imagine being able to walk down 42nd street all the way to the end and finding a beautiful reward when you get there...instead of things petering out into a forgotten urban wasteland of traffic and junky infrastructure.

[BrooklynRider]

It doesn't say where the tourist and private flights will be moved. That is a very troubling aspect of the article. Not quite a "full" report. If someone is winning, you can bet someone (less affluent) is losing.

[londonlawyer]

I agree that Barcelona is a gem. However, the European mindset values aesthetics far more so than the New York mindset does, and therefore, it's easier to create green spaces, etc. If the Times Square pedestrian zones had ever been put to a vote before being created, they never would have passed.

Consider how nice it would be to eliminate auto traffic on 14th, 34th, 42nd and 59th and make only one lane each way for electric buses and use the other lanes to expand the sidewalk dramatically and line them with trees. It would liberate pedestrians and be a great benefit. However, New Yorkers -- who complain about everything -- would oppose this great plan.

I would welcome a bit of Michigan Avenue on NY's streets.

http://thegoodcity.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/michiganavenue03pop.jpg

http://www.viewpoints.com/images/review/2007/290/18/1192665343-97754_full.jpg

[ZippyTheChimp]

Try to eliminate all car traffic from the main streets of downtown Chicago, and let us know if no one howls.

New York has over twice the percentage parkland as Chicago. Almost 4X the acreage.

[Ninjahedge]

In all fairness Zip, we need it.

Twice the parkland is impressive until you see every athletic field used, every green meadow on a 70+ degree day carpeted with bodies, etc etc.

NY is one of the areas that not only HAS these parks but, more importantly, USES them. Many a suburban park or town square I have seen with many an open bench waiting for some pidgeon to poop on it. (or, more likely in the 'burbs, sparrow).

Simply measuring % is no way to be able to satisfy need.






And Barcelona was GORGEOUS. I love the hidden things like the old cobblestone streets with the retractable bollards! So many ways to make it feel, I don't know, comfy but still maintain an active commercial presence.

[ZippyTheChimp]

In all fairness Zip, we need it.In all fairness NH, address my post.

Nothing about needing more parkland.

Nothing about Barcelona.

[Ninjahedge]

New York has over twice the percentage parkland as Chicago. Almost 4X the acreage.


In all fairness Zip, we need it.

I thought that was pretty direct... :confused:


Oh, also, you aren't the only person on the thread...:


I agree that Barcelona is a gem.

The double space between my comment on Barcelona and my comment about the need for space should have been a clue about me changing tack. I will add another CR... ;)

[londonlawyer]

Try to eliminate all car traffic from the main streets of downtown Chicago, and let us know if no one howls.

New York has over twice the percentage parkland as Chicago. Almost 4X the acreage.

I didn't address pedestrianizing streets in Chicago. I stated how enlightened Europeans are more inclined to do so than New Yorkers who fight everything that's proposed. With respect to Chicago, I simply said that if sidewalks were ever widened in NY, they should be landscaped like Chicago's. I am not a huge fan of Chicago, but they are one of the world leaders in beautifully landscaped sidewalks.

[BPC]

"Quiet Victory" Secured for Hudson River Park

March 25, 2010

by A.J. Pietrantone, Executive Director, Friends of Hudson River Park

...

In 2007, Friends of Hudson River Park filed legal action to stop the sightseeing flights operating out of the Park, to bring the Heliport into compliance with the Hudson River Park Act. After seven months of negotiations a 2008 agreement was reached to end the tourist flights on March 31st 2010. After April first, the Heliport can only be used for commercial, government, or emergency take‐offs and landings.
...

The end of helicopter tourism originating from Hudson River Park brings us closer to a new, and tranquil reality for Manhattan's West Side Waterfront, and reminds us just how precious its uninterrupted access and a quiet victory can be.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aj-pietrantone/quiet-victory-secured-for_b_513495.html


I was one of the named plaintiffs in this lawsuit, and consider it one of the few socially useful things I have done in my life. That said, there is more than a little bit of spin going on by the good folks at Friends of Hudson River Park. The outfit that ran the West Side helicopter tours, and last year murdered that group of Italian tourists with its incompetence, has formed a new company and moved the tourist flights to the Wall Street Heliport. Thus, expect to see just as many tourist flights up and down the Hudson this Summer as last. The underlying problem is that Mayor Mike is a helicopter enthusiast, and thus protects these criminals no matter how many people they kill.

[Stroika]

Are the helicopters not moving to a barge in the Hudson?

It would be a shame and huge loss for the helicopter flights to vanish from that part of the Hudson -- Manhattan isn't supposed to be a quiet, pastoral place (nor is it supposed to be something a few steps removed from that, like Geneva), and watching the helicopters are clearly a huge attraction and major source of entertainment/excitement for many of the residents and tourists who find themselves in that part of HRP.

[BPC]

You are the first person I have ever heard express enjoyment at merely WATCHING the helicopters. To each their own, I guess. All I would say is that, no, Manhattan is not supposed to be pastoral, but neither is it supposed to be like living on Andrews Air Force Base. Like any other city, this one should have a mix of bustling spots and quiet ones. Hudson River Park would seem to merit the latter treatment.

[ZippyTheChimp]

I'm gonna miss the boost from that great shot of unburned hydrocarbons as I wheeze by on the running track.

[Stroika]

You are the first person I have ever heard express enjoyment at merely WATCHING the helicopters. To each their own, I guess. All I would say is that, no, Manhattan is not supposed to be pastoral, but neither is it supposed to be like living on Andrews Air Force Base. Like any other city, this one should have a mix of bustling spots and quiet ones. Hudson River Park would seem to merit the latter treatment.

Awesome. By the way, that doesn't answer the question I asked so much as it allows you to get up on your soapbox and spread the NIMBY gospel.

I'll assume you don't have an answer, but if anyone else does, I'd be curious to hear it. The helicopters are a huge tourist draw, and, yes, there are New Yorkers who find them worthwhile as well, even if they don't run in BPC's pack.

[ZippyTheChimp]

If the question is whether the helicopter flights are a big draw, I'd say yes. It's cool to see Manhattan from the air.

If the question is whether helicopter watching is a big draw, I'd say no. Suppose it was strictly a closed facility for corporate and municipal use. Do you think "going to watch the helicopters take off" would be a major item on a tourists' to-do list? As someone who goes by often, it got old really fast.

Your contention that "Manhattan isn't supposed to be quiet" is bizarre. The noise of the city is a by-product of what it is, and should be accepted; but this is the first time I've heard it suggested that we should engineer-in some noise in places that are quiet.

The heliport is where it is because it has to be on the shoreline; it's not a park attraction.

If a completely noiseless helicopter were designed, would many object and say, "We want the engine and rotor noise?"

[Ninjahedge]

Lets make it simple.

There are things that just do not fit in with the rest. You havea WORLD CLASS park region on one of the busiest rivers in the world, and you are saying that not only should it be fenced off, with the path beside it squished to make room, but you should have helicopters parked there waiting for takeoff just spewing fumes and making noise?


You think for a moment, that having the helepad THERE is vital? You think that helecopters can't take off from anywhere else in the city and see the entire thing? That somehow putting them on a barge, or somewhere less conflicting would be SO difficult to get to in Manhattan that teh buisness would drop?

You think that maybe their location makes it so that people WALK by and say "hey, I was enjoying my stroll through the park but I would really enjoy a $$$ helecopter ride!!!"


No.


In all fairness, should they be eliminated? No, but putting a landing pad in Central Park would be seen as rediculous, why is it any less rediculous here? Just because it was there first?

This is not a witch-burning of the Helecopter Tours themselves, but an expressing of opinion that maybe the best place for it is not in a very nice park.

[futurecity]

Regarding Barcalona.... Great waterfront regenerated with help from the Summer Olympics. This is what the Olympics can do for you, hint, hint.... NYC should bid for 2024 IMO - most important and global city never to have hosted.

NYC just could never compare -- a riverfront is nothing compared to the med...oh and Barca had the sense to not build a highway right on the water.

Oh, and although Barca is a very nice city, it ain't perfect...if this were a barca forum and it wasn't just a tourist novelty, all the harsh critics here (who like to name NYC as an ugly pig, etc - you know who you are) would have a field day with all the ugly low rise buildings to be found just outside the historic center... In barcelona, there are a ridiculous ammount banal and ugly apartment buildings, even around the area of the Gaudi cathedral and main train station -- and don't get me started about the fields of soviet-like commies in the near suburbs between the city and the airport :eek:

But for waterfront, they did a good job minus the one touristy pier -- of course they are blessed with the med beaches for one. Also, Barcellonetta is a sketchy slum and a tourist trap.

NYC would need to bury stretches of the highway to get a really nice waterfront. Something tells me though that you would need a more radical mayor, a true visionary mayor to advocate for this....not Mr. Mike no rail to JFK in my lifetime/have no real interest in pushing for transit reform Bloomberg.

[lofter1]

The new section of HRP at Pier 62 & Pier 63, aka Chelsea Cove, is set to open Monday May 17 (http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20100514/REAL_ESTATE/100519897) after the 10:00 AM ribbon cutting.

The Skate Park (http://www.sitedesigngroup.com/blog/hudson-river-skatepark-grand-opening/) will open on the same day.

Pier 62 Skatepark - Opening May 17th (2010) (http://nyskateboarding.blogspot.com/2010/05/pier-62-skatepark-opening-may-17th-2010.html)

The carousel is to open later on this month.

[lofter1]

After that ^ it will be time to start a new thread, dedicated to this section of HRP (other piers within HRP already have their own separate threads (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/search.php?searchid=73772)).

[lofter1]

Why wait?

In eager anticipation I went ahead and started the new thread (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23695&pagenumber=):

Pier 62 & Pier 63 - Chelsea Cove - Hudson River Park

[Merry]

9-acre slice of Hudson River Park to reopen

After two years of construction, the newly revamped and remodeled section of the park at Chelsea Piers 62-64, just north of the Chelsea Piers Sports & Entertainment Complex, returns Monday.

By James Comtois

After more than two years of construction, one portion of the Hudson River Park is at last set to reopen.

The Hudson River Park Trust is holding a ribbon-cutting ceremony on Monday morning between West 22nd and 24th streets.

The remodeled section of the park features open grassy areas, new benches, a skate bowl, a carousel, a garden by Lynden Miller and a landscape sculpture by Meg Webster. The whole segment was designed by landscape artists Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates, who recently designed the reopened Brooklyn Bridge Park.

"This is one of the larger sections of the park," said Park Trust President Connie Fishman, who pointed out that the total area at Piers 62-64 is more than nine acres.

Trust Chairperson Diana Taylor will serve as the master of ceremonies at the ribbon-cutting. Also scheduled to attend are Gov. David Paterson, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development Robert Lieber, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, State Sen. Tom Duane, State Assembly Member Richard Gottfried, and City Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe.

According to Ms. Fishman, there is no connection between this event and Piers 40 and 57, which have been in disrepair for years.

The trust has tried a number of times to find a suitable developer for Pier 40, a dilapidated structure at the foot of West Houston Street. Last July, the board of the Hudson River Park Trust selected Youngwoo & Associates to redevelop the decrepit Pier 57, at the end of West 15th Street, as a vibrant city destination.

Ms. Fishman added that there is no new progress to report on those two structures.
Following this reopening, the Park Trust plans to open a large part of the TriBeCa section in the fall, making the whole of Hudson Square Park 80% complete.

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20100514/REAL_ESTATE/100519897

[ZippyTheChimp]

Gansevoort Peninsula - Pier 53

New Firehouse by CRStudio (http://www.crstudio.com/), who designed the Pier 62 carousel.

http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/6391/gansevoort02c.th.jpg (http://img517.imageshack.us/i/gansevoort02c.jpg/) http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/7030/gansevoort03c.th.jpg (http://img338.imageshack.us/i/gansevoort03c.jpg/)


Coverage at Curbed (http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/03/22/riverpatrolling_firemen_get_new_meatpacking_distri ct_clubhouse.php)

[Derek2k3]

Just for comparison, check out Shanghai's newly made over waterfront which was completed light-years faster than our ongoing effort:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=589635&page=14

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4023/4510468047_02216bd29d_b.jpg

A little too much hardscape. I'm not sure why that promenade is elevated, but it walls off the river from the city. I do like how wide it is in compared to HRP and ERP. The landscaping in our parks blows this away however.

This also made me appreciate the fact that HRP is being built in phases. It's cool how the different segments have their own energy and activities.

[lofter1]

It's a big sidewalk with some trees at the edge. Guess you have to do that when there are a gazillion residents.

[futurecity]

This is far far better than what NY has. Far better. For one reason - they eliminated around 4 or so of their highway lanes, while NY still puts cars over people and eliminated none. Also, the architectural riverscape is far superior than what NY has by 1000x thanks to the beautiful buildings. It also seperates people from the highway, not like NY has done since NY worships car commuters. The Chinese do urban projects right, the Ameriacns do them half-assed in practically every urban or transit project there is.

Example:

1) Proposed Florida HSR: Stops so much that it becomes a commuter rail -- typical foolish politician crap.

2) Chinese HSR: Non-stop, fastest train service in the world between Wuhan and somwhere (i forgot).'

I know China has tons of problems, and I don't condone them .. but when it comes to doing projects they do them 100% and don't make compromises like here in America.

[lofter1]

Do you know the history of Westway?

[ZippyTheChimp]

I know China has tons of problems, and I don't condone them .. but when it comes to doing projects they do them 100% and don't make compromises like here in America.They don't make compromises?

Would you like to trade our compromises for theirs?

[futurecity]

They don't make compromises?

Would you like to trade our compromises for theirs?

Not in many areas -- however it seems China is going the right way in urban and transit projects and is on track to far surpass us.

Combined with their beautiful riverfront and their stunning skyline, this new waterfront project was a bold step that sadly only they or perhaps Europe could accomplish. To close so many traffic lanes without adding any is bold and brave IMO.

I said that they did things well when it comes to infrastructure, transit, etc. it is no excuse that we have fallen so far behind the rest of the world when it comes to urban design projects and transit funding. We have become greedy and selfish IMO -- that civic projects are deemed too communist to fund with tax payer money, or that it takes 20 years to build 1 subway line... i could go on and on.

NY has made a token effort with its waterfront, but again, due to the basic cultural mindset of king car, nothing groundbreaking could ever be acomplished in this area for generations even in NY. People couldn't even imagine ''wasting'' money to bury a highway today because it would be considered too expensive. However, the same people neglect to think of the consequences of not taking action now.

Don't tell me that the westway needs to be 8 lanes wide... don't tell me that they couldn't have taken away at least a couple?

For a pioneering people, Americans have become rather caught up in old rigid beliefs while the rest of the world moves foward with common sense (in urban issues), i'm sorry to say.

[ZippyTheChimp]

^
You cant just separate out components of a society that are convenient to your argument.

As for the two waterfront images, I prefer the HRP. Your opinions aren't facts, especially when you're not experiencing it on a regular basis.


it is no excuse that we have fallen so far behind the rest of the world when it comes to urban design projects and transit funding.That's absurd. NYC is still well ahead of the norm for urban transit. The infrastructure is old and very expensive to replace in a densely built environment


People couldn't even imagine ''wasting'' money to bury a highway today.What exactly do you mean by this?

[futurecity]

People do not want to bury the westway, thats what i mean.

[ZippyTheChimp]

I just wanted to make sure.

So you think that the Westway project was mass-transit friendly?

Now I know you don't know what you're talking about.

[futurecity]

Um, nope... we misunderstand one and other. Just forget it.

[futurecity]

The effort and money that must've gone into this is remarkable. Notice that all that lower area used to be a horrible road.

It is a shame NY never embraced the river like the Shanghai citizens are doing. Given that they have that beautiful backdrop, their river ranks up their with the Paris and Londons of the world. What a shame we cut off our river with ugly highways... oh well, someday someone will have the sense to get rid of them.

I must say now that this must be probably one of the best urban sites in the world.

[ZippyTheChimp]

The effort and money that must've gone into this is remarkable. Notice that all that lower area used to be a horrible road.Doesn't look too inviting. Just my opinion.


It is a shame NY never embraced the river like the Shanghai citizens are doing.Explain your experience with this. Have trouble getting to the Hudson? Where?

[futurecity]

The city cut itself off so long, that it never developed an urban feel on the river front like we see in Shanghai with beautiful buildings, street parade, retail, etc... The park appears more like an adjunct rather than a vital urban setting. Would all change if the highway was gone IMO.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Didn't answer my question.

[Derek2k3]

I don't think the Shanghai plan is very attractive. The main advantage is that there's no highway and it's wider. But as Lofter said, it's mostly just a wide sidewalk.

Have you been to HRP recently futurecity?

[scumonkey]

ever?

[futurecity]

I don't think the Shanghai plan is very attractive. The main advantage is that there's no highway and it's wider. But as Lofter said, it's mostly just a wide sidewalk.

Have you been to HRP recently futurecity?


Just read the history of the westway. What a shame they didn't bury it at the time. I guess that's it then, shame. I wonder if they'll ever reconsider burying a mile or so.

[ZippyTheChimp]

^
You see a buried roadway, and think, "Out of sight, out of mind."

Burying route 9A would turn it in to an Interstate. You would need access to it at key intersections - 34th St, 23rd, 14, Canal. That means 4 tunnel portals at these intersections.

Also, you would still need a surface avenue to handle traffic to the streets between the main entry/exit points. In effect, you would be adding traffic capacity, which means more cars.


What an investment in the quality of life of its citizens.Indeed (http://www.flickr.com/photos/farang_noi/328015170/)

Anything else you want to say about Shanghai? There's a boatload of these at Flickr.

[futurecity]

^
You see a buried roadway, and think, "Out of sight, out of mind."

Burying route 9A would turn it in to an Interstate. You would need access to it at key intersections - 34th St, 23rd, 14, Canal. That means 4 tunnel portals at these intersections.

Also, you would still need a surface avenue to handle traffic to the streets between the main entry/exit points. In effect, you would be adding traffic capacity, which means more cars.

Indeed (http://www.flickr.com/photos/farang_noi/328015170/)

Anything else you want to say about Shanghai? There's a boatload of these at Flickr.

I could find plenty of pictures of NY that make it look like a hell hole.

Take a look at the shanghai thread -- they seem to have done a tunnel right without all those multiple entries/exit tunnels you talk about while reducing the 8 lane highway along the road way to i think 2 lanes or so.

I'm not talking about burying the whole highway, but putting a mile or so underground at key areas such as besides the railyard development, etc could create a fantastic pedestrian space for NY. Given that you are just burying the same road, you do not need surface access for that mile b/c people either get off side streets before going under the tunnel segment if they need to.

Anyway, that's just what I'd like to see happen.

[ZippyTheChimp]

I could find plenty of pictures of NY that make it look like a hell hole.I'm not the one making ridiculous glowing comments about how well the citizens are being cared for.


I'm not talking about burying the whole highway, but putting a mile or so undergroundA mile or so is over 25% the length of the park.


at key areas such as besides the railyard developmentThe railyard is the worst choice: you would have to go under the railroad tunnels. And a connection can more easily and cheaply be made with a bridge between the High Line and HRP.


you do not need surface access for that mile b/c people either get off side streets before going under the tunnel segment if they need to.You're describing a short underpass. A waste of money. I suppose if this were actually done, you'd complain about a half-measure.

This is what happens when you look at something in one place, and just transfer it to another place without any other considerations.



Got any photos of the park to share when you were there last year?

[futurecity]

No, I don't take photos. Life is too short to waste it behind an eyepiece or a lens.

You may think what I proposed is a waste, but an underpass or short-tunnel at an appropriate location along the park would at least create a large pedestrian plaza directly connected to the city, right on the water.... an instant people magnet which would probably be hailed as one of the greatest places in NY.

[scumonkey]

The whole park is already an instant people magnet...

[ZippyTheChimp]

No, I don't take photos. Life is too short to waste it behind an eyepiece or a lens.Or explaining it here.

[lofter1]

You may think what I proposed is a waste ... would probably be hailed as one of the greatest places in NY.


How much do you think citizens (it would come from all US taxpayers, as these type of projects invariably include Federal funding) should be willing to spend on such a space-increaser?

[futurecity]

As much as Western European and wealthy Asian countries spend on urban design, transit and civic beautification -- far more than what we do now... Then again, I'm not a fiscal conservative rationalist/capatalist and I'm anti war, anti defense spending, anti road/car -- for a gas tax. So, i'm obviously living in the wrong country! So to answer your question, yes, citizens should be willing to spend more for civic beauty and quality of life in all our cities IMO :) I believe this selfishness has led to the rise of cities such as LA, etc. where people take for their private sphere, while the public sphere becomes ugly and empty of enjoyment. Time to stop thinking about our private spaces and our products we buy and more about the space we live, since we have to live in it...

[lofter1]

But right now spending $$ on the Second Avenue Subway, Rail Link under the Hudson, 7 Line Extension -- all public transit works and a long way from being fully funded or completed -- are far more worthy than burying a stretch of roadway (which, due to bulkhead along the river, would require major work would cost an astronomical amount).

[ZippyTheChimp]

Geez, futurecity, get off the damn soapbox. It's getting really old.

If you ever really visit the park, take some pictures.

[Derek2k3]

Also FC, when you're in the park West Street isn't very noticeable in most sections.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4051/4689641790_cd7ddb2110_b.jpg


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4039/4689641788_c056b416a0_b.jpg

[MidtownGuy]

^nice down there for those folks.
up here in midtown not so much/ hopefully one day it will feel like a park even in the middle stretch where there is so much infrastructure marring any cohesive feeling.

[Merry]

Marvelous urban view in that second photo. Excellent work (photo and park).

[ZippyTheChimp]

http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/344/hrp22.th.jpg (http://img16.imageshack.us/i/hrp22.jpg/)

[ablarc]

^ Pretty as a picture.

[lofter1]

The boardwalk is one of the highlights of HRP. I've never seen them with more than a few people at a time, and mostly I find I have them all to myself. The plantings are terrific, with a constant change of color and texture (and even more eye catching changes as the seasons pass).

[MidtownGuy]

That photo is gorgeous. Pulls you right in. I have to get down there and check it out.

[ZippyTheChimp]

View south
http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/354/hrp23.th.jpg (http://img641.imageshack.us/i/hrp23.jpg/)

Seawall repaired
http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/9130/pier2504c.th.jpg (http://img64.imageshack.us/i/pier2504c.jpg/)

Snack bar on pier 25. If there's a larger cafe/restaurant. it'll be on pier 26.
http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/8436/pier2505c.th.jpg (http://img251.imageshack.us/i/pier2505c.jpg/)

[Merry]

Ah, from the view south, we can now be sure where we were in the first photo. Its beauty belies its location :).

[RandySavage]

Spent some time biking HRP this weekend... the newly opened Chelsea Cove section is great, with its pool skate park and Hudson River wildlife carousel with a green roof. People should check it out. With its opening the HRP is finally starting to feel like one long, enormous park with a some commercial/transportation/city services interruptions rather than the other way around.

The newest section of Riverside Park South (which abuts HRP at 59th) was completely empty - maybe 3 people using it - on a relatively nice summer Sunday afternoon. Who says you can't have Manhattan to yourself.

[Merry]

New pipeline to be built beneath Hudson River


BY Albert Amateau

Downtown residents have yet another gas problem in addition to the potential danger from hydrofracture gas drilling in the New York City watershed. The newest concern is a proposed natural gas pipeline that Spectra Energy wants to build from New Jersey across Staten Island and under the Hudson River to the Gansevoort Market District to connect with Con Edison’s gas lines.

The project will need a slew of federal, state and city approvals before construction is scheduled to begin in 2012. Completion is expected around November 2013.

“We’re concerned about the impact on public safety, traffic and noise during the construction period,” said Jo Hamilton, chairperson of Community Board 2.

The board is planning an October 5 public meeting on the project, at a time and place to be determined early next month, with representatives from Spectra, Con Edison and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Hamilton said. Spectra and Con Edison met with the Community Board 2 Environment and Public Safety Committee and representatives of Borough President Scott Stringer and Congressmember Jerrold Nadler on August 11.

According to preliminary plans, the project will involve a total of 20 miles of new pipeline between 30 and 40 feet below grade from Linden, N.J. across the northwest corner of Staten Island, through Bayonne, N.J. and Jersey City, then under the Hudson River to the southwest corner of the Gansevoort Peninsula where it will slant up to three feet below grade at Gansevoort Street near the 10th Avenue service road. At the August 11 meeting, a Spectra representative said the company would try to minimize traffic interruption where the pipeline crosses the West Side Highway.

Con Edison would continue the pipeline along 10th Avenue to West 14th Street to the Con Edison natural gas distribution system. “We supply natural gas to all of Manhattan, the Bronx and Westchester and we need the pipeline for reliability,” said Chris Olert, a Con Edison spokesperson. Exactly where the pipeline would connect with Con Edison is subject to adjustment, Olert said.

The project is still in the scoping phase for its Environmental Impact Statement and written submissions may be submitted to FERC until August 20.
“But we’ve been assured that anything received after that date will still be accepted. Since the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission doesn’t intend to file for the E.I.S. until early December, we will all have time for a thorough review,” Hamilton said.

“We are in the early stages of the project that will transport an additional 800 million cubic feet per day of natural gas into the area and are currently evaluating several routing options for the proposed alignment of the pipeline,” said Marylee Hanley, spokesperson for Spectra.

No interference with Hudson River Park plans

David Katz, marketing vice president of the Hudson River Park Trust, the state/city agency which has jurisdiction of the Gansevoort Peninsula where it plans to build a part of the five-mile Hudson River Park sometime after 2013, said the pipeline is not expected to interfere with the park project. The peninsula is still being used by the city Department of Sanitation to store trucks, but Katz said, “We are working with Spectra to make sure the pipeline project does not impact current use and future park plans.”

Spectra said the new pipeline, officially known as the New Jersey-New York Expansion, would result in about 100 construction jobs in 2012 and 500 in 2013 when construction is in full swing. The project would also generate $10 million in tax revenues, the company said.

Regarding safety, Hanley said, “The pipeline will be built to exceed highest safety standards set by the federal government.” Meter stations along the route continuously monitor pipelines for leaks and pressure loss, she said, and valves can be closed by remote control. In addition, inspectors physically check the land around the pipeline three times a week, Hanley said.

In addition to FERC, the Army Corps of Engineers must sign off on the project. The Environmental Protection Agency and the Coast Guard are among the federal agencies consulted in the approval process.

The state Department of Environmental Conservation and the Department of Transportation must review the project along with the Hudson River Park Trust. The city Department of Transportation must approve the right-of-way and issue construction and street opening permits. The Landmarks Preservation Commission has a review role in the process and the city Department of Environmental Protection must issue an infrastructure permit. Moreover, for the segments of the pipeline in New Jersey, six agencies will have to review the project.

http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_383/newpipeline.html

http://www.chelseanow.com/articles/2010/08/26/news/doc4c7586f4ed232569204999.txt

[Edward]

Hudson River Park (http://hudson-river-park.com/)

http://hudson-river-park.com/wp/wp-content/media/hudson-river-park-downtown-600x400.jpg (http://hudson-river-park.com/)

[Derek2k3]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4126/5038181944_714618a21f_b.jpg


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4127/5037564299_d1fa8b338e_b.jpg



http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4130/5038184116_cdc2b16549_b.jpg

[londonlawyer]

Hudson River Park (http://hudson-river-park.com/)

http://hudson-river-park.com/wp/wp-content/media/hudson-river-park-downtown-600x400.jpg (http://hudson-river-park.com/)

Magnificent!

[Merry]

Westway also discussed in the Riverside South Development (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3432&p=328443&highlight=westway#post328443) thread.


25th Anniversary of Westway

by Gene Russianoff

In New York City's long tradition of fighting City Hall, one of the most spectacular examples happened a quarter century ago this week.

It was 1985, when local elected representatives, community members, transportation and environmental advocates, fiscal conservatives and the U.S. Congress forced State and City officials to "trade-in" a planned Interstate highway and river development project known as Westway. The highway would have been built off of Manhattan's West Side and been partly constructed through landfill poured in the Hudson River.

The federal share of Westway's pricetag - $1.725 billion - was reallocated to fix our crumbling subways and buses (more than $1 billion) and to a more modest rehabilitation of West Street (several hundred million.)

Westway's supporters saw the project as a way to gain money from Washington and provide development opportunities off of the West Side of Manhattan. The highway's failure to move forward was another sign of how hard it was to advance construction projects in New York, they claimed.

Opponents saw the project as a misguided allocation of precious federal dollars at a time when our transit network was staggering under decades of inadequate funding. In the early 1980's, riders were plagued by derailments, track fires, crime, breakdowns, slow and unreliable service, boarding vehicles with non-working doors, inadequate lighting and graffiti.

For us, winning more than a billion dollars for transit was the right priority, as was keeping landfill out of the Hudson River.

This debate still goes on a quarter of a century later. For me, it is the vivid memories and lessons learned that linger:

- In June 1984, hearings were held by the feds at a hotel near Madison Square Garden. Hundreds of New Yorkers showed up. The Straphangers Campaign was one of the groups that helped pull a pre-hearing rally together. Westway supporters had construction workers in hard hats. But, as the New York Times reported we had a guitar and song, "which ended with the line, ''They paved the Hudson River, to put up the Westway project." "It was written by Seth Frazier of the Straphangers Campaign... one of the organizers of yesterday's rally."

Lesson: As they say in the musical Gypsy: "You gotta have a gimmick if you want to get ahead."

- In the January of 1985, after years of debate - and with the first Army Corps of Engineer's permit declared illegal by the federal courts - the Corps of Engineers again granted a permit for Westway to go ahead. Supporters called a news conference.
Twenty-five minutes after the event was scheduled start - as reporters crushed and jostled around us - the planned MC had not shown up. One of the politicians leaned over to me and said, "Show time." I ran the news conference.

Lesson: Be prepared. Better have your facts and figures down cold.

- To further the "inevitability" of Westway, the State and City held a rally on a West Side pier, There were hundreds of yards of bunting and speeches by the Governor and Mayor. And the Tottenville High School marching band!

Lesson: Government will pull out all the stops to convince the public it is going to win.

But then, in early September 1985, two things happened on the same day: An appellate court upheld a lower court decision that voided the Corps's Clean Water Act permit for Westway. Later that day, the House of Representatives voted 287 to 132 to block Federal funds for Westway landfill.

As is so often the case in community battles, Westway's trade-in did not end the story. Manhattan's West Side has remained the focus of many intense battles over the last 25 years. That includes continued plans to develop in the Hudson River, the below market value of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's sale of West Side Rail Yards to developers and Mayor Bloomberg's unlamented West Side stadium.

The big bang of all these struggles was the fight to stop Westway. That's why it is so important to savor its history and celebrate this winning fight against City Hall.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gene-russianoff/25th-anniversary-of-westw_b_743377.html

[Merry]

Pier 25 almost ready for fall

http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_391/coverlet.jpg

Noreen Doyle, the Hudson River Park Trust’s executive vice president, is still optimistic that the new Pier 25 will open by the end of the month. “We’re pushing, still pushing for October,” said Doyle. Pictured above is the 18-hole miniature golf course that will include one hole with a cave.

http://www.downtownexpress.com/index.html

[Merry]

Special Tax Sought to Fund Hudson River Park

Special Tax Sought to Fund Hudson River Park; Resistance Expected From Owners

By DANA RUBINSTEIN

Property owners around Hudson River Park, which will ultimately stretch five miles from the southern tip of Manhattan to 59th Street, could be required to pay a special tax totalling million of dollars annually to fund the park's operations.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/NY-AV351_HUDSON_G_20110313174407.jpg

The Friends of Hudson River Park, a nonprofit, has begun the public process required for the creation of a business or neighborhood improvement district. Such districts have the right to assess a tax on property owners within their boundaries. By law, the district can't be formed if more than half of these property owners object.

While the formal boundaries of the improvement district have yet to be determined, they would loosely encompass all the property owners along what will ultimately be a 550-acre park, west of Hudson Street and 10th Avenue. The area could include 1,700 properties, and the tax assessment would apply to both residential and commercial properties.

A Hudson River Park neighborhood improvement district would likely rival the size of the Downtown Alliance, which has a $13 million tax assessment, the largest in the city. The Friends of Hudson River Park say it hopes to generate an assessment between $5 million and $10 million annually.

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/NY-AV352_HUDSON_G_20110313173619.jpg

Although members of the steering committee say the assessment to any single property owner would be modest, they expect to face some resistance. "No matter what you do in New York, there's opposition," said Douglas Durst, a prominent landlord who is helping organize the improvement district.

Since the first business improvement district was established in 1984, 64 have been created in New York. All strive to supplement existing city services, be it through sanitation or programming.

On March 3, A.J. Pietrantone, the executive director of the Friends of Hudson River Park, sent a letter to the Department of Small Business Services announcing the first step in the public outreach process—the circulation of a district needs survey to area property owners.

Mr. Pietrantone sent the letter on behalf of the Neighborhood Improvement District Steering Committee, a group that includes Julie Menin, chairwoman of Community Board 1, and a number of area landlords, including Mr. Durst, chairman of the Durst Organization; Lisa Silverstein, senior vice president at Silverstein Properties; and Two Trees' head, Jed Walentas.

"I think we have come to accept the fact that because of the pressures on government funding, the private sector needs to play a role in maintaining parks the way we want them to be," Mr. Pietrantone said.

Hudson River Park is part of a new model for parks development, one that relies on revenues from privately run concessions within the park as well as tax assessments. It is an evolution of the sort of public-private partnership pioneered by the Central Park Conservancy and Prospect Park Alliance in the 1980s. Both are nonprofits that operate government parks relying, in part, on private donations.

The Friends of Hudson River Park maintains that because the park has bolstered real estate values in the area, it makes sense for those who have profited from those increased values to give back to the park. According to 2008 Friends report that used data analysis by the Regional Plan Association, "Approximately 20% of the value of properties within the first two blocks of the Greenwich Village section of the Hudson River Park can be attributed to the park."

"You've got all of these residential developers who have developed buildings all along the park…and when you look at their marketing brochures, they market access to Hudson River Park," says Ms. Menin.

The park was conceived following the 1985 demise of Westway, a controversial proposal to construct an underground highway off the West Side of Manhattan and build on top of it.
It was not until 1998 that the Hudson River Park Act was approved, allowing the city and state to appropriate $200 million toward the creation of a 550-acre park. The Friends of Hudson River Park took shape the following year.

According to Mr. Pietrantone, the park needs another $160 million for its completion, and is expected to be finished by 2018 at the earliest. The improvement district's assessment would also go toward improving access to the park, creating park-like areas in places where the park is narrower and perhaps augmenting the care of the city parks within the district's bounds.

The steering committee plans to meet in April to review the initial responses and then, by early June, create a draft district service plan for the area. By the end of the year, the Friends hope to submit a final plan to the City Planning Commission and New York City Council for approval.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703555404576195520506542928.html?m od=googlenews_wsj

[Ninjahedge]

I think so long as they can GUARANTEE that the funds would be used for that park alone, you will see less opposition to it.

If this turns into another "slushy" fund that sloughs off into some other projects pocket you will see a lot of angry West siders.....

[ZippyTheChimp]

New FDNY Marine 1 Clubhouse at Gansevoort (pier 53)

http://img862.imageshack.us/img862/7694/gansevoort01.th.jpg (http://img862.imageshack.us/i/gansevoort01.jpg/) http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/8991/gansevoort02.th.jpg (http://img845.imageshack.us/i/gansevoort02.jpg/) http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/5267/gansevoort03.th.jpg (http://img51.imageshack.us/i/gansevoort03.jpg/)

[ZippyTheChimp]

Holland Tunnel pier

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/8570/hrp25.th.jpg (http://img35.imageshack.us/i/hrp25.jpg/)