Page 20 of 33 FirstFirst ... 1016171819202122232430 ... LastLast
Results 286 to 300 of 489

Thread: Dept of Sanitation Garage in Hudson Square

  1. #286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by projectsnyc View Post
    I don't understand DSNY's position. They consider this Consolidated Sanitation Garage for three Community District's to be a "local" facility, meaning that its scope or impact needs only to be studied within a 400' radius.

    If you look at Title 62 of the Laws of New York, a "regional or citywide facility" is defined as one serving two or more community districts. DSNY's letter to the Friends of Hudson Square who raised this issue with them a few days ago indicates that Attachment B of Title 62 does not list garages, and that they are, therefore, not considered to be regional transportation facilities. However, both Attachments A and B have a footnote that states, "List is illustrative and should not be considered to include all such facilities."

    A "regional" facility would prompt a study within a one-half mile radius (basically a ten rather than a two block area) which would bring much of TriBeCa, the West Village, SoHo, and the Hudson River Park into the picture.

    Is this a "fatal flaw" in their Scoping Document? Back in 1999 CB2 agreed to accept one DSNY garage, it's time to go back to the drawing board and look at alternative sites for two of the three district garages.

    Regional Facility DSNY Style

    DSNY is also proposing a consolidated garage at East 73-74 street,adjacent to the FDR Drive for Districts 6,8A and 8. DSNY is also proposing a consolidated garage for two districts in BK district 1 as well as a single district garage for yet another district in BK district 1.

    DSNY's response to the Friends of Hudson Square is their interpretation of a regional facility. If the Friends of Hudson Square sues DSNY on a regional facility as well as fair share and wins, the rest of the Solid Waste Management Plan will go back to the drawing board. It would be interesting to check out all of the boroughs concerning consolidated garages,
    Last edited by Ellen Peterson-Lewis; September 3rd, 2007 at 01:40 AM. Reason: Want to Change title

  2. #287

    Default "Garbage plan trashes Hudson Square's future"

    Also, check out the Hudson Square supplement in this week's edition:

    http://downtownexpress.com/de_230/hu...abefights.html

    downtownexpress.com
    Volume 20 Issue 21 | October 5 - 11 2007
    Editorial

    Garbage plan trashes Hudson Square’s future

    When one mentions Hudson Square, many people, including even most New Yorkers, are at a loss. This unique neighborhood, located between Greenwich Village, Soho and Tribeca, was formerly known as the Printing District. But its new name, Hudson Square, is taking hold. This Downtown neighborhood is undergoing rapid change, which is why we have chosen this week to devote a special section highlighting Hudson Square’s attributes, as well as the challenges facing its future.

    On the one hand, Hudson Square is a place one can enjoy fine restaurants and a historic, quirky bar, like the Ear Inn, in a more tranquil environment removed from the crowds of Soho. On the other hand, the area has become a magnet for new construction, particularly in its southern section, which was rezoned in 2003 to allow residential use. In short, the neighborhood’s identity, a mixture of old and modern, is taking shape in exciting ways to create a vital, new district.

    This trend and the city’s misguided approval for an out-of-scale Donald Trump building are proof that Hudson Square needs intelligent, comprehensive planning to guide its continuing transformation. No longer should or can this area be a dumping ground for trucks, particularly garbage trucks, as before. Yet, that is precisely what the city seems intent on doing, with plans for a new 140-foot-tall garage for 95 garbage trucks for three Department of Sanitation districts to be built on the UPS lot at Spring and Washington Sts.

    However, there is united community opposition to this project. From artists living in lofts on Canal St. to affluent residents of the new Urban Glass House — designed by the late Philip Johnson — to a neighborhood native who owns a restaurant on Washington St. and hopes to benefit at last from the neighborhood’s new cachet, no one wants a towering garage and garbage-truck convoy roaring through the streets and exacerbating the traffic problems around the Holland Tunnel.

    Fear of the garage has spurred local developer Peter Moore and Eugene M. Grant Co., the St. John’s Center building’s owner, to seek creative, community-minded visions for Hudson Square. Earlier this year, they started a “charrette” process, commissioning five architectural groups to think outside the box — and beyond the mega-garage — and envision a dynamic, integrated neighborhood plan.

    As seen in the ambitious charrette illustrations in our special section, the architects focused on key elements: more park space and retail, better access to the waterfront and a saner allocation of the neighborhood’s buildable square feet. The studies are all predicated on increased residential use and a smaller, one-district Sanitation garage.

    The charrette is a model of grassroots neighborhood planning, in which community input and ideas begin a comprehensive dialogue — as opposed to planning being driven by the Department of Sanitation’s need for a place for its garbage trucks. The charrette’s intent is to start a discussion based on ideas and possibilities, then build a political consensus on how best to develop Hudson Square.

    Hudson Square is changing organically, in many positive ways, and shows great promise. The city must not dump on this nascent neighborhood’s future.

  3. #288

    Default

    I like how they always shoot everything down and talk of "constructive dialog" and "intelligent discussion". Yet all they are saying is "Not in my back yard, I don't care how much the city needs this, over my dead body". That's some constructive dialog right there.

  4. #289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eugenious View Post
    I like how they always shoot everything down and talk of "constructive dialog" and "intelligent discussion". Yet all they are saying is "Not in my back yard, I don't care how much the city needs this, over my dead body". That's some constructive dialog right there.
    Actually I think that editorial states that everyone in the area is quite comfortable with a 1 district garage. Is that such a bad thing?

  5. #290

    Default

    I didn't read anything in the editorial that said "everyone in the area is quite comfortable with a 1 district garage." A single district is better than three districts, but none is even better. I am sure "everyone" in the area would be comfortable with that.

  6. #291

    Default

    ^^^That is NIMBYism....there is already a DOS facility there so hard to see how you would not be comfortable with status quo

  7. #292

    Default

    ^^^^^

    I'll still go back to the original statement that "everyone in the area is quite comfortable" and I will underline and make bold for you the word "everyone" does not include me! I live in the neighborhood and I lived with the past where garbage trucks ruled the roost. I never liked those operations and I still don't like the cavalier attitude the DSNY has at their Spring Street facility. So the answer is no, "EVERYONE IN THE AREA IS NOT COMFORTABLE!"

    We might have to live with it, but everyone is not comfortable with the alternate plans.

  8. #293

    Default

    If the nimby thing is what you are saying I object to, it is not. It's called fair share. Why should the Hudson Square area host a district 1 garbage garage? If it was a district 2 garbage garage then it would make a little more sense, but not a district 1 garage. Does that make sense to the nimby's in district 1? I don't think so. The majority of district 1 residents seem to have an attitude that it should all go somewhere else but NIMBY.

  9. #294
    Random Personality
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Woodside, Queens
    Posts
    950

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CBTwo View Post
    If the nimby thing is what you are saying I object to, it is not. It's called fair share. Why should the Hudson Square area host a district 1 garbage garage? If it was a district 2 garbage garage then it would make a little more sense, but not a district 1 garage. Does that make sense to the nimby's in district 1? I don't think so. The majority of district 1 residents seem to have an attitude that it should all go somewhere else but NIMBY.
    We live in a city not in 'districts'. And according to your logic why should Astoria house power plants that produce 60% of the power needed for the city? Lets build a power plant in district 2. How about a water sewage plant? And while we are at it a landfill too for district 2.

  10. #295

    Default

    ^^^ You left out airport in your list.

  11. #296
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    They're going to build an airport in CBD 2??? Where would they put it

    Gansevort Peninsula could be a good place

  12. #297
    Random Personality
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Woodside, Queens
    Posts
    950

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by CBTwo View Post
    ^^^ You left out airport in your list.
    Thank you, I thought I had forgotten something on my list.

  13. #298

    Default

    City’s Recycling Station Plan Is Hobbled in the Assembly

    By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE


    Published: October 24, 2007

    ALBANY, Oct. 23 — In another setback for Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s Albany agenda, the Assembly speaker, Sheldon Silver, refused on Tuesday to hold a vote on a key part of the mayor’s plan for handling trash and recycling in Manhattan.
    The speaker said the city administration had failed to live up to a promise to seriously explore alternatives to the plan, and he said he was in no rush to move ahead until officials did so.
    The rebuff makes it unlikely that the measure, which would establish a recycling transfer station near Gansevoort Street in the meatpacking district of Manhattan, will be taken up this year.
    The speaker appeared unhappy with comments the mayor made in a news conference on Oct. 16, when Mr. Bloomberg insisted that he and his aides had “answered every single question, including some two days ago that his staff and the governor’s staff has asked for, period, end of story.”
    The speaker said that it was “unfortunate, that in an irresponsible fashion, despite everything we had as an understanding, he chose to do that.”
    The proposed station is part of the mayor’s ambitious plan under which each borough would be responsible for its own garbage, a break with the past and one welcomed by lawmakers from poor or minority neighborhoods, which for years have handled much of the waste and garbage-truck traffic generated by more affluent areas like Manhattan.
    Mr. Silver’s remarks seemed to signal a new ebb in his relationship with Mr. Bloomberg, which has veered between sour and sweet in recent years, sometimes at whiplash speed.
    As recently as last week, Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Silver praised each other warmly at a groundbreaking ceremony in Manhattan. But the speaker has used his clout to delay or confound the mayor on several major initiatives, including the failed West Side stadium project in 2005 and the controversial plan for congestion pricing this year. In June, bowing to the wishes of several of his members representing districts near the Gansevoort site, Mr. Silver delayed passage of legislation approving the new station. In an interview Monday, Mr. Silver said that the administration failed to provide more financial details on an alternative site for a transfer station on 36th Street.
    “Those numbers are not yet in, the use of Gansevoort is 2013, still more than five years away, so waiting for all of that to be completed does not impact in any way, shape or form from the use of it,” Mr. Silver said.
    The Assembly was meeting in special session on Tuesday, and there are currently no plans for members to return before next year. The plan requires approval from the Legislature because the Gansevoort site lies on land allocated to the Hudson River Park, which was established by the state and the city.
    The city has maintained that previous studies of the 36th Street site, which have been provided to Mr. Silver and his members, indicate that it would be far more costly and unwieldy than the Gansevoort site. But Farrell Sklerov, a spokesman for Mr. Bloomberg, said that the administration was open to further discussion about the issue.
    “We remain optimistic that we will convince the leaders in Albany that Gansevoort is the best and by far the most cost-effective site to handle recyclable materials,” he said.
    On Tuesday, some lawmakers said they were disappointed by Mr. Silver’s decision.
    “There’s still going to be thousands of trucks and tons of garbage coming into the Bronx that isn’t from the Bronx,” said Rubén Díaz Jr., a Bronx Democrat. “It’s delay tactics. Let’s just get it done.”
    During Tuesday’s Assembly session, the issue of illegal immigration also flared up, as Republican members attempted to force a vote on a measure to block Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s plan to grant driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants.
    The Republicans tried to add an amendment to a bill to extend Suffolk County’s sales tax. The amendment would have reversed Mr. Spitzer’s policy, promulgated by the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles last month, allowing people without Social Security numbers to obtain driver’s licenses.
    “The governor’s plan is risky, it’s illegal, and it’s irresponsible,” argued James N. Tedisco, the minority leader of the Assembly.
    As expected, the chamber’s Democratic leaders ruled the amendment not germane to the sales tax bill. But Republicans appeared satisfied that they had forced a procedural vote on the amendment, saying it essentially reflected members’ positions on the Spitzer policy.
    The amendment failed by a vote of 85 to 57, though at least 15 Democrats bucked their party leaders on the procedural vote, a sign of the intense passions the licensing issue has aroused.
    A second amendment — which would have indemnified county clerks who refuse to process the new licenses against lawsuits from irate drivers — met a similar fate.
    As the Assembly debated, Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo released a statement saying he would be defending the new policy against challenges, like a lawsuit filed on Monday by the Rensselaer County clerk, Frank J. Merola, who like many county clerks across the state issues driver’s licenses on behalf of the D.M.V.
    Mr. Cuomo has declined to say if he personally supports the policy. But in his statement, the attorney general indicated that he concurred with the Spitzer administration’s assessment of its authority to issue new license requirements. “We are defending these challenges and believe we will be successful,” Mr. Cuomo said.

  14. #299

    Default any linkage?

    ^^^ Is there any linkage between this transfer station and the garage? ie, they want the garage to be near the transfer station?

  15. #300

    Default

    The transfer station has to be on the waterfront. The two available sites are Gansevoort (preferred by the city) and pier 76. It has nothing to do with the garage.

    A similar situation exists at piers 97 and 99. Pier 97 has been used by DSNY for truck and salt storage. They will vacate that site and move into the new garage on W57th. Pier 99 is a transfer station.

Similar Threads

  1. New Year in Times Square
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: November 16th, 2013, 06:29 AM
  2. Toys R Us Times Square
    By noharmony in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2008, 11:37 PM
  3. W New York - Times Square Hotel
    By hyperfine in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: January 18th, 2005, 09:55 PM
  4. Times Square 2002 Celebrations Part I
    By Edward in forum Photos and Videos of New York
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 1st, 2002, 12:39 AM
  5. Pictures of luxurious W Hotel - Times Square
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 29th, 2001, 01:36 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software