Page 8 of 26 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 384

Thread: Hudson River Park

  1. #106

    Default

    Construction update: Dec 29, 2005

    Segment 3 (Tribeca) construction has begun. Demolition at pier 26



    Segment 6. Boathouse at pier 66.


    Cafe at pier 84



    Bikeway/walkway improvements:

    Gansevoort Penninsula


    Pier 57


    Passenger ship terminal

  2. #107

    Default New about (friends) of Hudson River Park

    A Ribbon of Green ?That Hasn’t Got Any

    Paying for Parks With the Public Purse
    By Matthew Schuerman

    The five-mile-long Hudson River Park was born from the rubble of Westway—the controversial plan to sink the West Side Highway and cover it with park, which met an ignominious end in 1985.
    But reclaiming the waterfront—and getting the hookers off the piers—still sounded good to pretty much everyone.
    So planners conceived a new ribbon of green around the edges of lower Manhattan, and phased in a little bit of profit-making development, too, to maintain the greenery. In fact, they even went so far as to say that the park would pay for itself.
    But that was 1995, and the financial plan showing that the park can indeed pay for itself hasn’t been revised since.
    Rents from developments like Chelsea Piers still cover the rent, but only for a small part of the planned park. Some 70 percent of the park remains to be built—and who will pay for that?

    “The party line is that it will be totally successful,” said Albert Butzel, the president of Friends of Hudson River Park, a booster group that has helped raise funds for the park, which is controlled by a city-state agency. “The reality is that it is going to need a lot of help.”
    Building the park will require some $450 million, and aggressive fund-raising will be required to obtain that money. But more harrowing to some park critics is the lack of a budget for day-in, day-out costs like mowing the lawns, picking up litter and patrolling the property, which may reach $17 million to $20 million once the park is finished.
    Mr. Butzel is thinking of something normally taboo: a new tax.

    “Initially, my sense is that this is not what we all bargained for when the Hudson River Park sold the park to the city. It was supposed to be self-sustaining,” said Edward Baquero, managing partner at Coalco, a real-estate investment company that owns two properties that abut the park, including a building with Diane von Furstenberg’s studio on West 12th Street.
    But he doesn’t rule out a special assessment district. “We should see what really went wrong,” Mr. Baquero said. “Was it a judgment error? If not, why was it off? I think they need to be very transparent.”

    “They,” in this case, is the Hudson River Park Trust, the quasi-public agency overseeing the park. The costs of both constructing and operating the park have climbed since first outlined in a 1995 brochure issued by Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and Governor George Pataki.

    The annual operating cost once completed was supposed to hit $10 million. Currently, with just 25 to 30 percent of the park up and running, the budget is about $12 million, paid for by rents, concessions and other revenues. As more parkland will come on line, the trust will gain a few more profitable ventures—like a banquet hall and marina planned for Pier 57 at 15th Street—but Noreen Doyle, executive vice president of the trust, said that no one knows whether the new revenues will offset the new expenses.

    Park Tax?

    The Friends of Hudson River Park, Mr. Butzel told The Observer, is two or three months away from releasing an analysis of 15 years of data comparing properties in the West Village—which is where the first sections of the waterfront park have been completed—with those elsewhere in Manhattan. The group is pursuing a two-pronged strategy, he said: The data may, in and of itself, convince enough people to contribute voluntarily, or it may persuade them to form a type of business-improvement district that would make those contributions mandatory for owners of property within its boundaries, which he said would probably extend about two blocks in from West Street.

    “We haven’t received any feedback from property owners. This isn’t even a public idea,” Mr. Butzel said. “This is still years away.”

    He said the study, undertaken with the Regional Plan Association, a nonprofit planning group, would consider a number of variables that may have contributed to value appreciation, such as proximity to a subway station, as well as the citywide real-estate boom.

    “Even between one block and three blocks from the river, you can see the difference,” Mr. Butzel told The Observer.

    “I think all of these are good ideas,” said Ms. Doyle, adding that the trust wasn’t involved in the tax-district study.

    “I think the Hudson River Park was not so focused on the issue of self-sufficiency. No one was in charge like Charles Gargano, who wanted to make sure it was really self-sustaining,” said Mr. Butzel, who is also a board member of the Brooklyn Bridge Park Conservancy, a support group for that park. “The Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation has leaned heavily in that direction so that revenues would be adequate, and the price of that is that buildings may be higher than they need be. But I think that residential development is a reasonable strategy. We are talking about one 30-story building. Why are people so upset about this?”

    Those principles also state, however, that “Specialized commercial uses … shall be encouraged and residential and office uses shall be discouraged.”

    Of course, residential development is exactly the kind envisioned for the park, and for good reason: A marina just would not make much money. Brooklyn’s new park would need six Chelsea Piers in order to pay for itself.

    The other document that state officials point to is a 2002 agreement between Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg. That agreement repeatedly refers to a “sustainable” park but never elaborates. (Environmentally sustainable? Financially sustainable?) At one point, the document permits but does not require commercial development to take place on the park: “the development of appropriate commercial uses may occur within the project area, provided that all revenues derived from such uses shall be used exclusively for the maintenance and operation of the project.”

    A Ribbon of Green ?That Hasn’t Got Any

    Of course, there is a liberal argument that new parks should pay for themselves whenever they can, so the public money can go to parks in poor neighborhoods that are poorly maintained. It’s the reverse of environmental racism, of putting all the transfer stations and power plants in poor neighborhoods where property values are low anyway and the residents are too disorganized to raise hell. We’re not even talking about power plants here; we are talking about luxury condos with river views.

    The state and city are already chipping in plenty of land and money to create both the Hudson River and Brooklyn Bridge parks; the self-sustaining part only pertains to the operation and maintenance budgets.

    Besides, some park lovers—or at least park administrators—argue that relying on the city and state to pay annual expenses is just a bad management practice.

    “Government has its ups and downs, and over the years, if you have a built-in ability to make sure you always have the bathrooms clean and lawns maintained, how much better would it be,” said Tupper Thomas, the administrator of Prospect Park in Brooklyn and the president of the Prospect Park Alliance, a private support group. And fund-raising, she added, doesn’t qualify as a “built-in ability”; it’s a very hard thing to do.

    The opponents of Brooklyn Bridge Park, who fear that the condominium owners will turn the park into their private domain, would welcome the chance to try out a special assessment district.

    “We proposed that last year. We called it a P.O.D., a parks oversight district, or a P.I.D., a parks improvement district,” said Judi Francis, the president of the Brooklyn Bridge Park Defense Fund. “We are not stupid. We know that it will improve our real-estate values. But give us the tax burden of the park without the privatization.”

    In other words, why can’t Brooklyn be more like Manhattan?
    Last edited by infoshare; February 25th, 2006 at 11:38 PM.

  3. #108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infoshare
    ...Lincoln Harbor Marina in Weehawken, N.J., where they will be able to stay at least until April.

    Its very calm here, Richard MacKenzie-Childs said in a telephone interview last week. Its very easy watching the boat in a marina, but we prefer being part of a community in Tribeca.
    Weehawken strikes mas a great big missed opportunity to create something fine and urban, and IMO infoshare's photos help make that point.

  4. #109

    Default Yankee relocates to Weehawken

    Quote Originally Posted by ablarc
    Weehawken strikes mas a great big missed opportunity to create something fine and urban, and IMO infoshare's photos help make that point.
    Thanks Ablarc, glad to hear you viewed the photos. I read recently that the current owners have put the ferry up for sale. Not certain: anyone have any intel on this story I would love to here it.

    cheers

  5. #110

    Default

    The opposite bank of the Hudson strikes me as a missed opportunity to annex a better fifth borough to the city than Staten Island.

  6. #111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by czsz
    The opposite bank of the Hudson strikes me as a missed opportunity to annex a better fifth borough to the city than Staten Island.
    Yeah, Englewood Cliffs to Bayonne would make a dense linear borough that would come complete with rail transit, Hoboken, Jersey City, Weehawken and even --appropriately-- West New York. It's defined topographically, and it's already more like New York than Staten Island is. Anywhere but the real world it would make a great land swap.

  7. #112
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by czsz
    The opposite bank of the Hudson strikes me as a missed opportunity to annex a better fifth borough to the city than Staten Island.
    You're a couple of hundred years too late to start that fight ... all over again:

    Settlement of New Jersey

    http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h591.html

    ... the early European settlement of New Jersey was a contest between the Dutch and the Swedes. The Dutch West India Company worked to stimulate settlement in the area by granting patroonships, land grants in which the grantee was given proprietary and manorial rights over settlers he sponsored.

    In 1620, a trading post was established at the site of Bergen, New Jersey, which would later be developed as the first permanent white settlement in the area. Other Dutch enclaves followed at Fort Nassau and at Jersey City.

    Swedish settlements began in southern New Jersey in 1638, which touched off a rivalry between the two powers over the fur trade. The Dutch under Peter Stuyvesant successfully evicted the Swedes in 1655.

    The entire region was claimed by England for the Duke of York (later King James II) in 1664. The name New Jersey was introduced, which honored the isle of Jersey in the English Channel.

    The Duke's claim was passed along to two of his supporters, Lord John Berkeley and Sir John Carteret. These enterprising businessmen offered land at bargain prices and full religious toleration to attract settlers. Confusion soon developed, however. The governor of New York, unaware of Berkeley's and Carteret's proprietorships, assigned lands to several Puritan groups.

    Tension developed between the Anglican proprietors and the Puritans with the latter refusing to pay rents to the former.

    In 1674, Edward Byllynge bought out the Berkeley share to establish a Quaker settlement. The colony was divided into two sections that year. The Byllynge Quakers controlled western New Jersey; Carteret owned eastern New Jersey until his death, when control passed to another Quaker organization, the Twenty-Four Proprietors.

    As things turned out, the Quaker leadership was no more popular with New Jersey society at large than Berkeley and Carteret had been. Ill feeling and even rioting led to the surrender of the Quaker charters to the Queen in 1702, although the actual ownership of land remained with the previous entities. The royal governor of New York served both colonies until public protests resulted in the appointment of a separate official for New Jersey in 1738.

  8. #113

    Default patroonships?

    Quote Originally Posted by lofter1
    ... the early European settlement of New Jersey was a contest between the Dutch and the Swedes. The Dutch West India Company worked to stimulate settlement in the area by granting patroonships, land grants in which the grantee was given proprietary and manorial rights over settlers he sponsored.
    "Patroon" from Wikipedia: I guess this is how waterfront development was done way-back-when.



    A patroon was a proprietor of a tract of land in the 17th century Dutch colony of New Netherland in North America. In order to encourage emigration to America, the Dutch West India Company granted patroons powerful rights and privileges, close to those of the feudal period.
    A patroon could create civil and criminal courts, appoint local officials and hold land in perpetuity, but in return would be obliged to establish a settlement of at least 50 persons within four years. Settlers on the patroon's estate were relieved of the duty of public taxes for ten years, but were required to pay the patroon in money, goods, or services in kind.
    The largest and the one only truly successful patroonship in New Netherland was Rensselaerwyck, established by Kiliaen Van Rensselaer. Rensselaerwyck covered almost all of present-day Albany and Rensselaer counties and parts of present-day Columbia and Greene counties in New York State.
    Albany has a CBA basketball team called the Patroons, once coached by NBA legend Phil Jackson.


    New Netherland(s) (Dutch: Nieuw-Nederland, Latin: Nova Belgica or Novum Belgium) was the territory claimed by the Republic of the Seven United Provinces of the Netherlands on the eastern coast of North America in the 17th century most of which was contained in modern day New York State, but also streched into modern New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Connecticut and Delaware.


    Arent van Curler, later van Corlaer, ( 1619 - 1667 ) was the cousin of Kiliaen van Rensselaer and undertook the management of Rensselaer's patroonship Rensselaerwyck in the Dutch colony of New Netherland in 1637.
    He was born in Nijkerk, Netherlands.
    In 1643, Van Curler married a widow, Antonia Slaaghboom, and the couple settled near Fort Orange.
    In 1662, he founded Schenectady on land he purchased from the Mohawks. He was known for his fair dealings with the Indians, negotiating disputes and arranging for captives to be freed.
    He died, drowning in Lake Champlain in northern New York, while attempting to visit Governor de Tracy of Canada.

  9. #114

    Default

    There's a great work of narrative history about the Renssalaerswyck patroonship called "Death of a Notary"...a fascinating and well-written account of Dutch New Netherland.

  10. #115
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by infoshare
    In 1643, Van Curler married a widow, Antonia Slaaghboom, and the couple settled near Fort Orange.
    She was probably relieved to get rid of that name ....

  11. #116

    Default

    Right after Death of a Notary, I read Island at the Center of the World, an account of life in New Amsterdam through the experiences of Adriaen van der Donck, who became a prosecutor at Renssalaerswyck. He later settled in New Amsterdam, where the Dutch West India Company granted him a patroonship north of the Spuyten Duyvil Creek.

    Van der Donck was known locally as De Jonkheer (young gentleman), and his estate called De Jonkheer's Landt. After the arrival of the English, it was called Youncker’s Land, and finally Yonkers.
    Last edited by ZippyTheChimp; February 28th, 2006 at 10:58 AM.

  12. #117
    Forum Veteran MidtownGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    East Midtown
    Posts
    6,832

    Default

    I love this community. Thank you for posts like the above, which keep me learnin'!

  13. #118

    Default The devils whirlpool

    Quote Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp
    Spuyten Duyvil Creek.

    Any takers on this Question?
    Does SPUYTEN DUYVIL translate into "the spitting devil" OR " to spite the devil" OR "THE DEVILS WHIRLPOOL" , OR maybe something else altogether - I have found no general agreement or authorative claims on any - my surmise is "the devils whirlpool".
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	1.jpg 
Views:	300 
Size:	128.6 KB 
ID:	1553   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2.jpg 
Views:	285 
Size:	111.7 KB 
ID:	1554  
    Last edited by infoshare; February 28th, 2006 at 08:35 PM. Reason: pics

  14. #119
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    From wikipedia ...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spuyten_Duyvil_Creek

    Spuyten Duyvil Creek



    Spuyten Duyvil Creek, also known as the Harlem River Ship Canal,
    is a one-mile-long channel connecting the Hudson and Harlem Rivers in
    New York City, separating the island of Manhattan from the mainland.

    The neighborhood called "Spuyten Duyvil" lies to the north of the creek.

    Spuyten Duyvil Creek originally flowed north of Manhattan's Marble Hill.
    The construction of the ship canal to the south of the neighborhood in 1895
    turned Marble Hill into an island, and when the original creekbed was filled in,
    in 1914, Marble Hill became physically attached to the Bronx, though it
    remained part of the borough of Manhattan.

    "Spuyten Duyvil" means "Devil's Whirlpool" in Dutch.

    External links

  15. #120
    Moderator NYatKNIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manhattan - South Village
    Posts
    4,240

Page 8 of 26 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Hudson Yards
    By Kris in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 1905
    Last Post: June 7th, 2019, 05:20 PM
  2. Pier 57 - Hudson River Park
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: December 17th, 2013, 04:00 PM
  3. Pier 45 - Hudson River Park
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: July 10th, 2012, 10:58 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: April 26th, 2011, 04:09 AM
  5. Third Avenue Bridge - Across Harlem River
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 10th, 2002, 06:36 PM

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