Park Matters

One stark fact that Hurricane Sandy brought home to us was that the Hudson River Park is on an estuary of the Atlantic Ocean which in turn shares the globe’s weather systems. Being on the edge of this magnificent historic river makes this park unique, not only as the definition of our community, but as a place to which visitors from all over the world will come to discover a new experience. The changes this edge of Manhattan have seen from its 19^th century maritime history to its evolving embrace of the bay are profoundly moving and beautiful. They will leave an enduring imprint on our experience of the city in much the same way the extraordinary talents of Calvert Vaux and Frederick Olmsted have left on our own generation.

The Hudson River Park Act put an end to the grand 1970’s visions of high rises built out to the pier head line into the river, blocking views and causing irreparable damage to “one of the most critical marine habitats on the East Coast” according to Marcy Benstock who heads the Clean Air Campaign. “Fisheries are the most important single source of animal protein for the world’s population,” Ms. Benstock emphasized. “Habitat loss and destruction is the single greatest threat to coastal and global fisheries – even more important than overfishing.” Protection of this habitat underlay the legal challenge leading to the defeat of Westway and the passage of the Hudson River Park Act to protect this five mile waterfront. Members of the state legislature are now being asked by the Hudson River Park Trust to amend this act to encourage development once again on the waterfront.

I was told by Madelyn Wils, president of the Hudson River Park Trust (HRPT) that this 550 acre park started in 1998 is still zoned M-1-5 for manufacturing with an FAR of 2 (floor area ratio, the ratio of building floor area to the area of the lot on which the building sits). One of the 11 strategies brought before the Community Board 2 Parks and Waterfront Committee on November 29 was a proposal to sell the development rights over select commercial piers, not the entire 490 acres of “land under water,” to properties on the east side of West Street (NYS Route 9A). This would be done by creating a special district similar to those around Grand Central Station, a landmark, the South Street Seaport and the High Line Transfer Corridor. Under zoning regulations this procedure is referred to as the transfer of development rights (TDR) used for example by the Trump Tower across from the United Nations and for the silver building on the south side of Madison Square.

Another strategy discussed by Alec Pruchnicki in the September issue of WestView News is the proposed Hudson River Park Neighborhood Improvement District (HRPNID), modeled on Business Improvement Districts elsewhere in the city. Under this proposal, property owners generally within two blocks of West Street would see a surcharge on their tax bill to cover costs of park conservation, highway landscaping, safer pedestrian environment, improved public spaces, and support for local merchant and community groups. It is expected that this surcharge would cover a $10 million annual maintenance cost for the park. It would take up to two years for this to come into play.

Currently, 40% of the costs of park operations and capital maintenance of some $10 million annually is met by parking income from Pier 40 (parking is prohibited elsewhere in the park), but deterioration of the pier is beginning to eat into the Trust’s ability to raise funds to cover the cost of maintaining it. Assembly member Richard Gottfried stated in a release in June that damage to the park from Hurricane Irene amounted to $14 million and that repairs to the severely deteriorating Pier 40 will cost $125 million and this was before Hurricane Sandy, which caused damage estimated to cost $10 million in repairs with another $20 million for hazard mitigation which the Trust, like everyone else in the state expects the cash strapped FEMA to cover. FEMA will probably take great care in allowing its money to be used to rebuild structures that will once more be damaged by the next storm.

Gottfried has proposed amending the law to allow new residential construction to replace a portion of Pier 40 and to remove the pier shed itself, opening up views of the Hudson. There is doubt, however, that a developer could afford to remove the pier shed and pilings, place new pilings and a flood proof building on top, and still generate significant income for the rest of the five mile park. Assembly Member Deborah Glick told me in an interview recently that she would support residential, art gallery, restaurant, and offices, but only through adaptive reuse of the existing pier shed.

Though I heard from Friends of the High Line that the Downtown Whitney Museum scheduled to open in 2014 had suffered damage to its underground infrastructure, both the architects, RPBW, and the museum officials denied such damage; however, an on-site contractor said that they had “30 feet of water in the cellar.” “How much will it cost to repair?“ I asked. “Millions,” he replied. Marcy Benstock concluded, “We must not rebuild what Sandy has destroyed. Retreat from the coast is the only thing known to work in many cases to reduce storm damage from the kind of storm SANDY was.”

While the Hudson River Park Act states that the operation and maintenance costs of the park be paid by “revenues generated within the park to the extent practicable” (emphasis mine), the law also states that the state and city shall “finance the Hudson River Park” and that “Additional funding by the state and city may be allocated as necessary to meet the costs of operating and maintaining the park.” The New York State Parks capital budget for the entire state is only $85 million. New York City’s capital budget is over $400 million. Neither body has funds to complete Hudson River Park in the near future leaving it only about 70% complete.

This precious land deserves a thoughtful, environmentally sustainable treatment. In the long run it should be a southward extension of Riverside Park. The excellent design that has taken place so far with a combination of active and passive recreation in beautiful surroundings should continue. This can and should be one of the most outstanding and enduring urban waterfronts in the world.