|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Regarding Proposed Restaurant in Union Square Park December 20, 2004 The Greenwich Village Block Associations is a community wide coalition dedicated to preserving and improving the quality of life for residents of our historic neighborhood. As part of our mandate we support improvements to our parks and playgrounds. Recently, The New York Times and The Villager have published articles about a BID/New York City Parks Department proposal for the north end of Union Square Park that cause concern, particularly since no Greenwich Village or Chelsea community organization has been consulted about this plan. Union Square, which has been designated a National Historic Landmark, is uniquely situated at the junction of several communities: Greenwich Village, Chelsea, the Flatiron District, the Gramercy-Stuyvesant area and the Lower East Side. Union Square’s historic role as a “soapbox” site and the presence of its nationally known Greenmarket make this a destination park for tourists as well. Indeed, in the opinion of many in the “food community,” the Union Square Greenmarket was a major impetus for the American style food revolution that has influenced the “kitchen arts” throughout the world. Ruth Reichl’s last column as The New York Times food editor detailed this culinary contribution. But Union Square is primarily a critical and cherished recreational spot for the surrounding community that includes the burgeoning residential population – with lots of small children – and neighborhood businesses, many of them purveying food. A part of the city that used to be a “dead” spot in the evening is bustling and brightly illuminated, thanks in part to more than 100 restaurants and cafes within a two square block radius of the park. An additional restaurant, particularly a private dining facility that consumes a section of Union Square Park, runs counter to public policy and is unnecessary and undesirable. Three-and-a-half acre Union Square Park is heavily used and frequently overcrowded; reducing the available recreational space by ceding it to a private use is not in the public interest. While paying customers are comfortably seated in the summer restaurant that has operated there for the past few years, other park users who want to take a break in Union Square — perhaps, with food purchased elsewhere — are often unable to find a seat on a bench and must sit on the ground.The GVBA is sensitive to the city’s fiscal restraints, but we are dismayed that the Park’s Department is routinely under-funded to such an extent that it must continually search for additional revenue. Our parks should not be regarded as assets that can be leased to increasingly crass commercial enterprise and vulgar public relations stunts. The proposed playground expansion should not be held hostage to a commercial venture. Union Square Park currently does not permit mobile food vendors within its confines. We suggest that the Parks Department should explore the financial benefits of allowing a reasonable number of these venders into this park as it has elsewhere. While the GVBA endorses the improvement and expansion of Union Square’s playgrounds, we do not believe that such renovations should be contingent upon permitting a restaurant to annex a section of our public space. |