• Calendar
  • Contests
  • Villager Blog
  • Jobs
  • Our staff
  • Media kit
    • Contact advertising
    • Specifications and sizes
  • Current print edition
  • Home delivery
  • Previously published
    • 2011
    • 2010
    • 2009
    • 2008
    • 2007
    • 2006
    • 2005
    • 2004
    • 2003
  • Buy a copy of The Villager
  • Get email updates
  • Classifieds
The Villager Newspaper
  • Home
  • Editorial
  • SPACES
  • Global Village
  • The Angry Buddhist
  • Progress Report
  • COLUMNS
  • CARTOONS
  • Talking Point I
  • Talking Point II
  • Gallery Seen
  • News
    • Community
    • Police Blotter
    • Education
    • Obituaries
    • Politics & Government
      • District One
      • District Three
      • Borough Pres.
      • Mayoral Race
    • Villager Videos
  • Opinion
    • CARTOONS
    • Reporter's Notebook
    • Talking Point
    • Notebook
    • Guest Editorial
    • Columns
      • jack wells
      • Leaders
      • LENORE SKENAZY
      • Books
      • Eats
      • Technology
      • People
      • Pet Set
      • Spin City
      • Clayton
      • Jerry Tallmer
      • Ira Blutreich
      • Evan Forsch
      • Flashback
      • Horoscopes
      • History
      • Youth
      • Sports
      • Health
      • Poetry
    • Editorials
    • Your Letters
    • Scene
    • Publisher
  • Arts
  • Scoopy's
  • In Pictures
  • Real Estate
  • Villager Blog
  • Special Sections
    • Film Fest
    • Sponsored Content
    • Why Pink?
    • Art Corner
    • 80th Anniversay
    • Pride
    • Meat Market
    • Progress
    • Union Square
    • Volunteers
    • Literature
    • Downtown Directory
      • From the publisher
      • Community Listings
        • Handicapped & Disabled Services
        • Health Services
        • Hotels
        • Legal & Financial Services
        • Neighborhood Associations
        • Police
        • Political Organizations
        • Post Offices
        • Public Officials
        • Recreation
        • After School Programs, Daycare and Nursery Schools
        • AIDS Services
        • Business Associations
        • Cultural Organizations
        • Education Colleges & Universities
        • Educational Services
        • Libraries
        • Museums & Attractions
  • Jobs
  • RSS for Entries

Survey says? C.B. 2 to release online poll on future of Pier 40

July 27, 2017 | Filed under: News,Community | Posted by: The Villager

At a meeting on Pier 40 two months ago, a leader of the Downtown United Soccer Club presented some of the league’s ideas for the pier, including a modest commercial use — adding a cafe — and increasing the amount of playing-field space. Photo by Lincoln Anderson

BY LINCOLN ANDERSON | So far, a series of meetings by a Community Board 2 working group focusing on Pier 40 have not exactly been going gangbusters in terms of drawing crowds of local residents.

To solicit more ideas and concerns about the planned redevelopment of the sprawling W. Houston St. pier, C.B. 2 now will be sending out an e-survey. Tobi Bergman, chairperson of the board’s ad hoc Future of Pier 40 Working Group, said the survey will be going out next week.

Few details were available at press time about the survey’s actual contents or exactly which e-mail lists will be used to distribute it — though, obviously the C.B. 2 list will be used.

In a recent interview, Bergman told The Villager, “We decided to do a survey to give a broader segment of the community a chance to weigh in, because the turnout at these meetings hasn’t been huge — because there hasn’t been anything on the table. Usually people start coming out [to meetings] when there’s a plan on the table.”

Although the Hudson River Park Trust, the waterfront park’s governing authority, has had one or more representatives at the meetings, which have been going for a few months now, so far no concrete plans have been broached by the Trust. What is known is that the Trust wants to redevelop Pier 40 to generate more revenue for both the massive W. Houston St. pier’s maintenance and the wider park, in general.

The Trust has tried, without success, to find ideas for the pier for more than a decade now. Two previous requests for proposals, or R.F.P.’s, from developers for plans to redevelop Pier 40 both went bust after the community opposed the proposals. Those failed ideas ranged from the world’s largest oceanarium during the first R.F.P. to a Cirque du Soleil-centered “Vegas on the Hudson” plan by The Related Companies during the subsequent R.F.P.

This past May, a deal was closed under which the Trust is selling 200,000 square feet of unused development rights from Pier 40 to the developers of the St. John’s Partners project at 550 Washington St. That project will see the old St. John’s Terminal redeveloped into a new residential-and-hotel complex with a significant amount of affordable housing included.

But Pier 40 still has remaining air rights, and if the pier’s current three-story pier shed is demolished, even more development rights will be available to build new structures on the pier.

“The difficult thing,” Bergman said, “will be to try to figure out how to protect the park from another overblown development project” without totally impeding the Trust from trying to redevelop Pier 40 at all.

The main goal of the Trust right now, he said, is to modify the park’s governing legislation, the Hudson River Park Act of 1998, to allow commercial office space to be built at Pier 40. Currently, under the legislation, space equal to 50 percent of the pier’s footprint must be reserved for recreational park use, while the rest of the pier can be used commercially to generate revenue for the park.

“What the Trust has made clear over the years is that they want as much flexibility as they get,” he noted.

The Pioneers team proudly took the field at Pier 40 at a Greenwich Village Little League Opening Day parade a few years ago. The pier’s enormous courtyard sports field is a sacred cow for local families. Villager file photo

But if what the Trust proposes is out of scale, no doubt there will be community backlash.

“If it’s huge, there will be resistance,” Bergman assured. “Scale is a huge issue.”

The former C.B. 2 chairperson and longtime local youth sports and parks activist noted that the pier has a floor-area ratio, or F.A.R., of 2 — meaning that if all the pier’s original development rights were still intact, the entire 15.4-acre pier could be covered solidly with two stories of floor space. Subtracting the 200,000 square feet that were sold to the St. John’s Partners project for $100 million still leaves the pier with a lot of usable development rights.

“You end up with half the floor area of the Empire State Building,” Bergman offered for comparison. “That’s what you could put there. What would be left would be 1.15 million square feet — the Empire State Building is 2.25 million square feet.

“And if you put offices there, you will have to have a certain amount of ancillary stuff — restaurants, cafes, coffee shops,” he noted.

The “density of the office space” will be a key issue, he predicted.

“If 10,000 people are working there, that would be a disaster,” Bergman warned. “Five thousand sounds like it’s still a lot.”

On the other hand, what the pier currently has — recreational park uses (its sports fields) and parking — are uses that have less impact and are less dense in terms of numbers of people on the pier.

Ultimately, Bergman pointed to the language of the park act as the guideline for any redevelopment of the pier. The legislation, he noted, says that “to the extent practicable,” the park will generate income through park commercial uses for the park’s maintenance and operation.

(“It is intended that, to the extent practicable…the costs of the operation and maintenance of the park be paid by revenues generated within the Hudson River Park and that those revenues be used only for park purposes. Additional funding by the state and the city may be allocated as necessary to meet the costs of operating and maintaining the park.”)

Looking at it another way, Bergman said, it isn’t — or shouldn’t be — a question of how much money the Trust wants to milk out of Pier 40, “but what can the park and the community take?”

“We don’t want to fight it again. That’s why we’re doing this,” he said of the working group’s goal of having recommendations for Pier 40 in place by the end of this year.

What is not wanted is another failed R.F.P., which would be “strike three” for Pier 40 after two previous processes tanked, he stressed.

“That would make chances even less likely it’ll happen,” he said. “We want a successful park / commercial project that can generate funds for the park. But,” he added, “the purpose of the park is not to raise money. The park’s commercial part has to be compatible.”

Personally, Bergman said he would have preferred some residential development as a way to raise funds for the park. Around five years ago, a group he helped spearhead, Pier 40 Champions — a coalition of the local youth sports leagues — proposed the idea of building two luxury residential towers near the bike path at the foot of Pier 40 as a revenue generator. But it never got off the ground due to lack of political support. Like office use, it would have needed a legislative amendment, since the park act doesn’t allow residential use. The leagues wouldn’t have built the towers, but they just suggested the idea.

“I thought the answer was a limited amount of residential,” Bergman reflected, “but the politicians didn’t want that, so we conceded that.”

Meanwhile, the Trust is not helping clarify things, in that it isn’t giving any real specifics on what it wants to see at Pier 40.

The Villager asked a Trust spokesperson if she could provide some more details about what the authority is envisioning, but she replied, “On Pier 40, the Trust respects the community board’s process and is not commenting at this point.”

At least one thing that is very clear, though: Bergman doesn’t want any of the potential office employees on Pier 40 thinking they’ll get insider dibs on the pier’s coveted courtyard or rooftop artificial-turf sports fields.

“They should have no special access to the fields,” he stressed. “No, not the same access to the fields as everyone else, because they already will be dominating the pier. Those fields are there for the community — not to make the pier more attractive to a commercial office use. I think that they would really have to be at the end of the line.”

Another big concern for the local leagues, like Greenwich Village Little League and Downtown United Soccer Club, and local schools that use the pier is that the playing fields never shut down.

However, the fear is that a massive Pier 40 project could close the pier for several years, meaning the leagues will have to scramble to find alternative field space.

“They should not close down the fields for construction,” Bergman stressed.

The Villager encourages readers to share articles:
Tweet

Advertisers from our print edition



Comments are often moderated.


We appreciate your comments and ask that you keep to the subject at hand, refrain from use of profanity and maintain a respectful tone to both the subject at hand and other readers who also post here. We reserve the right to delete your comment.

4 Responses to Survey says? C.B. 2 to release online poll on future of Pier 40

  1. guest July 27, 2017 - 16:35

    " not exactly been going gangbusters in terms of drawing crowds of local residents" — isn't that because the chairperson hand-picked who would be in the working group? Anyone who attended past events and signed up to help was dismissed, yes?

    Not sure who the survey is for, but they always favor groups of people over individuals, so the sports leagues and team have the opportunity to over-run such an idea, and individuals will never have their voices heard.

    Unfortunately, sports fields use up the largest part of any area with the least amount of numbers of how many get to use the space. They don't bring in much money, and they don't provide much access to All.

    Their is about to be a ton of senior housing across the highway from this Pier, so shouldn't our elders have a bigger say as to what goes here? If not, then I'd vote for a giant water park.

    I've read the Hudson River Park Act, and there is nothing wrong with it. It asks for the same things we all want in that area. A lot of locals spent a lot of time thinking and working on the Act. It was not just dashed off. It would be criminal to change the Act in any way.

    It sure sounds like the chairperson knows what he wants, and is laying out a path to get just that. Shouldn't the head of such an important committee be more of a moderator without ulterior motives?

    Reply
  2. Patrick Shields July 28, 2017 - 21:55

    Respectfully to Tobi, and the Pier 40 sports community,

    I still believe that nods to preventing disruption ought to be made secondary
    to any plan which gets in and gets out, and completes the task as quickly as possible. And that is small arena construction, period. Nothing else fits. Continuing to suggest that any large overhaul can be done with minimum disruption is hopeful, but not possible. C'mon. Construction environments are unsafe by definition, it why people wear hard hats, it's why there are environmental impact statements, it's why workers wear OSHA aprroved masks. Why keep pushing this fallacy?

    On the human impact side, an arena is temporary weekly crowds (and not even all year) rather than daily commuters, and as I have always argued, it is a commercial entity consistent with one of the most important constituents on the pier.

    Pier 40 needs a complete overhaul and there is only one certain way to do it,
    and the money still is at hand; you know where I stand on that one, soccer, and I still believe it has never been given a full and fair hearing in front of the downtown community.

    I have always argued that people will wait to shoot anything down, rather than have
    to come up with fully fleshed ideas. And so here you all are yet again.

    Though I have always felt hurricane and flood doomsayers to be overly alarmist, I agree with them in
    the context of what should go on or near the pier. Anything which would be disrupted by being unable to move after a surge: a hospital, a school (somewhat), housing (especially senior), offices. All of these things are impacted egregiously, costing millions, maybe billions to repair. An arena temporarily relocates a team while a field is repaired. NYCFC would move right back into Yankee Stadium on a temporary basis. Proven, and possible. All while revenues, TV, ticket, PILOT and/or otherwise, any shared revenues, continue to flow to the pier and the Trust.

    Why not invite them to make a pitch to the downtown community, publicly, transparently. Demand what the community wants. Continuation of the 50% threshold, passive green space, youth fields equal to or greater than currently. Just see if it is possible already, and let the community decide.

    The club has shown a genuine devotion, (and who cares if it is for marketing purposes, it's a business), to community development, and community action. They are out there, have been proving themselves.

    They deserve a hearing. Will you invite them to make an open, public pitch?
    Perhaps they are engaged elsewhere by this point, but why not find out? Why not let the community hear them out?

    When did Greenwich Village become so fearful of the new?
    Soccer is social and progressively political, perhaps the best hope to cut into the dominant American macho sports culture. It is pro woman and girl, and pro gay. It is pro Latino, pro immigration, and pro American, all at the same time.

    Now is the time. If you're going to say no, listen first. If nothing else, it will massively energize this discussion, and draw attention. If not, stubbornness has only done harm. The pier continues to rot.

    You need an interest injection? This is how you get it.

    Reply
  3. Waterfront Neighbor August 4, 2017 - 09:59

    " the chairperson hand-picked who would be in the working group? …Shouldn't the head of such an important committee be more of a moderator without ulterior motives?

    You have Bergman’s method of operation down to a T. This control freak has been operating this way for years. This process will be a farce.
    If 100% of the respondents want, for example, a flower market there and Bergman doesn’t, he will do his best to thwart the will of the majority who want the flower market . Who appoints this guy to these important positions?

    Reply
  4. Kevin Deeb April 18, 2018 - 00:44

    Not sure who the survey is for, but they always favor groups of people over individuals, so the sports leagues and team have the opportunity to over-run such an idea, and individuals will never have their voices heard. Unfortunately, sports fields use up the largest part of any area with the least amount of numbers of how many get to use the space. They don't bring in much money, and they don't provide much access to All. I have always argued that people will wait to shoot anything down, rather than have to come up with fully fleshed ideas. And so here you all are yet again. Reach into new neighborhoods to find profitable customers with residential mailing lists from Experience.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.


× 8 = thirty two

Search The Villager


Share This Post

Tweet


Sponsors

Sponsor


ClickHereForCalendarButton
ClickHereForCalendarButton

RSS Gay City News

  • Can Three Parents Make a Family in New York?
  • Federal Court Orders Trial on Trans Military Ban
  • David Buckel, Passionate LGBTQ Rights Litigator, Dead at 60

RSS Chelsea Now

  • Back to Work We Go — But First, Some Back-Patting!
  • Seeds Planted for Rooftop Gardens to Feed Midtown Needs
  • 10 Indicted for Stealing $500K Via Check Fraud, Mail Theft

RSS Downtown Express

  • Beware the Coarsening
  • We Are The Champions: ‘Bathtubs’ Compels Us to Respect the Art of Industrial Musicals
  • Tangible and Social: Virtual Reality at Tribeca Immersive
  • Transit Sam: Week of April 19, 2018
  • Tribeca’s Rich Offering of Queer Cinema
  • Police Blotter: Week of April 12
  • Lest we forget: Museum of Jewish Heritage marks Holocaust Remembrance Day

RSS East Villager News

  • Best in Screen, 2015
  • A Coney Island of the East Village at City Lore
  • NYCHA will build on ‘hot’ East Side, chief assures
  • After 50 years, famed fashionista Patricia Field closing Downtown store
  • God’s Love We Deliver is back and cooking again in its gleaming new Spring St. building
  • Scoopy’s, Week of Sept. 3, 2015
  • ‘N.Y. Corporate U.’ is crushing us, critics cry
  • Foodies steamed after wonton rent hike, taxes force out Charlie Mom
  • Crusty punk whose pit bull terrorized East Village is dead
  • Spring forward to fall festivals

NYC Community Media LLC also publishes:
The Villager • Gay City News • Chelsea Now • East Villager News


ONE METROTECH, 10TH FLOOR NORTH
NYC, NY 11201
Main Telephone: 212-229-1890
Fax: 212-229-2790
Advertising: 212-229-1890

© TheVillager.com (Copyright 2017). Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to TheVillager.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Log in - The Villager - Published by NYC COMMUNITY MEDIA