Village residents not pleased with Mercer plans
BY MEGAN MCGIBNEY
About 40 people gathered at the Little Red Schoolhouse
last week for CB2’s Parks & Waterfront
Committee meeting to get a glimpse of plans for
the interim renovation of Mercer Playground, which runs
along Mercer Street between Bleecker and West 3rd Streets.
Ricardo Hinkle, from the Parks Department, and Steve
Simon, the Manhattan Chief of Staff for the Parks Department,
were there to unveil the proposed design.
Hinkle displayed an image of the proposed redesign,
which included colorful geometric shapes for street games,
dotted lines for bike paths, and fences. It was based on
what was discussed during a March 2019 meeting, where
locals gave their input on what they wanted to see for the
redesigned playground. Some of the top community suggestions
at that meeting included a skate park, space for bikes
and scooters, and space for seniors.
But not everyone on Monday was convinced with what
they saw of the proposed design. Some were dismayed to see
fences and so few entrances. Others expressed concern over
the bike path, and a few even wondered about the homeless
sleeping on the proposed benches.
“This park should be available to the whole community,”
said a woman who did not like the fences. “It should be
inviting to others, and it will feel like you’re boxed in.”
One man pointed out the bike paths may not work.
“It doesn’t make sense to have street games while older
kids ride their bikes or scooters,” he said.
A man named Tim, who said he grew up with the park,
PHOTO COURTESY O A rendering of proposed redesign for Mercer Playground. F THE PARKS DEPARTMENT.
went into detail how the benches will attract the homeless,
who might create an encampment.
“There’s no break in the benches,” Tim said, pointing
out the lack of dividers. “The homeless will use the water
to shower. Their presence makes parents and their kids
uncomfortable.”
He also brought up the likelihood of marijuana users
going to the park in the spring and summer.
“You’re not going to stop people from smoking weed
during their lunch break,” Tim said as a few attendants
chuckled.
The budget for Mercer Playground is $385,000, which
made some wonder if donations could be accepted.
NYU pledged money for the playground’s renovation as
part of its Core Plan in the neighborhood, which invests in
local community projects.
Opposition over Union Sq. permit plan rages on
BY GABE HERMAN
As the city’s proposed plan to require special permits
for hotels in an area just below Union Square
continues its path through the ULURP (Uniform
Land Use Review Procedure) process, there has been
opposition from many local officials and residents, but
advocates worry that it could still pass in the end.
The plan would require that new hotels in part of
Greenwich Village and the East Village just below Union
Square would have to obtain special permits, which would
require approval from the City Planning Commission and
the City Council.
In November, Community Boards 2 and 3 passed
resolutions rejecting the plan, saying that it will still allow
for other large development in the area. CB3’s resolution
added the city had failed in its plan to recognize several
historically significant buildings in the area, and called
for downzoning the area from 9th Street to 14th Street
between Third and Fourth Avenues.
In late January, Manhattan Borough President Gale
Brewer also rejected the plan, and noted that she had received
hundreds of emails from concerned residents about
potential commercial expansion in the area.
“It does not provide any protection to the existing
residential stock, of which a significant amount is rent
regulated,” Brewer wrote in her Jan. 21 recommendation
on the ULURP application. “While hotel development
would be restricted, other commercial development would
not be subject to additional regulation. DCP’s Department
of City Planning own environmental analysis concludes
PHOTO BY GABE HERMAN
A view up Broadway below Union Square.
that office buildings in lieu of hotels would likely result
on sites they have identified as underbuilt if this land use
action is approved.”
Brewer recommended additional zoning measures to
address concerns about more commercial development,
and for the Landmarks Preservation Commission to work
with the community to identify historically significant
landmarks and properties to preserve them.
The plan was discussed at a City Planning Commission
hearing on Jan. 22, in which all of the public comments
were against the plan, including from community advocates,
a member of CB2 and many local residents.
“This neighborhood is my home,” said Donna Robin
Lippman, a resident of East 14th Street for 46 years, to
the City Planning Commission. “I have been feeling very
sad for the last many years as I watch my neighborhood
be mowed over. I watch small businesses close, small businesses
that provide services, and huge impersonal buildings
come into the neighborhood. And I ask you please,
please protect us.”
Lippman asked the City Planning Commission to work
to keep New York’s identity. “I feel like I’m a tourist somewhere,
instead of being home anymore,” she said.
Andrew Berman, executive director of Village Preservation,
said the plan in itself would not be harmful, but
wouldn’t provide the needed protections in the area from
development.
“The issue is that it does absolutely no good whatsoever
and it becomes a way for the city and the Council to say,
‘Hey, we did something,’” Berman said.
Berman echoed Brewer’s point that the city’s own
analysis said the plan would lead to high-rise office buildings.
“From our perspective that is no help whatsoever,”
Berman said.
The City Planning Commission hasn’t yet set a date for
voting on the plan. Berman said he expects the Commission
to approve the plan, as most of its members are appointed
by the mayor, who supports the proposal. Berman
said this was frustrating, despite being encouraged by all
the local pushback the plan has received.
4 February 13, 2020 Schneps Media