Building Football Stadiums and Convention CentersApril 29, 2005 The Jets want to build a football stadium and convention center for the West Side of Manhattan. This chart compares the project to similar stadiums built recently in other American cities. (Read More...)

AIDS Over FiftyMarch 25, 2005 by Sarah Stuteville
When Albert Derry was diagnosed with HIV, he didn’t imagine he would survive the year. The year was 1986. Derry now, 59, thinks he will live until 75, or about the average lifespan of a male in the United States.
“I didn’t really expect to live this long,” says Derry, as he sits in a backroom of Village Care, a non-profit organization located on W. 20th street which seeks to help New Yorkers living with AIDS through day treatment programs, “I never had a long term plan, once I was diagnosed, I thought ‘this is it, I’m going to die,’ because that was all I was seeing, people getting sick and dying.”
But AIDS has changed dramatically over the past ten years. Where once it was considered a death sentence, now with the help of anti-retral virals, people infected with HIV/AIDS are living longer, many into their fifties and sixties. According to ACRIA (The AIDS Community Research Initiative of America) 28 percent of people living with HIV/AIDS in New York City are over fifty and 67 percent over forty, which means they will be entering older age in the next decade.
This emerging demographic is raising new issues within the Gay and AIDS activist community and encouraging new research into the medical, psychological, sexual education needs facing older people living with the disease.
Derry says that he and many people he knows over fifty who are HIV positive often experience medical problems such as severe arthritis, neuropathy, liver and digestion problems. He is unsure whether these ailments are a result of old age, AIDS, or the drugs he has been taking to control the disease.
It is commonly accepted that general physical deterioration associated with aging such as diabetes, arthritis and heart problems can be intensified by HIV/AIDS infection, leaving older infected people with lots of pain and complicated medical problems. In addition, most AIDS drugs have only been tested on younger people; the potential side effects or effectiveness of certain treatments for older people are unknown. Whether long-term drug cocktail use may cause secondary health problems is another issue that has not yet been studied.
The psychological effect associated with growing old with AIDS is another issue that organizations are paying particular attention to. Researchers say that older infected people may be suffering from array of emotional issues ranging from depression and social isolation, to survivors guilt, post traumatic stress syndrome, and even a sense of anxiety provoked from realizing for the first time that they may live into old age.
“I only started thinking of life as something that wasn’t going to end tomorrow through a lot of psychotherapy,” says Derry. He attends workshops, lectures, treatment, and therapy sessions at Village Care about two to three times a week.
“When people began to live longer, other issues beyond survival began to emerge. Psychological issues, issues about medication and treatment, and general ‘how do I negotiate the day?’ issues,” says Arthur Webb, President and CEO of Village Care, who believes that helping older people with AIDS confront these issues is an important goal of the program, especially since they may be less prepared to enter old age and less likely to have traditional familial support systems,
Sex education and prevention models for older adults with, or at risk for, HIV/AIDS infection present another new hurdle for many organizations and sex educators who are trying to establish an age sensitive approach. This topic is particularly urgent at a time when new disturbing information has indicated that AIDS/HIV infection rates among seniors is on the rise.
“When we think AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases, we don’t think of people over fifty,” says Arlene Kochman a research associate with the Yale Research Project, “We tend to neglect the aging in our society anyway so it makes sense that we wouldn’t be considering the aging infected population either.”
As AIDS among the elderly is presenting a new challenge, the medical establishment, sex educators, and non-profit community programs like Village Care are beginning to explore the specific issues and needs of this emerging demographic.
The response is still in its infancy. A handful of recent and ongoing studies are just now beginning to investigate the problems and concerns of older infected people.
“We know we’re on the right track,” says Kochman, “It’s great that these people are living longer, but now the issue has to be resolved as to whether or not they can live better.”

Against the Tide, Crime Continues Rising in ChelseaFebruary 25, 2005 By Zubin Soleimany
As crime rates keep falling all over the city, why does it keep rising in one of the city’s most rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods? In the 10th precinct, which covers all of Chelsea west of Seventh Avenue, no one seems to have a straight answer.
According to the NYPD’s year-end report, crime in the 10th precinct rose 2.6 percent in 2004. While that number may seem small, only six of the city’s 76 precincts posted any increases in criminal complaints. Moreover, the small increase comes on top of a huge two-year spike in crime in the precinct. During a three-year period starting in 2001, crime fell 14% percent citywide, but rose 55 percent in the 10th precinct.
While criminal activity here is still relatively low, with about a third as many crimes committed annually as the worse precincts, the 10th still posts the highest increase of any for the last few years.
The numbers proved embarrassing enough for the precinct’s former commanding officer to falsify statistics. In June 2003, Captain Dominic Gentile was found to have deflated precinct crime rates by twenty percent after recording a quarter of the precinct’s felonies as misdemeanors in 2002.
Citywide, grand larceny was the only category of serious crime that rose last year, at 2.2 percent, with cases in the 10th precinct counting for 10.8 percent of the citywide increase. Grand larceny covers any theft worth $1,000 or more not involving force or breaking and entering. The 789 complaints of grand larceny in the 10th accounted for over half of the precinct’s serious criminal complaints in 2004, rising 76.5 percent since 2001.
Police officers at the 10th precinct referred all questions to the Deputy Commissioner of Public Information’s office. Lieutenant Eugene Whyte credits the rising crime to the neighborhood’s population boom and the continued growth of nightlife in Chelsea “There has been incredible growth in this area; where there are more people, you’re going to have more crime,” Whyte said.
According to Whyte, unattended property in clubs, such as purses containing credit cards and cash accounts for much of the precinct’s grand larceny complaints. To combat unattended item larceny, Whyte says the police will deploy plainclothes police and decoys of unattended handbags and laptop computers in Chelsea and all over the city to keep watch in higher risk areas like coffee shops and clubs.
But not all crimes in Chelsea are purse-snatchings. Six people were murdered in the precinct in 2004, up from one in 2003, while felony assault rose 7 percent last year and 69.6 percent over the last two years. In fact, all categories of criminal complaints show increases since 2001.
Steven Spyro, a longtime resident of Chelsea and the owner of Rainbows & Triangles, a gay boutique on Eighth Avenue, ventured that most of the precinct’s crimes were committed in the less gentrified part of the precinct west of Ninth Avenue. “Right now there are two Chelseas: everything around here and then all of the losers in the projects and that area, and you’ll never be able to gentrify the projects.”
The statistics present more of a mixed picture. While crime actually fell 32.6 percent last year in the precinct’s two public housing projects, it rose 28 percent since 2001.
Jimmy Pelsey, head of the tenant’s organization at the Robert Fulton Homes housing project doesn’t believe that crime in the precinct’s projects has declined. Pelsey believes that cops haven’t been recording all of the crimes: “The cops are just trying to make themselves look good; we have people making calls and the cops just don’t show up.”
Pelsey believes that the addition of several nightclubs around the projects has only added made things worse in west Chelsea, where the combination of the nightlife and the unemployed of the Fulton homes have made a dangerous mix.
Neighborhood thugs follow clubgoers as they leave and, Pelsey believes, the growth of nightlife has reinvigorated drug dealing in the neighborhood and its projects. Clubgoers, says Pelsey, “are just a whole new bag of candy for [neighborhood criminals].”
“I don’t blame the club owners, they’re just doing their business. The cops need to come down, get out of their cars for once and patrol around the projects and these clubs.”
David Rabin, president of the New York Nightlife Association and owner of The Union Bar and Lotus, echoes Pelsey’s sentiments. Rabin and other owners have been pushing for the ability to hire Paid Detail Units, groups off-duty NYPD officers that provide additional security for businesses. While Paid Detail Units have worked outside large concerts and sporting events since 1998, the NYPD prohibits them from working inside or outside of establishments selling alcohol.
Councilmember Christine Quinn, who serves Chelsea, has co-sponsored the Quiet Neighborhood Act, which would allow bars and nightclubs to hire Paid Detail Units. The City Council’s Public Safety Committee is expected to vote on the legislation in May.
“We believe that the police should increase their presence around clubs of their own volition, but if they don’t, we’re willing to pay for it.” said Rabin.

West Side Stadium and Convention CenterNovember 12, 2004
WHAT SHOULD BE BUILT ON MANHATTAN'S WEST SIDE?
Mayor Michael Bloomberg has outlined an ambitious plan for redeveloping
the 360-acre area in Manhattan west of Eighth Avenue from 30th to 42nd
Streets, which he calls the Hudson Yards plan.
The $2.8 billion development proposal would nearly double the size of
the Jacob Javits Convention Center and include a 75,000-seat stadium for
the New York Jets. Officials said the expanded convention center and new
stadium as well as office buildings and residential high-rises would
help create more than 15,000 jobs for the city and provide more than
500,000 days of additional hotel stays per year.
One of the big questions, however, is how the city will pay for all of
this.
The stadium would be financed with $600 million from the city and state,
which would pay for the retractable roof and the platform over the rail
yards. The Javits Center expansion would be financed by $600 million
from the city and the state, and $500 million from a $1.50-per-night
hotel tax. The extension of the number 7-subway line from Times Square
to the far west side would cost about $2 billion.
And there are concerns from local residents, who fear they will be
pushed out of the neighborhood.
The plan still needs approval from the New York State Legislature. The
City Planning Commission is set to vote on the proposal in November and
the City Council will consider it in January 2005.
YES: Time to Develop the West Side - David Weprin
NO: Stop the Stadium - Christine Quinn
LEARN MORE: Related Links

TIME TO DEVELOP THE WEST SIDE
By David Weprin
I believe the plan to develop the West Side of Manhattan, to expand the
Jacob Javits Convention Center, and to build a stadium for the New York
Jets works economically.
A Good Investment
We are starting with a private investment of $800
million from the New York Jets, which is unprecedented in any stadium
financing deal ever done anywhere in the country. The largest investment
before this was about $200 million, when the city of Chicago renovated
Soldiers Field.
We are not, as opposition groups would like people to think, taking away
money from things such as salaries for police, firefighter, and
teachers. We are talking about a capital project, which will be financed
by 30-year, long-term bonds. The numbers I have seen on the $300 million
invested by the city and $300 million invested by the state show that
the debt service will be paid off with $40 million a year. Even the most
conservative estimates show that the return will be $50 million a year
and some estimate up to $70 million a year. On strict economic terms,
this is a good investment.
Creating Jobs
The project will create approximately 18,000 jobs and new
economic activity in the area. There will be construction jobs as well.
We are talking about two new hotels on the site, restaurants, and a
major investment in one of the last underdeveloped areas in Manhattan.
A New Convention Center
The project will also double the size of the
Jacob Javits Convention Center, which will make us more competitive with
other convention centers across the country. We are not competitive
right now. When the Javits center first opened 20 years ago, New York
was in the top five convention sites. Now, we are about 18th or 19th,
because we don"t have a large room to accommodate 30,000 to 50,000
people. With the stadium, which will have a retractable dome, we will be
able to accommodate up to 70,000 people.
Sports and other Events
The new stadium will allow New York to attract
Super Bowl games, NCAA finals and other sporting events, as well as
concerts that will bring in additional revenue to the city. This is not
even considering the 2012 Olympics. The city may be a long shot, but you
have to look toward the future for the city. And this is a great
opportunity to bring the Jets back to New York from New Jersey.
The Future of the City
This is one of the last underdeveloped areas of
Manhattan. People have been talking about developing this area for the
last 30 years and nothing has happened. Any project in that area would
require that a platform be built over the rail yards and infrastructure.
That is what we are paying for. The $600 million from the state and city
would go to pay for that platform as well as the dome so the stadium
could be used for conventions.
The economic development committee of the City Council held two public
hearings on this project. They reminded me of bad weddings, where you
have a bride"s side and groom"s side and no one gets along. At these
hearings, on one side we had the labor unions and the supporters of the
project and on the other side were mostly West Side residents, who were
against it. But those same residents have indicated that they would
probably oppose any development of the area because they are worried
about traffic and congestion. People may live near the site, but few
actually live in that neighborhood.
We have to look ahead for the future of New York City. This is an
opportunity to leverage private investment to create jobs and economic
growth.
David Weprin represents the district 23 and is the chair of the City
Council's finance committee.

STOP THE STADIUM
By Christine Quinn
I represent the area that is being rezoned and targeted for the stadium.
Neither myself nor the other elected officials nor the community board
members nor neighborhood residents are opposed to this stadium in a
major "anti-development way."
Those of us on the West Side feel strongly - we don't necessarily call
it a wasteland, a word that has been used - that it is an area that is
in need of rezoning. We don't agree that only a couple of hundred people
live there - in fact, according to the census, there are 21,000 people
who live in the 50-square block area that would be rezoned - but we do
agree that the area should be rebuilt and upzoned. And we do believe
that the heart of that rezoning and up-building should be an expansion
of the Jacob Javits Convention Center.
Not the Right Plan for Conventions
We wish this plan was more squarely
focused on the Javits center and its expansion into a model that would
truly bring convention business to the city without being attached to
the stadium.
It's true that the city of New York is woefully far behind as it relates
to bringing conventions to the city, but if you look at the 18 cities
that beat us, so to speak, only one of those has a model where the
convention center flows into a stadium and another one has a stadium
across the street. So, only two of the 18 have a model like the one that
we're proposing here. The other 16 do not but nonetheless beat us. I
think that and other facts show that this is not the model one has to
have to truly be competitive in the 21st century convention business.
The Most Expensive Stadium Ever Built
As for the Jets stadium to be
built on the Hudson Rail Yard, which has been put forth by the Bloomberg
administration. I and many others have deep concerns about the financing
plan, in particular, the amount of public money that is going to go into
this plan. The Jets stadium I think will be the most expensive stadium
we've seen built. It's going to cost in the end $1.4 billion. The city
will pick up $300 million of that and the state another $300 million. We
hear a lot in the economic analysis, in the economic justification of
this stadium, that the money that is spent will be made up by increased
revenue, increased tax dollars.
I don't think that is actually true for a couple of reasons. I am
troubled by the fact that the environmental impact statement and most of
the economic discussion about the stadium is based on an Ernst & Young
statement, and nothing against Ernst & Young, but they were hired to do
that study by the New York Jets. That does not make them an independent
voice in this process - it makes them an equal voice, not an independent
voice. I don't know of any time before - certainly it's not frequent in
the municipal government - that projects, particularly massive projects
like this, are debated and deliberated based on an analysis that was
done by one of the parties with a major interest at hand.
It would have been as if myself or Community Board 4 had commissioned
the people to do an economic analysis. I think the Jets would be right
to say, "You're going to go by their numbers? They're against this, they
said they're against this, they hate this. Why would you go by their
numbers?"
I think we're right to say, "The Jets! They're for this -- they want
this. They're going to make a lot of money, why should we go by their
numbers?" I am very troubled by that.
False Promises
I am also troubled by the fact that if you look at the
analysis that is put out by the city of how much tax money will come in,
they're based on some fairly flawed ideas. When the deputy mayor
testified at the City Council, there was discussion about the stadium
bringing in many events to the city -- the Super bowl, the Final Four,
other major sporting events. In that analysis, there was some projection
that we would get those types of events in some cases every five years.
Later on in our hearing, sports and convention financial experts came
forward and said that those numbers are the most optimistic numbers they
have ever seen for any convention center. In fact, it is their
experience that the National Football League and other leagues do not go
to cities more than once a decade. And that for a city to get that much
business out of it is just impossible to imagine given these experts'
knowledge of sports scheduling. Also, many of the events, which are
projected to happen at the stadium, are events that require pressure
from a home team. As far as we know, besides the Jets, there aren't
going to be any other home teams of other leagues. Maybe there will be
and maybe that will change the economics, but maybe there won't be, in
which case things will come in a great deal shorter than is being
anticipated.
Not Enough Debate
The thing that's perhaps most troubling about this
plan is the degree by which it's moving forward out of the public domain
and public debate. The movement of the $300 million of city and state
money -- neither will be voted on by the City Council or State
Legislature. Such a massive project -- whether you are for or against it
-- needs to have more opportunity for public debate, public modification
and moments where elected officials can weigh in and convey the opinions
of their constituents by voting yea or nay.
Christine Quinn represents City Council district 3 on the West Side of Manhattan.

These articles were adapted from public statements or interviews with
the City Council members.
RELATED LINKS:
• Debating Jobs and Economic Development (Gotham Gazette)
• Community Gazette for District 3: Gotham Gazette's
Interactive Web page for West Side of Manhattan
• Official City Plan for Redeveloping West Side
• Citizens Union Foundation Forum on West Side Plan
• Web sites of groups in favor and opposed to plan, (Gotham Gazette)
• Bringing the Jets Home (Gotham Gazette)
• Another Sad West Side Story (Gotham Gazette)
• Regional Planning Association Reports on plan
• Citizens Union Analysis of West Side Plan (in pdf format)
• Independent Budget Office Report: "West Side Stadium: Touchdown for the City?"
• Independent Budget Office Report: "Estimating the Economic and Fiscal Impacts of the New York Sports and Convention Center"
• Westsidestadium.com
• Association for Better Choices: Group Opposed to West Side plan
• West Side Coalition
• KPF: Architecture firm that is designing the West Side Stadium

Greenwich Village: The Neighborhood That Never SleepsJuly 9, 2004 By Gautam Hans
On a recent afternoon in Washington Square Park, a
young man dressed in white robes and carrying a cornet
stepped into the water-filled fountain in the middle
of the park. He promptly began bathing himself while
belting off-key music through his instrument.
Most people walking through the park gave a quick
glance and then continued on their way, accustomed to or at least uninterested in such sights.
As the birthplace of social and literary movements,
home to thousands of New York University students as
well as artists, musicians, and soul-searchers, and a
prime destination for nightlife, Greenwich Village is
one of the liveliest places in New York City - and
also one of the noisiest.
In many ways, the business and residents in area
thrive on the eclectic culture. But those who live in
the area don't always appreciate the neighborhood's
boisterous reputation.
Noise, according to Arthur Strickler of community
board 2, is the number one complaint. So when Mayor
Michael Bloomberg recently proposed an overhaul of the
city's noise code, many in the area welcomed the
measures.
"Any legislation that reduces noise, we support," said
Strickler. "We tell residents to report incidents to
the police or another appropriate agency, but
legislation would make a great impact on the
situation."
Mayor Bloomberg seems to have drafted his noise plan
with neighborhoods like Greenwich Village in mind. He
met with the New York Nightlife Association, a group
that supports the plan, and gave bars and music venues
who are first time noise offenders an option to use
the money they would have paid in fines to try to fix
noise problems by installing soundproofing.
"We want to encourage a vibrant nightlife that makes
New York the fun and exciting city it is," the mayor
said. "But even in the city that never sleeps, we all
need some rest now and then."
While the mayor's plan sounds good in theory, some
area bartenders and restaurant managers said say
legislating lower noise levels will be very difficult,
much more difficult than the ban on smoking that the
mayor instituted over a year ago.
Noise, they say, is part of living in the area.
"I think that if you're going to live in New York City
you should realize that it's not going to be like
Kansas," said Mary Anne Sayre of Presto Pasta Grille.
"It's going to be loud, especially in a place like the
Village."
And while bars and nightclubs and their patrons may
get much of the attention for causing a racket, there
are plenty of other sources of noise.
On recent day, the source of noise that turned the
most heads was not a bar or a drunk, but a red New
York Sightseeing tour bus, whose guide shouted, "This
is the center of New York City nightlife" into a
microphone for the tourists riding on top.
As the noise faded away, diners looked up for a bit,
shook their heads, and return to their conversations,
giving no more response to tourists than to a man
taking a public bath with his musical instrument.

Chelsea: The Greening of the High LineMarch 10, 2004 By Andrea Lynn
In the seven decades since it was built, the High
Line, which is now an elevated railroad to nowhere,
has seen life as an escape route over "Death Avenue,"
as an eye-sore, and finally -- as a potential
paradise.
The concrete and steel railroad tracks snake through
some 1.5 miles of Chelsea and the Meatpacking District
along the Hudson River. Unused, barely noticed,
covered with wildflowers and grass, the High Line
could soon become a unique seven-acre park.
The High Line came into existence during an era when
trains formed the backbone of the city's manufacturing
economy. As many as 50 freight trains a day traveled
along the west side of Manhattan, creating a hazard
for pedestrians, which earned Tenth Avenue the
nickname of Death Avenue. To reduce this traffic, and
increase efficiency, the railroad companies, with
support from both state and city, created an elevated
railroad from 34th Street to Spring Street.
The railroad lost its appeal with the rise of the
interstate trucking industry. In 1980, it carried its
final train. filled with frozen turkeys. By the 1990s,
only a short portion of the elevated tracks - the part
now dubbed the High Line - remained.
That is when the Chelsea Property Owners Association
first started lobbying for its destruction. The
association's members own property either directly below or
straddling the tracks. They argue that the
deteriorating structure poses a danger to community
residents, threatens the 22 buildings that sit beneath
it, decreases neighborhood property values and stifles
development of the surrounding area.
The Giuliani administration heeded the concerns and
began to take steps to demolish the structure. But
before the first track could be removed, a new group
formed, calling itself Friends of the High Line, and went to
court stop the demolition.
Friends of the High Line and its allies say residents
of the area desperately need recreational space. The
High Line offers "open space and a unique structure,
even for New York, that if removed can never be
replaced," says Joshua David, co-founder of Friends of
the Highline.
Park advocates deny that the structure poses a threat
to the community. In 2002, the group hired Stephen
DeSimone, a structural engineer, who reported that the
High Line remains fundamentally sound. Tearing down
the structure, the friends say, could cost as much as
$25 million, will take 18 months and be noisy, dirty
and disruptive. In its suit, the group claimed that
city procedures require that the City Council, borough
president and area community boards review such a plan
and that no such review had been conducted. The court
agreed and halted destruction of the High Line.
In January, the state Supreme Court's Appellate
Division reversed the lower court. But while that court ruling allows
demolition, it does not require it. And so, it is
somewhat of a Pyrrhic victory for the property owners,
since the Bloomberg administration strongly supports
keeping the High Line.
In fact, it has already received a permit from the
U.S. Department of Transportation to begin developing
plans to turn the deserted structure into a public
park.
The Bloomberg administration and Friends of the High
Line envision the transformation of the High Line, the
width of two trains, into a recreational promenade
similar to the Promenade Plantee in Paris, a walkway on a restored elevated rail
viaduct. Fragrant gardens line the three-mile track in
France, while boutiques and cafes occupy the arches
beneath the rail bed.
But the supporters of the High Line want to make it
uniquely New York, and to that end, last year, they
held a competition. Among the 720 entries from 36
countries, was a plan for a heavily landscaped walk,
another for an aerial monorail floating above a meadow
of wildflower and a third for a mile-long series of
swimming pools.
The proposals did not have to be realistic, Robert
Hammond, co-founder of Friends of the High Line and a
member of the jury, told Architecture Week. "They
were required to be thought provoking, and they
were - and as exciting and unexpected as the High Line
itself," he said. Friends of the High Line hopes to
send all the ideas to design teams.
The city and Friends of the High Line have started the
process to select a designer for the High Line and hope to
have made their choice by sometime this summer.
Hammond has estimated it could cost as much as $60
million to
restore the ailing concrete deck slab and turn it into
seven acres of parkland. City Council Speaker Gifford
Miller has pledged his support for the High Line
project by committing $15.75 million in city funds
over the next three years. Federal funding and private
donations would make up most of the remainder.
............................
Related Story:
New York is building new parks and restoring old ones -- at a time of budget cutbacks and staff reductions. Anne Schwartz reports on how this has been possible.

Bye Bye to Car Alarms?July 25, 2003 Pols Weigh Car-Alarm Ban
New York Post
By Frankie Edozien
There was a lot of noise on June 11 at City Hall over a bill to end the most annoying sound in New York - the constant whine of car alarms.
A hearing on banning the pesky alarms elicited a chorus of supporters at a City Council hearing, but got no backing from the Bloomberg administration.
Roiled by constituents complaining about late-night alarm attacks, Councilwoman Eva Moskowitz (D-Manhattan) is pushing legislation to prohibit any installations of audible car alarms except by the manufacturer. Aaron Naparstek, a project coordinator at Transportation Alternatives, told the council's Committee on Environmental Protection that noisy alarms are a public health menace.
"[This] type of noise ... is linked to costly public health problems, lost productivity, decreased property value, and diminished quality-of-life," he charged.
The NYPD is opposing the proposed ban on alarms.

Homepage of the Community Gazette for District 3
Gotham Gazette's Community Gazettes Community news, views, and potholes for each council district
|