Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Parks

Privately Owned Public Space


 

A passerby would never guess that the empty space on three sides of a highrise on Third Avenue is an officially designated public plaza. Part of it is a block-long staircase. The rest consists of two small vacant slabs, one sunken and one raised. Everything about them screams "keep out," from the lack of seating to a forlorn row of discarded furniture and appliances.

Nearby, at the entrance to a residential building called the Future, is another official public plaza. This one is strikingly different. There are granite benches, planters filled with trees and shrubs and flowers, a drinking fountain, trash receptacles, even a sign that welcomes the public to the space.

These two places, across the street from each other in the East Thirties, illustrate the problems and potential of a special type of open space in the city. There are 503 such privately-owned "public spaces" in 320 buildings in New York, all but a few in Manhattan, and they are coming under increasing scrutiny. They owe their existence to zoning laws, passed in 1961 and amended numerous times since, that allowed developers to build taller structures in exchange for creating and maintaining plazas, atriums, passageways, and other spaces, all supposedly open to the public. Together, they amount to 82 acres, one-tenth the size of Central Park. In exchange, developers were permitted to add on an extra 16 million square feet of floor space.

Until recently, there has been no comprehensive inventory of these public spaces, and no way of telling how many were successful -- or indeed, how many were even open to the public. "It is slowly entering the zeitgeist as something that really has to be looked at," said Jerold Kayden, a professor at Harvard's Graduate School of Design, who conducted an in-depth study of the city's so-called bonus plazas together with the Department of City Planning and the Municipal Art Society. The study, Privately Owned Public Space: The New York City Experience, looked at each and every one of the spaces (the list available online, listed by neighborhood). It concluded that 41 percent of these spaces were of marginal value, particularly those created before zoning law amendments in the mid-1970s. Moreover, it found that almost half of the buildings were not in compliance with legal requirements meant to make the spaces accessible and attractive to the public.

Critics of the current zoning resolution say that the plaza bonus, along with loopholes in the law like the one that allows the transfer of air rights from existing buildings, has encouraged the proliferation of apartment towers that have ruined the charm and continuity of many low-rise neighborhoods.

Last year, City Planning Commissioner Joseph Rose proposed a complete overhaul of the zoning code, a plan known as the Unified Bulk Program. Among many other things (such as setting the height of a building in keeping with the character of the neighborhood that surrounds it), the reforms would eliminate the plaza bonus for residential, but not commercial, districts.

Whether the zoning reform will succeed is, like so much of the city, up in the air. Many are predicting its demise because of lukewarm support from elected officials, and outright opposition from the real estate industry, although it is still moving ahead through the approval process; the City Planning Commission held a hearing last week. If the zoning reforms are approved, however, the city will be left without a mechanism for creating new open space in residential neighborhoods.

THE VALUE OF SMALL URBAN SPACES

The idea of creating small urban spaces in exchange for building rights was viewed as an innovation when it was first incorporated into the New York City zoning law passed in 1961. Since then, cities all over the world have seen the benefit of this trade-off.

Urban designers see these small spaces as providing something different than the larger parks, whose missions include recreation and an experience of nature. They are, first and foremost, places for people to gather and relax. William H. Whyte, in his book The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, observed, "The best-used places are sociable places, with a higher proportion of couples than you find in less used places, more people in groups, more people meeting people, or exchanging goodbyes."

The most valuable public spaces create an atmosphere that invites people in, providing them, as Whyte wrote, with "people to watch, sun to bask in, trees to sit under, water to splash and listen to." Successful spaces often have food, drinking fountains, bathrooms, proximity to shops, as well as outdoor sculpture. Some of the best spaces are indoor atriums, usable year-round.

These bits and pieces of open space provide much-needed oases from the densely built Manhattan streetscape. They are places for office workers to eat their lunch and get a breath of air; for senior citizens to sit and socialize; for shoppers to take a break; and even for busy pedestrians to stop and talk on their cell phones. They make a city more livable.

AN ACCOUNTING OF PUBLIC SPACE

But how successful have the New York City public spaces been? The record is mixed, according to Privately Owned Public Space, which was the result of three and half years of researching dusty city files and visiting every single space. The project generated a database that will be kept up to date, and will eventually be available on the city planning department's web site.

Most New Yorkers would be surprised at some of the spaces included. How many people know that the landscaped semicircular driveways leading to East Side residential towers are bonus plazas? Extra-wide sidewalks and arcades at the edges of buildings also qualify. Certain gated plazas are supposed to be open to the public. The book has already begun to make people aware of the open space they are entitled to use.

The plaza incentive has been responsible for some of our best-used public spaces, like the Citigroup (formerly Citicorp) Building atrium and 590 Madison Avenue at 59th Street (still thought of as the IBM building). It has also produced some wonderful plazas, mini-parks really, in increasingly built-up residential neighborhoods.

The study found, however, that most of the privately owned public spaces were deficient in some way, especially those created from 1961 to 1975, before zoning amendments set higher standards. Some are forbidding open-air stretches of concrete, with no seating or other inviting amenities. These early plazas went hand in hand with the much-criticized "tower in the park" style of building. While it increased light and air, as it was intended to do, this style, exemplified by the succession of vast plazas along Sixth Avenue from 47th to 50th streets, ended up eliminating the "streetwall" and its storefronts that urban observers like William H. Whyte believed essential to a lively downtown.

But the study turned up numerous problems even with more recent plazas. Owners have removed chairs, plants and other amenities, locked gates to keep out the public, or turned plazas into parking areas or construction sites. A typical situation is "cafe creep," where restaurants appropriate public tables and chairs, making people who are not customers feel unwelcome. Very often, there are no signs informing the public that this is public space, though such signs are legally required.

WITH ENFORCEMENT

Many of the problems are the result of poor compliance with the law by building owners and lack of enforcement by the city. Already, now that information is available about places open to the public and the amenities legally specified for each, efforts at enforcement have increased.

At present there are almost 50 enforcement actions in various stages, including three lawsuits filed by the city. The lawsuits target three typical types of violations. At 40 Broad Street, a downtown office building, benches, planters, and trees were removed. One Worldwide Plaza, at 825 Eighth Avenue, is charged with letting restaurants take over public chairs and tables. A residential building, Parc East Tower at 240 East 27th Street, has locked a passageway leading through the middle of the block to a mini-park and waterfall.

There has been a marked increase in the number of calls reporting violations. "We think of it as an empowerment document," says Ellen Ryan of the Municipal Art Society, who directed the research project. Members of the public with complaints about specific spaces can contact the Department of Buildings, or the Department of City Planning.

The Municipal Art Society recently organized volunteers to visit 200 of the public spaces, to update the study. The society called it the "Holly Watch" in honor of William H. Whyte, who was known as Holly, and plans to do it every year

ZONING REFORM

The Unified Bulk Program proposed by Planning Commissioner Joseph Rose would eliminate the "as of right" plaza incentives in residential areas, so that developers would no longer automatically get to build extra floors in exchange for providing public space. The bonus plaza provision would be retained for residential buildings in commercial areas, by special permit, and for commercial and community buildings.

In a speech on zoning reform, Rose said, ". . . the concept of providing incentives to real estate developers to provide public open space on private properties produces largely unsatisfactory results. This is especially true in residential neighborhoods, despite repeated attempts at reform."

Many civic organizations and community boards are in favor of the reforms proposed by the Unified Bulk Program, including scrapping the residential plaza bonus. But some people argue that this is a drastic solution. In an Op-Ed piece in the New York Times, landscape architect Thomas Balsley wrote, "if the problem is poorly designed or maintained open space, surely the solution isn't to have no open space at all." Balsley, who designed a number of public plazas, says that with better design and enforcement, poorly functioning spaces "can be pulled from the ashes and turned into spectacular public amenities."

Dave Lutz of the Neighborhood Open Space Coalition, an advocate for open space, says "there should be public space tucked around" to make a city more livable and more aesthetically interesting. He says, "We're about to say than an experiment that has provided Manhattan with more public space since perhaps Central Park is a failure because some owners and the buildings department failed to meet their obligations." The spaces can always be improved, he says. "But if you don't have the space, you can't go back and do it right."

List and assessment of the privately owned public spaces, neighborhood by neighborhood (in pdf format): http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/dcp/pdf/poptab.pdf

 

In the News: Playing hardball in Bloomingdale Woods. Also, Parks embattled by accusations


In the News: Playing hardball in Bloomingdale Woods. Also, Parks embattled by accusations of prejudice and arbitrary fees; court victory over a water filtration plant underneath Van Cortlandt Park.

(Feb '01) A plan to put ball fields in Bloomingdale Woods Park is rolling ahead, in spite of opposition by Staten Island's leading environmental group, Protectors of Pine Oak Woods. The project raises the question of whether it is acceptable to build recreational fields in a city park set aside for its natural values.

Many people see the dizzying pace of development in south Staten Island as the underlying problem. So much new housing has been built and continues to be built without any planning for recreation or other community needs. Staten Island is actually one of the most biological diverse areas in the state, and environmentalists are trying to preserve some of the last unprotected scraps. Yet there is such an acute shortage of playing fields that kids are on waiting lists for sports, and sports groups are clamoring for the use of existing open space.

The project's supporters say that only the park's eastern section would be affected -- just 38 of a total of 138 acres, with actual construction on 11.8 acres. Baseball and soccer fields, as well as tennis and basketball courts, would be fitted in among the hills, to use the most level spots, save 70 percent of the mature trees, and avoid the officially mapped wetlands scattered about, although significant earth-moving would also be required.

The environmentalists say that they want ball fields, too, but argue that other potential sites would be more appropriate and cost-effective. They say that the wetlands in this section of the park are actually much more extensive than the official maps show, and that the project will fragment a rare native-species forest, allowing invasive species to come in. They note that the City Department of Environmental Protection originally designated this section of the park for its Bluebelt stormwater management plan. They also insist that it doesn't make sense to put ball fields in a hilly, wet site with poorly draining clay soils, predicting problems with muddy and eroded fields. A feasibility study done for the Parks Department in 1999 determined that creating sports fields in Bloomingdale Park would cost four times more than putting those fields at several other sites, with higher maintenance costs as well.

The political pressure to build is huge: Borough President Guy Molinari, Councilman Stephen Fiala, and Mayor Guiliani are all lined up behind the $5.8 million project, along with many other local officials. The Staten Island Advance editorialized against Protectors, saying the group was unreasonable in its opposition to altering even a fraction of the park. The Parks department resisted the idea at first, but has kept its silence since. The city transferred the project to the Department of Design and Construction, which intends to finish the required Environmental Impact Study by March. The department is accepting written comments on the issue until February 21.

Embattled at Parks

Parks Commissioner Henry Stern has been under siege recently, criticized for setting arbitrary fees for events in the parks and for discriminatory promotional practices within the department. Many of the criticisms focus on free-market strategies he has used to compensate for budget cuts by the city. The parks chief, who has a reputation for politically incorrect comments, eccentric behavior, and an abrasive management style, has also been called one of the best parks commissioners the city has ever had. Most recently, City Council members attacked his policy of charging high fees to homeowners who want to cut down established street trees.

In the discrimination case, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found that there was "reasonable cause" to believe that the department had discriminated on the basis of race and national origins in the promotion and assignment of employees. The commission also said that the department had retaliated against three workers who complained of discrimination. Twenty black and Hispanic current and former "parkies" filed complaints with the commission, saying they were passed over, some of them numerous times, for promotions that were given to younger, less experienced white colleagues. They also charge that job locations were assigned along racial lines.

A lot of the resentment focuses on a program (called the "Class of" program) instituted by Stern in 1994 to recruit top college graduates the way businesses do. Participants don't follow union rules and typically work long hours for little pay, but are given a lot of responsibility and have access to top department officials. About 80 percent of the young people who have signed on have been white. Although most program participants leave after two years, some have stayed and been promoted to permanent senior jobs - some of which were never formally posted -- ahead of career employees.

The day after the discrimination finding was released, Commissioner Stern appeared before the City Council with 46 boxes of financial data subpoenaed in an inquiry into the way the parks department set fees for companies and charities to stage events in the parks. This long-standing parks practice came under fire last fall when the Catholic Museum balked at paying $20,000 to stage a fundraiser in a Harlem park.

A few days later, Stern was back before the council testifying against a bill that would substantially lower what the department could charge homeowners who cut down trees on their sidewalks. Homeowners must pay the cost of planting a certain number of saplings, depending on the size of the original tree. This issue comes up mostly when a tree needs to be removed for a construction project -- a homeowner can't cut down a healthy street tree just because he or she doesn't like it. The parks department has collected $1.5 million in replacement tree costs in the last seven years, with the money going into a special tree trust. Council Speaker Peter Vallone said the fees "appear to be another set of arbitrary charges imposed by the Parks department." At the hearing, Deputy Parks Commissioner Alan Moss said that the number of replacement saplings was calculated from an accepted forestry standard based on the diameter of the tree.

Filtration plant blocked at Van Cortlandt Park

A decision by the state's highest court has essentially killed the city's plan to build a water filtration plant in Van Cortlandt Park. The plant was the city's solution to a federal order to filter the part of the city's water supply that comes from the Croton watershed. The court affirmed that state law requires permission from the legislature to use a park for another purpose, which is unlikely given the wide opposition to the plant by Bronx legislators, including Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz and State Senator Guy Velella, who represent the district the park is in.

There has been speculation that the new administration might allow the city to avoid filtration through new measures to protect the already heavily developed Croton watershed. The New York Times reported that Charles Sturcken, chief of staff of the city's Department of Environmental Protection, said that the agency would pursue every avenue with the federal government. But Environmental Protection Agency spokeswoman Mary Mears was quick to squelch that notion. "Our bottom line is that the Croton watershed must be filtered in order to protect public health," she was quoted as saying. "That bottom line isn't one that comes from any particular administration." If the filtration plant is not built soon, the city faces millions of dollars in fines.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

Parks and Parking Along the Hudson


If anyplace is a paradise paved over into a parking lot, it is the Hudson shore of Manhattan. For two generations, parking apparently was the best and highest riverside use from the Battery to 59th Street, followed by homeless encampments and dumps.

Green is returning to the Hudson shore through efforts of the Hudson River Park Conservancy, its successor, the Hudson River Park Trust, and the community. By late 2001, recreation paths will connect Battery Park to Riverside Park. In Greenwich Village, the park has trees and a grassy lawn heavily used by sunbathers. Pier 40 houses a soccer field, batting cages and a cafe. On Piers 25/26, there is a day camp, a river research facility and a boathouse for human-powered craft. In season, the Trust sponsors movies and concerts.

Still, most of the plan for the Hudson River Park remains on paper. The existing park is far more asphalt gray than it is green. And residents fear delay, or worse, a sellout.

At the heart of the debate is the plan for capacious Pier 40. Proponents of P3 the Pier, Park & Playground Plan seek to convert the 1.2 million square foot site to open space and neighborhood recreation. The Pier now houses freight transshipment, police barricade storage, and over two thousand cars. P3 hopes to build 20.8 acres of ball fields, running paths, and sunbathing areas intermingled with artistsÅó» studios, limited concessions and parking. The $120 million plan is financed by parking revenue and an assumed $30 million contribution from the Trust. Parking revenues would also pay operating costs. Tobi Bergman, P3's President, extols the "self-sufficient" plan as "the best opportunity to provide Lower Manhattan with open space and recreation". Community Boards 1 and 2 have endorsed the plan.

The Trust, the entity in charge, has no comment on P3. It plans to broadly seek proposals for pier development and operation. According to Noreen Doyle, Trust spokesperson, the proposal process will seek "compatible uses, open space and revenue consistent with the Hudson River Park Act of 1998".

Arthur Schwartz, Chairman of both the Hudson River Park Advisory Council and CB2's Waterfront Committee knows how important this site is to the locals. Residents of Chelsea and the Village have surprisingly little parkland. For decades, residents have seen waterfront plans come and go. Schwartz senses the time is now. "If we get the ball rolling this year, there will be a Pier 40 park by 2005-6".

Reaching goals and getting balls rolling differ. Assemblywoman Deborah Glick is concerned about the eventual magnitude of commercial space and the allocation process for using park space. Schwartz carefully defined his goals emphasizing his hope for "the greatest amount" of park, the "least noxious" commercial uses and the "minimal necessary" revenue. It is these "details" that will define how green (or gray) the park will be and how much revenue Pier 40 will contribute to the Hudson River Park. Glick argues that Pier 40 and its local users should not have to make up park-wide shortfalls at the expense of local green.

Sounding Off

The Trust's proposal process may yield concepts that kick off revenues to sustain the three-mile park while kicking out neighborhood uses and green. It's about balance -- political balance between Mayoral and Gubernatorial appointees, financial balance between revenue needs and open space for park uses and a balance among users - local, visitors, passive, and active.

Achieving balance depends on two key steps. These are the words the Trust puts into its proposal documents and the guidelines the Trust adopts for evaluating the completed proposals. The choice of words and criteria will likely color all that follows.

Glick's concerns are about values, community values. When the trust talks revenues, they also talk values, many fear -- financial values. Green is a color of many shades. To some it is the color of money, to others it is the color of paradise.

The question remains whose values will choose the words and criteria that create a park.

(Feb '01) If anyplace is a paradise paved over into a parking lot, it is the Hudson shore of Manhattan. For two generations, parking apparently was the best and highest riverside use from the Battery to 59th Street, followed by homeless encampments and dumps.

Green is returning to the Hudson shore through efforts of the Hudson River Park Conservancy, its successor, the Hudson River Park Trust, and the community. By late 2001, recreation paths will connect Battery Park to Riverside Park. In Greenwich Village, the park has trees and a grassy lawn heavily used by sunbathers. Pier 40 houses a soccer field, batting cages and a cafe. On Piers 25/26, there is a day camp, a river research facility and a boathouse for human-powered craft. In season, the Trust sponsors movies and concerts.

Still, most of the plan for the Hudson River Park remains on paper. The existing park is far more asphalt gray than it is green. And residents fear delay, or worse, a sellout.

At the heart of the debate is the plan for capacious Pier 40. Proponents of P3 the Pier, Park & Playground Plan seek to convert the 1.2 million square foot site to open space and neighborhood recreation. The Pier now houses freight transshipment, police barricade storage, and over two thousand cars. P3 hopes to build 20.8 acres of ball fields, running paths, and sunbathing areas intermingled with artistsÅó» studios, limited concessions and parking. The $120 million plan is financed by parking revenue and an assumed $30 million contribution from the Trust. Parking revenues would also pay operating costs. Tobi Bergman, P3's President, extols the "self-sufficient" plan as "the best opportunity to provide Lower Manhattan with open space and recreation". Community Boards 1 and 2 have endorsed the plan.

The Trust, the entity in charge, has no comment on P3. It plans to broadly seek proposals for pier development and operation. According to Noreen Doyle, Trust spokesperson, the proposal process will seek "compatible uses, open space and revenue consistent with the Hudson River Park Act of 1998".

Arthur Schwartz, Chairman of both the Hudson River Park Advisory Council and CB2's Waterfront Committee knows how important this site is to the locals. Residents of Chelsea and the Village have surprisingly little parkland. For decades, residents have seen waterfront plans come and go. Schwartz senses the time is now. "If we get the ball rolling this year, there will be a Pier 40 park by 2005-6".

Reaching goals and getting balls rolling differ. Assemblywoman Deborah Glick is concerned about the eventual magnitude of commercial space and the allocation process for using park space. Schwartz carefully defined his goals emphasizing his hope for "the greatest amount" of park, the "least noxious" commercial uses and the "minimal necessary" revenue. It is these "details" that will define how green (or gray) the park will be and how much revenue Pier 40 will contribute to the Hudson River Park. Glick argues that Pier 40 and its local users should not have to make up park-wide shortfalls at the expense of local green.

Sounding Off

The Trust's proposal process may yield concepts that kick off revenues to sustain the three-mile park while kicking out neighborhood uses and green. It's about balance -- political balance between Mayoral and Gubernatorial appointees, financial balance between revenue needs and open space for park uses and a balance among users - local, visitors, passive, and active.

Achieving balance depends on two key steps. These are the words the Trust puts into its proposal documents and the guidelines the Trust adopts for evaluating the completed proposals. The choice of words and criteria will likely color all that follows.

Glick's concerns are about values, community values. When the trust talks revenues, they also talk values, many fear -- financial values. Green is a color of many shades. To some it is the color of money, to others it is the color of paradise.

The question remains whose values will choose the words and criteria that create a park.

Peter B. Fleischer, currently writing a book on the New York City waterfront, was formerly a transportation and environment policy advisor to New York City Mayors David Dinkins and Rudy Giuliani.

Fees for Parks. Also: Making Parks Political


A longstanding Parks Department practice of soliciting "donations" from private groups that want to use city parks for large-scale events has come under increasing scrutiny recently. The issue came to a head when the National Museum of Catholic Art and History protested a last-minute requirement by the Parks department for a $20,000 payment in order to stage a fundraiser in an East Harlem Park.

The immediate crisis was solved when an anonymous donor came up with the money, but the action angered City Council speaker Peter Vallone, who began an investigation. Parks Commissioner Henry Stern and Mayor Giuliani defended the practice, although Stern ultimately apologized for the way the request had been handled, saying that he would draw up new guidelines to clarify the process of soliciting donations. A City Council official confirmed news reports that Speaker Vallone and Mayor Giuliani were negotiating a revision of the system.

New Yorkers generally support charging private organizations for using the parks, especially profit-making companies, or when the event damages or prevents the public from using the park. Criticism has focused on the informal and sometimes vague nature of the requests, and whether the amounts requested are fair. In one article, the Colombian Civic Center and several other nonprofits bemoaned the increasingly steep fees they have been charged to hold festivals in Flushing Meadows-Corona Park.

Another problem is lack of accountability for how the donations are spent. The money goes to a number of non-profits that help city parks, including the City Parks Foundation. If the money were given directly to the Parks Department, it would end up in the city government's general fund (like the $45 million in other revenues the Parks Department raised last year), where it could not be specifically earmarked for parks. But there is no public accounting for how much money is brought in and how it is spent.

Some parks advocates feel that decreasing public funding for parks has put pressure on the parks department to conduct this type of problematic fundraising, a charge that city officials deny. Although the city has had great success in raising private money to restore some of the city's flagship parks, maintenance suffers in many parks. Parks advocates wonder whether the city has gone too far in expecting private donations to make up for lack of public support.

Anne Sounds Off

We New Yorkers love our parks and rate them highly, but without realizing it, we have lowered our expectations for what kind of resources we can expect the city to devote to parks. The parks department operating budget, which covers maintenance and recreational programs, has been declining for decades and is now less than one half of one percent of the city budget. The city has cut the parks department staff in half since 1986. Private donations have made a dramatic difference in a few flagship parks, but haven't begun to close the gap overall. We're used to a shortage of playable ball fields and jam-packed pools and skating rinks. We're pleasantly surprised when the bathrooms work. Most New Yorkers don't even know that the city once had employees in most parks to provide upkeep and youth recreational programs.

This could change.

In 2001, because of term limits, we'll be electing a new mayor, comptroller, public advocate, and 36 of the 51 city council members. It's a golden opportunity to elect representatives who understand the importance of parks and recreation to the life of the city.

The Parks Council, a nonprofit advocacy group, has begun laying the groundwork to make the most of this opportunity. The organization's overall goal is to raise the parks department's operating funds to one percent of the city budget, as well as to make sure that this additional money is distributed equitably to bring parks throughout the city up to the standards of our best parks. As part of its "Campaign for Parks and Recreation: 2001," the council is developing profiles of parks, open space, and recreation facilities in every city council district, and meeting with all the candidates to educate them on park issues. It plans to publicize the position statements of the candidates on its web site. The council is also building s upport from many sectors of the community that depend on parks in some way but don't generally advocate for parks. This includes youth service agencies, sports leagues, real estate and business groups, schools, and the police force.

Just a relatively small additional investment of city funds in parks, with good managerial oversight, would reap significant dividends for nearly every aspect of city life. We can raise our expectations a little. After all, shouldn't a city like New York have a world-class park system?

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

Election Special--THE PARKS AND THE POLS


Few candidates have put a high priority on the need for open space, greenery, or recreation in the city. But there are many issues the candidates could be talking about.

THE ISSUES:

PAYING FOR PARKS

Parks are a top quality-of-life issue for any city, especially a city that is as densely built as New York. Parks and the recreational opportunities they afford are far more important to a city's well-being, economic and otherwise, than is generally recognized. Imagine living without trees; without places to play or picnic; with no view of greenery or open water. Yet according to a recent study, New York City allocates far less money to parks and recreation than most major cities in the country, just $42 per capita. Many people also feel that the state shortchanges the city when it comes to spending money from the Environmental Bond Act and other state funds on city parkland and open space. Federal funding for New York City parks has also declined.

 

GREEN FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR

New York City's minority neighborhoods have the fewest and most poorly maintained parks and recreational amenities in New York City. This is one of the many "environmental justice" issues the city faces. In some sections, the only green places are the community gardens, planted and tended by the residents on vacant lots owned by the city. When the city began leasing the lots to gardeners 20 years ago, it was with the understanding the land would eventually be reclaimed. Nevertheless, many of the gardens have come to serve a vital function for their community.

Recently, the city has begun auctioning off gardens to developers, in some cases for housing, which is also a pressing need for these communities. But garden advocates point out that there are numerous vacant lots with no gardens on them, and the communities need both housing and open space. In some neighborhoods, like the Lower East Side of Manhattan, the gardens themselves have contributed to the increase in property values in the neighborhood, reviving developers' interest in lots that were abandoned decades ago.

Legislation is before the City Council that would require a thorough public review before a community garden could be developed, and provide a way to transfer gardens to the parks department or a land trust. New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer has filed a lawsuit to stop the city from auctioning off gardens without following the established public-review process he contends is already required by law. In the State Senate, John Sampson of Brooklyn introduced a bill that would, among other things, dedicate community gardens as parkland. Senator Velmanette Montgomery sponsored another bill that would allow non-profits to apply for Environmental Bond Act Funds to purchase community gardens. Neither bill made any headway in Albany.

GOVERNOR'S ISLAND

Last winter, Governor Pataki and Mayor Giuliani finally reached an agreement about what should be done with Governor's Island. Their plan includes a significant amount of open space. Legislation introduced by Senators Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Charles Schumer, and Representatives Benjamin Gilman, Jerrold Nadler and Carolyn Maloney, would transfer the island at no cost to the Governor's Island Redevelopment Corporation, which is in charge of the preservation and development effort. The bill would place the historic sites on the island in the National Park System. But time is running out. If the bill is not passed in this session of Congress, the city could lose the chance to regain the island at no cost.

CONTROVERSIES OVER TWO PROPOSED PARKS

Two new waterfront parks are in various stages of progress -- the Hudson River Park and the Brooklyn Bridge Park. Although both parks have widespread support among area residents and local civic and environmental groups, there are also vocal opponents who object to the scale of the development and the inclusion of commercial elements to help finance the parks' upkeep. Opponents see the parks as development in disguise; they want to see more traditional green spaces. Supporters of the parks take a pragmatic approach, believing that with the current reluctance of government to fund and maintain parks, plans that make room for sports complexes, restaurants, and other money-making enterprises are the only realistic way to reclaim the waterfront as parkland.

TAKING PARKLAND FOR OTHER USES

Battles are being waged in different parts of the city over plans to use public parkland for private concessions or for what some believe are inappropriate public uses. Although the specific issues are quite different in each situation, the larger concern is that this sets a dangerous precedent of taking away, rather than adding to, public open space.

The city wants to build a chemical water filtration plant in Van Cortlandt Park in the Bronx. The plant would filter water from the Croton Aqueduct, satisfying the requirements of a federal water-quality lawsuit against the city. The city plans to build the plant underneath 30 acres of the Mosholu Golf Course, rebuilding the course on top when the project is completed in about five years. Opponents of the plan contend that the filtration plant will actually rise 30 feet above existing ground level, and increase noise, traffic, and pollution in the area. In May, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by the Parks Council and community groups against the plant. The groups are appealing the decision.

At Ferry Point in the Bronx, a former city dump that was transferred to the parks department is being turned into a luxury golf course by a private developer. Seven of the 400 acres will become a public park near a low-income housing project on the east edge of the site. But a 30-foot-high wall will block access to the rest of the park, including a waterfront esplanade, from the residential areas. The New York Environmental Justice A lliance opposes the plan as the privatization of public space that excludes low-income residents. Aside from the environmental justice concerns, there are also many troubling environmental questions, beginning with the toxic chemicals still remaining from the site's previous use.

Environmental groups in Staten Island are opposing the city's plan to build a complex of sports fields in a natural wetland area in Bloomingdale Park. They say there are other potential recreational sites that are not wetlands and have lower associated construction and maintenance costs. Staten Island Borough President Guy Molinari has pushed the plan, citing the need for soccer and other fields for the borough's increasing number of young families. Because the Department of Environmental Conservation has not designated the area as a state-regulated wetland, construction can proceed; environmental groups are contesting the DEC ruling.

THE CANDIDATES' POSITIONS

KRUEGER-GOODMAN RACE

Most of the candidates have not campaigned on issues relating to parks or community gardens. Few responded to inquiries about their positions on the issues, although a number of incumbents have records in support of parks.

One of the exceptions was Liz Krueger, who is challenging Senator Roy Goodman for the Manhattan district he has represented for 32 years. She called back herself to discuss her strong support for parks and community gardens. "We have way too little park space and open space throughout New York City," she said, "and it's a true quality-of-life issue for the future of our city."

ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN

Also responding to our inquiry, an aide to State Senator Eric Schneiderman said that getting more green space in the city was a high priority of his. Senator Schneiderman, who represents parts of Manhattan and the Bronx, is ranking minority member of the Senate Committee on Environmental Conservation.

PARKS FUNDING

The elections that could make a difference in the city's financial commitment to maintaining and expanding its parks will not be held until next year, when a new mayor, new borough presidents, and a largely new City Council will be elected. Some of the incumbent state senators and assembly members have supported state funding for city parks or worked to get funding for parks in their districts, including Senator Martin Connor and Assemblymen Joseph Lentol. State Senate candidate Liz Kreuger supports increased state funding for urban parks. She is also particularly interested in working with community groups to make the waterfronts more accessible, and sees the need to coordinate federal, state, and city efforts in that area.

Both Hillary Clinton and Rick Lazio have made general statements supporting federal funding for urban parks (available on the web site of the League of Conservation Voters). They support the federal Conservation and Recreation Act now being considered by Congress. The Act would establish a separate trust fund for open space conservation, including money for urban parks and recreation.

The presidential candidates also support the concept of a federal land conservation trust fund, although George W. Bush takes care to emphasize his belief that any federally funded land acquisition must not trample private property rights. Audubon magazine published the candidates' statements on this and other environmental issues.

COMMUNITY GARDENS

Two state senators have introduced legislation in Albany: Velmanette Montgomery and John Sampson. Liz Kreuger says she is a strong supporter of community gardens, and although she is not yet familiar with the details of the past legislation, she would support state efforts to promote the gardens.

The Green Guerillas, a garden advocacy group, has begun a campaign called Plant the Vote. By registering voters and educating people about the community garden issue, it hopes to get garden supporters elected in next year's citywide elections.

Although both United States Senate candidates have made general statements in support of environmental justice initiatives, only Rick Lazio specifically mentioned the need to redress the lack of open space in the inner city. His statement to the League of Conservation Voters said, "Ă…Ăł|we need more parks and recreational opportunities throughout this land, but the need is highest in our crowded urban areas. That is why I have consistently supported funding for the Urban Parks and Recreation Program." Ralph Nader calls for an Urban Policy Initiative, but its various recommendations omit any mention of investing in urban open space or recreation.

GOVERNOR'S ISLAND

Rick Lazio is a cosponsor of the legislation to turn Governor's Island over to New York. In answer to a question at a recent Manhattan environmental forum, Hillary Clinton said she was hopeful for the bill's passage. If the bill doesn't pass, she said, "I would certainly take up this cause in the next Congress."

TAKING PARKLAND

Hillary Clinton has issued a statement opposing the Van Cortlandt Park filtration plant. At the environmental forum, she said, "I have stated that I am not in favor of the filtration plant." She expressed her belief that the water quality problems should be solved instead by stronger efforts to protect the watershed. Rick Lazio has not responded to inquiries about his position on the plant. Both State Senator Eric Schneiderman and Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz, who represent the area, oppose building the plant in Van Cortlandt Park. Both worked to stop a previous effort to put the filtration plant at the Jerome Park Reservoir, and have proposed legislation in Albany to designate Jerome Park as official parkland. The land around the park is now closed to the public. The bill, however, did not advance because of opposition by the mayor and other Republicans. Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

In the News: Garbage Out, Parks In; Also, rating New York City's parks


A new State Park will be created along the waterfront in Williamsburg, a neighborhood with the dubious honor of having among the least open space and the most waste transfer stations in the city. Through an unusual agreement, the State will lease the land to New York University, which will turn part of the park into fields for its outdoor athletic program. The fields will be available to the community 5l percent of the time, including the summer. The state will develop the rest of the park, which is expected to include some sort of promenade along the waterfront and the rebuilding of existing piers. The agreement calls for NYU to maintain the entire site.

"This particular site has been on a lot of people's radar screens for a long time," said Eric Kulleseid, New York State Director of the Trust for Public Land. After closing down a nearby waste transfer station that planned to expand to the site, local groups began organizing to turn some of the land into a waterfront park. They succeeded in getting the land listed for acquisition on the state's 1998 Open Space Conservation Plan. Because the state had funding only to purchase the land, the deal was finally clinched by the agreement for NYU to develop and maintain it. The partnership was brokered by the Trust for Public Land, which also negotiated the purchase and will own the site until the state can take title.

The park site, a former rail-to-barge depot called the Eastern District Terminal, has been abandoned for decades. Its dilapidated condition, and the fact that it is fenced-off private property, hasn't stopped residents from using the site for years to fish, sunbathe, walk their dogs, and take in the spectacular river and skyline views. "It seemed so self-evident to everyone here that this is what should happen," said Peter Gillespie of Neighbors Against Garbage about the park. "We wondered why it took so long to get everyone else to realize it." Looking to the future, he said, "There is a lot of potential for other projects like this to happen. We're hoping that this is the first step."

Anne Sounds Off: Insights from a new parks book

The Urban Land Institute and the Trust for Public Land have just published an invaluable new study, Inside City Parks, which describes the park systems in 25 major cities, including New York. Published for the first time are statistics about the cities' park acreage, staffing, and funding, among other things. Author Peter Harnik covers the history of each system, provides successful examples and cautionary tales, and discusses parks in the context of each city's political and economic milieu. His look at the New York City park system, its strengths and shortcomings, could help spur new action to improve our parks.

New York has a higher proportion of parkland than any other city in the book, and among the many wonderful parks are two that set the standards for all others, the Olmsted gems of Central and Prospect Parks. Yet New York ranks toward the bottom of the list in the amount it spends per person on parks and recreation -- just $42. Only four cities spend less. Some cities, including Seattle, Minneapolis, and Portland, Oregon spend from two to four times as much per resident. New York also spends a much smaller portion of its park department budget on recreation than many cities. Per capita, it has the lowest number of recreation centers, public swimming pools, and public tennis courts. For example, New York, with a population of about 7.4 million, has 35 recreation centers, 54 pools, and 860 sports fields; Chicago, population 2.7 million, has 260 recreation centers, 89 pools, and 1,019 sports fields. Harnik reports that adjusted for inflation, New York's overall spending on parks dropped 31 percent between 1987 and 1996, and the recreation program's budget shrank by 65 percent.

Nevertheless, Harnik is optimistic about the future for New York City parks, citing among other things the public-private partnerships that have revived many parks, the new waterfront parks in the works, and the efforts of scrappy and inventive park activists. In New York and all over the country, Harnik sees a new appreciation for parks taking root, with parks either newly opened, under construction, or being planned in most of the cities profiled.

One of the conclusions Harnik draws is that the successful city park systems have flourished because of a mayor or other powerful civic leader who cared about parks and had a vision for what parks could do for the city. Because there are so many other urgent priorities, parks are often last to get funded. It takes a leader who understands that trees, lawns, flowers, lakes, open vistas and river views, places to stroll or play ball -- things that feed the part of the human soul that responds to the natural world -„ all affect the "hard" urban issues, like crime, business development, real estate values, tourism. That's something to think about for the next mayoral election.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

Final Design for Brooklyn Waterfront Park. Also: Funding for Urban Parks


Less than a year ago, neighborhood opposition killed a proposal for a massive hotel and development along the DUMBO shoreline in Brooklyn. Since then, with amazing swiftness, a realistic plan for the entire downtown Brooklyn shoreline has been created, and has won the backing of most of the area's civic organizations and elected officials. In a borough that has the least amount of parkland per capita in New York City, the Brooklyn Bridge Park would be one of first of a new generation of parks, along with the Hudson River Park, to reclaim the scenic and recreational assets of the waterfront.

The Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation presented the final design to the public in July. For years, Brooklyn community groups have been advocating for a waterfront park. Last September, the Port Authority (which owns the piers along the waterfront) agreed to give the Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation a year to come up with a plan for the park. New York State provided funding for the planning process. Part of the agreement was that the park must generate enough income to pay for maintaining itself.

The design for the park evolved through a series of public workshops attended by some 4,000 people over the past year.

The proposed park would occupy a long, very narrow site running from the Manhattan Bridge to Atlantic Avenue, transforming an industrial matrix of piers, warehouses, and parking lots into a landscaped space with spectacular views of the harbor and the Manhattan skyline. The plan includes numerous recreational amenities, such as playgrounds, a swimming pool, an ice-skating rink, and an outdoor amphitheater, as well as commercial projects like a hotel and a banquet facility. It also calls for restoring the nine-acre Empire-Fulton Ferry State Park and its historic warehouses.

The plan has wide support in the community. Although some people are unhappy with the commercial features, most seem to have made peace with the assumption that the park must produce income for its continued upkeep. A group of Brooklyn Heights residents oppose the plan, however, largely because of a predicted increase in foot traffic down Joralemon Street, which would be the main route to the park from the subway. The group, Waterfront Development Watch, recently sent petitions and letters, its analysis of the proposed park and an alternative plan to the Governor and Mayor.

By the end of the summer, the Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation will submit its master plan to the State and the Port Authority, which must approve it and agree to provide funding for construction, estimated at $150 million. (The City has already pledged $64 million over four years for the project.) A lead agency will be designated to oversee the park's completion. Then begins the extensive public environmental and land use review, ultimately leading to a more detailed design.

Even before the review process, the City and State could make some of the changes set forth in the master plan. The City has committed $7 million in this year's capital budget to improvements to its property in the area. The State has begun repair work in Empire-Fulton Ferry State Park.

Anne Sounds Off: Landmark Law for Land Conservation

You probably won't read about it in the papers, which have largely overlooked the progress this summer of a bill that is of major importance for urban parks, as well as land and wildlife conservation nationwide. The legislation, called the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA), would provide nearly $3 billion a year from offshore oil and gas royalties to preserve open space, protect wildlife, restore coastlines, and help develop urban parks and recreation areas.

Among other things, the legislation would dedicate $900 million annually to the Land and Water Conservation Fund. This fund was supposed to receive that amount from offshore oil receipts, but has been shortchanged since it was established in 1965. Half of the money is currently divided among the states for state and local parks, recreation, and natural resource protection. The new legislation would allocate funding to other urban park, recreation, and forestry programs as well.

The House passed its version of the legislation, 315-102, in May. In late July, The Senate Energy and Natural Resources committee approved a carefully crafted bill that resulted from intensive negotiations between Senators Frank Murkowski (R-AK) and Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), who each had their own version of the bill. The full Senate is expected to consider the bill after the August recess. Opposition in the Senate comes from a small group of western senators concerned about property rights issues, who may try to block the bill's passage.

Some environmental groups, while supporting the bill, want to make sure that the final legislation doesn't allow funds meant for coastal restoration to be used for environmentally damaging projects like roads and port facilities. They also want to eliminate a provision that offers incentives for new offshore oil and gas drilling in Alaska.

Conservationists have been trying for decades to secure a permanent funding source for federal land and wildlife conservation programs. With the strong support of the Administration and key legislators, supporters feel this year offers the best shot ever for this legislation. "This is clearly the moment," said Alan Front, senior vice president of the Trust for Public Land. New York's senators should press for a Senate floor vote and support the passage of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

 

In the News: The War on Beetles


The Asian long-horned beetle has struck again, this time infesting trees along Luther Gulick Playground near the Manhattan approach to the Williamsburg Bridge. The trees were chopped down, chipped and burned to kill the insect and its eggs, the only way to stop the spread of the insect, which has no natural predators in the United States.

The tree-killing beetle made its first attack in New York in 1996, in Greenpoint, Brooklyn. The Parks Department believes that it stowed away in the wood of crates brought from China to the Greenpoint docks. Since then, nearly 3,000 trees in Brooklyn, Queens, and Manhattan have had to be destroyed to stop its spread. Last year, the beetles were discovered in Ruppert Park in the Upper East Side, too close for comfort to Central Park.

"The beetles pose an enormous long-term danger to the city's forests and to trees all along the Northeast," Parks Commissioner Henry Stern was quoted as saying in the New York Times. "All of humanity is together in fighting this. This is biological warfare and we are on the side of the trees."

The Parks department has stepped up tree inspections in special zones around areas where the beetle has been found, and is asking people to report sightings of the insect or the characteristic pencil-sized holes it bores in upper tree trunks. In April, the department announced a $10 million federal, state, and city effort to battle the beetle, with funding for inspection and the destruction and replacement of infested trees with seedlings.

Adult beetles are about one and a quarter inches long, shiny black with white spots, and have long black-and-white striped antennae. They chew out depressions in the bark higher up in the trees to lay their eggs. The larvae bore into the tree to feed, coming back through the trunk when they reach maturity, leaving the telltale holes. Other incriminating evidence is a pile of sawdust at the base of a tree or at the intersection of a branch and the trunk. See the Asian long-horned beetle alert. To report any sign of the beetle, call the Parks department at 1-800-201-PARK.

Anne Sounds Off:

A recent article in the Albany Times-Union documented the depressing result of funding cutbacks for park maintenance in a number of upstate cities. Albany, for example, has slightly more than half the park workers it had two decades ago, with predictable deterioration of parks, particularly small ones. When budgets are tight, Schenectady's Mayor said, "the parks are the first to get whacked."

Sound familiar? New York City just approved another budget that continues an inadequate level of spending on park maintenance. Though this year's funding is $3 million higher than last year, the extra money goes to salary increases for existing staff and 31 new seasonal workers, not to increasing much-needed skilled maintenance staff, like gardeners, tree pruners, and plumbers. In fact, the budget includes a hiring freeze that aims to cut 100 fulltime park workers through attrition. The Parks department has been supplementing its maintenance staff with welfare workers, and private fundraising and volunteers are helping to maintain some parks. But many parks, especially in the poorer neighborhoods, are in terrible shape. Less than one-half of one percent of the City budget goes to the Parks department operating budget. It's time for our elected officials to stop thinking of parks as frills and realize that investing in open space and recreation pays off„in higher real estate values, crime reduction, improved air quality, and the kind of city where people and businesses want to locate.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

In the News: Roundup


Final Stages of Brooklyn Bridge Park The final master plan for the Brooklyn Bridge Park will be presented in mid-June. Earlier in the spring, after a six-month process that included numerous public workshops, the park planners presented the draft design for the 1.3-mile-long waterfront park. The reaction was reported to be positive from the Port Authority, which owns the piers where much of the park would be built. Some Brooklyn Heights residents remain concerned about an increase in pedestrian traffic on Joralemon Street, a residential street that would be the only access route to the park from Brooklyn Heights; park planners have met with the residents, but the issue has not been fully resolved. Meanwhile, park advocates have been working to build support for the park as well as to get more people down to the waterfront even before it is built.

Litterers Beware! The Parks Department launched an anti-littering campaign in May, hoping to change our wayward ways with trash. New Yorkers are champion litterers, as anyone who has visited the parks on a summer Monday morning knows. The Parks department says it picks up nearly 1,300 cubic yards of litter every day, a fact that it will dramatize with cubic-yard-sized plexiglas boxes (a new form of art installation?) The campaign is stressing public education, including children's anti-littering contests and clean-up projects. The department is posting signs in five languages warning of $100 fines for littering. Large groups that are required to hold permits will have their permits revoked if they leave a mess, as well as forfeit their clean-up bonds. It is not clear, however, whether there will be additional enforcement. On Staten Island, Borough President Guy Molinari launched his own anti-litter initiative two weeks earlier, but with more teeth: the assignment of ten specially designed sanitation cruisers as well as ticketing by the police.

Parade Grounds' New Duds The construction of a new football field will kick off the restoration of the dismal playing fields in Brooklyn's Parade Grounds. Renovation plans also include new soccer, softball, baseball, and multi-purpose fields, basketball courts, a concession stand and a new playground. Drainage problems will be addressed and several fields will be covered with a new low-maintenance artificial turf. It is a happy ending to a controversy that erupted when the City decided to build a temporary minor-league stadium in the park. Brooklyn Borough President Howard Golden blocked the plan, refusing a compromise in which the City would have paid for fixing up the entire Parade Grounds. Now Golden has come through with $10 million that will make the complete restoration possible.

Anne Sounds Off:

Anyone who cares about parks and open space and outdoor recreation should be drumming up support for a landmark piece of legislation now working its way through Congress. In May the House voted to dedicate, for the first time, nearly $3 billion a year in offshore oil revenue to a variety of park, wildlife and recreational needs, including the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). The receipts would go into a trust and could not be diverted elsewhere. The measure, called the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA), passed overwhelmingly with bipartisan support, despite opposition from the House Republican leadership.

Beginning in 1964, when the LWCF was established, royalties from offshore oil and gas leases were supposed to go to federal land acquisition and matching grants to states for local parks and recreation. A fund called the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program (UPARR) was later set up to give matching grants for recreation projects in the inner cities. But in reality, oil receipts have been included in the general federal revenue that gets divvied up during the annual appropriations process, and actual funding for parks and recreation has never been close to what was authorized. Even so, many significant open space acquisitions and recreational projects in the New York were made possible by LWCF money -- a listing is available on the web site of Americans for Our Heritage and Recreation.

Looking at LWCF-funded projects in the five boroughs over the past thirty-five years, there is a noticeable pattern: many projects funded in the late 60s through the 70s, fewer in the 80s, virtually nothing in the 90s. For four years in the late 90s, Congress appropriated zero dollars state in matching grants.

If CARA becomes law, federal spending for conservation could not be held hostage to politics during the budget process. Every year the LWCF would automatically get $900 million, with half going to the states. Of this, $102 million would go to New York State, including $28 million for land acquisition. UPARR would receive $125 million annually.

CARA has broad public support, but could face opposition in the Senate, particularly from a small but vocal group of property-rights advocates. The bill is scheduled to be marked up in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in mid-June. With only about 40 working days left in this session of Congress, early consideration by the full Senate is important if the legislation is to be finalized this year.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

Protecting community gardens


At an Earth Day event on the steps of City Hall last week, Council members Ken Fisher and Adolfo Carrion announced new legislation to protect community gardens. City Council members and dozens of community gardeners gathered at City Hall (after being disarmed of the wooden "stems" of their fake flowers) to laud the legislation, which would create for the first time a City policy governing community gardens.

The legislation establishes a moratorium on developing community garden lots, which is legally necessary before the other provisions of the new law can be enforced. It designates the community gardens as an existing use of City property rather than as "vacant lots," and no longer allows the City to develop community gardens without a thorough review process, including an EIS, and public input. It also provides the opportunity to preserve existing gardens through a transfer to the Parks Department or a land trust. "This is very reasonable legislation," said Dave Lutz of the Neighborhood Open Space Coalition. "It is not asking for all the gardens to be saved. It is asking for a rational planning process to be put into place to take into account more than one need."

The gardens were built on vacant lots leased from the City with the understanding that it could reclaim them at any time. Over the last twenty years, they have become part of fabric of their communities, and sometimes the catalyst for the revival of neighborhoods. In 1998, the City transferred the gardens from the Parks Department to the Department of Housing and Preservation, and canceled their leases. Last year, as more than 100 gardens were about to be auctioned off by the City, the Trust for Public Land and the New York Restoration Project stepped in to purchase them. Now more garden lots are slated for housing, and several have already been razed. The gardens have become a victim of their own success, improving their neighborhoods to the point that developers find them attractive.

For the time being, a moratorium on developing community gardens is in place, the result of a lawsuit filed by New York State Attorney General Elliot Spitzer. There is also community garden preservation legislation before the State Senate, but none in the Assembly. State legislators are not expected to act until the City Council does.

Anne Sounds Off:

The economy is good and tax revenues are up, but the Mayor's proposed budget for FY2001 further pares down operating funds for the Department of Parks and Recreation. The executive budget reduces the Parks operating budget by $10.7 million from what is projected to be spent this fiscal year. It eliminates 102 seasonal playground and maintenance workers, projects a reduction of 97 full-time staff members through attrition (replacing half with part-time workers), and cuts other maintenance expenditures. Though a number of other departments have funding increases, once again Parks gets just crumbs from the budget pie, about four-tenths of a percent.

During the fiscal crisis in 1992, the City greatly reduced its workforce in many areas, including Parks. Staffing for other departments, like Police, Fire, and Sanitation, has since been restored, but the number of Parks employees has actually declined. At a time when the City has added almost 2,000 acres to the Parks system, it provides less money for maintaining the green and recreational space it manages, which amounts to 13% of the City's acreage.

Parks Commissioner Henry Stern has kept the parks functioning by using thousands of welfare workers and paying for repairs (often made necessary by the lack of routine maintenance) through the creative use of the capital budget, which is borrowed money. The department has focused on keeping up the smaller and more heavily used parks; the larger parks are in worse shape, except Central and Prospect Park and a few others where private funds and capital spending have picked up the slack. You have to wonder what will happen to our parks during the next fiscal crisis.

Although the welfare workers clean the parks of litter and graffiti, there are not enough skilled Parks employees to keep up with tasks like tree pruning, gardening, and electrical and plumbing repair. In December 1999, the Parks Council surveyed hundreds of park volunteers and community groups about the services and features most in need of attention. Among the items that were ranked highest were gardening and tree pruning.

While the mayor has tackled a number of "quality-of-life" issues during his tenure, he has given low priority to maintaining the open spaces that make the City a better place to live and visit. It is interesting that the Mayor is proposing to increase maintenance staff next year for just two parks„and one is the newly restored City Hall Park. As Mark Caserta, Director of Public Policy at the Parks Council, said, "The Mayor realizes he needs maintenance workers for 'his' park. His park is built with $20 million of borrowed money, and he realizes that he needs to take care of it. That's what the rest of the City needs, too."

The City Council should at very least restore the 102 seasonal workers--positions the Council originally created, two for each district. Beyond that, let's look toward increasing the Parks operating budget to truly meet maintenance needs, and begin to dismantle the capital spending house of cards.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden. 



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years