AA's "Fat Flier" Got Whole Row
Ashley Dupre On Tiger Woods' Babes: "At Least I Kept My Mouth Shut"
Same-Sex Marriage Blame Game Aims at Paterson, Addabbo
Wife Tries To Abort And Poison Husband's Lovechild
Rihanna's Random Airport Search
After more than two years of protests and a long, drawn-out lawsuit, a State Supreme Court judge has ruled that the city can go ahead with converting a large part of the 80-year-old Pavilion in Union Square park into a restaurant. Up until a couple years ago, a seasonal restaurant and bar had operated in part of the Pavilion; the city's new plan—part of a sweeping $14 million rehabilitation of Union Square—would involve leasing a larger area of the Pavilion to a year-round restaurateur.
Opponents like Union Square Community Coalition have objected to what they see as the privatization of park space in a neighborhood with an abundance of restaurants. Yesterday Justice Jane Solomon ruled that the operation of an eating establishment in the park is consistent with public purposes. She also decided that it makes sense to put a restaurant concession in the pavilion because the area outside the pavilion is being converted into an expanded playground. But Solomon did rule that opponents could return to court once the final plans for the restaurant were announced.
In a statement, Geoffrey Croft at NYC Park Advocates told us the community coalition is planning to do just that: "I'm disappointed that the Mayor and Union Square Partnership will now force a small non-profit to spend even more time and money addressing the needs of the community, especially its children. They should be ashamed of themselves." Jennifer Falk, executive director of the Union Square Partnership, said in her statement [pdf], "We are gratified by the court's decision. Just this month, the North End Project reached a major milestone at 50 percent completion... We can't wait for the west plaza to be completed in the next few weeks just in time for the Greenmarket's busiest season of the year, and for the playground to open later this summer."
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
this is a disgrace.
benepe should be ashamed of himself. he's become another one of bloomberg's lapdogs (like quinn).
he's nothing like his father - that's for sure!
bloomberg has nothing but contempt for people who aren't rich.
as if there isn't enough commercial space in the immediate area... we need to use park space for this purpose???
and BTW this debacle has made navigating Union Sq a nightmare for way too long now. The whole thing is a disgrace.
What disgrace? What does this have to do with rich people or poor people? Restaurants add liveliness, security, and a place to get food and use the bathroom. This will be a welcome addition to Union Square. I hardly see how preventing the city from putting a place to eat in Union Square Park is one of the "needs of the community, especially its children." If the objection is commerce in the Park, why then is it ok to have a farmer's market 4 days a week? Because the City doesn't make any money off of greenmarkets? It's not like it's going to be a MacDonald's with glowing arches or something. I don't see how the Shake Shack makes the experience of Madison Square Park worse. Or Wichcraft in Bryant Park. I don't think Tavern on the Green is what's wrong with this city. At the end of the day, this will make the park a more vibrant public space with more layers of activity and I'm thankful that the Parks Department can see beyond just benches, grass and hex pavers. Having a place to eat in a park can actually be a nice thing.
this parkland/pavillion will be used for private and commercial use. this is public space. this is space for everyone who lives in this city (and visitors) to share.
to compromise the use of public space like this for an upscale restaurant is wrong. no citizen should be more entitled than another in using this public space by way of buying it from the city, for his profit. someone (a friend of benepe's and a wealthy ally of bloomberg's) gave the union square partnership lots of money. yes, it was a donation, but it was more for the purpose of greasing the wheels and getting much more in return. as far as adding livliness - what the hell are you talking about? union square is lively enough. central park would be better off without tavern on the green. it's tacky and shouldn't be in a beautiful park. that space would be much nicer if it was filled with trees and grass.
Do the opponents to a restaurant have a viable alternative plan for the pavilion? What else do they want to do with the building that doesn't involve some sort of business?
I believe they want it for a public community center.
I'd be interested to see that proposal. I don't inherently have a problem with the restaurant thing (concessions have worked well in other parks - Bryant, Madison, Central, etc..) but a community center could bring a lot to the area.
To answer IvoryJive, maybe a "disgrace" is too harsh a term...but do we really need another restaurant in the Union Square area? Aren't there enough places to eat and toilets to use ? All great cities of the world like London, Paris and Berlin value the concept of open space. It allows people to escape, even if momentarily, from the crowds, the madness and the clutter of living in an urban setting. It's not the benches and grass, per se...it's the sense of freedom and space that an open space fosters, and the ability of plain nothingness to help us center ourselves as individuals.
All great cities of the world like London, Paris and Berlin value the concept of open space.
And those cities have outdoor restaurants, often in public space. Dining outdoors can be just as nice as walking around. The real problem is that the city planners centuries ago didn't leave enough open space when they laid out the grid.
Danny Meyer will probably do a better job maintaining Union Square than the parks department, especially with all the budget cutting going on.
ughh, no thank you. there's enough going on in the park already! i agree, there are tons of restaurants in the immediate area and the market in the park!
Jesus Christ. It's the perfect event...The birth place of the labor rights movement sold to the highest bidder...The erosion of labor unions...Exactly whats wrong with this country. This is disgusting.
The thing is, "open space" to me is not synonymous with escape and quiet. Union Square, in the heart of Manhattan, is a busy, active urban public space. With the market, the musicians and performers, the vendors, the artists - this is not a serene nature preserve. If you want peace and quiet, go to Central Park, not Broadway and 14th Street.
Sure London and Paris and Berlin have world class urban parks, but they have urban plazas too - great vibrant public meeting places like Picadilly Circus, Centre Pompidou, and Alexanderplatz. Because of the grid New York has virtually no such squares or plazas, just parks and streets and nothing in between. And you always have to cross a street to get into a park - they are like islands in the middle of traffic.
Union Square is never going to be a natural refuge, nor should it be. It has central location, mass transit, density, commerce, buzz - activity should be celebrated here and I hardly think a restaurant represents some evil corporate interest undermining our public virtue. Many of us actually want things to do and places to eat INSIDE our parks and squares - as part of the same experience, not across the street. Dining in a park is much nicer than dining on a sidewalk.
Really what they should have done is closed down the streets on the north and west sides of Union Square and made them part of the park - then you would have cafes and restaurants as part of the same, contiguous public space without having to build a new restaurant in the historic structure.
With so much free and open space around this city, it's nice to see a fancy restaurant go here. Commercial spaces are becoming so hard to find these days. I get bored in the park on weekends, thinking that there is probably something I could be doing that costs money. Perfect!
Couldn't be happier with the decision. It was a restaurant and it will remain one. Great source of revenue for the parks department - and a fantastic amenity for the public. Too few places in New York where you can dine while among nature. Hope they do it in Washington Square too!
If you don't want to eat there and spend money, then don't - nobody's forcing you to. But don't tell me that people eating outdoors in a park is going to ruin the experience of being there. This is from a Jan Gehl report DOT published:
"The positive effects of providing café seating go beyond the benefits to individual restaurant owners, as café seating contributes to an improved public realm, and increased economic vitality for a city. It is a cause for concern that the three- mile stretch of Broadway from Columbus Circle to Houston Street, one of the City’s leading thoroughfares, has only 6 outdoor cafes."
go to the protest tomorrow: http://ishawithaneye.wordpress.com/2009/04/07/union-square-protest/
If anyone can remember back as far as two or three years ago, Luna Park, the previous restaurant in Union Square Park, didn't really take any space within the pavilion because the pavilion was a dead zone, rotting from years of neglect - I have many not-very-fond memories of trying to find a supposedly public bathroom amidst storage areas for rakes. Instead, the restaurant was in the outdoor area behind the statue of Lincoln.
So, despite what is reported in this story, it doesn't seem that the proposed restaurant is taking up a larger area at all. Instead, a dank and cramped space is being made-over into a restaurant and the earlier restaurant, which was much bigger in area than the inside of the pavilion, is going to be part of a much bigger play ground. I would say that this represents a benefit to all park users, whether they want to eat in the restaurant or not.
Anyone has kids? It could be nice to have them play on the playground, while sitting and enjoying coffee at the terrrace of the restaurant.
What else are you going to do in that building anyway? It is an akward space. Community center? What does that mean? Who would program such a space, and who would pay for it?