A great victory for river!
To The Editor:
Re “Fed judge torpedoes ‘Diller Island’; Says no need for it to be in river” (thevillager.com, March 24):
This is a great victory — and no thanks to the Hudson River organizations that dove into the tank, glub, glub, glub, glub, glub, on Diller Island. They turned their backs on the Hudson River Fishermen’s Association’s historic victory over the corrupt $6 billion Westway boondoggle, a victory that set aside this stretch of the river as a sanctuary for juvenile striped bass before they migrated to sea.
FYI, Westway was backed by two presidents, Carter and Reagan, two governors, Hugh Carey and Mario Cuomo, two senators, Pothole D’Amato and Pat Moynihan, Mayor Edward I. Koch, The New York Times, construction unions, real estate interests and David Rockefeller, the latter who essentially said, “Who cares if 36 percent of the juvenile striped bass disappear each year?”
Well, I daresay that he would have cared greatly had 36 percent of his bank’s assets disappeared each year.
Three Cheers for The City Club of New York!
Robert H. Boyle
Boyle is founder, Hudson River Fishermen’s Association and Riverkeeper
Pier55 is still afloat
To The Editor:
Re “Fed judge torpedoes ‘Diller Island’; Says no need for it to be in river” (thevillager.com, March 24):
I am deeply disappointed by The Villager’s misguided coverage of last week’s Pier55 court ruling, replete with uninformed and specious characterizations of the project and the recent court decision.
The portrayal of that ruling as fatal to the project is erroneous. The decision was entirely related to procedural claims and, contrary to this paper’s reporting, involved no finding of environmental harm, nor the inability of the project to secure a Clean Water Act permit. Indeed, the plaintiffs never made any claim of such harm. The same was true of the plaintiffs’ failed challenge to the project’s state Department of Environmental Conservation permit, in which they only argued about procedure (and lost).
And in the only lawsuit where they claimed environmental harm — without any proof — they lost at each of the three levels of the New York State court system.
While the reported decision was disappointing, it emphatically did not determine that the project could not be approved, nor that it violates the Clean Water Act. Any responsible reading of the decision would recognize that. It’s a shame The Villager didn’t.
Diana Taylor
Taylor is chairperson, Hudson River Park Trust
Editor’s note: The letter writer is right that one sentence in The Villager’s online article did incorrectly say that the Pier55 project violated the Clean Water Act — when, in fact, it was the Army Corps that violated the act. Judge Lorna Schofield, on p. 5 of her written decision on March 23 on the Pier55 lawsuit by The City Club, states: “[T]he U.S. Army Corps of Engineers violated the Clean Water Act…by defining the project’s purpose too narrowly and by relying on that unlawful basic purpose to determine that [the] proposed action is water dependent.”
Just like Space Mountain
To The Editor:
Re “Fed judge torpedoes ‘Diller Island’; Says no need for it to be in river” (thevillager.com, March 24):
The judge should have added that the “Jetsons”-themed entertainment complex is just damn ugly and belongs in Orlando.
Carl Rosenstein
‘A blow to thousands’
To The Editor:
Re “Fed judge torpedoes ‘Diller Island’; Says no need for it to be in river” (thevillager.com, March 24):
Score a victory for those who’d like to see Hudson River Park sink into the sea.
Last week’s court ruling, barring Pier55 from moving ahead, was a blow to the thousands who have been looking forward to this new treasure of a park on the city’s majestic waterfront. The asphalt-slabbed Pier 54 was shut for safety reasons years ago. In its place, a generous philanthropic gift offered a lush green garden and nonprofit arts center.
Pier 55 wasn’t without controversy. The Friends of Hudson River Park — an independent 501(c)(3) organization — participated in hours of public meetings to evaluate this proposal, a gift in excess of $100 million offered by Barry Diller and Diane von Furstenberg. Community Board 2 went through the plan clause by clause — and managed to improve it. In the end, C.B. 2 supported Pier55 after hearing from hundreds of voices in the community.
One group that wasn’t there to listen was The City Club of New York — a dormant organization that woke up to file its lawsuit. The City Club pursued its case with no input from the people who actually rely on Hudson River Park for open space — for access to water, yes, and also to sky, and air and green. Hudson River Park is all of these, in a city that hungers for them.
Pier55 poses no environmental threat to the Hudson River. Every court decision made that clear, including last week’s. And yet, there are still a few people who believe that the best future for the Hudson River waterfront is one underwater: Let the piers sink into decrepitude.
Seventeen million visits to Hudson River Park each year — runners and sit-in-the-sunners alike — are testament to all the New Yorkers who beg to differ.
Susanna Aaron
Aaron is secretary, Friends of Hudson River Park
Thanks, ‘Crusty’ Club
To The Editor:
Re “Fed judge torpedoes ‘Diller Island’; Says no need for it to be in river” (thevillager.com, March 24):
I was truly disturbed to learn of the court’s decision to halt the construction of a beautiful public park from being built on Pier55 in Hudson River Park.
How did this happen? I’ll tell you: the narrow interests of the obscure City Club, Tom Fox and a select few have selfishly dealt a huge blow to the creation of a new park and venue for the performing arts.
These few individuals are standing in the way of a new park for the thousands of families who live on the West Side and the millions of New Yorkers and visitors who seek open green spaces, arts and culture.
These folks do not represent the park community and the millions who use Hudson River Park. They have pushed this lawsuit to destroy this gorgeous new park, and would prefer to have nothing in its place.
I have previously said that they should give up their obstructionism, but they continue their self-righteous and nonsensical crusade without any concern for what the public wants and needs.
Consider the result if these guys succeed: A tremendous display of generosity on the part of Mr. Diller, squandered; a public asset cities around the globe would love to have, lost; the will of the community, snuffed out.
All so a small group, fueled by crusty, petty grievances, could feel good about itself.
Shame on them.
Michael Novogratz
Novogratz is chairperson, Friends of Hudson River Park
‘Ridiculous’ garden
To The Editor:
Re “Blaz shores up Pier 40 but chops Eliz. St. Garden” (news article, March 23):
The “Elizabeth St. Garden” was nothing more than a junkyard before the announcement to develop it for affordable senior housing.
The argument that residents need green space is ridiculous since Sara Roosevelt Park, at nearly 8 acres, is just two short blocks away. This is just an attempt by some to keep lower-income people out of “their” neighborhood.
Karlin Chan
Vote for Avella
To The Editor:
Re “Blaz shores up Pier 40 but chops Eliz. St. Garden” (news article, March 23):
Tony Avella for mayor! Get this tyrant de Bozo out!
Emily Straton
On land and sea…
To The Editor:
Re “Blaz shores up Pier 40 but chops Eliz. St. Garden” (news article, March 23), and “Fed judge torpedoes ‘Diller Island’; Says no need for it to be in river” (thevillager.com, March 24):
The Elizabeth St. Garden group deserves so much more than what it has been given — basically nothing, from Councilmember Margaret Chin and Mayor de Blasio. Sometimes I think that the energy spent on issues should be changed to getting new people elected to office and reforming the election process.
It is a shame that we have a mayor who appears not to care very much for Downtown Manhattan. Maybe we need to provide him a gym Downtown, so he doesn’t have schlep to Brooklyn every morning to do his exercising.
By the way, de Blasio was chosen by very few New Yorkers in a low-turnout election. It is amazing how much power he has and how few cared to vote.
Many residents living near this Pier55 were disturbed that the Hudson River Park Trust — an entity that seems more representative of itself than anything else — could just give away a piece of the river. Will other rich folks be gifted portions of the Hudson to build trophy islands?
People kept saying, “Oh but you can’t reject such a magnanimous present,” implying that we peons should thankfully accept this generous gift. Barry Diller and Diane von Furstenberg have been generous and we should be very appreciative of their other gifts, such as to the High Line. However, this one crosses the line where they are being given part of a natural resource that should be treated as a treasure commonly owned by all.
A member of Community Board 2 evidently said, “Damn that City Club” for winning its lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps over Pier55. I am also a member of C.B. 2 and I thank The City Club for winning. Let’s hope the decision sticks.
Elaine Young
E-mail letters, not longer than 250 words in length, to news@thevillager.com or fax to 212-229-2790 or mail to The Villager, Letters to the Editor, 1 MetroTech North, 10th floor, Brooklyn, NY 11201. Please include phone number for confirmation purposes. The Villager reserves the right to edit letters for space, grammar, clarity and libel. Anonymous letters will not be published.
