Solving the Pier 40 quandary
To The Editor:
Re “St. John’s plan includes nearly 500 affordable units, small park, maybe hotel” (news article, Oct. 22):
Finally, a very good plan that works. Kudos to Assemblymembers Deborah Glick and Richard Gottfried for the (albeit imperfect) legislation making it possible.
Having looked at the symbiotic relationship of these two massive structures — Pier 40 and the St. John’s Center — for years, it’s heartening to see such an obvious solution to the Pier 40 quandary finally realized. I hope the “community” will support this proposal as strongly as it has opposed all the previous ones.
Saving Pier 40 in this manner allows the continuation of its existing uses (kayaks, boat builders, Downtown United Soccer Club, Greenwich Village Little League) and opens the door to “redevelop” much of the pier’s shed space for a plethora of community and educational uses still to be imagined, and hopefully realized in the same spirit as the pending 75 Morton St. school.
Andrew Berman of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation should take a pass on this one. Not everything from earlier eras can, or should, be kept as it was when the city was not as developed, and crowded, as now. Historic preservation should not be a zero sum game.
There should be support from G.V.S.H.P. for intelligent and selective development where there is such an obvious benefit to the larger community.
Chris Gaylord
This isn’t about me!
To The Editor:
Re “Hey, Harry — try headphones!” (letter, by Bill Abrams, Oct. 29):
Bill Abrams has attempted to deflect attention away from the real issue and toward me. And someone else wrote that I should “get a life!” Well, The Villager has just printed two of my columns, and, lo and behold, I actually do have a life!
Mr. Abrams lectured me about how to live in my “community” and told me to “wear headphones” if God’s Love We Deliver’s parties are too loud. What kind of “community” requires you to barricade yourself in your home and wear headphones? Should I also wear sunglasses? On sunny days, even passersby must shield their eyes from G.L.W.D.’s “gleaming” edifice.
G.L.W.D.’s blaring disco was equivalent to an invading army kicking down our door with jackboots. Even people on the street were yelling, “Shut up!” The sound could be heard as far away as West Broadway.
I don’t oppose G.L.W.D.’s mission of helping those who are ill and in need. My mother and grandmother received meals from Caring Community and Meals On Wheels. God bless those organizations. I wish I had Michael Kors’s money to help them. But why does G.L.W.D. help some, and trample over others?
G.L.W.D. was not approved by Community Board 2 as an outdoor event space.
As an old newspaper illustrator, I love newsprint, but newsprint can’t fully represent the sound and fury of the attack that was leveled against this community. The Villager has reviewed actual video — with sound — of that event; and, as the press representative of this community, it has honestly and courageously reported it.
Harry Pincus
The ultimate activist
To The Editor:
Re “Dorothy Ryan, outspoken activist in ’60s, ’70s” (obituary, Oct. 22):
It was sad to learn that Dorothy Ryan has passed away. She was the ultimate activist who rose from P.T.A. president at P.S. 41 to a distinguished position on the community school board. Her vigor and zeal helped at a time of need. Today, we need more activists seeking to improve our children’s schools.
Sylvia Rackow
Chumley’s Scoopy scolding
To The Editor:
Re “Chumley’s not 86’ed” (Scoopy’s Notebook, Oct. 22):
Being a gossip columnist and a cat, Scoopy can’t be expected to grasp all the facts. So it may be helpful to point out a few things that Scoopy got wrong or didn’t mention about the Chumley’s situation.
The bar may have been “popular with the likes of John Steinbeck and William Faulkner” long ago. But, for many years prior to the internal masonry collapse that shut it down, Chumley’s was popular mainly as a place for groups of college students and out-of-towners to load up with beer and make noise, often late at night on the (narrow) street.
Chumley’s has been “slow in reopening” not because of a “string of lawsuits” but because — before any lawsuit was filed — whoever headed up the gutting and rebuilding of 86 Bedford St. took a very long time to do the work.
Community Board 2’s S.L.A. Licensing Committee, its published minutes tell us, voted unanimously on Oct. 15 to recommend denial of Chumley’s liquor license application unless the place satisfies multiple requirements — including a lot of noise-control measures, a ban on “promoted events” and “security in front of and inside the premises at all times.” These, of course, are to prevent expected nuisances from the tourist/student/bridge-and-tunnel crowd.
Despite Chumley’s known history (and, predictably, future) of hosting unruly binge-drinking crowds, the Bedford-Barrow-Commerce Block Association has been cheerleading for it to reopen since at least 2011. Whoever agrees with B.B.C.’s pro-Chumley’s position must not have lived within earshot of 86 Bedford during Chumley’s last go-round. Or else they had the gift of sleeping very, very soundly.
Bryan Dunlap
Affordable smokescreen
To The Editor:
Re “Praise for Stuy Town sale but also concern about massive air rights” (news article, Oct. 29):
And you thought the Bloomberg/Quinn team was real estate friendly. De Blasio is finding more and more ways to destroy low-rise Downtown than his odious predecessors. His “affordable housing” mantra is a huge smokescreen for the giant real estate concerns swallowing the city.
Carl Rosenstein
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, 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.
