UNION SQ. NORTH-END RENOVATION GETS FINAL APPROVAL
By Albert Amateau
The Villager, NY
May 19 2006
The city’s Art Commission on Monday unanimously approved the
much-revised renovation plan for the north end of Union Square Park,
with some further modifications.
The vote by all eight of the 11 commissioners present at the May
15 meeting means that construction on the Union Square north plaza,
the pavilion with a controversial seasonal private restaurant and an
expanded playground, can begin this year.
The renovation, sponsored by the Union Square Partnership business
improvement district with the Parks Department, has been planned,
hotly debated and revised several times over the past several years.
Playground space, renovation of the now underused and decrepit pavilion
and preserving the north plaza as a place of public assembly and as
a venue for the largest Greenmarket in the city have long been points
of debate.
Neighbors who have been anticipating the renovation were gratified at
the final conclusion. Ken Salzman, who lives a block away from Union
Square with his family including three young children, said he hoped
the playground would be done before his children were too old to use
it. He also lauded the proposed new restrooms, one of which would be
accessible only by children and their caregivers.
Gabrielle Tessler, who also lives a block from the square, praised
the playground proposal, which includes equipment for older children.
Tessler visits Union Square with her daughter, Julia, a 6-year-old
pupil at P.S. 41 in the Village.
But several elected officials joined the chorus of neighborhood
opponents against a pavilion renovation that depends on use as a
restaurant six months of the year.
Nevertheless, the Art Commission commissioners made it clear that
they had jurisdiction only on the park design and had no say at all
on the use of the pavilion.
The commission approved the plan for the pavilion as submitted by
the Department of Parks and the landscape architect Michael Van
Valkenburgh Associates, but demanded the elimination of a proposed
cantilevered balcony on the south side, which was added to provide
the seasonal restaurant with a terrace for 10 additional restaurant
seats. Commissioners agreed with several neighborhood critics that
the balcony with its 4-foot-high banister was not appropriate for
the pavilion.
The commission also eliminated a proposed row of trees next to the
north side of the pavilion, saying the trees obscured the view of
the pavilion, which was built in 1932. But the commission did endorse
the disputed proposal for a row of eight trees along 17th St. at the
north end of the open plaza, plus a row of trees on the west side of
the plaza between 15th and 17th Sts.
The commission called for the new trees to be planted 30 feet apart
in a continuous trench rather than in individual tree pits. The
planting arrangement is intended to give the trees a chance to grow
in a high-risk location. A row of trees planted in pits along 17th
St. in the 1980s to commemorate the Turkish massacre of Armenians in
the 1920s did not survive longer than four years.
Jack Taylor, a preservation advocate and public member of Community
Board 5, and other critics, have called for a north plaza – the
historic site of mass public protests – to be free of any trees or
barriers that would inhibit public assembly.
“We urge you to remember that Union Square is a national historic
landmark, designated for the role of the north plaza in accommodating
mass demonstrations, rallies, parades, political and social protests
and the exercise of citizens’ rights of peaceful public assembly and
free speech,” Taylor said. “An unhindered and unadorned space has
been maintained there since 1882 and even earlier,” he said.
However, William Castro, Manhattan Parks commissioner, told the
Art Commission that since the renovation of the south end of Union
Square Park was completed four years ago, 98 percent of permits for
public assembly at Union Square were issued for the 14th St. end of
the park. Nevertheless, he added, the north plaza is still available
for public demonstrations.
Castro also pointed out that the new playground will be three times
the size of the present playground, and the restaurant space in the
renovated pavilion will be smaller than the space that Luna Cafe,
the current seasonal outdoor restaurant, occupies on the south side of
the pavilion. The plan originally called for a year-round restaurant
in the pavilion but was changed last year to seasonal use.
Longtime critics of the plan, including former City Councilmember
Carol Greitzer, Paula Schaeffer and Geoffrey Croft, also denounced
the proposal for a restaurant in the 31/2-acre park. Castro, however,
said that City Councilmembers Christine Quinn and Rosie Mendez,
have accepted the plan.
But some critics derided as “public outhouses” the two proposed
free-standing restrooms for public use to be built on the east and
west sides of the pavilion. Critics said the restrooms within the
pavilion should be reconstructed and made public all year-round.
Under the approved plan, the pavilion restrooms will be for restaurant
patrons during its seasonal operation and open to the public the rest
of the year.
Critics including Barry Benepe, a founder of the Greenmarket and the
father of Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe, criticized the location
of the playground in the sunken area now occupied by Luna Cafe.
“Nowhere else is there a playground that you have to walk into down
a flight of stairs or a ramp,” he observed. Benepe also denounced
the restaurant use of the pavilion in an area with many prominent
restaurants.
Aides for Borough President Scott Stringer, Assemblymember Richard
Gottfried, State Senator Tom Duane and Congressmember Carolyn Maloney
called for work to begin as soon as possible on the playground. But
they also denounced the pavilion restaurant.
Earlier this year, Community Board 5 approved the plan by a vote of
29 to 1.