From WNYC News Blog:Mayor Bloomberg has rezoned large parts of the city to make room for population growth, but he’s had a hard time creating the open space where these new residents will be able to exercise. WNYC calculated how much more open space the rezonings will provide compared to how many more residents are expected to make those places their homes. It turns out that back in the 1990s, the city developed guidelines for this ratio: all large new developments, they say, should ideally provide 2.5 acres of open space for every 1,000 residents once they are fully built out. Taken as a whole, the rezonings fail to meet that goal.
It’s easy, after all, to allow developers to build residential buildings in formerly industrial spaces, or build taller buildings in places where low-rises prevailed. It’s harder to actually buy up private property and convert it to open space.
Well, creation of parkland would be one of those instances where eminent domain would be used for the public good. But we never seem to use it to create open space. Instead, the City uses it to give developers cheap land so they can overdevelop even more.
6 comments:
Was it $100 million they had to buy up that toxic brownfield at the mouth of Newtown Creek? How many thousand units?
It would be interesting to list up everyone that has a hand in this, from city government, lenders, developers, architects, the whole shebang.
Then prep a list on how many of their family would live on such a location.
Also be interesting to see if they made any provisions in their insurance coverage for future possible Love Canal type claims.
Check out the open space along Silvercup's project or the Two Coves/Astoria Houses project.
(Hint, its shit)
Look it up and publish it Crappy.
What does the community say - particularly the parks and the local waterfront groups.
"Well, creation of parkland would be one of those instances where eminent domain would be used for the public good. But we never seem to use it to create open space. Instead, the City uses it to give developers cheap land so they can overdevelop even more. "
- - -
Perhaps my ability to understand is limited, but, is it just a teeny bit possible that the Commissar gives land to developers either free or extremely low cost so that the developers will have even more profits? And those profits will be used to pay back the Commissar as a way of showing appreciation? By the way, land that was seized from private property owners who were already making excellent use of the property? But, were no handing over part of those profits to make the Billionaire Commissar even richer?
And, is it just a teeny bit possible that converting any plot(s) of land to open space parkland for permanent public recreational use is simply of no value to already extremely wealthy developer cronies of the Commissar, so they persuade the Commissar (friendly persuasion of a green kind) to skip over the creation of opens spaces?
Finally, is it just a teensy bit possible that we can change all this by using September 15 to kick the Commissar's ass all the way back to Boston?
Finally, is it just a teensy bit possible that we can change all this by using September 15 to kick the Commissar's ass all the way back to Boston?
---
The answer is 'no' unless someone can goad him into acting stupid - a number of times
or get out all the shit they have been keeping a lid on and will hit the fan this time next year - after elections!
What's the big deal? Bloomturd will just change the guidelines just like he changed term limits.
What do you need open space for??
Build more unit. And clean up the blights like willets point
Post a Comment