From the NY Times:There is an idyllic little pond in the Bronx that might make any newcomer stop and stare and say, “Say, just what is that pond doing in the Bronx?”
The answer is that this is Fieldston, the section of Riverdale that resembles an English garden district. Indian Pond has been a park for residents for nearly a century.
But now the pond is threatened, many residents fear, by the proposed development of an adjacent parcel of land. The developer says he plans to cut down many of the majestic trees around the pond and build a driveway near it.
A lawyer for the owners says a consultant will be hired to ensure that the pond is not damaged, but many neighbors worry, nonetheless, that the removal of the trees would cause runoff and disturb the fragile environment around the pond.
The property, 1.3 acres at 4680 Fieldston Road, is owned by three brothers — Matthew, Edward and Marshall Bloomfield — who plan on subdividing and building three additional houses. The project would require the removal of 50 of the 81 trees on the property, many of them more than a century old.
The loss of the trees and the development of the property could disturb the already delicate ecology of the pond, said one resident, Peter Mott.
“It’s in trouble, and I worry very much that adding three new houses will add more runoff into the pond,” he said. “It certainly won’t be the same place it is now.”
The owners must apply to the board, and also to the city’s Planning Commission and Landmarks Preservation Commission for approval.
11 comments:
Let's hope that the Landmarks Preservation Commission does not approve of what would be a crime against nature, aesthetic beauty, urban planning, and our quality of life. An identifying spot in that section of Fieldston is the pond surrounded by the huge and graceful trees. If demolition is approved, it would set a negative precedent for Historic Districts citywide. The brothers should build elsewhere in a tasteful style that makes the whole community happy, but not destroy a unique enclave at any cost.
Let the city buy the property.
Looks like a big West Nile Virus petri dish to me.
Runnoff into the pond? What the residents dogs don't pee and *hit near or in the pond already?
Cutting the trees is a big deal and the residents could buy out the owner developer to save the trees. It seems to me they don't want to pay up rather have the city prevent an owner to do as they want within the code or have the city buy it to preserve the exclusiveness of their properties.
Anon #1 & #2, kudos for seeing it correctly.
Sarah, sharp witted.
Rego-Forester, bike lane lover.
Bloomfield brothers? 'nuff said.
People like Velvethead & Sarah are not in their right senses. Bloomfield bros, now that's an interesting one!
Afraid of runoff! These people should count their blessings they don't live in Queens!
That would be a shame. It looks so beautiful the way it is. How can developers get away with this?
There is no ordinance in the City of New York that protects private trees regardless of their age, health or stature. The CB 7 Queens Parks Committee in 2009 pushed for the legislation that wood protect private trees >24 inches dia. It went to City Council and never heard of again.
It is not the time or era to talk of tree preservation 'cause no one is really interested. Even the Mayor who speaks of preserving canopies across the City has his Commissioners removing trees by the thousands on public improvement projects. So why save private trees even if they would be worth $100,000 of dollars per tree. Stupid brothers.
Whatever happened with the trees? And the development?
Post a Comment