Group opposed to building in the water (imagine that!)

From the Huffington Post:

Citing Hurricane Sandy, environmental advocates are urging New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) to veto a bill that could expand development along the New York City riverfront. But supporters say those criticisms are nothing more than reheated opposition to the original Hudson River Park.

At issue is the park and a series of piers along the west side of Manhattan. Plans to develop the piers jutting into the Hudson River into sports facilities or additional park space have stalled for lack of funds.

A bill that passed out of New York's legislature with scant opposition in either chamber promises to change things, by allowing the park to sell "air rights" -- the ability to build tall buildings taller -- to developers that own land across from the park. The money earned could then be used by the Hudson River Park Trust to repair and further develop the piers.

The bill, which is strongly supported by the Hudson River Park Trust, also includes provisions on new development for the waterfront -- allowing for a helicopter landing pad, "entertainment barges," and a few other new uses of the piers.

But there's a hitch: Hurricane Sandy, and the threat of rising tides from climate change. After Sandy, environmentalists pointed out that they had warned for years about the dangers of development along the waterfront, only to be ignored.

The new Hudson River Park bill was sent to Cuomo on Friday, and he has 10 days excluding Sundays to veto or sign it. If he does nothing, it will go into law.

Housing slump hits Queens hard

From the Daily News:

Queens homeowners are feeling the pain of the housing slump.

The volume of home sales in the borough fell by 9% in the third quarter, compared with the same period last year, according to a report from NYU’s Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy.

The decline exceeded the drop in home sales citywide, which measured 4%.

Queens also stood out when it came to declining property values. Prices in the borough have depreciated 30% from their peak levels, which were reached in the fourth quarter of 2006.

When the best case scenario doesn't happen

From the NY Observer:

On May 17, Governor Paterson and several other officials and community leaders assembled on Manhattan's West Side for a ribbon cutting at Hudson River Park, the 5-mile-long strip of green space, converted piers and bike lanes along the Hudson River. They were on hand to christen the new (and growing) park's latest section, a 9-acre run that has a new skate park and gardens near West 24th Street.

It is, indeed, the season of parks: Earlier this spring, the long-planned Brooklyn Bridge Park opened its first section, a large pier; and the year-old High Line elevated park that runs through Chelsea is laying materials for its second phase, to open next year.

There's just one little nagging detail with these expanding parks: There's not enough money to fund their upkeep, and, for the most part, no one quite knows where it will come from.

All three parks were held up as gems of an economic development agenda in New York, as, theoretically, they were to be self-sustaining or close to it, with the private sector to pay for the ongoing operations. Yet the situation is one of classic overreach, as the administrations of Mayor Bloomberg and three governors put their faith in the panacea concept of the public-private partnership, pledging a win-win for all involved. The logic ran like this: New parks would be built; creative planning would open the floodgates to money from the private sector to fund maintenance year after year; and public balance sheets would be spared. The reality is far less heartwarming. The city and state are now grasping to find ways to make the parks work in the long term and are finding no answers that pass muster with the local communities and elected officials whose sign-off is needed. With this question mark hanging overhead, the fact that the groundbreakings continue-money continues to go into expansion-looks to be something of a reckless move, as officials are betting that some unspecified solution will indeed materialize at some future date.