|
Community leaders are voicing concerns about the fate of the South End Avenue pedestrian arcades, a three-block chain of columned, sheltered walkways that line the street-level facades of four large apartment buildings on the west side of the street. In addition to offering a community amenity that many residents value for protection from rain and bright sunlight, these loggias provide generous extra space for a dozen retail storefronts (many of them housing locally owned small businesses) located in the buildings, creating a comfortable buffer between the front doors of each establishment and the narrow sidewalk outside the columns.
In June, 2015, the Battery Park City Authority (BPCA) hired a consultant to formulate recommendations for redesigning the streetscape along South End Avenue. Among the possibilities that this project is exploring, Gwen Dawson, the Authority’s vice president for real property, explained at that time is modifications to the arcades. They, “were originally part of the master plan and design guidelines,” she noted, “which tends to stifle the retail presence and activity.” She added, “the visibility for retail activity is very limited.”
 |
|
|
The space in front of the Battery Park City Day Nursery, who director Denise Cordovan says, “quite honestly, if I have to build out those arcades, it.s going to kill my business.” |
This issue was raised at the April 13 Open Community Meeting hosted by the BPCA, where Denise Cordivano, the director of the Battery Park City Day Nursery (which is located behind one of the arcades), said to Authority chairman Dennis Mehiel and president Shari Hyman, “I really beg you to take a deep breath before you do anything to South End Avenue.” This remark elicited a round of applause from the audience of more than 100 residents who had gathered to hear a presentation from BPCA officials, and ask them questions.
“We’ve been in the neighborhood for 29 years,” Ms. Cordivano continued. We’ll celebrate 30 years this September. And quite honestly, if I have to build out those arcades, it’s going to kill my business. It means that I’ll need to be relicensed by the Department of Health. It means that I’ll have to go through the Department of Buildings. It means that my front door will be closed during that construction time. It means that parents will find another school for that school year, and therefore, I’ll lose at least one year’s worth of business.”
Ms. Dawson, replied, “we are in the process now of working with our consultant team who has now formulated an analysis of the survey results and is translating that into set of impressions and recommendations. And those will be discussed with you.”
Ms. Cordivano pressed, “is there a timeline of when those will be presented?”
Ms. Dawson said, “it will be prepared by the time of our next quarterly community meeting.”
“Will there be a decision at that time in July, or will it be an open forum where we can comment?” Ms. Cordivano asked.
At this point, Mr. Mehiel interjected, “when we have received the results of the analysis, the recommendations, that will be public information to the residents and anybody else who is interested. And there’ll be an opportunity for discussion at the next meeting, before the decisions are finalized.”
Ms. Cordivano added, in a reference to a public opinion poll about South End Avenue that was conducted by the BPCA’s consultant, “as far as the survey goes, I know there’s a lot of people who get surveys and don’t read them, but you need to be aware that our landlord was not aware of the survey.”
The same topic was taken up three weeks later at the May 3 meeting of the Battery Park City Committee of Community Board 1 (CB1). Nick Sbordone, the BPCA’s new community relations spokesman, said, “the BPCA survey was to answer what people expect to see when they cross that street. What do they want it to look like?” He added, “as you know, South End Avenue was one of the first areas of Battery Park City to be built…”
He was interrupted by several members of the committee, who retorted, “…and we like it exactly the way it is.”
Mr. Sbordone continued, “we want to see what kind of feedback we may get from people who use South End Avenue — people who work in the area, people who live in the area, businesses that transact business in the area.” He noted that the survey originally had a deadline of January 11, which was extended several times, most recently to May 6.
Committee chair Anthony Notaro recalled that CB1 had collaborated with the City’s Department of Transportation on a separate study, which focused on traffic and pedestrian safety. “Then the Authority BPCA went off and created their own South End Avenue study. We had no input to what they were doing, what their motivation was, what their objective was. And they created this survey, which was targeted to different audiences, but it wasn’t clear who.”
“We’re very concerned that the BPCA is looking at something that we’re not connected with,” Mr. Notaro continued, “and may not have the same objectives. This is a very important issue for us to work together on, or to fight on. It’s as simple as that.”
Committee co-chair Ninfa Segarra said, in a reference to the points raised by Ms. Cordivano at the April 13 Open Community Meeting, “at your Town Hall, there was one of our major businesses on South End Avenue reporting that nobody had ever talked to her. We want to know specifically about the local retail businesses. Has somebody talked to them in person, explained the process, and given them a role? Because they are important players. They are partners in our community.”
Mr. Sbordone answered, “that absolutely a fair question. The short answer is yes. They have been contacted. This study has several prongs: street outreach to pedestrians, then emails to residents and businesses. We want to make sure that we’re doing a better job of letting people know that this thing is out there.
Ms. Segarra noted, “it takes half a day to have someone walk up the street and talk to each of those retailers.”
This led Mr. Sbordone to observe, “some people just don’t want to talk when they hear you are from the government and you want to help.” But, he added, “nothing is imminent.”
This led Battery Park City Committee member Tammy Meltzer to note, “the original deadline was January 11. That you’re extending it is new information.”
Mr. Notaro agreed, “this is absolutely new. Our whole assumption here was that this survey closed months ago.”
Ms. Meltzer raised additional reservations about the survey. “There are questions that were crafted with a negative supposition,” she observed. “Like, ‘what are the issues that you have with the arcades?’ That is a loaded question. There are many people who don’t think there are any issues. But if you are asked for issues, you’re going to answer the question. I have an issue with the way in which some of the questions were asked.”
Ms. Segarra concurred, describing the questions contained in the survey as, “leading.”
This led Mr. Notaro to observe, “nobody understands why the hell you want to fill in those arcades.”
Committee member Jeff Mihok said emphatically, “we don’t want that to happen,” and Ms. Meltzer agreed, “that’s what we don’t want.” Justine Cuccia, a public member of the Battery Park City Committee reiterated, “we want the arcades left alone,” and Mr. Mihok said, “there’s nobody in this room who wants to lose those arcades.”
Mr. Notaro concluded, “there are three messages for the Authority here. First, this is a bone of contention. Second, the new May 5 deadline will come and go and the BPCA will say, ‘see, we didn’t need to do this, because nobody answered.’ And that will be because nobody knew.” He suggested that the BPCA, “throw that out and start all over again.” And third, he said, “if you and Gwen [Dawson] come back and show us who was surveyed and the initial feedback, that would be important.” |
