DOCSLIB.ORG

Theplan Revised V7 2-1-12.Indd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

RECLAIMING CULTURAL HERITAGE A PLAN FOR THE HARLEM AFRICAN BURIAL GROUND HUNTER COLLEGE | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AFFAIRS & PLANNING FALL 2011 Created for the Harlem African Burial Ground Task Force East Harlem HABG/126th Street Bus Depot TABLE OF CONTENTS “The development of a A Note from the Fall 2011 Hunter College Urban Planning Studio 1 Execu ve Summary 2 memorial district will not Client Vision 6 only enhance community Process 7 History 11 recogniƟ on of their rich Chronology 14 history, but those who know Defi ning Community 16 of the village of Harlem, and Public Visioning Workshop 33 come from afar, will become Memorial Statement 41 familiar with this porƟ on Six Planning Elements 43 Planning Recommenda on Phases 44 of the village and its fi rst Phasing Tables 45 Planning Recommenda ons 49 church, which happens to Community 50 Harlem African Burial Ground Task Force Development 50 be the genesis of Harlem.” Community Educa on Campaign 53 Public Arts Program 55 Commemora ve Program Ac vi es 58 Community Safety and Security 60 -Reverend Patricia A. Singletary Poli cal 61 Poli cal Ac on 61 Elmendorf Reformed Church Historic District Designa on 64 Subway and Street Co-Naming 69 Legal Support 70 Synergy with Exis ng Area Plans 70 TABLE OF CONTENTS Economic 72 Economic Development and Zoning 72 Market Network 80 Physical 81 Bus Depot Reloca on 81 Archaeological Explora on 83 Pedestrian Safety 84 Waterfront Access 84 Memorial District Walking Tour 88 Walking Tour Guidelines 91 District Design Recommenda ons 96 Cohesive Signage and Ligh ng 96 Ligh ng Recommenda ons 97 Street Beau fi ca on 98 Sustainability 100 Design Concept Overview 101 Memorial Design Recommenda ons 102 Design Alterna ve One 102 Design Alterna ve Two 108 Design Alterna ve Three 116 Conclusion 121 Acknowledgements 123 Endnotes 127 [cover photos] Photos: Harlem African Burial Ground Task Force. h p://harlemafricanburialground.wordpress.com/; Jonathan Joseph [preceding pages] Elmendorf Reformed Church. Photo: h p://www.fl ickr.com/photos/59816658@N00/4005164712/ Context Map. Map: Jonathan Joseph and Erin Congdon [page immediately following Table of Contents] The corner of 1st Avenue and 126th Street Photo: Jillian Puszykowski A NOTE FROM THE FALL 2011 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY HUNTER COLLEGE URBAN PLANNING STUDIO The Fall 2011 Hunter College Urban Planning Studio developed RECLAIMING This report has been developed by students in the conducted a community visioning workshop to CULTURAL HERITAGE: A PLAN FOR THE HARLEM AFRICAN BURIAL GROUND for the Fall 2011 Hunter College Urban Planning Studio for inform the studio’s fi nal recommenda ons. Six purpose of establishing a conceptual vision for the commemora on of the Harlem the Harlem African Burial Ground Task Force. The main themes emerged from these inves ga ons: African Burial Ground. The plan outlines design guidelines, recommenda ons, studio is comprised of 15 candidates for a Master memorializa on; visibility; connec vity; economic strategies and future policies that will assist the studio’s client, the Harlem African of Urban Planning Degree, under the direc on of development; urban design; and quality of life. Burial Ground Task Force, with memorializing the burial ground and educa ng the Hunter Urban Aff airs and Planning faculty member These themes served as guiding principals as studio public about its historical and cultural signifi cance. Pablo Vengoechea and teaching assistant Ma hew members developed the fi nal recommenda ons. Bissen. The studio is a semester-long project The Task Force has already done considerable work toward educa ng the public las ng from late August through December. The The recommenda ons contained in this plan off er and crea ng strategic ini a ves around the memorializa on of the burial ground. Task Force asked the studio to develop a plan and methods for crea ng a defi ned historic, memorial recommenda ons for a memorial and district for and cultural district, celebra ng the cultural The studio was asked to create a plan to assist the Task Force in furthering these the Harlem African Burial Ground, located between history of East Harlem, enhancing the visibility and objec ves. The studio, accordingly, engaged in a four-month-long planning process East 126th and 127th Streets at 1st Avenue in East awareness of the burial ground site, developing aimed at providing the Task Force with a cohesive plan for the memorializa on of Harlem. connec ons to community assets, implemen ng the Harlem African Burial Ground. This document details the planning and design measures to improve the quality of life, and recommenda ons that developed from our fi ndings. Therefore, it is with great The Harlem African Burial Ground (HABG) genera ng economic investment that will benefi t the pleasure that we present the following report. site is currently occupied by a Metropolitan East Harlem community. These recommenda ons Transporta on Authority (MTA) bus depot. In incorporate both planning and design principles in Sincerely, addi on, the Department of Transporta on (DOT) order to assist the Task Force in developing a vision Members of the Fall 2011 Hunter College Urban Planning Studio is engaged in a project on the Willis Avenue Bridge for the memorializa on of the Harlem African Burial in an area that may also have been used as part Ground. The recommenda ons are divided into four Steven Belkin Jonathan Joseph of the burial ground. The current use of the site areas: community; poli cal; economic; and physical. Zachary Campbell Rachel Levin does not provide any acknowledgement of its Daniel Compitello William Long signifi cance to East Harlem’s cultural history. In Community Erin Congdon Marc Pearce addi on to memorializing the site, the Task Force Task Force Capacity Development: The Task Force Nathaniel Diego Samuël Poisson also recognizes the need to increase community should engage in a strategic planning process to Alexandra Hanson Jillian Puszykowski awareness about the burial ground and the history develop consensus regarding short, medium, and Kay Hart Sara Romanoski of the Village of Harlem. In light of these requests, long term goals and the best strategy for achieving Eric Herman the studio created recommenda ons for both a site these goals. This includes determining the future specifi c memorial and a memorial district. structure of the Task Force itself. Professor Pablo Vengoechea Teaching Assistant Ma hew Bissen Over the course of four months, the studio Community Educa on Campaign: The studio conducted extensive research, engaged in mul ple recommends that the Task Force con nue to raise site visits, met with the Task Force members, and the profi le of the HABG and educate community 1 Reclaiming Cultural Heritage A Plan for the Harlem African Burial Ground 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Community (conƟ nued) that the Task Force engage with the CB11 Public stakeholders about the burial ground’s importance Safety and Transporta on Commi ee, community- by organizing ongoing events, developing a based organiza ons, and local service providers to educa onal network of local churches, and enhance safety and security in the neighborhood. collabora ng with local schools and ins tu ons of higher educa on. PoliƟ cal Poli cal Ac on: The Task Force should develop and Public Art Program: East Harlem has a vibrant execute a coordinated poli cal ac on campaign arts community that can contribute to the focused on crea ng a level of public and poli cal memorializa on of the Harlem African Burial support for the memorializa on of the burial Ground. The Task Force should work with community ground such that it becomes untenable for the MTA stakeholders to develop a community-based arts to con nue opera ons on the site without regard to program to engage local ar sts and youth in the its history as an African burial ground. crea on of public art commemora ng the HABG and East Harlem’s history. Historic District Designa on: A new Preserva on Commi ee within the Task Force responsible In addi on to crea ng new works of public art, the for coordina ng research, community outreach program will reinforce and integrate exis ng public and advocacy could lead to the iden fi ca on of art projects and ar sts in the neighborhood into the proposed district boundaries. This commi ee would public art plans for the district. also be responsible for pursing the various historic designa ons and funding opportuni es outlined in Commemora ve Program Ac vi es: Commemora ve this sec on of the plan. program ac vi es off er the opportunity for the Task Force to crea vely showcase the signifi cance Subway and Street Co-naming: The studio of the Harlem African Burial Ground and aid recommends that the subway sta on at East the memorializa on of those buried there. 125th Street and Lexington Avenue and East 126th Commemora ve program ac vity collabora on Street, between 1st and 2nd Avenues be co-named opportuni es include the “Pinkster” Celebra on, to represent the presence of the burial ground. Harlem Week, Black History Month, and the African- The co-names could be selected though a public American Day Parade par cipa on process that includes the East Harlem community, the Task Force, and Community Board Community Safety and Security: In order to 11. [opposite page] address safety and quality of life issues within the Buses idling in front of the 126th Street Bus Depot East Harlem community, the studio recommends Photo: Jillian Puszykowski 3 Reclaiming Cultural Heritage A Plan for the Harlem African Burial Ground 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PoliƟ cal (conƟ nued) Physical Physical (conƟ nued) Design Alterna ve 2: An Adap ve Reuse alterna ve Legal Support: The studio recommends that the Bus Depot Reloca on: To provide space for the Walking Tour: The Task Force should design that removes the use as a bus depot and provides Task Force procure legal representa on to explore proper memorializa on of the burial ground, the and implement a walking tour to highlight the a memorial of the burial ground in the exis ng the ques on of ownership and land rights.
Recommended publications

  • Stateman's Legacy Stamped

    July 17-23, 2015 Your Neighborhood — Your News® SERVING PARKCHESTER, HUNTS POINT, FORDHAM SOUTH, GRAND CONCOURSE, FORDHAM NORTH, BRONX NORTH, CO-OP CITY $$ GRAB AT GOLDEN EAGLE BY PATRICK ROCCHIO hitting anyone,” stated a po- auto theft. A brazen morning rob- lice source, and then fl ed the “Thank god for the 49th bery at a popular diner has scene. Precinct,” said Signorile. community leaders in Morris The investigation is ongo- “They are doing a wonderful Park and an elected offi cial ing as of press time, and so far job looking into this.” raising concerned. no arrests have been made. MPCA vice-president Al A man posing as a food The incident raised con- D’Angelo was concerned that inspector asked to see the cerns among community the incident could have an ad- basement at the Golden Ea- leaders in Morris Park. verse affect on Morris Park’s gle Restaurant at 745 Morris Morris Park Community reputation and desirability. Park Avenue and when taken Association president An- D’Angleo said that he be- downstairs, displayed a fi re- thony Singorile said that the lieves Morris Park is one of arm and demanded money MPCA would be monitoring the safest areas in the city, from the manager, according the situation and said that the but if people see changes for to police. community needs security the worse in terms of crime The robbery took place at cameras. and quality-of-life, middle around 7:20 a.m. on Friday, “It is getting out of hand,” class people with the means July 15, a police spokesperson said Signorile after the rob- to do so may decide to leave.
  • Mount Morris Park Historic District Extension Designation Report

    Mount Morris Park Historic District Extension Designation Report

    Mount Morris Park Historic District Extension Designation Report September 2015 Cover Photograph: 133 to 143 West 122nd Street Christopher D. Brazee, September 2015 Mount Morris Park Historic District Extension Designation Report Essay Researched and Written by Theresa C. Noonan and Tara Harrison Building Profiles Prepared by Tara Harrison, Theresa C. Noonan, and Donald G. Presa Architects’ Appendix Researched and Written by Donald G. Presa Edited by Mary Beth Betts, Director of Research Photographs by Christopher D. Brazee Map by Daniel Heinz Watts Commissioners Meenakshi Srinivasan, Chair Frederick Bland John Gustafsson Diana Chapin Adi Shamir-Baron Wellington Chen Kim Vauss Michael Devonshire Roberta Washington Michael Goldblum Sarah Carroll, Executive Director Mark Silberman, Counsel Jared Knowles, Director of Preservation Lisa Kersavage, Director of Special Projects and Strategic Planning TABLE OF CONTENTS MOUNT MORRIS PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT EXTENSION MAP .................... AFTER CONTENTS TESTIMONY AT THE PUBLIC HEARING .............................................................................................. 1 MOUNT MORRIS PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT EXTENSION BOUNDARIES .................................... 1 SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................................. 3 THE HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE MOUNT MORRIS PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT EXTENSION Early History and Development of the Area ................................................................................
  • MTA Bx15 Bus Timetable

    MTA Bx15 Bus Timetable

    Bus Timetable Bx15 New York City Transit Fordham Plaza - The Hub via 3rd Av / 125th St Local and Limited-Stop Service For accessible subway stations, travel directions and other information: Effective June 10, 2021 Visit www.mta.info or call us at 511 We are introducing a new style to our timetables. These read better on mobile devices and print better on home printers. This is a work in progress — the design will evolve over the coming months. Soon, we'll also have an online timetable viewer with more ways to view timetables. Let us know your thoughts, questions, or suggestions about the new timetables at new.mta.info/timetables-feedback. Bx15 Weekday To Fordham Plaza, Bronx Harlem Harlem Harlem Mott Haven The Hub Morrisania Claremont Tremont Fordham Plz St Claire Pl / W 125 St / E 125 St / 2 Willis Av / E 3 Av / 3 Av / E 168 3 Av / 3 Av / E 3 Av / E W 125 St Fred Douglass Av 138 St Westchester St Claremont Tremont Av Fordham Rd Bl Av Pky - - - - 12:54 1:02 1:06 1:10 1:15 - - - - 1:14 1:21 1:25 1:29 1:34 1:07 1:12 1:21 1:25 1:31 1:38 1:42 1:46 1:51 - - - - 1:53 2:00 2:04 2:08 2:13 - - - - 2:13 2:20 2:24 2:28 2:33 2:07 2:12 2:21 2:25 2:31 2:38 2:42 2:46 2:51 - - - - 2:53 3:00 3:03 3:07 3:12 - - - - 3:13 3:21 3:24 3:28 3:33 3:07 3:12 3:21 3:25 3:30 3:38 3:41 3:45 3:50 - - - - 3:53 4:01 4:04 4:08 4:13 - - - - 4:13 4:21 4:24 4:28 4:33 4:07 4:12 4:21 4:25 4:30 4:38 4:41 4:45 4:50 - - - - 5:13 5:21 5:24 5:28 5:33 - - - - 5:22 5:30 5:34 5:39 5:45 - - - - 5:30 5:39 5:43 5:48 5:54 5:07 5:12 5:21 5:26 5:31 5:40 5:44 5:49 5:55 - - - - 5:40 5:49
  • East Harlem, Manhattan (September 2016)

    East Harlem, Manhattan (September 2016)

    PLACE-BASED COMMUNITY BROWNFIELD PLANNING FOUNDATION REPORT ON EXISTING CONDITIONS EAST HARLEM, MANHATTAN FINAL SEPTEMBER 2016 BILL deBLASIO MAYOR DANIEL C. WALSH, Ph.D. DIRECTOR Mayor’s Office of Environmental Remediation This document was prepared by the New York City Department of City Planning for the New York City Mayor’s Office of Environmental Remediation and the New York State Department of State with state funds provided through the Brownfield Opportunity Areas Program. CONTENTS PURPOSE 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 PART ONE Geography and Land Use 10 Demographic and Economic Profile 28 Recent Public Initiatives and Private Investments 35 PART TWO Environmental Conditions 41 Potential Strategic Sites 43 KEY FINDINGS AND NEXT STEPS 57 APPENDIX 58 PURPOSE This existing conditions foundation report was commissioned by the New York City Mayor’s Office of Environmental Remediation (OER) to help community members and community-based organizations (CBO’s) conduct place-based planning for revitalization of vacant and underutilized brownfield properties. Place- based planning by community groups is supported by OER under the NYC Place-Based Community Brownfield Planning Program and by the New York State Department of State in the Brownfield Opportunity Area Program. To advance implementation of plans, OER provides financial and technical assistance to CBO’s for cleanup and redevelopment of brownfield properties and seeks to help people foster greater health and well-being in their neighborhoods. Brownfields are vacant or underutilized properties where environmental pollution has deterred investment and redevelopment. Pollution introduces many risks to land development and often causes community and private developers to pass over these properties, especially in low-income neighborhoods where land values may be depressed and insufficient to cover added cleanup costs.
  • 2165 Church of All Saints (Roman Catholic)

    2165 Church of All Saints (Roman Catholic)

    Landmarks Preservation Commission January 30, 2006, Designation List 385 LP- 2165 CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS (ROMAN CATHOLIC), PARISH HOUSE AND SCHOOL, 47 East 129th Street (aka 50-52 East 130th Street, and 2041-2053 Madison Avenue, 41-45 East 129th Street), Manhattan. Church, built 1883-86 and 1889-1893, Renwick, Aspinwall & Russell, architects. Parish House, built 1886-89, Renwick, Aspinwall & Russell, architects. School, built 1902-04, William W. Renwick, architect. Landmark Site: Borough of Manhattan Tax Map Block 1754, Lots 20 and 24. On September 21, 2004, the Landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation as a Landmark of the Roman Catholic Church of All Saints, Parish House and School and its related Landmark site (Item No. 2). The hearing had been duly advertised in accordance with the provisions of law. There were twenty-one speakers in favor of designation, including the legal representative of the Archdiocese of New York, Councilmember Bill Perkins, Congressman Charles Rangel, Former Chair of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, Gene Norman, the pastor of the Church, Rev. Neil O’Connell, the Chairperson of Community Board 9, numerous parishioners and representatives of various organizations including, Landmarks West, the Victorian Society, the Landmarks Conservancy, the Municipal Arts Society, the Morningside Heights Historic District, the Society for the Architecture of the City, and the Historic Districts Council. There was one speaker opposed to designation and three speakers who did not take a position. In addition the Commission has received a letter from New York State Senator David Patterson in support of designation. The Commission previously held a public hearing on this church on June 14, 1966.
  • Gansevoort Market Historic District Designation Report Part

    Gansevoort Market Historic District Designation Report Part

    Gansevoort Market Historic District Designation Report New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission 2003 Cover Photo: 52-58 Gansevoort Street (c. 1939) Gansevoort Market Historic District Designation Report Report researched, written, and coordinated by Jay Shockley Edited by Mary Beth Betts, Director of Research Additional research by Gale Harris and Virginia Kurshan The three Block 738 building entries written by Gale Harris Alterations sections in building entries by Donald Presa Additional assistance by Diana Carroll and Alissa Dicker, interns Photographs by Carl Forster Maps by Kenneth Reid Commissioners Robert B . Tierney , Chairman Pablo E. Vengoechea, Vice-chairman Joan Gerner Sherida E. Paulsen Roberta B. Gratz Thomas K. Pike Meredith J. Kane Jan Hird Pokorny Christopher Moore Vicki Match Suna Richard M. Olcott Ronda Wist, Executive Director Mark Silberman, Counsel Brian Hogg, Director of Preservation Acknowledgments The research by Regina M. Kellerrnan, executive director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, which culminated in the publication The Architecture of the Greenwich Village Waterfront (1989), formed a basis for the initial construction history of the building entries. The staff wishes to thank Sue Radmer, consultant to the Society, for additional building and thematic research. Additionally, the Commission wishes to thank Lynne Funk and Jo Hamilton, volunteers; and Kenneth R. Cobb, director, Municipal Archives, and Brian G. Anderson, commissioner, N.Y.C. Dept. of Records & Information Services,
  • Maneuvering Mobility: Measuring Multimodality in New York City's Selected Transit Hubs a Thesis Presented to the Faculty of Ar

    Maneuvering Mobility: Measuring Multimodality in New York City's Selected Transit Hubs a Thesis Presented to the Faculty of Ar

    Maneuvering Mobility: Measuring Multimodality in New York City’s Selected Transit Hubs A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of Architecture and Planning COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Urban Planning by Faisha Namira Indrakesuma May 2018 Advisor: Dr. Weiping Wu, Director of MS Urban Planning Program, GSAPP Reader: Jonas Hagen, PhD Candidate Urban Planning Program, GSAPP Abstract The main purpose of this research is to answer the question of how New York City encourages multimodality through institutional and fare integration and how different transportation hubs within the city service multimodality through physical design. This research is primarily a qualitative study that heavily relies on direct field observations as well as reviews of the relevant literature. The analysis of this thesis is broken down into three main categories of multimodality integration: institutional, fare, and physical. The analysis of physical integration is focused on three transportation hubs: namely the Atlantic Terminal, the Wall Street Ferry Station, and the Harlem 125th Street Station. This thesis finds that New York City is a unique context in the organizations that are active in daily operations of public transportation. This institutional division of operations would consequently lead to low integration. While the presence of different transportation modes are continually present in proximity to each other, the ease of transfer most of the time is coincidental based on density and frequency of service and has little to do with intentional integration. ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank the wonderful faculty and students of the Columbia University Urban Planning Program who have nurtured and fed my passion for urban planning.
  • West End-Collegiate Historic District Extension Designation Report

    West End-Collegiate Historic District Extension Designation Report

    Addendum to the West End-Collegiate Historic District Extension Designation Report On October 30, 2013, the City Council of the City of New York modified the designation of the West End-Collegiate Historic District Extension, Designation List No. 465, LP-2462 (L.U. No. 918), City Council Resolution No. 1998, by deleting the following properties: 214 West 72nd Street Borough of Manhattan Tax Map Block 1163, Lot 42 232 West 73rd Street [Display Address: 236 West 73rd Street] Borough of Manhattan Tax Map Block 1164, Lot 42 In addition, the areas of the street beds of West 72nd Street and West 73rd Street that are directly in front of these buildings are also deleted from the district. West End-Collegiate Historic District Extension Landmarks Preservation Commission W 79 St 6 West End-Collegiate 320 3 7 250 9 3 9 0 9 1 3 2 Historic District Extension 2 1 9 3 Borough of Manhattan, NY [LP-2462] Calendared: November 16, 2010 339 317 257 251 340 324 262 W 78 St 250 Public Hearing: June 28, 2011 Designated: June 25, 2013 Boundary of District Extension 2 1 3 5 6 8 0 Tax Map Lots, District Extension 1 0 343 323 233 273 W 77 St Boundaries of Existing Districts Tax Map Lots, Existing Districts West End-Collegiate 2 1 6 Deleted by City Council Historic District 9 October 30, 2013 241 235 3 260 W 76 St 230 3 Existing Historic Districts 6 Historic District Extension Bronx 2 1 3 9 259 235 H W 75 St e 304 228 A 5 W n 1 R m 3 r e y i B s v s r t H e e t o est Side/ r Upper W r E u a s d d d i n d a w s d Central Park West e m o a A n D y Manhattan A ric District v Histo r P v y 301 W 74 St 231 Queens 1 320 232 5 Brooklyn 319 251 234 232 (Display 320 W 73 St Address 236) 1 311 233 W 72 St 216 214 344 West 71st Street Historic District 357 353 303 213 352 342 308 W 71 St 212 2 1 2 2 250 0 2 Feet 303 211 ¯ W 70 St Graphic Source: MapPLUTO, Edition 09v1, 2009.
  • PART III — Appropriations Requested by The

    PART III — Appropriations Requested by The

    PART III APPROPRIATIONS REQUESTED BY THE JUDICIARY AND THE LEGISLATURE COMMENTARY OF THE GOVERNOR ON THE JUDICIARY In accordance with Article VII, Section One of the State Constitution, I am transmitting herewith the appropriations requested by the Judiciary for fiscal year 1999-2000. As required by the Constitution, I am presenting the Judiciary budget as it has been submitted by the Office of Court Administration. The Judiciary's All Funds spending request is $1.36 billion, a $68.9 million, or 5.3 percent increase over the current year. Of this amount, $1.26 billion is requested from the State tax dollar supported General Fund. If fully enacted, General Fund support for the Judiciary will increase in fiscal year 1999-2000 by $62.9 million or 5.3 percent over 1998-99. This compares with a recommended increase for the Executive branch of slightly over one percent. While much of the requested increase reflects the cost of continuing current operations, discretionary initiatives totaling $7.9 million (218 new positions) are included. In addition, a new proposed grant program for local justice courts lacks specificity and has the potential for significant growth in future years. The General Fund increase includes: — $26.4 million for a 21 percent salary increase for judges; — $9.6 million for negotiated salary increments; — $7.9 million for initiatives such as specialized court parts, automation and court security; — $12.5 million for annualization of previous and current year initiatives; — $9.9 million for various workload and inflationary increases; — $6.2 million for increased fringe benefit costs; — $3.5 million for 17 new certificated judges; — $1.3 million for new judgeships established in 1998; and — $500,000 for a new grant program for Town and Village Courts.
  • A High Line for Harlem

    A High Line for Harlem

    www.nycfuture.org JULY 2010 A High Line for Harlem A plan to turn a mile of empty space under the Metro North tracks in Harlem into a vibrant market for hundreds of local entrepreneurs could do wonders for a neighborhood lacking in affordable retail space and a city struggling to retain independent businesses 2 A HIGH LINE FOR HARLEM AT ITS PEAK IN THE 1950s, EAST HARLEM’s LA MARQUETA was home to over 500 mostly Puerto Rican vendors occupying space in five separate buildings stretching from 111th Street to 116th Street on Park Avenue. For decades the market figured prominently in travel guides, as residents and tourists alike would flock there to buy avocadoes, guavas, cassava, and tamarind—things you weren’t likely to find anywhere else in the city. That stands in strong contrast to the way things look today, when on a recent visit just two vendors were open for business and there was not a single shopper. Three of the original buildings no longer exist and another sits empty. If travel guides mention the market at all anymore, it is usually in the past tense, as the former “crown jewel of ethnic markets Off the CUF commentaries are published in the city.” periodically by the Center for an Urban Future. Alternatively written by outside ex- The city’s Economic Development Corporation (EDC), which controls the perts and CUF staff, the commentaries aim to highlight critical opportunities and chal- site, is now moving forward with what it describes as an incremental ap- lenges facing New York and other cities, proach to revitalizing the market, building a kitchen incubator for food and generate fresh ideas for policymakers, manufacturers and hoping that eventually helps to spur entrepreneurs business leaders and nonprofit practitioners.
  • Benchmarking New York City's Municipal Building Portfolio

    Benchmarking New York City's Municipal Building Portfolio

    California Energy Commssion DOCKETED 12-AB1103-1 TN # 68675 NOV 26 2012 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 ROLE OF BENCHMARKING IN CARBON REDUCTION STRATEGY 5 NYC GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS VS. NATIONAL AVERAGE 8 RESULTS BY BUILDING TYPE 12 RESULTS BY OPERATING AGENCY 21 CONCLUSION 22 TABLES AND FIGURES INDEX 23 APPENDICES 24 Executive Summary Benchmarking Effort Overview In 2009, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg signed the Greener, Greater Buildings Plan, a landmark legislation package that enacted a set of energy efficiency requirements for existing buildings in New York City. Local Law 84 requires facility owners of public buildings over 10,000 square feet and private buildings over 50,000 square feet to benchmark their energy use each year. Since 2009 the City has benchmarked 2,730 buildings including libraries, police stations, firehouses, schools, courthouses, health, community, and family centers, and government offices. The City performed this benchmarking using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Energy Star Portfolio Manager tool which is widely accepted as the industry standard for benchmarking. For eligible facilities Portfolio Manager rates energy performance on a scale of 1–100 enabling building managers to see how their facilities are performing relative to similar buildings nationwide. This report highlights the Portfolio Manager benchmarking results for libraries, fire stations, police stations, warehouses, medical offices, K-12 schools, courthouses and office buildings. These building types represent a variety of City departments’ facilities and provide a representative sample of municipal buildings. Collectively, these eight types make up more than 75% of the City’s building portfolio. Role of Benchmarking in Carbon Reduction Strategy This report provides the most comprehensive benchmark information possible on New York City government buildings which are 10,000 square feet or larger.
  • Bronx Harlem River Waterfront Bicycle and Pedestrian Study

    Bronx Harlem River Waterfront Bicycle and Pedestrian Study

    Bronx Harlem River Waterfront Bicycle and Pedestrian Study August 2006 Michael R. Bloomberg, Mayor City of New York Amanda M. Burden, Director NYC Department of City Planning Monica Bronx Harlem River Waterfront Bicycle and Pedestrian Study August 2006 Michael R. Bloomberg, Mayor City of New York Amanda M. Burden, Director NYC Department of City Planning Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction 1 Project Description 1 Planning Framework 3 Chapter 2. Existing Conditions 7 Overview 7 Land Use 13 Major Projects and Future Plans 14 Section by Section 15 Section 1: Macombs Dam Bridge to 145th Street Bridge 15 Section 2: 145th Street Bridge to Madison Avenue Bridge 20 Section 3: Madison Avenue Bridge to 3rd Avenue Bridge 24 Section 4: 3rd Avenue Bridge to Willis Avenue Bridge 29 Section 5: Willis Avenue Bridge to Triborough Bridge 34 Chapter 3. Future Developments 39 The Gateway Center at Bronx Terminal Market 39 The Yankee Stadium Project 42 Chapter 4. Recommendations 47 Overview 47 Section by Section 52 Section 1: Macombs Dam Bridge to 145th Street Bridge 52 Section 2: 145th Street Bridge to Madison Avenue Bridge 61 Section 3: Madison Avenue Bridge to 3rd Avenue Bridge 66 Section 4: 3rd Avenue Bridge to Willis Avenue Bridge 77 Section 5: Willis Avenue Bridge to Triborough Bridge 83 Next Steps 89 References 91 Credits 93 Bronx Harlem River Waterfront Bicycle and Pedestrian Study Chapter 1. Introduction Project Description The waterfront along the Harlem River in the South civic organizations and state and local governmental Bronx has the potential to be a valuable destination organizations.