DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report the Effects of Neighborhood Change on New

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report the Effects of Neighborhood Change on New Final Report The Effects of Neighborhood Change on New York City Housing Authority Residents May 21, 2015 Prepared for: NYC Center for Economic Opportunity Office of the Mayor City of New York 253 Broadway, 14th Fl New York, NY 10007 Submitted by: Abt Associates 4550 Montgomery Avenue Suite 800 North Bethesda, MD 20814 In Partnership with: The NYU Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy 139 MacDougal Street, 2nd Floor New York, NY 10012 Authored by: Samuel Dastrup Ingrid Ellen Anna Jefferson Max Weselcouch Deena Schwartz Karen Cuenca Foreword The Center for Economic Opportunity (CEO), working closely with the New York City Housing Authority’s Department of Research and Management Analysis (NYCHA), contracted with Abt Associates to produce research that would shed light on how changing New York City neighborhoods affect NYCHA residents and point to opportunities to improve outcomes for NYCHA residents. Abt has worked closely with the Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy at NYU to conduct this research and produce this report. Three community partners (BronxWorks, Hudson Guild, and Urban Upbound) and their NYCHA resident employees partnered with Abt and the Furman Center to conduct the study’s rapid ethnographic assessments (REA). Ingrid Ellen from the Furman Center is the Principal Investigator for this report. The report is jointly authored by Samuel Dastrup, Anna Jefferson, Deena Schwartz, and Karen Cuenca from Abt and Dr. Ellen and Max Weselcouch at the Furman Center. Alvaro Cortez at Abt served as the Project Quality Advisor for the study. The report includes analysis by Amy Ellen Schwartz and Meryle Weinstein, researchers at NYU’s Institute for Education and Social Policy. Abt staff Tom McCall and Furman Center research assistants Colin Bottles, Razi Shaban, Robert Collison, Mariana Oliver, and Jonathan Bigelow also contributed to the research. We are grateful to Mary Patillo, who assisted with the REAs and gave expert advice to the entire project during her year visiting NYU from Northwestern University. The rapid ethnographic assessments described in this report would not have been possible without the assistance of our community partners, their community ethnographer employees, and residents and community stakeholders in neighborhoods selected for the REAs. We are especially grateful for support at BronxWorks from Brian McCullough and John Weed; at Hudson Guild from Ken Jockers, Miguel Pedraza-Cumba, and LeeAnn Scaduto; and at Urban Upbound from Veronica Momjian. This project would not have been possible without our community ethnographers: Jamie Berrios, Kiera Diaz, Nicole Gomez, Tracie Middleton, Juwan Stone, and Lily Rosenthal. This report greatly benefitted from input from the staff of CEO and NYCHA. Tamara Dumanovsky from NYCHA introduced us to NYCHA administrative data, made introductions to NYCHA staff in the REA neighborhoods, and provided helpful insight throughout the research project. We also acknowledge helpful input from Anne-Marie Flatley of NYCHA. Finally, Jean-Marie Callan and Carson Hicks of CEO provided insights and guidance throughout the research project. CEO RESPONSE TO ABT ASSOCIATES EVALUATION ON THE EFFECTS OF NEIGHBORHOOD CHANGE FOR NYCHA RESIDENTS May 2015 In his second State of the City address on February 3, 2015, Mayor Bill de Blasio made affordable and mixed income housing the center of his agenda, promising to build and preserve 200,000 affordable homes which will house over a half million New Yorkers in the coming decade.1 The plan includes building 80,000 new affordable housing units and preserving the affordability and quality of 120,000 existing housing units. An emphasis of the plan is to foster diverse, equitable, and livable neighborhoods. 2 Subsidized housing has been an important poverty-alleviation tool in neighborhoods across the city for decades. However, the landscape around public housing has shifted dramatically. Most New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) housing was built in what were low‐income neighborhoods, but today an increasing number of these NYCHA developments are located in gentrified or rapidly changing neighborhoods. The Center for Economic Opportunity (CEO) recognized that the implications of such change are complex – with potential concerns for residents but also potential benefits – and wanted to learn how neighborhood change is affecting the lives of low-income New Yorkers. CEO is the City of New York’s anti-poverty innovation unit. Working in conjunction with City Agencies and other partners, CEO develops, manages and evaluates program and policy initiatives to help the City improve its systems and identify effective responses to poverty and its related challenges. Part of the Mayor’s Office of Operations, CEO supports the administration on issues of equity and equality. CEO also produces the annual Poverty Measure Report which provides detailed insights into the scope of poverty and impact of public policy across New York City. The report has consistently shown that the poverty rate for New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) families would approximately double without this housing subsidy.3 In this study, CEO sought to answer a stand-alone research question (rather than evaluating a specific programmatic intervention) and contracted Abt Associates to evaluate how neighborhood change, or gentrification, affects the lives of NYCHA residents. To do this research, Abt partnered closely with New York University’s Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy, three community-based partners (BronxWorks, Hudson Guild, and Urban Upbound), and NYCHA residents to learn about experiences of neighborhood change in New York City. CEO worked closely with NYCHA’s Department of Research and Management Analysis on the project. The research team examined effects of neighborhood change for NYCHA residents by classifying neighborhoods containing public housing as persistently low-income, increasing income, or high-income and then identifying indicators with the potential to vary across categories. The evaluators conducted both a citywide quantitative analysis and in-depth qualitative case studies of developments in three illustrative neighborhoods selected to correspond with these three neighborhood classifications – Sedgwick Houses in Morris Heights, Queensbridge Houses in Long Island City, and Elliot-Chelsea Houses in Chelsea. The qualitative case-studies drew on community-based participatory research – leveraging the perspectives of community members, particularly NYCHA residents, and engaging them as core research partners. The field research for this study was conducted from April to August 2014. 1 NYC Office of the Mayor. State of the City: Mayor de Blasio Puts Affordable Housing at Center of 2015 Agenda. [Press Release] 3 Feb. 2015. 2 See NYC Office of the Mayor. Mayor de Blasio Unveils ‘Housing New York’: A Five-Borough, 10-Year Housing Plan to Protect and Expand Affordability. [Press Release] 5 May 2014, and read the full report: Housing New York: A Five Borough, Ten Year Plan. 3 See The CEO Poverty Measure, 2005-2013, Appendix C. Prior research has resulted in mixed findings on the effects of neighborhood change for low-income individuals.4 The touchstone for much of this research is the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Moving to Opportunity (MTO) demonstration project, which used random assignment of housing vouchers in the 1990s to measure neighborhood effects. Until recently, evaluations of this project had found some positive effects of neighborhood change on mental and physical health, but no effects on socioeconomic or educational outcomes.5 However, a follow-up evaluation released in May 2015 found differences in outcomes related to the age at which children move to higher-income neighborhoods, with impacts on college attendance and earnings for children who moved before age 13.6 In this study, Abt finds statistically significant differences in earnings for NYCHA residents living in different neighborhood types. Annual household earnings average $4,500 higher for public housing residents in high- income neighborhoods as compared to persistently low-income neighborhoods. Earnings are $3,000 higher for those in increasing income neighborhoods. Further research is needed to determine the mechanisms that create differences in earnings for public housing residents across neighborhood types, but the evaluators find little evidence that differences are driven by sorting (self-selection into specific developments) or observable differences in the populations. The case studies presented in this report complement the quantitative analysis by describing residents’ personal experiences of neighborhood change, highlighting some of the ways this observed difference in incomes may be offset by higher costs for NYCHA residents in high income neighborhoods. Affordability is described as a growing concern for residents as neighborhood incomes increase. Another key theme from these case studies is that income inequality gets mirrored in reported experiences of available resources and opportunities for public housing residents living in neighborhoods with higher incomes. In these neighborhoods, NYCHA residents report feeling that private market housing residents are the impetus for and primary beneficiaries of neighborhood improvements. In all three types of neighborhoods, residents expressed a need for more enrichment, skill-building, and employment opportunities, of the sort offered by CEO and NYC Young Men’s Initiative (YMI) programs.7
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Strategic Policy Statement 2014 Melinda Katz
    THE OFFICE OF THE QUEENS BOROUGH PRESIDENT Strategic Policy Statement 2014 Melinda Katz Queens Borough President The Borough of Queens is home to more than 2.3 million residents, representing more than 120 countries and speaking more than 135 languages1. The seamless knit that ties these distinct cultures and transforms them into shared communities is what defines the character of Queens. The Borough’s diverse population continues to steadily grow. Foreign-born residents now represent 48% of the Borough’s population2. Traditional immigrant gateways like Sunnyside, Woodside, Jackson Heights, Elmhurst, Corona, and Flushing are now communities with the highest foreign-born population in the entire city3. Immigrant and Intercultural Services The immigrant population remains largely underserved. This is primarily due to linguistic and cultural barriers. Residents with limited English proficiency now represent 28% of the Borough4, indicating a need for a wide range of social service support and language access to City services. All services should be available in multiple languages, and outreach should be improved so that culturally sensitive programming can be made available. The Borough President is actively working with the Queens General Assembly, a working group organized by the Office of the Queens Borough President, to address many of these issues. Cultural Queens is amidst a cultural transformation. The Borough is home to some of the most iconic buildings and structures in the world, including the globally recognized Unisphere and New York State Pavilion. Areas like Astoria and Long Island City are establishing themselves as major cultural hubs. In early 2014, the New York City Council designated the area surrounding Kaufman Astoria Studios as the city’s first arts district through a City Council Proclamation The areas unique mix of adaptively reused residential, commercial, and manufacturing buildings serve as a catalyst for growth in culture and the arts.
    [Show full text]
  • S T a T E O F N E W Y O R K 3695--A 2009-2010
    S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K ________________________________________________________________________ 3695--A 2009-2010 Regular Sessions I N A S S E M B L Y January 28, 2009 ___________ Introduced by M. of A. ENGLEBRIGHT -- Multi-Sponsored by -- M. of A. KOON, McENENY -- read once and referred to the Committee on Tourism, Arts and Sports Development -- recommitted to the Committee on Tour- ism, Arts and Sports Development in accordance with Assembly Rule 3, sec. 2 -- committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee AN ACT to amend the parks, recreation and historic preservation law, in relation to the protection and management of the state park system THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: 1 Section 1. Legislative findings and purpose. The legislature finds the 2 New York state parks, and natural and cultural lands under state manage- 3 ment which began with the Niagara Reservation in 1885 embrace unique, 4 superlative and significant resources. They constitute a major source of 5 pride, inspiration and enjoyment of the people of the state, and have 6 gained international recognition and acclaim. 7 Establishment of the State Council of Parks by the legislature in 1924 8 was an act that created the first unified state parks system in the 9 country. By this act and other means the legislature and the people of 10 the state have repeatedly expressed their desire that the natural and 11 cultural state park resources of the state be accorded the highest 12 degree of protection.
    [Show full text]
  • NYCHA Facilities and Service Centers
    NYCHA Facilities and Service Centers BOROUGH DEVELOPMENT NAME ADDRESS Manhattan Baruch 595- 605 FDR Drive Staten Island Berry Houses 44 Dongan Hills Brooklyn Farragut 228 York Street Manhattan Harborview Terrace 536 West 56th Street Brooklyn Howard 1620 E N Y Avenue Manhattan Lexington 115 East 98th Steet Brooklyn Marcus Garvey 1440 E N Y Avenue Bronx Monroe 1802 Story Avenue Bronx Pelham Parkway 975 Waring Avenue Brooklyn Pink 2702 Linden Boulevard Queens Ravenswood 34-35A 12th Street Queens Ravenswood 34-35A 12th Street Brooklyn Red Hook East 110 West 9th Street Brooklyn Saratoga Square 930 Halsey Street Manhattan Washington Hts Rehab (Groups I and II) 500 West 164th Street Manhattan Washington Hts Rehab (Groups I and II) 503 West 177th Street Manhattan Wilson 405 East 105th Steet Manhattan Wise Towers/WSURA 136 West 91st Steet Brooklyn Wyckoff Gardens 266 Wyckoff Street Page 1 of 148 10/01/2021 NYCHA Facilities and Service Centers POSTCO STATUS SPONSOR DE Occupied Henry Street Settlement, Inc. Occupied Staten Island Mental Health Society, Inc. 10306 Occupied Spanish Speaking Elderly Council - RAICES Occupied NYCHA 10019 NYCHA HOLD NYCHA 11212 Occupied Lexington Children's Center 10029 Occupied Fort Greene Senior Citizens Council 11212 Vacant NYCHA Occupied Jewish Association Services For the Aged Occupied United Community Centers Occupied HANAC, Inc. 11106 Occupied HANAC, Inc. Occupied Spanish Speaking Elderly Council - RAICES Occupied Ridgewood-Bushwick Sr Citizens Council, Inc. Vacant NYCHA Occupied Provider Name Unknown Occupied
    [Show full text]
  • Bronx Civic Center
    Prepared for New York State BRONX CIVIC CENTER Downtown Revitalization Initiative Downtown Revitalization Initiative New York City Strategic Investment Plan March 2018 BRONX CIVIC CENTER LOCAL PLANNING COMMITTEE Co-Chairs Hon. Ruben Diaz Jr., Bronx Borough President Marlene Cintron, Bronx Overall Economic Development Corporation Daniel Barber, NYCHA Citywide Council of Presidents Michael Brady, Third Avenue BID Steven Brown, SoBRO Jessica Clemente, Nos Quedamos Michelle Daniels, The Bronx Rox Dr. David Goméz, Hostos Community College Shantel Jackson, Concourse Village Resident Leader Cedric Loftin, Bronx Community Board 1 Nick Lugo, NYC Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Milton Nuñez, NYC Health + Hospitals/Lincoln Paul Philps, Bronx Community Board 4 Klaudio Rodriguez, Bronx Museum of the Arts Rosalba Rolón, Pregones Theater/Puerto Rican Traveling Theater Pierina Ana Sanchez, Regional Plan Association Dr. Vinton Thompson, Metropolitan College of New York Eileen Torres, BronxWorks Bronx Borough President’s Office Team James Rausse, AICP, Director of Planning and Development Jessica Cruz, Lead Planner Raymond Sanchez, Counsel & Senior Policy Manager (former) Dirk McCall, Director of External Affairs This document was developed by the Bronx Civic Center Local Planning Committee as part of the Downtown Revitalization Initiative and was supported by the NYS Department of State, NYS Homes and Community Renewal, and Empire State Development. The document was prepared by a Consulting Team led by HR&A Advisors and supported by Beyer Blinder Belle,
    [Show full text]
  • S P R I N G 20 18
    S P R I N G 2018 URBAN REVIEW LETTER FROM THE EDITORS A magazine of the Hunter College Planning is inherently political; this is something that Hunter students know well. The Introduction Department of to Planning course has many students reading entire books on problem solving and policy analysis, Urban Affairs & Planning as we aspire to not simply write plans from afar but to affect change, using our skills as planners to SPRING ‘18 advocate within the imperfect and at times broken realm of politics. STAFF However, politics is not simply a tool to accomplish goals of planning. Planning itself is a powerful Editors in Chief political tool, one that can be used to accomplish and demonstrate political goals. A zoning change, a Aly Hassell parking limit, or a design for a park are not technical planning decisions but are pronouncements of Atara Lindenbaum priorities, of political goals, and of particular visions of space and community. Our responsibility as future planners is to probe this technical side of planning, determining its larger context. Layout and Design Editor Aly Hassell This issue of Urban Review had the privilege to feature two accomplished and active planners: Com- missioner Mitchell Silver of the NYC Parks Department and Dr. Lester King, Sustainability Planner Writers James Hull in Houston, TX. Both Silver and King emphasize the need for proper community engagement and Beatriz Gil dialogue. Vicky Garvey Ranjana Venkatesh It is time to ask, however, if this focus on process, on stakeholder engagement and communication Atara Lindenbaum suffices. Equitable planning processes may be inherently positive improvements, but our cities, our Andy Lawson Michael Kralovich people, need equitable results as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Design and Visual Resources
    18.0 Urban Design and Visual Resources A. INTRODUCTION This chapter evaluates the effects of the Proposed Action on the urban form and visual resources of the Project Site and surrounding Study Area. Provided in this chapter is a description and analysis of the existing urban design and visual resources of the Project Site and Study Area, and descriptions of Future conditions with and without the Proposed Action in 2009. No significant adverse impacts to urban design or visual resources would result from the Proposed Action; the variations, all of which would be constructed according to the same site plan and building envelope as the Preferred Development Program, would likewise result in no significant adverse impacts to urban design or visual resources. The Proposed Action would result in development that differs substantially in height, bulk, form, scale, and arrangement compared to the uses currently found on the Project Site. These changes are identified in the CEQR Technical Manual as conditions suggesting that analyses of urban design and visual resources are appropriate. Based on guidance in the CEQR Technical Manual, the urban design analysis considers the potential impact of the Proposed Action related to building bulk, use, type, and arrangement, block form, street pattern and hierarchy, streetscape elements, and natural features. Also, based on guidance provided in the CEQR Technical Manual, the visual resources analysis considers the potential impact of the Proposed Action on important views of visual resources, such as the East River waterfront and the historic Queensboro Bridge and New York Architectural Terra Cotta Company building, from publicly accessible locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Amazon's Document
    REQUEST FOR INFORMATION Project Clancy TALENT A. Big Questions and Big Ideas 1. Population Changes and Key Drivers. a. Population level - Specify the changes in total population in your community and state over the last five years and the major reasons for these changes. Please also identify the majority source of inbound migration. Ne Yok Cit’s populatio ge fo . illio to . illio oe the last fie eas ad is projected to surpass 9 million by 2030.1 New York City continues to attract a dynamic and diverse population of professionals, students, and families of all backgrounds, mainly from Latin America (including the Caribbean, Central America, and South America), China, and Eastern Europe.2 Estiate of Ne York City’s Populatio Year Population 2011 8,244,910 2012 8,336,697 2013 8,405,837 2014 8,491,079 2015 8,550,405 2016 8,537,673 Source: American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates Cumulative Estimates of the Components of Population Change for New York City and Counties Time period: April 1, 2010 - July 1, 2016 Total Natural Net Net Net Geographic Area Population Increase Migration: Migration: Migration: Change (Births-Deaths) Total Domestic International New York City Total 362,540 401,943 -24,467 -524,013 499,546 Bronx 70,612 75,607 -3,358 -103,923 100,565 Brooklyn 124,450 160,580 -32,277 -169,064 136,787 Manhattan 57,861 54,522 7,189 -91,811 99,000 1 New York City Population Projections by Age/Sex & Borough, 2010-2040 2 Place of Birth for the Foreign-Born Population in 2012-2016, American Community Survey PROJECT CLANCY PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL 4840-0257-2381.3 1 Queens 102,332 99,703 7,203 -148,045 155,248 Staten Island 7,285 11,531 -3,224 -11,170 7,946 Source: Population Division, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Lewis Katz New Renaissance Basketball Academy Charter School Education Corp
    PROPOSAL SUMMARY AND TRANSMITTAL FORM Proposed School Information Charter School Name: Lewis Katz New Renaissance Basketball Academy Charter School Education Corp. Name: Lewis Katz New Renaissance Basketball Academy Charter School Education Corp. Status: New Education Corporation Proposal Type: Standard New School Proposal School District (or NYC CSD): CSD 7 Opening Date: 8/1/2020 Proposed Grades and Enrollment Proposed Affiliations (if any) Charter Charter Management Grades Enrollment N/A Year Company (“CMO”): Year 1 9 88 CMO Public Contact Info N/A Year 2 9-10 176 (Name, Phone): Year 3 9-11 264 Partner Organization: New Visions for Public Schools Year 4 9-12 352 Partner Public Contact Info Mark Dunetz, 212-645-5110 Year 5 9-12 352 (Name, Phone): Lead Applicant Contact Information First Lead Applicant Name: Dan Klores Applicant is a: Parent Teacher School Administrator District Resident Education Corp./Charter School Organization Name: Applicant Mailing Address: Primary Secondary Email: [email protected] Phone #: Phone #: Second Lead Applicant Name: Applicant is a: Parent Teacher School Administrator District Resident Education Corp./Charter School Organization Name: Applicant Mailing Address: Primary Secondary Email: Phone #: Phone #: List additional lead applicants in the “Other” section. Not Applicable Additional Applicants Listed in “Other” Media/Public Contact Information (required) Name: Dan Klores Phone #: 646-335-3249 Email: [email protected] Lead Applicant Signature Signature: Date: 6/22/18 By signing this Proposal Transmittal Form, the Lead Applicant certifies that the information contained in this proposal to establish a charter school pursuant to the New York Charter Schools Act with the State University of New York Board of Trustees is true and accurate to the best of his or her knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • Final PHA Agency Plan Annual Agency Plan for Fiscal Year 2018
    U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Public and Indian Housing Final PHA Agency Plan Annual Agency Plan for Fiscal Year 2018 Shola Olatoye Chair & Chief Executive Officer Date: October 18, 2017 1 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development OMB No. 2577-0226 Annual PHA Plan Office of Public and Indian Housing Expires: 02/29/2016 (Standard PHAs and Troubled PHAs) Purpose. The 5-Year and Annual PHA Plans provide a ready source for interested parties to locate basic PHA policies, rules, and requirements concerning the PHA’s operations, programs, and services, and informs HUD, families served by the PHA, and members of the public of the PHA’s mission, goals and objectives for serving the needs of low- income, very low- income, and extremely low- income families. Applicability. Form HUD-50075-ST is to be completed annually by STANDARD PHAs or TROUBLED PHAs. PHAs that meet the definition of a High Performer PHA, Small PHA, HCV-Only PHA or Qualified PHA do not need to submit this form. Definitions. (1) High-Performer PHA – A PHA that owns or manages more than 550 combined public housing units and housing choice vouchers, and was designated as a high performer on both of the most recent Public Housing Assessment System (PHAS) and Section Eight Management Assessment Program (SEMAP) assessments if administering both programs, or PHAS if only administering public housing. (2) Small PHA - A PHA that is not designated as PHAS or SEMAP troubled, or at risk of being designated as troubled, that owns or manages less than 250 public housing units and any number of vouchers where the total combined units exceeds 550.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Communities in the Bronx: Melrose
    Morrisania Air Rights Housing Development 104 EXISTING STATIONS: Melrose SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES IN THE BRONX 105 EXISITING STATIONS MELROSE 104 EXISTING STATIONS: Melrose SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES IN THE BRONX 105 MELROSE FILLING IN THE GAPS INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION SYNOPSIS HISTORY The Melrose Metro-North Station is located along East 162nd Street between Park and Courtlandt Av- The history of the Melrose area is particularly im- enues at the edge of the Morrisania, Melrose and portant not only because it is representative of the Concourse Village neighborhoods of the Bronx. It is story of the South Bronx, but because it shaped the located approximately midway on the 161st /163rd physical form and features which are Melrose today. Street corridor spanning from Jerome Avenue on the The area surrounding the Melrose station was orig- west and Westchester Avenue on the east. This cor- inally part of the vast Morris family estate. In the ridor was identified in PlaNYC as one of the Bronx’s mid-nineteenth century, the family granted railroad three primary business districts, and contains many access through the estate to the New York and Har- regional attractions and civic amenities including lem Rail Road (the predecessor to the Harlem Line). Yankee Stadium, the Bronx County Courthouse, and In the 1870s, this part of the Bronx was annexed into the Bronx Hall of Justice. A large portion of the sta- New York City, and the Third Avenue Elevated was tion area is located within the Melrose Commons soon extended to the area. Elevated and subway Urban Renewal Area, and has seen tremendous mass transit prompted large population growth in growth and reinvestment in the past decades, with the neighborhood, and soon 5-6 story tenements Courtlandt Corners, Boricua College, Boricua Village replaced one- and two-family homes.
    [Show full text]
  • Gantry Plaza State Park, Queens, New York [EDRA/Places Awards, 2001
    Peer Reviewed Title: Gantry Plaza State Park, Queens, New York [EDRA / Places Awards, 2001-2002 -- Design] Journal Issue: Places, 15(1) Author: Salvadori, Ilaria Bressi, Todd W Chey, Katy Publication Date: 2002 Publication Info: Places Permalink: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/66x458m7 Acknowledgements: This article was originally produced in Places Journal. To subscribe, visit www.places-journal.org. For reprint information, contact [email protected]. Keywords: places, placemaking, architecture, environment, landscape, urban design, public realm, planning, design, EDRA, awards, Gantry Plaza State Park, Queens, New York, Ilaria Salvadori, Todd W Bressi, Katy Chey Copyright Information: All rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. Contact the author or original publisher for any necessary permissions. eScholarship is not the copyright owner for deposited works. Learn more at http://www.escholarship.org/help_copyright.html#reuse eScholarship provides open access, scholarly publishing services to the University of California and delivers a dynamic research platform to scholars worldwide. Gantry Plaza State Park Queens, New York Gantry Plaza State Park is a new riverfront space in Long Gantry Plaza State Park has set a standard for New York Island City, Queens, across the East River from the United City’s waterfront revival and redefined its neighborhood’s Nations, and one of the first elements of a Battery Park image and sense of place. Visitors from all walks of life, City-style development project called Queens West. It was of all ages and backgrounds come to appreciate Gantry praised by the jury for its design qualities and for its success Plaza—and, more importantly, they are returning. “People in becoming a community and civic open space.
    [Show full text]
  • New York State Assembly Rules 822 Legislative Office Building, Albany, Ny 12248 Health Tel: 518-455-4941 Fax: 518-455-5939 Higher Education Richard N
    COMMITTEES: NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY RULES 822 LEGISLATIVE OFFICE BUILDING, ALBANY, NY 12248 HEALTH TEL: 518-455-4941 FAX: 518-455-5939 HIGHER EDUCATION RICHARD N. GOTTFRIED MAJORITY STEERING 75TH ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 242 WEST 27TH STREET, NEW YORK, NY 10001 TEL: 212-807-7900; FAX: 212-243-2035 CHAIR CHAIR E-MAIL: [email protected] COMMITTEE ON HEALTH MANHATTAN DELEGATION July 11, 2013 Matthew Wambua, Commissioner Department of Housing Preservation and Development 100 Gold Street New York, NY 10007 Re: Fulton Houses Project – 140001ZMM, N140002ZAM Dear Commissioner Wambua: The Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) should immediately withdraw its plan to build housing on the grounds of the NYCHA Fulton Houses development and remove a playground and community garden and replace them with a parking lot, certified with the City Planning Commission earlier this week. HPD should then work in good faith with the residents of Fulton Houses, the Chelsea community, Community Board 4 and local elected officials to develop a suitable proposal for the site, consistent with HPD’s long-standing promises to the community. The team at HPD who developed the plan and chose how to present it needs to be re-examined, and a new developer should be selected. HPD’s plan to rip out a playground and community garden to build a parking lot, and the fact that this plan was developed and certified for ULURP without any notice to or consultation with the community has quickly generated a high degree of anger and distrust among the community and its leaders. At the community meeting held last night about the project, HPD, the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) and the developer succeeded in heightening that level of anger and distrust, which I had not thought was possible.
    [Show full text]