DOCSLIB.ORG

Conefefisfefr a I Conedlson

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conefefisfefr a I Conedlson conEfefisfefr a i conEdlson, Jeffrey L. Riback Assistant General Counsel December 22, 2006 VIA OVERNIGHT MAIL AND E-MAIL The Honorable Jaclyn A. Brilling Secretary New York State Public Service Commission Three Empire State Plaza Albany, New York 12223 Re: Case 06-T-0710: M29 Transmission Line Project Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. Dear Secretary Brilling: ConsoUdated Edison Company of New York, Inc. ("Con Edison") and the New York State Department of Transportation ("NYSDOT") have executed the enclosed Joint Proposal resolving all matters between them related to Con Edison's application to the Commission for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need under Article Vll of the Public Service Law for the referenced M29 Transmission Line Project (the "Project"). The Joint Proposal is submitted in accordance with the November 20, 2006 Ruling Further Establishing Case Schedule of Judges William Bouteiller and Michelle L. Phillips in this proceeding. Enclosed for filing are an original and ten copies of the executed Joint Proposal, with appendices, exhibits, and the applicable sponsoring affidavits for the Project application, as amended. Discussions leading to the signing of the Joint Proposal were initiated pursuant to 16 NYCRR § 3.9 by letter to you dated October 20, 2006. The Joint Proposal has also been discussed with PSC Staff and the City of New York. PSC Staff recently advised us that it would not sign the agreement, and would make no decision about signing the agreement, until it had the opportunity to review the alternative route proposals submitted by the other parties. With respect to the City of New York, we understand that it has not yet completed the internal review process necessary for it to sign the agreement. We are hopeful that these parties will be able to sign the Joint Proposal within the next few weeks. Also enclosed are an original and ten copies of a Joint Statement in Support of the Joint Proposal, executed by Con Edison and NYSDOT. Copies of the executed Joint Proposal and the Joint Statement in Support are being provided by electronic mail and overnight mail to Judges Bouteiller and Philhps, the presiding officers in this Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. 4 Irving Place New York NY 10003 212 460 6677 212 260 8627 fax [email protected] proceeding. Additional copies are being provided by electronic mail to the active parties in this proceeding, with the exception of the Exhibits, which will be provided by re^lar mail. Respectfully submitted. Enclosures cc: The Hon. William Bouteiller The Hon. MicheUe L. Phillips Donna K. Hintz, Esq. (NYSDOT) Active Parties List (12/21/06) / i. !" ^ STATE OF NEW YORK PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Case 06-T-0710 — Application of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need Pursuant to Article VII of the Public Service Law for the M29 Transmission Line Project Joint Proposal December 22,2006 STATE OF NEW YORK PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Case; 06-T-0710 — Application of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need Pursuant to Article VTI of the Public Service Law for the M29 Transmission Line Project Joint Proposal THIS JOINT PROPOSAL is made as of December 22, 2006 by and among Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. ("Con Edison" or the "Company") and the New York State Department of Transportation (collectively referred to as the "Signatory Parties"). Introduction On June 14,2006, Con Edison filed an application with the New York State Public Service Commission (the "Commission") seeking a certificate of environmental compatibility and public need ("Certificate") pursuant to Article VII of the Public Service Law ("PSL") for the construction and operation of an approximately 9.5-mile, 345 kV high-pressure fluid-filled ("HPFF" pipe-type), primarily underground, transmission line connecting Con Edison's existing Sprain Brook Substation in the City of Yonkers, Westchester County, with the new Academy Substation to be located in the Inwood section of upper Manhattan in the City of New York (the "Project"). By letter dated July 24, 2006, the Commission requested that Con Edison supplement the application by submitting the Company's plans for site work and the masonry building design associated with the Academy Substation. On August 8, 2006, this information, designated Exhibit 10 of the application, was filed as a supplement to the application. On October 6, 2006, Con Edison filed revised pages to the application reflecting a change in the proposed method for the transmission line crossing of the Harlem River. The application and supplements (hereinafter, the "Application") were provided to all statutory and other parties on the service list at the time of filing with the Commission. Public statement hearings were held before Presiding Administrative Law Judges William Bouteiller and Michelle Phillips in Yonkers, New York, on the afternoon and evening of September 6,2006, the purpose of which was to receive unsworn statements from members of the public regarding the Application and other supporting materials. Additional public statement hearings were held before Judge Phillips in the Bronx and upper Manhattan during the afternoons and evenings of October 16 and 17, respectively. A preliminary conference was held before Judges Bouteiller and Phillips at the Conunission offices in Manhattan on September 7, 2006, to take appearances by active parties to the proceeding, to discuss pending issues, discovery, the settlement process, and further case scheduling should evidentiary hearings be required. An opportunity for discovery has existed since the filing of the Application on June 14, 2006. After exploratory discussions among the parties, a letter noticing the scheduling of negotiations was sent via electronic mail on October 20, 2006, to those persons on the then- current Active Party List to the proceeding and the Administrative Law Judges, and was duly submitted to the Secretary of the Commission by letter and electronic mail of the same date. To date, Con Edison has responded to 121 interrogatories and information requests submitted by New York State Department of Public Service staff ("DPS Staff), Manhattan Community Board 12 ("CB12"), Time Warner Cable ("TWC") and The New York and Presbyterian Hospital ("NYPH"), with respect to the Project's need, design, and construction. Con Edison's responses to DPS Staffs interrogatories were satisfactory to DPS Staff, and no further interrogatories or information requests have been received from DPS Staff, CB12, or any other party, other than TWC. Responses to three additional interrogatories from TWC ;are not due until after the date of this Joint Proposal. A joint resolution of the case is now feasible because, after thorough investigation and discussion, the Signatory Parties more fully understand their respective positions and recognize that a mutually satisfactory resolution of those positions is possible. The Signatory Parties also believe that this Joint Proposal will further the objective of allowing Con Edison to meet both near-term and projected long-term electric load growth in upper Manhattan, the Bronx:, and southern Westchester County in a reliable, and environmentally sound manner. The Counly of Westchester, which actively participated in the negotiations leading to this Joint Proposal, is not a Signatory Party hereto, but is not opposed to the Project. In addition, by letter dated December 14, 2006, attached as an Exhibit hereto, the New York State Department of Transportation stated that it "supports [Con Edison's] original proposed route that utilizes routes in the Cities of New York and Yonkers." Terms of Joint Proposal I. General Provisions 1. It is understood that each provision of this Joint Proposal is in consideration and support of all of the other provisions of this Joint Proposal and is expressly conditioned upon approval of the terms of this Joint Proposal in full by the Commission. If the Commission fails to adopt the terms of this Joint Proposal, the parties to the Joint Proposal shall be free to pursue their respective positions in this proceeding without prejudice. 2. The terms and provisions of this Joint Proposal apply solely to, and are binding only in the context of the present Application. None of the terms or provisions of this Joint Proposal and none of the positions taken herein by any party may be referred to, cited or relied upon in any fashion as precedent or otherwise in any other proceeding before this Commission or any other regulatory agency or before any court of law for any purpose, except in furtherance of ensuring the effectuation of the purposes and results of this Joint Proposal. 3. The Signatory Parties agree to submit this Joint Proposal to the Commission along with a request that the Commission expeditiously adopt the terms and provisions of this Joint Proposal as set forth herein. 4. The Signatory Parties recognize that certain provisions of this Joint Proposal contemplate actions to be taken in the future to effectuate fully this Joint Proposal. Accordingly, the Si^jnatory Parties agree to cooperate with each other in good faith in taking such actions. 5. In the event of any disagreement over the interpretation of this Joint Proposal or implementation of any of the provisions of fhis Joint Proposal, which cannot be resolved informally among the Signatory Parties, such disagreement shall be resolved in the following manner: (a) the Signatory Parties shall promptly convene a conference and in good faith attempt to resolve any such disagreement; and (b) if any such disagreement cannot be resolved by the Signatory Parties, any Signatory Party may petition the Commission for resolution of the disputed matter. 6. This Joint Proposal shall not constitute a waiver by Con Edison of any rights it might have to apply for additional or modified permits, approvals or certificates from the Commission, NYSDEC, or any other agency in accordance with relevant provisions of law.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fordham Plaza Conceptual Master Plan
    Fordham Plaza Conceptual Master Plan New York City Economic Development Corporation Summer 2010 New York City Department of Transportation Summer 2010 Prepared for New York City Economic Development Corporation with New York City Department of Transportation Prepared by WXY Architecture and Urban Design Contributing Consultants Sam Schwartz Engineering, PLLC Economics Research Associates MG McLaren Engineering, P.C. Leni Schwendinger Light Projects VJ Associates Inc. of Suffolk This report was made possible through New York City Industrial Development Agency Printed on ENVIRONMENT® Papers: Forest Stewardship Council(FSC) certified, made Carbon Neutral Plus, 30% post consumer recycled fibers, and Green Seal™ Certified. Fordham Plaza Conceptual Master Plan Table of Contents Foreword 5 Introduction 6 1: A Safe, Efficient Multi-Modal Transit Hub 12 2: Extending the Vitality of Fordham Road 16 3: A Reason to Come & A Reason to Stay 20 4: A Model for Sustainability & Quality Design 24 5: Making It Happen 28 Acknowledgments 31 Stamford White Plains 25 minutes 45 minutes Fordham Plaza 17 minutes Grand Central Terminal Foreword Dear Friend, On behalf of the many stakeholders who helped shape the proposal, it is with great pleasure that we introduce the conceptual design for re-making Fordham Plaza into a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly public space and world- class intermodal transit hub. Over the course of the last year, our agencies have worked closely with Community Boards 6 and 7, local elected offi cials, surrounding businesses and property owners, New York City Transit, Metro-North Railroad, local institutions and residents to generate a concept for the Plaza and adjacent streets that will create an iconic public space in the Bronx, while easing traffi c congestion, supporting transit use and fostering neighborhood economic development.
    [Show full text]
  • Harlem River Waterfront
    Amtrak and Henry Hudson Bridges over the Harlem River, Spuyten Duvyil HARLEM BRONX RIVER WATERFRONT MANHATTAN Linking a River’s Renaissance to its Upland Neighborhoods Brownfied Opportunity Area Pre-Nomination Study prepared for the Bronx Council for Environmental Quality, the New York State Department of State and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation with state funds provided through the Brownfield Opportunity Areas Program. February 2007 Acknowledgements Steering Committee Dart Westphal, Bronx Council for Environmental Quality – Project Chair Colleen Alderson, NYC Department of Parks and Recreation Karen Argenti, Bronx Council for Environmental Quality Justin Bloom, Esq., Brownfield Attorney Paula Luria Caplan, Office of the Bronx Borough President Maria Luisa Cipriano, Partnership for Parks (Bronx) Curtis Cravens, NYS Department of State Jane Jackson, New York Restoration Project Rita Kessler, Bronx Community Board 7 Paul S. Mankiewicz, PhD, New York City Soil & Water Conservation District Walter Matystik, M.E.,J.D., Manhattan College Matt Mason, NYC Department of City Planning David Mojica, Bronx Community Board 4 Xavier Rodriguez, Bronx Community Board 5 Brian Sahd, New York Restoration Project Joseph Sanchez, Partnership for Parks James Sciales, Empire State Rowing Association Basil B. Seggos, Riverkeeper Michael Seliger, PhD, Bronx Community College Jane Sokolow LMNOP, Metro Forest Council Shino Tanikawa, New York City Soil and Water Conservation District Brad Trebach, Bronx Community Board 8 Daniel Walsh, NYS Department of Environmental Conservation Project Sponsor Bronx Council for Environmental Quality Municipal Partner Office of Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrión, Jr. Fiscal Administrator Manhattan College Consultants Hilary Hinds Kitasei, Project Manager Karen Argenti, Community Participation Specialist Justin Bloom, Esq., Brownfield Attorney Paul S.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Board 5 Section 197-A Plan Phase 1 Summary Report
    Bronx Community Board #5 Morris Heights / University Heights / South Fordham /Mount Hope Section 197-a Plan Phase 1 Report Community Board 5 Section 197-a Plan Phase 1 Summary Report Prepared by: EMW Planning & Architecture 14 Spring Street Hastings-on-Hudson, New York 10706 June, 2002 - 1 - Bronx Community Board #5 Morris Heights / University Heights / South Fordham /Mount Hope Section 197-a Plan Phase 1 Report PHASE 1 SUMMARY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER I – SECTION 197-A SCOPE OF WORK 1 1. Planning Background 1 2. Building on the Present 2 3. Data Collection and Analysis 5 4. Community Vision 6 5. Issues Confronting the CB5 Resident Population 6 6. Harlem River Waterfront 8 7. Commercial Revitalization and Development 9 8. Gateways into the Community 14 9. Transportation 14 10. Community Board Boundaries 15 11. Grand Concourse 15 12. Environmental Objectives 17 13. Fair Share 18 14. Next Steps 18 CHAPTER II – EXISTING CONDITIONS 19 1. BACKGROUND 19 2. SOCIOECONOMIC BACKGROUND 20 3. LAND USE AND ZONING 26 4. TRANSPORTATION 29 5. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE 30 6. Social Services 30 - 1 - Bronx Community Board #5 Morris Heights / University Heights / South Fordham /Mount Hope Section 197-a Plan Phase 1 Report PAGE CHAPTER III – NEEDS ASSESSSMENT 32 CHAPTER IV – BIBLIOGRAPHY 40 CHAPTER V – BUDGET 43 CHAPTER VI – POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES 44 Appendices (Available at CB #5 office) APPENDIX A: SELECTED FACILITIES AND PROGRAM SITES IN NYC: THE BRONX APPENDIX B: BRONX CB #5 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE APPENDIX C: ZONING MAPS APPENDIX D: SELECTED EXCERPTS FROM THE BRONX: AN ECONOMIC REVIEW BY NYS COMPTROLLER H.
    [Show full text]
  • DCLA Cultural Organizations
    DCLA Cultural Organizations Organization Name Address City 122 Community Center Inc. 150 First Avenue New York 13 Playwrights, Inc. 195 Willoughby Avenue, #402 Brooklyn 1687, Inc. PO Box 1000 New York 18 Mai Committee 832 Franklin Avenue, PMB337 Brooklyn 20/20 Vision for Schools 8225 5th Avenue #323 Brooklyn 24 Hour Company 151 Bank Street New York 3 Graces Theater Co., Inc. P.O. Box 442 New York 3 Legged Dog 33 Flatbush Avenue Brooklyn 42nd Street Workshop, Inc. 421 Eighth Avenue New York 4heads, Inc. 1022 Pacific St. Brooklyn 52nd Street Project, Inc. 789 Tenth Avenue New York 7 Loaves, Inc. 239 East 5th Street, #1D New York 826NYC, Inc. 372 Fifth Avenue Brooklyn A Better Jamaica, Inc. 114-73 178th Street Jamaica A Blade of Grass Fund 81 Prospect Street Brooklyn Page 1 of 616 09/28/2021 DCLA Cultural Organizations State Postcode Main Phone # Discipline Council District NY 10009 (917) 864-5050 Manhattan Council District #2 NY 11205 (917) 886-6545 Theater Brooklyn Council District #39 NY 10014 (212) 252-3499 Multi-Discipline, Performing Manhattan Council District #3 NY 11225 (718) 270-6935 Multi-Discipline, Performing Brooklyn Council District #33 NY 11209 (347) 921-4426 Visual Arts Brooklyn Council District #43 NY 10014 (646) 909-1321 Theater Manhattan Council District #3 NY 10163 (917) 385-0332 Theater Manhattan Council District #9 NY 11217 (917) 292-4655 Multi-Discipline, Performing Manhattan Council District #1 NY 10116 (212) 695-4173 Theater Manhattan Council District #3 NY 11238 (412) 956-3330 Visual Arts Brooklyn Council District
    [Show full text]
  • City Council District Profiles
    BRONX Van Cortlandt Village, Kingsbridge Heights, CITY Fordham South, Mount Hope, COUNCIL 2009 DISTRICT 14 University Heights, Morris Heights Parks are an essential city service. They are the barometers of our city. From Flatbush to Flushing and Morrisania to Midtown, parks are the front and backyards of all New Yorkers. Well-maintained and designed parks offer recreation and solace, improve property values, reduce crime, and contribute to healthy communities. SHOWCASE : St. James Park The 2008 Spotlight on Recreation is a new project of New Yorkers for Parks award-winning Report Card on Parks. This report exam- ines the conditions of athletic fields, courts, and playgrounds in a random selection of neighbor- hood parks. Each outdoor recre- ation feature was inspected on three separate site visits, once each in June, July, and August to show the performance of these specific features over the course of the summer. The basketball, handball, and tennis courts in St. Julius Richman (Echo) Park, Mount Hope James Park were surveyed for The Bloomberg Administration’s physical barriers or crime. As a result, this project. The courts’ ratings reflected a need for improved PlaNYC is the first-ever effort to studies show significant increases in care. Visit www.ny4p.org for sustainably address the many infra- nearby real estate values. Greenways more information on the Spot- structure needs of New York City, are expanding waterfront access light on Recreation: A Report Card including parks. With targets set for while creating safer routes for cyclists on Parks Project. stormwater management, air quality and pedestrians, and the new initia- and more, the City is working to tive to reclaim streets for public use update infrastructure for a growing brings fresh vibrancy to the city.
    [Show full text]
  • Fordham Plaza Conceptual Master Plan
    Fordham Plaza Conceptual Master Plan New York City Economic Development Corporation Summer 2010 New York City Department of Transportation Summer 2010 Prepared for New York City Economic Development Corporation with New York City Department of Transportation Prepared by WXY Architecture and Urban Design Contributing Consultants Sam Schwartz Engineering, PLLC Economics Research Associates MG McLaren Engineering, P.C. Leni Schwendinger Light Projects VJ Associates Inc. of Suffolk This report was made possible through New York City Industrial Development Agency Printed on ENVIRONMENT® Papers: Forest Stewardship Council(FSC) certified, made Carbon Neutral Plus, 30% post consumer recycled fibers, and Green Seal™ Certified. Fordham Plaza Conceptual Master Plan Table of Contents Foreword 5 Introduction 6 1: A Safe, Efficient Multi-Modal Transit Hub 12 2: Extending the Vitality of Fordham Road 16 3: A Reason to Come & A Reason to Stay 20 4: A Model for Sustainability & Quality Design 24 5: Making It Happen 28 Acknowledgments 31 Stamford White Plains 25 minutes 45 minutes Fordham Plaza 17 minutes Grand Central Terminal Foreword Dear Friend, On behalf of the many stakeholders who helped shape the proposal, it is with great pleasure that we introduce the conceptual design for re-making Fordham Plaza into a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly public space and world- class intermodal transit hub. Over the course of the last year, our agencies have worked closely with Community Boards 6 and 7, local elected offi cials, surrounding businesses and property owners, New York City Transit, Metro-North Railroad, local institutions and residents to generate a concept for the Plaza and adjacent streets that will create an iconic public space in the Bronx, while easing traffi c congestion, supporting transit use and fostering neighborhood economic development.
    [Show full text]
  • Document.Pdf
    BESEN INVESTMENT SALES TEAM Amit Doshi Executive Director (212) 951-8401 [email protected] Shallini Mehra Senior Director (212) 951-8414 [email protected] Paul J. Nigido Senior Financial Analyst (646) 424-5350 [email protected] Carine Citadelle Marketing Associate (646) 472-8750 [email protected] Besen & Associates 381 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Tel: 212.689-8488 Fax: 212.689-9518 BESEN INVESTMENT SALES TEAM Greg Corbin Executive Managing Director (646) 424-5077 [email protected] Aaron Kline Director (646) 472-8747 [email protected] Miguel Jauregui Director (212) 951-8402 [email protected] Brandon Serota Associate (646) 472-8732 [email protected] Jacob C. Lenchner Associate (646) 424-5061 [email protected] Besen & Associates 381 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 689-8488 Fax: (212) 689-9518 TABLE OF CONTENTS 15 PROPERTY OVERVIEW 11 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FINANCIAL OVERVIEW 22 PROPERTY PHOTOS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11 “LINC” PROGRAM OVERVIEW PROPERTY OVERVIEW 15 LOCATION MAPS PROPERTY PHOTOS FINANCIAL OVERVIEW 41 INCOME/EXPENSE REPORTS RENT ROLLS 4341 Tiebout & Evergreen | 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 118 Units | 108,445± Square Feet 2240-2242 Tiebout Avenue, Bronx, NY 10457 2240-2242 Tiebout Avenue, Bronx, NY 10457 consists of a 5-story building with 45,445± SF and 57 units. Built on a 130’ x 100’ lot, the property is situated on the west side of Tiebout Avenue between East 183rd Street and East 182nd Street, four short blocks from 182-183 Street [B, D] subway line. Improvements include new mailboxes, repointed bricks, new boiler and flashed rubber roof. The property is ideally located near Fordham University, New York Botanical Garden, St.
    [Show full text]
  • NEPA Scoping Report
    Bruckner-Sheridan Expressway Interchange and Hunts Point Peninsula Access EIS (Design Phases I-IV) NEPA Scoping Report August 2007 Design Report/Environmental Impact Statement (Design Phases I-IV) D010319 P.I.N. X730.39 Route I-278 / I-895 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Table of Contents NEPA Scoping Report A. Introduction....................................................................................................................... 1 B. Background and Problem Definition ................................................................................ 1 Deficiencies at Interchange ................................................................................................... 2 Hunts Point Access Difficulties ............................................................................................ 2 C. How Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures were Developed............................. 2 D. Alternatives Considered During Scoping ......................................................................... 3 E. Process Used to Evaluate the Alternatives........................................................................ 5 Ranking of Objectives.......................................................................................................5 Qualitative Screening ......................................................................................................... 6 Quantitative Screening .......................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • The Early Impact of COVID-19 on Young Adult Workforce Development: Insights from the Field a Jobsfirstnyc Working Paper
    The Early Impact of COVID-19 on Young Adult Workforce Development: Insights from the Field A JobsFirstNYC Working Paper May 2020 About JobsFirstNYC JobsFirstNYC creates and advances solutions that break down barriers and transform the systems supporting young adults and their communities in the pursuit of economic opportunities. Our innovative approach to developing new partnership models has helped shape public policy, private philanthropic investments, and the best practices of employers, colleges, service providers, high schools, and others. Over the last 14 years, JobsFirstNYC has worked with more than 150 organizations in communities across New York City to build innovative solutions that connect young adults to economic opportunities. About this Working Paper This working paper is a rapid-response effort to hear from our network of partnerships, capture their voices, and share initial recommendations on how to ensure young adults and their communities are not left out of immediate and long-term investments and reforms needed as a result of the fallout brought on by COVID-19. JobsFirstNYC • www.jobsfirstnyc.org The Early Impact of COVID-19 on Young Adult Workforce Development 1 Executive Summary The COVID-19 pandemic threatens the health and economic well-being of New Yorkers. It exacerbates preexisting inequities that young adults and their communities have long faced, leaving many with few opportunities to protect their health and continue earning a paycheck to support their families. Prior to COVID-19, while the economy was seemingly strong, the statewide young adult unemployment rate was high. Since the statewide PAUSE order on March 22, 2020, young adults have experienced a disproportionate share of job loss and are likely to remain unemployed even after the shutdown ends.
    [Show full text]
  • City Council District Profiles
    University Heights, Morris Heights, BRONX Highbridge, West Concourse, East Concourse, CITY Concourse Village, Claremont, Bathgate, COUNCIL 2009 DISTRICT 16 Morrisania, Melrose, Crotona Park East Parks are an essential city service. They are the barometers of our city. From Flatbush to Flushing and Morrisania to Midtown, parks are the front and backyards of all New Yorkers. Well-maintained and designed parks offer recreation and solace, improve property values, reduce crime, and contribute to healthy communities. SHOWCASE : Mullaly Park “Parkland alienation” is the taking of parkland for a non-park use. Today, parkland can be taken for development too easily, and in a dense city where parks are our front and back yards, this can have a devastating effect. New Yorkers for Parks has worked with the legal community to strengthen the alienation process and protect parks that are in danger of being alienated. In 2006, the New York City Council and State Legislature approved the seizure of 22 acres of well-loved Gouverneur Playground, Claremont Village parkland including a portion of The Bloomberg Administration’s physical barriers or crime. As a result, Mullaly Park to build the new Yankee Stadium despite strong PlaNYC is the first-ever effort to studies show significant increases in community opposition. To down- sustainably address the many infra- nearby real estate values. Greenways load New Yorkers for Parks’ edu- structure needs of New York City, are expanding waterfront access cational brochure on alienation, including parks. With targets set for while creating safer routes for cyclists please visit www.ny4p.org stormwater management, air quality and pedestrians, and the new initia- and more, the City is working to tive to reclaim streets for public use update infrastructure for a growing brings fresh vibrancy to the city.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Vision for the Bronx's University Heights Waterfront
    The People’s River: A New Vision for the Bronx’s University Heights Waterfront july 23-24, 2014 Table of Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................3 1 | ULI and the TAP Process ...................................................................................5 A. Urban land Institute B. Technical Assistance Panels (TAPs) C. Panelists and the TAP Process 2 | Background and Assignment ...........................................................................8 A. Study Area and location B. Existing land uses and Zoning C. Demographics D. Objectives for the TAP 3 | Panel Observations and Findings ................................................................. 11 A. Unique Attributes B. Study Area Challenges 4 | Panel Recommendations ................................................................................13 A. Grand Vision B. Short-Term Plan (2-3 years) C. long-Term Plan (10-20 years) 5 | Next Steps ............................................................................................................21 2 Executive Summary The urban land Institute’s New york District Council (ULI New york) convened the university Heights Waterfront Technical Assistance Panel (TAP) in july 2014, bringing together stakeholders, including New york City officials and community leaders, with a panel of land use and development professionals for a two-day session focused on exploring the development potential for the university Heights waterfront. This portion of the
    [Show full text]
  • JULY 6-19, 2017 ORWOODQ EWSQ Nvol
    Proudly Serving Bronx Communities Since 1988 3URXGO\6HUYLQJ%URQ[&RPPXQLWLHV6LQFHFREE 3URXGO\6HUYLQJ%URQ[&RPPXQLWLHV6LQFHFREE ORWOODQ EWSQ FREE NVol. 27, No. 8 PUBLISHED BY MOSHOLU PRESERVATION CORPORATION N April 17–30, 2014 Vol 30, No 14 • PUBLISHED BY MOSHOLU PRESERVATION CORPORATION •JULY 6-19, 2017 ORWOODQ EWSQ NVol. 27, No. 8 PUBLISHED BY MOSHOLU PRESERVATION CORPORATION N April 17–30, 2014 INQUIRING PHOTOGRAPHER: SEE PHOTOS: STATE OF AMERICA | PG. 4 OPEN HOUSE AT FIVE-TWO | PG. 9 DOWNZONING FINDINGS REVEALED G&T Report Out | pg 2 Report fi nds Bedford Park and Kingsbridge Heights can be downzoned Kingsbridge Step Street Gets $6M Fix pg 7 Police Up Patrols at St. James Park | pg 11 Photo by Adi Talwar JOHN REILLY AND his wife Lois Harr stand across the street from their private home at East 202nd Street in Bedford Park (left). The couple hopes a report supporting downzoning of the neighborhood can prevent construction of a much taller building two houses down (right). By DAVID CRUZ be assessed before submitting clip in Bedford Park had espe- board convenes again. Even At its June 14 meeting, them to the city. cially prompted the study. then the city would have to Community Board 7’s Land For Lois Harr, a resident “Time is running out,” give final approval of any zon- Use/Zoning & Housing Com- in Bedford Park, the motion Jean Hill, committee chair, ing changes, which could take mittee approved the findings represented a victory in pre- said at the meeting. “So we months. This offers a window of an independent study that venting further construction need to jump on it.” for developers to continue its would limit height restric- of high-rise properties in Bed- But even as the commit- sweep of Bedford Park and tions on new buildings in two ford Park and Kingsbridge tee approved the results, it Kingsbridge Heights, neigh- Bronx neighborhoods, despite Heights, the two neighbor- still needs the full board’s borhoods where two-story the study’s author recom- hoods studied.
    [Show full text]