|
LETTERS
NOT ANTI-DEVELOPMENT, BUT THIS AIN'T SMART! Received from Roger Friedman Sea Cliff June 28, 2016 To the Editor: In regards to the Waterfront Development one major point that’s being missed is that the opposition is not anti-development. We are for cleaning up the site, we are for the development of the site. We applaud the EPA and the DEC for their work to date and, as we’ve stated at the public meetings, we hope they will continue to remediate until it is completely cleaned up and there is absolutely no danger to human health. We would also applaud the smart, responsible development of the site, but the current plan is neither responsible nor smart. This project is being called “Smart Growth” but it violates virtually all Smart Growth Principles. The closest LIRR station, a staple requirement of the regional smart growth movement, is anywhere from one mile to 1.6 miles away - or in practical terms, about a half hour walk. The nearest supermarket is 1.2 miles away, up a giant hill (North Shore Farms). Urban planning standards cite true walkability as anything reachable on foot within a quarter mile radius. Using City Hall as an anchor of the downtown area, the eastern portion of the Garvies Point site is roughly a .6 mile walk, more than double the walkability standard used by urban planners. Furthermore, it is not mixed use, it is 96% residential; it offers limited transportation options; it does not blend in with the existing surroundings or architecture; it does not strengthen existing communities; it is not practical, fair or cost effective; it disregards stakeholder input. It is out of scale with the surrounding area and it is simply too dense. RXR has stated that the company “…has been and continues to be at the forefront of downtown revitalization and redevelopment. In addition to real estate endeavors, our efforts also focus on improving communities as a whole, including economic development, education and public safety…” that all sounds very nice and yet this is not “downtown”, it will not “improve our communities” it will destroy them, and they have no desire to work with people who actually live here to create something we can all live with. RXR is trying to create a precedent for their “Urban-Suburban” model, and, if unchecked, they will shove it down our throats whether we like it or not! We must not let that happen. As stated at the outset we are not anti-development. There have been other plans put forward in the past that we would support wholeheartedly, and that would still bring new residents and business and spur much needed economic activity. In fact, a real mixed use development with some residential, shops and other local businesses would most likely spur more economic development for Glen Cove than the current plan. Mayor Spinello calls the opposition a "small number of naysayers”. He also says that the City has a contract that needs to be honored. That is a convenient dismissal of the issues we have brought to the forefront. Indeed, it is a tactic of the powerful to frame the debate in a narrow way – “it’s either all or nothing” – “if we don’t get the TIF financing we can’t do the project”, “there has been too much invested in this plan to change it at this point”, “we have a contract”… It’s nonsense. The contract has already been renegotiated no less than 7 TIMES! The debate needs to be re-framed – what works for ALL of the stakeholders in the community? If not this plan than what is possible? That’s a discussion we, and most in the community, would support and welcome wholeheartedly. Roger Friedman Committee for a Sustainable Waterfront BACK TO WEEKLY |
|
|
