Anthony West wrote:
Fascinating, Ray. Truly thought-provoking. Thank you very much.
Fond though I am of park planning, and eager though I am to suck up to
landscape architects in public if it'll shave 3% off their final bill
... still I suspect one reason Needle Park is no longer a crime-ridden
vortex is not "because" it has been "renewed" as Bryant Park, but
because the entire island of Manhattan has been relentlessly gentrified
by overwhelming market forces over the past 15 years, if I read
correctly between the lines of my New Yorkers. So it may be a case of
planning following, rather than preceding, demographic changes in the
neighborhood. Still fasinating, though.
according to the bryant park website:
1974 - park designated as 'scenic landmark'
1979 - park overrun by dope dealers
1980 - masterplan by Heiskell and Biederman
(founders, Bryant Park Restoration Corp, a BID)
1988 - city agencies approve BPRC's masterplan (drafted
by Hanna/Olin Ltd)
1992 - park re-opened to lavish praise, including that of
"the business community, whose assessments helped
fund the renewal and now benefit from higher rents
and property values"
late
90s - lunchtime crowds of 4000
- - - - -
this raises an interesting question: given that our cities
are no longer in a comparable 'abandoned, crisis mode' of
the 60s and 70s, should these BID models still apply? should
new ones be developed? why should we consider a BID now that
we're near the end of the first decade of the 21st century?
with gentrification abounding, and cities thriving and
pulsing with all this new life and vigor?
..................
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
"It is very clear on this listserve who
these people are. Ray has admitted being
connected to this forger." -- Tony West
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
