(Editor’s note: We are going to start a new category of Guest Pens. Just send the info in on any one of our comment section (it is always monitored), and I will post. Some people do not want to use their name, but I will verify that they are credible. )
As we prepared for CPC testimony on the Lower Concourse Rezoning, we read the fine print. Well, Con Ed chimed in, but not at the public hearings. Apparently they are the fee holder for 287 Exterior Street. A modification allowed by the NYC Department of City Planning, BUT NOT YET APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, would give them a special allowance.
First they block the Bronx Kill, now they are trying to block access to the Harlem River. It is disappointing to say the least.
Defend the Harlem River Greenway. No Special Treatment for Con Ed! Testify. Tell your Council member to vote no, or remove this special treatment from the language.
Details at:
N 090302 ZRX Lower Concourse Rezoning* BX 1 at:
http://a030-cpc.nyc.gov/html/cpc/index.aspx?searchfor=lower+concourse
p.29
and
See Con Ed’s letter asking for this special treatment at page 44-48 of:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/env_review/lower_concourse/apendix_n.pdf
Is this fair, or right?
http://www.friendsofbrookpark.org
Activists are a threatened species, but there’s safety in numbers. If you can’t be active, please $upport your local environmental activist.
646.648.4362
PO Box 801
The South Bronx, NY 10454
Editor’s Comment: Today, June 25, we spoke with Con Edison’s representative and have been assured that they are in accord with the Harlem River Working Group’s goals of a greenway and increased waterfront access. Under the current zoning, Con Edison does not have to provide access. With the new zoning, they wanted to discuss how big the pedestrian walkway would be, as well as how much of a ribbon of land around the inlet would lead to the water. Check out the parcel of land and see where the inlet is — 287 Exterior Street.
Now we can see how important it is to keep talking to each other. Thank you all for you interest. ~Karen


By harry on Jun 25, 2009 | Reply
The new zoning would require 40 feet. They are asking for an exception that is the basic reality, no matter how they want to spin it. That’s the value of dialogue and advocacy and not capitulating and being spun.
The vote was postponed again, thx to advocacy, till Tuesday. More time to press and to fight fight fight!
By ***mricle*** on Jul 24, 2009 | Reply
Fight, fight, fight… Win ever?
By ***icle*** on Nov 1, 2009 | Reply
Where did this end up? Is it still doing the limbo?