The pavilion on the north side of Union Square Park will house a privately owned restaurant.
Should NYU faculty and their dependent children receive full tuition remission?
Bidding is about to begin on a restaurant space in Union Square Park's pavilion, which is currently under renovation. The winning bidder will secure a 15-year contract to operate a private cafe, along with the option to maintain a kiosk or food cart nearby.
In 2008, the Union Square Community Coalition, a group of local activists, sued the city and the Union Square Partnership, stopping construction in the Square for a year. But Justice Jane S. Solomon of the New York State Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit this past March, ruling that a restaurant is consistent with the park's purpose as a venue for public activities.
A spokesperson for the Union Square Partnership called Solomon's ruling a community victory, saying that its members are pleased that the "legal impediment has ended and that work can continue."
But Geoffrey Croft — a plaintiff for the case, and president and founder of New York City Park Advocates, a nonprofit that aims to improve public parks — is not happy.
"We want our day in court," Croft said. "It's clearly not a public use to have a restaurant."
Croft said communities often lack the necessary information and resources to challenge policy.
"In this case, there's a very powerful business corporation involved," he said. "It's ridiculous that [the] community has to spend hours fighting to save their own space."
Croft said the city's actions meant a "loss of free speech" for the community. He said an anonymous entity should not be allowed to control the use of the public space. In the spring of 2008, an anonymous donor gave $7.1 million to the Union Square Partnership with the stipulation that the money be used for the restaurant. Some speculate that the donor gave the money so he or she would be at an advantage to win the bid for the restaurant space.
Croft described the implications installing a restaurant would have on area residents, including NYU students.
"Certainly, students should be able to use recreational and cultural space," he said. "It's supposed to be for everybody, but the business improvement district wants to keep it for its own purposes. Students won't get that opportunity."
Even as bidding approaches, Croft does not anticipate a resolution to the conflict anytime soon.
"This will go on for a while," he said.
Still, many NYU students see the restaurant as an improvement to Union Square.
"It would be nice to have a restaurant," Steinhardt sophomore Josh Ocampo said. "It'd be really profitable, so why not?"
Tisch sophomore Makenzie Daris agreed: "Union Square is one of the city's central hubs, and [the restaurant] will add to the atmosphere."
Edita
Oct 13, 2009
3:04 p.m.
I can't think of anything that would be less of an improvement to Union Square than yet ~another~ restaurant. It's elitist to pretend that a "restaurant is consistent with the park's purpose as a venue for public activities," and Justice Solomon should be ashamed for making such an elitist decision. A restaurant is for paying customers only.
Hey NYU students: Please take a stroll over to Union Square and really look around. It's literally surrounded by restaurants.
It's unconscionable to steal public space away from NYC residents in order to install a restaurant in an area teeming with them already.
The NYU student who said, "It'd be really profitable, so why not," in questioning why it wouldn't be a bad idea to use public space for a private restaurant in Union Square saddens me to no end.
Why Not? Because it's wrong to value profits over people, that's why.
Public space should be considered sacred, not there for the taking by the hightest bidder. It's meant to be accessible and free for all to enjoy, not just for those priviliged enough to be able to afford an expensive meal. Also, think of the carbon footprint another restaurant is adding to NYC--and in a space meant to be preserved for the people to enjoy.
Even sadder is that Union Square park plays an incredible role in the history of the American labor movement, and to this day remains a central space for social and political activism of all kinds. For all those that fought for the rights we all have today, we have a responsibility to fight like hell to make sure that we don't cave in and allow our rights to be trampeled on in the name of "profits."
That space could be used for something that could benefit the community greatly, such as an open center for children, or something with cultural value that doesn't require money to enjoy. Let the community decide.
Cheers to Mr Croft, and those fighting the good fight!
Robert
Oct 13, 2009
10:37 p.m.
How much better would the world be if people like Edita or Geoff Croft would stop whining?
leave a comment
Comments from unregistered users will appear once they are approved. Log in to have your comment show up immediately.