|
|
|
May 15, 2002
Joseph Seymour William Fellini Dear Messrs. Seymour and Fellini: Thank you for PATH’s May 7 letter responding to the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation’s written concerns regarding the proposed addition of entrances to PATH stations on Christopher Street. As we have previously stated, we recognize that PATH has a very important responsibility to its riders to ensure their safety and ability to evacuate the PATH system through its stations in the case of emergency. However, we must stress that PATH also has a responsibility to the community in which it is located, and must try to ensure that its projects and its presence not unduly impact upon their largely residential and historic surroundings. Our neighborhood will in all likelihood be home to any new station entrances in perpetuity, and all efforts should be made to ensure that PATH’s safety needs are addressed in a manner which is compatible with the needs of the surrounding community, and without increasing the impact or burden upon it. Unfortunately, PATH has thus far not shown a willingness to consider the alternatives necessary to achieve such an outcome. We question your assertion that the sidewalk intrusion and the narrowing of traffic lanes this project will entail will not have a negative impact on the surrounding area. Regardless of NYCDOT’s compliance with the proposal, we believe it is self-evident that pedestrian and traffic flow will be affected by this project, and that the ultimate responsibility lies with PATH to choose the appropriate configuration for any project which you undertake. We also still do not see a reflection in PATH’s approach to this project that acknowledges the extremely sensitive historic surroundings in which the stations are located, which have been recognized (with the intention of their preservation) by local, state, and federal government. Furthermore, PATH has still not shown a willingness to engage suggestions made by GVSHP and others that alternative locations which could accommodate the need for new PATH entrances be considered. It is telling that the spots chosen for the new entrances were determined solely by their relationship to the underground station locations, and were seemingly not at all modulated in relation to their street level surroundings. We continue to call your attention to the fact that, unlike the proposed new entrances, the current stations’ entrances are located within the building line, on or next to streets and sidewalks which are approximately twice as wide as those at the proposed entrance locations. While we understand that PATH finds itself trying to address a need not contemplated 95 years ago when these stations were built, PATH can and should now address the clearly discernible needs currently found above ground as well as below. No satisfactory explanation has yet been supplied as to why placing the new entrances on or near major streets like 6th Avenue or 7th Avenue South, in or near existing subway entrances, is not being considered. Such a configuration is the case at every other New York City PATH Station, and would clearly benefit PATH riders. We are also still very seriously concerned that no particulars have been put forward about PATH’s protection plan during any construction period, and that no written commitment has been made for daily control inspections of any construction locations. We urge that this be remedied as soon as possible before any work begins at any location. We are, however, grateful that you have committed not to close Christopher Street to bus traffic for the bulk of any construction period, although acknowledging that closures could become possible on a half-day or full day basis on occasion. In such an event, we hope that any decision on where to re-route the Christopher Street bus would be made in consultation with the community, as the narrow historic streets of Greenwich Village present special issues in relation to bus traffic. We will continue to work with PATH on the above ground design of this project, outreach to affected parties, and efforts to ensure that work not damage fragile, historic structures. But if this process is to move forward in good faith, PATH must show a willingness to consider alternative locations for these entrances, and acknowledge the very real concerns about the appropriateness and impact of the entrances in the current proposal. We ask that this be PATH’s next step before moving any further forward with this plan. Sincerely, Andrew Berman Cc: Governor George E. Pataki |