36 responses to “Park Improvements at Fort Independence Park and around the Reservoir”

  1. Karen

    This is an accurate description of the meeting. I did add that the request for a running path around the reservoir is one of CB8’s priorities for 20-30 years back. The discussion with the CB and the DEP about cleaning the perimeter dates back as far and was the first time we were instructed about the importance of the Leventhal Memorandum (an explanation of who does what in a multi-agency task such as Sanitation cleaning the area, Parks cutting the grass, and the DEP, well doing what they do best ………………..).

  2. WaterBlogged.org » Jerome Park Reservoir Park’s Department Design

    […] Community Board 8 Parks Committee held a meeting on January 8. Details of this meeting are at the Fort Independence Park Neighborhood Improvement Association (FIPNA) site at: http://www.fipna.org/2009/01/10/park-improvements-at-fort-independence-park-and-around-the-reservoir… […]

  3. anthony

    some members of the bedford park community are still upset at how after 25 years, they still cant get it right

    jerome park resevior should be a clean and open space for ALL communities-not some

    it is a misjustice if i am reading this right that;

    1- there are NO capital Park monies to help?

    2- no baseball field for children

    3- how can you make a plan to improve when the Parks & DEP are still exploring “open space” for the community.

    i am a 30 year community board 7 resident who jogs jerome park daily. while i am happy that there will be improvements on 2 sides of the resevior, i am sad that the other 2 sides will be destroyed. so, its a neighborhood vs neighborhood fight? hmmmmmmmmm

    i remember many enviosing this years ago

  4. karen

    Anthony ….. this is just the recreational pathway that the Parks Department is proposing. They stated that they would maintain the new areas along Sedgwick that they are creating (in addition to upgrading the existing jogging path in FIP). They do proposed to expand the field like area for children (as there is no real place for a full field). The plan is for the full perimeter of the reservoir, it is just not enough money. As you know, the $200 million had to go to other places so they could get the vote, and so our community lost again!

    Parks said they will do more for the eastern side of the reservoir when the DEP finishes up making a mess (which makes sense) on other projects. Not only is the DEP working on the valves and chambers across from Bronx Science, but they have to upgrade the five gate houses! No one knows how long this work with take (but there sure is time for planning meetings with the community in the mean time, right?) “Open space” inside the fence is still under discussion by the DEP.

    However, it is not neighborhood vs neighborhood as you stated. It is just a limited amount of money that is already four years late on getting started, and when they finish up doing all the DEP work underground, above ground and demolishing, then new ideas can come forward … including green open space and the Outdoor Urban Ecology Lab (OUEL) on the public side of the fence.

    Stay Tuned!

    No matter what …. the DEP knows that WE ARE HERE and WE ARE WATCHING ….

  5. Anne Marie

    The $4.5 million for the Jerome Park Pathway could be allocated more equitable right now. That would mean that the western half of the reservoir would have to give up some of its improvements and share the money.

    Parks will not have more money to spend on the eastern side of the reservoir when the DEP is done with its construction because Parks is spending all $4.5 million on the western side of the reservoir in the current plan.

    Regarding the eastern edge of the reservoir: the DEP is only working in the southern half of Harris Park Annex, and Parks could improve the 2-3 acres north of where the DEP is working. This improvement will not be destroyed by DEP construction because the DEP has already completed the tunnel from the filter plant to the reservoir.

    However this would mean the western half of the reservoir would get a little less improvement, so that the eastern half would get some improvement. Apparently the Fort Independence Park Neighborhood Association doesn’t want to share the money.

    I, as president of the Jerome Park Conservancy, got this money allocated through then Assemblyman Jeff Klein. It was meant for the Conservancy, not FIPNA.

    The Jerome Park Conservancy’s plan has always had the running track inside of the DEP’s security fence, and the Conservancy agreed as a group to these designs.

    Some people are simply promoting their own plans now, to serve certain neighborhoods. It’s just not fair.

  6. anthony

    Good Afternoon Karen

    I will not comment much further as I sadly was not at the scheduled meeting this week at CB8. Sce then however, i have received a number of reports. I will just go by this thread as informational.

    Firstly, I am glad your well and active and secondly, the neighborhood misses you.

    Secondly, let me give a big shout out to Margret for posting her report and to everyone involved in the association for doing what they do best-staying active!

    I do have some thoughts though!

    1-As you say, is there any “allocated monies already in place” for the re-doing of the eastern side” of the reservior or is all of the filtration money going to Fort Indep Park? could you clarify? I get the sense from the comments above that there is not?

    2- I am glad that there will be an expansion of a children playing ground. With birth rates in the area so high, Dart is right, as it only makes sense!

    3- Of course as you may know, I write a community column for The Bronx News newspaper. I intend on getting the minutes to the meeting and provide Bronx Readers with additional info. Can I use your website as a neighborhood resource?

  7. karen

    Anne Marie, the Parks Commissioner was clear that the DEP would have to do work along the eastern side when their permit expires — in about three years.

    Stop trying to make this one neighborhood against the other. The plan is for the WHOLE reservoir. Schematics will be uploaded.

  8. Karen

    Anthony, Thanks for your comments. You are welcome to link FIPNA as a neighborhood resource.

    There was no budget presented on the cost of the work. Since you are a runner, you know the area. The jogging trail will start at Sedgwick Avenue at Reservoir Avenue and continue through the Fort Independence Park to Sedgwick until Goulden Avenue. You may have missed the old jogging trail in FIP as it was eroded away as you go toward 95, but it was there since 1987.

    Anyone who runs or walks around the reservoir, uses the blacktop path in Fort Independence Park to get to Sedgwick at Giles Place. It is a well-known fact. Another well known fact is that the community has been asking for a running pathway around Jerome Park Reservoir since the time I was the Chair of Community Board 7 — and that was in the early 1980s.

    While there is no budget for the other side, there are avenues available for funding, including the statement by the Parks Commissioner that the permit requires the DEP to restore the parkland. As far as I can remember, that permit was originally given in the 80’s, so they have a lot to make up.

    Finally, this project is four years in the waiting. Continued discord will only delay any progress and the original $5 million will become less and less as the years go on.

    /Karen

  9. Anne Marie

    I agree that the DEP has had a construction permit for Harris Park Annex since the mid 1980s. But that does not mean that they still need the whole strip for the work that remains to be done.

    The Parks Department is talking about the DEP’s current permit, not their construction plans. Since Parks spoke to DEP (1 1/2 to 2 years ago?), the DEP has completed the tunnel work.

    I agree that there is a plan for the whole reservoir but the ONLY PART THAT IS BEING FUNDED adjoins Sedgwick Ave, along the western edge. There is no more money for any other projects in the future.

    The plan by the Parks Department is only for the area outside of the DEP’s security fence, while the Conservancy’s plan is for the whole reservoir, inside and out of the fence.
    Since the DEP is currently reconsidering public access, and has hired a consultant to study it, it would seem that the Conservancy’s plan may be more current than the one done for the Parks Department.

  10. karen

    Anne Marie,

    Some of these are questions for the DEP at the next FMC meeting. They are NOT finished with the tunnel work as they are building a Valve and Meter Chamber across from Bronx Science and, no one asked them what kind of work space they need for the Gate House rehabilitation.

    But there should be room where the Demo Plant is to create the OUEL, and that is a park that was on the permit since the early 1980’s.

    As for the DEP allowing access inside the park, I was thinking that the extension they asked for was in the end of May and nine months would bring us to February, Now that will not be resolved until another nine months, which means September. More than likely it will be postponed again until after the election so December …….and so it goes on and on………..

    We don’t want to loose our funding …….to some other project that will be needing more money.

  11. Anne Marie

    I’m not proposing that we wait to spend the money. I’m just suggesting that since the DEP’s work is now focused in the few acres north and south of gatehouse 5, near 205th Street, that the northern portion of Harris Park Annex could be improved with the current funds.

    I also have an idea about how we could do some minor improvements at the south end of the reservoir as well – without a jogging path.

    The DEP’s construction permit only requires that they restore Harris Park Annex when they are done. They are not required to improve it. That means they’ll spread some seed and plant a few trees.

    And as you know, the $4.5 million was allocated by legislation for a recreational pathway at the Jerome Park Reservoir and cannot be used for other projects. We will not lose the money.

    We should do it right.

  12. karen

    Anthony,

    For a look at the full project, go to http://www.waterblogged.org where you will find a jpg of the schematic and the pdf. I will post more later.

  13. Anne Marie

    I forgot – The tunnel is completed.

    The valve chamber and shaft that are now under construction are part of an entirely separate project.

  14. anthony

    i could not find the schmantics karen but i did find the mou and courtesy of the website, the 2004 allocations of the water filtration monies (when i see it in its entity i get sick), it says than $5million should be used as a recrentational pathway. I do not know if Anne is right or wrong when she says she got it allocated for “inside” the reservior but whether inside or not-it should benefit the whole parkway.If this plan does not include western side improvements then this plan is not neighborhood friendly. If it is about doing one side first, before the other, to start improvements TODAY, then take the $5million, divide by the 4 sides, for at least, a foundation of both equity and improvements. The $2.5 million should be held in some “Parks escrow” account to ensure future funding NOW. if we wait 3 years, it will never be there and the divisions of the neighborhood greater (just one man’s opinion)

  15. Phil

    “Anne Marie”,

    You said “The Jerome Park Conservancy’s plan has always had the running track inside of the DEP’s security fence, and the Conservancy agreed as a group to these designs.”

    I would like to know how many community residents agree with this plan?

    Will the DEP allow everyone access “inside the fence” 24 hours a day?

    Do we have to go through security checks just to get “inside the fence” and go jogging?

    What good is giving the community as a whole a recreational pathway that will not have totally free access?

    It seems to me that you have one goal and only one goal which is the “inside the fence” design that you keep mentioning over and over again. If this takes years to come to fruition or maybe doesn’t even happen, what’s the point? If there is money there now and the Parks Department is willing to make a pathway for everyone to use why wait for a plan that may never happen?

    Also as a community we have been burned by DEP so many times that to wait for a consultant of theirs to tell us that the plan is not feasible, well it’s just not to the benefit of ALL involved.

    These are just my thoughts on this subject and do not represent FIPNA as a group.

    -Phil

  16. Phil

    Good points Anthony. You can find a PDF of the schematics here: Parks Master Plan

    You can also see the smaller image of it here: Parks Master Plan – Image

    I am attaching the image here as well:

    -Phil

  17. Karen

    Anthony,

    We did not design the park.

    The Parks Department said they could not work on the north area to the east because the DEP has a permit for this area and their work may end up ruining whatever Parks did.

    Parks could not work on the south area to the east because they could not get Lehman College to remove their Parking lots (and I guess relocate the school?).

    Parks could not plan to work on the south side along Reservoir Avenue because the NYC DOT said the sidewalk is not big enough for a pathway.

    So there you have it. Why would we disagree with a plan to do something?

    As Phil, I am not representing the point of view of any organization, only my own.

  18. anthony

    Thank You Phil

    the map is invaluable!

    and again, if i read some of these comments right, it sounds like, for many other reasons, 9some good some bad) that the only feasible place to work now is on the Ft Ind side because the other sites are either too small, too much construction or that a parking lot is already in the way.

    Even if this is true, the $5million allocated to the pathway, which should be in its entity, should be partically earmarked NOW, to ensure FULL improvments. If we do not, only more neighborhood fighting will begin.

    Sad, what came about in 1984 as a Federal Mandate worked!. Confuse & Divide the neighborhoods!. With Norwood & Woodlawn partially destoyed, now it is time to pit Bedfor Park Vs ft indep, once again, for the sake of public policy. Sadder is that 100 year old communities now fighting against each other in the last 20 years while trying to represent their neighborhoods. Most noteably, $5million is only 2%. 2%? we are fighting over 2%? OK, maybe I should follow Karen’s lead. Although I love this neighborhood so much, it might be time to move, before i do not recogize the one i fell in love with in 1979.

  19. Anne Marie

    Phil, These are good questions and I will do my best to answer them.

    1. Q. “I would like to know how many community residents agree with this plan?”

    A. When the JPC was developing its plan for a park at JPR, it intentionally included leaders from most of the organizations, housing complexes, schools, etc. from around the reservoir. These people were supposed to gather input from their respective constituents. In addition we, and our designer, Gail wittwer, held a series of small and large public meetings to discuss the plan. We took this process very seriously, raised money, and developed consensus over a few years before we agreed upon the basic design principles (which includes a running track at the edge of the water). So, the majority of the community agreed via their leaders. No one ever wrote to the Conservancy in disagreement, and thousands of people were involved in these meetings. (FYI – Karen Argenti represented FIPNA on the board, and she too agreed.)

    2. Q. “Will the DEP allow everyone access “inside the fence” 24 hours a day?”

    A. I do not know the answer until the DEP completes its review. If a lot of people feel that this is an important issue, then we can negotiate for it.

    3. Q “Do we have to go through security checks just to get “inside the fence” and go jogging?”

    same answer as 2. I do not know how much the DEP is reconsidering.

    3. Q. “What good is giving the community as a whole a recreational pathway that will not have totally free access?”

    A. Clearly you have never been inside the fence. It is MAGNIFICENT in there. You are next to 96 acres of blue water, all sparkling with light. It is inspirational.

    4. Q “It seems to me that you have one goal and only one goal …If there is money there now and the Parks Department is willing to make a pathway for everyone to use why wait for a plan that may never happen?

    A. This is not my goal, but the Conservancy’s goal. I am just trying to achieve what we all agreed to. I too think we should spend the money now outside the fence, but just not for a running track. The Conservancy never agreed to a running track outside the fence.

    In design it is always good to have a master plan. We have a master plan and should build it in increments according to the guiding principles. The reservoir was probably first designed by Frederick Law Olmsted, and his work deserves the utmost respect.

    I hope this helped answer your questions.
    Anne Marie

  20. Anne Marie

    Karen, This is in response to post #17 to Anthony.

    The City knew, or should have known, all of these constraints in 2004 when they allocated the $5 million for the pathway. That’s why it has to be inside the fence to work.

    Anne Marie

  21. Karen

    Anne Marie, In #20, you give the City too much credit. While someone told you it was going inside the fence, it never ever dawned on any one else. We all thought it was going outside since it was not enough money.

    Karen

  22. Anne Marie

    Karen, I think you’ve got it backwards.

    There is enough money for a recreational pathway inside the fence because there are no obstructions there.

    $4.5 million is not enough money for outside the fence because you have to move the Lehman facilities.

    Nor is there a way to have a view of the water from outside the fence because the berm (the dam), and the parking lot are in the way.

    Besides, we never had the pathway outside the fence, so when they agreed to a pathway based on the Conservancy’s plan, they were agreeing to inside the fence.

    As you know, both the DEP and Parks actively participated in the Conservancy’s development, and sat on the board. They had seen the park plan countless times. Why, the DEP had even agreed to transfer all the land, from the water out, to the Parks Department.

    Anne Marie

  23. Karen

    Anne Marie, As you know, the JPC Design Elements state that we would strive to create two paths around the reservoir: 1. a soft path that hugs the edge of the water – for running and walking, and 2. an asphalt path that will meander between the sidewalk and the water – for “wheels” (bicycles, roller blades, wheelchairs, baby carriages, etc.). We also referred to it as a “work in progress” knowing that some of the design elements would never come to fruition.

    This current debate is only on the issue of which part of the design plan comes first.

    We can not wait for a fence to come down. As you now know, the DEP wrote a secret memo to themselves stating that we were not going to be able to have access. They did this on the SAME day that they APPROVED the LIST OF PROJECTS! Therefore, they never intended to do, whatever you think they promised you.

    I am going to upload some old JPC files for people to read.

    /K

  24. Phil

    At an FMC meeting that I attended DEP would not allow public questions. They have never been open and upfront with any of us. If you actually believe that the DEP will be removing the outer security fence you have been mislead.

    As far as running inside the fence, I am sure the water is beautiful at times, at others it is not so nice. This summer there was no water in the south side of the reservoir and all that was there was a low lying body of water that was murky and green. This same body of water brought millions of tiny bugs to our neighborhood. The DEP denied all of this and said there was nothing they could do about it.

    Again, running inside might be nice as you say, however will it really be that nice running between 2 high fences? One is 8′ and the other 10′, won’t it feel like running in a jail yard?

    Again these are just my thoughts!

    /Phil

  25. Anne Marie

    first Karen re #23, The Conservancy does not have a document called “work in progress.” We have a brochure called “Design For A New Urban Park – Jerome Park Reservoir – Jerome Park Conservancy.”

    The DEP posted a lot of the Conservancy’s documents after I presented to them in June 2008. They are at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/news/croton.shtml

    I never said we have to wait for the fence to come down.

    I’d like to remind you of some of your comments to the CFMC in the past year. More than once you have said that the DEP has a direct connection from the aqueduct to the filter plant, and they could take the reservoir completely offline, and turn it all into a park.

    It seems starnge that you were promoting a complete park at the CFMC meetings, and are obstructing it now that the DEP has said they are reconsidering public access.

    and now Phil re # 24

    The DEP did not set the rules for the CFMC, the whole committee did. The DEP is just one member.

    I know their traits.

    I never said we have to wait for the outer fence to come down. But it could.

    The DEP is doing a lot of work on the Croton system, including the restorion of the “New Croton Aqueduct.” That’s why there’s no water in the reservoir. Once they are done with this work the water will be back.

    As for the 2 fences. I think the inner fence can be replaced by a much lower, more aesthetic fence. That’s why I was asked to get a bid back in 2004.

    Anne Marie

  26. Anne Marie

    JPC materials can be found in the minutes of 6/19/08 meeting of the CFMC. The links are below.

    The Conservancy’s materials start on page 46 of part 1. They include our postcard, brochure, newsletter.

    The Conservancy’s Preservation Report is in Part 2 and 3.

    The files are large and take a while to load.

    http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/croton-6-19-08-part-1.pdf
    http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/croton-6-19-08-part-2.pdf
    http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/pdf/croton-6-19-08-part-3.pdf

    Anne Marie

  27. Karen

    Anne Marie, The form was up on the internet from my old web page for Jerome Park. It was labeled a working document, because that is what it was. No one ever thought every detail of every word was going to happen. It was Design Elements; things could change.

    There is also no disagreement between us on the park issue and on getting the DEP to give up on JPR. I have never changed my mind as to what I would like to see in the long run, but for now, it is time to let the city DO SOMETHING for Jerome Park Reservoir!

    I am sure that a delay will just mean nothing for us. They do not have to spend the money on JPR; the city can do whatever they want. Just look at the list of projects: one of them is Macombs Dam Park — and they are not going to spend that money because that is Yankee Stadium! Or who knows, maybe they will put in a waterfall.

    The point is that there was never any order as to what should go first, so as long as something is proposed and it is not a bad design, let’s fight bigger battles that loom before us.

    I don’t know why you say I am obstructing something — I am only stating my point of view. I already explained discussing the access question in #10 — they are not going anyplace fast.

    /Karen

  28. anthony

    well obviously everyone needs to be commended for their activity on this site it is even more impressive that there is now linkage to information on this site. while it will take time to read all this information (and I will) , in laymans terms, i ask the same question (but this time a different way)

    *what was the jpr allocation of the water filtration money?

    *What is it supposed to be used for?

    *was fort indy park part of this allocation process?

    then the arguement(s) should flow from these questions:

    my own view; firstly, the fact that jpr only received 2% of the allocation is inexcusible. secondly, i love jpr for so many reasons; the jogging, the view, the semantics, etc. if there are allocations for jpr and different sides (4) of the fences all need help in their areas then the money should be divided by 4.

    While a parks eschow account is not best, a solution should be created for putting the money in their to ensure safekeeping. So with available monies and available grounding to be fixed now;

    Yes, 25% of the monies should go to the fixing of ft indy park. a park i also love almost as much as jpr. while i live on mosholu and do not enjoy it as much as you guys do im sure, i enjoy running through it 3times a week, and yes, in short, it needs help, now!

    i would truly hope one day we can achieve the regoins of a open space water plane-that i enjoyed so much hanging out in 30 years ago

  29. karen

    Be sure to check out the newer link on FIPNA: http://www.fipna.org/2009/01/11/jerome-park-conservancy-jpc-for-the-jerome-park-reservoir/

    And most of the schematics (not including the existing condition maps) are located here on WATERBLOGGED: http://www.waterblogged.org/schematic-8-9-the-southside-along-reservoir-avenue/

  30. WaterBlogged.org » From Other Blogs: Jerome Park Pathway Discussion

    […] In addition to reading our blog with photo’s and attachments, you will find a very interesting dialogue on FIPNA at: http://www.fipna.org/2009/01/10/park-improvements-at-fort-independence-park-and-around-the-reservoir… […]

  31. Anne Marie

    I’d like to thank Jeff Klein for allocating these funds to the Jerome Park community, and I hope he can help us get the reservoir opened up to the public again.

    Riverdale Press
    January 15, 2009

    Jerome Park redux
    Nick Judd

    State Sen. Jeff Klein may revisit the fight over Jerome Park Reservoir.

    Local advocates are engaged in a vigorous debate over what to do now that the city Department of Parks and Recreation has announced it’s ready to go forward with a plan to clean up the park.

    Longtime Fort Independence Park leader Karen Argenti and fellow Fort Independence Park Neighborhood Association leader Phil McDonnell want to take Parks’ proposed $4.5-million plan for a public pathway around the Jerome Park Reservoir before inflation lowers the allocation’s worth.

    But Anne Marie Garti of Jerome Park Conservancy wants to keep pushing for more money. She says the allocation was supposed to pay for a pathway around the entire reservoir, but Parks officials say they can only realistically work on the northern and western edges. The proposed plan also puts the pathway outside the reservoir fence, another thing Ms. Garti doesn’t like.

    When Mr. Klein held the Assembly seat Naomi Rivera now sits in, he was the chief procurer of that $4.5 million for the reservoir.

    “I mean first of all the Jerome Park Reservoir is a beautiful park, and it should be used by the community just the same way Central Park is used as a running track,” Mr. Klein said when asked to weigh in on the issue.

    He said he would review the memorandum of understanding that outlines what the money should be used for, and may reach out to DEP.

    http://www.riverdalepress.com/printfull.php?sid=7271&current_edition=2009-01-15

  32. anthony

    i was at the FMC yesterday and in my opinion many crazy (some wonderful) happened:

    1- Karen & Lynn-DEP Parking Lot.you guys were scheduled to make a report-and neither of you were there. there was no explanation nor no substitute. i hope everything is ok.

    2- JPR was not even on their agenda. anne marie requested, and was appoved, to have a discussion about it.

    3- One of THE DEP reps, “Mark” (a board member) was , in short, abomable!. we are residents here-some of us long term-but mark wants us to stay in our homes and be quiet as our discussions or particapation in these meetings disrupts the progress they are making ( I told Lyn Pyle who was at the meeting “At least you cant blame him for being honest about his stupidity”

    4-In regards to Jobs and Commerce-the total effect is around 33% (in my view a lousy job)

    5- There was representation from High School of Science & Lehman College. It was expressed that Lehman wants to help with the inclusion of the pathway and Science is concerned about both the current construction and future beautification

    6- According to the construction report, it sounds like the beginning of the worst is starting in 3-5 weeks.

    and other things

    but i will say this in short, especially because of the posting above. it really might be best to discuss this issue with assemblyman klein and to wait to see if it is possible to have inclusion into the resevior. This way we might have a “people plan” with “political power”. as you might know, Senator Klein now is also 2nd in command of The Senate.

    Fort Indepence Park needs priority attention. but so do all the surrounding residents! As a member of CB8 said a few times, it is 2.5 miles!

  33. karen

    Anthony, Sorry we missed the meeting, but it did not seem to be anything on the agenda. Certainly if we knew we were on the agenda, we would have attended. I received a notice, but no agenda, so it would be impossible to know — and I can not believe I am going to say this — it would be impossible to know what the DEP is thinking. LOL

  34. Phil

    Anthony, why are you surprised by this “3- One of THE DEP reps, “Mark” (a board member) was , in short, abomable!. we are residents here-some of us long term-but mark wants us to stay in our homes and be quiet as our discussions or particapation in these meetings disrupts the progress they are making.”?

    This is the way the DEP representatives have treated us always. There is nothing new here. I have not attended many of the FMC meetings but the ones I have attended where the DEP was there, we were not allowed to speak to them. It was like we were in class and had to raise our hand to speak but the teacher never called on us.

  35. FORMER FIPNA PRESIDENT

    ********************************
    I READ THE NUMEROUS,COMMENTS ON THIS ISSUE WITH IMPROVEMENTS FOR JEROME PARK…….AS YOU KNOW, TINA ARGENTI AND I FOUGHT LONG AND HARD FOR MANY YEARS TO GET IMPROVEMENTS IN JEROME PARK [PIGEONPARK] AND AROUND THE RESERVOIR…..EVERYONE SHOULD JUST STEP BACK AND TAKE A BREATH….. FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS WE FOUGHT WITH THE DEP TO STOP TRYING TO DESTROY OUR COMMUNITY…DEP HAS ONE THOUGHT IN MIND AND THAT IS TO DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE DEP AND SCREW THE COMMUNITY.THAT HAS BEEN THEIR MANTRA FOR YEARS…..YOU’VE BEEN THERE..YOU FOUGHT MANY OF THE FIGHTS WITH US…DID WE NOT HAVE ‘HANDS AROUND THE RESERVOIR’??? IF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IS WILLING TO PROVIDE THE COMMUNITY WITH A JOGGING PATH AROUND THE RESERVOIR AND HAS THE MONEY.,GO FOR IT…I DO NOT TRUST THE DEP AS FAR AS I CAN SPIT……OUR ULTIMATE GOAL YEARS AGO WAS ALWAYS TO GET THAT PATHWAY AROUND THE RESERVOIR FIXED AND MAINTAINED SO THAT THE COMMUNITY COULD UTILIZE IT. THE DEP NEVER DID ONE THING THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO OR EVER DID MANY OF THE THINGS THEY WERE MANDATED TO DO…..IF THERE IS A CHOICE ON WHO DOES THE PROJECT AND WHO WILL FOLLOW THROUGH…GO WITH PARKS …THEY ALWAYS DID WHAT WAS BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY, WHEN THEY WERE FORCED TO SEE THE LIGHT ….DEP STINKS AS FAR AS I’M CONCERNED AND IF IT WAS PUT TO A VOTE BY FORMER FIPNA BOARD MEMBERS.IT WOULD BE PARKS DEPARTMENT HANDS DOWN…..YOU NEED 2 DOG RUNS????? PEOPLE JOG, KIDS RIDE BIKES, PEOPLE ROLLERBLADE YOU NEED A VIABLE USABLE MAINTAINED PATHWAY AND IF PARKS WILL DO IT….AND THEY HAVE THE MONEY ..I SAY GO FOR IT.. GET IT IN WRITING AND STOP ALL THE BS ALREADY…..THIS IS WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTED FOR YEARS…..AND THE OLD ADAGE REALLY DOES WORK HERE.. ” A BIRD IN THE HAND, IS WORTH TWO IN THE BUSH”…

  36. anthony

    Phil

    I , like yourself, have been fighting with The DEP (in Norwood) since the transfer in 2002. While i have seen the DEP as non responsive before, this is the 1st time I saw high disregard for community respect. Even The Chairman had to remind DEP, “we must listen to all concerns, even if we do not like them”.

    I thik the next and last step should be to get now Senator Klein activly involved . Also, i think it is time to highly publish this sad controversy (like The riverdale Press). In a few days, i will be picking up information (mostly from this blog) to do a story on the Bronx news newspaper. if anyone has any thoughts, please feel free to contact me. If anyone needs any help during the wonderful season we call Income Tax season, just go to the website linked here

    Do you have a Financial Dream:
    [EDITOR’S NOTE: No direct advertising allowed in comments, please see our posting rules]

Leave a Reply