PlaNYC sounds wonderful and it seems that we are making real progress in improving land, water, transportation, energy and air. While it is nice that we set goals for where we want to be, it is even nicer that PlaNYC is acting to work towards achieving these goals. The updates from 2011 and 2012 showed some progress here in New York City, a sign that PlaNYC has been effective. Hopefully, other cities all across the globe will marvel at our success and rush to emulate PlaNYC.
I am a bit skeptical about all the success that has been attributed to PlaNYC. The 2011 and 2012 updates noted that 250,000 more residents are within a 10-minute walk of a park. First of all, I am sure there are ways to make these numbers appear more impressive than they actually are. My big question is what exactly is a park? Does it have to be a green area? Does a swing set and a bench constitute as a park? I would define a park as a place where someone can go for recreation and be able to appreciate nature. There should be green at a park and schoolyards should not count. Ideally, a park should be able to accommodate several recreational activities from nature walks to baseball games. Many of the parks that have been built for PlaNYC could be tiny, almost useless parks. Therefore, I am not completely sold on the progress PlaNYC has made.
One of the best park models I have seen is the plan to build a park at the former site of the Fresh Kills Landfill. While I do not support the creation of this park, I can only admire the park design. It will accommodate dozens of activities. It is set to be five parks in one, all comprising the Fresh Kills Park. The Confluence will contain a bunch of athletic fields and host waterfront activities. The North Park will contain natural settings for beauty, walking, running, biking, and picnicking. The South Park will contain soccer fields and mountain bike paths. The East Park will contain a scenic route and areas for Frisbee, golf, sports fields, and other recreation activities. Now THIS is a park! If only all parks could model this one. Unfortunately, this is completely unrealistic, especially in crammed cities like NYC where land is at a premium. It is only possible on Staten Island because it is being built over a horrific landfill.
I have a lot of mixed feelings about the creation of this park. Many toxins and known carcinogens have been detected in significant amounts at the landfill and in nearby residential areas. I have noticed high rates of lung cancer on Staten Island, maybe partially due to this. That is why I am skeptical about building a park where all these toxins are. I understand that the landfill is buried deep and will remain closed forever. I also understand that the air and ground will be monitored for toxins to ensure safety. However, I cannot get it through my head to accept it and watch future generations taking their children to the park at the former site of the landfill without even knowing it existed. But I do love the idea of taking advantage of the now unused land by building a park there. It seems like it will be an amazing park that I would love to go to. It will help Americans get outdoors more and enjoy nature. Hopefully it will be a step in stopping future kids from being hooked on electronics and staying indoors all day. Hopefully when it is all said and done, I will develop a clearer attitude towards this park and the former landfill.
