CB8 Steps in to Dog-Run Debate
Parks Department agrees to reconsider use of sand-like surface
By Shayndi Raice
Posted by Our Town on July 29, 2009 · View Comments
New Yorkers love their dogs. Perhaps a little too much. A vicious and vocal battle has erupted between Upper East Side dog owners over the safety and quality of the run at East 63rd Street, on the far side of the FDR Drive. Residents involved in the fight have accused each other of lying, falsifying petitions and sabotaging the park.
“I have never seen such a rude and abusive group of people, to each other and to us,” said Barbara Rudder, a Community Board 8 member, during a July 21 meeting that was meant to facilitate dialogue between dog-run users and the Department of Parks and Recreation. Rudder expressed frustration with the ongoing battle between dog-run users over the surface of run, with some arguing to raze it in favor of a hex tile surface and others praising the sand-like surface. “I would vote for turning it in,” she said, in support of closing the park altogether.
Some users like the run’s soft surface, while others complain about health and hygiene issues. Photo by Andrew Schwartz
Although the Parks Department decided last month that it would not change the sandy surface of the run after a pro-surface petition presented 350 signatures, overwhelming and vocal complaints from some dog-park users have forced the city to reconsider.
“Parks listened to the dog owners at last night’s meeting, including those who liked the new surface as well as those who would like to see it changed,” said Cristina DeLuca, a spokesperson for the Parks Department. “We are currently evaluating the information gathered from the meeting and will look into whether certain improvements can be made to the dog run.”
Some dog owners are complaining that their animals are vomiting and getting conjunctivitis and diarrhea from ingesting the sandy surface, which they claim is filled with feces and urine due to improper drainage. They are also complaining that the particles are overwhelmingly annoying, as dogs and owners track back significant amounts of sand to their apartments upon returning from the park. Others, however, say the soft surface is easy on dogs’ paws and they see no reason why the city should spend money in changing the surface.
The anti-surface group claims that the pro-surface users primarily use the small run, which only allows in dogs weighing less than 25 pounds. They say they are only pushing to change the surface of the big run, since the larger dogs are the ones who seem to get dirtier and suffer health effects from the surface. Pro-surface users, however, argue that the majority of users in both runs like the surface as it is. Both sides have accused each other of making up signatures or getting signatures from people outside of New York City.
While the Parks Department said it is considering changes to the run, representatives at the July 21 meeting said the problems likely stem from insufficient maintenance. The Parks Department says that the surface used at East 63rd Street is the same material used in other runs in the city, including the Tompkins Square run, where similar problems have not been reported. Most dog runs in the city have a group that invests volunteer time in cleaning the run. The East 63rd Street dog park has no group in charge of the run, in part because of the contentious battle that has been going on since the installation of the run in September.
“There has not been a dog run in the city, until now, that does not maintain itself,” said a Parks Department representative at the meeting.
Currently, the board is not planning to vote on the issue.
“There has not been a dog run in the city, until now, that does not maintain itself,” said a Parks Department representative at the meeting.
We HAD a dog run that required NO maintenance other than emptying of garbage cans. The Parks Department (Adrian Benepe) along with the City Council (Jessica Lappin) decided to close that maintenance-free dog run and chose to spend $300,000 of tax-payer dollars on a high maintenance dog run.
Why? We ask and ask and ask yet not a single politician is willing to answer that question.
The Manhattan Community Board 8 197-a Plan for the Queensboro Bridge Area was approved by the City Planning Commission and adopted by the City Council in the summer of 2006. In this plan, the maintenance-free dog run was to remain in Pavilion Park where it had been for years. Who on earth decided to foist this maintenance nightmare upon our community?????
Miss McLaughlin,
At the prior CB meeting you and one of your pro-paving friends caused such a raucous with you cursing at people and CB members, slapping, hitting that you both had to be asked to leave. This article refers to the last meeting that I attended but apparently you did not (at least to my knowledge).
You keep wanting to rehash the past. Parks has clear plans for the Pavilion and dog owners were then provided with a dedicated state of the art urban dog run. There are literally hundreds more dog owners using the new run than the make shift Pavilion.
Get over it. It’s done.
This is confusing. The headline says one thing but the quote from Parks seems to indicate that Parks will look at some modifications (not paving) for the run. Perhaps they will correct drainage issues or provide permanent shading, but no one heard anything about changing the surface to hex stones.
At the meeting, when explicitly asked to provide proof from veterinarians about alleged health issues caused by the soft surface, no one could or would produce any. In fact, a CB member was heard to say “of course they haven’t and can’t.”
I think the comment about dog owners selfishness was directed at those few who demand the run be paved over. Here you bitch about spending money to build the run but you turn around and demand that tens of thousands more be spent to pave it over. You can’t have it both ways.
The Parks rep is quoted here talking about volunteer groups and their importance. It’s about time that all dog owners come together to help maintain the run in the spirit of community.
While I am at it, who put that doggie wading pool outside the run on the esplanade? That is an inappropriate place for it. It belongs inside the run.
The Park Dept wants us to “do maintenance” on a surface we never requested. Maintenance entails irrigating and raking the gravel/sand surface. The Park Dept is unable to tell us how this can be done between the months of October through May when the water is turned off. The Park Dept tells us that lack of maintenance is the reason the park is flooding frequently. We never had floods in the Pavilion, when the surface was hex tiles. The esplanade is not flooded after the rain, same as the street is not currently flooded after two hours of rain. Within hours after a 5 hour maintenance session is performed by half a dozen hard working civilians/volunteers on weekends, the surface is moved around again by dogs at play. Maintenance also does not prevent dogs from swallowing the gravel, no matter how neatly raked it is.
I can’t wait for it to be repaved. I just got back from the dogpark and spent 30 minutes cleaning my hall and my apartment floor from all of the dirt. Then I wrang my mop out in the kitchen sink and when I went to clean out the dirt, it actually scratched the stainless steel sink and I have scratch marks all over it (I guess thats what decomposed granite does to steel!). My dogs are usually clean but when they go to the dogpark they get so dirty and every time a dog from the run jumps on me I get dirt all over my clothes.
I just washed my shoes and realized the surface of the dog run made holes in the bottom of my shoes with rocks permanently embedded in them. I have ruined about 10 pairs of new shoes on the dogrun so they had to be thrown away. Not to mention breathing in all of the dust. I feel like I am in Grapes of Wrath in the dust bowl and I cough after I breathe it in.
I don’t understand why anyone would want this surface. It’s filthy and unsafe. I had to take my dog to Animal Medical after her eye was bright red and mostly closed from getting the decomposed granite in her eyes. The tiles at Carl Shurz park are so much better than the 60th St dog run. I don’t understand how anyone would like this unsafe, unsanitary and dirty surface. I don’t think it has to do with maintenance, it has to do with the fact that we should not have our dogs rolling around in decomposed granite, getting the granite in their eyes, inhaling the granite dust and trecking it into our halls and apartments. Get rid of the granite, please!!
For over a decade, there was a maintenance free dog run at Pavilion Park. People and dogs stayed clean, happy and HEALTHY! My dog never once got ill during the 4 years I took her to the run that had hex tile! Now we can’t use the run at E. 63rd Street because of the surface. Not only is my dog allergic to the unsanitary, muddy mess I am too! I cough, I scratch I sneeze, it’s HORRIBLE. The old run was always crowded with a wonderful group of people. The attendance in the new run has drastically diminished. Why? Because of the inhospitable SURFACE! Pave the park with hex tile!
Mr. Berns. the attendance at the new dog runs is exponentially higher than at the pavilion. Dog owners are using it throughout the day and evening in much higher numbers than before.
Why is it that spoiled Upper East Siders (I confess to being one) are the only dog owners claiming that their dogs are getting ill from what your side calls ’sand’? It is not only improbable but it is a lie.
Now dogs could be getting sick because there are more dogs present. Like schools where children spread common illnesses, this is more probable than inert materials causing illness.
Jane, you seem to think that Parks said they would pave over the run. Were you at the CB meeting. No one said that Parks would even consider paving over the run. Modifications maybe, but a wholesale change is improbable. Also, Carl Schurz is changing its dog run to the same surface as the Esplanade.
Monica, Mara, Charlie- stop living in the past. It is over. Accept it and move on.
I ONLY HAVE BEEN TO ONE MEETING ON JULY 21,2009, AND WAS PLEASANTLY SURPRISED THAT THE ATMOSPHERE WAS QUITE CIVIL CONSIDERING THE DIFFERENCES OF OPINIONS EXPRESSED. I made a comment that both the community board AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BOTH VISIT THE RUNS AND TAKE DOGS WITH THEM,, GATHER SAMPLES AND MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THEIR ANALYSIS. At the conclusion a member of community board 8, TOOK THE MICROPHONE AND ADDRESSED BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED IN A MOST GRACIOUS MANNER. Then 2 other members spoke out, without facing the audience and expressed ahger at what they perceive to be ENTITLEMENT on the part of those objecting to the surface. THEY APPEARED TO BE NON OBJECTIVE AND BIASED, PROBABLY DUE TO THE FIGHTING AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING. I tried to reason with them as we left, they both turned on me ACCUSING ME OF BEING ABUSIVE AND THREATENING TO CLOSE THE RUN. If this is the way the board is going to evaluate the issues, then I fear for a rational decision/ compromise on the future of the run. As I ststed earlier, this meeting was CIVIL and thepast unpleasantness should NOT enter into any decisions. PS WE WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE DISPUTE LOVE OUR DOGS SO WHY IS THER SO MUCH RANCOR?
James, you stop living in denial. Just because you are not hearing from people at Thompkins or Washington Square Park, does not mean that their dog runs are issue free. The difference is that we will not allow the Park dept to make bad decisions and get away with them. Also, if you visit Thompkins, you will see that their surface differs from ours, as it is more compact. Theirs is also a real park, with trees and shade, something we have been denied despite repeated requests that Park allow us to pay to build adequate shade for us and for our dogs. There are severe drainage and dust issues in our dog run which the park dept has been unable to mitigate or tell us how to alleviate. Our dogs are getting sick and there is no denying that. There were several errors made in the installation of this surface and the dog run had be closed down while the park dept rushed in to replace the wrong gravel they had put in. What makes you think they did not err the second time around? This is an experimental surface and this experiment has failed.
Mara, I cannot speak about those other dog runs. All I know is what the Parks rep said at the meeting, “The Parks Department says that the surface used at East 63rd Street is the same material used in other runs in the city, including the Tompkins Square run, where similar problems have not been reported.” Assuming that is accurate, then any problem is not with the surface material.
Perhaps the installation was improperly done. That could be corrected. Anyone reading newspapers would know that this too often happens with construction projects. You say it is too soft. I am no engineer, but perhaps they put down too much material or it is not compacted enough. Whatever any so-called problems are, they can be resolved. Parks can rectify any problems by reinstalling the surface properly. They never said anything about paving it.
Calling the surface material ‘experimental’ is incorrect. No one from Parks ever called it that. If it has been used in other dog runs in and out of the city, it is not experimental. And I, and others, absolutely do question your claim that the surface material is unsafe. Produce the proof and not just hearsay. Get statements from veterinarians who have visited the run and have them produce the scientific proof that it is unsafe. As the CB member said, you have not produced the proof and can’t. You and those who want the run covered in concrete -that’s what pavers are made of- are crying wolf.
Miss Lewin is right about the CB meeting being mostly civil. It was, but she fails to mention that because of Miss McLaughlin’s and one of her supporters named Andrea outrageously poor behavior at the prior CB meeting, two police officers had to be stationed at the most recent meeting. You may be advocating for your dogs but in the process your group has caused problems for all dogs and owners in the community.
Again, from the CB meeting and this article, it is clear that Parks has no intention to pave over the dog park.
The day before this article came out, I prepared the following letter to the “Powers That Be”, e.g. Parks Commissioner Castro, CB8 District Manager Thompson and Co-Chairs Schneider, Simon, Mayer and Price, Assemblyman Kellner, City Council Member Lappin and City Comptroller Thompson. I sent it to them today so I’m posting this for all to read and to open a dialogue with Upper East Siders…
********************************************************************************
SUBJECT: Providing CHOICE for Community Board 8 Dog Run Users
Dear ___________:
I write to you in order to present a fair and simple solution to the controversy surrounding the BigDogRun at the East 63rd Street Esplanade which fits easily into the Parks Department plan to ultimately green the East River Esplanade running from East 60th Street to Carl Schurz Park.
By way of introduction, I own three dogs – two 14+ seniors and a toddler. When my elderly dogs were young we were regular users of the Pavilion dog run at Heliport Park at East 60th Street. Subsequently we became regulars in Central Park in order to take advantage of the morning off-leash hours. However, we kept our options open and used the Pavilion in the afternoons and evenings. When we heard that there would be a new dog run at East 63rd Street, we were pleased because we would now have an easier-to-reach option for our aging dogs and selves. However, once we began to use the dog run, we were disappointed by the many problems the crushed stone surface presented to us, specifically:
• My companion, who uses a cane, cannot walk onto the run in order to retrieve the dogs or to sit on the benches while they play.
• The dust blown around by the wind and the active large dogs congests my lungs, nose and eyes so after several attempts to use the run, each resulting in an allergy attack, I have stopped going.
• The first time my young dog went to the run he contracted conjunctivitis.
• On subsequent visits (I’m not one to give up easily), my dogs brought sticky “dirt” back to my apartment and into my bed because the dust/mud simply doesn’t come off by itself on the walk home.
So you see, I am multiply vested in the outcome of the current dispute about the surface in the BigDogRun at the Esplanade.
As a result of my concerns, I participated in the initial fundraising event for both the large and small runs at the Esplanade on April 26th of this year (FUNd @ the RUN) by selling raffle tickets and manning the tables the day of the event in order to raise money for:
• shade umbrellas, since the design of the dog run failed to include a permanent structure for shade (a situation which we are told is being corrected by the Parks Department)
• rakes, shovels, hoses, sheds, and other tools required for dog run users’ cleaning and maintenance of the dusty and/or muddy crushed stone surface, and
• doggie pools.
But it appears that our money has been wasted on the above items due to: 1) the latent defects in the composition and installation of the crushed stone surface in the BigDogRun, which are so numerous that they must be mentioned on the attached sheet; and 2) poor design planning by the Parks Department in failing to provide permanent shade and in locating the runs directly adjacent to the FDR.
These issues have caused serious contention between BigDogRun and small dog run users because the small dog run users are satisfied with their surface while the BigDogRun users are distraught over the serious health, sanitation and maintenance issues the crushed stone has precipitated. The difference in opinions is related to the fact that the BigDogRun requires more maintenance than the small run because: 1) large dogs kick up and dig up much more sand than do small dogs and 2) there are drainage issues concerning the concrete area near the water source in the large run. Additionally, the stirred-up dirt causes the health and sanitation problems enumerated on the attached sheet.
BigDogRun users have approached the Parks Department and Community Board 8 in an attempt to have the surface of the BigDogRun changed to hex tile, which has been proven to be easier to maintain, healthier, safer and cleaner than the crushed stone. This proof lies simply in the facts that the former dog run, which existed at the Pavilion in Heliport Park for many years, consisted of hex tile and Pavilion users never experienced the maintenance and health problems they are encountering at the new BigDogRun.
Petitions for and against changing the BigDogRun surface have been submitted. But it is irrelevant which side has the greater number of signatures on its petitions or how many signatures are truly or falsely represented, for their numbers are most likely to cancel out each other. Competing opinions from veterinarians will also be mutually cancelling. Chemical analysis of the crushed stone, which was suggested be undertaken by the Parks Department by one member of CB8 at its July 21, 2009 197-A meeting, will be challenged, and its findings rejected, by the side it disfavors.
Additionally, in an attempt to prevent the users of the large dog run at Carl Schurz Park from suffering the same problems they were encountering with the crushed stone surface at the Esplanade, many BigDogRun users attended the Community Board 8 meetings related to changing the surface of the two dog runs at Carl Schurz Park. However, while heeding our advice about not cutting down the size of their large dog run, the Carl Schurz people ultimately decided to use crushed stone in their large dog run and hex tile in their small dog run.
In light of this decision, I came up with the following fair and simple solution to all dog run users at the soon-to-be greened Esplanade: CHOICE.
The Parks Department and Community Board 8 can take recourse in the democratic method of dispute resolution by taking advantage of offering choice. This will give equal recognition to both sides of the controversy. Instead of trying to hand down a single monolithic solution, Parks and the Board can use the fact that there are 4 dog runs in contention: 2 large and 2 small at each end of the Esplanade. At both Carl Schurz Park and East 63rd Street, one run of each size can be surfaced in hex tile and the other can be surfaced in crushed stone (see attached Collaborative Solution Sheet), resulting in the following:
• All dog owners would then have a choice of surface.
• By purchasing hex tile for two locations, cost savings from volume purchases can be expected.
• Parks and the Board can be praised for their wisdom and escape accusations of favoritism or insensitivity to community needs.
Please reflect on the issue of CHOICE. We look forward to your response.
Attachment 1:
THE BIGDOGRUN AT THE ESPLANADE
HAS TWO SETS OF PROBLEMS:
CONSTRUCTION AND LOCATION.
CONSTRUCTION
The construction material consisting of crushed stone has created the following problems:
• Drainage and Maintenance Issues:
- Widespread mud
- Displaced sand
- Geo-Membrane and substructure defects
• Dust-Related Human Illness:
- Respiratory/asthma problems (lung and nose)
- Eye irritation
• Surface-Related Canine Illness:
- Vomiting from ingesting sand when ball playing
- Conjunctivitis from sand/dust
- Diarrhea from bacteria/virus in fecal matter remaining in surface
• Sanitation Issues: The surface creates a disproportionate amount of “sticky” dust which clings to clothes, people and dogs and is consequently brought into apartments. This dust must be cleaned off dogs’ paws and bodies because it doesn’t come off by itself on the way home from the run.
Faulty design planning has created the following problems:
• No Disabled Access
• No Sun Protection:
- The trees are currently ineffective because they will take too long to
grow to effective height.
- The umbrellas are proving to be ineffective as well because the sun crosses the run during the entire day.
- We need a more permanent structure.
LOCATION
The location problems with the BigDogRun are as follows:
• Carbon Monoxide/Harmful Fumes: Unlike the Pavilion, the BigDogRun is directly adjacent to the FDR so dogs and people are constantly exposed to car fumes.
• Significant loss of green space near a planned high-use area.
The following problems must be considered during Phase 2 discussions because they present potentially dangerous conditions to the community-at-large:
• Adjacent to a narrow area with plans for high foot, bicycle and equipment traffic:
- Foot traffic to dog runs, planned restaurant, planned Pavilion Park
- Bicycle traffic along Esplanade and down the adjacent hill
- Vehicle traffic for Parks maintenance activities
Attachment 2:
COLLABORATIVE SOLUTION
TO THE GREENING OF THE DOG RUNS
ON THE EAST RIVER ESPLANADE
The Esplanade in Manhattan Community Board 8 (CB8) is anchored at both ends by parks, with Carl Schurz Park (CSP) to the north and the East River Esplanade (ERE) Park to the south. Fortunately for Upper East Side (UES) dog-owning residents, each park contains two dog runs—one for use by small dogs and another for use by big dogs.
CSP renovation plans call for having their small dog run resurfaced with hex tile. The ERE small dog run consists of crushed stone, with which the users are very happy.
CSP renovation plans call for having their big dog run resurfaced with crushed stone. The ERE BigDogRun consists of crushed stone, with which the users are very unhappy because the surface is causing health, sanitation and maintenance issues. Rather than throwing good money after bad in an attempt to make what could be expensive repairs, why not change the ERE BigDogRun’s surface from crushed stone to hex tile, since it proved to be low maintenance and clean when the dog runs were at the Pavilion at Heliport Park?
In this way, equal options will be provided for both large and small dog run users in the UES. CB8 dog runs will consist of:
One large run with crushed stone and one with paver hex tiles.
One small run with crushed stone and one with paver hex tiles.
PEOPLE WILL USE THE NEWLY GREENED ESPLANADE MORE OFTEN WHILE GOING TO
WHICHEVER RUN THEY PREFER.
EVERYONE IS SATISFIED.
Andrea
Nice try. At least you admit that opinions doctors and scientists would not be respected. That means only a concrete covered dog run would shut up the complainers.
First, please also introduce yourself as the owner of the dog walking company that heavily uses the dog runs.
Second, Parks is not going to spend tens of thousands to pave the runs at either park in concrete. Nowhere else in NYC does there appear to be any concrete covered dog parks; at least from what I could tell through web searches.
Third, those who are pleased with the current run clearly stated at the CB meetings that they are not just small dog run users. They own both large and small dogs, so please stop trying to marginalize them. Facts are stubborn things.
I drive pass the dog run on West 23 Street and the Hudson. It is right against the highway but dogs and owners are happily using the dog run. So your claim that the esplanade dog run was placed in the wrong spot is a reach at best. And paving the dog run would not solve your phony claim of a “significant loss of green space.”
Finally, while you yourself clearly state that veterinarians and scientists would not be respected, you -a dog walker- present yourself as an expert with these outrageous claims:
“• Drainage and Maintenance Issues:
- Widespread mud
- Displaced sand
- Geo-Membrane and substructure defects
• Dust-Related Human Illness:
- Respiratory/asthma problems (lung and nose)
- Eye irritation
• Surface-Related Canine Illness:
- Vomiting from ingesting sand when ball playing
- Conjunctivitis from sand/dust
- Diarrhea from bacteria/virus in fecal matter remaining in surface
• Sanitation Issues: The surface creates a disproportionate amount of “sticky” dust which clings to clothes, people and dogs and is consequently brought into apartments. This dust must be cleaned off dogs’ paws and bodies because it doesn’t come off by itself on the way home from the run.”
Sidewalk superintendents have always existed around construction projects, but now we have Sidewalk Scientists.
Make it easy…Give us back the old run that we all loved. It’s cement, has shade, great seating, great drainage,running water and is low maintanence. Everyone was always happy and healthy there. As a matter of fact instead of giving us 1/2 back as before ehy not let us use the entire space. You will never hear anyone complain. It has all that we need and is away from the FDR which is noisey and dirty with fumes from cars. That run has been closed for a year and nothing has been done to it. We could have been using it for the last 2 summers happily. We have 2 German Shorthaired pointers. We have always had 2 and we have been going to the run for over 13 years. We miss it so much! Our dogs need to run and catch balls. Balls do not bounce well or go far in the sandy granite. They run faster on the cement. All in all it is so much better for dogs that like to run,no matter what size they are..We have been to many runs in the city and the only one that kind of works is the 51st St run on the river in Beekman Place and that is because the center area is cement and the sides have trees and dirt. Still not as good as our old run. Been to the Park in Union Square 14th ST as well as the Carl Schultz run and hate them. They both have big stones or dirty sand. My dogs hate the Carl Schultz run. PLEASE give us back the old run. All you need to do is reapair some of the fencing on the river side so balls can’t go into the water and put a few more seats back that they took out at the end right before they closed it. This is so easy. It is a no brainer! The keep up cost is almsot nothing. Remember the old saying ” If it ain’t broken don’t fix it.”
Hi all,
We were in attendance at the meeting on July 21, and witnessed this dog run is fine vs., the dog run needs to be fixed. I am not a proponent of hex tile, or any other “hard” surface in the dog run, but I do know there is something quite wrong with the current surface.
You might call me naive, but per the Parks Department, they feel this is an issue of maintenance, and after reading the blog, many seem to want a maintenance free dog run and even re-opening of the upper area. As dog owners, I don’t have to tell you that having a dog is hard work and is definitely somewhat of a lifestyle change for many.
Since the meeting, many people, including my wife and myself have stepped up our efforts and began to rake the run and spray it down with water, clean the pools, etc. We will continue our maintenance efforts while the Parks Department compares the E63rd River Run against Tompkins Square run. Of course I want this to be the best dog run possible for our dogs, and if this means bringing in a new surface, I am all for it as long is it is not a hard surface. We all appreciate the limited supply of green space in this city, why would we willing remove what precious space we have. I am saddened to hear that people would put the health of anyone’s pet at risk. My own dog ingests the crushed stone and has diarrhea pretty much every time we go to the run. Does he absolutely love playing there? Yes! Why else would I rake the surface with a broken foot in a walking boot if my dog didn’t love playing with your dogs?
I do believe that there is something wrong with the surface. Today, I noticed my dog has an eye infection. We will be going to the vet on Friday. James, these health issues are a real concern for many people and their dogs. The fact that the run is near the FDR, does pose a serious health risk. “Outdoor air pollution is the result of automobile and industrial emissions. The major culprits are ozone, fine particulate matter, and carbon monoxide. Epidemiologic studies have linked these pollutants to increased exacerbations of heart and lung disease, emergency hospital admissions, and deaths”, says Dr. Joseph Cooke, a pulmonary specialist and Associate Professor of Clinical Medicine and Public Health at New York Presbyterian- Weill Cornell Medical College.
I have not been to Tompkins Square, but to plan on visiting it soon for my own comparison of the two runs. Andrea, permanent shade structures are unsightly in a green area; give the trees time to do their job. Yes, it’s awful now, but in three years you’ll be very happy sitting under a tree in the shade, than a permanent structure under pigeons.
Remember, this dog run is for the dogs. We need to make it the best it can be for them! The fact is that many people and dogs are getting ill, and it is a directly correlated to the dog run. If there is a way to alleviate the dog run issues by performing more maintenance, we, the dog owners need to do it. If it is a problem with the material, then that issue will be resolved, but in the intermediate time, we need to do our part.
The argument is much stronger that it is a surface issue with the crushed stone if we work the surface and show CB8, & The Parks Department that we are maintaining the run ourselves, yet we are having the same issues. From my understanding at the outcome of the board meeting, and from talking to two board members afterwards, we can’t do nothing and expect a new surface.
We need to become more organized in our maintenance and have a plan of attack on our maintenance. We can’t just be digging trenches and doing work at random. That only makes the work harder for each of us separately.
Cheers,
Brian
I agree with everything Andrea said. My dogs have suffered health issues and so have I. Aside from the decomposed granite being unsafe and unsanitary (it put my dog in the emergency room!), I think the design of the dog park was not very good. It was really good looking when they were building it, but the architect did not think about the boiling direct sunlight beating down on people and dogs. So there was no shade built in. Now that we have umbrellas, they are far away from the benches. So you cannot sit without getting majorly sunburned. The decomposed granite is either a big cloud of dust, that makes me and my dog cough, or it is a muddy mess, where dogs get gross stuff all over them. It would be much better paved or with tiles. Also, there are rats that live in the bushes that come out in the evening to eat the garbage. It’s a pretty shape, but the problems with the granite and the shade were not thought out by the planners in advance. If the run were paved or replaced with tiles, we would save the taxpayers a great deal of money, because we would not have to pay to replenish the decomposed granite that makes the dogs, people and shoes dirty and sick.
Who moved the dog run????
The 197-a Plan for the Queensboro Bridge Area, approved in 2005, is part of the New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program. The 197-a plan is intended to serve as a guide for the coordinated revitalization of the area around the Queensboro Bridge. After much discussion in 2004, and before approval of the 197-a, city officials and organizations and the community determined to leave the dog run where it was in the Heliport Park. The 197-a was approved by the City Planning Commission and CB8 and the COMMUNITY in the summer of 2006 after receiving endorsements by the Manhattan Borough President, Scott M. Stringer, and Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney who went so far as to send letters of support that specifically mentioned the Heliport Park Dog run. These letters were sent to Christine Quinn, Speaker of the NYC Council and to Amanda Burden, Director of the Dept. of City Planning.
SUDDENLY on February 1, 2009, CB8, on orders from Adrian Benepe, Commissioner of the New York City Parks & Recreation Department, decided to MOVE the DOG RUN. At the same time, these same officials decided to cover the surface of the dog run with crushed stone. The move and the controversial surface material was STRONGLY opposed by dog run using community and those who did not own dogs. They were ignored by officials. (See 3/1/07 CB8 meeting minutes.)
What we now have is a 6,000 square foot sand pit on the esplanade and a locked Heliport Park. The entire community has been robbed of green space. This is an issue that affects everyone, not only dog owners. We want answers.
When was the decision to move the run made? We don’t yet know; however at a CB8 Parks Committee/197-a Queensboro Bridge Area Subcommittee
CB8 Board Members Present: Laura Mayer, Peggy Price, Judy Schneider, Helene Simon, Richard Burg, Susan Grossman, Barry Schneider
Schematic presentation for the Pavilion Park and the new East River Waterfront Park at the former Heliport Site. Schematic presented by Parks: Bob Redmond, Alex Hart and George Kroenert. The plans call for moving the dog run. The schematic refers to a “Decomposed granite surface with drainage system beneath.”The amount of money available for this phase is $950,000.
Approved 7 – 0. No objections from community members—were any present?
I implore Laura Mayer, Peggy Price, Judy Schneider, Helene Simon, Richard Burg, Susan Grossman, Barry Schneider, Bob Redmond, Alex Hart and George Kroenert and Jessica Lappin (who secured funding) to step forward and tell us what happened. If you have nothing to hide, why are you hiding?
$950,000 for a 6,0000 sqare foot dog run!!!!! You gotta be kiddding.
“I have never seen such a rude and abusive group of people, to each other and to us,” said Barbara Rudder, a Community Board 8 member, “I would vote for turning it in,” she said, in support of closing the park altogether.
Barbara Rudder should resign. She is an ineffective advocate for the community she purports to represent. Our community had a happy maintenance-free peaceful dog run. There were NO complaints about it. Yet, Barbara Rudder now seeks to blame the members of the community for a disasterous acrimonious situation that CB8 helped to create. We, the community are the victims of a self-serving poltical game that has absolutely nothing to do with dogs. Community Board 8 is a farce.
Petition History:
1. Mara submitted a petition with 175 names of big dog run users who wanted to change the dog run’s surface. Parks complained, because, although all those who signed had signed the petition in the dog run, they claimed addresses were needed to prove that those who signed were community members.
2. Lori Light submitted a single petition on June 10, 2009 for both the big run and the small run. Lori’s petition, containing 345 names and addresses is almost a duplicate of the petition she submitted to Parks a few years ago to prove that small dogs needed their own dog run. Apparently, these very same small dog owners now are really concerned with the surface of the big dog run.
In addition Lori, supplemented her fake petition with names of people who do not even own dogs. For example, a friend of Lori’s who stopped by the run while Lori was in there (with her dog) was added to her petition.
A Pomeranian Meetup Group that has met twice in the small dog run (but no longer meets there because the run is too hot) had their members sign Lori’s petition although some of them live in far flung places like Yonkers and Long Island and made only a single visit to the run!
3. Mara re-submitted her petition with 368 names and addresses of community dog owners or dog industry workers who live only in Manhattan on July 21, 2009.
4. At the Community Board 8 meeting later that day, one of the Board members crowed that now Lori has 400 names. God only knows who these new additions are–I am sure her cousin in Azerbaijan was deemed eligible to sign after he saw a picture of Lori’s dog in the run!
Mara’s Petition Cover Letter:
Dear Terese Flores:
Attached please find an updated petition (Mara’s Petition) consisting of 368 names representing signatures of community members who would like the surface of the East River Esplanade’s BIG dog run changed from sand (brownstone screenings) to safe, clean paver hex tiles.
I believe the names on this petition to represent the community because:
1. They contain signatures only of dog owners or people who work in the community in a dog-related industry; and
2. All of the signatures are of people who live in Manhattan with the far majority of the names coming from the 5 zip codes immediately surrounding the dog run (10065, 10021, 10075, 10028, 10022 and 10128).
Contrast this to Lori Light’s petition which contains many names of people who even live in as far flung places like Yonkers and Long Island. Out of 345 names on her petition, only 288 of those on her petition came from the 5 zip codes mentioned.
Mara’s Petition (353 names from the 5 zip codes)
Lori’s Petition (288 names from the 5 zip codes)
Also contrast this petition to Lori’s who went so far as to add names of non dog owners who happened to stop by the dog run to say hello to Lori (and her dog) while she was in the run.
I believe it to be obvious that this petition clearly represents the will of the majority of the community. Please listen to the people and change the surface of the BIG dog run to clean, safe paver hex tiles.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Mara Robaschek
The Large Dog Run at East 63 Street & East River is causing many health problems for people and dogs.
There is a pattern with the Parks Department. They act without consulting with the public, or ignore the suggestions of the public in matters which affect us. Despite the expectations and demands placed on us to maintain the dog run at East 63 Street, we also have no role in administrative decisions impacting us.
While the concept of private-public partnership has been good for the Park Department, it is not currently being practiced. Parks Commissioner Benepe has called this the Golden Age of Parks. Rather, it is the Murky Age of Parks.
THIS IS THE PROBLEM:
The surface, which we pleaded three years ago with the Park Department and Community Board 8, should not be brought to the new dog run. It is much more hospitable to bacteria than the surface we had for over a decade in the now closed Pavilion dog run. We requested the hex tiles which proved to be clean, safe and virtually maintenance free, and even offered to pay for it ourselves. We were ignored repeatedly. They brought us the gravel/crushed stone surface nonetheless and it proved problematic immediately. The Park Department, including Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe and Manhattan Borough Parks Commissioner William Castro, have been aware of this since late last year, yet they are ignoring us. Two weeks ago they went as far as voting to bring this filthy and dangerous surface to the Carl Schurz Dog Run in upcoming renovations, despite objections from community members.
The Park Department has also been unable, or unwilling, to tell us definitively where this surface was shipped from, and we have heard Alex Hart, the Park Dept architect say Turkey, Commissioner Benepe’s spokesperson says Plymouth, Pa and Mr. Redmond of the Parks Department, thinks, but cannot swear it’s from the Carolinas.
The dog run is not handicap accessible. Two of our friends, who used to bring their Service Dog and Seeing Eye Dogs to the dog run, can no longer do so as they cannot navigate the surface. The blind gentleman is unable to protect his face from flying crushed stones. Despite their pleas to the community Board and Park Department nothing is being done.
The dog run has had drainage problems from day one. The Parks Department is demanding the civilians to do maintenance, which involves daily hosing and raking, yet they are unable to tell us how to do that when the water is turned off in all city parks from October until May.
Our Dogs are ingesting gravel and throwing up after every visit. Many cases of conjunctivitis have been reported. People are suffering from allergies and asthma exacerbation due to the ubiquitous dust wafting in the air. Crushed stone flies into the air and hits people on their bodies and faces.
The Parks Department refused to allow us to erect adequate shade (with money we raised) in a space which is under direct sunlight from sunrise to sunset, and after several months of inaction, they put up three patio umbrellas which are supposed to shade a 5,000 Square foot dog run.
We filed a petition with the Community Board, Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe and Council Member Jessica Lappin. Dog owners who use the dog run have been pleading with the Park Department since November, 2008 to fix this for us. This has broken up the community of dog owners who used to gather daily to play with their pets and socialize with their neighbors.
We fear they will ignore us until a grave injury is suffered by a human or a dog.
Mr. Mancini,
Are you an actual user of the run? If you are, then you would know I’m a “Ms.” and not a “Mr.”
I can assure you, if you were suffering the same ailments as myself and my dog, you would be SCREAMING for change.
Who Moved the Dog Run ????
The 197-a Plan for the Queensboro Bridge Area, intended to serve as a guide for the coordinated revitalization of the area around the Queensboro Bridge approved in 2005, is part of the New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program. The 197-a was approved by the City Planning Commission and CB8 and the COMMUNITY in the summer of 2006 after receiving endorsements by the Manhattan Borough President, Scott M. Stringer, and Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney, who send letters of support that specifically mentioned the Heliport Park Dog Run to Christine Quinn, Speaker of the NYC Council and to Amanda Burden, Director of the Dept. of City Planning.
In the approved 197-a plan, the dog run was to remain where it was already located in Pavilion Park. The matter had been discussed prior to approval of the 197-a plan at a November 15, 2004 Community Board 8 197-a Queensboro Bridge Area Committee meeting. According to the minutes of that meeting “a lively discussion ensued on pros and cons of having a dog run at the waterfront. If there was to be a dog run, the planner [Buckhurst Fish & Jacquemart] thought it was better to have it in this [Pavilion] location so that the park at the waterfront level would not be overrun with dogs.”
SUDDENLY on February 1, 2009, CB8 on orders from Adrian Benepe, Commissioner of the New York City Parks & Recreation Department, a decision to MOVE the dog run was made. At the same time, a decision to cover the surface of the new dog run with crushed stone was made. The move and the controversial surface material was STRONGLY opposed by the entire community including both the dog run using community and those who did not own dogs. The community’s objections were ignored.
What we now have:
• A 6,000 square foot sand pit on the East River Esplanade;
• An empty unimproved 100% concrete Pavilion Park (which had been locked for a year)
• A dangerously crowed waterfront esplanade that is overrun with dogs, children, bicycles and pedestrians all of whom must navigate a very narrow strip of land, the only piece not taken up by the sand pit, in order to get past the dog run.
The entire community has been robbed of green space. This is an issue that affects everyone, not only dog owners. This is a travesty of justice.
$$$$$$ Show Me the MONEY $$$$$$$$
In a March 17, 1993 agreement between NYC and Rockefeller University a payment of $1.5 million was made by Rockefeller University to the East River Esplanade Maintenance Fund to be administered by the Parks Department. The yearly income generated from this payment was to be earmarked for the maintenance of the 60th St. Pavilion yet the Pavilion has never required any maintenance at all. In 26 years, there should be quite a bit of money in this fund.
$$$$$$ Where is the money? $$$$$$
Oh my goodness!
This is such a reality show, that I am now reading the NYTimes first, then zooming daily to read the local spats on OurTownNY.
You guys are better than Page Six!
Just for the record, I am NOT the “Jane” that wrote in formerly.
I am just another citizen of NY with a companion dog that I love dearly.
When the Sandpit arrived with fresh sand, it was like having a mini beach by the East River.
Basking in the sunlight and watching the boats. This was just heaven! For about a day!
Shortly thereafter, this mini paradise ultimately became a lifestyle change.
Scorching temperatures, blinding sunlight reflecting from the water, wearing baseball caps, and purchasing disposable dogpark outfits and shoes, (feeling like they should issue us Biohazard Hazmat suits, and a shower when exiting the Park).
Plus, the air quality actually is irritating.
Living in a luxury apt, I now have altered my lifestyle to accommodate the sand and dirt in my house, special dirty clothes bags (to wash separately), and special locations for the shoes. My dog has special towels to wash her down, which takes several minutes, and still I have sand trekked into the home, and the same white streaks you see on the park benches on my leather furniture.
I actually shower in the guest room, so not to mix dogpark dirt in my bedroom.
Within the first week, I rushed my dog to the local Humane Society to check the rocks floating in her eyes. There was no space for us that day and suggested the Animal Hospital…..I took her home, called a neighbor to hold her down and gave her a doggie eyewash. Not fun for anyone! (plus, I am not doing this again.) Dogs have an extra lid for rocks, but the Sandpit stones linger in the eye with sharp particles.
Don’t get me wrong, I still go to the Sandpit because I give my dog a choice between parks in the evening. Every blue moon she wants to check out the sandpit.
However now, My dog will not even pick up a tennis ball in the park as it is actually too dirty for even a dog. She no longer will jump in the pool because the water is filthy within two minutes.
She is however entertained by the RATS!
Yes, midsize rats that are zooming in on dog’s vomit!
People were screeching!
And, it was very entertaining for the dogs.
Whatever, the outcome….I still see no reason/answer why we cannot have both the Pavillion and the Sandpit. OR, expand the fence to give a bit of hextile property(?)
Otherwise, what was to be a wonderful experience for citizens and their pets, has altered our City lifestyle .
That is OK, I have a Farm and it is not much different than coming in from tending the farm animals and garden.
TO WILLIAM CASTRO, Manhattan Borough Commissioner, NYC Parks:
You admit you made a mistake regarding the surface of the dog run. Yet, you favor Ms. Light and her false petition? How very cabal of you Mr. Castro.
Follow the money trail folks.
*****
Dear Neighbor,
Commissioner Benepe has asked me to respond to your email regarding the dog run on the East River Esplanade at East 63rd Street. We believe that the majority of dog owners and their dogs enjoy the current surface.
We will be improving the dog run later this month by re-installing the material in thinner layers, rolling over it to compact it, and inspecting the drainage and clearing any problems that we may find. If you have any questions about this work, please feel free to call Park Manager Terese Flores at 212-408-0261.
Thank you again for writing. It was good of you to take the time to do so.
Sincerely,
William Castro
Manhattan Borough Commissioner
City of New York Parks & Recreation
24 W. 61st St.
New York, NY 10023
I would like to make it clear that Parks employees– those who do maintenance–on the esplanade are not at all to be blamed for this terrible dog park situaiton. The maintenance employees do a fantastic job and have always proven to be friendly, professional workers.
James, I agree with what you say. However you ate wasting you time. The cabal will continue wiith it’s lies and inuendo ad infinitum.
One very important fact is always overlooked. All or most of the cabal are T least part time dog walkers. So they don’t want the extra work (if it is true) of cleaning their clients property.
The pol in the small run own take care of their dogs. Of course they want them to be able to dig holes and roll around.
This craziness needs to stop. We are being insulted and harassed and our only “crime” is wanting our dogs to have a safe place to play. I used to take my dog to the dog run despite her getting sick, I tried to put up with the eye infections, throwing up the dirt, and inhaling the dust. And then I realized this was not the right thing to do for my dog. These are not “minor inconveniences” as someone called it. It is compromising my aging dog and playing Russian roulette with her health. The fact that in the past week I borrowed the pool a handful of times so my dog and her friends, who also do not use the run any longer, can enjoy sitting in a clean pool for a little while does not make me a vandal. For over a decade in the pavilion everyone who knows me knows that I respect my community and my environment and that I would never commit any act of destruction. If anything, I am known as the “poop police”, always ensuring we all have a clean place to play. What has happened to our community in the past 11 months is the real crime. For people to resort to name calling and banal accusation because they happen to disagree is disgraceful. Why doesn’t anyone stop and say – ” I like this surface, but maybe I need to see the other side’s point of view. They are upset, their dogs are getting sick. Maybe I should feel more compassion and try to see what we can all do together to make everyone happy”. Instead they are staying we are inventing illnesses. They say that the only ones who claim their dogs are getting sick are those who hate the surface. Of course! why else would we hate this surface? Why else would we be trying so hard to fix what we feel is so wrong, which is harming our beloved pets and which has brought so much strife to a previously happy dog community.
The Concrete Cabal is rejoicing today with their report that the old pavilion has been reopened. Good for them. Perhaps they will finally move on. They can return to the pavilion, buy their own hoses, pools, bin, etc. Of course, there is no shade up at the Pavilion so expect them to complain again.
Of course, Parks is unlikely to provide fencing to make it a dog run.
And come this fall, Phase 2 of the Esplanade Renovation will almost certainly include reuse of the pavilion for purposes other than a dog run. For now, at least, perhaps, responsible dog owners can relax.
Until…
There were NEVER any complaints about the Pavilion Dog Run. Every one loved it. It was, and is, a stunningly beatiful dog run. Shady, breezy, clean–everything any dog and dog owner could ever ask for. All that and $0 ZERO cost to maintain. Absolutely maintenance free. No rakes, no shovels, no tractors, no geotextile fabric, no SAND.
Why is it that I know there was never a single complaint? I did a FOIL (Freedom of Information Law) request for documents. And guess what? Not a single document came back complaining about the Pavilion Dog Run. Not one.
While we love the fact that this issue has generated so much reader debate, the tone of the comments has gotten too personal and mean spirited, with an overabundance of name-calling. To that end, I’ve removed several inappropriate posts. Moving forward, comments that include personal attacks will not be approved.
Thanks,
The Editor
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Editor. We also are perplexed by why a debate over a dog run surface should generate so much hate, harassment and personal attacks.
Dear Editor
You should remove this entire string of commentary since the contents from the concrete people are riddled with factual errors. Better to just let this entire issue die now that the city has said they will not pave the run ever.