Fwd: FOCUS: EMAIL CB1 TODAY

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Kahanov Learan

unread,
Jan 16, 2010, 2:11:32 PM1/16/10
to seaport...@googlegroups.com

-- 
Learan Kahanov
NYC DP
www.lkdp.com

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Cheryl Ip D'Hollander" <ip1...@mac.com>
Date: January 16, 2010 1:57:30 PM EST
Cc: "Cheryl Ip D'Hollander" <ip1...@mac.com>
Subject: FOCUS: EMAIL CB1 TODAY


Dear Friends and Neighbors,

ALL SUPPORTERS OF 3R MUST SEND EMAILS TO CB1 in support of 3R. They are telling us that they take the count very seriously, and so far they have received more emails from #2 supporters than from us. 

OUR VOICES MUST BE HEARD, and we must get CB1 to endorse 3R on Tue Jan 19.

Please EMAIL to both of these addresses IMMEDIATELY:



Other Elected Officials whom you can include on the same email:


SAMPLE #1:

Dear Community Board Members,

I, along with many, many other residents of the Financial District & Seaport, am extremely upset at the lack of consideration for option 3R school zoning. My family and I have been residents of the FIDI for the past 3 years; we chose this neighborhood specifically because of its growing community of young families and the proximity of Spruce St. School. The FIDI children understand their neighborhood as being bound by Spruce Street on the north, Broadway on the West, Broad Street on the south, and Water Street on the East.  The children in this community have been growing up together, and they belong together in the same school in their own neighborhood.

If it can be agreed that the definition of “Community” is “Same people, same place”, then Proposal 2 is designed to break our community. If this was not your intention, then you cannot vote for option 2; option 3R is the only reasonable choice.

The obvious dangers of crossing West Street have been made abundantly clear in many other letters to you; I won’t go into detail here other than going on the record that it is UNACCEPTABLE to send the kids across this busy highway twice a day for every school day of the year.  From growing up here, the streets within the FIDI are already well known to the children; this knowledge and comfort should be taken advantage of.  Disruption makes no sense.

You will also be aware that most of the debate around the 3 proposals has been around how Tribeca is being split up to send its kids to either PS 234 and PS 89. As far as I am aware there is no opposition to the entirety of the FIDI kids being sent to Spruce Street School – on the contrary, there is only direct support for this.   The school has the capacity and the community has the desire. This needs to be respected by the Community Board. PLEASE VOTE FOR PROPOSAL 3R.

Thank you for your consideration, this is an extremely important and heartfelt matter for us in the FIDI and Seaport.

Respectfully,



SAMPLE #2:

I am outraged that OPTION 3R is not being considered for my
son/daughter who live at the corner of ....... 
This shows in my view a blatant disregard for the FiDi
condo-owners who pay an enormous amount in city taxes. 
Clearly none of you have taken the walk from FiDi across
West Street to BPC versus to the Seaport.  We are part
of the Seaport community and should be zoned with Spruce St
School.

Please address this issue and my concern.  My
neighbors and I are organizing ourselves around this
issue.  We urge you to take it seriously, and
potentially meet with us in person.

Thank you for your consideration.



SAMPLE #3:

My wife and I , 10 plus year residents of Lower Manhattan,  belong to a group of Lower Manhattan citizens representing the majority opinion regarding the school re-zoning debate. School re-zoning is our #1 voting issue, and we seek endorsement of Lower Manhattan Rezoning Proposition 3R by our elected representatives and affiliated government agencies. We have over 1000 signatures and growing, from Tribeca, Battery Park City, the Seaport, and Financial District, all overwhelmingly in favor of Proposal 3R and unanimously and vehemently opposed to Proposal 2.

 

Proposal 3 serves the greater good for the vast majority of Lower Manhattan, while Proposal 2 tears apart the fabric of all of Lower Manhattan for the sake of a few new buildings in one small section of Tribeca. 

 

If the concern is only safety around West Street (assuming you are ignoring all the safety concerns at other crossings mind you), then let's please fix it, but not re-zone around it.  Let's enforce the 35MPH speed limit, let's slow down the traffic lights, add more crossing guards and speed bumps.  Destroying the communities that have been built and are being built in Lower Manhattan, rather then enforcing safety around West Street at Warren and Chambers street, would be a huge disservice to all of Lower Manhattan.

 

We seek your endorsement of Proposal 3R. 

 

It would be my pleasure to discuss our concerns with you.  Thanks for your consideration and support



SAMPLE #4:

Dear CB1 Members,

 

My wife and I live in Lower Manhattan with our two daughters.  We are part of the Lower Manhattan Coaltion for Proposal 3R and against Proposal 2.  We have accumulated over 1000 signatures (and counting) from all corners of Lower Manhattan, including Financial District/ Seaport (with full backing of the PS397 PTA), North and South Battery Park City and Tribeca in favor of Propsal 3R and opposing Proposal 2.  I would like to emphasize three very important points:

 

1) This concerns all of Lower Manhattan not just Tribeca

 

I hope you all agree that the issue is one that affects the whole of Lower Manhattan, not just a corner of Tribeca. 
Proposal 3R maintains the natural boundaries of existing (Tribeca) and burgeoning communities (FiDi/Seaport, North and South BPC) and by doing so serves the greater good of all of Lower Manhattan.  Proposal 2 tears apart the fabric of all of Lower Manhattan for the sake of a few buildings in a small section of SW Tribeca.

 

2)  The issue of overcrowding

 

Please let's not forget that the initial problem is one of overcrowding and how best to distribute school children among the 4 great schools equitably and in a long term viable way; all the while preserving the integrity of our comminities.
Proposal 3R is the most effective in reducing overcrowding at PS 234 and makes better use of available seats in PS 89 then Proposal 2.  This is a view shared by Ms. Elizabeth Rose of the DOE. 

 

3)  "If the concern is safety around West Street, then let's address it, but not re-zone around it"

 

Under Proposal 2, the journey is not safer for a child in Financial District to travel to South Battery Park City (PS 276), nor is it for a child in NE Tribeca to travel beyond Park Row to Spruce Street (PS 397), nor is it convenient for Gateway Plaza children to travel to North BPC (PS 89).
If the concern is safety around West Street at Warren and Chambers for parents having to take a foot-bridge or cross walk to PS 89, then let's please fix it, but not re-zone around it.  Let's enforce the 35MPH speed limit, let's slow down the traffic lights, add more crossing guards and speed bumps.

 

Dividing the communities that have been built and are being built in Lower Manhattan, rather then enforcing safety around West Street at Warren and Chambers street, would be a huge disservice to all of Lower Manhattan.  If people don't feel a part of their communities, they will leave.

 

We understand there is no easy solution and I greatly appreciate the work you are doing.   I simply want to say that we can all work together to resolve the safety concerns around West street at Warren and Chambers and keep the majority of children within their communities.  Let's build for the future.

 

Please voice your support for Proposal #3R.




Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages