The article in TAPinto Summit (In Letter, Senator Booker Lauds Summit Park Line Concept) noting endorsement of this fantasy project by Senator Booker just hit us as for what it is, "the big gorilla in town."
Only thing most people hear about the project comes from its principal endorser, Councilman Rubino, the consultant,/,architectural firm, and the public relations machine churning positives on it. Many fellow Summit residents we have spoken to are not positive about benefits to be derived for the community as a whole.
Major objections include:
Why do we need a long, open walkway for a 100' view of the New York City skyline from a distance of 22 miles? Hello, this isn't Weehawken.
Why do we need to build a bridge over Broad Street again? Yes, even the architectural drawing shows it is still a restrictive bridge, blocking driving sight lines and an impediment for commercial and residential traffic. Ah, a new trestle on Broad Street... how 19th century!
Has anyone given a real financial estimate, not only of the acquisition and construction costs, including time for City engineering personnel? None we've seen, only loose "guesstimates."
And the hook is in the continuing costs to Summit.
What about continuing costs for the City in security and maintenance? Just how many police patrols are needed each hour, day and night? And, what is necessary in increasing the number of officers and administrators to accomplish proper safety levels? Has that been addressed?
Did we hear about other costs? Insurance, for one. Lighting, for another. And, definitely residential and commercial tax increases to cover these.
Summit has continuing need for sensible investments... schools, roads, parking and infrastructure attractive to commercial and retail businesses, and which offer overall beauty with public access. Include Bryant Park, Memorial Field, the Summit Community Center (SCC), and the Tatlock area for walking and recreation. They all rightfully demand part continuing support.
The SCC, for example, needs funds now to finish that improvement for many Summit citizens. This is much bigger priority that is sensible and feasible for a large portion of our residents. It is the type of funding that continues at a scale that manageable and attractive to many in Summit
We don't view the same price / value result from initiating the High Line and certainly not at the costs now and in the future. By proceeding any further before it is too late to halt or greatly modify the concept and proposed execution, we see a need for open public discussion.
Larry & Gail Everling