DEIS: Summary of alternatives; No action alternative
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Draft EIS states:
Lots 12 and 13D would be removed with the construction of Gateway Center at Bronx Terminal Market, resulting in a loss of parking as compared to today.
Unlike the proposed project, the No Action Alternative would not displace parkland, nor would it cause a temporary loss of recreational facilities in the project area during construction. However, the No Action Alternative would not result in a 4.63-acre net increase in accessible open space, including 5.82 new acres of recreational waterfront parks and esplanade that would be provided as part of the proposed project. Therefore, although the No Action Alternative would not result in significant adverse impacts on open space, it would not provide new and enhanced recreational facilities and would, therefore, not have the benefits to parklands that
would be realized with the proposed project.
The No Action Alternative would result in the same volume of auto trips being generated to and from Yankee Stadium as would the proposed project.
The No Action Alternative would not result in an increase in parking facilities or parklands in the vicinity of Yankee Stadium. The waterfront would not be developed under the No Action Alternative, so that approximately 261,000 square feet of retail space would be constructed on this site, as proposed in the Bronx Terminal Market Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
New York City would continue to collect rent on the existing stadium, but would spend money for stadium upkeep, leading to a direct deficit of $77 million over a 30 year period under the No Action Alternative.
However, since the No Action Alternative would not provide new public open space along the Harlem River, it would not provide for the new visual resources that would be realized with the proposed project.
The No Action Alternative would not result in the removal of mature street trees or the alteration of existing parkland, Yankees fans driving to the stadium would continue to circulate excessively through the area in search of hard-to-find parking spaces on-street would not be expected to generate new traffic.
The “no action” alternative reads like it is the best alternative for the community. The community would get to keep all of its well-used and well-loved parkland. Plus certain already programmed parks improvements would get built anyway. No mature trees will get chopped down. There would be no adverse neighborhood or business impacts. Traffic would probably not get any worse than it already is.
The only bad impacts would be to the Yankees. They would lose some parking because of the Gateway Center project at the Bronx Terminal Market site. This would probably make it harder for some fans to find parking for the game, so they’d have to either carpool with other fans or take public transit to the site, which is what they should be encouraged to do anyway.
The existing, cramped conditions at the stadium would continue. The Yankees would have to share a weight room with the opposing team. The press would have to sit with the fans. Expensive luxury seating, restaurants and parking couldn’t be added to the stadium to generate more revenue for the team. How could the community (one of the poorest zip codes in the country) be so insensitive to the needs of the wealthiest team in baseball? It smacks of injustice.