What’s Danny Meyer Cooking in Union Square?
Zagats darling natural choice for open-air eatery—‘A track record helps,’ says parks commish Benepe
MORE
Tales of Retail
Restaurateur Danny Meyer gets a lot of credit for spearheading the retail renaissance around Union Square Park.
Opening his perennially popular Union Square Cafe in 1985 helped set off a seismic shift in real estate surrounding the notoriously nicknamed “Needle Park.” The area once overrun with junkies is now infested with foodies, who can easily score a quick fix at any one of the many top-rated eateries, including six operated by Mr. Meyer, within a five-minute walk of the park.
Imagine what commercial magic the Midwestern-raised hospitality guru might conjure up inside the park.
As co-chair of the neighborhood economic development corporation, the Union Square Partnership, Mr. Meyer, 49, is currently involved in the planned reconstruction of the ancient 3.6-acre square’s north end.
A collaborative effort with the Parks Department, the ambitious public-private project involves, among other things, renovating the park’s old run-down pavilion, built in 1930, and installing new plumbing, electrical, and heating and cooling systems, with the stated intention of converting it into a windowless restaurant space.
Construction is expected to begin this winter.
Yet, contrary to the critical acclaim typically associated with Mr. Meyer—the reigning king of Zagat Guide superlatives—the whole restaurant-in-the-pavilion idea has been getting some pretty bad reviews.
Ever since Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe first uttered the ‘R’ word back in October 2004, in fact, neighborhood activists and local politicians have railed against the proposed restaurant as a blatant example of the continuing commercialization of the public park system.
“In neighborhoods like Union Square which are starved for green space but already overwhelmed by dining choices, it is terrible public policy to continue to transform municipal parkland into a commercial engine,” opined State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick in her most recent December 2007 newsletter.
Mr. Benepe has argued that the eatery is “crucial” to the park’s continued vibrancy. “Why wouldn’t you want to bring hundreds of people into the park during the off hours to make it safe and vibrant?” he asked.
Adding a dash of mystery to the simmering brouhaha is the anonymous $5 million donation that’s partially bankrolling the reported $19.6 million reconstruction effort.
Skeptics have long suspected that the source of the secret funding might be someone bent on nabbing the forthcoming licensing contract to run the revamped pavilion eatery.
Could that mystery money man be Danny Meyer?
“That’s the speculation, of course,” a critic of the proposed restaurant told The Observer—speculation that Parks Commissioner Benepe adamantly denied: “It is not Danny Meyer, nor is it any other board member or anybody who has any business interest in the proceedings. It is strictly a charitable gift.”
Mr. Meyer, though, is not barred from bidding on the contract. Mr. Benepe confirmed that “from the city’s perspective,” there is no conflict of interest, despite his position with the private-sector group that’s partially funding the reconstruction. “This is a city project,” Mr. Benepe said. “The city has the final say on all aspects on the final design and operation.”
The usually hospitable Mr. Meyer himself declined to be interviewed for this article.
But who better, really, to shepherd Union Square Park into a thriving dining destination than the guy who transformed nearby Madison Square Park into one big line for brisket-infused burgers?
Indeed, Mr. Meyer’s Shake Shack might be the best example of the anti-commercialization activists’ worst fears.
Just last week, construction crews were digging up a section of Madison Square Park in order to install a new outdoor heating system so that Mr. Meyer’s ravenous disciples might bask in the glorified fast-food stand’s alfresco splendor no matter what the weather. Even without the heaters, some customers still turned out for a brisk lunch last Thursday on the coldest day so far this season, braving bitter windchill in the single digits for some warm cheese fries and hot chocolate. Next Page >
48 East 81st Street
"For nirvana seekers searching for a rare oasis in the city, we are pleased... " More details |
|
Oh great, just what this neighborhood needs -- one more unaffordable place for the 20-something thin & trendy & over-their-credit-limit crowd, who are driving the smaller, affordable eat-in and take out places out of the area.
There are hardly any decent, eat-in inexpensive places left in the Union Square area where a cup of coffee is still $1.00 that are not parts of chains. There are many hard working folks on modest incomes who do not want to bring lunch every day but can't find an inexpensive place to eat.
Mr. Meyer, wonderful as he might be, seems to have lost touch with us "little people" as have the city's decision makers, who seem to be catering to only one group of people -- which does not include me or most of the people I know.
There's no stopping Danny Meyer.
I'm thrilled that the disgusting Luna Park is gone. Maybe Danny Meyer could open a place that does reasonably-priced take-out (a la Shake Shack) AND have a sit-down dining area. The space is big enough for that.
Adam Kuban is 100% Right. Any $3.50 taco shop burrito in Southern California is better than any all the overpriced tasteless burritos here in New York. DM or someone has to figure this out and bring it here. He'd make a killing!
Wow, poster #1, you're not judgmental at all, are you ("...the 20-something thin & trendy & over-their-credit-limit crowd...")?
And how about this asshat comment "...Mr. Meyer...seems to have lost touch with us "little people"...catering to only one group of people -- which does not include me or most of the people I know...."
Well, if it doesn't include YOU and the people that YOU KNOW, why don't YOU MOVE to someplace else where they only serve food in super-cheap places for the 50-something fat & dumb & can't-afford-to-have-a-credit-card-because-my-credit-score-is-so-bad crowd.
"...There are hardly any decent, eat-in inexpensive places left in the Union Square area where a cup of coffee is still $1.00 that are not parts of chains..." Yeah - that's right, because Union Square isn't THE TYPE OF AREA that caters to 'inexpensive places,' and hasn't been that way for over a decade! If you want cheap crap food and $1.00 bottomless cups of coffee, move to Gary, Indiana, Norman, Oklahoma, or Cleveland, Ohio.
"...There are many hard working folks on modest incomes who do not want to bring lunch every day but can't find an inexpensive place to eat..." Welcome to New-frickin'-York. Boo-hoo-hoo.
As for myself, I am going to enjoy an awesome lunch at Shake Shack this afternoon!
I for one am thrilled. I live just off union square and I've always wanted to see something made of that rundown pavilion. It has such great potential. Despite all the complaining I don't see any alternatives being proposed by so-called community activists. I'm sure they would love it to just stay a run down mess.
Commenter # 5 needs to take a xanax and calm down a little. And not be so nasty and rude and age-ist. And check the facts. The Union Square area is not just where people live, it is also where they work, go to school, as well as come for medical and other business and human services.
In the past decade, the loss of the few inexpensive, affordable eat-in and take out places has been a hardship for many people. Any improvement to the Pavillion will be very welcome -- especially if it is appealing and affordable to the large number of people working and visiting the area. I am a life long New Yorker who has seen many small businesses disappear because of no commercial rent controls and lack of respect by realtors for the neighborhoods they inhabit.
Well addressing the rats that populated the fringes of Luna Park is really the necessary first step to gaining my patronage regardless of the specific project details.
Of course you are taking a public space and making it available to only those who can afford it. So the guy making the comments regarding the upscale surroundings - well they are private property and can do as they wish within the law and restrict access with high prices. But can a public (key word - "public") park do the same?
This is Bloomberg for ya. The entire city is for sale for the right guys and the right price. This is city planning without public input. I'm sure that there were hearings but we saw how well that worked with the recent MTA fare hike. Its been said and noticed many times before - NY is very different than it has been.
Love Danny Meyer, Love Shake Shack - why go far to pick on Gary IN (where I'm from btw), Norman OK - which is not without merit when it comes to beef and not mention the numerous-cheap-chain delicies available in the Garden State? Everyone from the midwest isn't 20, 50, fat or ignorant about great food.
Typical government mode-of-operation: "it ain't broke, but let's spend a lot of money and fix it anyway. p.s. we'll spend PUBLIC funds to make the PRIVATE sector richer !
The planned privatization of the pavilion and over 40' of the north end of Union Square is nothing more then a give away of public land to a board member of the Union Square Partnership.
The pavilion originally called the Children's Pavilion was intended for the use of our children, not for wealthy businessmen to make a few more millions off the back of the taxpayers of New York City. The land is not the property of the Parks Dept it belongs to New Yorkers, and rightfully should be available for public use. For our children and their children, not for the likes of Danny Meyers or any other such entrepreneur.
The playground behind the proposed restaurant will become a haven for rats, the scent of freshly cut grass in the spring and summer will be replaced by the scent of festering garbage. Our kids deserve more.
The last large open public space in New York City should certainly be restored and reserved for the public and healthy events such as the Greenmarket. The cost to taxpayers would be but a fraction of what we will have to pay to give our property away. The time required to do this a fraction of the planned 2 year project.
I feel a hand in my pocket and it does not belong to me.
It seems most people don't mind having their pockets picked so they can have a good burger. What a sad commentary on this city and these people! Why don't we just send the Parks Department and Danny Meyer our paychecks instead of making them go through the backdoor? Why don't we just call a spade a spade here, folks.