Unions, laborers rip ‘anti-development’ stance tied to Manhattan casino project

Laborers converged on a block on Manhattan’s Far West Side last week to hear union leaders denounce what they are calling the “anti-development” policies of special-interest groups and city officials, who they said are stalling construction and compromising the livelihood of trades people.

The labor leaders, among them Gary LaBarbera, the president of the Building and Construction Trades Council of Greater New York, and Vincent Alvarez, who heads the New York City Central Labor Council, were vehement in their criticism of the Friends of the High Line’ opposition to development near the elevated park.

According to LaBarbera and others who addressed the throng of laborers who assembled on West 18th Street last Thursday evening, High Line officials are against further development along or near the park that would cast shadows on the elevated walkway. In particular, the Friends of the High Line don’t want to see a casino built near the park’s northern end, LaBarbera said. 

“The project they're trying to stop is a $12 billion project over seven years that will employ 30,000 building trades members. That's what they're trying to take away from us. 30,000 jobs is what they're trying to kill,” he told the hundreds of assembled union members. “We can't let them do that, brothers and sisters, because again, it's your futures.” 

The centerpiece of the project, a partnership of Related Companies and Wynn Resorts, would be a shimmering, 80-story skyscraper and two smaller towers overlooking the Hudson River across 11th Avenue in the Hudson Yards development. Besides the casino, the project would include offices, apartments and a park.

LaBarbera chided the High Line’s opposition, which he told the workers was principally because the project would cast unwanted shade on the elevated park, which spans nearly 1.5 miles, from Gansevoort Street to 34 Street. 

“It’s all lies … that the shade is going to ruin the visitor experience. Well, the project they're trying to stop is three blocks,” he said. “So what are you telling me? That you may have a little shade, but the other mile and a half you have the sun?” 

Risks 'permanent damage'

High Line officials, though, say that labor leaders have materially mischaracterized their position on development. While park officials were on board with Related’s 2009 plans for development, which included a significant housing component and open space, those have been set aside in favor of two redevelopment scenarios that would “substantially increase the negative impact on the High Line.” One of those would include the casino project, which considerably downsizes the number of housing units.

“We want the Western rail yards developed. The Building Trades Council wants the Western rail yards developed. And that would be happening right now if Related and Wynn hadn’t secretly changed their original plans without community input,” Josh Vlasto, a spokesperson for Protect the High Line, said in an emailed statement. “The Building Trades should be protesting Related for slowing down development with their changes that permanently harm the High Line and the community.” 

Protect the High Line is affiliated with Friends of the High Line, the nonprofit that operates and maintains the park. 

In a Daily News op-ed last week, the executive director of Friends of the High Line, Alan van Capelle, said the altered development plans for the site were submitted without input from the community, and that, if built, the project would do “permanent damage” to the elevated park. 

“Unfortunately, design choices in the development plan for Hudson Yards West would severely and permanently block views of the city, shroud the High Line and other open spaces in shadows for most of the day and upset other community assets,” he wrote. 

Van Capelle noted that the High Line “has been a catalyst for economic growth on the lower West Side,” with new construction sprouting on either side of the elevated park since its conception. But he chastised the new plans’ diminution of proposed housing on the site from up to 5,700 to about 1,500. “That’s right — in the middle of a housing crisis, the developers are asking to slash the amount of housing they would build,” van Capelle wrote. 

He also noted that the restyled project would need zoning changes. And if a casino is part of the project, it would require a license from the state Gaming Facility Location Board. Before that, though, both the zoning changes and the casino would have to secure OKs from local officials, and neither is assured. 

Of the six-member Community Advisory Committee that would have to green-light the casino, at least three — City Council Member Erik Bottcher, State Assembly Member Tony Simone and State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal — have reservations about a casino project in their district.

“I’ve been clear: I’m philosophically opposed to a casino on the west side of Manhattan. The community has been against it, and unless that changes, I’m a no,” Simone said earlier this year. 

Van Capelle, who began his professional career as a union organizer and for a time served as a deputy political director for SEIU 32BJ, said that contrary to how he was being portrayed by the union leaders, he was allied with the union members — “standing with workers fighting for good jobs comes naturally to me,” he added.

But Alvarez, the Central Labor Council's president, said the city needed a thriving labor force to keep it dynamic, and suggested that elected officials sometimes stand in the way of progress.

“We want to see the excuses stop. We want to see housing being built, we want to see stores being built, we want to see hotels being built, we want to see highways being built,” he told the laborers. “We want to see the excuses stop from people who have their own self interest, and [from] politicians who may have their own interests and putting their interests ahead of the city, too. So we got your backs in this fight as long as it takes.”