Dyson College of Arts and Sciences

areas. Even before the hurricane struck, however, the HRPT had raised concerns about the conditions of several piers. In particular, Pier 54, in the city's Chelsea neighborhood, was crumbling. Pier 54 stood out for its historic significance; it was the site where Titanic survivors first made landfall aer their ship sunk in 1912. Pier 54 was also the launch point for the Lusita- nia days before it was torpedoed by German U-boats in 1915. Contractors had repaired Pier 54 in 2010 and 2011. However, in April 2012, the HRPT decided to close more than half of the pier, citing concerns about a possible collapse. Although the HRPT had been aware of Pier 54's deteriorating condition for years, minimal fund- ing had been available for maintenance. e HRPT received no public funding for operating and main- taining the park; the organization had received some funding from the city, state, and federal governments, but only for capital projects. To support its day-to- day operations, the HRPT rented space on the piers to commercial tenants and operated concession stands serving park visitors. e decisions that sealed the fate of Pier 54 took place during a change in leadership at the HRPT. In June 2011, Madelyn Wils became the organization's president and CEO. Wils had previously held an exec- utive-level position with the New York City Economic Development Corporation, a nonprofit organization that coordinates public-private partnerships on real estate projects. Shortly aer Wils began at the HRPT, the organization entered into an agreement that trans- formed the advocacy group Friends of Hudson River Park into the Trust's fundraising arm. ree environ- mental organizations opposed the change, arguing that it would lead to more development along the rivers. e change also resulted in the departure of several Friends board members who wanted the organization to play a watchdog role, rather than focusing on fund- raising. In 2013, the longtime chairman of the Friends board, Douglas Durst, le over a dispute related to an- other of the park's piers, Pier 40. e HRPT and Diller team worked mostly qui- etly on a replacement for Pier 54 in 2013, seeking small changes in the Hudson River Park Act and pursuing state redevelopment funds. en in November 2014, the Diller team announced that, rather than replace Pier 54, they would build a new floating park called Pier 55. Public hearings followed, and the HRPT signed a lease with the Diller team in February 2015. As designed, Pier 55 will be a 2.7-acre hu- man-made island in the Hudson River that would serve as a park and venue for special events. Designed with rolling hills ranging from 30 to 62 above the water, the park will also have a built-in amphitheater to host events, half of which would be free or low cost. e park is intended to be a public space, although its funding mostly comes from Diller, a private donor. e project has faced numerous challenges. Perhaps one of the more significant challenges was the civic organization City Club of New York's suit in June 2015, arguing that the project lacked transparen- cy and that it needed to go through an environmental review. e Diller team disputed those allegations, and the two sides appeared several times in court, delaying construction. In 2016, Diller accused Durst of funding the City Club's lawsuit, which Durst later confirmed. In July 2017, at the urging of New York City mayor Bill de Blasio, the two sides met to try to resolve their differ- ences. However, the meeting did not result in an agree- ment. Less than a week later, two members of the City Club filed a new lawsuit to block a permit the Army Corps of Engineers had issued for Pier 55. In Septem- ber 2017, Diller announced that he was dropping the project aer investing more than $40 million in it. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced weeks lat- er that the project was back on, aer working out a deal between Diller and Durst. Media coverage of Pier 55 evolved with the dis- pute between proponents and opponents. Some early articles on Pier 55 were issue-based, which helped to articulate varying visions of urban resilience via the environment, recreation, public-private partnerships, design, and transparency. For example, proponents of the project maintained that Pier 55's "undulating form is not merely a design feature, but an attempt to address environmental issues in an area of the Hud- son designated as a marine sanctuary and spawning ground for striped bass" (Bagli and Pogrebin 2014, para. 24). However, the article also pointed out that the project "raises thorny questions about private control over public spaces, the secretive planning process be- hind it and the potential competition between it and other new cultural institutions hoping to make their mark on the city" (para. 7). Aer the lawsuit, the dominance of game- based coverage shied the focus to contestation and away from substantive conversations among different stakeholders and how they actually conceptualized re- silience. For instance, one game framed article began: "It looks like Pier 55, a $250 million construction proj- ect on the Hudson River, will be moving forward—for now—aer receiving the required permit modification 61

• Cover