Roosevelt Island Sportspark Swim Classes For Toddlers As Well As Kids 3 years And Over
Image of Roosevelt Island Sportspark Toddler Swim Program
Roosevelt Island Parents' Network coordinator Eva Bosbach reports that the swim classes for children at Sportspark provided by the Roosevelt Island Operating Corp (RIOC) are now also available on a drop-in basis (no registration needed), and include new classes for children of age 3 years and up. According to Ms. Bosbach:
Children 6 to 36 months:
For an amazing $5 per class per family, join us for fun in the (warm!) water, including basic swim skills, songs, floating, splashing, games and more. Classes are offered every Wednesday at 10.30 and 11am and every Sunday at 11 and 11.30am and run until Dec 18th/22nd. Please bring a swim diaper and a bathing suit for your child and a swim cap for yourself as well as a lock for the locker. Classes are taught by Ryan Sherrill.
To access the pool with a stroller, it is best to go around the Tram station on the Queens side, make a right under the bridge and another right, to get between the basketball court and the swimming pool building. The door will be on your left. If you are coming from further up on the island, you can take the south bound red bus and let the driver know after the Tram stop that you would like to get off at the next stop, Sportspark's swimming pool. You will be right at the door.
You can register and pre-pay for the rest of the classes to secure your spot, or just join on a drop-in basis. The classes are not full and not restricted to RI residents, so feel free to bring friends and forward this information.
Children 3 years and up:
Discounted learn to swim classes for children ages 3 years and up are offered by the swim and aqua aerobics instructor from Sportspark, Ryan Sherrill, on Saturday afternoons 3-4pm. The cost is $15 for drop-in or $100 for a 10-week course. Ryan also offers semi private and one-on-one classes as well as swimming lessons for people of all ages (learn to swim or improve your skills). For questions or to register, call or e-mail Ryan at 917.261.7761 or ryansherrill84@gmail.com .
Thank you RIOC.
28 comments :
Can you sit on the ends when the middle is empty, or will it topple over?
Theresa, the only thing lower than a greedy developer like Kramer is someone who apologizes for him, like you.
As far as Kramer trying to entice renters and buyers to lease his wonderful apartments, by installing benches in the shape of, you know - the sort of oversize, overstuffed thingamajigs they smoke in da islands, hey, why not? He's tried everything else to sell or lease the empty apartments, why not pot?
As for driving out the poor: Wouldn't it stand to reason that Kramer and all the other greedy developers, you know, the ones who have only one thing on their minds, which isn't pot, would prefer to have well-healed folks leasing their units rather than poor, or even middle-income residents, since it's that much more likely a more well-off person can afford the high rents/prices Kramer and the other developers prefer to change for their "luxury" accommodations than a not-so well-off person? What is so hard to understand in that? The logic of the market dictates the "sorting" that is always seen in the so-called "glorious mosaic" of NY neighborhoods - but it's a pattern of de facto discrimination that Lindsay and Rockefeller tried to break when they thought up RI.
If my logic is nonsensical then you haven't lived in NYC all your life, to see what the results are of landlord and developer greed. The only thing those guys have in mind is maximizing profits. If they feel they can make more money by bringing in the gentry, they will stop at nothing to get rid of the "lower classes". They even "disappear" pesky rent-controlled tenants on occasion - this has been known to happen. The motive? Money.
Hey, it's a free blog, Ms. Gray! You have as much right to rant away on it as I have to mew away, in my own way.. Hooray for Kitties! Don't insult my "blessed" long-suffering and patient feline species!
No, Bloomberg was disliked because he kicked a lot of opportunities to make a lot of money in the direction of people of his class, the ultra-rich, the 1%, of which he is the richest, as he is the richest man in NYC. Bloomberg had no regard for the poor, the homeless, and so forth: For example, the backlog of repairs at the NYCHA housing is in the tens of thousands.
Yet, Bloomberg has no problem cutting lucrative deals with developers, who can easily afford to not accept the lucrative deals, and pay the tax, instead of getting tax breaks on top of all sorts of other goodies, such as favorable up-zoning, which Bloomberg helpfully arranged for them.
If Bloomberg hadn't been so generous with this rich friends, then maybe there would be money to pay for the NYCHA repairs, for example. But Bloomberg doesn't consider that. His thing is: "Hey, let's fingerprint the recipients of SNAP benefits in NYC" a nasty little law that was overturned in Albany. But that's Bloomberg - sticking it to the poor/disadvantage at every opportunity. Just as with "stop-and-frisk".
The list of what Bloomberg did to give poor and middle-class people the shaft goes on and on. The degree of revulsion generated by his extreme favoritism toward the rich is reflected in the lopsided victory of Deblasio.
And as for Deblasio taking developer money? What I've heard is that the developers began courting Deblasio, not the other way around, once they saw he was gaining traction - specially once Wiener imploded. The developers began staging meet 'n' greet affairs for him to attend, not his campaign for the developers. The developers were literally forcing money into his hands, I suppose in the expectation that he will turn out to be another Bloomberg. If he does turn out to be another Bloomberg, then the electorate will have made a poor choice and can try again in four years with a more progressive candidate.
Not every politician sells out to the highest bidder, KTG. It would seem, under capitalism, that everyone has a price, and that the richest can thus get to call the shots in politics, just as they get to pull the strings with so many other aspects of modern life.
But that is only partially true.
The rich donors and corporations always donate to both parties, and candidates are of course happy to accept the money flowing in.
The quid pro quid aspect? In general, it does work out that the pols will do the donors' bidding - but not always. You do occasionally get figures that will not toe the line and continue to smooth things out for the 1% with favorable tax laws, regulations, etc., as "expected".
Sometimes, the donors are surprised that their "horse" has not turned out exactly as planned. We shall see how Deblasio will put into effect his campaign promises: It will indeed be interesting.
Yes - you can sit on the ends without it toppling over. :-P (I tried it!) The plastic "wood" is a little thick, though, so if you try it, it is somewhat uncomfortable, as it seems to dig into your legs - it's hard to explain, but the height of the bench plus the thickness of the wood, doesn't make them that comfortable. The bench back is minimal - really, not much of anything. The only thing anyone can do is lean forward - there is no way to relax by leaning back as with park benches with backs (even in the section with the back support). I don't think this accommodation is going to be particularly appreciated by the elderly. You are right - it would be very easy to fall off the ends, although most users will of course not do so. Not sure if the bench is really "the safest" in that regard.
There is a certain blog poster who will likely become far more unhinged when she learns that DeBlasio is the next Lindsay.
"Theresa, the only thing lower than a greedy developer like Kramer is someone who apologizes for him, like you."
A criticism about you and your comments here implies support of the people you complain about? You do this quite often...
Question: Bloomberg accepted a $1 salary for the job (I may be wrong here, but I remember hearing that at some point). Will DeBlasio take a full Mayoral salary? And how much is that?
yes, everybody is free to comment as they wish but a little more civility and less rancor would be welcome.
Also, David Kramer, in my opinion, does not deserve the insults. He is a decent guy and a responsible developer.
All of this over Benches? Really?? Benches? They are benches people!!! Geez I agree with everyone who thinks it's ridiculous that this is even worth discussing or that they should have been able to weigh in on the bench design.
On my way into the office this morning, I noticed they were installing more, including some in front of the Senior Center.
agreed 100%, people will find anything to complain about
Welcome Back Sal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPw-3e_pzqU
Some people actually care about design.
Amen.
Unbelievable but true: The almond flour required for a recipe I want to make is actually available on the island, at both Gristede's and the new grocery. And if that is not unbelievable enough, Gristede's has it for $1.00 less.
Uncomfortable? Nope, they just generally make no sense (especially in this case), or rather, a mountain out of nothing. But then again, I am not a "yuppie", so w/e.
These benches were put there for the new hipster population on the island.the poor and low income people on the island are not welcome to sit on them
These benches are very upsetting.as these benches are a hipster delite. Hipsters love to sit on these benches and play with their laptops and drink their lattes.I am in fear that the hipsters on the island will fight over the use of these benches. Rira needs to look into this. More p s officers may be needed
I am very worried about these benches. When the homeless see these benches they will make it their home.there will be war between the hipsters and the homeless.my money is on the homeless
Benches on the islande life will never be the same on the island. Omg
You do realize the benches are shaped like roosevelt island right? Not weed. You say money is all these developers have in my mind, but the only one who has really mentioned profit and kicking out the poor is you. Could it possibly ever occur to you that sometimes people do things because of art and design to improve the island? You do not know Kramer, you do not know his intentions, all you know is that he has designed a new bench. Usually how it works, is if you want to make a lengthy forward claim about someone, you should probably have hard evidence to justify it. And thank you informing me that I have not lived in NYC my whole life, huh i thought i had. Kitty, I know it's a free blog, but interminable rants are not actually encouraged babe.
What is that supposed to mean? In general, I'm opposed to developers who tear apart neighborhoods in the name of money, instead of providing a fair share of affordable housing for the less well-off. Is there something wrong with that?
There are many out there who think just like me, and they just voted in droves for a new Mayor who has pledged to put the money-hungry developers in their places! Meaning - the developers take the back seat to people, and people's needs. From now on, the emphasis is going to be on affordable, not luxury housing.
We have found a real peoples' advocate in Bill Deblasio - let's see if his bite is as strong as his bark come January!!
It's true - I don't know Kramer personally, only have seen him around at community meetings occasionally. But - let's face it: Southtown isn't exactly an extension of the GDP.
The tenets of the GDP were only lightly followed in Southtown.
The vitiation of the GDP started, on a big scale, with Octagon, but was then fully carried through at Southtown.
Does anybody really think the authors of the GDP had in mind an expensive condo building for RI? It definitely happened - but is it what was supposed to have happened?
The experimental nature of the island, as a community that could defeat the usual arrangements, the sorting by class/socio-economic level/ etc - was ended when Southtown and Octagon were built. Southtown and Octagon, as nice as they may be, are really no different than a million other similar developments elsewhere: Mostly for those that can afford the rather expensive rents/prices - with, unfortunately, very, very, few "affordable" units thrown in.. definitely an inversion of what is actually needed in NYC in terms of affordability.
My topic that I am going to vent about is the huge increase of dogs on the island and "the poop" that comes with it. First off, I want everyone to know that I am an animal lover. I grew up on Long Island with dogs, horses and other live stock animals in backyards as pets in my neighborhood. However this is not the country and 'we all share the common grounds and sidewalks'. I do not like seeing dogs peeing on our buildings and trees on Main Street or along the water view walkways. Everyday I see dog owners allowing there dogs to run around on the grass and ball fields where dogs should not be. These are areas designated for children to play, these are not a dog parks. Recently right outside the door of 580 Main Street was a pile of dog poo, is this for everyone to enjoy?!
I just don't think it's right that dog owners are not respecting the laws and rules of the limited outdoor common areas we islanders share.
Maybe we should all just pick up a leg and piss on Main Street or wherever else on the island that we want to. It seems to be okay and works fine for some of the dog owners. It truly is sad, because there are responsible dog owners on the island, but it takes only a few bad dog owners to make me want to bark!!
For many years there were restrictions on dog ownership in the buildings on RI and we did not have that problem. I don't remember why the restrictions were lifted, but I am sorry they were.
I'm not certain what, specifically, they are considering, but I just noticed that HAP Investment Developers is "looking at Roosevelt Island": http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/11/realestate/commercial/eran-polack.html?_r=0
That is interesting. Maybe it has something to do with building housing for Technion staff - since the outfit is also Israeli.
That is unbelievable that it's found at all on RI, but it's not unbelievable that Gristedes which is expensive as it is, is selling it for $1 less than the organic market. The organic market seems to be setting records on price. It's getting quite difficult to find "bargains" there anymore.
Post a Comment