I am saying I fully reject the means of NIMBYism, nevermind the ends.

But yes, I would be against reducing park space.

In this case I thought GP was celebrating the move for preserving park space, perhaps because this building isn't on the pier but just land? But I am not sure.

The building, 550 washington, is huge and on land. Pier 40 is next to it, (towarss the west) across the NYC west side highway. Pier 40 is mostly on water as the name implies

Building being sold does not reduce park space. It fact that building was an eyesore before redevelopment. Now, I contend it makes it more likely that thanks to the new tenants,Pier40 will have a major facelift

Would kids be able to play at an MLS Stadium?

In a similar vein, the Olympics 2012 bid for NYC would've been where Hudson Yards is now, but was rejected over concerns about bursty event traffic (the area already hosts the convention center.) This location is even less able to handle bursty traffic, it's not near any express subway lines or commuter rail terminals.

> However, they did not count on a surprise rival: parents of the little league baseball kids that regularly play at Pier40 turf fields

The MLS soccer field was long canceled at that point because of Hurricane Sandy, it seems. (Dunno, I don't follow Chelsea real estate. I live in Brooklyn.)

So as far as I can tell, pier 40 will continue to be used for public park.

this Google building is across the street.

Everyone loves kids' play spaces when it's other people's money being spent on them, but when there's money on the line it looks like commercial real estate generates a lot more value.