I remember going there once with my parents, long about 1957 or so, and asking them why we had to pay a membership fee rather than simply an admission to get in -- and my mother explaining that it was to keep it whites only. Maybe that's why we never went back a second time.
I don't know if the pool was part of Palisades Amusement Park or just next to it -- but I do know that you'd see ads for it all over Manhattan, with a picture of a woman in one of the very modest two-piece suits of the period, lounging back with ripples breaking over her. (The pool had a wave generator.) And yet there was apparently a large fraction of the population of Manhattan that was not welcome there. Strange.
I haven't thought about that in a long time. I'm going to google and see what I can find out.
On edit: I found a poster version of the lounging lady -- though I suspect it cuts out some of the ripples that were there in the wider billboard version. Notice that it advertises buses leaving from Broadway and 167th Street -- just half a mile from the northern boundary of Harlem, which according to Wikipedia is 155th Street.
On second edit -- here we go, but from this article it sounds like the policy was changed in 1951, which doesn't match with my recollection. Perhaps they kept it going on a de facto basis into the late 50's -- because there was sure a membership fee and there were sure no non-whites in the pool.
http://blog.nj.com/ledgerarchives/2009/02/leisure_activities_remained_qu.htmlThe state's most visible fight over swimming was at the famous Palisades Amusement Park, the carnival-like park that was immortalized in the pop tune "Palisades Park." The park itself -- including its rides and midway games -- was open to blacks. But the pool -- said to be the world's largest saltwater pool -- was not. . . .
As was customary in the North, there were no actual signs barring entrance. Instead, said Gargiulo, patrons seeking to swim were told they needed to join a private club. When black patrons tried to join, however, they were told the club was full.
The park was picketed by protesters on summer weekends for three years, from 1947 through 1949, and eventually sued by the ACLU. "Don't get cool at Palisades Pool," read one picket sign, he said. Park owners were able to rebuff the lawsuit by claiming the pool was actually leased by the Palisades Sound and Surf Club Inc., a private club. As such, said the judge who dismissed the suit in 1948, it was not a public accommodation and its owners were free to accept whomever they chose as members. . . .
When, after three years, the owners finally acquiesced and changed park policy, they did it with a minimum of fanfare, Gargiulo said. He suspects they kept their about-face quiet because they didn't want to antagonize their white customers.
Third edit:
Sorry if I've got a bit of a bee in my bonnet about this, but it seems important. I found a couple of references through Google Books. The first suggests that even though the policy had technically been changed, the pool maintained a climate of hostility towards blacks that discouraged them from using it. And the second explicitly refers to a segregation policy as late as 1962.
http://books.google.com/books?id=HZ3XCz-LrngC&pg=PA82&lpg=PA82&dq=palisades+amusement+park+pool+segregated&source=bl&ots=j9kRU2VGxP&sig=JUtQlIlYW7LHd1PEB-7oC3NzQRA&hl=en&ei=j6BXSuyYBuWytwfH_IXeCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5http://books.google.com/books?id=ArQRbUPD7E4C&pg=PA159&lpg=PA159&dq=palisades+amusement+park+pool+segregated&source=bl&ots=7W0-XqgSfi&sig=Qw-UkaRGU5kWBg0ACQYbPFPmGak&hl=en&ei=8KNXStujIpGKNIO2kJ4I&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7