Proposal for Atlantic Ave. Clink Maybe Not Such a Clunker?
This morning the Eagle takes a look at what might have been for the Brooklyn House of Detention and appears to be quite wooed by the plan Hamlin Ventures; Times Equities, and Common Ground Community submitted: “the proposal called for a different approach to handling low-level, non-violent offenders, who constitute the overwhelming population of this…
This morning the Eagle takes a look at what might have been for the Brooklyn House of Detention and appears to be quite wooed by the plan Hamlin Ventures; Times Equities, and Common Ground Community submitted: “the proposal called for a different approach to handling low-level, non-violent offenders, who constitute the overwhelming population of this facility, while adding 490 units of affordable and market-rate housing, plus retail, all in a stunning physical environment that disguises the existence of a corrections facility.” The city called the group’s proposal, as rendered above, “unacceptable,” perhaps because it didn’t include enough jail beds (the Dept. of Corrections wanted 1,500; we’re unsure how many beds Hamlin/Time Equities were planning). The “redevelopment of the Brooklyn House of Detention provides a unique opportunity to introduce new assumptions into the criminal justice system in New York rather than just build new beds, says Abby Hamlin of Hamlin Ventures, which is apparently still lobbying for some version of the proposal to be accepted. Is there no better way to meet the need of the Department of Corrections for jail beds, improve services to detainees and their families, recognize the concerns of the community, and leverage this prime location for additional public benefit?
City Failed to Acknowledge Plan for Brooklyn Jail [Brooklyn Eagle]
A Look at the (Rejected) House of D Condo-Retail Plan [Brownstoner]
Just open the damned jail already. Let the community residents shop in the jail’s commissary.
I imagine that DOC’s position is that there is no amount of cash that would compensate for the political and bureaucratic nightmare of trying to get a new jail sited someplace else. Watch how long it takes to come up with another site in the Bronx now that the original proposal has been withdrawn.
Ok, but I don’t think options such as alternative development are completely irrelevant. I would think the agency’s agenda could change pretty easily, and shockingly quickly, if they would get enough cash from such alternative development to do something else.
Sorry if I misread your post, 1:52. I think the fundamental “problem” here is that the community and the agency have different agendas. Exploring all possible options may reveal many worthy schemes but if those don’t dovetail with the agency’s goals, they’re not going anywhere. For example, Dennis Holt has pointed out in the past that this block could be an extremely valuable development site. True, but completely irrelevant to DOC.
Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s how I am sizing this one up. I’m not taking sides, just making what I think is a realistic assessment of the political and bureaucratic reality based on years inside and outside of government.
I, at 1:52, didn’t advocate that the existing structure should be torn down, or that this plan is the best option. I, and Dennis Holt, and a lot of people just think HOD needs to fully explore all possible options with as much input from the community as possible. This one looks interesting, but it seems it was written of very quickly. Maybe at least pieces of it are a good idea. Issuing this RFEI, for which the city could make money or spread costs, and having a couple community meetings isn’t exactly all they could be doing.
In any event, maybe, given the potential split between government and private development on this site, tearing the existing structure down is part of the most cost effective option. We won’t know until all options are fully analyzed. Even given the current market, this is a very valuable spot of land.
How can doing your homework be a bad thing? If the HOD has done it, they just need to share their results a little better.
Not sure how someone can in the same breath state that money has been wasted on the House of Detention and then advocate for a proposal that included tearing the existing structure down. Isn’t that (if true) ‘good money after bad?’
1:27; Yes, having to deal and whether they should deal are two completely different things. That doesn’t mean that DOC shouldn’t make every effort to fully explore every possible solution. There has already been so much money wasted on the HOD, some man hours analyzing options surely won’t do any more to break an already broken bank.
No, 1:05. This was not a RFEI for something, anything, tell us what to do with the site. Those do get issued. This was a request for ideas how the jail could be doubled in size and possibly enhanced with other uses to make it more visually and/or programmatically palatable to the community and its elected representatives. Nobody proposed anything that did that. DOC holds all the cards here: it has the zoning necessary to expand the jail without any further approvals. It doesn’t have to deal.
Whether or not it was “responsive” in a technical sense, it appears this proposal is something the DOC should have fully analyzed, possibly even in a public forum. Building another building, more beds, etc. is the easy way. They have a chance to do something really innovative for the judicial system that works with the community.