CB6 Parks & Recreation Meeting Recap

Another report from a community board blogger…
Last summer, Brooklynites spent many a sunny day at Pier 1, the preview of the Brooklyn Bridge Park opened by the Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation (BBPDC) and the Brooklyn Bridge Park Conservancy. Summer turned to fall and Pier 1 closed, but Wednesday night’s meeting of the Parks and Recreation Committee of Community Board 6 drew a good sized crowd to discuss the status and future development of the Park. BBPDC President Regina Myer made a presentation about the Park’s design and construction, State Senator Daniel Squadron discussed the Park’s financing and governance, and residents of CB6 came prepared to talk about the community’s role in planning the Park—or lack thereof.

Myer was up first to speak about the current status of the Park’s construction and planning…

…Her presentation was full of glossy, gorgeous 3D renderings, including a 30-foot wide promenade stretching the Park’s 1.3-mile length, sheltered inlets for kayaking, and a sandy beach. Myer appealed to the crowd by emphasizing the many sustainable elements incorporated into the Park’s design, from recycled granite steps to 70% self-irrigating lawns. Myer also outlined the construction schedule for the first two sections of the Park; Pier 6—accessible from Atlantic Avenue—and Pier 1—accessible from Old Fulton Street—are slated for completion in late Winter 2009/2010 and Summer 2010, respectively. In the meantime, be on the lookout for opportunities to tour the construction site this summer, Myer promised. She also said that the BBPDC has not yet secured funding for Piers 2, 3, and a portion of Pier 6.

Despite the pretty pictures and Myer’s polished presentation, the meeting’s attendees were ready to voice their strong objections and express their frustration with the lack of community involvement in the project since the BBPDC was formed in 2002. There was a general sense among committee members and CB6 residents—many of whom had been working on the plans for a park for 20 years—that they had not been asked by the BBPDC what they would like to see in a park or how they would allocate the budget. Many questions were posed regarding the design and height of the condominiums and hotel planned within the Park’s grounds, which Myer deflected by arguing that the purpose of the meeting was to report on the Park’s status, not its financing or the residential component. Several people cited the BBPDC’s decision to eliminate a proposed access point at Squibb Park (via a foot bridge across Furman Street) as a glaring example of the lack of community input. Myer attributed the change to the recent $8 million dollar budget cut, and countered by pointing out the Park’s six other access points. Another source of ire were the berms—sound deflecting gradients—planned for the Park’s edges along Furman Street. Were the berms necessary considering the projected reconstruction of the BQE, or could the budget reallocated to bring back the Squibb Park access? Myer diplomatically responded that the BQE reconstruction isn’t likely to happen until 2020, the berms were already being constructed as an integral part of the Park landscape, and that decisions about the Park’s design were largely set at this point. Attendees also expressed their desire for spaces to hold farmer’s markets and community events in the Park; Myer noted that Brooklyn Flea (yay!) will be held at Brooklyn Bridge Plaza starting June 14.

State Senator Daniel Squadron took the floor next to outline his vision for a world-class Brooklyn Bridge Park, an urban landscape on par with Central Park and Prospect Park that would not—to the delight of most in attendance—require in-park housing as a revenue stream. Squadron spoke of the need for year round recreation facilities (he introduced the possibility for an ice rink, a floating pool, and covered tennis courts), the possibility of opening a middle school in 360 Furman Street a.k.a. 1 Brooklyn Bridge Park, and the ongoing efforts to establish a single system of governance to connect the parks along New York City’s waterways.

At the heart of Squadron’s presentation, though, was the concept of a Park PIRC—Park Increment Re-Capture—that would fund the project and supplant the need for the BBPDC’s planned residential developments. Using the case study of the Hudson River Park, the PIRC plan assumes that the presence of the Brooklyn Bridge Park and proposed rezoning in the area would lead to increased property values and taxes. The City would then fund the Park’s operating budget using a percentage of the increase in property taxes in rezoned areas within 0.4 miles of the Park. The PIRC plan is not a new tax or a tax increase, and only rezoned residents and businesses would have see a percentage of their property tax increase allocated to the Park. Under this plan, in one year PIRCs would generate $7 million dollars, essentially replacing the bulk of the proposed revenue from in-park development. Within five years PIRCs would generate more than the $16 million per year required to maintain the Park. Squadron pointed out that, considering the economy, PIRCs are a safer bet than counting on people buying luxury condominiums.

Squadron had a much easier time with the crowd than Myer, but still faced questions from the group. A few people were concerned that a PIRC scheme has never been used in New York City, and that if PIRCs became the norm, parks in less affluent areas could suffer. Some wondered it a property tax increase recapture system could cause a good public school to argue that they too deserve a cut of the money from surrounding property value increases. Squadron argued that while there is no precedent for the PIRC program, there is also no precedent for revenue generating in-park residential developments, and that the question of schools and other value adding neighborhood features was being considered and explored more thoroughly. On the whole, however, the CB6 residents in attendance were in favor of the plan. Representatives from the Cobble Hill Association and the Carroll Gardens Neighborhood Association expressed their support for PIRCs as an alternative to residential development in the Park, and as the meeting wound down, the members of the Parks and Recreation Committee made a motion to support Squadron’s resolution at the next CB6 meeting.

— Meredith from Carroll Gardens