Work Starting Soon on BBP’s Squibb Park Bridge, Pier 5


Yesterday at a Brooklyn Bridge Park board of directors meeting there was news about the cost and construction time frame for the park’s Squibb Park Bridge and sports fields at Pier 5. A firm called Kelco Construction Inc. was awarded a $6.2 million contract to build the bridge, the Post reports, and a $19.2 million contract to construct three turf fields and a playground on Pier 5. The 396-foot-long pedestrian bridge will connect Brooklyn Heights to Pier 1, the section of the park where a hotel and condo will be built. Construction on both the bridge and Pier 1 is supposed to start next month and be finished by next fall.
Brooklyn Bridge Park Officials Dish Out $25M in Contracts [NY Post]
Report from Brooklyn Bridge Park Board Meeting [BHB]

24 Comment

  • I’m surprised how much money goes into this area.

    Not really.

  • I haven’t seen the numbers from surveys but i’ll warrant the vast majority of users are from out of town or are B & T. This is a city-wide, national, international park and designed to be so. Bridge is so visitors to Promenade can get directly to the Park (and BH residents, who have been working to get this park for a generation) can more easily access it).

    Go to the Park and talk to the people there, listen to the languages they speak.

  • you mean the waterfront?

  • $25MM is a pittance for the value that we’re getting from this park, and will continue to get generations into the future.

  • oh good, I will look foward to it being built.

  • oh good, I will look foward to it being built.

  • hope they place a mattress at that sharp turn to catch the skateboarders.

  • Wait… No one is reacting to the price tag?! $6.2 million for this bridge?

    Long pedestrian suspension bridges in the mountains requiring helicopters and horses costs far less than this. Snowbird Mountain in Utah built an 8,000 foot chairlift and a 600 foot TUNNEL with a 570 foot conveyer lift for the same price!!!

    http://www.snowbird.com/about/construction/peruvian.html

    • Comparing projects done by private sector in other states is like comparing them with projects done on another continent. Public projects in NYC often have as much as 30% soft costs: engineers; design; owners rep; lawyers (many). Regulations, public processes and long long approvals cost much dinero. Costs to work in ourlocation, cost of labor MUCH higher, costs of materials, not remotely comparable to Utah. ‘Right to work’ state….

      • Chris… That’s all well and good. but we’re talking about a ABSURD disparity. A chairlift and a tunnel (in an environmentally sensitive and protected area) for the same damn cost.

        I pointing this out because NYC is stupid. The people that run it are stupid. The people that vote for those people are stupid. The contractors are shysters. NYC allows them to be.

        This bridge should be build in two parts in Utah (if it’s so cheap), trucked across the country, and airlifted into place with a Chinook. We can use our high labor costs to fasten to 8 bolts.

        $15,500 per foot?!

        • Putting in that bridge can’t legally be done by a chinook nor would it be safe, and WAY more than 8 bolts to fasten. ‘

          Stupid’ doesn’t really explain it well. We have a construction system here (union plumbers on public and high rise jobs won’t install chinese made toilets, for example) that is hard to change, though it should for sure.

          We have a litigation environment that caused much higher soft costs so everyone is protected and covers their ass.

          I don’t disagree with you at all. Voting won’t change the union environment, nor should it, and won’t change the courts situation where there is not enough capacity to produce rapid dispositions, thereby hugely raising the cost of litigation.

          We have a multi decade long encrusted, complex heavily regulated densely built environment. Not at all comparable to Utah.

          Would you like to live in Utah ? I would if i skied a lot…. and was rich.

          Compare Vermont and N.H. Latter a great place to shop, cause low taxes and low services. Vermont is much more taxes, but has caring services.

          • Of course I was exaggerating with the Chinook idea… however, there shouldn’t be one elected or appointed official that is comfortable for a $6.2 million 400-foot wooden/steel bridge! That is just plain asinine. New York City is not a moon landing for chrissake.

            Why can’t the City of New York control costs the same way Walmart does? And I don’t mean busting unions… I accept that as a cost of doing business. But there are PLENTY of more flexible costs that I’m sure could be squeezed to almost nothing.

          • Sorry Tyburg. It’s not asinine. It’s a good investment. Totally disagree with your whining.

          • Architect66 — Good job missing my point, boy-o. Did I say the bridge was a bad idea? Did I say *anything* of that sort? Come on.

            Let me cut-and-paste what I said so you can read it again. “however, there shouldn’t be one elected or appointed official that is comfortable for a $6.2 million 400-foot wooden/steel bridge! That is just plain asinine. New York City is not a moon landing for chrissake.”

            Guess what is even a BETTER investment? A $300,000 bridge that doesn’t cost $6.2 million to build. (And yes, I’m pulling that smaller number out of my arse, but it’s intended as illustration. But I bet you could build this same bridge almost anywhere else for less than $1 million.)

          • I won’t comment on your reading comprehension capabilities, numbers you pull out your arse, or your logical faculties, Tyburg, but please note that my comment addressed the quality of the investment, not whether or not there should be a bridge.

            But I do disagree with you regarding the quality of the investment and the reasonableness of cost. I think you are WRONG when you claim that the cheaper bridge is a better investment. There is a big difference between a bridge that is designed for a public institution and one that is designed for a private client. Public buildings are much more rigorously designed for a number of reasons including an increased service life, conservative planning for failure and redundancy, and a substantially lower tolerance for risk compared to private sector buildings. It’s not reasonable to compare construction costs between public sector and private sector development.

            Also, As a work of civic architecture, the bridge will have enduring cultural value, and it is appropriate to pursue design excellence and innovation in such a structure.

            By the way, here is a link to a site that purports to put a price tag on the cost of a moon landing – http://www.asi.org/adb/m/02/07/apollo-cost.html – The 1969 Apollo 11 mission cost $355MM in 1969, or about $2.2BN in todays $ – no comparison to a small bridge really.

          • architect — OH FOR CHRIST SAKE! I didn’t say the a cheaper bridge should be built. I SAID the bridge shouldn’t cost this much. The same damn bridge. Not a cheap bridge. Not cutting corners.

            If honestly think this bridge SHOULD cost $6.2 million, then that’s ridiculous, but I guess you’re an architect so the idea of reducing costs is not on the top of your list.

            You can’t possibly tell me that this SAME bridge would cost more than, say, $2 million is almost any city in this country.

          • To the contrary tyburg, as a taxpayer, I care very much that costs of public works be kept lean, mean and manageable, especially in the long term. And as an architect who has worked on public projects, I do not believe that corners should be cut. And I can tell you that public works in New York are not 3x more expensive than public works in other urban areas.

          • I won’t comment on your reading comprehension capabilities, numbers you pull out your arse, or your logical faculties, Tyburg, but please note that my comment addressed the quality of the investment, not whether or not there should be a bridge.

            But I do disagree with you regarding the quality of the investment and the reasonableness of cost. I think you are WRONG when you claim that the cheaper bridge is a better investment. There is a big difference between a bridge that is designed for a public institution and one that is designed for a private client. Public buildings are much more rigorously designed for a number of reasons including an increased service life, conservative planning for failure and redundancy, and a substantially lower tolerance for risk compared to private sector buildings. It’s not reasonable to compare construction costs between public sector and private sector development.

            Also, As a work of civic architecture, the bridge will have enduring cultural value, and it is appropriate to pursue design excellence and innovation in such a structure.

            By the way, here is a link to a site that purports to put a price tag on the cost of a moon landing – http://www.asi.org/adb/m/02/07/apollo-cost.html – The 1969 Apollo 11 mission cost $355MM in 1969, or about $2.2BN in todays $ – no comparison to a small bridge really.

    • “Wait… No one is reacting to the price tag?! $6.2 million for this bridge?”

      I initially did. And also at the “a $19.2 million contract to construct three turf fields and a playground on Pier 5″

      But I didn’t want to say anything cause it’s in the sacred land of Brooklyn Heights. And it’s a park overlooking the city and the much loved Brooklyn Bridge.

    • “Wait… No one is reacting to the price tag?! $6.2 million for this bridge?”

      I initially did. And also at the “a $19.2 million contract to construct three turf fields and a playground on Pier 5″

      But I didn’t want to say anything cause it’s in the sacred land of Brooklyn Heights. And it’s a park overlooking the city and the much loved Brooklyn Bridge.

  • Question:
    Is this park; Brooklyn Bridge park; generating revenue for the city?

  • I think the footbridge is kind of dumb myself. It doesn’t really create much of a shortcut and it will probably disrupt a perfectly good children’s playground.
    Most people seem thrilled by it though, so I defer to the conventional wisdom. In my humble opinion the six million should be redirected to…for instance…building the damn park?

  • How about an NYC comparison…. labor and unionism constant… Last spring, the DOT spent $2 million for extra street repairs after the extra harsh winter. This entailed 40,000 potholes filled and 30,000 square yards of more intense repairs.

    Yes, it’s not building a small pedestrian bridge. I know. A small pedestrian bridge should obviously be 3X as expensive as 3 months of street repairs.

  • How about an NYC comparison…. labor and unionism constant… Last spring, the DOT spent $2 million for extra street repairs after the extra harsh winter. This entailed 40,000 potholes filled and 30,000 square yards of more intense repairs.

    Yes, it’s not building a small pedestrian bridge. I know. A small pedestrian bridge should obviously be 3X as expensive as 3 months of street repairs.