Brooklyn Bridge Park: It’s a Go!

why demolish the purchase building - there is precious little history left on the fron there as it is.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 9:35 AM

Rejoice we defeated the idiotic NIMBY racist folks in Cobble Hill and Joralemon Street. Their quiet streets now ruined by actual people going down to enjoy the waterfront. Imagine!

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 9:54 AM

actual people going down to their boat slips... how much will one of those go for?

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 10:04 AM

Man, my murderball team is going to LOVE hitting Montague St. drunk off our ASS after a few games down there!

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 10:10 AM

9:54 - In what way are your so-called NIMBYs racist?

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 10:13 AM

They should build an underwater observation tunnel connecting this to the South Side Seaport, and have two towers rise up out of the water with observation decks along the way.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 10:14 AM

Hallelujah!

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 10:39 AM

Centerpiece my ass, you misleading asshat. There are three residential building being built. Each one is the far end of the park (2 on the sout side, one on the north side). Proceeds from those 3 buildings will make it possible to operate the park without being dependent on the whims of the state budget. THat's a good thing. You'll still have 85 acres of waterfront park. Do the expensive buildings along 5th ave and CPW take away from central park? Are the coop towers on Prospect Park west the centerpiece of Prospect Park? No! So shut up and stop standing in the way of a noble effort to increase the amount of park space for the people of Brooklyn.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 10:41 AM

* centerpiece of THE FINANCING of this park *

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 10:54 AM

I'll believe it when I see it. This will be quietly scaled back and finally dropped half done when the economics of doing projects in Brooklyn threatens the redevelopment of the Manhattan (Dubai Disneyland) waterfront.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 11:13 AM

Keep your asshats on. All that they are doing now is asbestos abatement and clean-up.
We are not going to see tree-plantings any time soon.
The Purchase Building is little more than an eyesore blocking a fantastic view. Demo on that should start soon. No one is going to miss it when it's gone.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 11:14 AM

<3

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 11:15 AM

The new residential buildings planned to rise next to 360 Furman Street (aka 1 Brooklyn Bridge Park)would be next to (not in) the proposed park. They will not help finance the park but rather will pay for the ongoing maintanence of the Park should it ever get built.
The misinformation campaign put on by nearby residents about the buildings and the park is worthy of Saddam's former ministry of communications.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 11:32 AM

You gets the soccer ball if you kick it into the water?

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 11:58 AM

85 acres includes the water fwiw. and they count the water fairly far into the river.

And I do think this rendering should have the other buildings in it -- are they to be in those white "foot prints"? Blocking the view of the bridge from this POV?

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 11:59 AM

The first game contested on the soccer pitch should be asshats vs. fucktards. Losers get thrown in the river to be chopped up by criss-crossing "The Beast" sightseeing boats.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 12:21 PM

There are large abandoned cold storage warehouses where the white footprints are. I think a new hotel is planned for that site.

The new residential buildings are south of this view.

In my opinion, the whole Port Authority site should have been sold to a developer for the construction of housing. The state cannot afford to build a new park here. A nice waterfront promenade that would run north south through the new commnity would be great. That way the area would have life all year round and real money could be raised from the sale of assets rather than from the wallets of already over-taxed NY residents.
It would also provide new housing. It would have been a win-win. The current proposal is a lose-lose. plus its never going to happen.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 12:21 PM

The views from the Promenade of the East anchorage of the Brooklyn Bridge will be partly blocked by the new hotel.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 12:30 PM

About time NYC redevelops it waterfront property. Manufacturing and warehousing left here a long time ago and I don't need relics standing up as a momento. NYC has the most underutilized watrefront property in the world. Let's get on with it. Coney Island, east side, west side, all of it.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 12:34 PM

I agree with 12:34, Lets get on with it.
The governemnt is clearly not up to the task.
(Why is it that the higher the taxes the less the government can actually do?) The private sector needs to be allowed to step in and mop things up and put up new buildings and communities. I wish the dead hand of the state and city governments would release its vice-like grip. How long has Albany been talking and planning and paying for drawings and models for a park on this benighted strip of industrial wasteland? Fifteen years? Twenty years? Enough already. Offer the bureaucrats early retirement and sell the land to private interests.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 12:44 PM

12:21, and winners get to sip champagne on their yachts moored in the park's marina?
LOL

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 1:16 PM

For the record it is not 3 new residential buildings but 5 new residential buildings - two at Atlantic Ave /pier 6 next to 360 Furman Street, 2 at Fulton Landing and one at John Street. 1250 luxury apartments - making it 40% larger than Concord Village. Housing does not belong inside a public park. Sad that the city and state pols dump Brooklyn with this precedent. This was to be the great park to celebrate the great bridge. Pathetic, really, to diminish our great bridge with this housing complex.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 1:16 PM

good god, 1250 apartments? i had no idea. heard about the grocery store. i guess a victoria's secret is next, huh? some park. too bad - we need parks in brooklyn.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 1:23 PM

12:21 You want a year round ecomnic asset? Legalize gambling in NY and turn these industrial dumps into hotels and casinos. No tax dollars needed and the tourists will cough up plenty of Euro's and Pounds. New Jobs for the local economy. Lots of major cities around the world have this. HK has Macau, you can gamble in the Airports in Schipol(NL) and Vegas while waiting for your flight, the Indian resrevations are making a killing in CT, A.C. sucks anyway, why not NYC?

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 3:56 PM

Excellent question, Brooklynnative. One only an asshat would ask!

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 5:22 PM

New York Magazine used the term "asshat" in today's "Daily Intelligencer."

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 5:50 PM

New York Magazine used the term "asshat" in today's "Daily Intelligencer."

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 5:51 PM

stop with the ridiculous comparisons to highrises on the great lawn. This is not some undeveloped wasteland of granite and trees to be set upon by FL Olmstead we're talking about - there are already industrial buildings in the footprint of where those developments are going to be. Why not just say the buildings are alongside the park just like CPW buildings are alongside CP? You can say the buildings are in the park if you want (because they're being developed in tandem with the park and therefore part of the same plan) but it's clear they're on the edges of the park, not "in the middle of the great lawn" or whatever this park's equivalent is. I'm not a believer in everything coming out of the BBPDC, which has little credibility in my eyes for their maintenance budget, constant revision of park uses, etc., but the rhetoric of the anti-BBPDC camp about the buildings is just plain misleading.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 6:25 PM

These buildings are IN the park. There is no separation of park lands from the buildings, particularly the three buildings in the north end. They sit right on the lawns that were to have been park lawns. Take a look. The john Street building is RIGHT IN the park, no separation from a street or roadway. The Hotel/Condo buildings at Fulton Landing, too. The two new towers in the south end have a 15 foot road surface around them - private road by the by for people who live in the park - hardly Central Park South, east, west or the same for Prospect Park. And those great parks have the addition of a wall and berms to separate the park areas from residences.

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 6:41 PM

Google says: 1,480,000 search results for "asshat"

Posted by: guest at January 30, 2008 11:13 PM

Think about it, why would anyone want to buy an apt. in a park? Unless, of course, it really isn't gonna be a park with active recreation and such...oh, yeah, they took out all the active year-recreation once they decided to put housing down there. Get the picture? Private uses of the park drive out public uses. Want to have 30 story towers inside the berm in Prospect park? Sounds like a good plan.

Posted by: guest at January 31, 2008 9:19 AM

Ditto on 9:19. Fuggatabout housing inside parks. Let's get back to combating the alarming rates of obesity and asthma in NYC with a REAL PARK that has active year round recreation. Fuggatabout luxury condo owners who don't want people using "their lawns". Who wants condos in parks anyway? Lazy politicians who are on the dole from real estate developers? Wherz dah park?

Posted by: guest at January 31, 2008 9:29 AM

This park will be stunning. Had the park construction actually begun when it was supposed to (April 2007) the 1 BBP sales would have gone much quicker. Next 9 months will see the warehouses on pier 1-6 torn down (as of BBPDC release dated Jan 28- construction began this week), and the doubters will begin witnessing the transformation from wasteland to jewel. Even our politicians cannot screw up for much longer the most obvious beautification project in NY state.

Posted by: guest at February 2, 2008 8:34 PM