« HMS Market Report: Pretty Much What Miller Samuel Said 'Notorious': How the Neighborhood Has Changed »

January 20, 2009

Apartments, Hotel in Brooklyn Bridge Park On Hold

brooklyn-bridge-park-rendering-0109.jpgMuch to the glee of the BHA and others, the hotel and apartments that were to be built from at the end of Atlantic Avenue and Old Fulton Street and generate income for the park have been delayed indefinitely, reports The Brooklyn Paper. The culprit? Ye olde recession. The impact of the announcement on the schedule of the park itself has not been made public.




Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/8046

Comments

The park is over budget now. It is supposed to be self sufficient(for operating money). Battery Park City's Apartments pays for everything on the Hudson in Manhattan and Governors Island and the parks on the East River too. Its too bad some of that money can't come to Brooklyn....

Posted by: smeyer418 at January 20, 2009 10:02 AM

The NIMBYs really have no grasp when it comes to matters economic.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 20, 2009 10:05 AM

In other news today, the sun rose in the sky....

Posted by: slick at January 20, 2009 11:07 AM

DIBS: the ultimate NIMBY

Posted by: werner at January 20, 2009 11:11 AM

The Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation will be holding a public meeting at 6:00 pm on Thursday January 29th, 2009. The topic will be the Park's Financial Model. The meeting will take place in the Dibner Auditorium, NYU-Polytechnic University, 5 Metrotech Center.

Posted by: g man at January 20, 2009 12:28 PM

Park on hold.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 20, 2009 1:12 PM

"Brownstones Half Off" - the park is not on hold. If you've been reading the paper or even if you'd gone down to the site in the last week, you'd see it's quite the opposite. Construction teams are mobilizing to begin work on the first phase of the park at Pier 1 and Pier 6. Also, let me get this straight - a governmental entity is actually responding to well-known market conditions in order to maximize revenue for the park - and that's bad news?

This whole article seems premature. The development corporation just announced a meeting to talk about this very topic. So why don't we wait to hear what they have to say and then cricize instead of making up what we think is going on and criticizing that phantom scenario.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at January 20, 2009 1:32 PM

"Construction teams are mobilizing..."

Residual effect. The contractor will juice the funds while they are still there. Even though you "hear a whistle", "coach" still tells you to "play through". But the "whistle was blown" and you will "bring the ball back". Park on hold.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 20, 2009 2:00 PM

"Make my heights" is the biggest BBP booster of all time. he/she will not let a word of criticism pass without scolding.
"The park is good, critics are bad" Thank heavens no one elected him/her Pope of all Parks.

Posted by: sam at January 20, 2009 2:15 PM

Yeah, I saw heavy equipment on the piers today, and a 40' container belonging to a diving company.

Posted by: denton at January 20, 2009 2:49 PM

I never said critics are bad - I just think that alot of their arguments are full of holes and I point em out when I see them. I actually believe that many of the critics have good intentions.

Like the argument put forth by BHO. It's very convenient for him that actual construction work taking place as we speak is not proof that the project is alive and ticking. Based on that logic, there is nothing that could possibly proove the project is still alive. If David Patterson came on this site and promised that the project was funded and moving forward, BHO would find fault with that too. So therefore, I'll make the same bet with BHO that I offered to make with you Sam - I will meet you on Pier 1 in one year (the announced early opening date for Pier 1 is winter 2010). If there's a portion of park built and open, you all owe me a couple of beers. If you want - I'll even raise the stakes. Loser has to take a dip in the east river..

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at January 20, 2009 3:19 PM

p heights, for those of us living through this saga now since time immemorial, "the park" has become more of a mythic ideal than a real place, like Avalon. They did demo some of the old warehouses, and they do "promise" to have the first itty-bitty conrer of the park finished by next year so that is all for the good. Unfortunately, this project does not have a built-in constituency, more of the locals are agaisnt it than for it, so politically it is very fragile.
I did hear that they are trucking in the soil from the excavation of the new LIRR tunnel. That is a good sign. Worst scenario? -mountains of dirt sitting abandoned on collapsing piers for the next six years.

Posted by: sam at January 20, 2009 4:36 PM

sam, I was not aware "more of the locals are agaisnt it than for it". Why would that be? Unless you're talking about the debate over the usage, i.e., how much would be private and how much would be public. I'm personally thrilled at the prospect of having the space developed...one day...

Posted by: Biff Champion at January 20, 2009 4:52 PM

Biff, there is a huge backlash agaisnt the park from residents of Fulton Ferry, Brooklyn Heights and Cobble Hill.
At issue is the "privatization" of the park by condo towers and hotels. Some suspect this argument is disingenuous and what people really don't want is additional traffic and visitors from "other parts" of Brooklyn. Some folks, especially in Willowtown and Cobble Hill are dead set agaisnt the park and have created their own organization to stop it.

Posted by: sam at January 20, 2009 5:13 PM

Thanks sam. The privatization of the park is exactly what I was referring to when I commented that is the only reason I could think of for people to be opposed to the project. But if the park isn't built, what are those in BH, CH, etc. expecting to see on the site? Pavement for the next 50 years?

Posted by: Biff Champion at January 20, 2009 5:35 PM

Sam don't confuse volume with numbers. Based on my extensive conversations with locals, most are thrilled at the notion of having a park, and accept the funding plan that requires under 10% of the land to be used to fund the operating expenses of the park. Those opposed to the park are only a very loud handful who include the editorial board of the brooklyn papers. Just because they're loud doesn't make them the majority. Also, I take issue with characterizing the first opening as "itty bitty". If memory serves, it includes all of pier 1, and a portion of pier 6 and totals around 15 acres - not itty bitty by anyone's standards.

I understand why long-time watchers of the park would be skeptical and disillusioned by now. But you've got to see the signs that are in front of your eyes right now and recognize that the people running this project right now are not the same ones who stalled for 15 yeas. People tend to think of government as a monolithic entity - but it's not. It's made up of a cast of thousands of indivduals - some excellent, some horrible. The current tema has done nothing but produce countless signs that this park is actually happening: demolition, construction contracts signed, timeline, and now actual work happening on site. Never during the 20-year history of this project have there been so many positive signs. What's it going to take to turn you into a believer sam?

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at January 20, 2009 5:39 PM

I do believe...I do believe...I'm clapping my hands, really.
I agree with you that there are better civil servants than others but in reality, it is not about individuals, it is about monstrous government agencies such as the Port Authority of NY & NJ, and the Empire State Development Corporation. Can there be worse, less efiicient, more dysfunctional government bodies anywhere?
I'm clapping, but unless some zillionaire steps up and says "I'm building it and paying for it" (fat chance) it is not going to happen. Sorry, it's one of those things I just know that unfortunately I am right about.
If the towers don't happen, the park won't happen. We are hearing the towers are on hold. Any questions?

Posted by: sam at January 20, 2009 6:35 PM

So are you taking me up on my wager sam? Loser takes in a dip in the east river off of pier 1 in January 2010?

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at January 20, 2009 7:01 PM

Speak for yourselves, bloggers! Willowtowners and Cobble Hillers ARE NOT AGAINST THE PARK. They are against a development project full of luxury apartments in new buildings, full of berms without possibility of recreation, and without (until perhaps now) an open public process.

PLEASE don't bring up the NAC, CAC, CACK, or whatever the latest name is -- they're not a true public entity and the members are a hand-picked unrepresentative microcosm chosen by the Conservancy, rather than by their own neighborhoods or neighborhood associations. Many may be fine people, but they are not neighborhood representatives. Those who don't believe there's a sizeable constituency, please see:

1. The election of Daniel Squadron over the 20+ year incumbent, who ushered in private housing WITHOUT ANY OPEN PUBLIC PROCESS.

2. Repeated full-to-the-gills workshops at LICH to re-envsion the park as an actual PARK.

And realize that the true NIMBYs are those who will either settle, or even wish for, a park full of private housing to discourage people from outside the Heights/DUMBO visiting the park. These deluded people need to consider the legitimacy of the budget figures used to justify housing, rather than alternative sources of revenue. (Not to mention acreage formulas using water acres to bring down the cost per acre!) We can only pray that we're approaching that goal with the meeting coming up.

Posted by: bklyn20 at January 20, 2009 7:17 PM

Biff,
Please see above ^^^^^
I rest my case

The locals, many of them, hate this park.

Posted by: sam at January 20, 2009 7:57 PM

Sam,
Please see above ^^^^^
I rest my case

The arguments made by the critics, many of them, are based on paranoia and some weird perception that the residents of the developments, instead adding to the vibrancy and safety of the park (in a jane jacobs "eyes on the street" kind of way), will instead build electric fences guarded by rabid dogs to keep out anyone who doesn't live there.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at January 20, 2009 8:16 PM

P Heights, OK hon, now you have lost me. Huh?

Posted by: sam at January 20, 2009 8:24 PM

It's not "paranoid" to think that for-profit real estate developments might have an interest in creating something that might most people don't think will seem very "park like". Anyone remember how quickly the "park" at the proposed Atlantic Yards disappeared.

Posted by: Boerum Hill at January 20, 2009 8:41 PM

"Loser has to take a dip in the east river."

Pinch your nose.

"Worst scenario? -mountains of dirt sitting abandoned on collapsing piers for the next six years."

That's the best case scenario.

I liked what they did this past summer. I would very much welcome the park (so hopefully I'm wrong). But the reality is that their funding model is breaking down. Park on hold.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 20, 2009 10:21 PM

Boerum Hill - that's a terrible analogy. AY is nothing like brooklyn bride park. Noone is relying on private developers to build the park - they will just build on the development sites. A public agency (BBPDC) is building the park. The design for the park is already set and much of the park will already be built before a single developer gets involved.
See what I mean sam? All of these anti BBP argumens are full of holes.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at January 20, 2009 11:36 PM

Make My Argument The Losing Argument

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 20, 2009 11:51 PM

P Heights has stopped making sense.
That's too bad, I enjoyed our repartee.

Posted by: sam at January 20, 2009 11:56 PM

BHO - the fact is you know nothing about whether or not the funding model is breaking down or not, since the only source for this information is the brooklyn papers. In less than 10 days, we'll all be able to hear directly from the horses mouth how they plan to deal with the credit crunch and we'll all be able to judge for ourselves.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at January 21, 2009 12:05 AM

Dammit, MMHTPH! Give me the last word! You're right about the horse's mouth. We will soon find out. But you're wrong about my sources:

DJIA lost 40 percent (bottom?)
Madoff collapsed
NYS unemployment server crashed
Citi's getting whacked
[it's 2:03 AM - don't make me list them all]

BTW, Paragon is having a sale on wet suits.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 21, 2009 2:05 AM

Make my Hieghts,

You're right that the Park is being built by a Public Agency and not the Developer. However, the ongoing funding for the Park will come from the private component of the Park. If the Park is dependent on that money, then inevitably the interests of the private component will come first. The best case scenario would be that you end up with a "Park" that is more like the promendade in Battery Park City than like CentraL Park or Prospect Park.

Posted by: Boerum Hill at January 21, 2009 9:55 AM

Live in Brooklyn Heights. Loved last summer's pocket park, would love even more to see the whole shebang. Not bothered one whit by the idea of private housing/hotels in the park, or by the idea that people from "other neighborhoods" would come there. And I find the fury at a self-funding park ridiculous and wearying.

And it brings up one of the things I like least about my neighborhood: the visceral, knee-jerk hatred of ANYTHING new. (Oh my God, the bike lanes are GREEN!) A while back one of the sites on my daily rounds -- might have been Brownstoner, maybe BH Blog -- dug up an old Times article about the imminent pooper-scooper laws. Folks in the Heights were going ballistic in opposition. It was kind of funny, but mostly just sad.

Posted by: BklynJace at January 21, 2009 10:10 AM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions