Amidst Lingering Controversy, BBP Construction to Begin
Construction on Brooklyn Bridge Park is likely to begin next month, according to an article in today’s Daily News, and the first phase of the project will involve the demolition of the landmark Department of Purchase building. “It’s further evidence that the [ESDC] cares so little about what the community thinks,” said Judi Francis, president…
Construction on Brooklyn Bridge Park is likely to begin next month, according to an article in today’s Daily News, and the first phase of the project will involve the demolition of the landmark Department of Purchase building. “It’s further evidence that the [ESDC] cares so little about what the community thinks,” said Judi Francis, president of the Brooklyn Bridge Park Defense Fund. “All parties, for and against the project, have wanted to preserve it because it’s a landmark.” Others, however, have argued the building needed to come down because it would interrupt the park’s continuity, and the LPC approved its demolition last year. Meanwhile, some neighborhood watchdogs are concerned about other aspects of the project as it gets off the ground: “I’m happy that the process is moving forward, but I hope there is a comprehensive plan for financing the park,” said BBP critic Roy Sloane.
New Waterfront Park Coming Soon [NY Daily News]
Brooklyn Bridge Park Meeting: The Morning After [Brownstoner]
Brooklyn Bridge Park: Your Input, Please [Brownstoner]
12:43
what are you talking about? Have you ever walked down by the Purchase Building? It completely blocks the view of the waterfront to pedestrians on Front Street and of the north sweep of the shoreline from the Fulton Ferry Park.
It is one big view-blocker. Just because it is not a highrise does not mean it is a good building. It is a very long ugly warehouse that not only blocks the view but also blocks circulation north and south on the park. By contrast the Dock Street building will block the voews of the condo owners behind it in DUMBO, but very little from any pedestrian’s point of view. Believe it or not, when people are walking over the Brooklyn Bride, their gazes are not fixated on the ugly factories of DUMBO.
Most of the apartments that will be paying into the park maintenance are in 1 Brooklyn Bridge Park, aka 360 Furman Street. Those apartments will be sold and inhabited whether or not a new park is created next door. Isn’t it better that the real estate taxes paid by those condo owners go to maintain the park rather than into the City’s general fund? It’s a no-brainer.
Ms. Lewis;
I repeat my statement that this city needs a new Robert Moses, to deal with the likes of community activists such as your organization.
Your statement above is amazing to me. It is written as if there is no political process in this town. If the “community” is so outraged that part of a former industrial area is being converted to residential use, and most is being converted to a parkland, then why aren’t they contacting their local representative? Why aren’t the letters pouring in?? As the old expression goes, politicians count votes, and surely if there was such an overwhelming consensus of oppostion, as you state, they would have gotten the message.
I am also boggled by your laundry list of requested amentities. Do you want a park, or a country club? If it’s the latter, who will pay for the amentities? Where was the revenue coming from that you state ($10 million)?
It seems to me that you are typical of many community activists who are willing to block all progress unless you get your way on everything. You are not satisfied with the compromises that are the normal part of any political process, so you take to the courts.
Benson
12:51,
your arguement is full of holes.
It is well-crafted propaganda, I grant you,
and it misleads beautifully.
The facts on the ground are that the powers that be do not have the money to build, much less maintain, a new park. I think many of us are hopeful that Gov. Spitzer will come up with the money to start building the park but he will never relent on the funds for maintaining the park. Those funds will be generated by 360 Furman St. formerly owned by the Jehovahs, now being converted to hundreds of luxury apartments, and three other much, much smaller residential buildings to be built in the formerly manufacturing-zoned area west of Furman Street. The difference between this and putting up towers in Prospect Park is that Prospect Park is a park and has been one for a long time. There is no park along Furman St, there never has been one. Perhaps some day, one will be built, regardless of your opposition. That new park will be maintained by the “payments in lieu of taxes” or PILOT funds generated by the residential buildings NEXT TO the park. By far the biggest of these buildings, previoulsy cited, was built in the 1920’s. You do yourself and the community a diservice by twisting the truth and producing compelling mistatements that have the power to confuse and convince the impressionable and those who do not have the facts at their disposal.
It is really a cool building architecturally and it is too bad that people couldn’t figure out a way to save it. Seems like it wouldn’t have been that hard to come up with a plan that preserves the building.
I usually don’t read blogs but thought I would at least try to shed light on the BBP Defense Fund’s position on the “park”. First, the communities that surround the park – all of them – developed and signed off on a great park plan in 2001, a plan that led the state and city to commit funds to build it. That plan also had enough revenue – almost $10 million – to sustain it without any need for housing. That plan, forged by thousands of hours of volunteers’ time and significant community input and, again, community agreement across the board, was never even considered when, on Christmas eve 2004 a housing development was foisted on the public – totally without community input. Now we have a plan that is stripped of the top features the communities requested: swimming pools, ice rink, indoor field house, outdoor amphitheater and a place to have drinks out on the piers. But we do have 1250 luxury apartments inside the park. And whether or not you personally like the Purchase building, all the communities that surround the park also spoke out about trying to preserve this building – with many suggestions for reusing the building as a restaurant or ice rink (also serving the need for revenue generation). Once again, the requests by the communities -all the surrounding civic associations as well as city-wide Landmark preservation groups – were ignored by the ESDC. So now we have just the most expensive “park” without any year round recreation and limited access along its perimeter. Oh, and 1250 units of private luxury housing – a precedent. How do you feel about 6 high-rise towers inside of Prospect Park? I welcome a conversation and/or a meeting to outline the specifics of the Defense Fund, and how we we are working for a real park – and a real park, the sooner the better. My number is 718.797.9830. I have the courage not to hide behind an anonymous moniker- I hope you will speak to me, particularly if you would like to help us secure the great park Brooklyn deserves. Judi Francis, President of the BBP Defense Fund
I don’t see the inconsistency in the preservationists’ position. This is a two story building. It doesn’t really block pedestrians or views (widening the perspective on the photo above would reveal this). The proposed Dock Street building would be much, much taller. The absurdity of the comparison suggests deep antipathies toward the “activists” that undermine reasonable consideration.
This building is an impressive example of New Deal modernism, and, like the Williamsburg Houses, complicates architectural history. Up close, it really stands out from the other service buildings in the area. A little care would make it shine in the park.
Let’s get rid of this building, and NOT build Dock Street. That would be a nice solution.
If you haven’t heard anyone oppose the demolition of this building then you are out of it. The Landmarks Commission approved the demolition over the strong objections of all the surrounding community organizations. Some individuals in those organizations may ne in favor of the demo but if so they are keeping their thoughts to themselves. If you oppose Dock Street but are in favor of the demo of the Purchase Building, you are in a small minority of vocal activists.
The politically correct stand among the “gentry” is to oppose Dock Street and oppose the demo of Purchase. That’s that.