bbp52011.JPG
Crain’s has an article breaking down the various challenges that presently exist in terms of bringing Brooklyn Bridge Park plans to fruition anytime soon. As has been covered, the Brooklyn Bridge Park Corp.’s recent draft report from consultants identifying possible funding sources for the park not involving housing has been met with suggestions from community groups and electeds that the park should pursue Watchtower properties as possible future sources of revenue. Crain’s notes the final report that’s supposed to identify income for the roughly $16 million a year for maintaining the park is due next month, and that the city “will contribute about $50 million more toward completing the park only if it can reach an agreement with BBPC on a program for self-sustained funding.” Meanwhile, the idea of constructing several new in-park developments to help fund the park remains controversial with a bunch of politicians and neighborhood groups. The bottom line, according to the article: “After more than two decades of planning and $233 million, the park is not even half-finished. The next major step is spring of 2012, with the opening of three recreational fields covering five acres at Pier 5. The BBPC says two-thirds of the park will be completed by 2013.”
Work on Brooklyn Bridge Park Could Stall [Crain’s]


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. Bloomberg’s vision of the future is that so many hundreds of thousands of filthy rich people are going to start pouring into the city that we may not be able to build luxury towers fast enough to meet the demand.
    I think that by and large the vast numbers of people coming to New York are impoverished immigrants, the rich prefer to live in places with more convenient parking and lower taxes.
    But in the coming decades even the poor will start detouring around NYC and the we will loose population. There is little reason for business people to pay such a premium to be miserable. There are lovely restaurants everywhere nowadays. And have I mentioned taxes?

  2. to repeat what someone has already written, the rendering that we saw of buildings near the Squib bridge is the proposed hotel complex.
    The condo towers are proposed for the south end of the park. Nothing is stopping anyone from building them except that the market right now is flooded with brand-new condo towers.

  3. “I say let them build the structures, and provide good amenities in the ground floors. If it means that the park will be finished and well maintained in perpetuity, then so be it.”

    To my surprise, I find myself agreeing with designerbiker.

  4. sorry fsrq, but I don’t consider those dinky little strips in BPC. They’re more like well manicured underwear stains. Pretty to look at perhaps, but they smell of fertilizer and conceit. This is a new park, with incredible potential and housing is the worst possible solution. I should know. I’m in the real estate development business. And I’m not on the BH Board. Live in Manhattan and think you bozos in brooklyn shouldn’t make the mistake we’ve made with our waterfront.

  5. “btw plenty of public parks are more or less up-kept by PRIVATE funds – Central, Bryant, increasingly Prospect to name a few”

    Completely incorrect.

    Prospect Park’s budget is approximately 80 percent paid by the city and 20 percent paid privately. Central Park is roughly 60 percent public and 40 percent private.

    This kind of formula is an excellent balance in keeping the public involved and allowing the input of private individuals and groups that can help innovate new programs and projects.

    The idea that BBP should be completely privately funded is not only impractical, it’s a concept that threatens the core principals behind public parks that are available and open to all.

  6. In the blog last week there was an article about the new bridge to Squibb park. The rendering showed the volume of the two new buildings as gray boxes, and it did not look as bad as I had imagined.

    I say let them build the structures, and provide good amenities in the ground floors. If it means that the park will be finished and well maintained in perpetuity, then so be it.

  7. I agree with fsrq and will add that in the current administration “new park” means “opportunity for new development” The two go hand in hand. Their most spectacular success has been the Highline in Manhattan. Everyone loves the new park on the old viaduct and no one has paid much attention to the upzoning on all the adjacent blocks that has resulted in the construction of fairly large new buildings. It was a brilliant synthesis.
    Things have not worked out so splendidly in Brooklyn yet either here or in Williamsburg although things could turn around. There is something very wonderful about living on the waterfront.

1 2 3