Misspellings and Missteps at Kane and Hicks
A reader with a bird’s eye view of the construction taking place on the Northwest corner of Kane and Hicks writes us to express his frustration at a construction worker’s failure to correctly reassemble the old barricade: back in 2004, it spelled “vote”, a sign of how long this project has lingered. (At least they…
A reader with a bird’s eye view of the construction taking place on the Northwest corner of Kane and Hicks writes us to express his frustration at a construction worker’s failure to correctly reassemble the old barricade: back in 2004, it spelled “vote”, a sign of how long this project has lingered. (At least they could have made it read “Veto”.) As we noted a few weeks ago, things are starting to pick up, though the consensus seems to be that this will be nothing special to look at.
Wheels Turning at Kane and Hicks [Brownstoner] GMAP
You know I can appreciate the need for additional housing, but for crying out loud can’t something be done to ensure that new development is a little more in keeping with the neighborhoods they’re built in. I feel like theres a lot of opposition out there to the way Brooklyn is currently being developed, but in the end the developers wind up doing what they want anyway.
…or even like they did on the West Side of Manhattan (off the west village).
Make it mostly park, with some restaurant/retail, no greater than 4 stories, like that Cipriani development that is going in.
No 40-story condo tower colonies there, the priceless location remains open and recreational, and the public will be so much better off for it.
Why some people insist that a 40 story view- and recreation-blocking colony of private condo towers is the only answer any time that rare *public* waterfront opens up is completely beyond me.
NYC waterfront needs to be developed into PARKS not housing. I know I am dreaming, but wouldn’t it be great if the Brooklyn waterfront was just open park land.
I’m with the times, and I don’t hate towers, I’d just prefer something else. If the decision were solely up to you, based on pure aesthtics and near where you lived, would you prefer towers, or something else?
NYC waterfronts need to be developed. Period. Get with the times….
And speaking of precedents, I forgot to mention the late inclusion of all the residential towers added to the waterfront park plan.
Just more causing me to expect the worst for the piers south of Atlantic Ave.
Greg,
Seeing what just happened down Atlantic Avenue in recent years (huge tract streamrolled into plans for 20 new HUGE towers, you can bet that such a huge stretch of priceless waterfront property will be under similar pressures, and may get approved to proceed in spite of fierce community protest just like Atlantic Yards did.
So I share your skepticism regarding the Community Board and power of community/public pressure, now that there is comparable recent (current!) precedent.
This is in the hands of the Port Authority (and not requiring eminent domain seizure of existing private property like AY), so it makes it that much easier for local pols and developers to make an end-run around the public to strike deals that suit themselves.
Another example: isn’t Yassky under fire for supporting developers against community’s preservation wishes for 184 Kent on the Williamsburg waterfront, paving way for it to be torn down to make way for towers (potentially)?
So yeah, expect a lotta backroom dealings (like the waterfront study a few years back), but this time making actual deals with developers, and the public largely locked out.
Hate to be grim, just too many recent precedents across Brooklyn pointing that way.
You are right about Pier 6, my bad. I don’t think though that CB 6’s opoosition counts for much, my experience has been that most of the time they act just likek you would expect wannabe politicians to act. I know there will be a lot of opposition to any tall buildings, I just don’t think the opposition will succed. I’d love to see the planned Brooklyn Brewery at Pier 7 come to fruition, but I just don’t see how one two or three releatively tall (taller than existing buildings) will be avoided. Not looking for an argument, but I am wondering why you think local, even community-based opposition, will prevent the PA, Pols and developers from building large residential on this prime spot?
greg,
CB 6 is opposed to any large residential towers on Pier 7-12.(Pier 6 is part of Brooklyn Bridge Park) They have tenatively supported smaller, live-work buildings for artists. Pier 7 will remain as industrial.