Last week fancy renderings from the seven developers vying to build a hotel and condo near Pier 1 were released, but the Eagle reports that—as with everything involving Brooklyn Bridge Park—the proposal process has its critics. Some people who were at the meeting at which the proposals were released “voiced concern over the development’s impact on the park and surrounding neighborhoods,” according to the article. Concerns were also aired about the time frame for the process, which allows a few weeks for written comments from the public. Meanwhile, old worries about the nature of the park surfaced. Roy Sloane, president of the Cobble Hill Association, had the following to say: “Is there anyone here who doubts that a commercial building has been introduced into a park we fought 25 years for? They plan to turn it into a mall!”
Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Raises Questions [Eagle]
Possible Plans for Bridge Park Development Site Released [Brownstoner]


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

  1. The Highline is actually a good comparable to BBP.
    It is the same idea. The city creates an amenity (the Park) the adjacent lots become more attractive so the city upzones and the new buildings pay for the upkeep of the park in lieu of regular property taxes. This is the Bloomberg model.
    People need to remember that like the highline, there was no park here at all until the city decided to make one. The highline was a train track, Brooklyn Bridge Park was industrial piers.
    It is extremely misleading to say that new buildings “in the park” are planned. 360 Furman Street predates the park as did the old cold storage warehouse that were demolished to clear the site of the buildings in question here. That the city decided to make a park at all when the whole tract could have been converted to taxable uses is the miracle that should be celebrated.

  2. Sloane and the Cobble Hill Association have been fighting AGAINST the construction of the park for at least ten years. They wanted the derelict piers and abandoned cold storage warehouses to stay exactly the way they were in 1999. They have no credibility whatever with anyone, but journalists seem to think they make for a good sound byte.
    In the real world they are inconsequential.
    Don’t you want to report what some of the real people said at the hearing?

1 2 3 4