Brooklyn Bridge Park: When and How?
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…
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]
Most of the recent additional public parks have had funding sources required. the problem with building new public parks without funding sources is the Parks departments budget has been shrinking and adding new parks without funding means less money for already strained parks budgets. Hudson River Park is completely independently funded….and includes housing(nice housing too) in Battery Park City. The City already has added more than its 50% share of the capital costs. The $50 million additional is 100% city funding. If the State actors want to they should put the money up too..after all it was the State(through the ESDC) which everyone universally agrees wasted tens of millions of dollars. There is already housing in the park. the foot print of the proposed housing will be smaller than any other suggested source-leaving the most open space. I have no problem if the State actors would guarantee that any short fall in their alternative source will be made up by state and not City funds(again assuming from within the 4 corners of the park)….and fees from users is a non starter. but that won’t happen.
“It’s never made sense to me that this particular public park has to be self-funding,”
Thats because you clearly havent thought much about it. when the Park was conceived it wasnt a Park, and funding for the building and upkeep of a park of this size and scope would never be (or have been) appropriated by our government, so a self-funding plan was adopted (btw plenty of public parks are more or less up-kept by PRIVATE funds – Central, Bryant, increasingly Prospect to name a few)
So while all of you people can sit around whining that this park shouldn’t be self-funded or you can get around to reality and realize – its housing or no more park.
“Opponents of ‘housing’ are killing the park development.”
DING DING DING – thats the actual goal!
Nothing is stopping them from building the housing or the new hotel except the economy, which is, um, not robust.
The legal problems with the Empire Stores and TW are the result of extremely clumsy shenanigans between State Parks and City Hall.
“Brooklyn Brodge Park is stuck right now. . . . Without the income-producing development there will be no more new park.”
I agree with Minard.
It’s never made sense to me that this particular public park has to be self-funding, and I agree that the amount of revenue they expect BBP to generate annually is unrealistic. But charging admission will never happen, nor would I want it to.
tough sh….
Who the fuck wants housing down near the park????
we want open space not more freaking high rises and more people …..
“City parks can’t legally charge admission? So change the law”
-you have to be on the Board of Governors of the Brooklyn Heights Association, am I right?
The Housing component of the park has been part of the planning of BBP for years before the park construction began.