November 29, 2006
Judge Tosses Brooklyn Bridge Park Lawsuit
The lawsuit brought by the Brooklyn Bridge Park Defense Fund against the state and city over leasing land to private developers was dismissed by a state judge yesterday. While the Brooklyn Bridge Park Defense Fund had been fine with earlier plans for private development as the state worked to add 85 acres of parkland to the area, when the number of condos increased sharply, a lawsuit was filed. The state's argument was that the private development would help create revenue to sustain the park. From the NY Sun:
The judge, Lawrence Knipel of state Supreme Court in Brooklyn, struck down [the BBPDF's claim that the state "violated" a public trust doctrine by leasing parkland to developers]. The parcels that will go to developers, Judge Knipel ruled, "are not parkland, have never been parkland and were never designated to become parkland."The private development includes not just condos but a hotel. The BBPDF plans to appeal.The decision suggests that Judge Knipel found more than only legal arguments in the court papers. Underlying the case, Judge Knipel wrote, " is a fundamental disagreement" over whether a park should be designed with bringing in revenue.
"While this court is sympathetic to petitioner's position that parks should not be burdened with the cost of their own maintenance, this is a disagreement of philosophy, not law," the decision says.
|
Hello, luxury condos.
Bye bye, promenade.
Is there anything there now? How can you say goodbye to something that doesn't and can't exist without that of which you disapprove?
Bye bye dilapidation, hello beautiful park partially funded by private development.
Wow, where to start?
The Promenade does exist. It has for quite some time, I believe the 50s to be exact. Oh, and BTW, the only reason it does exist is because the community fought Robert Moses and stopped him from putting a six-lane highway through some living rooms (including one that would become mine). So that's the first thing.
The second is that right now the Promenade offers drop-dead views of the City to anyone who wants to amble down there. The old docks, which are dilapidated and underused, could be turned into a beautiful park. But here's the thing, and you might have to read this twice to get it, but by SELLING this land to developers, which is what the park builders are set to do, they will then BUILD BUILDINGS that will BLOCK the views of the Promenade. Specifically along the north end, where the old National Storage building will be replaced by a new building which will reduce the view of the Brooklyn Bridge and points north to merely a rumor.
A beautiful park funded by private development? The park that is proposed is neither as beautiful as it could be, nor is it a "park" funded by philantropic concerns, as you imply. It is a land grab, pure and simple.
So lets review:
Promenade is there, and lovely as is
Views destroyed by greedy developers
Park plans are smokescreen for land grab
Sorry to have to fact check you guys, but there was obviously a desperate need to.
You can adopt the knee-jerk, progressive "private development is evil" approach that you are taking, or you can look beneath the surface and understand what this is REALLY about.
The lawsuit is a joke, and the people behind it are akin to any other group of rich, white elitist bourgeois who want to protect what is a de facto gated community. These same people, who now hold up the 2000 "illustrative" plan as if it were the Magna Carta, were vocal critics of that earlier effort. In fact, at that time, they argued that one of their precious brownstone streets should be closed to PEDESTRIAN traffic - you know, to keep the huddled brown masses from walking down their street to a public park.
They don't want to change the plan - they want to kill the park. Don't let their name fool you.
The current land on the downtown Brooklyn waterfront is an underutilized industrial wasteland that nobody has had access to for more than 5 decades.
What is proposed is a massive new park, yes, financed by private development - but private development that takes up LESS than 10% of the footprint of the overall park project.
If you've seen the actual park plans - and I have studied their evolution closely over the last 10 years - they are stunning. They include an entire pier - each one about the size of Union Square, incidentally - filled with covered court sports including handball and basketball.
Another pier is devoted entirely to open field play - football, frisbee, kite flying.....In addition to that, the upland will offer a series of beautiful rolling hills, and the designers have incorporated some incredible water-level boardwalks and a safe kayaking zone that will offer many people in Brooklyn their first opportunity to intimately experience the water up close.
Thankfully they have lost their lawsuit. Hopefully Brooklyn can now get its park.