• We endorse the plan’s strong and inventive concept for the Park’s open spaces. The current plan envisages a larger proportion of open space than any previous iteration, and that space is masterfully designed. The design team has incorporated floating walkways, natural shorelines and creative land forms to create a multitude of routes, close to the water’s edge, through this long, narrow site. We will have the opportunity that is unmatched in the City to experience the East River and its vistas. The plan offers active and passive recreation spaces that are so badly needed in Brooklyn.

• We continue to support creation of a self-sustaining park with development limited to that which is necessary to cover maintenance and operating costs of the Park. As you recall, the Port Authority, State and City are contributing land to the project with the understanding that at least 80 percent of it will be public park land. The remaining land must be used to generate revenues to support the ongoing maintenance and operations of the Park.

• We endorse the concept of “urban junctions”, agreeing that development parcels should be concentrated at those points where the City and its infrastructure intersect with the Park.

• We believe that housing is the most appropriate and effective means to finance the Park because it offers the maximum amount of revenue for the least amount of development footprint, and it ensures a year-round source of activity and stewardship for the Park.
  
  We are, however, concerned about the height of the proposed 315 foot residential tower on the uplands of Pier 6. Many BHA members have complained that the building is too high for the waterfront. Our Park Committee is engaging in constructive dialogue with Development Corporation staff and designers about this concern.

Recently, the design team has suggested including town houses along Furman Street between Piers 2 and 5. We are opposed to this idea because a string of town houses would negate the urban junction concept and privatize the narrow upland areas of the Park. We are discussing alternative programming for this part of the Park with the planning team.

As of now, an important source of revenue for the Park is not included in the planners’ financial projections; namely, payments to the Park from the developer and owners of 360 Furman Street in lieu of property tax payments. We understand that City and State officials are working to secure such payments for the Park. This could mean additional revenues, possibly reducing the necessary amount of new development.

We have other concerns and suggestions:

• We acknowledge that there is currently not enough money available to build all of the amenities that we would like to see included in the Park, most notably an indoor active recreation facility. As the Park design continues, space should be saved for such future use and a commitment made to secure its funding.

• Sound attenuation for areas within, around and above the Park must be planned and designed now as part of the effort to build the Park.

• The Purchase Building is a contributing building in the Fulton Ferry Landing Historic District, and its demolition would create a dangerous precedent for historic preservation. Consequently, we would like to discuss potential park-related uses for all or part of the building with the Park design team.

• Access and transportation to the Park must be designed to limit the amount of vehicular traffic through Brooklyn Heights and the other residential neighborhoods near the Park. Joralemon Street between Hicks and Furman Streets should not provide vehicular access to Furman Street or to the Park.

• We acknowledge that there is currently not enough money available to build all of the amenities that we would like to see included in the Park, most notably an indoor active recreation facility. As the Park design continues, space should be saved for such future use and a commitment made to secure its funding.

• The proposed 16-story building on the Con Edison lot at the north end of the Park leaves relatively little space for public access. We urge the Park planners to modify the plan so as to increase public access to that end of the site. Also, the DEP building should be incorporated into the Park plan now, and the nearby DOT sheds should be removed.

• The development parcels must be subject to strict design standards to ensure design excellence that will enhance the Park experience, not detract from it.

Planning for Brooklyn Bridge Park has come a long way, and public involvement has played a critical role since its inception. The development team must continue meeting regularly with neighborhood groups and elected officials until the Park is built.

Click here for the Letter to Members