Pier 1 Domes Doomed? Our Man With Cam Investigates.

By on June 18, 2010 11:28 am in brooklyn bridge park, Health, Kids, Parents, Video

Mr. Junkersfeld takes a morning stroll to the Pier 1 playground, finds the solar fryers climbing domes fenced off, and learns their fate.

, ,

27 Responses to Pier 1 Domes Doomed? Our Man With Cam Investigates.

  1. bornhere June 18, 2010 at 11:36 am #

    http://tinyurl.com/2al8kmy

  2. ABC June 18, 2010 at 11:47 am #

    there were MANY small kids burned and they didn’t address the problem. the one this week was seriously burned. wonder how large the lawsuit will be?

  4. Karl Junkersfeld June 18, 2010 at 12:38 pm #

    Please, Pier One is not in DUMBO. The southern side of Old Fulton is the Heights. The northern side is DUMBO. It is a clear dividing line. If Pier One is in DUMBO, maybe we should call this blog the DUMBO Blog.

  5. Sheeple Waker June 18, 2010 at 12:42 pm #

    Acres & acres of precious NYC waterfront property was left to fester during 30-40 years of non-use! No jobs, no recreation, no tourists visiting, etc.? Why aren’t politicians/bureaucrats ever held responsible for outrageous wastes like this?

    Now after all that, they give us shoddy, ill-planned nonsense!

  6. Karl Junkersfeld June 18, 2010 at 1:10 pm #

    I’ve been to Pier One just about every day since it opened and I would hardly say that the park was ill planned. This area is laid out brilliantly from every aspect conceivable. They have created elevation with land fill (topography), they have created water gardens, spiral pools, beautiful lawns etc etc etc…..

    This is probably the best planned park in the history of New York.

    Let’s not go overboard because of 3 ill-planned orbs. Any fair objective person would say this park is outrageously beautiful. It is flat out a super park space.

    To expect everything to go perfectly right out of the gate is unrealistic. The key is learning from your mistakes and correcting them promptly.

  7. Dan In Brooklyn June 18, 2010 at 4:02 pm #

    I agree with Karl’s last comment 100 percent. People on this blog have been extremely critical of this park’s designers, primarily citing a couple small mistakes, when the park as a whole is an amazing addition to the area and a beautiful place to spend time.

  8. my2cents June 18, 2010 at 4:39 pm #

    I second Karl and Dan. I am tired of carping about the park and “design over function.” We are really lucky to have it, and these are minor teething troubles that are easily fixed.

  9. digby June 18, 2010 at 5:16 pm #

    The East River shoreline represents a close to 50 year old epic market and local government failure. Isn’t it ironic that some of the NYC areas most valuable real estate has sat dormant for this long period? The fact that something is being done to create greenspace there for the benefit of the public for long term should be cause for joy. Instead, the back benchers now nit-pick on the tiniest details and lose site of the bigger success at work here. Yes, a merry go round, condo or eatery here or can be problematic, but not to the point where all deals are stopped. These small items should be manageable with constructive dialogue among all parties.

    As a renting transplant (I know, not the type you want to see here), I often think of the Heights as a fabricated section of an otherwise real, thriving, hard nosed city. Its residents walk hand in hand in a Pleasantville sort of way (JWs), and the others are imported middle aged trust funders with few of the worries that most of us have, with an alarming blindness to the bigger picture and ongoing fixation on minute details that over time normally work themselves out. Then you have the “native” aged, the long term residents who “stuck it out when things were in the shitter” and who think they have eminent domain power over just about everything. In reality, these dinosaurs just happened to buy at the right time, and now have or soon will create their own trust funders among their offspring – to ensure ongoing solvency to the Heights Casino! The gray army disdains the JWs but, in fact, their nest eggs have been valued because of the JWs real estate escapades. Both parties do need more productive outlets for their time – and to spend their loads of money. Go help a kid in East New York to learn how to make money off money or something!
    Me? I am enjoying Piers 1 and 6, and cannot wait to see 2, 3, 4, and 5 open and enjoyed.

  10. ashton June 18, 2010 at 6:49 pm #

    The domes get hot. Get rid of them. Put something else in their place that children will enjoy. What’s all the angst?
    Something doesn’t work like it is supposed to, so get rid of it. No need to get all philosophical and metaphysical.

  11. AEB June 18, 2010 at 7:16 pm #

    The issue of the domes isn’t a judgment on the utility, design or beauty of the WHOLE park.

    Rather it speaks to a lack of consciousness on the part of those who designed them and those who reviewed and green-lighted their construction and installation without, apparently, asking the right questions about their safety. Or maybe ANY questions.

  12. ashton June 18, 2010 at 7:45 pm #

    I think I wrote this before but I will repeat it, nothing was ever so hot as the vinyl upholstery in my father’s station wagon back in the pre a.c. days. Holy smokes, a kid felt like a burger on the grill. When we used to get in the car and we felt the burn, we knew: it’s summer!

  13. cat June 18, 2010 at 9:39 pm #

    I agree with AEB.

    And Ashton, just because we got burnt as kids is no reason to be laissez faire about putting gigantic inverted woks in a playground. The back seats of our parents’ station wagons were an inadvertent hazard. The playground was PLANNED, and supposedly with children in mind.

  14. ABC June 18, 2010 at 9:44 pm #

    Ashton, was it hot enough to burn your skin off? Bcs, unfortunately, that is how hot the domes got.

    I like the park. I don’t think it’s the best designed public park I’ve seen lately (chicago has done a great job) and there are design issues, but it’s a great addition.

    But the whole “We never had carseats when I was a kid and we survived” kind of argument is so dumb. Listen, your dad’s station wagon was not hot enough to forever scar you. The end.

  15. Sheeple Waker June 19, 2010 at 1:01 am #

    To Junkersfeld, Dan, my2cents, digby, et al:

    Why do you ignore the first part of my comment, “Acres & acres of precious NYC waterfront property was left to fester during 30-40 years of non-use! No jobs, no recreation, no tourists visiting, etc.? Why aren’t politicians/bureaucrats ever held responsible for outrageous wastes like this?”

    Furthermore, the burn-the-kids domes aren’t the only problem with the park. Did you not read the lengthy comments about the lack of safe entry/egress at Pier 1 & Pier 6? Our politicos had about 40 years to plan this park, while prime waterfront property was left to rot! Why not get it right the first time?

    Please stop being apologists for our dysfunctional government!

  16. Publius June 19, 2010 at 3:24 am #

    I hope the Starchitect will compensate the people of the City of NY out of the $18,000,000.00 he received for his firm’s “expertise” in all of these emerging design flaws.

  17. nabeguy June 19, 2010 at 7:25 am #

    Sheepie, it was not the city government per se that held up the development of the waterfront, it was the Port Authority. Up until 2000, they were still insisting that it was a financially viable entity.
    http://tinyurl.com/34foztn

  18. AEB June 19, 2010 at 5:08 pm #

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/19/nyregion/19orbs.html?ref=nyregion

    From the article:

    “…The domes cost a total of $84,000 and were made by Urban Design Berlin, a German company that says it makes “extraordinary stylish play equipment.” The domes also met national and international play structure safety standards, Ms. Mitchell said….”

  19. T.K. Small June 19, 2010 at 5:44 pm #

    It is interesting that the NY Times article that AEB references, doesn’t mention the BBP Conservancy or Development Corporation.

  20. Karl Junkersfeld June 19, 2010 at 6:10 pm #

    Excuse my ignorance. I know the city now has control over the park’s finances yet they reference the Empire State Development Corporation. Am I the only individual that is confused?

  21. nabeguy June 19, 2010 at 6:42 pm #

    $84,000? For 3 domes? Seems the kids are the only ones getting burned.

  22. Lisa June 19, 2010 at 10:15 pm #

    Get a refund on the domes and fund the Double D Pools for the summer.

  23. David on Middagh June 19, 2010 at 10:34 pm #

    For $84K, the domes should come with their own individual hydraulic cooling systems.

    (Just my opinion; I am not a playground hydraulics engineer.)

  24. ABC June 20, 2010 at 8:46 am #

    Maybe the domes can be moved to the Walt Whitman Park which has some shade. Possibly shave a little off the budget for that park which is 4.5 million dollars. Yes — four point five million dollars.

  25. David on Middagh June 20, 2010 at 12:09 pm #

    Which is Walt Whitman Park? Adjacent to the Emergency Mgmt. building on Cadman Plaza East?

  26. Claude Scales June 20, 2010 at 12:32 pm #

    David: yes.

  27. David on Middagh June 20, 2010 at 2:06 pm #

    I think Walt would have preferred a water slide.