New York Daily News Really Likes Plan for Brooklyn Heights Library

By on September 24, 2014 10:18 am in Brooklyn Heights

As regular BHB readers know, last week the Brooklyn Public Library announced its decision regarding who will build a 30-story tower on the site of the Brooklyn Heights Branch library. Based upon a recent Op-Ed, the Daily News—whose publisher, Mort Zuckerman is also the lead investor in developer Boston Properties, Inc.—heartily approves the selection of the Hudson Companies:

NYDN: The Brooklyn Public Library’s trustees have approved an extraordinarily good deal for their cash-strapped system that would establish a brand-new outpost in Brooklyn Heights to be paid for by the sale to a developer of the city-owned land on which a branch now sits.

In a nod to NIMBYism charges that have been leveled before against local residents, the News editorial board had this to say:

The streets of the Heights echo with charges that the library system is selling its soul. Nonsense. Brooklyn’s 60-branch network has piled up some $300 million in major construction costs. The city budget’s contribution for that purpose this year: just $20.8 million.

Of course, BHB would be remiss it didn’t provide a comment about the library deal from Michael White of Citizens Defending Libraries:

A year ago last July Bill de Blasio stood with Citizens Defending libraries calling for a halt to the sale and shrinkage of our libraries including the Brooklyn Heights Library.

What’s different now is that our citizens diligence has brought to light a state of affairs with respect to how the library’s sale and shrinkage was conceived that is far worse than anything de Blasio or anyone else knew about back then.

I think the BPL trustees have therefore embarrassed themselves by at this time further pursuing an endeavor with such a contaminated past.

Next round in this saga? October 7 when the Brooklyn Heights Library Community Advisory Committee meets to discuss the plan that BPL leadership has already approved.

Stay tuned!

Share this Story:

, , , , ,

←  Older Comments
 →
  • bethman14

    Sorry Hights Res, you’re flat out wrong. The City will still own the library….it will still be a public, city owned library just like it is today. Thats fact spelled out in dozens of places. You can argue that the library is getting smaller, you can argue that there shouldn’t be more condos in BH, you can argue there should be more affordable housing….but saying that a public resource will be forever lost is just a plain old flat out lie. Sorry, but it is.

  • heights res

    “but saying that a public resource will be forever lost is just a plain old flat out lie. Sorry, but it is.”
    Please reread what I wrote – never said that a public resource will be forever lost. What I wrote was:
    “Doesn’t matter if a (smaller) library is included; the PUBLIC land will be forever lost. Also rarely mentioned – the library was built on land originally taken through eminent domain.”
    I stand by that……..

  • Michael Rock

    I almost never read the comment section of a blog, but when I slip up and forget, I almost always find myself reciting the serenity prayer.

  • gatornyc

    Why is public land sacred? Simply put, it isn’t as governments buy and sell public land regularly. The sale of public land can be exceptionally beneficial where, as here, it enables government to unlock its value. If the City was selling one of the many office style buildings it owns would you have the same concern?

  • heights res

    PUBLIC land (including parks) is intended to be used for the greater good. This may (very) occasionally/rarely include selling/trading public property. I cannot see how that applies in this instance. How is allowing private developers to make a gazillion dollars in exchange for a much smaller library resource ever to be considered to be in the PUBLIC interest?
    More serious is the fact that the land was originally obtained through eminent domain. That is a legal designation that insists on public use.
    “The Fifth Amendment imposes limitations on the exercise of eminent domain: the taking must be for public use and just compensation must be paid.”
    It all stinks…..

  • Cindy Sm

    The proximity to and ease of access for
    A research facility is a central factor to
    It’s usability and value. The number of
    Users IS a central measure of its public
    Value. The ease of access for this out-
    Standing facility was a great feature
    of this PUBLIC resource…..

  • Reggie

    Exactly BPL’s argument. More people come to the Central Library, proposed as the future home of the Business Branch, for start-up, employment and other business information, and it is more centrally located.

  • Justine Swartz

          I congratulate the  wealthy St.Ann’s private school children who in addition to already having a first rate gymnasium in their school and utilizes Cadman Plaza Park for their outdoor activities in the Fall and Spring, and play in the St. Francis college Olympic Swimming pool during the summer time will now 
    be the beneficiaries of another gymnasium that will be located in the new proposed condominium development at Cadman Plaza.
          I commiserate with the underprivileged AfricanAmerican  children who live in the projects at Concord Village, scant blocks away, who will not be invited to any play-dates in the new swanky
    gym. Life is not fair and this is a great educational lesson for
    the poor kids.  
                Justine Swartz            

  • Cindy Sm

    Tell me something; just WHERE is
    The center of the business community
    In this borough? The Boro Hall area or
    (duh) next to prospect park…well you
    Can always research on the net…with
    Everything you do VERY searchable…

  • Reggie

    Sure, the central business district is downtown. But since economic growth is driven by small business (duh), there really is no center–it’s everywhere.

  • marshasrimler

    wrong again.. its giving away public property

  • marshasrimler

    yes Beth.. a lawsuit or lawsuits are coming

  • marshasrimler

    it is being taken apart. thee BPL says it it going in the stacks at Central… another fable

  • marshasrimler

    wrong. it is being buried in the stacks.

  • marshasrimler

    it is here.. no doubt about it. we have the brooklyn tech triangle and new incubators coming on board. the BPL is behind the times

  • bethman14

    You know Marsha there has been some really very interesting, in fact cutting edge research done that has shown beyond a doubt that there are about 2.5 MILLION people in Brooklyn who DONT live in Brooklyn Heights!!!

    Isn’t that wild?? Can you imagine it? An entire population of people who are actually closer to Grand Army Plaza than you are?

    I know, for a BH elitist its a revelation thats tough to believe, but it happens to be true!

  • marshasrimler

    I know..i am a native new yorker who has worked and taken public transit from midwood to canarise

  • Mary

    No project that alters public space should ever be categorized as a “no-brainer”. The BH library was never a ‘dump’ until the BPL set its sights on its land.

    On another note: The carping that BH residents are in an exclusive, white, rich enclave that hates affordable housing is absurd. There are three Mitchell Lama co-op buildings on Cadman that have housed middle-income families for decades. There were also affordable M-L rental buildings, until their covenants expired and the long-time residents were evicted.

    These integrated communities helped to stabilize BH in the 70s and 80s, attracting a mix of people, all with equal stakes. This is in sharp contrast to the condo 80/20 formula that gives the super majority of private units a dominant voice, while reaping property tax relief from the minority of “affordable” housing units.

    Shame, shame, shame, Brooklyn.

  • Mary

    Correction: 70 Henry went private a few years back. So that’s 2 M-L co-ops left.

  • Mary

    75 Henry…

  • Klezmer O’Brien

    Why do you think that anyone who disagrees with you is on the payroll of somebody else? Maybe you’re just wrong? Or out of touch? Or…

  • marshasrimler

    not all who disagree just some. like you and bethman

  • Klezmer O’Brien

    If I could find someone who would pay me to come in here and banter with you, I would take it. But so far no rich and powerful guy is dumb enough to do so. And what would me and Bethman charge for our little conspiracy? i wouldn’t pay us minimum wage for arguing with somebody like you in postings nobody reads.

  • marshasrimler

    your insults mean nothing to me

  • Klezmer O’Brien

    Well, obviously.

    You dish it out but you can’t take it.

    Anybody who disagrees with you or has a differing perspective, no matter how respectfully articulated, has some dark and ulterior motive, funded by THE MAN.

    Eleanor Rigby. Picks up the rice in a church where a wedding has been.

    Lives in a dream.

  • marshasrimler

    huh?

←  Older Comments
 →