Court Strikes Down “Save The View Now” Lawsuit; Injunction Lifted

Word has reached us that on Friday, June 12, Justice Knipel of the New York Supreme Court issued his decision in the litigation brought by Save The View Now and other plaintiffs seeking to rectify the blocking of views from the Brooklyn Heights Promenade and other locations by the Pierhouse structure under construction at Pier 1, Brooklyn Bridge Park. The decision holds that the lawsuit was barred by the statute of limitations, and that the provisions limiting the height of structures at that location are not enforceable. The lifting of the preliminary injunction means that construction of the penthouse portion of Parcel B, the part of the structure south of the pedestrian bridge, may now proceed.

STVN and its allies are considering an appeal. We have been promised a copy of the decision and of the Brooklyn Heights Association’s response soon, and will report further when it is available. DEVELOPING

Photo for BHB by Carrie Hamilton.

Share this Story:

, , , , ,

  • DIBS

    Yet you can’t suggest any.

  • Willow Street Watch

    Do either you or mr skunk read the blog before you start your rock throwing?

    For several weeks, elsewhere in this blog I have repeatedly suggested three basic reasonable avenues that have been
    used in dozens of situations of communities under attack.

    The three “J” points (again) are:

    1) make every effort to find a viable basis to take this matter
    from the state court system with its corruption and “level”
    of academic understanding and general behavior and move
    the action to the FEDERAL bench. If you have ANY legal
    background you would know the huge difference between
    the two environments AND the difference of how all manner
    of vile perps view thethe sobering prospect of standing before
    a federal Judge….

    2). Establish a REWARD SYSTEM for information on wrongdoing
    connected to any institution or condition which represents or
    may represent a threat to the Heights. Money put on the street
    ALWAYS brings all kinds of criminal/improper behavior and
    the perpetrators to the surface. Think depth charging people…

    3). Explore every avenue to place a ballot resolution related to the
    situation, or any threatening condition. Ballot resolutions can
    Be a severe punishment for any entrenched establishment
    because it alters the basic references points they have to
    operate in. A abusive action which results in even a move
    towards a ballot proposal is one of the most sobering con-
    sequences any “questionable figure” in public life can face.

    Put up all the false objections and arguments any of want, the reality
    is if you at this point do not move to do at least two of these basic
    Measures which have long been shown to be effective, you will
    continue to loose and be walked on…or is that what you want?

  • Willow Street Watch

    Please note the above three “J” points which I asked you to read…

  • skunky

    In re your “points”
    1) There’s no Federal money or property involved. This is a local zoning issue, not a civil rights issue. End of story.
    2) What kind of information could possibly come to light that might prove some sort of criminal act? Again, it’s a zoning issue, not criminal.
    3) AS WE’VE TOLD YOU BEFORE (see, I do read the blog), there is no provision in NY law for a ballot measures to be petitioned for. End of story.

    But hey, continue to bring up your moot “points” and you can feel self-righteous over the failure of the Save the View movement. I’m just here to point out that the righteous indignation over a marginally obstructed view is hilarious. This view used to be of rotting piers and abandoned warehouses.

  • Remsen Street Dweller

    The water view before Brooklyn Bridge Park was beautiful.

  • ws gilbert

    But you don’t live in Brooklyn Heights and we are hardly impressed with your two houses, Rolls or your hats!

  • ws gilbert

    So you want the view and neighborhood ruined because you can’t afford to live here. Not at all selfish, is it? I can’t afford to live on Central Park, but I wouldn’t want to ruin it for my own selfish ends. Newsflash – we all can’t afford to live where we want to.

  • ws gilbert

    No, you are wrong, it was a fairly unobstructed, iconic, world class view of the Manhattan skyline and the Brooklyn Bridge. That’s what we have lost.

  • Andrew Porter

    If you’re alleging bribery is involved, I’d suggest you have some damned good evidence before you post something here—and using a pseudonym at that.

  • Willow Street Watch

    First, I said we should make every effort to find a basis for federal court intervention. The fact that you, or an assorted gaggle of friends of the developers and casino types say this cannot be done does NOT mean there is no avenue here. And the courts involved do not need to be civil courts only.

    Second, if anyone tells me that there isn’t very serious wrongdoing in many parts of the real estate business I ask them to take their medicine or stop lying….and legally actionable does not only need to be criminal. While you very well might find it upsetting, cash rewards have resulted in thousands of serious crimes and civil infractions coming to light.

    Third, ballot resolutions are under many circumstances, have halted and prevented legions of assaultive behaviours against communities nationwide, the history is VERY clear on this….and just because hoards of crooked political types and propagandists deny it doesn’t make it not so……

  • Willow Street Watch

    Typical snide remark. What I advocated is an effort to unearth
    wrongdoing. If we had a full body of evidence we wouldn’t be doing this. But tell me, in your informed view, are there no criminal or
    improper acts going on in the real estate business? Really?
    We are under attack, our whole enviorment is in peril and you
    Don’t think we should be asking some hard questions? Oh by
    The way, use of handles is not improper.

  • Andrew Porter

    I back up my opinions by using my real name, whereas you…

  • Andrew Porter

    Spelled “grammar” wrong. Broke the word “understand” in two, and capitalized the second part. “Doesn’t any” should be “Don’t any…”

    If you can’t properly communicate your case, why should anyone read what you say?

  • Nomcebo Manzini

    That’s what you and many other posters miss. When people like Ratner and now some other rapacious developer “get away with” vandalism on a scale that far exceeds all the spray paint ever sold in the 5 boros, there’s gonna be even more of it in the years ahead.

    Bloomberg is/was a “master communicator” and a very flawed human being. By phrasing this – and getting many otherwise sensible people to “buy it” as, “We want world class parks, but we can’t saddle NYC’s residents with millions over the years to maintain it, … so we’ll make like airplanes – there’s FIRST CLASS for those who can afford it and “COACH” for everybody else.

    What went unsaid is that the LLC’s who buy these “precious” (in every sense) condos don’t pay their fair share of taxes and the developers basically fund pols instead of paying THEIR FAIR SHARE. And now that they’ve successfully drafted Bill de B. onto their team, Mayor Mike gets to indulge in some more bitter laughter.

    What Mike did brazenly “because he believed it to be in the City’s best interest (MAYBE!),” Bill has adopted as both pragmatic and making at least a little more likely his having a shot at a 2nd term.

    Anybody who can’t see that this is quite a bit different from a restaurant opening where there’s a noise or smoke or odor problem is essentially deaf and blind. That a Rep.-controlled Congress abolishes Estate taxes is “par for the course.”

    When as many New Yorkers as now seems to be the case say, “Without developers, where would we be? Give ’em what they want!” … “the end is near!”

    Parks and Libraries and the other things we expect from government CAN be financed the old-fashioned way, via an at least half-way fair tax system. The people using NY apts as a kind of colossal CD – spending 10-30 nights a year “in town” … could easily be hit up for what it takes to live inside a WELL MAINTAINED park. Believe me, they won’t opt for a condo in Boston as a result.

    Ever hear, “Heads, I win – Tails, you lose.” That’s what’s happening here. Oligarchs say, “I want my condo surrounded by greenery with an unobstructed harbor view…. I don’t give a F*** about anybody else’s view. You make it happen … but don’t expect me to pay much in taxes. I made and make my money in another country and your thieving, stupid politicians agreed to waive taxes for 30 years.” COME ON!