“Flatiron” Design Proposed For Library Site

Question: what did everyone think of last night’s CB 2’s meeting? I thought the tie vote and deferment to a later date was impressive
given the former shoe-in status of the approval.

The Mitchell Lama one is 31 and the privatized one facing Cadman Plaza is 34. Not talking about the obviously lower buildings.

No matter how eloquently you try to make this point it smacks of one thing . . . stereotyping and racism (okay, so two things).

What the Willowtown clown says with rancor and ineptness actually DOES capture a portion of the NIMBY sentiment that has a less sewage-y smell but joins the “dissent” just as Clarence Thomas often joins 3 or 4 slightly less crazy guys.

On the Federal level, people have come to accept that “infrastructure projects” put millions to work. Of course, because it’s government spending, most Republicans oppose it, but the dynamic – GROW OR DIE – is basically just as sound as climate change, even if their supporters’ profiles are as different as can be.

The only thing I find terrible – going beyond lunacy about “staturary” that I personally find pitiful – is that there is nothing resembling “due process” here. The Library has been starved over the years, so they’re pretty desperate – and would probably take a low-ball offer without much hesitation.

But – as an astute commentator pointed out – we’ve already seen the “nose under the tent” ploy at work, with “trial balloons” calling for this, that and the other thing – but they didn’t make the “final cut.” (Anybody with a year or so memory re LICH will recognize the playbook.)

How does the City “make a deal” without anything resembling an arms length appraisal? In a better world, maybe, the City would share in the profits, but even in our current, very flawed one where Bill de B talking “liberal” while he sits down with REBNY and says, “What can we do for each other?” … it’s insane to agree on a price and then spec the darn thing out.

What homeowner would commit to a renovation at a specified price without having a “concrete” design to reference?!

Add to it that the folks working for the city (now) might very well wind up in the private sector in a year or 2. If they’re – sorry if there is even one guy or gal there who stays for reasons other than lack of ambition and desire for a decent pension – actually “lifers” at this or that agency, do they begin to have the savvy or smarts or clout of the folks across the table from them?

And the local pols are more of the same. They’ll posture a little, because it might be hazardous if they looked too much like they’re in the pockets of Marvel and its cronies. But they’ll fold pretty quickly, telling everybody about the “great deal” they got for library users.

Plenty of park land has been “traded” – probably on equally developer-favorable terms. Should churches get special tax treatment for centuries and then “cash out?” … Should the City consider things like libraries and parks as monopoly money or deeds printed on 2 inch squares of cardboard? I think not. The developers are 1 percenters who need to be dragged from the trough that our City has become. No, you cannot put $1MM down, borrow a ton, and increase your net work $10MM in a year or 2 and have an income stream forever.

If the City’s employees and politicians started to represents the City’s residents and voters, we might actually get a win-win here, rather than the “1 for you, 20 for me” that’s both normal and seemingly pre-ordained!

Your comments are bordering on the pathological. Your analogies are illogical and your anger is blatantly hysterical. I think you need to move to a gated community somewhere north of the Arctic circle.

wrong. affordable housing was one of the main points of consideration when considering proposals.

you can see what all the developers proposed. ALL on-site

http://www.bklynlibrary.org/sites/default/files/files/pdf/bkheights/CAC%20RFP%20briefing.pdf

ALL of what you have just said was mentioned either in testimony or in private contacts last night at the CB 2 meeting. Were you there?

So besides what you said, what effective methodology do you have
To halt or limit this approaching menace? Do you have something to
offer to actually HELP with the situation?

Because that’s what’s needed now…we all know why this is bad, what
we need is for something to really help safeguard the Heights.

I get the impression that somehow you’re not exactly from the Heights.

Notice the large shadow this monstrosity projects over the Heights, even in the glossy rendering. Wonder what it will do to the nearby trees.

I could not attend. But one thing is dead certain: This building will cast dark, morning shadows reaching deep into the Heights all year round. There should be a call for shadow studies accessible on line for all to see which project where and when the shadows will fall. We need to know what we are in for.

Well, the fireworks began when the board manager seeming to “explained to those opposed that the pro development presentations would go on then the board would vote on the matter.

This caused Jeffrey Smith to begin to shout that the process had all the openness of a soviet show trial. Others triggered by Smith shouted that he entire process was stacked. The manager quickly rose now saying that opposed comments would follow the presentation. Meanwhile members of the board, used to their insularity, began to shout at those questioning the process to be quiet and ” just listen”…The pro development presentations turned out to be TWO HOURS. The wondonderfully transparent and integral Brooklyn public library board took the position that a 33 floor building was a great ifea because it will allow large funds to, they say, flow to a wide number of other neighborhood projects and libraries all over the borough. Then we had the Hudson company and ” Marvel” architects with their very reasonable (sounding) glowing accounts of the site selection, the funding which will flow to the BPL and why a significantly dowdownsized facility, now half sunken in the ground is a perfectly reasonable idea.

http://www.brooklyneagle.com/articles/2015/6/18/brooklyn-heights-library-cb2-hearing-ends-stalemate-after-hours-testimony-0

because what was said at the hearing – the article seems very fine reporting – summarizes the “state of play.” … But I come away thinking that too many folks (like the BHA) have “rolled over.” Do the residents (co-operators, I think) of 40 Clinton have the ghost of a chance of litigation, given that their apartments will go from well-lit to the opposite?

The absence of infrastructure improvements is very troubling to me. Yes, they’ll have a decent amount (it appears) of underground parking, but given how very heavily trafficked both Clinton St. and CPW are, it would be very tough to provide adequately for cars getting in and out – on either side. Of course, the developers would prefer that the exit be on CPW, because they mention a “townhouse feel” to the proposed Clinton St. main entrance. That would/will have the effect of making the library portion less attractive and less safe.

Then there’s developer b.s. about “volumetric studies” re sunlight – they are clearly building as high AND as wide as the law permits – when the lying starts before construction, it bodes ill.

What really would be nice would be tying the building to the BPL delivering on its promise to maintain service for a few years in the Heights. Does anybody believe that they can and will?

Last, for all that there are thoroughly bigoted comments below – is this blog not “moderated” at all? – one would hope that Heights residents were among those who thought a “poor door” last year was a step too far!!

So, welcome to 2015, where the affordable housing units that earn the developers the right to go that much higher … put those units a mile or 2 away. I won’t get all high and mighty, but there are a lot more supporters of “narrowing the gap between rich and poor” than there are folks who raise questions about the City VERY CONSCIOUSLY increasing income and race segregation. There’s mention that Eric Adams might get to say something about all this, and it surely would be great if he showed genuine courage here.

When one thinks how bodies like the one holding this hearing are usually rubber stamps, the fact that they wound up with a tie vote – yes-or-no – speaks volumes as to how malodorous a deal this is.

Last, here’s what looks like a pretty “fair” – well, probably at “high noon” when nary a shadow can be found – photo that went online earlier this week:

http://280cadman.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/h11.jpg

If Bloomberg were still mayor, it probably would have gone to 50 stories with the proviso that the condo send some money toward the maintenance of the parks that will make each apt. 20-30% more pricey.

Welcome to Brooklyn’s very own “Second Avenue in the East 80’s!”

Then Joan Millman rose to speak in resounding terms she denounced the sale of public property to private interests as an irreversible loss. Her testimony was met with lour applause! Others followed noting that this was the first such sale in the history of the city and the board was crossing a line, a legagy they would have to live with.

Others again pointed the the BPL governors’s convoluted and less than clear financial statements. Interestingly, neither Mr White or hus sup-poters brought up the pattern of HOW the BPL board was appointed something that was an item of strong prior investigation by the friends
of the library organization…the effect of having testimony after a long presentation was that a large number of those wishing to speak who
Had signed up, had to leave prior to being given a chance to speak.
After 10 PM one speaker, Doug Bivono detailed the intertwining of the network of mostly well hidden from public view longest organizationsforming the basic corridor between the mayor’s office and the RE development community. As almost the last speaker, neighbor-
hood activist Jeff Smith rose saying lack of transparency has another two names fraud and scam. He pointed to the increase in population with “not one new police, not one new fire and not one new ems..

You are right, Joe, that affordable housing was part of the RFP. However, to Ben’s accusation, Hudson never said it would construct its affordable units on-site.

Re: guest, brixtony, gatornyc: Once upon a time there was a very “interesting” institution named the Frankfurt school. Out of their
Twisted minds came the freedom crushing doctrine of political correctness. About 1968, campus radicals and soon college administrations began to try to enforce PC. Sonn anything a certain political/cultural sector didn’t want discussed or they had no answer
To, they sought to ban on campus.

The American way, siirs, is to refute an argument not to try to ban
Discussions or a topic. If you have an effective honest reply let’s
hear it. Otherwise, allow others their honest view on critical matters.

True — I never thought Brooklyn Heights could become a pitiful Valley of the Shadow of … Shadows.