Opponents of Pier Six Towers Voice Concerns At Public Meeting

By on June 23, 2015 10:32 pm in brooklyn bridge park, Cobble Hill, Development, Downtown Brooklyn, DUMBO, Environment, Government, News, Real Estate

At yesterday’s public meeting of the Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation board, revised plans for the two high rise residential buildings proposed for the landward side of Pier Six were presented for consideration. The meeting was held as a result of the settlement of a lawsuit brought by People for Green Space.

As Mary Frost’s Eagle story reports, local residents representing various interested groups were present and expressed their concerns, as did a representative of State Senator Daniel Squadron’s office. These concerns largely were about the effect of new, dense residential development on local infrastructure, especially considering the additional residential development contemplated for the LICH site and the site of the Brooklyn Heights Branch Library, and the development already occurring at Pierhouse and in downtown Brooklyn. They were united in calling for a new environmental impact study based on major changes that have taken place since the last study was completed. They also questioned the need for the housing to support the Park’s projected expenses.

Two local business groups, the DUMBO Business Improvement District and the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership spoke in favor of the new buildings, stressing the positive effects on local commerce. The Partnership’s representative said that over 1,000 people had expressed interest in applying for affordable units in the proposed towers.

Share this Story:

, , , , , , , ,

  • Willow Street Watch

    I would advise anyone reading any comments here to first, STOP, go back, and fully review ALL the comments made under the June 20 story on the Upcoming 6/22 meeting of the NYDC n Pier 6 development.

    The press coverage has been good but disappointing in three aspects; the placid nature compared to what really occured. The coverage in no way conveyed the visceral atmosphere of anger which surfaced in part,, upon people seeing BBP Corp members passing notes/whispering to board members during the proceedings! Then, calls to have numerous board members due to recuse themselves due to apparent conflicts of
    Interests were also VERY jarring and not covered.

  • mlcraryville

    There are those who insist that the numbers the Park Corp. put out have to be accepted. Why? Because [profit making] corporations all pay for their own audits and financial reports. Therefore, the Park Corp. numbers should also be accepted. BUT, our Park Corp. was not founded as a profit-making company. It is a public interest company. Unlike the commercial companies,there is no SEC or any other regulatory agency setting the precise rules for auditing their numbers. No, the BBPC is regulated only by whims and appointees of the Mayor; that is the City. But, in this case, the City has a general interest in promoting the “highest” use of the property, not the use which would best serve the interest of the public and not the use which would make the developers most happy.