Heights Residents and Electeds Gather in Opposition to Pineapple Walk Tower

By on January 8, 2016 12:19 am in Brooklyn Heights, Development, Real Estate

As reported in detail by the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, concerned Heights residents and numerous elected officials convened at 101 Clark Street on Wednesday night to brainstorm ways to convince their neighbors at 75 Henry Street and adjacent town houses to vote “NO” on the potential sale of Pineapple Walk.  A developer has offered $75 million dollars for the site owned by Whitman Owners Corp. and has proposed a 40-story tower along with new retail stores.

Peter Bray, Executive Director of the Brooklyn Heights Association warned investigating the sale “opens a Pandora’s Box” adding that once developers have entered the conversation “with their money, PR firms, architect’s fancy renderings and promises pulled out of their pockets, it’s all very seductive. You can’t say no at that point, you’re really committed. A yes vote is saying this is going to happen.”

Councilmember Steve Levin said shareholders should reject the offer, “because of the impact to the community of the development, because of the impact of the density, because of the light and air impacts.” Adding, “[Shareholders] are obligated to look to after the long-term financial stability of their building” but he would also “encourage them to consider the input of their neighbors.”

Cadman Towers Board President, Toba Potosky cautioned that once the site has been sold, Whitman Owners Corp. has no influence over what developers will build explaining, “you’re not going to be partners.”  Unlike the recently approved sale of the Brooklyn Heights Library (where Councilman Levin negotiated many “sweeteners” to the deal), this sale is as-of-right and does not require approval from the City.   Shareholders have been asked to vote by January 15th, not on the actual sale, but whether to investigate the offer in more detail.

DISCLOSURE: This correspondent is a resident of Whitman Owners Corp.

Share this Story:

, , , , , , , ,

←  Older Comments
 →
  • DIBS

    Well if it is downzoned, who is to say that the developers will still want it or that the shareholders will feel they are being adequately compensated at a reduced price? That changes everything.

  • rss

    Have you taken rush hour trains lately?

  • rss

    I agree. The neighborhood will not benefit from this. The wonderful thing about Brooklyn Heights is that it is still a neighborhood – you know the shopkeepers, you have at least a nodding acquaintance with many of its residents. We don’t need to make it into a mini Manhattan. We are already going to have a big influx of people using subways, schools, parking, etc. due to the Pier House and the library tower.

    And despite what has been said elsewhere in this post – I think the small shops on Pineapple Walk are great.

    The tower will benefit the people that are given a big payout. (Except perhaps those that live on the Pineapple Walk side and will have their views ruined). I don’t see that anyone else is for it.

  • Thurston Howell, III

    Millions. Well I’m impressed. Although, it’s not hard to own “millions” of dollars of real estate in the Heights, two coops or condos would do that.

    Some advice: I’d be embarrassed to throw my wealth about. It doesn’t mean you are somehow smarter or more astute about things.

  • Mark on Middagh

    You dont even represent a majority of the posters on this thread, much less the majority of the public opinion.

  • SongBirdNYC

    I almost never comment but now you’ve ticked off a Mama Bear. I am a resident of Whitman Owners corp and the parent of a child at P.S. 8. And, since you read the blog you know that I have attended practically ALL the CEC rezoning and development meetings and have been writing about overcrowding and the rezoning for well over a year. I was assisting at P.S. 8 THIS MORNING. There are children with special needs who are receiving their instruction IN THE HALLWAYS of the school. They have ONE, I repeat ONE room for what they call “specials” like Art. Music, drama and other stuff is done IN the classrooms (Kindergarten has 25 kids, upper grades have more). There is no science lab. There is no language instruction. So you want to talk about lies? You’re spreading them yourself Mr. “I own millions of dollars of real estate.”

  • Mark on Middagh

    Obviously, you have not tried to enroll your child in elementary school lately.

  • cool

    This is a contentious topic, and I am writing in support of the development of Pineapple Walk area. Brooklyn Heights is a beautiful neighborhood, but it can’t be seen in isolation. One of, if not, the greatest problems facing NYC is the lack of housing, and I believe this issue trumps issues such as the loss of views and temporary bouts of overburdened resources. BH is blessed with one of the best elementary schools in the city, once of the greatest concentration of transit infrastructure, and an incredible choice of parks. In terms of what a city can offer a neighborhood, BH benefits in spades. People want to live here, for good reason., and they should be welcomed.

    Overburdened schools, policing, and hospitals are fixable problems even with new people coming to the neighborhood. CEC13’s decision is the most recent evidence
    of this. A new tower, should it come to pass, would not be out of character with the three other towers already existing. That area was already specifically excluded from the landmark limited height zone. That said, I am in favor of pressuring developers to make sure that new projects provide sufficient amenities to a neighborhood.

    I support the new development as a recognition that this amazing city that we live in will continue to grow, and that we need more
    capacity for those new people to live here. I am not in favor of a shrinking city, and without new development, this city will price itself out of relevance. I am not arguing that this development solves all of the city’s faults, but I do think opponents understate the benefits of more residential density (look at the diversity of shops in DUMBO). Importantly, the development at Pineapple Walk would not violate landmark rules and would not, on its own, have a material impact on school and transit infrastructure.

    In sum, I support the development since I support the dynamism
    of the city. BH’s charm and character will be preserved with the existing regulatory protection of the limited height zone. The residents of 75 Henry should be free to make a choice that is in their best interests, without fear that it is against the interests of the neighborhood.

  • Remsen Street Dweller

    This is NOT about affordable housing. It’s about greed and real estate interests that control our city and its politicians.
    No one is or will be trying to solve the problem of overburdened schools, hospitals, etc. Obviously, everything that isn’t nailed down is ripe to be ripped away to create towers of expensive co-ops.

  • Concerned

    You think this is about affordable housing? Really? Well, you are wrong. Good day.

  • DIBS

    Exactly. As a private, as of right development, there won’t be any affordable housing so cool’s opening premise isn’t a valid one

  • Concerned

    I just read your post again. Strange arguments. Such as: “I am not in favor of a shrinking city, and without new development, this city will price itself out of relevance.”
    You are actually arguing that the greatest city of all time is going to be irrelevant unless we keep developing great neighborhoods like Brooklyn Heights? There are plenty of other neighborhoods that need development that aren’t 1/100th as nice as bo heights. Get outta here developer troll.

  • AEB

    The Pineapple Walk stores–and particularly Peas N’…sorry, All In One Food Mart–provide precisely the kind of services, lacking elsewhere in the Heights, that define optimal neighborhood amenity. They act as a community glue. They are more than worth saving.

    Practically speaking, don’t these places have long-term leases? I suppose they could be bought-out–but one imagines, hopes, there would be determined resistance to such a move.

  • martinlschneider

    There is a history here. The land was taken by the city and zoned to moderate income housing. The taxpayers absorbed the cost of writing down the acquisition costs of the land. As Commissioner Robert Weaver pointed out at the time the whole idea was to increase living values over the years, not boost land values. Nor were those years of tax relief enjoyed by the residents of 75 intended to give them a giant windfall. Those who have nevertheless enjoyed it once are now looking to win another lottery. Those who vote for a sell-out will be proving themselves to be totally selfish or ignorant or both and making all the rest of the neighbors the losers, big time. Let us hope that the “better angels” win this one.

  • JaneonOrange

    I have to say that I am surprised to hear anyone outside of 75 Henry voicing support for this project. I do agree that more could be done with Pineapple Walk, but having grown up here and moved back as an adult I can say that the neighborhood and trains to Brooklyn have never been more crowded. I also miss the mom & pop stores that began to disappear in the ’80s (not Club Wild Fyre so much, but at least they could keep a business going in that space). To think that any of the condos in the tower would be affordable is laughable. Look at the heinous pier houses. The best the neighborhood could hope for would be for foreign investors to buy the apartments and not live in them. What a great addition??!!

  • Danny K

    I wasn’t sure whether you are a development shill but now it seems clear that you are. Nobody who lives here would say that.

←  Older Comments
 →