“Threats” Close Pier 2 in Brooklyn Bridge Park

By on April 27, 2016 5:34 pm in brooklyn bridge park

According to a Parks Department officer standing at the blocked-off entrance to Pier 2 on Wednesday afternoon, the pier was closed early after threats of  “organized fights” among groups of kids.

He said that it was possible that the pier would be closed for several days, though he hoped that it would be able to be re-opened on Thursday.

An NYPD officer said that it was the decision of the park, not the police department, to close the pier, and that the increased activity–organized theft and trouble near the park entrances–may be a result of schools being closed this week.

The other piers remained open.

Share this Story:

, ,

←  Older Comments
 →
  • Concerned

    I agree with you. And I have been advocating that all entrances to BBP go around Brooklyn Heights, which is why I wanted the “suspension” bridge from Squibb Park to stay closed. Moreover, the less entrances/exits the better for safety in BBP because criminals know they have nowhere to go if they commit crime in the park.

  • Concerned

    So sad. I’m glad I don’t live on Joralemon, but I feel bad for those that do. Honestly, how can the market value of apartments on Joralemon not be 10+% lower than the rest of BK Heights??? If you take every townhouse and apartment along Joralemon, that means the decision to have Joralemon as a ingress/egress has cost residents of Joralemon millions and millions of dollars and gained them only stress, broken planters, noise pollution, public urination, violence, etc…

  • Concerned

    Nope! Just more helicopters to fill our airspace as they make their escape…

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlsiLOnWCoI Arch Stanton

    No, there is no way to close the streets to pedestrian traffic. As far as cars, that’s not likely to happen either. For one thing, there is the Firehouse on Hicks which rapid needs access to Furman St. Also, Joralemon takes a lot of traffic off of Henry st as a way out of the area, it would not be fair or practical to increase traffic on Henry just to spare lower Joralemon.

  • TVC15

    It is indeed. But fear not, Mr. Trump’s star continues to rise (Indiana, here we come!), so come January 2017, when Mr. Trump becomes leader of the free world, we can ask him to build a wall to keep the naughty people out (or keep them in, or whatever the Trump-walls are designed to do…). Of course, Mr. Trump is also a tried and tested financial wizard with knowledge of all-things-New-Yorky, so there is no reason not to call on his advice on walls and money and so on well before january 2017 — hopefully to fix all the other various neighborhood problems. Go Donald! god (yes, I jest, I know there’s no such thing as god; just like Santa) bless america…

  • Concerned

    No one here cares what skin color a person is committing crimes. We just want the crime to stop/lessen.
    The precedent being set in this country, where you can’t discuss crime without being labeled a racist, is very dangerous. Tell me, any of you (TVC15, Studio Brooklyn, neighboronhicks), how is it that anyone here can broach the subject of crime in the neighborhood without you calling them a racist? I am being dead serious and not facetious. I would really like to know so that I can see your point of view.
    And please, don’t give me some post about how the socio-economic system creates criminals. That is not the subject here. That is, unless you want me to preface every one of my posts about crime with how the person committing the crime has probably been screwed by the system. Is that what you want!?!

  • TVC15

    Oops… I was agreeing with paul and with you. My comment “It is indeed” was in agreement with paul’s final sentence “It’s about our safety, fact, and statistics!”, not his first sentence. Reading it again, I see how it can easily be misinterpreted. I need to sharpen my blogging.

    I agree with all you wrote, just above.

    Anyhow, back to Indiania-watching and wall-wishing and general Trumping… (all of that stuff was satirical, of course).

  • Michael

    So provide a great FREE facility… respond by having rumbles. Perfect.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    Sorry, Concerned, just saw this.

    I think there are a few things going on here. One is the whole inevitable park runoff: you have a large public facility, it attracts a lot of people, so statistically some of those people are going to engage in disruptive or criminal behavior. In this regard I sympathize with those who feel that Brooklyn Heights is the recipient of an unfairly unique portion of this burden, and I think a heightened police presence would probably be the best short term solution to that problem.

    But then you’ve got the bigger picture, and here I would (predictably) invoke my previous statements about engaging in the cultivation of a holistic solution to the crime and mischief problem. And again, I’m not saying it’s the sole job of Heights residents—it’s work that needs to be done at a municipal, state, and federal level—but I do think we owe it to ourselves and to others to make it a part of the conversation instead of just screaming about our own few square feet of bluestone.

  • http://www.petfinder.com Adopt Foster Pledge Share

    Turn the courts into a dogrun. Adopted dogs only!

  • Michael

    works for me

  • joey_c

    “was a little nervous to walk through the park since the people that
    normally hang out there were wandering in groups throughout the park
    smoking weed”

    yeah, everyone knows that smoking weed makes people violent! /s

    by literally all metrics, your neighborhood is decent and safe. your exaggerated concern is asinine.

  • joey_c

    to cars or pedestrians?

  • joey_c

    statistics from the nypd demonstrate quite clearly that the heights is one of the safest neighborhoods in the entire city. this handwringing over a couple of incidents is laughable to people who live virtually anywhere else in the borough.

  • joey_c

    you display no sense of context of proportion.

    even with the addition of these incidents, your neighborhood (formerly mine as well) has a very low crime rate that other neighborhoods would love to experience, and it also has great amenities in terms of the park and the promenade.

    those amenities are going to draw people from a wider cachement area than just the immediate neighborhood. if you want to avoid being called a racist nimby, then maybe you should refrain from whinging about how having people walk down your street is ruining your (sky-high) property values. somehow it hasn’t done anything to manhattan property values.

    these are the kind of comments we have from people agreeing with you:

    “was a little nervous to walk through the park since the people that
    normally hang out there were wandering in groups throughout the park
    smoking weed. Pier 2 should probably no longer be basketball courts
    & the whole park needs increased police presence considering the
    types of people it seems to attract.” – new to bk heights

    “The problem is and always has been the Pier 2 basketball courts. They
    attract a higher percentage of aggressive young men than do the other
    BBP destinations (the soccer field, or Pier One, for example).” – peterbrooklyn

    that’s pretty obvious racism.

←  Older Comments
 →