Times: Squibb Park Pedestrian Bridge Will Be Fixed

By on July 14, 2016 12:03 am in brooklyn bridge park, News

The “bouncy” pedestrian bridge connecting Squibb Park and Brooklyn Bridge Park, closed for the past two years because it bounced and swayed too much, “should reopen next spring” according to “[p]ark officials” quoted in this New York Times story. According to Brooklyn Bridge Park Corporation President Regina Myer the bridge will be less bouncy–an engineer who studied the bridge’s problems and designed a solution is quoted in the Times as saying it will be about a half as bouncy as before–but that safety is the primary consideration. The Times notes that the cost of the repair has yet to be determined, but that the BBPC has a suit underway against the designers and constructors of the bridge.

Photo: C. Scales for BHB

Share this Story:

, , , ,

←  Older Comments
Newer Comments  →
  • Concerned

    Nice logic. I’m sure you got a 1600 on your SAT’s with it. LOL. But to take the bait, I AM against bouncing houses in swift winds. I’m also against any type of bridge, whether bouncy or rigid, that leads outsiders who don’t respect our neighborhood, through the heart of our neighborhood.

  • Teresa

    I neither ignore nor denigrate, nor have I ever implied that anyone posting here is a liar. That is an unfair and incorrect observation. I offer my own perspective, and I don’t advocate for anything. Even if I did, though, the personal shots would be gratuitous.

    I love the Park, I spend a lot of time in it, and that’s the opinion I share here. As for bias…I’m not really sure how one expresses a fondness for (or aversion to) something without it.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    Wow, I’m about to go from Dr. Spock (babies) to Mr. Spock (Vulcans), since we’re now talking about logic. Your logic would dictate that we close every entrance to the neighborhood. We’d have to teleport to Eamon’s for that drink.

  • Concerned

    Of course you ignore and denigrate your neighbors here. I have no issues with you loving the park. I like the park. But you continue to ignore your neighbors’ bad experiences. You continue to ignore the issues that the park has brought about. Moreover, you proactively attempt to downplay others’ bad experiences by saying that “the crime has existed before”, whenever someone mentions an issue with the park. HOW MANY TIMES has Bornhere said that he/she watched a mob of people being escorted out of BBP up Joralemon, ruining his/her night? And how many times have you either ignored Bornhere’s concerns or simply said “there were issues here, before.”
    You ignore. You denigrate. And it is insulting and, quit frankly, dangerous, to ignore your neighbors’ concerns.

  • Concerned

    No, my pointy eared friend. I only ask that the entrances to BBP go around Brooklyn Heights as much as possible. And any entrance to BBP through Brooklyn Heights be patrolled thoroughly so as to maintain respect that the first suburb in the USA and the first historic district in Brooklyn should command from now and years to come.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    Would a couple of cops gently bouncing up and down on the bridge appease you?

  • Concerned

    That’s bad positioning. I’d put a cop in the shadows of the forever scaffolding at Cranberry and Columbia to watch the city bikes, another at Cranberry and Hicks because the lighting there is poor, and maybe another roaming up and down Orange to keep the peace. I would also consider training these police to use a boomerang, so that any wanna be criminal would think twice about acting out here. There’s no shame in getting taken out by a pistol, but you can’t ever hold your head high in your neighborhood after getting taken out by a boomerang.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    I know we like to joke around here, but if I were some kid from Crown Heights dribbling a ball down Orange I’d hope the penalty for alarming the locals by being in the vicinity of a can of spray paint or something would be a bit milder than a cop brandishing a weapon and using it on me before I’ve been charged or tried.

  • Bornhere

    Thanks (as almost always) for the support, Concerned, but Teresa said something very important in her comment: she opines from her perspective. I get that. As I commented, when neighbors were complaining about whatever the loud event was taking place at the Bossert, the block and a half buffer between the Bossert and me left me blissfully unaware of the annoyance; but I can only imagine how it might be for those closer to the hotel if that sort of soiree were to become commonplace; then, I would wholly support their concerns. That Teresa doesn’t in some way commiserate with those affected by the stunning negatives of BBP is my only complaint. But, in truth, as encouraging as it is to read like thoughts from neighbors, none of our opinions/positions posted here really make a difference, anyway. Which is either good or bad :)

  • Packy

    That bridge is a big problem for the NH. The losers that damage property here are acting out of pure spite that they live in a broken horrible area. They hate that this nabe is clean. The people that live here spend a lot of money on upkeep and personal labor cleaning the front of homes. Leave us alone. We are not bigots because we dont want punks ruining our property and hard work.

  • Concerned

    I agree, even if it is a boomerang.

  • Teresa

    Double negative warning: I don’t not commiserate with people having negative experiences. As I’ve written here before, crime is troubling and it needs to be addressed. My concern lies in how park users in general are characterized; the assumption that any crime in the neighborhood is a result of the park; and the suggestions about how park users should be treated in order to try to reduce crime in the neighborhood. I also don’t agree that the influx of people from all over the city and the world is a bad thing, or that we’re entitled to a quiet, insulated community. And I love the park.

    And, as I noted above, it’s tiresome to have potshots repeatedly taken at me by someone who refuses to identify him/herself and repeatedly mischaracterizes what I think. It seems unnecessary.

  • Concerned

    I’m not sure of the motivation of the trouble makers, but I agree with the rest of your sentiment.

  • Concerned

    The reason I take exception with your comments is that you go out of your way to downplay crime that (at least to some degree) is from the new traffic from the BBP and/or the basketball courts (you know, like the brawls, guns, a shooting, etc…).
    If you had your way, Brooklyn Heights would look like the south street seaport, except with basketball courts and a lot more crime. Be well, neighbor.

  • redlola

    lol. this blog is so predictable. knew exactly who would say what as soon as I saw the topic of the thread. i’m sure many of you on this thread can guess where i stand as well.

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

    I’m not one for making assumptions.

  • redlola

    good for you. #shrugs

  • StudioBrooklyn

    That’s probably because, like many of us, you’ve been reading and commenting here regularly for a while. So it’s not a matter of guessing; many of us already know where others stand. I’m not sure what pointing out this predictability achieves. I think the question is whether this conversation will move forward or if we’ll continue to rehash the same tired points. Unfortunately we seem content to do the latter.

  • redlola

    Thanks for taking the time and several more sentences to regurgitate my point. That was predictable too.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    You’re welcome! Always a pleasure.

  • gc

    We should be grateful that our predecessors were able to muster up more power than us when they pushed back and stopped the BQE from tearing our neighborhood apart.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    My wife and I were recently discussing the idea that a comprehensive history of Community Vs. Development in Brooklyn Heights would make excellent historical reading. I don’t know a lot about what led up to the BQE being rerouted around the neighborhood, but I’d be curious to learn about the ways that issue was similar and dissimilar to the bouncy bridge, if it can be said that the two are comparable.

  • redlola

    i am not sure what many ppl achieve with their comments. not sure what you achieved by regurgitating my point. that is the nature of blogs and social media. most times, people talk without an endgame. as far as dealing with it productively, there is no single coping mechanism that will apply to all of us because of our respective filters. hence, any discussion of dealing with it will devolve into the same arguments about ppl who see the influx to the courts as an issue because of the uptick in BS it has brought and others who will explain it away or act blind to its realities. Therefore, we will all deal with it individually as it affects us. Hopefully, it won’t affect us. In my fantasy world, people will be able to cross to the courts and back through whatever route without damaging and disrupting the community so that these tired and predictable conversations here could end. Frankly, at this point, I would rather talk about any of a myriad of other things like what type of business we’d like to see in the old Banana space. Waiting for someone to say foot locker or house of hoops :).

  • StudioBrooklyn

    Hmm. I didn’t see my comment as regurgitating yours as much as deconstructing your meta commentary. In other words, you said this blog is predictable (with a tone that implied either contempt or amusement depending on what “lol” meant), and I offered a response to where that predictability comes from. Since you’re a bubbling fountain of loveliness I’ll guess you meant sincere amusement, and consider coquettish giggles implicit in your remarks, as I do for DIBS. ;)

    Now, back to the topic: I think “BS” is an excellent characterization of the park-related issues, as it encompasses a spectrum from the nuisances to the real dangers. But what can we do? I have an idea of what we don’t seem to be able to do:

    We can’t close the park, or parts of it.
    We don’t seem to be able to stop or reverse any part of this development.
    We can’t block Joralemon.
    We can’t get rid of the bridge or any other unit of infrastructure belonging to the developer.
    We can’t stereotype park-goers. Well, we can, but it looks horrendous and it’s factually wrong.
    The list goes on.

    I acknowledge that there has been an increased amount of crime as a result of the influx of traffic to the neighborhood, some of which carries a portion of the population more likely to commit crime. I’m still unsure as to whether this increase warrants the response some have demanded, beyond just heightened police presence.

  • Andrew Porter

    Reported here on the BHB, with photos:

    http://brooklynheightsblog.com/archives/68763

  • Andrew Porter

    The sun comes up and goes down. It’s predictable. Your point?

  • wwc

    None. Just an observation. Is there some rule against that?

  • wwc

    NYT coverage of Brooklyn Heights’ issues seems a bit off base.

  • gc

    So many things in our neighborhood that we “can’t” have any impact on. Pretty sad statement about our will to insure that the Heights continues to be the great neighborhood we moved into.

  • StudioBrooklyn

    I don’t make the rules. Those were offered as observations. Please let me know if there’s some realistic reason why any of them were incorrect.

←  Older Comments
Newer Comments  →