Pier Six Towers Update: Developers Busy Building and Advertising Despite No Court Decision

By on January 29, 2018 10:48 pm in 11201, brooklyn bridge park, Development, Legal, News, Real Estate

The Brooklyn Paper reports that the developers of the two controversial high rise residential towers on the uplands of Pier Six, near the Atlantic Avenue entrance to Brooklyn Bridge Park and on park land, have already done extensive construction work on one of the two towers (see photo in story linked above) and are, as the story indicates, already advertising to (although not yet accepting any money from) prospective condo buyers. This is despite there is as yet no final ruling on a lawsuit brought by the Brooklyn Heights Association and others to prevent construction of the towers, on the contention that revenue from them is not necessary to fund the park’s maintenance. As it stands, a judge has ordered that, while construction may proceed at the developers own risk, they should do nothing “that is irreversible or incapable of restoration to its original condition” until the court issues its final decision.

Share this Story:

, ,

  • W.R.

    The renderings are sooo misleading. The mayor should be tarred and feathered

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7nPOzGeyaw Arch Stanton

    I would love to to see Mayor de Ball-less-io & Governor Count Cuomo spend a couple of days in a village stock in the middle of Times Square. Then a tar n’ feathering.

  • gatornyc

    How are the renderings misleading?

  • Jorale-man

    28 stories is obscene for that location. The local subways are going to start feeling a little cozier with all of those new residents.

  • Andrew Porter
  • Andrew Porter

    This is nothing. A few blocks away, Fortis is planning a 440-foot-high tower, part of the LICH redevelopment. Details in The Real Deal here:

    http://tinyurl.com/ycdmy7dj

  • Jorale-man

    That’s what you get in a city (and a country) without proper zoning laws. It’s anything goes…

  • instantindian

    They make the buildings look way smaller than they are – the smaller building, which has topped out is easily taller than 360 Furman next to it.

  • StoptheChop

    Some NYC elected officials in Manhattan are going to bat for their communities and beating back some oversized development projects. Here, Fortis is bragging about the “new neighborhood” it’s creating within an — um — already existing neighborhood.

  • W.R.

    Fortis is the worst. Sleazy guys building cheap unattractive buildings. The old LICH doctor building in the heights required multiple complaints until they quasi complied with landmarks. But that was after building a roof deck illegally, punching through walls, putting in unauthorized decks etc. While they fixed part of it, the roof deck and decks stayed.

  • Nomcebo Manzini

    Lots of conflicting feelings in me. Sure looks to me like much of the negativity is “I’m all right, Jack,” i.e., ask yourself how NYC looks to a June graduate – ’17 or ’18. $3000 to rent a 1 BR if you’re lucky … in a “nice nabe.” [The new City Council speaker did a good job of laying out the issues earlier this week.]

    (Sure looks to me – DoBro, say – like ridiculous “over-building,” but I won’t match wits with billionaire builders and their backers…. Unless the Republicans have repealed gravity, I have to think that some older rentals are going to have to come down $500-1000/month to be rentable.)

    And the siting certainly doesn’t damage the park 1/50th as much as Pier House does/did. Basically, that’s a non-issue … except “on principle,” which I admit is significant.

    Not sure what Andrew’s point is with that photo, but except for a small number of Willow St. residents, it’s hard to imagine a less controversial (“legitimately”) site in 11201. Even Fortis’ building will have a negligible impact on things like home values in Cobble Hill.

    Yes, there ARE lots of real issues, but elbow room on the 2/3 at Clark Street is not one of them – people who grab at that one are too easy to dismiss as 100% self-centered.

  • TeddyNYC

    Just for comparison, do you know the height of 180 Montague?

  • StoptheChop

    Ask Brad Lander to get re-involved– he was able to prevent Fortis from gaining even more square footage beyond what it’s claimed as of right, but he didn’t take it further than that. But it would require real, sustained pressure from elected officials and groups like CHA– and going up against deBlasio and Glen.

  • redlola

    are you serious? i can’t even with the insanity of this response

  • Reggie

    Please define “proper.”

  • Reggie

    180 Montague Street is 34 stories tall and was built as-of-right.

  • Teresa

    This is copyright violation, unless the PA gave you permission to use it. It’s fine to link to it, though.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7nPOzGeyaw Arch Stanton

    The 50′ building height restriction ends east of Clinton St.

  • guest

    That’s just factually wrong. The smaller building is several stories smaller than 360 Furman.

  • gatornyc

    You need to check your glasses prescription. The building that just topped out is plainly shorter than OBBP with the bulkhead floors possibly even in height with OBBP (minus the penthouse unit).

  • Andrew Porter

    I’ll take it down if you give your real name, not hide behind a screen name.

  • Teresa

    Teresa Genaro. Contribute to the blog & for many years posted a photo with my comments.

  • Andrew Porter

    There, finally did it.

  • BrooklynCrab

    It maybe (at its peak) only equal to the top of the main structure at OBBP but it certainly is not half as tall as OBBP, as it appears in the rendering.

  • gatornyc

    What rendering are you referring to BrooklynCrab that indicates that the building would be half as tall as OBBP? The rendering posted at the site gives no comparison to OBBP.

  • Banet

    He’s referring to the image at the top of this post. It mak s the shorter building seem visibly shorter than 1BBP. It’s highly misleading.

  • gatornyc

    It’s not the developer’s fault that BHB keeps using an old rendering. People need to do their due diligence. All of this is easily obtainable public information.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7nPOzGeyaw Arch Stanton

    The new building is right next to One Brooklyn Bridge Park so how can it not be a comparison? The rendering is what was proposed, clearly not a realistic rendering of what is built.

  • gatornyc

    Of course OBBP is a proper comparison, but renderings change and this was a very early rendering. Indeed the Park worked with the developer post award to on both buildings. Much more current renderings are readily available. You can’t accuse a developer of misrepresenting what is being built by comparing it to an outdated rendering. That’s like saying I’m going to grade your term paper on the first draft.

  • Banet

    Fair enough. Can you point me to an accurate rendering in the developer’s website or on the Park Corporation’s site?

    I’m not being snarky — I genuinely would like to see it.