The condo project at 20 Henry Street is at last hitting the marketplace after years of delays. Final polishes are taking place at the former Peaks Mason Mints building, known as the Candy Factory, with asking prices between $450,000 and $2.56 million for studios up to 4 bedrooms. The building includes 24 lofts (six of them penthouse units, at $2+ million), with an additional 14 units in an adjacent modern structure on Poplar Street scheduled to wrap by summer.

An article in today’s Wall Street Journal reminds us of the building’s history: The former industrial space was built in 1885 as the base of candy makers Mason Mints and Mason Dots. In the 1970s, it became housing for artists under the state’s Mitchell-Lama subsidized-housing program.

Artists lived in studios there until the program ended in 2004. Developers Urban Realty Partners bought the site in 2007, but weren’t able to finish a conversion to condos after the imminent financial crisis. Los Angeles-based Canyon-Johnson Urban Fund stepped in and took over the project in 2010, alongside plenty of legal drama.

When plans were first announced that the factory was slated to become a condo development, the Brooklyn Heights Assn. wanted 20 Henry’s garden to remain open space, the WSJ adds—which is now the site of the new 14-unit modern building. BHA executive director Judy Stanton says she still prefers the garden to the new building, but is glad the factory is finally ready for new homeowners: “I’m sure it will attract families.”

Brokerage firm Stribling & Associates is marketing the project, and says that 20 Henry St. already has an 800-applicant waiting list.

(Photos: Wall Street Journal)

The beautifully historic but long-suffering Romanesque revival Offerman Building along Fulton Street Mall is at last getting the facelift it so deserves. As H&M continues its new-construction two-story glass modernist build-out next door, TJ Maxx will open a downtown Brooklyn store at 505 Fulton Street, according to signage that appeared within the last week.

Imagine Ralph Lauren, Calvin Klein and Giorgio Armani having presence on Fulton Street (albeit last season). This long-promised renaissance may well take hold, after all, as developer United American Land has its eye on fully developing the block at Fulton and Bridge Street, after demolishing the Offerman annex to build H&M.

Meanwhile, downtown Brooklyn’s City Point up the block continues to take shape, first comprising a four-story 50,000 sf retail building on Albee Square across from the landmarked Dime Savings Bank building. In all, that project intends to encompass 1.5 million square feet of retail and residential.

The Offerman Building’s upper floors are rumored to be going residential, so it appears a full reno is forthcoming. The handsome structure was built in 1890 by Henry Offerman, at the time one of the tallest buildings in Brooklyn. It is best known as the location of Martin’s department store, which ushered other major retailers to the area, including A.I. Namm & Son Department Store and Abraham & Straus (today, Macy’s).

Read a full history of the building on The Smoking Nun blog here.

The two narrow retail spaces at 214 and 216 Hicks Street—which housed the recently closed Overtures and Dara Ettinger—have been demolished inside to carve out a single larger space.

A manager at next door neighbor Heights Cafe at 84 Montague Street—which owns the retail building—tells BHB that no one has yet leased the space, but it is believed that the additional square footage will attract more potential vendors.

Dara Ettinger jewelry opened at the beginning of May 2011 and barely lasted eight months at 214 Hicks, while beloved stationery and gift boutique Overtures at 216 Hicks endured for 30 years. Still hanging on: high-end clothier J. McLaughlin at 218 Hicks.

In the BHB post a week ago about the new 80-unit building at 75 Clinton Street & Montague (on right) going rental, a healthy debate blossomed here between the architectural charms of its facade versus the new 40-unit residential building one block down at 101 Clinton Street & Joralemon (left). You guys took each building to task, with typical opinionated passion.

So let’s put up your dukes, BHB followers. We invite a full-on discussion about the merits—or not—of each property. The Corcoran link for 75 Clinton is here. 101 Clinton doesn’t appear to have a dedicated site yet, since it’s still under construction. You are welcome to add whatever you’ve seen, heard or linked to.

Please keep it clean, friends.

Good luck: Prices range from $2,800 to $7,000 a month. Marketing Directors VP of Sales Angela Ferrara, the building’s marketing firm, says Invesco decided to take advantage of the “booming” rental market.

Before plans were approved in 2007 to go residential, 75 Clinton Street was a bankruptcy court. Is there a waft of irony there, perhaps?

And that makes three. Baluchi’s Indian restaurant is preparing to open its 10th NYC location, in Brooklyn Heights, at the north end of Henry Street near Cranberry Street.

McBrooklyn shares that it joins Gandhi Palace on Montague (which replaced Amin) and Curry Heights on Remsen.

There are nine Baluchi’s throughout New York City, including Soho, the Financial District, East Village and Park Avenue. This is its second Brooklyn location, joining 310 Fifth Avenue in Park Slope.

The discussion is already hopping on today’s Open Thread Wednesday here. (Photo: McBrooklyn)

The Brooklyn Paper: “There are a lot of people who want to keep it around,” said Lowy, who hopes to find a new home for the theater if the building can’t be saved. “It makes it easier to move forward knowing we have all this support.”

The story also quotes landowner Tom Caruana’s architect (not named) as saying “plans for the site are not yet ready to be shared.” Architectural historian Francis Morrone, author of An Architectural Guidebook to Brooklyn, who the article says “is working with the [Brooklyn] Heights Association on an in-depth history of the building”, is quoted thus: “It’s an intact piece of history, …A major part of what makes Brooklyn Heights what it is is this historical physical fabric.”

The plans of the development company that bought 72 Poplar Street, the former NYPD building (see photo), will be considered at the meeting of the Executive Committee of Community Board 2 tomorrow (Monday, January 23) evening, starting at 6:00, at the Library Learning Center, room 515, of Long Island University, at DeKalb and Hudson Avenues.

According to the developer, as quoted by C.B.2:

Application is to extend the existing fourth floor, construct a new fifth floor addition, set back the rear wall by five feet to achieve legal light and air requirements, construct new rear façade, install new accessible ramp at Poplar Street entrance, create new window and door openings at east and west facades, and construct a one-story rooftop addition on adjacent garage.

The Real Estate Board of New York is amping its drive to derail the still-tentative landmarking of 21 buildings in downtown Brooklyn, by sending out a mailing to thousands of area residents urging them to bend City Council’s ear against the newly proposed historic district. In addition, on Friday, REBNY sent a letter to City Council Speaker Christine Quinn urging the Council to rethink the decision.

All landmarked districts require final approval from the City Council and mayor within 120 days. The Council vote is slated for Feb. 1, with two hearings scheduled next week.

Preservationists had claimed victory last September when the Landmarks Preservation Commission unanimously approved the “Borough Hall Skyscraper Historic District,” a cluster of highrises built in the late 19th and early 20th centuries along Court Street and the corners of Joralemon, Remsen and Montague Streets around the already landmarked Borough Hall. Commission Chairman Robert B. Tierney noted then that “the buildings had a central role in Brooklyn’s development and illustrate an important chapter of New York City’s history.”

But a number of property owners, local landlords and developers were vehemently opposed, claiming it would drive up costs and impede retail redevelopment. Mike Slattery, SVP of the Real Estate Board of New York, sneered in September that the buildings “have little architectural and historic significance and distinction.”

In an article published in Crain’s Business New York January 18, Steve Spinola, president of REBNY, further belittled the district: “The city continues to landmark away its economic future. We want the people in the area to know landmarking will cause a lack of investment in buildings.”

Detractors argue that the designation puts a financial burden on landlords, who have to obtain additional permits and pay extra fees for any changes or upgrades on their properties. REBNY surveyed owners of roughly 750,000 square feet of space within the proposed historic district, and predicted property owners and retail tenants will incur $4.7 million in additional costs over the next several years as a result of landmark regulations and rules, according to the letter obtained by Crain’s.

“Some owners were prepared to make an investment in their buildings, but now they have a noose around their neck because it will cost them more money,” added Spinola.

Brooklyn Heights Assn. president Judy Stanton has stated that the landmark designation “is necessary to protect those buildings from being torn down—it does not prevent redevelopment. It has been a longstanding regret we did not get a district sooner.”

Brooklyn Daily Eagle: Following what one person described as “an exhilarating” discussion on the value of contextual vs. contemporary architecture in a historic district, the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) yesterday asked the design team of a proposed new five-story, five-unit building at 30 Henry St. in Brooklyn Heights to consider making some additional changes.

The story notes that Brooklyn Heights preservationist Otis Pratt Pearsall and Brooklyn Heights Association President Jane McGroarty and Executive Director Judy Stanton all urged the Commission to reject the proposed design and require something contemporary and distinctive. BHA member and architect Jonathan Marvel is quoted as saying, ““We implore you to inspire, to delight, to raise the bar on originality.” But Park Slope resident and preservationist Clem Labine said the site doesn’t need a “starchitect” building that would be “dissonant and disruptive.”

The Commission’s legal counsel said it didn’t have the power to require “a particular style.”

Brooklyn Paper: Next Wednesday, building owner Tom Caruana will present plans for a new structure at 70 Henry St. at Community Board 2’s Landmarks Committee — an early step in gaining city permission to demolish an edifice in the landmarked neighborhood, according to District Manager Rob Perris.

The article quotes Caruana as unwilling to reveal details of his plans, but saying he will “move forward” as soon as possible. Lowy is quoted as saying he will do whatever is necessary to keep the Cinema going, even if he has to move it to DUMBO.

Glass on the addition, under construction, to 20 Henry Street, reflects the facade of the building at the northwest corner of Henry and Poplar streets, as seen from the Brooklyn Bridge on January 7.

Construction of two more sections of Brooklyn Bridge Park on the East River waterfront–a bridge from Squibb Park on Columbia Heights over Furman Street to the park and three playing fields and an adjoining picnic peninsula on Pier 5–is expected to commence in January following authorization of construction contracts for the sections at a meeting of the board of directors of the BBP corporation at noon on Tuesday, December 5, at the park’s newly opened offices on Furman at Joralemon Street.

Both contracts were awarded to Kelco Landscaping and Construction of Commack, N.Y. The firm previously did the landscaping and built the playgrounds on Piers 1 and 6. Among its other projects is the 9/11 World Trade Center Memorial. The contract for the Squibb Park bridge is $6,223,864 and for the work on Pier 5, $19,245,180.

In her report to the board, BBP President Regina Myer discussed the future construction of a hotel and residential building at Pier 1. The proposals of five developers were unveiled at a meeting of the Brooklyn Bridge Park Community Advisory Council on November 22. The deadline for feedback on the proposals is December 22. Under the leadership of teams of architects, CAC members are giving their feedback at workshops at the park offices at 6:30 the evenings of December 5 and 6 and at 9 the morning of December 7. The feedback will go into a report to be submitted to those who select the winning proposal. The workshops are open to the public.

But what new info did we learn from today’s report? THERE’LL BE A WATERFALL.

Brooklyn Eagle: According to Perris, BKSK architect Stephen Burns made the presentation to the Land Use Committee. Citing the committee minutes, he said there will be accessible underground parking with the parking entrance slightly sloping down.

The layout of the building will consist of floors two to four with one layout — some units containing 10-inch balconies for flower boxes and casement windows — and a separate layout for the top floor penthouse.

Burns also told committee members that the entranceway into the building will be through a covered passageway that leads directly to a courtyard. The courtyard will have a waterfall that is visible from the entrance, according to the Land Use Committee minutes.

Last evening’s Community Meeting got off to an interesting start when Brooklyn Heights resident and long time Brooklyn Bridge Park advocate Tony Manheim asked State Senator Daniel Squadron if, now that in a deal brokered in part by Squadron and Assemblywoman Joan Millman, the State has given control of the Park to the City, he and Millman would consider yielding their nominees’ position on the Park’s board to representatives appointed by the Mayor. He also asked if Squadron thought it now appropriate to have the Park’s management “collapsed into” the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. Squadron said he was “not excited” about giving up his slot on the board, but that Manheim’s ideas were “conceptually interesting.” Another person suggested that, instead of mayoral nominees, the board slots go to community representatives.

Things later took a heated turn when Marsha Rimler, after first saying she was “very disappointed” with Squadron’s handling of the housing-in-the-Park issue, asked Squadron if he would refer to the “board of ethics” (by which she presumably meant the New York State Commission on Public Integrity) the question whether his wife’s job in the Mayor’s office constituted a conflict of interest when he dealt with the City on this issue. Squadron said he considered this question “out of bounds,” and went on to say that he had negotiated zealously with the City and got it to agree to allow tax payments on the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ properties to be used for Park maintenance and operations, which the City had strongly resisted, and to defer any residential construction at Pier 6 until the next mayoral administation. Squadron also said that in his negotiations with the City he had helped to secure many amenities for the Park, including a skating rink, a floating swimming pool, and the Pier 5 “bubble” which, he said, he thought would become a reality despite the lack of responses to what he said was obviously a “flawed” initial Request for Proposals.

David Manning, who moved to the Heights from Manhattan hoping for peace and quiet, raised the issue of helicopter noise. Squadron said he had “worked in good faith” with the operators of the Downtown Heliport to try to find a workable solution, but that “good faith didn’t work.” He has now concluded that only a complete ban on tourist helicopter flights will work and, to groans from the audience, urged everyone to “keep chopping away.” A former Federal Aviation Administration official and Lower Manhattan resident said that this was the first time he had ever advocated curtailing aviation, but he believed that the tourist flights should be ended because they are “unsafe” and do not, contrary to what some City officials have said, contribute anything to the City’s economy because the operators are based in New Jersey and do all maintenance, repairs, refueling and the like there. Squadron added that the assertion that some people come to New York just to take a helicopter ride “doesn’t pass the laugh test.” Judy Stanton, Executive Director of the Brooklyn Heights Association, said a request for the City’s economic data on the helicopter flights had been made under the Freedom of Information Act. She also said the State Department of Environmental Conservation should monitor both air quality and noise at the heliport. Squadron said this was a good idea.

Squadron noted that the residential parking permits proposal faced a long and tortuous path before it could become reality. First the City Council, following this morning’s (Wednesday) hearing, would have to pass a “home rule message” asking the State for authority to issue the permits. The State Assembly and Senate would then have to pass enabling legislation, which would then go to the Governor for signature. If the legislation was enacted, the City Council would then have to pass an ordinance putting the scheme into effect. He said he viewed this as a quality of life issue, because “people driving around looking for parking spaces” has negative effects on congestion, safety, and air quality. He said Mayor Bloomberg had supported the idea when it was coupled with congestion pricing, but that the failure of congestion pricing to pass meant he no longer favored resdential permits. A story in today’s New York Post says that Brooklyn GOP State Senator Marty Golden opposes residential parking permits on the grounds that they constitute a “tax,”and that anyone should be allowed to park where they wish (Update: Could this also be because his rather convoluted district has more people who park their cars in Brooklyn Heights to get to the subway than has people from out of the area parking on their streets?) He said that the proposal would never pass the GOP controlled Senate. The same article quotes Bloomberg as now being undecided on the issue, noting that some residents favor the permits while some merchants oppose them. Update: The “home rule message” passed the City Council’s Committee on State and Federal Legislation today.

Transportation related issues dominated the rest of the discussion. Among the issues raised were: restoration of bus service over the Brooklyn Manhattan Bridge, improvement of security at the High Street subway station, better sevice on the G train, which Squadron said was the next line he would press the MTA to improve, and safety at the intersection of Atlantic Avenue and Court Street, where one person present said a cupcake vending truck creates a hazardous condition for pedestrians crossing.

Squadron also said he supports the campaign to establish a public middle school to serve students from Brooklyn Heights and nearby neighborhoods. He concluded by urging everyone to attend his next Community Convention, to be held early next year.

Over three years ago, we noted that the proposal by landlord Pinnacle Group to build a parking garage in the courtyard between the A.T. White Riverside Apartments and the BQE, which would entail destruction of a grove of mature trees (see photo) as well as disruption of tenants’ lives, was “proving harder to kill than Rasputin.” Just over a year ago, the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal denied Pinnacle’s request to re-open its previously denied application for permission to construct the garage. Earlier this year, a court upheld the DHCR’s decision. Now, it seems, Pinnacle’s ba-a-a-ack.

Ben Bankson, President of the Willowtown Association, has received a message from Bill Ringler, President of the Riverside Tenants’ Association, reporting that Pinnacle’s attorney, Ken Fisher, has persuaded the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission to allow a modification to the permit for the garage which would relocate the entrance to the garage, and that the modification was allowed without any public hearing (though Pinnacle asserts that ther was one), and Pinnacle is now reapplying to the DHCR, seeking a third bite at the apple. The Riverside tenants have until Wednesday, October 26 (two weeks from yesterday) to respond to Pinnacle’s petition to the DHCR, and they are considering how to proceed and exploring options as to legal representation.

Bankson contacted Judy Stanton, Executive director of the Brooklyn Heights Association, who said she was not notified of the application to the LPC for modification of the permit. She is looking into the matter further.

Update: I’ve amended the text above, based on Bill Ringler’s comment below.

New York Observer: Now it appears that labor unions are alleging that Leviathan is not even a legitimate company. In a suit filed in Westchester County Bankruptcy Court, the Mason Tenders District Council and Metallic Lathers Local 46 are claiming that Leviathan is dummy corporation set up by a company called HRH Construction that allowed HRH to avoid using union labor and assuming the costs of union fees and benefits. In an ironic twist, they are pursuing the company under RICO laws, the same sort that weakened the mob-connected unions in the 1980s and ’90s.

Whether this results in any delay in work on 20 Henry remains to be seen.

The following item is on the agenda of the Community Board 2 Land Use Committee’s meeting beginning at 6:00 p.m. this coming Wednesday, September 21, at room 2400 of the Dibner Building, NYU Polytechnic, 5 MetroTech Center:

Stefanie Marazzi, Esq., with the Law Office of Slater & Beckerman LLP, will present Board of Standards and Appeals Application #105-11, for a special permit to operate the Massage Envy Spa, a “physical culture establishment” as defined in the Zoning Resolution (PDF), at 147 Remsen Street.

Also on the agenda is a discussion of the business terms of the partial sale of the Municipal Building, at Court and Joralemon streets, for use as a retail space. Representatives of the City’s Economic Development Corporation will be present to address this issue. On August 15, Mayor Bloomberg announced that United American Land had bee selected to develop the property.

Finally, the Committee will consider the following applications for modification of properties within the Brooklyn Heights Historic District:

156 Hicks Street — Application is to modify a bay window and install a deck.
265 Hicks Street — Application is to construct a rooftop addition, install a balcony and alter openings.
46 Willow Street — Application is to match the existing dormer on one side of the house, replace the existing windows, enlarge the top floor space and re-siding the existing addition.

Image: C. Scales for BHB.

The BBPC has also issue3d an RFP for a temporary structure to enclose a playing field on Pier 5, enabling it to be used in the winter months.

Crain’s New York Business: The Brooklyn Bridge Park Corp. will grant the group submitting the winning proposal a five-year contract to operate and maintain the structure each year from Dec. 1 to March 31. The winning bidder will also be responsible for designing and building the structure, which will be dismantled in warmer weather. The city has an option to renew the permit for three additional seasons. The request for proposals said the city will favor those that include free or low-cost programming elements. The winner will also be in charge of all capital costs over $750,000 associated with the construction and installation, of the bubble at Pier 5, including preparation costs.

The Crain’s story quotes BBPC President Regina Myer as saying the structure “will enrich the park by encouraging year-long active recreation use at this world-class location”.

While the new design for 27 Cranberry Street by local starchitect Tom van den Bout has LPC approval, it still has some preservation minded Brooklynites wringing their hands. The new design substitutes brick for brownstone and zinc for bronze elements but some think the home is still too big for its humble block.

However, this process and discussion around this project is a perfect real-time example of the search for “authenticity” outlined in Suleiman Osman’s The Invention of Brownstone Brooklyn.

If both plans were equal in scale, how “authentic” is the new approved brick facade versus van den Bout’s original vison of real brownstone (from the original quarry) frontage? It’s equally plausible that “back in the day” a builder may have chosen to build a brownstone on that lot.

What do you think? If the argument is based on scale, is “historical” relevance no longer in play? Are we now in the business of arguing over which imaginary “past” we’d like to embrace in future construction?

Brooklyn Paper: “We wished he would build a small house instead of what he’s entitled to build — but it’s still impressive,” said Judy Stanton, executive director of the Brooklyn Heights Association, which unsurprisingly supported van den Bout’s original plans. He is a former president of the association, after all.

Simeon Bankoff of the Historic Districts Council, who opposed the townhouse from the start, said he’s resigned to the new plans.

“It’s too big,” Bankoff said. “Cranberry Street is specifically low scale so it’s a tough site. This might have worked if it was on another block in Brooklyn Heights.”

We noted earlier that the Brooklyn Bridge Park Corporation announced its intention to issue a request for proposals to develop a hotel and apartment complex in the area between the landscaped Pier 1 and Furman Street. during August. BBPC has wasted no time, issuing the RFP today. The proposed complex may look like the rendering shown here (image from Brownstoner).

Crain’s New York Business: The new development will be made up of a hotel with somewhere between 170 and 225 rooms and a 150- to 180-unit apartment complex. The selected developer has the right to build up to 514,000 square feet. The project will also include parking facilities, park restrooms and park support facilities. Responses to the request for proposal are due Oct. 24.

The Crain’s story quotes Chris Havens, founder of Creative Real Estate Group, as saying the hotel business in Brooklyn is “strong,” and predicting that the RFP will attract “many respondents.”

Two buildings — the larger, northern one with hotel rooms, a restaurant, housing units and parking; the smaller, southern one with housing units and parking — will be built in a currently fallow area between the bike/walking path and Furman Street. The first, “Building A,” will be 100 feet high, and the second, “Building B,” will be 55 feet high.

The plan will contain 300 parking spaces, 170 to 225 hotel rooms, 150 to 180 housing units and 300 parking spaces. Among the criteria to be used in choosing designs are street trees, signage, sustainability and how the plan fits in with the surrounding area.

The BBPC cited the “economic recovery” as a reason to build — hotel occupancy increased from 81 percent in 2009 to 85 percent in 2010, and the average rate per room went up as well.

During the “Q&A” phase of the meeting, though, Judi Francis of the BBP Defense Fund expressed her opinion that the BBPC’s economic evaluation of the housing situation was unrealistic. “Fifty percent of the units at 360 Furman Street are still unsold”.

Also during the meeting, the BBPC board approved the licensing agreement with Jane’s Carousel. The Brooklyn Eagle described the approval as being “amid enthusiasm”, which leads me to put this question to you, our reading audience: Am I the only one who thinks Jane’s Carousel is gaudy and ugly as sin?

The Brooklyn Eagle reports that the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America are miffed about how the developers of 20 Henry Street, Magic Johnson’s Canyon Johnson Funds, is compensating its workers. Our man in the NYC Council Steve Levin pointed out the firm’s questionable hiring practices earlier this year.

Brooklyn Eagle: Protesters from the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America blew whistles and chanted, “Who’s the rat? Capital [Interiors]!” as they marched across the street from the 20 Henry Street (Candy Factory) condo construction project Thursday.
“The subcontractor Capital Interiors does not pay area standard wages and benefits,” said Michael Donnelly, representative of the NYC District Council of Carpenters. “No health benefits, nothing. The New York State Department of Labor sets the wage scale, but they chose not to abide by it. It’s basically a race to the bottom.”

Clearly the union members are not familiar with the song “Magic Johnson” by the Red Hot Chili Peppers which warns, “Other teams may pray for dreams, but he don’t give a f**k!”

The critically acclaimed documentary film Battle for Brooklyn will return to the Heights Cinema, Henry and Orange streets, this Wednesday, July 6, to begin a one week run every evening starting at 7:15. At the first two showings, this Wednesday and Thursday, the filmmakers, Mike Galinsky and Suki Hawley, along with Daniel Goldstein, who led the protest against use of eminent domain for the Atlantic Yards project, will be present after the screening for discussion. More about the film here. (Double click on the image to enlarge.)

Voting against forwarding the report were John Raskin, appointed to the board by State Senator Daniel Squadron, and Anne Strahle, appointed by Assemblywoman Joan Millman. Raskin strongly criticized the report’s exclusion of possible revenues from the Watchtower properties, as had City Council Member Steve Levin and a representative from the office of Council Member Brad Lander at the full board meeting earlier. Raskin characterized the report as “a document produced for City Hall.” Committee member and President of the City’s Economic Development Corporation Seth Pinsky replied that consideration of the Watchtower properties was properly excluded because the proposal to use payments in lieu of taxes on these properties as a revenue source would violate the requirement that no revenues to which the City is entitled be diverted for park use, and because of timing and risk factors associated with revenues from the Watchtower properties.

Update: At this afternoon’s meeting of the board of directors of Brooklyn Bridge Park Corporation, board member and city Parks and Recreation Commissioner Adrian Benepe said that the it was his hope that the funds would be restored before they affected the timing or nature of the park build-out.

Based on its study, BAE concluded that the annual revenue to be anticipated from the alternative sources, taking into account risk factors, ranges from $2,421,000 on the most conservative assumptions to $6,951,000 on the most optimistic ones. (See page iii of the Report; these amounts are the same as in BAE’s draft report–see here.) The largest part of this ($1 million on a conservative basis; $4 million on an optimistic view) would come from creation of a Park Improvement District, which would levy a fee on properties (both business and residential) located near the park. Creation of such a District would require approval of a majority of the affected property owners. No revenues were anticipated from conversion of the Watchtower properties because of uncertainty concerning Watchtower’s willingness to pay for expedited land use review, which was the one source of revenue (apart from a potential one-time payment in consideration for redesign of the hotel planned for the Pier 1 upland so as to improve the view from apartments in the Watchtower complex) that was considered to meet the requirements of the MOU. Proposals to allow PILOTs, or similar levies, on the Watchtower properties were dismissed as violating the terms of the MOU. (See pages vii-viii.)

The projected revenues from the alternative sources, even on the most optimistic assumptions, would be far less than the anticipated annual operational and maintenance expenses of $16 million (see page 11). Therefore, if the conclusions of the BAE study are accepted, alternative sources can at best be expected to reduce somewhat the scale of housing needed to supply revenues for the park.

The Committee on Alternatives to Housing will meet this coming Tuesday, June 14, at 2:00 p.m., on the first floor of the Brooklyn Public Library, Brooklyn Heights Branch, 280 Cadman Plaza West, to consider whether to submit BAE’s report to the full board. The public is invited to attend, but no comments from the public will be entertained. Public comments were received for a period following submission of the draft report in February until April 23 (see here).