ENOUGH’S ENOUGH
Activists are fighting two proposed towers in Brooklyn Bridge Park
Brooklyn Bridge Park has become so successful that some say it’s time to completely restructure the way it’s financed. Some activists say the park project, which is funded by revenues from real estate developments within the project footprint, may already be producing enough money to be selfsustaining — without additional construction.
Specifically, a group of grass-roots community activists is taking aim at the final two proposed towers that will comprise 430 apartments, including units subsidized at 30%, at the southern end of the 1.3-mile-long green ribbon along the East River from Brooklyn Heights to DUMBO.
“It’s pretty well known that, even with the park’s platinum-plated expense and maintenance budget, there is already sufficient money to sustain the park,” said Judi Francis, president of the Brooklyn Bridge Park Defense Fund. “I believe they’ll have so much money that they won’t even be able to spend it. This is all about appeasing real estate interests. It’s as simple as that.”
Opponents of the plan have always argued that the skyscraping towers will block views and consume space that could be used as additional park land. But now they have a new line of attack, claiming the towers may no longer be necessary for the park’s future financial security.
Supporters — and there are many — think opponents are wrong.
“It’s a math problem,” said Charlie O’Donnell, a local venture capitalist who runs a kayaking program in the park. “There’s just no other way to get the money that’s needed for the park. Anyone who says otherwise just doesn’t understand anything about capital finance.”
For now, construction of the towers is blocked as the activists and the Brooklyn Bridge Park Corp. negotiate whether a new environmental impact study is required.
“Since the initial proposal for the park was put place, the real estate market has transformed completely and there needs to be a clear accounting of what the existing financial needs are,” state Sen. Daniel Squadron (D-Brooklyn) told the Daily News. “With this new (Mayor de Blasio) administration in place, it would be appropriate to take a fresh look at alternative revenue models.”
The genesis of the dispute dates back to the blueprint for the current version of the park, which was drawn up under former Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Gov.
Some members of the public underestimate the need. — REGINA MYER
Continued from previous page George Pataki. Under that plan, the $370 million park was conceived as one of the most spectacular — and expensive — in history. But its amenities and maintenance would never be a drag on the city budget because the controversial scheme called for the annual budget to be derived from funds from commercial and residential developments at the site, including a former Jehovah’s Witness building that was rebranded One Brooklyn Bridge Park, the two new Pier 6 towers and three additional condo projects.
The plan also called for the Civil Warera Empire Stores warehouse at 55 Water St. to be redeveloped as an enormous retail and office hub.
For the most part, the park has been a success and construction has remained on schedule. Another 9 acres of undulating, grassy park land and a massive marina are slated to open this spring. Overall, the park project is slated to be 65% complete by the end of the year.
New Yorkers have been flocking to the park’s busy roster of events, including an outdoor film series, volleyball, kayaking, performances and astronomy nights.
It’s also had an overwhelming impact on real estate in both Brooklyn Heights and DUMBO.
“The park is one of the biggest reasons that real estate values have gone up in Brooklyn as much as they have over the last few years,” said Deborah Rieders, a luxury broker with Corcoran Group. Before the park, he said, “the less expensive properties in Brooklyn Heights were those closer to the water and farther from the subway. Now, the price per square foot for properties by the water has soared.”
But critics of the tower construction say those prices have gone up so much that the condo projects — one called the Pierhouse inside the footprint of the park and another at 1 John St. in DUMBO — are generating far greater revenues for the park than planners could have anticipated. Such revenues, this argument goes, may be enough to sustain the park without additional construction.
The park corporation vehemently contests that claim, citing inflation and the future costs of repairing the crumbling piers on which the park is built. It says recurring revenues from the park will amount to $11.2 million a year by 2018, which won’t cover its projected operating budget of $12.4 million. “We’re projecting way out in the future to ensure the park’s security,” Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corp. president Regina Myer said. “Some members of the public underestimate the need. The fact is that the piles beneath the piers are all being undermined by waterfront termites. As responsible stewards of the park, we can’t just pretend that problem will go away.”
But critics say the corporation’s short-term financial models don’t tell the whole story. They point to the fact that recurring revenue figures will go up by nearly $5 million when tax abatements awarded to the new buildings by the city expire in 2020, significantly bumping the revenues of the park. The condo taxes, which would normally go to the city, will instead be given to the park. They’re right about the numbers, but the corporation said it’s still not enough money to keep the park going in 10 to 15 years.
Critics also object to the recent announcement that some subsidized housing would be included in the towers, since they say those types of units don’t generate the same level of revenues as market-rate apartments. In other words, if the park authorities can afford to give up some of their revenues for affordable housing, then maybe they don’t need to build any housing in the first place.
Locals are split over the Pier 6 plans. Some have joined the effort to fight the towers, while others recognize them as necessary to keep the park alive.
“It’s a math problem,” said Charlie O’Donnell, a local venture capitalist who runs a kayaking program in the park. “There’s just no other way to get the money that’s needed for the park. Anyone who says otherwise just doesn’t understand anything about capital finance."
O’Donnell called opposition to affordable housing in the park “offensive and really grotesque.”
It’s outrageous that the affluent residents of Brooklyn Heights, whose property values skyrocketed because of the park, are now making a fuss about the prospect of poorer people moving into the neighborhood, he said.
“The irony of people from One Brooklyn Bridge Park being against this housing in the park is unbelievable,” he said. “It’s very hard to take seriously.”
Members of the opposition group, Save Pier 6, declined to comment, citing the ongoing litigation.
Meanwhile, Squadron claims that financing the remainder of the park via real estate deals may not be the only option.
He cites a deal that the park came close to making with the city in 2011 in which the city would have diverted tax revenue to the park from the sale of a building portfolio owned by the Jehovah’s Witnesses in Dumbo.
That deal fell apart when the sale didn’t occur under the former mayoral
administration and was contingent on the new owners filing to rezone the properties for residential use. When a sale of the portfolio did occur last year, it was to a developer who said he plans to keep most of the buildings for office use.
The park corporation said that deal is off the table for now, and many alternate revenue models have been exhaustively explored, but Squadron argues that the new administration could reintroduce it.
“It is fully within this administration’s power to continue to pursue that revenue option,” he said. “The proposals for housing development within the park are a mistake.”