Sections

Breaking news! Council committee approves Dock Street project!

The Brooklyn Paper
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Don’t miss our updates:

A key City Council committee this afternoon backed — by a surprisingly wide margin — DUMBO developer Jed Walentas’s controversial bid to build a 17-story tower next to the Brooklyn Bridge, hours after Speaker Christine Quinn reportedly had given her OK.

The Council’s land-use committee voted 17–4 to support Walentas’s request for a rezoning on his Dock Street site so that he could build a 300-unit tower — which includes a public middle school and scores of units set aside as below-market-rate rentals — a project that opponents claim will forever damage views of the historic and landmarked span.

“I have to vote yes … because it’s in the best interest of the community overall,” said Councilmember Robert Jackson (D–Manhattan), speaking for many on the panel.

The support for the project came on the heels of a fiery committee hearing last week, at which several councilmembers slammed the city’s school building agency over internal e-mails that cast doubt about whether or not the city actually considered other sites for a public middle school.

At that hearing, Councilman Eric Gioia (D-Queens) said called one of the e-mails “the most disturbing document that I have seen in my eight years in Council,” he said.

Gioia hammered this point on Thursday afternoon, reminding his fellow committee members of the e-mail in question, denying that the missive could be understood in the larger context.

“Unless the next e-mail was, ‘Just kidding,’ I don’t know what would put that in context,” he said.

But Gioia — joined by Councilmembers Charles Barron (D–Canarsie), John Liu (D–Queens) and Tony Avella (D–Queens) — lost the larger battle to the other committee members, who did insert rare language into the rezoning that requires Walentas to make good on his promise of the middle school and the affordable units.

That addendum to the bill did not satisfy Avella.

“I am thoroughly disgusted,” he said, his face reddening like a cartoon tea-kettle.

“People are going to go by and say, ‘Who the heck allowed this building to get built?’ The Brooklyn Bridge is a national treasure. It should be protected — that is the bottom line.”

Longtime project foe Councilman David Yassky (D–Brooklyn Heights) echoed Avella’s point about the view, but continued to stress his belief that the city could get a better deal for a middle school from a different developer.

“It is clear that there are plenty of other places to build a school in [Downtown Brooklyn],” said Yassky, who task force has proposed many locations — including inside the soon-to-reopen Brooklyn House of Detention — all of which have been shot down by the School Construction Authority.

On Thursday, Walentas said he was “pleased” by the committee vote.

“It’s a great project,” he added. “We have worked hard to demonstrate that Dock Street DUMBO will be a thoughtful, contextual, positive addition to the neighborhood [that will] provide the community with a new middle school and DUMBO’s first-ever affordable housing, all in an environmentally friendly green building that respects the surrounding neighborhood and its historic character.”

The committee vote in support of the project was a rare instance when a council committee opted not to defer to the wishes of the local member, in this case, project opponent Yassky.

It would be equally rare if the full Council, which is expected to vote on the development next week, overturns such an overwhelming committee vote.

The Council approval — which the New York Observer reported on Thursday is nearly a sure thing, thanks to Quinn’s support — is the final hurdle in Walentas’s hunt for a zoning resolution that would allow him to build residential apartments on a site currently reserved for manufacturing or hotels.

Borough President Markowitz (who called for a taller and thinner building) and the City Planning Commission (which suggested a slightly shorter building with other minor alternations), have already approved the rezoning.

The Planning Commission version is the one on which the Council committee voted on Thursday.

Opponents have rallied repeatedly and compiled a list of celebrities, such as Ken Burns, Gabriel Byrne, Helen Hunt, Gary Sinise and David McCullough who object to the project.

A review by The Brooklyn Paper earlier this year revealed that very few public views of the bridge would be obscured by the tower.

But Gus Sheha, president of the DUMBO Neighborhood Alliance and an opponent of the project, was livid after the vote.

“It’s clear that this committee today sold the Brooklyn Bridge,” he said.

Updated 8:03 pm, October 13, 2015: Story was updated to clarify the vote.
Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook
Subscribe

Don’t miss our updates:

Reasonable discourse

Homer Fink from Brooklyn Heights says:
And check out full list of who voted yes or no as well as some inside the council chatter:
http://brooklynheightsblog.com/archives/10279

Thanks!
June 4, 2009, 5:22 pm
Homer Fink from Brooklyn Heights says:
Try this link for the BHB story
June 4, 2009, 5:22 pm
Fourth Estate from DUMBO says:
Now I know who to campaign against. I now support Ratner and his insane "Atlantic Yards Project", after all, Ms. Leticia James, it's for the good of the community!
June 4, 2009, 7:40 pm
davoyager from BH says:
Gus Sheha is just mad they didn't sell the bridge to him.
June 4, 2009, 9:52 pm
Harry from Dumbo says:
If we're gonna be landmarkishly sensitive, let's return the WHOLE AREA to the way it was in 1883.
June 5, 2009, 1:20 am
Paul from Park Slope says:
Lotta Councilmembers showed their true colors today, didn't they? When Walentas can't finance this thing due to the next economic downturn (yes, kids, hold onto your hats, it's coming...) how many will be denying that they even voted for it, and what does it matter, it won't happen, shame about the school, etc. etc.

Gus Sheha, best quote!
June 5, 2009, 8:47 am
JudahSpechal from Bed-Stuy says:
This vote proves my point about Developers & Politicians. What give Council Woman James. You r a ball of contradiction with both Atlantic Yards & Dock Street. What are you & the fellow politicians not telling the people?
June 5, 2009, 9:36 am
Charles from PS says:
There are major differences between the proposed Atlantic Yard project and the Dock Street project. Be rational, people.

The AY is the largest urban development and taxpayer based financed project in the city's history. The amount of due process violations, misrepresentations, and clear favoritism in violation of the present land owner's Constitutional rights is appalling.

The DSP is a regular rezoning and development project of one building in an area already full of similar used buildings and heights. The recent evidence the city colluded with the developer, however, should put this project on hold if anyone cares to file suit.

Leticia James seems to be a careful and thoughtful official, and I should think there is no reason to question her decisions as based on contradiction. Not every project is the same, and development is a good thing when done properly, and under the law.
June 5, 2009, 10:06 am
thomas from former, DUMBO says:
"The Tower of DUMBy-lon"
You heard it here first.
Walentas exploited the artists to build his war chest and has yet to learn his lesson. A hard rain is going to fall, and soon.
New York is not well represented by ignorant council members who voted for this folly. The school is a ruse as is the low income housing. Take it from an exploited tenant of Walentas who has no regard for anybody but his treasures.
He has displaced enough people all ready and now the bridge too? Greed is not good.
June 5, 2009, 3:31 pm
BernieMadoff from NYCCF says:
I'll fund the project. I think it's a good idea.
June 5, 2009, 5:53 pm
tsk tsk from OBMUD says:
We need more open space to admire the greatest landmark in the world.
Covering the Brooklyn Bridge is like hiding Audrey Hepburn behind a Burka.
Shame on the NYC council members who have plotted to ruin this graceful beauty. What's wrong with a two or three-story middle school? Who ever heard of a middle school in a skyscraper? Are the city council members really so easily duped? If their so altruistic as they pretend, why can't greedy Walentas and Two Trees just stop at the third floor? No one wants them or their monstrosity in DUMBO. Walentas will forever be remembered by Brooklynites like Walter O'Malley is. Never forgotten for certain.
June 5, 2009, 6:05 pm
Fourth Estate from DUMBO says:
Charles,

I do think there should be legal challenges, but to suggest Councilwoman james is thoughtful and considerate is a stretch...her ties to the Walentas money tate is proof enough she is corrupt and should be investigated.
June 5, 2009, 6:11 pm
Two Cents from Heights says:
To Charles from PS: Thank you for injecting some critical thinking and sanity into this. I agree with you entirely.

To tsk tsk from OBMUD: Oh, PLEASE, already - it's not a "burka" on the bridge (and that kind of hyperbole discredits your argument).
As Charles noted, development can be a good thing.
And as Harry from Dumbo implied: Change happens. N.Y.C. isn't a wax museum, you have to work with and anticipate change, and you get noplace by saying "noooooooooooooo!" and monsterizing everything.
June 5, 2009, 9:04 pm
higher ground from suspension bridge says:
Dear 2 cent and 1/2 wit for change:
Look at the former Penn Station a la' 1963. We don't want that happening again now do we? That is why landmark commissions were established. And just for the record, the Brooklyn Bridge is even far more important than the former Penn Station by Stanford White. Maybe you like the underground compromise Penn Station has turned into? Maybe you'd like to move the Brooklyn Bridge to Staten Island so we can all see it better? I'm sure the yes votes from the council members would go for that too if Walentas sweetened the pot enough. The change I'd like to see is a new city council, but the next one with common sense and decency!
June 5, 2009, 11:26 pm
davoyager from bh says:
Ya know this whole corruption argument has very little merit in the face of the fact that all three votes have been overwhelming yes votes. The community board, the planning commission and now the land use committee. I don't think politicians or developers are going to spend capital so lavishly as to buy an overwhelming vote. If there had been a close vote than I could see some back room shenanigans. At the very least there were a lot of people in the room when support was won for this project so it would better be characterized as a front room deal.
Looks to me like the voice of the people.
June 5, 2009, 11:45 pm
david from dyker heights says:
The Philistines have control of the council.
The philistines are also overlooking DUMBO from the clock tower at One Main.
You know, as fiercely as Walentas fights every developer who comes into (or tries to come to) DUMBO, they are just Philistines fighting Barbarians.
Philistines and Barbarians have destroyed DUMBO and the once beautiful bridge views. Once the sight of the bridge is gone, it's gone. And if there is justice, gone be the careers of the council. They've all ready damaged their reputations with their absurd vote.
June 5, 2009, 11:58 pm
Fourth Estate from DUMBO says:
DA- you do know that CB2 and the Planning commission are unelected?
June 6, 2009, 12:16 am
Cherize from Newark says:
Is Leticia related to Sharpe James?
June 6, 2009, 12:33 am
Jorge from Queens says:
I worked in DUMBO for many years and every time Walentas/Two Trees develops a building, he/they sell out of it, then develops his/their next project in the exact sky view blocking any, many if not all views in his/their next project. IE when he/they developed 1 Main St., he/they next moved on to the "hotel Project" between One Main and the Water but never got the permits and was sued by his neighbors. Then he developed the Sweeney Bldg. and 50 Washington which both will lose their views from this new project.
What does this tell you? A. Walentas is a souless developer who has a plan to sell "views", then removes them without a glimpse of conscience. Bottom line: If you don't buy from him, there won't be another building on the other side of the street over the Empire Stores which inevitably is in his next sights.
June 6, 2009, 12:46 am
hyperbole from poesia ponte says:

When the visual poets
can no longer spy the bridge,
the waterfront will lose it's appeal
and become a loud dark void.
June 6, 2009, 1 am
Fourth Estate from DUMBO says:
DUMBO was much better when it was crack heads and artists. At least the crack heads could be told 'Go Away' and they would.
June 6, 2009, 1:51 am
crackhead from farragut says:
we crackheads have a code.
walintas and too trees gots no code in their dirty heds.
and the city council? dats war i's gets my crack.
June 6, 2009, 3:51 pm
sweeney from dumbo says:
Hey Crackhead-
You make a lot more common sense than any of this nonsense.
Ha Ha Ha
You made my day!
June 6, 2009, 4:04 pm
Fourth Estate from DUMBO says:
Glad to see a crackhead responding!
June 6, 2009, 9:52 pm
Two Cents from Heights says:
higher ground from suspension bridge says: "Look at the former Penn Station a la' 1963. We don't want that happening again now do we?"

Let me know when they plan to raze the entire Brooklyn Bridge and replace it with a claustrophobic shore-to-shore multilevel mall.
Because otherwise, your analogy doesn't work.
June 7, 2009, 11:10 pm
jed the jug head from fess up says:
you have no clue
June 8, 2009, 1:03 am
Larry from B Hts says:
tsk tsk said: 'Who ever heard of a middle school in a skyscraper?'

17 stories wouldn't be a 'skyscraper' anyplace outside of Alaska, or maybe Kansas. (Seriously, do you really live in nyc??)
The kids wouldn't suffer from the thin air at that monumental height anyway, since the school would be at the building's base. Heavens! Most extant nyc schools are multistories higher than that.

This hysterical stuff is sounding more & more like NIMBY plus 'omg! I'll lose My Personal View.'
June 8, 2009, 7:56 am
Jane David from Lead Poison says:
Studies have concluded that the lead content beneath the bridges in NYC are the highest in the city, unhealthy to children first and foremost, and at dangerous levels with children affected first. Unless there are extensive tests undertaken, I do not see this monstrosity ever being built.
As for Larry's comments, I agree the school (after lead tests have been cleared) should commence and stop at the bottom floor. Why build 17 stories when you can build a real skyscraper in East Bushwick or Anchorage.
(Sarah P., is that you again ?)
June 8, 2009, 4:58 pm
chris from new havens says:
this project benefits one big fat developer.
(period)
The school bait got the city council on board,
the financial crisis and the fall of the house of walentas
will terminate this project.
Fear not.
It will not be built.
June 8, 2009, 5:02 pm
giuseppe alphonse gambino from bensonhurst says:
4th estate refers to the press, if I'm not mistaken.
You mister 4th estate come across as a desperate man writing on the bathroom walls because even the reporters sign their name.
The democratic reference of the 4th estate is disgraced by the likes of your graffiti bantering.
It stinks like a rat in the sewer too long.
June 8, 2009, 5:07 pm
Fouth Esatet from DUMBO says:
The sewer is filled with the names of those who claim to represent the fourth estate
June 8, 2009, 9:54 pm
Fouth Estate from DUMBO says:
Seems like another name has surfaced!

Fear not, the Fourth Estate has been paid for by a grant from Two Trees!
June 8, 2009, 9:57 pm
blah blah blah from jubilene says:
Just tell Jed this is not happening for another 100 years.
No one wants another tower except JW.
Build it, and you will see no one running to buy or rent space adjacent to the loudest corridor in all of NYC.
Ha Ha Ha.
Why waste your time and ruin the view when
Anchorage needs a highrise and DUMBO could be missing their idiot at the same time, JW.
Blah Blah Blah.
June 9, 2009, 12:19 am
Larry from B Heights says:
Jane David from Lead Poison says: "Studies have concluded that the lead content beneath the bridges in NYC are the highest in the city, unhealthy to children ...
"I agree the school (after lead tests have been cleared) should commence and stop at the bottom floor. Why build 17 stories when you can build a real skyscraper in East Bushwick or Anchorage."

I have to give us NYers credit: We can come up with a staggering arsenal of objective (ahem) reasons for opposing something.
In this case - I thought that someone might "discover" that Dock St would displace some indigenous, rare, and hitherto-unknown form of wildlife, or even protozoan; or that the construction would disturb tectonic plates and cause 5.0-Richter quakes; or wrap the globe in Krakatoa-like dust, enhance global warming, raise coastal water levels, and bury Bklyn under 50 feet of water by 2016.

But I forgot about that perennial "it's all about the kids" fallback.
I certainly hope that very precise environmental studies will be done to determine how far the kid-danger zone extends, so that families with kids will be barred from living within X blocks of ANY bridges, bridge/tunnel access areas, perma-clogged main drags (like the BQE), or visiting any park-recreation areas near bridges ... much less reclaiming former industrial areas. (Go for it!)

And you get extra NIMBY points for wanting a "skyscraper" built in East Bushwick or Anchorage -- anyplace you don't live.
June 9, 2009, 8:11 am
trace from park slope says:
This council actully voted against the recommendation of DAVID MCCULLOUGH!??!! You guys don't deserve the Brooklyn Bridge - I'm gonna send it to Britain, where they know their ass from their elbow..

Good Luck getting Walentas to do what he says he is going to..Fool me once, as our past Dear Leader tried to say, and i've been fooled, fool me twice and - well you've fooled me twice! This is going to be fool me for about the fiftieth time, with Walentas' projects..
June 9, 2009, 11:04 am
aesthete from reality says:
Build a thousand skyscrapers but don't let Walentas and two trees design the project.
THEY ARE ARTLESS! The proof is all over the neighborhood they purchased for one US Dollar (yes, that's true) during the economic collapse of NYC during the 1970's.
Two Trees "almost" got it right when they invited Rem Koolhaus to design the DUMBO hotel except the space they gave him was in the East River. Hello! Is there anybody home in Two Trees? Why don't you resurrect Frank Gehry's rejected brilliant design? Now that's architecture but way too aesthetic for the Walentas-Two Trees company you artless b's.
June 9, 2009, 12:55 pm
Frank Lloyd from Taliesen says:
DUMBO used to look cool but I'd have to agree about the artlessness of the developers there. What a disgrace. pre-fab fugly shist and cavernous shells posing as luxury condos.
HA HA HA. The only people worse than the developers are the asses who buy or rent them because the developers are not challenged to do better. Cover up the bridge and there had better be something good to look at!
Where is the art? I would expect the council to know the difference but the developers must be held accountable. No more bad architecture! NYC is too important a world showcase to put up these fugly designs all ready! Get a real architect!!!!!!!
June 9, 2009, 5:32 pm
Carson Prarie Scott from Loop says:
Why not just hang Jane's carousel from the span of the suspension bridge? Go for it all.
Glitter Dust, kitsch, and maybe some nice pink flamingos while you're at it. The city council would love that too.
June 10, 2009, 12:44 am
Land Abuse? from Docks says:
Was that the Land Abuse committee?
Where is the Landmarks Committee?
June 10, 2009, 12:45 am
Ginny from LES says:
Great, another eye-sore from the makers of container apartment complexes.
June 10, 2009, 12:50 am
Jim from Fulton Landing says:
Even the Movie Theatres and parking garages built into the Empire Stores sounds more feasible than this concept.
June 10, 2009, 12:52 am
augusto from tivoli says:
Preposterous.
June 10, 2009, 2:05 am
Gino from Ft. Green says:
Now why would they want to build a thing that ugly next to the Brooklyn Bridge?
June 10, 2009, 2:06 am
v.Goth from Gothenburg says:
The End of The Empire.
Drive a Hummer Over It,
It's Done.
And while you're at it, why don't you put a license plate that says
DUMBO on an SUV gas guzzler you drive through the rain forest?
Go Ahead,..... it speaks tomes.
June 10, 2009, 2:09 am
disgusted from Dumbo says:
A school can go anywhere, but the Brooklyn Bridge is irreplaceable. This proposed development is a terrible idea. Kill it.
June 10, 2009, 2:25 am
Regina from Bay Ridge says:
MAYOR MIKE-
PLEASE REPLACE THE CITY COUNCIL WITH SOME INTELLIGENT LIFE FORM.
June 10, 2009, 1:08 pm
huckleberry from Downtown Brooklyn says:
If you allow developers carte blanche to erect buildings whenever and wherever they please, with money as the sole motivation, then prepare to live in your 4' x 6' studio, in a building resembling a jail. I literally live next to a hole created by Gregg Wolpert, who made a deal with my landlord for air rights ($10,000,000 worth) under the conditions that there are no apartments in my building. We were determined to be rent stabilized by the DHCR in 2005. We've had Frank Ciolli, owner of Grimaldi's, knock on our door and try to extort $280,000 from us. We've told every politician, including the DA, this paper and every local paper we can, about our story. (http://70willoughby.com) Nothing's happened. We've won over 13 pieces of litigation. We've had a judge, Leon Ruchelsman, accept a personal letter from our landlord's attorney's (without giving us the same courtesy). This particular judge was investigated for accepting bribes during the Brooklyn judge scandals.

Big development is a dirty business with no real accountability. It is INCREDIBLY naive to believe that the powers that be will look out for the community's best interest. Why should they? they don't actually live in the neighborhoods they're altering...
June 10, 2009, 3:04 pm
worse from DUMBO says:
Very Sorry to hear your woes Huckleberry. I've had Walentas and Two Trees screw me over during my lease with them too. Big Developers have Lawyers Money and Hubris and they ARE evil you can be certain. As for the pols, well they lick the shoes of the developers who walk through the sewers. This I know to be true.
Jed, can you hear me now?
June 10, 2009, 5:08 pm
nu, deja vu from gumbo! says:
Sigh.
It's pretty evident that some anti-DockStreeters have posted here multiple times under several handles.
As if you get points for quantity. Or as if it's not obvious.
June 10, 2009, 7:55 pm
huckleberry from Downtown Brooklyn says:
I truly don't think this is a pro-/anti- issue. There are such things as facts, and if history is a lesson, then we can make an educated guess about the future. The reason I always hesitate to post on threads like these is because of truly stupid people (and I don't intend that to be mean; I intend it so that they feel bad about themselves and learn simple grammar or, at the very least, respond to a specific topic. During the Enforcement proceeding at the DHCR, in which my landlord had to testify under oath, the DHCR lawyer asked him if he knew how to read. He wasn't being mean – he was simply responding to the types of answers that the landlord gave...

So, in response, to nu, deja vu: What exactly is your opinion? You made a point of commenting, yet I don't think you realized you didn't actually give an opinion to the TOPIC at hand. I understand that you're suspicious, paranoid, and feeling attacked by unknown people, who may or may not be posting "multiple times under several handles." What EXACTLY does that have to do with your opinion about developers, DUMBO, politicians, maybe even the history of over-development in some neighborhoods, low-income housing, rent-stabilization, artist neighborhoods, the place of artists in the city, gentrification, etc. etc.

This is a very contentious topic that is not new to the city. There's always been a tug-of-war between artist's communities, low-income communities (what are now diminishing middle class neighborhoods), into homogenized city-burbs that suck the character and charm out of rich, eclectic, creative neighborhoods where people actually thrive on thinking and expressing themselves without fear of standing out or standing apart.
June 10, 2009, 8:52 pm
nu, deja vu from gumbo! says:
huckleberry from Downtown Brooklyn says: "So, in response, to nu, deja vu: What exactly is your opinion? You made a point of commenting, yet I don't think you realized you didn't actually give an opinion to the TOPIC at hand. I understand that you're suspicious, paranoid, and feeling attacked by unknown people ..."

"Suspicious"? "Paranoid"? "Attacked"? That's a rather grandiose-arrogant analysis -- espec. since my short post dealt SOLELY with irritation at the old "multi-posts under different names" ploy.

Thus far, you've condescended to post, at considerable length (for the benefit of "truly stupid people" who lack "simple grammar" and organizational skills), and have sniped at me for failing to EXPRESS an opinion (really, how DARE I not address the "specific topic"?).

Perhaps you're feeling attacked, paranoid, et al, but
I'm merely irritated by threadsful of bogus same-people posts. They waste my time, aren't enlightening, discredit the arguments, generally get increasingly flaky, and make me look elsewhere for info.
I also won't give opinions-on-demand to some twit who thinks I don't "realize" what I write, and who whips up absurd psych analyses based on thin air and his or her current bad mood.
June 10, 2009, 11:22 pm
Robert from Park Slope says:
Who will pay serious money to live next to the Brooklyn Bridge access ramp?
June 11, 2009, 10:04 am
Dumbo from Dumber-O says:
nu appears to be getting especially desparate and the hypocrisy is laughable!
If you think anyone is wasting your time, go elsewhere, scoot, scram, scadaddle! as if I or any of these writers are actually addressing you and you alone, you megolomaniac.
The tower design is an arrogant blunder that offends people from Tennessee to Timbuktu. The audience of David McCullough and Brooklyn Bridge admirers are wider than the Brooklyn Paper's articles are capable of reaching and you haven't seen anything yet. You are pretty paranoid and self centered if you think all of these comments are directed toward you. The bridge is ours, not yours. The war of the bridge has clearly been started by Walentas and Two Trees. The response will expand and become global before ground is ever broken, count on that. I've heard people from Seven states talking about the absurdity and hubris of the design just today. The forces are mobilizing and Two Trees and Walentas have not bought the air rights to the bridge.
You clearly are unable to entertain a thought other than the one sided, pro development of a very bad design.
This will be fought till the end and it will have to wait a long time before you get anywhere with this poorly planned, inarticulately designed, stick in the eye of common sense leviathan. Just today I've happily donated to a legal fund to drag this halt order into the courts until a David McCullough approved design can be found. Developers are bad for the world and only legal challenges will talk your monied language. Touche'
June 11, 2009, 11:32 pm
Carlos from Boerum Hill says:
Is the school for the deaf?, blind? or ______?
June 11, 2009, 11:35 pm
Santos from Red Hook says:
Let them build it, I have this feeling that after eight freaking ugly buildings they'll finally get this next one right.
June 12, 2009, 12:21 am
Rocky from Carroll Gardens says:
Them developers sound really flakey.
I wouldn't trust them.
June 12, 2009, 12:23 am
Ken Burns from TVLand says:
"visual pollution"
June 12, 2009, 12:41 am
Adler Sullivan from Chicago says:
A friendly request to the architect of this project:
Please remove your design from having any association with infamy for an eternity.
If this project is actually built, your reputation is at peril and your legacy will be associated with the worst offense in the field of architecture since Alaric visited Rome.
No joke.
June 12, 2009, 12:54 am
Stanley from NYC says:
They are getting ready to dumb down dumbo.
Quality of life does not matter around here.
June 12, 2009, 2:25 pm
R. from Chelsea says:
Sad, really. People still are not learning the lesson of the economic downfall. Greed over integrity does not lead in the long run to prosperity.
June 12, 2009, 2:54 pm
Glenn from Vinegar Hill says:
Save an apartment for NY1 for their traffic report.
They can cut down on the helicopter costs living in the thick of traffic every hour on the hour.
June 12, 2009, 2:58 pm
Candy Darling from Meat Packing Dist. says:
"Abandoned Rail Line Gets New Life As NYC Park"
and now....Walentas/Two Trees/ Bridge Tower seems to be ahead of the curve in pre mature developing for the eventual "abandoned bridge".
June 12, 2009, 4:33 pm
Peter from Cobble Hill says:
Unbelievable. What a shame this lowdown
scheme can get this far.
June 13, 2009, 2:57 am
Rick from Casablanca says:

This re-zoning is criminal.
Just throw every tenant who lives under the bridge out of there. That's what they did to the artists when the laws said you couldn't live anywhere under there. What's changed besides the mega-greed?
June 13, 2009, 3:03 am
James from Bay Ridge says:
Just look what these jerks are doing now.
June 13, 2009, 11:51 pm
Walter from ebbets field says:
Nimby points, multiple post points, blah blah blah.
Thanks for scorekeeping but
maybe you should go back to Keyspan Park and follow the Cyclones and just stay out of serious business of architectural design and landmark infringement.
Now here's a score to mark down on your scorecard: one long bronx cheer for a seventeen story brooklyn flop.
June 14, 2009, Midnight
Wooley from Broadway says:
What happened to the set back laws?
June 14, 2009, 12:02 am
cracker from One Main says:
Go away crack head Jed
June 14, 2009, 6:43 pm

Enter your comment below

By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:

You agree that you, and not BrooklynPaper.com or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to BrooklynPaper.com the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.

Don’t miss out!

Stay in touch with the stories people are talking about in your neighborhood:

Optional: Help us tailor our newsletters to you!