110 Amity Street: back on the market

As reported by Brownstoner and our many of our members, 110 Amity Street is back on the market. And yes, the Corcoran broker overseeing the offerings, which include adjacent properties, has the same last name as the developer who went before the Landmarks Preservation Commission last year. That is all we know at this point. If you know more than that, let us know.

props to Linda Blyer and Judy Willig

As reported in the Brooklyn Heights Press & Cobble Hill News, the CHA's own Linda Blyer has been honored by Brookyln District Attorney Charles Hynes. She and Judy Willig of the Heights & Hill Community Council will be saluted at the DA's annual Brooklyn's Extraordinary Women celebration. Congratulations, Linda and Judy.

Earth Hour: March 28

CHA Green Czar Dave 'Paco' Abraham writes in to remind us that Earth Hour is coming up:

Earth Hour: All parts of the world big and small making a conscious decision to turn off their lights for one hour on March 28, 2009 as a reminder of our planet's conditions and that we DO have the collective ability to change it.

I first heard about this last year and recall specifically unplugging everything I could in my apartment and just hanging out with friends. I kind of envisioned shutting all my lights, unplugging any cords, and perhaps having dinner outside. Maybe some people will play cards by candlelight or just sit and chat enjoying the company of old friends and new acquaintances.

What: Earth Hour
When: March 28, 2009, 8.30 p.m. to 9.30 p.m.
Where: Everywhere

join the party: Thursday, May 7, 2009

The Cobble Hill Association will celebrate its fiftieth anniversary at a gala party at Borough Hall on Thursday, May 7, 2009, and you are invited.

This is going to be a fabulous event with music by Michael's Dreamland Orchestra and catering by EVENTfull.nyc. Just click the link to get your ticket. We are going to announce a major project that could run for the next fifty years. Come to the party to find out what it is.

What: CHA 50th Anniversary Party
When: Thursday, May 7, 2009, 6.30 p.m. to 9.00 p.m.
Where: Brooklyn Borough Hall

CHA letter on Brooklyn Bridge Park

The Brooklyn Paper's editorial this weekend refers to a letter that we have circulated to elected officials and the press this week. I thought we should also share the letter with the community because we all have a stake in the park, as well as in the management of public funds. Here it is.

March 3, 2009

Ms. Regina Myer
President, Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation
633 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10017

Re: Brooklyn Bridge Park, financial data, and the federal stimulus

Dear Ms. Myer,

On January 29, 2009, the Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation released some financial data about the park’s construction and operations budgets to the public. We are grateful that, since its last public disclosures in October 2005, the BBPDC agreed once again to provide such data.

The Cobble Hill Association has been one of the strongest advocates for a Brooklyn Bridge Park for more than two decades. Continuing our historic role as park advocates, I am writing to you out of concern regarding both what the January 29 financial data reveal and what they do not.

We would like to ask your help in seeking answers to lingering, important questions about the financial disclosures. We make this request for the sake of transparency and good government. Putting aside for the moment controversies about the park’s design, we are concerned that the park’s finances are a mess. The worst-case scenario would be one where millions of dollars were ill-managed and ill-spent and the public wound up without a world-class park. No one wants that to happen. Can you help us in seeking answers to these Ten Unanswered Questions about Brooklyn Bridge Park? We are confident that greater transparency will make a great park more likely.

1. Utilities for what exactly?

The financial disclosures for construction show a $61 million cost for utilities. That is so high a cost that we believe it includes the cost of providing utilities to the development parcels. The unique funding scheme for the park’s maintenance calls for the development parcels to pay for the park. If any portion of the park’s construction budget is spent to benefit the development parcels, then the reverse would be true: the park would be paying for the development parcels. That would be a theft of public moneys and must never be allowed to happen.

Question: Will any portion of the $61 million utilities cost provide utilities or utilities infrastructure for the development parcels?


2. Construction or Operations?

The unique, controversial funding scheme for the park’s maintenance and operations budget designates certain items as “Maintenance and Operations” which would, in any other park financial model, be classified as “Construction Costs.” One such example is the pilings beneath the piers. Slide 26 of the January 29 presentation reveals that these “Marine Infrastructure Costs” are part of the Maintenance and Operations Budget. The annual amount of Marine Infrastructure Cost is $4,060,000, or 25% of the annual Maintenance and Operations budget of $16,104,000. These costs are obviously misclassified.

Question: By classifying traditional Construction Costs as “Maintenance and Operations,” isn't the result that the M&O budget is artificially high and that, therefore, the development parcels will have to generate commensurately more revenue to pay for the park’s inflated M&O budget?


3. Where will the money come from?

We have a second question about the marine infrastructure mentioned in question 2. Slide 26 of the January 29 BBPDC presentation reveals the following: “The cost of this work could be as high as $150 million, which must be performed over the next 15 years.” That is a lot of money without any apparent funding source.

Question: How can marine infrastructure costs be budgeted at $4,060,000 per year in the M&O budget yet also cost $150 million over 15 years? And where will the money come from to pay this unbudgeted $150 million cost?


4. Soft costs?

The construction budget shows “Miscellaneous Soft Costs” of $13,100,000. That’s a lot of miscellaneous.

Question: Can we obtain a breakdown of this large miscellaneous cost?


5. Architects and engineers?

The construction budget shows “Architecture and Engineering” costs of $20,400,000. In answer to a question of mine at the January 29 public meeting, Regina Myers of the BBPDC revealed that, so far, Van Valkenburgh Associates has been paid $18 million. That leaves only $2.4 million for all remaining landscaping design and architectural work, not to mention all past and future engineering.

Question: Since the architecture and engineering costs have almost entirely been spent already just on the landscape architect, how will the engineers’ and architects’ fees be paid as the project moves forward?


6. How much development?

The acreage devoted to private development has grown from 7 acres in 2006, to 8 acres in 2007, to 10.2 acres at the January 29 meeting. We do not understand why the acreage keeps growing since the total park area has not grown.

Question: What accounts for the progressive growth in land area occupied by the development parcels? Can we see the development acreage broken down by building and surrounding private amenities?


7. Alternative funding?

The unique, controversial funding scheme for the park’s maintenance and operations budget relies chiefly on housing, a revenue source that is subject to huge market swings. We know that there will also be concessions and automobile parking in the park, yet these were not included in the financial disclosures, nor was the revenue generated by the River Café.

Question: What amount of revenue is expected to come from park concessions and automobile parking, and might it be enough to allow reductions in the height of the development parcels? Will the revenue from the hotel restaurant and a possible grocery store at 360 Furman Street go to the park, or will it be kept by the operators of the development parcels?


8. Furman Street Freeze-Out?

The building at 360 Furman Street is expected to generate annual revenue of $2,982,000 towards the park’s Maintenance and Operations budget through PILOTs and ground rent.

Question: If the developer of 360 Furman Street, Robert A. Levine, defaults on his loan, who will be responsible for paying the revenue that the site is expected to generate?

9. Pop-up money?

We learned at the January 29 meeting that the BBPDC incurred costs to create the so-called “pop-up park” for the summer of 2008, but no other details were provided.

Question: Can we see a detailed breakdown of the costs to create the pop-up park and the revenue that it generated? We are particularly interested in itemized costs for design, construction, programming, security, operations, food, and liquor, as well as to whom the costs were paid.


10. Old data or new?

The Final Environmental Impact Statement was issued in December 2005. Appendix C devoted many pages to explaining in detail the park’s Revenue Assumptions and Maintenance & Operations budget.

Question: Since the financial data released on January 29, 2009 are so different than the data that were the basis of the 2005 FEIS, would the BBPDC provide similarly detailed explanations of its Revenue Assumptions and M&O calculations in 2009?


One more point: the federal stimulus

We are aware that our elected officials are considering asking Governor Paterson to direct some of the state’s 2009 federal stimulus money to pay for the $150 million in marine infrastructure costs mentioned above. I myself publicly asked Senator Gillibrand on February 18, 2009 to consider lending her support to this idea.

We believe that the stimulus money should be used for this purpose but only on one condition: that in exchange for removing this massive cost, which the BBPDC classifies as Maintenance and Operations, the hotel and the new housing in the park should be eliminated forever from the park plans.

Why do we feel that this arrangement would be justified? The reason for the new housing has always been explained in terms of the park’s uniquely expensive operating costs. But consider this: With the annual $3 million from 360 Furman Street and without the need for the annual $4 million for marine infrastructure costs, the park would no longer be uniquely expensive to operate. With this combined $7,042,000 plus the unknown revenue from concessions, the park’s operating costs would be cut in half. Why then would we need new high-rise apartments at Pier 6 and a hotel at Pier 1?

Let’s find a way to use the federal stimulus money to make the new housing and the hotel unnecessary. Haven’t we all said that we do not want housing if it proves unnecessary to pay for the park?

Please let us know when we might be able to meet with you in person to discuss these questions and to ask your support in finding the answers.

Thanks.


Jeff Strabone
President, Cobble Hill Association

Dock Street statement at City Planning Commission

Many thanks to Linda Blyer for delivering the CHA's testimony regarding Dock Street to the City Planning Commission yesterday. Here is our statement.

Statement of the Cobble Hill Association to the City Planning Commission
regarding matters C 090181 ZMK, C 090183 ZSK, C 090184 ZSK,
10 Dock Street, Brooklyn

March 4, 2009

City Planning Commission
Spector Hall
22 Reade Street
New York, New York 10007


Good afternoon, members of the Commission. My name is Linda Blyer. I am testifying today on behalf of the Cobble Hill Association in the matter of 10 Dock Street. We urge the Commission to oppose the application at its current height.

The three greatest icons of New York City are the Statue of Liberty, the Empire State Building, and the Brooklyn Bridge. All three appear on calendars, logos, billboards, book covers, tourist info, and in the hearts and minds of all New Yorkers. Aside from their grace and beauty, all three benefit from their unobstructed visibility from multiple directions and prospects. The matter before you today would forever destroy the greatest set of views of the Brooklyn Bridge. It is every New Yorker’s responsibility to stand up for our City’s great history and to defend it from attack. Members of the Commission, the application before you represents an attack on Brooklyn’s greatest historic icon.

The application has gotten as far as it has because the developer, Two Trees Development, has cleverly tacked on a school to the project. Of course we all want more schools. But forcing the City to choose between historical preservation and school construction is a cynical false choice. We can have both. By pitting preservation against education, the applicant has set the past against the future. This tactic is reminiscent of the colonial policy of divide and conquer. The applicant is trying to divide our community, but we are one in rejecting this false choice and insisting on both education and preservation. Everyone who wants the historic views of the bridges preserved also wants a school in Dumbo. Indeed, the reason we want the views preserved is precisely because we want to pass our City’s legacy on to the next generation.

This developer, Two Trees Development, is the same one who is responsible for 10 Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn. That is the now famous case where they tried to build sixth-floor luxury penthouses in the Cobble Hill Historic District by calling them 'stair bulkheads' on the official architectural drawings that they submitted for approval to the City. These same so-called 'bulkheads' were then pitched to the rental market as 'penthouses' when the City's back was turned. Are we now supposed to trust this same developer to build a 'school'? What is their idea of a 'school'? Do we want to find out? This developer has no regard for history, for laws, for neighborhoods, or for Brooklyn.

Members of the Commission, we ask you to defend the City's historic legacy and reject this application as presented. We ask that you limit the applicant, and all others, to build no higher than the roadway of the Brooklyn Bridge. Any building this close to the Bridge should be prohibited from towering over the Bridge. The developer can build high-rises further away from history. Please stand up for the Bridge, for the City, for the past, and for the future by opposing this application.

Thank you.

Dock Street hearing: March 4

In January, we told you about the proposed building planned for Dock Street by Two Trees Development. The picture above shows before and after views. The next hearing on the matter will be very important. It will be held on Wednesday, March 4 at the City Planning Commission in Manhattan during the afternoon session.

As we have explained before, all of Brooklyn has a stake in preserving the historic views of the bridges. The main point to make is that no building that close to the bridges should exceed the height of the roadway. Again, this is the same Two Trees that tried to pass of penthouses as 'stair bulkheads' at 194 Atlantic Avenue.

What: City Planning hearing re Dock Street.
When: Wednesday, March 4, 2009, after 12.30 p.m.
Where: 22 Reade Street, Manhattan.

Please attend the hearing if you can and defend the integrity of historic Brooklyn and the bridges. The next step after this is contacting our City Council members to oppose the plan.

Senator Squadron's Community Convention

State Senator Daniel Squadron has organized the first-ever 25th Senate District Community Convention, and you are invited. From the official announcement:

Join Senator Squadron, elected officials and more than 100 neighbors on Sunday, March 15th to discuss pressing issues facing the 25th Senate District. Senator Squadron seeks your input and participation on housing, transportation, education, and many other district needs.

What: 25th Senate District Community Convention
When: Sunday, March 15, 2009, 3.00 to 6.00 p.m.
Where: Borough of Manhattan Community College,
199 Chambers Street

Yes, that's in Manhattan.

If you would like to go, Senator Squadron asks that you RSVP to Jasmin Sanchez, 212-298-5565, convention [at] danielsquadron [dot] org.

join the LICH mailing list

To stay in touch with events at LICH, join their mailing list. Zippi Dvash, LICH's Assistant Vice-President of Public Affairs and Development, writes in to say:

If you are interested in receiving advance notice of health talks, screenings, lectures and events at LICH, please email Zipporah Dvash in the Department of Public Affairs & Development at zdvash@chpnet.org, and ask to be added to their electronic news bulletin community. The list is private and will never be shared with a third party.

take advantage of LICH

One of our complaints about the management of LICH has been that they don't get the word out about either the services they offer or the high quality of those services. With all the news reports about financial uncertainty, it is easy to lose sight of the fact that LICH is still an excellent hospital with the same range of services that it offered a year ago.

With that in mind, we have offered to help LICH get the word out about their positive news as well. Here is a notice from LICH about a free community education workshop series about diabetes:

Diabetes is on the rise in the US, largely due to lifestyle choices. Long Island College Hospital (LICH) of Brooklyn, in conjunction with the Dodge YMCA at Atlantic Avenue, is hosting a community education workshop series about diabetes. The sessions include use of medication, foot care, new technology, counting carbs, glucose monitoring, type I diabetes vs. type II and more. Registration is required, but the sessions are free to the community.

WHAT: Community education workshop series about diabetes.
WHEN: 1.00 to 2.30 p.m. on
Tuesday, February 10,
Tuesday, February 17,
Tuesday, February 24.
WHERE: Dodge YMCA, 225 Atlantic Avenue, Classroom B (second level).

Info/Registration: Sara Reyes, Dodge YMCA, 212-912-2421, sreyes [at] ymcanyc.org.

Diabetes Self-Management Education: Brooklyn has some of the highest rates of diabetes in the state. If untreated or poorly controlled, diabetes can have devastating health consequences. Research has shown that controlling the blood glucose levels help neutralize the risk of health complications from diabetes. There have been many recent advances in diabetes management from better understanding the role of diet to development of new medications/insulins and high-tech devices. Come learn about diabetes management and self-management. This weekly three session work shop will provide a comprehensive overview of the diabetes and instruction in the self-management tasks that will allow people with diabetes to be in the best position to work with their HealthCare provider to help assure optimum diabetes management.

LICH properties for sale

LICH has put some of its properties up for sale, as reported by Brownstoner and other sources. Here is the list of properties:

74 Amity Street
76 Amity Street
78 Amity Street
82 Amity Street
86 Amity Street
113 Congress Street
43 Columbia Place
385-389 Hicks Street

As we all know by now, LICH is under the thumb of Continuum Health Partners, a relationship that both entities would like to terminate. When news broke that LICH properties were being sold, the first question was whether Continuum was going to sell the properties and then take the money and run. Based on the imperfect fact-gathering that we have done, it looks like the profits from the property sales will not line Continuum's pockets.

There are two explanations that we have heard from reliable sources, both of which we find plausible although we would still like more evidence. One explanation is that the money will be used to pay down LICH's building mortgages, which are held by the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York and guaranteed by HUD. The other explanation that we have heard is that the money will go towards a reserve fund for possibly lingering malpractice claims. If, as expected, LICH enters into a partnership with SUNY Downstate, their high malpractice insurance premiums will vanish because they will be part of the state system. But LICH would still need to hold a reserve for pre-SUNY claims that may arise.

As we find out more, we will pass it on.

Atlantic Yards event today

I apologize for the short notice, but this just came in yesterday. The Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods is hosting a public event with the Atlantic Yards ombudsman. Yes, he exists, and he will answer your questions.

WHAT: Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods Hosts Q & A re Atlantic Yards
WHEN: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 7.30 p.m.
WHERE: St. Cyril of Turau Belarusian Cathedral, Atlantic Avenue at Hoyt Street

From the CBN notice:

The Empire State Development Corporation's Atlantic Yards Ombudsman, Forrest Taylor, will be at the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods' bi-monthly general meeting next week to field questions about the stalled mega-development project.

Mr. Taylor took questions from the public and elected officials at CBN's January 2008 meeting, and this will be good a opportunity to follow up on answers he gave then.

If you're curious about when the ESDC expects the Carlton Avenue Bridge to be rebuilt; why the Governor has been slashing budgets on just about every state-funded program while remaining mum about Atlantic Yards; just what the heck is going on with security plans for the planned basketball arena; or anything else having to do with the project—this is your chance. CBN has also extended invitations to several Brooklyn elected officials, who may welcome the chance to pin down the ESDC on the many unaddressed issues and unanswered questions hanging over the Atlantic Yards project.

In addition, if you're a member in good standing of one of CBN's member organizations, and you're interested in joining CBN's Steering Committee, there will be at least two seats open in the election that will be conducted at Wednesday's meeting. Nominations can be submitted from the floor. The Steering Committee meets once a month.