“Downtown Brooklyn presents a
layered, seemingly impenetrable wall when viewed from Brooklyn Heights. The
composition, especially with the oblique view of Borough Hall, seems designed
as a purposeful representation of the city while it simultaneously denies
continuity and the expansiveness to the neighborhoods beyond.” Photo and caption by Jason Montgomery.
Last Tuesday we put on a session at the Brooklyn
Historical Society, the topic the rezoning of Downtown Brooklyn. “Downtown
Brooklyn is evolving and changing rapidly with a surge of new development. But
will these changes give us the downtown we all desire?” we asked. So, we
explored the future of Downtown Brooklyn with the 2004 Special Purpose District
Zoning Resolution, reviewing the goals of the rezoning and assessing the
results so far, turning to a panel of experts on planning, community advocacy,
government affairs, and development for a discussion on key issues critical to
Downtown Brooklyn’s future, including public space, pedestrian experience and
safety, public and private development, transportation, and connectivity to
surrounding neighborhoods. Participants
included myself, moderating the panel discussion, Bethany Bowyer (Downtown Brooklyn Partnership), Hilda Cohen (Make Brooklyn Safer), Ali Esmaeilzadeh
(Forest City), and Kevin Hom (City Tech). Offered at Brooklyn Historical Society in
partnership with the Downtown Rising Working Group.
Jason Montgomery, Assistant Professor Department of Architectural Technology City Tech, introduced our session, reviewing the aims of the rezoning
that displaced historic businesses to make way for skyscrapers, luxury towers,
and a more polished view of urban life. The point of the rezoning
was to establish a comprehensive plan for strong and diverse
commercial markets, bringing business to downtown. (And while, there certainly
were already businesses in the area, along Fulton, these were not sufficient
for the Bloomberg administration). Through the re zoning,
Downtown was promoted as a third business district in New York, after Lower and
Midtown Manhattan. Then
and now, the planning challenges for the space, poor streetscape and an isolated
downtown core, were many. Still, the city moved a zoning plan for a business
district. Ten years later, many would scratch their heads and wonder what had
happened to Brooklyn, starting in downtown.
Professor
Michael Duddy reviewed the horizontal changes to the landscape, including a swath
of residential buildings that have gone up in the last decade, skyscraper after
skyscraper, as Downtown Brooklyn evolved with a developer
friendly agenda, without complimentary public infrastructure of schools or
transportation.
“Today,
you can’t count the cranes on a view of Flatbush,” Duddy explained. The redevelopment of the neighborhood has
gone through several stages. 1985-2005
witnessed the Forest City’s MetroTech, the first significant development in the
area since the 1930’s. This is the sort of dead of isolated space, repelling
bodies from a space few use or enjoy. 2004 ushered a new phase of development, new
towers, City Tech and NYU anchoring this as a student space. Today, downtown Brooklyn is integrating educational,
residential, and cultural resources, as well as the neighborhoods, Boerum Hill,
Brooklyn Heights, and Fort Green, each of these neighborhoods disconnected and
separate. Over the years, this downtown has a hard time relating to these other
neighborhoods. The most natural
integration moves from South to North, from Boerum Hill to Atlantic, yet the
others are less smooth. The challenge involves
connecting the isolated core out to the
rest of the city. The barriers, double
parked cars, and demarcating lines create any number of challenges. “Getting from Fulton to Jay Street one sees
no smiling faces,” confessed Duddly.
Comparing
glossy photos of plans for glitzy streets without cars to images of gridlock
along Flatbush, Hilda Cohen, a transportation advocate with Make Brooklyn Safer and Families for Safe Streets,
offered a telling observation. “In between planning and construction is 15
years of change. Within it remains a vast
gap between the ‘bold new ideas’ and the reality. Where are the bold new ideas for streets
asked Cohen. “Our streets are for us, not for cars. What are the ways to improve and report a
problem?” So, how can we market streets
for people to linger, to share space? How can we re imagine Jay Street, making
this street usable for multiple users, while doing away with barriers, such as
rows of double parked cars blocking bus lanes, clogging up traffic. If Brooklyn wants to be a cutting edge space,
our streets must reflect this, it must realize that shared space is
necessary. We need bold new
designs. What makes these streets feel
comfortable?
I followed by posing a question to our panel,
noting Downtown Brooklyn is the third largest "business
district" in New York City after the Financial District and Midtown
Manhattan. The 2004 Develop Plan promotes Downtown Brooklyn as a key
location for back office space. With Brooklyn's evolution over
the past decade and the technology boom in Brooklyn, the planning for
Downtown Brooklyn likely now needs to achieve different goals. What should be
changed in the planning for Downtown Brooklyn to adapt to these new conditions? Is there a model urban "character"
that should guide the development of Downtown Brooklyn?
Kevin
Hom, a dean and architect with City Tech, suggested that Brooklyn, itself,
could be a source for insight into its future. “Brooklyn was once one of the
great cities in the US,” he explained.
Ocean Parkway is a great model of a street, as an open thoroughfare,
rapid transit, and great design.
Downtown Brooklyn surrounded by water and industrial sites could be an
ideal. Further, Manhattan is saturated,
no room for further development.
Brooklyn has been a model for design for 100 years. Today, the challenge
includes exchanging high-rises for residential prototypes. It’s a unique space with a history to address
its challenges as one of the great cities.
Ali Esmaeilzadeh,
of Forest City, suggested that the city needs to create incentives so we can
get the city where we want it too be.
Bethany
Bowyer, of Downtown Brooklyn Partnership,
pointed out that projects such as the Brooklyn Strand are in the works. And today, the office vacancy is just 3%.
Kevin Hom noted that with economic vitality, there was
less inclusiveness. He pointed to the
example of an Armani now on Atlantic Ave. That’s going to cater to a new kind
of Brooklyn, one that has not always been there. Yet, city planning can guide this; government
can plan this, opening a social and political dialogue.
For this to work, we have to rethink the streets here as
other cities have, noted Cohen. She pointed to the example of Portland, Oregon
where buses run for free downtown. So
people use the buses, instead of cars, with gridlock reduced. We have to
rethink how we get around.
Bethany finished with a question, can downtown be
connected with the Navy Yards, Dumbo and the Brooklyn Strand?
How do you enhance the changes that have already happened
noted Hom. The area needs connection.
While it has brand appeal, the area is going to need to
balance the rush to develop itself with the past 100 years of good planning
here.
I asked the crowd who of us go to downtown to eat? Who remembers the old Gage and Tullner
restaurant down here? Few rose their
hands.
Downtown Brooklyn, especially Jay
Street, is home to a large population of college students. How can the uses, public spaces, and streets
of Downtown Brooklyn better provide a sense of place for these students while
leveraging the students' energy to help activate Downtown Brooklyn? How
can community spaces in Downtown Brooklyn help foster community, integration,
and interaction? What kind of spaces need to be developed?
Hom pointed out that some of the good planning
that makes BAM thrive, an active theater and restaurants, open streetscape, could
be extended downtown so people want to stay after work.
The realization that we need a vibe
on the ground is becoming more prescient acknowledged Ali.
While downtown Brooklyn is an
economic hub, it is missing needed infrastructure, noted several of the
audience members, with frustration in their voices. While 10,000 new residential units have been
created, supporting schools, libraries, and hospitals have not been developed.
It is the responsibility of
government and governance to create these things, Hom pointed out. Only
community pressure can create the impetus to create these things. People have to organize.
People want to live here. This is one of the great cities, along with
Shanhai, Los Angeles, Tokyo, and London.
The people want to make it great.
Yet, from the 1950’s when the Dodgers left until 2004, the borough was
sinking. And now its turning around with
new tides of buildings and people.
Several called for halting the
residential development until attendant needs are addressed.
If the problem involves the streets overflowing with cars, then I have to agree with Ms. Cohen. Rethink the plans the way other cities have, wherein they are not crowded by private vehicles, because they are open to the suggestion of public transportation. At any rate, thanks for sharing that with us, Ben. I enjoyed stumbling upon your blog. I hope to see more though. All the best! :)
ReplyDeleteDaniel Roberson @ Mark Bentley PA