Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Brooklyn Bridge "PID" Funding Scheme Dead In The Water

Home and local business owners would pay a new tax to maintain Brooklyn Bridge Park in a proposed tax zone (shaded in brown). This was one of a few revenue schemes released by a California consulting group hired to explore potential revenue in order to avoid building residences within the park's footprint. A similar Park Improvement District (PID) proposal supported by Mayor Bloomberg to pay for maintenance and operation (M&O) of the High Line esplanade in Manhattan was quickly scrapped after strong public criticism emerged.

The park's wildly inflated proposed $ 16 million dollar annual budget for M&O has long been seen as a transparent attempt to justify housing in the park. The park's 2009 Financial plan for instance includes a number of Capital expenditures such as maritime bulkhead and pile protection, vehicle replacements, and a capital reserve. Together these add up to more than $ 6 million annually, or roughly 40% of the proposed budget.

So far the City has refused to take responsibly to fund the park's annual upkeep. "The City does not have the money to have new parks and fund them," Mayor Bloomberg famously said at the opening of Brooklyn Bridge Park on March 22, 2010. - Geoffrey Croft


Brooklyn Bridge Park could raise one-quarter of its massive maintenance budget through a new tax on local businesses and residents — but that idea is dead in the water, say critics, who think there are better ways to raise the money, according to the Brooklyn Paper.

A consultant hired last year to search for revenue to maintain the park without building residences within its waterfront footprint released a draft report on Tuesday that predicted that $1 million to $4 million towards the park’s $16-million maintenance budget could come from a new tax on residents and business owners within a quarter-mile of the park.

But the scheme — called a “Park Improvement District” — is so unpopular that before the ink dried on the study, the proposal was already being blasted as “insulting” and “a scare tactic.”

“The Park Improvement District they proposed is not going to happen,” said state Sen. Daniel Squadron (D–Brooklyn Heights). “There are viable alternatives to the current plan” to include housing in the park.

The construction of housing and other revenue-generating uses stem from a 2002 agreement between the city and state that the $350-million park raise its own maintenance budget so it would not be a drain on city coffers.

But the proposed 20- to 30-floor luxury high-rises have long been the 1.3-mile waterfront development’s most controversial feature, so last year, park planners created a Committee on Alternatives to Housing.

On Tuesday, the committee’s consultant issued a draft report that found $2.5 million to $7 million in new revenues, including the controversial new park improvement district, which would extend from Furman Street to as far east as Henry Street and as far north as Bridge Street in DUMBO.

The consultant, however, did not consider a proposal being pushed by Squadron that would capture tax revenue created when several currently tax-exempt Jehovah’s Witness-owned buildings are sold and return to the rolls.

Squadron is pushing the consultant to consider such revenue before the end of the report’s 60-day “public comment period.”

“The most-important alternative revenue source has not yet been studied: tapping into the 2.8-million-square feet of nearby Watchtower properties,” he said.

Like Squadron, other opponents of housing inside the park dismissed the park improvement district tax.

“We already pay our taxes,” said Judi Francis, president of Brooklyn Bridge Park Defense Fund, which has sued to keep housing out of Brooklyn Bridge Park and to maintain the open space in the same way that normal city parks are maintained: through the Parks Department budget. “Dedicate more of those dollars to parks and then we’ll talk.”

Despite the derision, the idea of creating a Business Improvement District for a park is not without precedent. The High Line and Hudson River Park, both in Manhattan, have considered BIDs to generate revenue, though neither did. Bryant Park is supported by a massive BID that manages more than $5 million a year to supplement city services.

In addition to the $4 million maximum revenue raised by the park improvement district, the consultant identified $3 million in revenues that could be raised by:

• Parking fees — $230,000 to $440,000.

• Creating more concessions beyond the soon-to-open wine bar at Pier 6 and cart food on Pier 1 — $40,000 to $365,000. It’ll likely be the lower number, the consultant admitted.

• Changing the proposed residential buildings to retail space — $250,000. Even that figure is unlikely because limited public transportation would make the park a poor location for retail.

• Charging sports enthusiasts more to use proposed recreation facilities inside the park — $600,000.

“The most-important alternative revenue source has not yet been studied: tapping into the 2.8-million-square feet of nearby Watchtower properties,” (Top Right) said state Sen. Daniel Squadron (D–Brooklyn Heights).

A public hearing on the report will be held at St. Francis College [180 Remsen St. between Clinton and Court streets in DUMBO, (718) 222-9216] on March 31 at 6 pm. For info, visitwww.brooklynbridgeparknyc.org.

Read More:

Park’ Foes decry Park ‘tax’ scheme, push for revenue from Witness buildings

The Brooklyn Paper - February 23, 2011 - By Laura Gottesdiener

Bloomberg Rejects Proposal For The City To Pay To Maintain Brooklyn Bridge Park - Taxes Eyed

A Walk In The Park - December 21, 2010

No comments:

Post a Comment