standard At Crown Heights Armory Forum, Numerous Ideas and Hurdles Ahead

Richard Hurley, Esq., and City Council Member Laurie Cumbo speak to the audience (Photo by Matthew Taub)

A community forum concerning redevelopment of the Crown Heights Armory Tuesday evening brought forth numerous ideas from local residents, as well as a petition of demands that developers would be forced to meet in exchange for permission to take control of the area. Based on an explanation from officials as to the process going forward, there will be significant hurdles to ensure such community interests are heeded.

The Armory, at Bedford Avenue between President and Union Streets (Wikimedia Commons)

The Armory, at Bedford Avenue between President and Union Streets (Wikimedia Commons)

The Armory, at Bedford and Union Streets, has been targeted for a transformation for several years. Proposals have included everything from a Chelsea Market-style Bazaar, fitness facility, sports arena, and childrens’ center. Originally under state control, it was recently placed under the city’s jurisdiction and a Request For Proposals (RFP) was issued to developers interested in the site.

“Can we trust the developers?” asked Richard Hurley, a local lawyer who led the meeting of the Crown Heights Community Council. “These are the same people too often taking our homes. They have to understand the distrust we have. They have to understand they need to earn our trust.”

Map by Matthew Taub

Map by Matthew Taub

Though many RFP submissions are kept secret, Hurley believed there are about six submissions now pending. He mentioned one in particular –a joint proposal of the Local Development Corporation of Crown Heights and Steiner Studios–that he favors.

“This is a local group that’s been here when times were bad, and now when times are good,” Hurley said. “Other developers are transient, they don’t live here. Now they want to come in and take advantage.”

Even with a local developer, however, Hurley was worried that certain community interests might not be met unless made binding. He made it a point to circulate a petition, demanding a ban on any usage fee for local residents (for whatever amenities are built on the site), employment opportunities for locals within the facility (including managerial employment), and health care services, among other requests.

A mostly congenial if occasionally testy crowd agreed, emphasizing enthusiasm for more facilities but a general distrust of many developers and interested parties.

Photo by Matthew Taub

A number of political figures dropped by and spoke to the packed room. City Council Member Laurie Cumbo (D-Brooklyn) was one of them. Cumbo emphasized the need to be “proactive, not reactive” to proposals and advised she would check in with other armory redevelopment groups, such as in Park Slope, to glean their prior successful strategies.

There will be several more community meetings ahead as the RFP process advances.

  • http://www.corleybrooklyn.com Michael Corley

    The RFP process isn’t a secret bidding process. The moment a city agency accepts a proposal, there is a process at the community board level allowing a formal review.

    Further, any group can fund, prepare and submit an environmental Impact study to submit to …

    1. The local community board

    2. The elected council person’s office of the district the proposed development is occurring in.

    3. And NYC’s Planning Commission

    *** and arm their attorney with when it’s time to go to court.

  • Moria

    The map shown is incorrect. The armory is across the street to the right (East) of blue highlighted section. The block with the large solid grey mass-IS the Bedford Armory. It takes up almost the entire if not all of the block between Bedford and Rogers.

    • Matthew Taub

      Thank you for the heads up! I will try to adjust it later. Was going to visit the site but the meeting took place amidst the torrential downpour.

  • Pingback: Over a Dozen Violent Sex Offenders Residing in Unmarked Prospect-Lefferts Gardens Building - Brooklyn Brief()