Community Input

it is really inconceivable how a "Parks" dept would destroy trees and pour more cement... especially when Fort Greene is being overwhelmed by diesel, trucks, noise etc.

I strongly object to the removal of historic and beautiful trees and further adding more hard space, reducing green space, removing the mounds, altering the historic fencing and otherwise altering the Olmsted vision for this park. I am in favor of fixing the bathrooms which have been neglected for years, having more operating hours for the visitor's center, having more guards at night in the park and fixing/repairing walkways, entrances, etc., so people don't trip, etc...NOT for tearing out our beautiful trees.

it is really inconceivable how a "Parks" dept would approve of destroying that which creates a city park, namely its trees!!! and pour more cement...especially when Fort Greene is being overwhelmed by diesel, trucks, noise etc., all that a city park is designed to help muffle and protect the air we breathe -- which the trees do by their very nature - positive health impacts for all, especially children and the elderly.

process not open enough; misinformation; lack of thorough cost-benefit analysis

There are three - out of many if I have to choose to focus - mot important points here: 1) the process of decision-making (not open or democratic enough); 2) misinformation or insufficient information about the impact of the new design, especially re 58 tree elimination; and 3) lack of thorough cost-benefit analysis (social, cultural, environmental health factors included) with sufficient public out-reach magnitudes and legibility.

Not familiar enough to comment but I agree with the folks who love and use the park everyday. They should be the ones to help with the design. Make it the community project it should be, and I am never for cutting down trees! This seems like a tragedy, especially in view of the rapidly changing climate we are facing and the need for carbon capture and shade!!!!

"Removal of these trees seriously degrades the Park"

The proposed design doesn’t follow the Parks w/o Borders initiative to make parks more accessible and oversteps its focus on edges. It appears to be a poor design and focuses on the view of the monument from Myrtle rather than on actual usage and experience of the park. I am primarily disturbed by the removal of Zelkova trees on the monument steps and their replacement by a few ornamental trees. Shade on this large expanse of stone steps is very important for accessibility. Climbing up all these steps in the hot sun will not be fun. Removal of these trees seriously degrades the Park and the lush view toward Manhattan from the monument plaza. Such a drastic change to one of New York’s best parks needs a lot more design sensitivity and study. I’m an architect and have designed landscapes. I also know top landscape architects in the city that may be able to lend their expertise.

"Maintain the historic beauty of our park without gutting it."

The existing entrances should be truly accessible. Do not remove stone walls unless it is necessary to remove a small portion to add a ramp. Leave mounds in place. Children love playing on them. Maintain the historic beauty of our park without gutting it.

While I agree that all entrances to FGP should be wheelchair usable, I would like the mounds to stay as they are. The one nearest the stairs makes a good stage for events such as the Great Pupkin contest and various concerts. Kids love playing on them. Let them stay!

"More grass. More green. Not more pavement. Not fancy things just to look fancy."

More intimate spaces "enclosed" by trees. Places to sit at tables, benches in the shade, areas for placing blankets in shade. No trees should be removed. We need them for clean air and shade and to have places to feel a tiny bit of privacy. More grass. More green. Not more pavement. Not fancy things just to look fancy. People use this park as their backyard. We should think of the park this way, not as a promenade.

"this is an opportunity to make real improvements that would be appreciated by the community and park users, and it is being wasted."

I don't understand the rationale behind their proposal. How badly needed is more event space? Are there not other improvements that would make a bigger difference for everyday use of the park? It feels like this is an opportunity to make real improvements that would be appreciated by the community and park users, and it is being wasted. Closing that section of the park for years in order to flatten a couple of mounds doesn't seem to add any value for anyone. Also- shouldn't they first replace the trees that have been removed recently??

"a small park... does not need a grand avenue made of concrete."

More trees, shrubs and flowers - this is a small park that should serve as a recreational green space; it already has a beautiful staircase leading up to the monument and does not need a grand avenue made of concrete. This will greatly decrease the park's value.

Proposed design looks big and corporate, I want one that has lots of sunny and shady spots more gardens, jogging path, a place of concerts/dj or band dance parties.

"This kind of money should fund maintaining, repairing and upgrading the present park amenities"

"WE do NOT need more pavement in the park. There is plenty already."

The proposed plan is not user friendly. It is too vast and unsympathetic to use. particularly by children and small groups or individual adults. This kind of money should fund maintaining, repairing and upgrading the present park amenities including a serious process of adding trees and plantings which decline naturally over time and require care and maintenance. Erosion control and earth replenishment are needed. WE could also fund recreational programs within the park more generously. WE do NOT need more pavement in the park. There is plenty already.

"The Parks Without Borders process has lacked the transparency... contributed to an environment of mistrust and runs against the program's stated goal of unifying parks with their neighborhoods."

The Parks Without Borders process for Fort Greene Park has lacked the transparency, publicity and - most importantly - the meaningful community engagement appropriate to a renovation project of this significance. This has contributed to an environment of mistrust and runs against the program's stated goal of unifying parks with their neighborhoods. It is critical that NYC Parks remedies these issues before advancing any design. Fort Greene Park is the centerpiece of our community. By allowing its community to lead in its renovation, NYC Parks will surely achieve a more favorable outcome.

I thought I read that healthy, appreciated trees were being replaced ? That isn't made clear in this presentation. The 'mounds' are an interesting and useful feature.

"Find a way to address the drainage with minimal impact to the existing structures and certainly without cutting down so many trees!!"

Why would you pave paradise?? Fix what is currently broken i.e. cracked pavement but to do what Parks without Borders suggests is wrong and a waste of money and time. Also, how can it be called Parks without Borders when the proposal appears to be adding a ton of borders? Find a different way to use the funds. Also, why is this the only corner being fixed? Have the residents of Ingersoll, Whitman and Kingsview been consulted? Who actually wants these changes made? i have a feeling it's a much shorter list (mainly consisting of those who DO NOT LIVE near the park) than those who wish the park to remain the way it is. Thank you for your consideration.

"not this current flawed, politically driven proposed design by Parks Without Borders by an unknown landscape architect"

The process is flawed. There should be a design competition open to the world's best landscape architects to submit competing designs to the NYC Parks Dept and involved public officials, community boards and general public for review. The winning design should be submitted to the Landmarks Preservation Commission for review, not this current flawed, politically driven proposed design by Parks Without Borders by an unknown landscape architect.

Appropriate design covers needs of current and future local users, storm water management. Best to avoid antique historic design that seems less likely to address erosion , soil conservation and noise and light pollution that can emerge for the new proposal.

I don't think the large open processional walkway is in keeping with the historic Olmsted character of the park. I also am opposed to the removal of so many large trees.

"The process stinks"

The process stinks in that I'm just hearing about it and it seems it has already been approved. I think the trees should be preserved and the walls around the park should stay in tact. I'm not a huge fan of the mounds but as they have some historic value I can see keeping them as well.

"The mounds should be restored with their original wooden benches and maintained."

Of course I'm pleased to see money and thought being invested into a park I love and use very often, but the proposed design suggests removing one of the defining characteristics of Ft.Greene Park - the A.E.Bye grass mounds. The mounds should be restored with their original wooden benches and maintained. They are a unique and historic feature of our park. They are so much more effective as a design element in that space than an open promenade would be. Just look at promenades around NYC; Brooklyn Heights, the open space by the Court Houses at Boro Hall, the Literary Walk in Central Park - These straight, open spaces are enjoyable to pass-through but they don't promote gathering and small group activities the way the existing A.E. Bye mounds do. My two cents: restore the mounds, integrate handicapped access to the existing entry points, save all trees, add grilling stations, resurface basketball court, dig out fallen tree roots, plant grass/perennials, fix both entry steps by Brooklyn Hospital (an embarrassment to our city), install a proper, level soccer area on the south east lawn, repair the ongoing flooding issue along Washington Park (another embarrassment) and incorporate a designated dog run so that all park users don't have to deal with dog remnants. Those are some of the things that I think $10.5million could help. Thank you for your efforts in promoting a true public process and for providing the opportunity for me to speak out about the direction of our park, Ft.Greene Park.

There are too many impermeable surfaces in the Parks Without Borders proposal- and too many mature shade trees destroyed in the process- How are they mitigating and managing storm water runoff and the myriad of benefits of the trees they propose to take away?

they should upgrade/repair the existing structures and add a ramp to the existing steps from Myrtle.

Keep healthy trees, don't add pavement unless ADA access issue. Work with community.

It is shocking that we haven't fixed the Dust Bowl. It infuriates me. I've lived here for 15 years, and it has gone from dusty bowl to complete sand pit. It actually makes me go to the park less. I'm a soccer player and have participated in those games but we can't ignore it any longer. The lawn should be blocked off and re-seeded until it's lush like Central Park Sheep's Meadow, so everyone in the neighborhood can use it. I mean, really...

I would like to see the old growth trees maintained. Those trees are visited by woodpeckers and red tailed hawks, birds that bring awe to urban dwellers.

I'd like the existing park features to be refurbished and updated. Preserve the trees!

Fixing the bathrooms and water fountains would be good. Adding something soft to the pavement so it isn't so harsh on the feet. Trees are always nice. More basketball and fitness stuff is always nice, too.

The park is perfect just the way it is. It just needs better bathrooms. Do not touch it's beautiful trees. Invest money in projects that are truly needed in Brooklyn, such as better housing for those in need. Leave the trees alone!!!

Trees are important. they have been there longer than us, and help us. Don't kill them.

Do not remove mature trees or permeable grass areas to put down pavement!

No transparency and no community input is outrageous!

Simply repair cracked pavements and improve playing courts and playground equipment. Absolutely NO tree removal needed: we need shade, not concrete!

"The choice of the area seems racially motivated and extremely disruptive to the communities that use it most, especially the projects."

The millions earmarked and the lies told by PWB signal corruption on some level: investigate and stop them now before damage is done! Hold public hearing in the park and announce them widely. Make sure that black community leaders and park users are involved in the decision making. Make sure that every dollar is tracked that will benefit contractors, politicians, Parks people pushing this. Get the mayor involved, as well as Brooklyn politicians, Laurie Cumbo, Tish James, Walter Mosley and seek their public statements.

The hills and trees there do not need to be removed for flat open space.

There's too much hardscaping. The proposal is contrary to the City's green initiative to create more plantings and reduce stormwater runoff. And the decision-making process is, of course, opaque.

"None has the right to take life from our park."

Not everything in life has to look so manicured and regal. The park is for the people. No one has a right to redesign it to their liking at the cost of trees. While government denies climate change, the people are waking to see the environment as something that must be protected, especially in a city where fresh oxygen is desperately needed. None has the right to take life from our park.

We all live in an urban environment. What is most needed is peace, shade, green, quiet; as an antidote to the daily onslaught of Ainsley overload and nature deprivation.

I really don't want to see any trees cut down if possible. The age, majesty and shade of them should be preserved as much as possible.

The park is AMAZING as-is! I'm shocked that they want to completely destroy the amount of green. It's a haven for us during the summer and winter months!

"the mounds... are visually more interesting than a flat concrete avenue"

More green areas, not more concrete - the whole city is concrete, the park is supposed to be grass and trees. And cutting down that many trees is criminal. The water fountain is a nice idea, otherwise the proposal lacks imagination and reduces much of what makes the park unique and special, especially the removal of the mounds, which are a unique feature utilized by many for exercise, play spaces for children, and are visually more interesting than a flat concrete avenue leading to the monument.

should NEVER cut down trees unless diseased. ALWAYS plant more

"turning our park into an ugly business-looking mall isn't the answer."

We have a very special park and members of many different communities come to use it - scrubbing the north area of the park closest to the projects seems really f*cked up. The trees deserve to live, the trees deserve to be cared for in the best way, but turning our park into an ugly business-looking mall isn't the answer. And if they threaten to tear down my favorite tree in the park I?€?ll stage a live-in protest.

The trees in FGP are some of the oldest and most valuable in the city. I would like to see them keep the old trees and maximize green space.

"it is a waste of money to destroy the park, this money can and should be put to other use."

It destroys the original park design. Not in keeping with the original design of Frederick Law Olmsted and Calvert Vaux. This plan make the park look too commercial and destroys the peace and tranquility of the park in its present layout. In addition, it is a waste of money to destroy the park, this money can and should be put to other use. Why fix what is not broken?

No cutting down of mature trees!

"stop paving everything and fencing in green space! A horrible trend I see all over the city. NYers need spaces to get in touch with the earth not just look at it."

I'm not sure but I think input from the ACTUAL users of the space is critical. I also think historical preservation is essential as well. I don't know what the best plan is (as I am not a heavy user of this part of FG park) but this doesn't look or feel right, much like most of the development happening in our community. I have lived in Fort Greene and Clinton Hill for 17+ years and feel it is sad to see what is happening in our neighborhood i.e. over development, loss of community values, etc. And, stop paving everything and fencing in green space! A horrible trend I see all over the city. NYers need spaces to get in touch with the earth not just look at it. Also, let's talk about how fixing up that part of the park wasn't a priority until all of the development rolled in on the Myrtle side of the neighborhood. Let's also talk about how many parks in poor communities throughout the city are in disrepair, some even dangerous, but the parks department is going to prioritize making FG Park "fancy"?

"People love to picnic and sit out in this exact location you are proposing to pave."

The trees there are so beautiful, and are one of my favorite places to go in the fall. The proposal says this side of the park is underutilized but I'm not sure what that means, there are always many people there. People love to picnic and sit out in this exact location you are proposing to pave. My children love playing on the mounds. People are always exercising on the shady steps and in the exercise park and basketball court. What happens to those? Perhaps what you mean is underutilized by white Ft. Greene residents? That may be true but it is richly utilized by the many people who live on that side of the park. Ft. Greene Park is highly segregated in its use. Maybe that is the question that should be asked. This is not the answer to that question. Many people's apartments face this change, have they been consulted about how they would like the view from their buildings and block to look? I am sure this step would happen if changes were proposed on the significantly more expensive Washington Park and DeKalb side. Finally. Trees are plants that have a much longer timeline than humans. As the trees there are about my age and I am halfway through my life, I'd say they have a while to go still. In fact google puts Norway Maple lifespans at 100 years. Let's let them live and keep providing beauty and clean air for residents.

Honor the trees and green space, protect and nurture it.

I wish there was a clean open lawn to picnic on but I love the old trees and historic aspect of the park

Whatever the change it should be safe, accessible, and full of trees for health & shade, green space for enjoyment and for ensuring rainwater is captured and not contributing to runoff and sewer outfall.

"the removal of green space and these beautiful trees is a terrible idea!!!!"

The broken sidewalk and park pathway paving should be replaced and the stairs can be replaced by a ramp or ramps. The approach to the monument can be improved by means of added signage and interactive exhibits, and the circular area should be cleaned up and replanted. However, the removal of green space and these beautiful trees is a terrible idea!!!!

"The new design is all concrete"

The new design is all concrete and designed only to focus on a man-built monument - this is NOT what our community wants or needs! The process was deceptive, promising MORE green space, not less. Such a terrible misuse of public funds when more green space is so desperately needed in this community.

Please please please do not cut down any healthy trees!!!!!! That is my major problem with this proposal. Thank you.

"Fort Greene Park is pretty perfect as is with the exception of the bathroom situation."

I think Fort Greene Park is pretty perfect as is with the exception of the bathroom situation. Those could definitely stand to be improved. It would be nice if the one at the visitor center were available more consistently too.

Improve what is existing, and retain the old features.

They didn't tell the neighborhood residents of Myrtle Avenue, nor the new families in the new high rises. 80% of the people don't know. Take a simple survey and find out.

The PWB proposal is awful. leave the trees alone.

"It’s a unique park. Please don’t destroy it’s charm."

I think the park is wonderful the way it is. If pavement could be renovated/fixed - the soccer field reseeded and the bathrooms updated - that would be fab. Maybe some more benches. That’s it. I am from Switzerland and we love our old trees and romantic parks. It’s a unique park. Please don’t destroy it’s charm.

Facebook -- Watch More Videos and Share