8 Years of News

On Friday, July 18, 2025, members of FFGP spoke with Brooklyn News 12 to voice their disappointment in the ruling. "This decision represents a setback not only for Fort Greene Park but for all New Yorkers who believe in protecting our city's green spaces and honoring our shared historical and cultural heritage," said FFGP President Kelly Schaffer.

Despite the court's decision, the group emphasized that their fight is far from over. FFGP vowed to continue mobilizing neighbors, raising awareness, and pressing city officials to adopt the community's counter-proposal — one that preserves the tree canopy, restores historic landscape features, and ensures the park remains accessible, sustainable, and welcoming for future generations.

During WBAI Radio's "Living for the City" program on May 14, 2025, hosts discussed Mt. Prospect Park and Fort Greene Park, explaining the situation well.

The lush but aging greenspace was chosen as one of eight city parks to be overhauled by the Parks Without Borders program in 2016. Nine years later, the projects have wrapped up in the other seven parks — but haven't begun at Fort Greene.

That's because a group of local activists, the Friends of Fort Greene Park, believe the project will do more harm than good, and doubt the city's studies that say otherwise. In an effort to stall the project and demand more information about the plan, the Friends have filed three lawsuits against the city since 2018.

A Fort Greene nonprofit group took the city Parks Department to court on March 27, arguing the city agency failed to conduct a full environmental review before approving a $24 million redesign of Fort Greene Park that would result in the removal of 78 trees.

Friends of Fort Greene Park (FFGP) argued that the Parks Department violated the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), according to a press release.

The controversy over a $24 million redesign of Fort Greene Park, which will axe 78 mature trees, continues, according to Pix11. Set for 2026, the project swaps invasive Norway maples for 200 native ones, adds ADA entrances, and fixes drainage, per the park's Conservancy, which says 30 of the trees are unhealthy, 24 are invasive and 24 threaten pipes. The Friends of Fort Greene Park, however, which has been fighting the plan since 2017, claims it skipped environmental reviews — decreasing shade, replacing green swaths with concrete and destroying park features designed by famous landscape artists.

FOX5 New York reports that a $24 million project to redesign Fort Greene Park faces legal opposition from local residents. The plan calls for the removal of 78 trees to make way for pedestrian plazas and increased accessibility, but opponents say the project will harm the environment and community health. Residents filed a lawsuit arguing that tree loss will impact air quality, wildlife and shade in a neighborhood already affected by asthma and heat.

Leaf these trees alone.

Plant-loving locals are looking to block the city from chopping down 78 trees in Fort Greene Park – a move they say would turn the greenspace into a "summer frying pan."

A group of residents in Brooklyn's trendy Fort Greene is suing the city and fighting with the parks conservancy over a plan for a pedestrian plaza despite officials pledging to replace the healthy trees with 300 saplings.

Two organizations that want to make improvements to Fort Greene Park have been arguing for decades. As CBS News New York's Kristie Keleshian reports, the fight has made its way to court.

Parks Department lumberjacks will be chopping down trees in Fort Greene Park as part of a recently-relaunched $24 million makeover.

The group's first lawsuit in 2017 revealed that officials lied about many of the trees being sick and near-death to advance their plans, and Braun worried that the city might try and do the same again in the name of aesthetics.

"Obviously the trees that are in truly bad shape, you don't want a tree falling on somebody, nobody objects to that," said Braun. "We would oppose the removal of healthy mature shade trees for design purposes."

An attorney representing the locals opposed to the tree removal demanded that the city allow for full transparency, as well as sufficient input for neighbors. "It is clear that the prior plan for the Park required the Parks Department to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement prior to approving any project for the Park," said Richard Lippes in a statement.

The agency recently adjusted the proposal's timeline, scheduling the completion of the procurement process for November 2020. That would pave the way for a 12-18 month construction process, and the city's apparent moves to plough ahead stunned the activists. "It just shows that the Parks Commissioner [Mitchell Silver] is forcing through this unpopular and legally questionable proposal of his."A lawyer for Friends of Fort Greene Park said last week that officials need to address the judge's order before they can proceed.

"They have to produce a piece of paper [saying] why they believe that they're not subject to SEQR," said Michael Gruen. "All of this the court said must be addressed and the court isn't going to guess how Parks comes out on it, it's up to the Parks Department to think it through and express it in an intelligent way."

Friends of Fort Greene Park and Gruen in August launched a blitz of document requests from city and state agencies about the project, but they have yet to get any files.

The residents group previously successfully sued the agency, when a judge ruled that the Department had lied about the health of dozens of the trees to advance their plan, and another local opponent of the plan worried that the agency was again looking to override their concerns.

"It just goes to show you the lengths they're willing to go through while being untruthful," said Monique Cumberbatch a resident of the Kingsview Homes cooperative housing complex adjacent to the park.

"We don't want to take out trees that have longevity in front of them and replace them with immature trees that would take decades to become mature," Assemblyman Walter Mosley said. He emphasized the importance of preserving existing green space.

The section of the park across from public housing has not seen significant investment since the 1970s, unlike the southern half near Dekalb Avenue. Locals also worried the redesign could spur gentrification.

For generations, towering trees in the northwest corner of Fort Greene Park have sheltered outdoor celebrations of residents from the New York City Housing Authority apartments located directly across the street.

"This is the reason I stayed in Brooklyn," said Stacy Williams, says Stacy Williams, who has lived in the Ingersoll Houses for the past 28 years. Nearby, her granddaughter played on Bye's mounds. “Any function, this is the park to go to.” ... A city proposal would remove the mounds for a pedestrian thoroughfare, creating space for vendors and events.

As her granddaughter played atop the grass-topped mounds, Williams was dismayed that the landforms would be replaced with concrete ... "The park don't really need this glamorous thing you're putting in it."

City legal eagles filed a notice of appeal on Feb. 13 against state Supreme Court Judge Julio Rodriguez III's January order¹ for the agency to produce evidence that their $10.5 million park overhaul — which includes felling 83 trees — wouldn't have a significant impact on the neighborhood's namesake lawn, siding with local environmental advocates.

¹ https://www.brooklynpaper.com/state-judge-orders-city-to-study-fort-greene-park-revamp-environmental-harms/

"The Parks Department fell short in its responsibilities to be transparent and accountable throughout its Parks Without Borders design process," said Friends of Fort Greene President Ling Hsu.

"Thankfully, Fort Greene residents came together and prevailed in two lawsuits in a row, saving mature trees from the meaningless destruction the city intended to begin in 2018. The ruling is a reminder to the Parks Department to resume its role as a steward of greenery for the community at historic Fort Greene Park," she added.

Friends of Fort Greene Park — local advocates fighting plans to tear down 83 trees in the Brooklyn green space — won the second of two lawsuits against the Park Department in New York State Supreme Court last week, the group announced.

"This decision should awaken the Department to reality," said legal advisor Michael Gruen. "Environmental regulation is not enacted to be evaded as if it were merely an annoyance."

Georgette Poe, an FFGP member and resident of nearby NYCHA housing, celebrated the ruling as a victory for the public housing community, as the plan would have cut down 58 mature trees in the northwest section nearest the Ingersoll and Whitman houses.

"The City came in, didn't ask us what we needed and then didn't listen to the neighborhood," said Poe. "[They] wanted to take our park away, telling us we're not welcome anymore."

"It just doesn't make sense," said FFGP member Arija Flowers. "Parks are supposed to be about trees and green spaces, birds and bees. We don't need another paved plaza."

And though the letter says that about 267 replacement trees will be planted in Fort Greene Park, "it does not provide any explanation as to its reasoning in determining that neither the destruction of apparently healthy trees nor the addition of trees throughout the park has the potential for an adverse impact," the judge said in his ruling.

The final reason the letter is deficient is that "there is no real explanation as to why [the Parks Department] concluded there is no possibility of any negative aesthetic and cultural impacts or of negative impacts to the neighborhood character," the judge wrote.

In a key victory for community activists and tree lovers, a state Supreme Court judge has ordered the city to reassess a fiercely contested renovation of a beloved Brooklyn park that would have razed more than 80 trees.

In a statement, Kate Bartholomew, chair of the Atlantic Chapter of the Sierra Club, said, "It is heartening to see that Justice Rodriguez also recognizes that the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation failed to adequately assess the implications of its design decision when choosing to move forward with a plan to alter and renew Fort Greene Park."

An artist has stepped up to support activists who are fighting to save trees and historic design features the city plans to tear down in Fort Greene Park.

Oosterlaken told the Brooklyn Eagle the concept for her art installation started with a broad question: Who should be designing public spaces?

While doing random research, she wound up reading about the Parks Without Borders program and the controversy it sparked in Fort Greene. She sought out the Friends of Fort Greene Park to find out more about the issue."The main thing that was wrong was that people didn't feel listened to," Oosterlaken said she discovered. "I believe there are ways to change the park — but it shouldn't be done this way."

It's an enormous illustration, inscribed with quotes from local residents about what the park means to them and what they think should and shouldn'’'t be done to change it.

"We need repairs. We should preserve the natural beauty of the park," one inscription says.

Residents are dismayed at the Parks Department's plan to cut down dozens of old trees, pave over grass and greenery, and replace them with a concrete plaza.

Residents say the park is used for activities on a regular basis. They say the Parks Department has been working on a Parks Without Borders program that has not been transparent. Residents who live near Fort Greene Park say they have taken the city to court twice.

The first time, they say they demanded transparency from redacted paperwork concerning the state of the park and recommendations for changes. Residents won that lawsuit.

The unredacted report showed that the recommendations of the landscape architect were consistent with what residents want. That's why the Parks Department redacted it.

Now, they have filed a second lawsuit asking the city to conduct an environmental review of the impact of cutting down the trees and removing the grass. One person referred to it as a frying pan effect, because without the trees and all the cement, it's just going to capture heat.

Of nine park-goers who said they lived nearby, seven had heard of plans to renovate the park, and only one expressed unambivalent enthusiasm about the changes. Other opinions included “They should leave the park alone” and “They're trying to throw us out of the park."

"I've been here over 50 years, and now they want to take down the trees and do changes," said a man walking his bike between the mounds. Terri Ball, who has family in the Whitman houses, said she's happy about the repairs, but hates to see those grassy mounds go. "I've attended two or three weddings on the mounds," said Ball.