Originally published at: City paves over beloved Bed-Stuy street aquarium - Boing Boing
…
4 Likes
It was cute and all, but definitely had a “this is how you get sinkholes” kind of vibe. I mean, they did have to fix the leaky hydrant eventually. (They did, right?)
13 Likes
I feel the same way. It was very pretty, but persistent leaks are hell on infrastructure.
This could have been accommodated perhaps, by adding a lining and pump system to the site, but constantly losing fresh water into the ground isn’t great for anyone.
6 Likes
they could have maybe waited until after fixing all the other known leaks in the system. that’d have at least given it… a few hundred years probably
6 Likes
City did the right thing as crappy as it might seem. That said the impromptu aquarium looked fun but not feasible long term, however this working out as long as it did and seeing people’s positive interactions and reactions to it should be a clue to the community that there is a way to get an official public installation where a fountain with fish could be put in. Organize and advocate for more natural spaces and art installations, it’s good for our well being and to create communal spaces.
6 Likes
This enraging news via Jennifer Sandlin!
3 Likes
When some locals immediately scooped up some of the fish to find better homes for them, they were attacked as “Karens,” but the fact is, the people who turned a puddle into an “aquarium” had absolutely no consideration for the survivability of the fish in the first place - they just thought sticking them there looked pretty. Subsequent contributors who decorated the space didn’t alter that. In between inconsistent water levels, contaminants getting in, cats and local wildlife, not to mention the total destruction that winter weather would have wrought, it was always extremely temporary. That it was paved over and the surviving fish were collected and taken elsewhere was a best case scenario - for the fish, anyways. The pavement can always be painted or otherwise decorated, with no animal cruelty involved.
Or until after winter, at which point the fish would all be dead and it would no longer be “controversial.” 
Unfortunately the basic problem is that in order to have fish, you need a hell of a lot more space than they had there - and even if you can find that space, then you get into maintenance costs and safety issues.
5 Likes
Wasn’t the aquarium just there to call attention to a fire hydrant in need of repair? Sure, people may have enjoyed it, but it should always have been considered a temporary thing until the city had time to address the issue.
I don’t think anyone who thinks the city did something wrong is being reasonable.
3 Likes
I suppose the city, if they wanted to be coy, could have tried to save it, like we did here with our rat hole in Chicago. Not sure where Splatatouille is these days.
uhh… isn’t that spelled koi? 
4 Likes
Maybe it’s because I don’t live surrounded by concrete, but this shit is just dumb. Beyond all the points made so far about why this was temporary at best, were the citizens planning on suing the local fire department or the city if the fire hydrant had to be used for its intended purpose. I’m pretty sure a fire fighter isn’t going to care about your “aquarium” when they need to hook up their truck to put out a fire that could be endangering someone’s life.
They didn’t need to discuss anything with you, because it is their job to maintain infrastructure. You don’t own the fire hydrant or the side walk. I will say that in the before and after pictures it looks like the same hydrant. Now I know they can be rebuilt, so maybe the hydrant was actually fixed. If it wasn’t, the city is a bunch of assholes as well. If they just let it keep leaking they will have to replace that new concrete much sooner than later.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
