Get Brooklynian.com by Email! 
Grab the Feed (RSS)
===
Doing just fine, thank you.
Doing just fine, thank you.
Brooklynian » Forum » Prospect Heights »
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/22/nyregion/thecity/22intr.html?_r=1&ref=thecity&oref=slogin Not one person from Prospect Heights was interviewed.
-
Lumi Rolley, a major force behind NoLandGrab, doesn't live in Prospect Heights, either, but her views are often taken seriously. Unlike Ms. Rolley, I DO live in Prospect Heights and I support the Atlantic Yards.
-
Hi, Jack Krohn. It seems that most people I've encountered in PH are OPPOSSED to the Atlantic Yards project. I'd love to hear from a supporter (you) as to what about the project's scale is preferable to a smaller development that opponents hope to see. What aspects of the plan will outweigh the concerns of extreme traffic, instant gentrification, the creation of a barrier between Fort Grenne/Clinton Hill and Park Slope/Prospect Heights, and so on?. I read somewhere that the development would make that area of Brooklyn the most densely populated area in the US by a factor of 2!!!
-
I read somewhere that it would be the home base for a new flesh eating race of lizard people! I don't need to back that up because I 'read it somewhere.'their world is entirely different from ours, a whole different set of rules apply, fierce, natural, savage -- it's the only way they can survive in their world.
-
izisharp » I read somewhere that the development would make that area of Brooklyn the most densely populated area in the US by a factor of 2!!!
Raulism, if you're listening, this is why I made a point of arguing over the semantics of this statistic. In fact, it may be the most dense in terms of residents per square foot, but not in terms of people per square foot, including the people who work and visit the areas, which are far more important measures of density in terms of how quality of life is affected. The misleading nature of the stat is demonstrated by the post above, since in fact there are many areas which are considered highly desirable as residential areas, whose day to day population density is far higher than AY will be. -
devincf » I read somewhere that it would be the home base for a new flesh eating race of lizard people! I don't need to back that up because I 'read it somewhere.'
Devincf, given that you yourself used the equivalent of an "I read somewhere" argument in a separate argument with me in the Lounge area, and have since completely failed to back up your claim with evidence, I think you should avoid snide comments at newbies. -
escap » In fact, it may be the most dense in terms of residents per square foot, but not in terms of people per square foot, including the people who work and visit the areas, which are far more important measures of density in terms of how quality of life is affected.
Far more important? Drastic increases in resident density affects commutes, parking, schools, fire and police protection in ways that high people per square doesn't. People who work here don't ride my train. -
qtrain » [quote="escap"]In fact, it may be the most dense in terms of residents per square foot, but not in terms of people per square foot, including the people who work and visit the areas, which are far more important measures of density in terms of how quality of life is affected.
Far more important? Drastic increases in resident density affects commutes, parking, schools, fire and police protection in ways that high people per square doesn't. People who work here don't ride my train.[/quote] Not sure how that makes any sense. Police and fire services only help night time inhabitants, and completely ignore the day time ones? Nobody drives to work or takes cabs in commercial areas? People don't ride the trains heavily in midtown Manhattan? Daytime density is in fact a lot more critical to the concern about traffic that is most often raised, and yet, like I said, far more heavily trafficked areas are considered highly desirable places to live, judging by the real estate markets there. I would agree only on your point about schools. -
I'm not sure I'm following you, escap. Are you saying that the fact that AY is a highly desirable place to live trumps the concerns of traffic, air quality, crowded schools and so on? To me this "highly desirable" point is irrelevant to the debate over the scale of the Ratner project. But, as I said, I'm not following you. What are you saying?
-
I guess my point was that it seems very irresponsible to print/post an article that incorporates the views of citizens WITHOUT asking for opinions from citizens that actually live in the subject neighborhood. No?===
Doing just fine, thank you. -
BrookFetish » I guess my point was that it seems very irresponsible to print/post an article that incorporates the views of citizens WITHOUT asking for opinions citizens that actually live in the subject neighborhood. No?
I was stunned to see not one person who actually lives here was interviewed. Really, really LAME, bad reporting, if not actually dishonest. -
I agree that it was weird that PH residents were not included, but there were several FG residents, which is every bit as much in the footstep of the project as PH is, so it's not like nearby residents were excluded. I'd say it's a fair bet that my apt is closer to the proposed site than most other people's on this board. Just to clarify what my point was above, I was merely taking issue with the "most dense area" stat, as I think it is a misleading exaggeration. And I was not commenting on AY's desirability, just saying that high density does not equal low desirability. However, I admit it's a semantic argument, since I would readily admit that the project will be extremely dense, and I have no doubt that it will have a massive impact on the surrounding area. I, of course, just happen to think this is a good thing.
-
escap » Not sure how that makes any sense. Police and fire services only help night time inhabitants, and completely ignore the day time ones? Nobody drives to work or takes cabs in commercial areas? People don't ride the trains heavily in midtown Manhattan? Daytime density is in fact a lot more critical to the concern about traffic that is most often raised, and yet, like I said, far more heavily trafficked areas are considered highly desirable places to live, judging by the real estate markets there. I would agree only on your point about schools.
If it was purely commercial, fire or police per person is lowest 9-5, when I'm not here. Same with the trains/traffic -- if thousands more are coming here to work when I'm leaving, that's not affecting my quality of life like thousands more joining me on the trip out of the neighborhood. Resident density is the correct measure for those concerns. -
Sorry, I can't agree with you on this one. By any measure, most of midtown Manhattan is more dense than this project will be, and, as measured by the prices of housing in that area, it is extremely coveted as residential space. You think midtown is Manhattan is a 9 to 5 scene? Riiight. You think that people who live there aren't bothered by crowded trains b/c people are coming in rather than going out? Wrong again. You think the huge crowds of that area don't tax the local police and fire departments? Is traffic or parking not a concern? Clearly wrong on all counts. Again, if you merely say, "Hey, I don't want to Manhattan-ize Brooklyn", then we're just talking opinion and you'd have every right to say that. Anyway, that's the last I'll say on this, since whether AY will be the most dense or the 100th most dense has essentially no bearing on my overall opinion of the project.
-
escap - when was the last time you tried getting on a Brooklyn bound (as opposed to Manhattan/Bronx) 2 or 3 train from Atlantic Avenue between 5 and 7 p.m. on a normal weekday during the school year? I've tried it multiple times - unless you're at the very front or very back of the train (and even that is not a guarantee) you're either not getting on, or you're getting crushed. the trains are already packed to the gills. that level of density reminds me of trying to get on the 4/5/6 trains at 59th, 51st or Grand Central at rush hour, as well as trying to get on the 1 train at 50th street at rush hour. if you really think adding thousands of people into the mix making similar commutes, as well as thousands of non-drivers coming out for basketball games won't be burdensome, I'm not entirely certain what mass-transit system you use.like a smoked meat with an earthy youth overnote
-
alafairnadia » escap - when was the last time you tried getting on a Brooklyn bound (as opposed to Manhattan/Bronx) 2 or 3 train from Atlantic Avenue between 5 and 7 p.m. on a normal weekday during the school year? I've tried it multiple times - unless you're at the very front or very back of the train (and even that is not a guarantee) you're either not getting on, or you're getting crushed. the trains are already packed to the gills. that level of density reminds me of trying to get on the 4/5/6 trains at 59th, 51st or Grand Central at rush hour, as well as trying to get on the 1 train at 50th street at rush hour. if you really think adding thousands of people into the mix making similar commutes, as well as thousands of non-drivers coming out for basketball games won't be burdensome, I'm not entirely certain what mass-transit system you use.
No, I agree. The trains are very crowded, and in fact I ride the 2/3 all the time during rush hour (it's a breeze for me having lived in Tokyo which is on a whole nother dimension of crowdedness, but anyway that's besides the point). The AY development will no doubt make the crowding even worse. No argument there. -
escap » [quote="alafairnadia"]escap - when was the last time you tried getting on a Brooklyn bound (as opposed to Manhattan/Bronx) 2 or 3 train from Atlantic Avenue between 5 and 7 p.m. on a normal weekday during the school year? I've tried it multiple times - unless you're at the very front or very back of the train (and even that is not a guarantee) you're either not getting on, or you're getting crushed. the trains are already packed to the gills. that level of density reminds me of trying to get on the 4/5/6 trains at 59th, 51st or Grand Central at rush hour, as well as trying to get on the 1 train at 50th street at rush hour. if you really think adding thousands of people into the mix making similar commutes, as well as thousands of non-drivers coming out for basketball games won't be burdensome, I'm not entirely certain what mass-transit system you use.
No, I agree. The trains are very crowded, and in fact I ride the 2/3 all the time during rush hour (it's a breeze for me having lived in Tokyo which is on a whole nother dimension of crowdedness, but anyway that's besides the point). The AY development will no doubt make the crowding even worse. No argument there.[/quote] The AY planners are fully aware of this. I am sure they will be a lot more trains put into service during the game season. -
alafairnadia » escap - when was the last time you tried getting on a Brooklyn bound (as opposed to Manhattan/Bronx) 2 or 3 train from Atlantic Avenue between 5 and 7 p.m. on a normal weekday during the school year? I've tried it multiple times - unless you're at the very front or very back of the train (and even that is not a guarantee) you're either not getting on, or you're getting crushed. the trains are already packed to the gills. that level of density reminds me of trying to get on the 4/5/6 trains at 59th, 51st or Grand Central at rush hour, as well as trying to get on the 1 train at 50th street at rush hour.
Really? I do this daily (at about 6:20), and I've never come close to being crushed. I split 50/50 between taking the 2/3 and 4/5. I almost always have the option of a seat on the 4/5, and only in the event of a "police investigation" or other situation, have noticed crowded but certainly serviceable conditions on the 2/3. Nothing close to what you see on the Lexington Line. -
smackdown » [quote="escap"][quote="alafairnadia"]escap - when was the last time you tried getting on a Brooklyn bound (as opposed to Manhattan/Bronx) 2 or 3 train from Atlantic Avenue between 5 and 7 p.m. on a normal weekday during the school year? I've tried it multiple times - unless you're at the very front or very back of the train (and even that is not a guarantee) you're either not getting on, or you're getting crushed. the trains are already packed to the gills. that level of density reminds me of trying to get on the 4/5/6 trains at 59th, 51st or Grand Central at rush hour, as well as trying to get on the 1 train at 50th street at rush hour. if you really think adding thousands of people into the mix making similar commutes, as well as thousands of non-drivers coming out for basketball games won't be burdensome, I'm not entirely certain what mass-transit system you use.
No, I agree. The trains are very crowded, and in fact I ride the 2/3 all the time during rush hour (it's a breeze for me having lived in Tokyo which is on a whole nother dimension of crowdedness, but anyway that's besides the point). The AY development will no doubt make the crowding even worse. No argument there.[/quote] The AY planners are fully aware of this. I am sure they will be a lot more trains put into service during the game season.[/quote] The MTA is part of the AY planning? And if they can alleviate congestion, how come they haven't managed to make Grand Central any less hellish? oh, right, they installed industrial fans so people don't melt while they stand there, watching packed trains drive by. I don't have that level of faith in the MTA or the AY planners.like a smoked meat with an earthy youth overnote -
escap » Sorry, I can't agree with you on this one. By any measure, most of midtown Manhattan is more dense than this project will be, and, as measured by the prices of housing in that area, it is extremely coveted as residential space. You think midtown is Manhattan is a 9 to 5 scene? Riiight. You think that people who live there aren't bothered by crowded trains b/c people are coming in rather than going out? Wrong again. You think the huge crowds of that area don't tax the local police and fire departments? Is traffic or parking not a concern? Clearly wrong on all counts. Again, if you merely say, "Hey, I don't want to Manhattan-ize Brooklyn", then we're just talking opinion and you'd have every right to say that. Anyway, that's the last I'll say on this, since whether AY will be the most dense or the 100th most dense has essentially no bearing on my overall opinion of the project.
the stat is that AY would be the most dense residential community in the country. if it were a census tract, which it isn't though it is a similar size of your average census tract, it would be twice as denseset as the densest. if the density doesn't matter to you that is fine. but it is not disputable, the project would be the most dense in the country. here: http://therealestate.observer.com/2006/10/ratner-will-bring-us-closer-together.html here is a nice visual representation: http://dddb.net/php/latestnews_Linked.php?id=292 -
Jack Krohn » Lumi Rolley, a major force behind NoLandGrab, doesn't live in Prospect Heights, either, but her views are often taken seriously. Unlike Ms. Rolley, I DO live in Prospect Heights and I support the Atlantic Yards.
I thought you lived in Crown Heights, no? regardless, the keepers of No Land Grab are Lumi (about ten blocks away) and Amy who lives 500 FEET away. this is a stupid game. the point the orginal poster is making, i think, is that an article (a rather vapid one) trying to guage the area would not have published 9 interviews and have 3 interviewees all from Crown Heights with NOBODY from Boerum Hill, Prospect Heights or Clinton Hill. that seems like, well, BAD reporting, at best. But thats what we've gotten used to from the paper of record. -
ratnerville4ever » the stat is that AY would be the most dense residential community in the country. if it were a census tract, which it isn't though it is a similar size of your average census tract, it would be twice as denseset as the densest. if the density doesn't matter to you that is fine. but it is not disputable, the project would be the most dense in the country. here: http://therealestate.observer.com/2006/10/ratner-will-bring-us-closer-together.html here is a nice visual representation: http://dddb.net/php/latestnews_Linked.php?id=292
Geez, I really don't even care about this point, but you're virtually forcing me to waste bandwith addressing it!! This remarkable calculation is based on a hypothetical extrapolation of the density per acre at AY to a density per square mile measure, resulting in a figure of "between 436,363 and 523,636 people per square mile". This is downright funny. There won't actually be 500,000 in that square mile, but, if the 22 acre site was replicated across a square mile, then there would be. What about the 100,000 that worked in the WTC? How many would that have been according to this dubious math? On the other hand, compare an actual square mile in midtown to the actual square mile here. It's funny, because I actually believed this claim before you provided me with this link. There is no apples to apples comparison going on of density per 22 acres, so I could claim my apt is denser if extrapolated out to a square mile as well. Can you imagine how many people would be in the city if it were as dense per square foot as my living room couch? Great example of how "Liars figure and figures lie." Meanwhile, my apologies to everyone for wasting so much time on this trivial argument--it's a disease, like alcoholism.
:-# Must...not...argue..about AY anymore.... -
Once a week I go into the city for appts, etc, and usually end up coming home {2/3. GAP stop} between the hours of 5:30 and 7:30 pm. It is ALWAYS too crowded, and many times I have to wait for multiple trains to pass before I can get on with a small wheelie cart. Forget getting a seat. Let's add thousand more people to that, shall we? Ok then. Tokyo sardine trains, here we come. It's also become very dangerous riding bikes here because of the street car traffic, this year I was doored twice,almost doored 4 times, hit once and almost hit 3 times while on my bike in PH. Been riding in Manhattan and BK for over 22 years, it's never been this bad, ever. Adding thousands more of everything to this mix is, well, there are many words for it, none of them nice or smart.
-
I'm proud to say that I got mentioned on the hallowed NoLandGrab web site (my agent thanks you, guys). Whoever wrote the response, declared that it's OK to reside outside of Prospect Heights and still be concerned about the Atlantic Yards. I agree with this statement, but find it amazing that two days earlier, NoLandGrab contained the following statement: *Is it also nitpicking to say that of the four supporters of the project interviewed, three are listed as living in Crown Heights, which is not one of the immediately surrounding neighborhoods? The opponents all hail from the vicinity of the Vanderbilt railyards. It does reinforce the idea that it's pretty hard to find anyone in Prospect Heights/Ft Greene/Clinton Hill/Park Slope/Boerum Hill that supports the project.* If it's OK to reside outside of Prospect Heights and be concerned about the project, then why bother to make the above distinction? If the supporters quoted in the article had actually been opponents, I'm sure that NoLandGrab would have gladly declared Crown Heights a "surrounding neighborhood". Though I disagree with this notion, the border of Crown Heights is usually considered to be Washington Avenue, which would place Crown Heights much closer to the footprint than Boerem Hill and Clinton Hill and comparable to Park Slope and Fort Greene. Hence, by the standards of 99% of this board, it would qualify as a surrounding neighborhood. The conclusion is that opponents can reside in any neighborhood, but supporters must reside in one of the areas designated by NoLandGrab as an "immediately surrounding neighborhood" if their opinions are to be taken seriously. For the record, I live west of Vanderbilt, clearly in Prospect Heights.
Welcome! Please log in to post, or register a new account!