Get Brooklynian.com by Email! 
Grab the Feed (RSS)Brooklynian » Forum » Prospect Heights »
-
OK, the MTA decided to negotiate only with FCR for the next month and half, or so. Fine. There is a (admittedly slim) chance that they will not reach an agreement and the MTA will solicit more proposals. I believe that I am one of a number of people who feel that (1) building stadiums is not good economic development policy in large cities, never mind in one of the largest cities in the world, and (2) despite the gross lack of good affordable housing, a development that is 100% housing is probably not the best way to ensure the vitality of a neighborhood far into the future. So, my question is: if the MTA decided to solicit more bids on the land, and if you magically had access a ton of money, what would you (yes, you) propose to do with Vanderbilt Yards? Build as much affordable housing as you could? Build a stadium? A library? A mall? School? Hospital? Casino? Park? Technology center? Or would you just leave it as it is? I’ve been listening to many people complain about both the FCR and Extell bids. I’d love to hear what those of you who are unhappy with the Ratner proposal, the Extell proposal, or (like me) both proposals would do if you had a few hundred mil to ante up and make a serious offer. It doesn’t hurt to immagine or be creative – this is play money, after all. So, how about it?
-
good question. you first, Mr. Underhill. ok, if we are just talking about the yards... I would do mixed-income housing, a massive recreation center (which would include a pool), a school, open green space active (baseball field) and passive, retail space of sizes that cater to small local businesses, and small business offices, as well as an open-air (but covered for offseason) market. I would use local architects and mimic the housing stock in the area, i don't mean all lowrise, but I do mean some stately buildings. there is a stab at it.
-
Honestly, I think what Ratner has planned isn't too far from one of the best uses for the space. Most people in Daily Heights appear to view Atlantic Yards from the perspective of neighborhood residents - which is, of course, what most posters to this forum are. But the Atlantic Yards space ultimately is not a neighborhood space. At the locus of one of the best mass transit hubs not only in the city, but in the entire country, the ideal use of that space should be something that allows people from all over to converge upon it. Compared to similar hubs in the city (34 St, Times Square, Grand Central, Fulton St), the Atlantic Avenue area is woefully underutilized. While local businesses are good anywhere, the Atlantic Yards location needs to serve more than just locals. In a strange way, the residents - who by and large seem to be very progressive about large scale issues - are becoming very NIMBY and conservative about this specific development. Here is a massive public location that is woefully underutilized, and the locals want to put in a recreation center or small park that would ultimately serve locals only. Or they simply want more residential space - good, but we all know the problems of too much value locked in real estate and not enough being generated through actual jobs. Also, nevermind the fact that it's one of the few places in the city easily accessible to virtually every other neighborhood. The proper use for the place is something on a fairly large scale: a central business district, a convention center, an arena. Instead, it appears that neighborhood concerns about parking and noise - and God forbid the riff-raff that are basketball fans - have superceded these concerns. There is of course the veneer of public good (housing! small boutiques!), but it appears that the real concern is about perceived threats to the quality of life. It might as well be the Darien town council talking about preventing an additional lane on I-95. I also think local concerns about the strain of traffic are overstated. Most NBA games are on weeknights, when people will come (mostly via subway) straight from work, the way they go to weeknight Knicks or Yankees games. As far as I know, most people who go to Madison Square Garden - also on top of a great transit hub - tend to avoid driving, and I imagine it will be similar at Atlantic Avenue (cf also: Fenway Park, Wrigley Field, etc). Yes, there will be a bit of parking strain, but I imagine locals will adapt fairly quickly. And if parking is fairly hard to come by, then visitors will be less inclined to drive anyway. As someone who grew up literally across the street from a 4,000 seat auditorium and about 2 blocks from a 3,500 seat college basketball arena (smaller yes, but the neighborhood and streets were also much smaller than in Prospect Heights), I know that trying to find a parking spot during the couple of hours an event was going on was a nightmare and generally to be avoided. For those of us who lived in the neighborhood, we secured our spot beforehand and walked to dinner or the grocery store if necessary. And, if so desired, we got to walk to the event - which was the greatest privilege of all. This, of course, is why we live in cities - to be able to walk, or take mass transit, just about anywhere. The Ratner plan certainly has its flaws - I don't think there's a need for 60-story buildings in that area, and the whole plan in general could use a good bit more interaction with the street. But the increase in housing - both high-end and affordable, the development of a large public use space, a more sensible utilization of the transit hub, and the general creation and addition of long-term jobs in all tax brackets* makes the plan fairly compelling. I have yet to see an idea that is more sensible to both the city and the neighborhood. Jamie *At first, I imagined it was going to be all low-end or temporary jobs, such as concessionnaires. But the stadium and development itself are going to create mid-level building management jobs, and the Nets franchise is going to bring in a few high-level front office jobs as well. It also wouldn't surprise me if many of these full-time employees move into the neighborhood.
-
Jamie, very good post. I only disagree with you that there's "no need for 60 story bldgs". Why not? At first I was shocked that there would be such a huge scale of development, but after my initial reaction wore off I found the idea exciting. Who among us would like to see the Williamsburg Savings Bank destroyed? No one, I presume, but that bldg was and continues to be wildly "out of scale". Not exactly contextual development there, but it turned out to be a landmark bldg that is loved by the borough. Special kudos to you for recognizing that the NIMBY crowd is a conservative movement, not a liberal one. Not enough people realize that or address it.
-
NIMBY crowd? what is a NIMBY? I'll tell you, folks like Marty Golden, GOP State Senator who loves Ratner's project but has told me in a meeting that he'd never want it in his neighborhood. that is a NIMBY. People concerned with issues of development in their own neighborhoods are not NIMBY, they active participants in public interest and community interest. NIMBY is a canard, and its use grows tiresome by the minute. btw, whoever above talked about most people taking subways to the games. where do you get that data? why 3k parking spots, then, proposed by Ratner? why, on a weekend do 60% of MSG visitors drive? and that is in the more suburban friendly Manhattan.
-
There's already a Brooklyn central business district last time I checked. Or does Metrotech and all of that not count because it's not big enough? What's the obsession with bigger = better? I live in Prospect Heights because the neighborhood is mostly residential and affordable and not a business district. If I wanted to look out my window and see a skyscraper, I would scrape together some money and forego eating to move to downtown/midtown Manhattan. My problem with the project is that it is in an essence creating a private microneighborhood dwarfing everything else in its path. How lucky that person in that 30th floor luxury apartment will be having a little ant farm-like view before them! I guess there goes my little view of the skyline, but that's progress, right?
-
Guest, why get so hung up on the term NIMBY? But here's an example of what it means. I was speaking with a member of my block association in Fort Greene who is opposed to the arena project. When I said, "You may not like it but you can't fault the city for supporting it; it's their job to do what's best for the borough and city as a whole," he replied, "Yeah, but let them do it somewhere else." So he agreed that the project was good for the city but just didn't want it conflict with his own narrow self interest. That's NIMBY. I am concerned with issues in my own neighborhood--crime, bad schools, rats and garbage, and especially the LACK of development. There are too many abandoned buildings, rundown blocks and undeveloped swaths of land. I welcome a bustling, urban environment, that's why I choose to live in the city. If you want the suburbs, move to New Jersey.
-
escap » I am concerned with issues in my own neighborhood--crime, bad schools, rats and garbage, and especially the LACK of development. There are too many abandoned buildings, rundown blocks and undeveloped swaths of land. I welcome a bustling, urban environment, that's why I choose to live in the city. If you want the suburbs, move to New Jersey.
And the bustling urban environment of skyscrapers and a stadium is where it's at? Nothing says development like new people to further strain transportation! And, oh look, those older buildings are abandoned and the blocks are still run down! But who cares when you've got a shiny new thing to stare up at?! Talk about some whacked priorities. -
There's really no reason for me to be hung up on the term NIMBY, other than it's what appears, to my outsider's eye, to be going on. I should also admit, as I have in my one or two previous posts, that I am an outsider to PH (though a frequent visitor, as moderator EmilyM and her husband are two of my closest friends and the consummate hosts). Re: traffic - As I mentioned in my above post, I grew up in an area that was frequently inundated with events and their related parking issues, and I considered it a privilege to be able to roll out of my door and attend these events (or just open my window and hear the reverb of bands I liked, such as Phish and the Indigo Girls). I also currently live in an area - SoHo / Nolita - that has massive parking issues every single weekend. People drive in from the 'burbs, shop til they drop, and go home. And yes, they do drive. Try Canal St or the Holland Tunnel on any weekend afternoon. And it seems to get worse with time. That said, I've learned what times and places are best for finding a spot (such information is privileged and will only be released upon the presentation of an adequate bribe
). Ultimately, I don't think parking issues really mar the quality of life; I'm fortunate to live in a great neighborhood, and I don't mind sharing. I guess this is just the result of growing up in a tourist town.
(Would yap more, but big meetings at work this afternoon - ciao, and all the best)
-je -
Candicissima, I don't understand--you think that leaving the Atlantic Yards as is will somehow spur the renovation of the older, abandoned buildings? What's the logic there? I know it's massive, but if thousands of residential spaces are added to the area, all those people will need places to eat, shop, socialize, etc. That means hundreds of local business opportunities to create restaurants, cafes, bookstores, internet cafes, retail shops, electronics, and on and on. This further influx of capital will likely lead to greater investment appeal, all of which creates positive economic momentum. As I see, it's only through this kind of a scenario that we can hope to attract more development of the rundown sections; protesting development so that a few brownstoners can see the the Manhattan skyline (and why would you want to see those awful tall buildings that you hate so much?) will inhibit local development, not attract it.
-
Jamie, Your post is well spoken and welcome, let me say a few things though.
Jamie » Most people in Daily Heights appear to view Atlantic Yards from the perspective of neighborhood residents - which is, of course, what most posters to this forum are. But the Atlantic Yards space ultimately is not a neighborhood space.
I agree that a major hub is terribly underutilized, there is a great oppertunity for something to be built there. You are right that the Atlantic yards is not a neighborhood space, but wrong in your view that the neighborhood should have no say. It was the resident of the cummunity who made a concious effort and investment to revitalize the local community long before ratner made his appearance, it is also the community that will have to cope with any problems that the project may bring. There is also the question of Eminent Domain, with the Extell proposal and the outrageous scope of Ratners proposal that it is not absolutely necesary. I would also like fow someone to show me where such detailed brownstones are still being built, nowhere becasue the economy of building homes does not support it, its not like Ratner wants to knock down some wood frame homes built in the seventies. There is something to be said for the preservation of an era that is now gone and will never return, but thats my opinion.Jamie » At first, I imagined it was going to be all low-end or temporary jobs, such as concessionnaires. But the stadium and development itself are going to create mid-level building management jobs, and the Nets franchise is going to bring in a few high-level front office jobs as well. It also wouldn't surprise me if many of these full-time employees move into the neighborhood.
Yes, the nets would bring a few midlevel jobs, but think about the amount of space being used. Now consider a school, hospital, technology center (eg. Metrotech ), the number of higher level jobs any of those would bring would be fourfold, not to mention probably the same number if more lower level hot dog sales postions which would operate on a 9-5 weekly basis not just during games. An arena is mostly empty space, why do that when you could fill it with offices and classrooms. You also said before the hub was under utilized, so what then is the sense of having an arena with at most a few games a week (in season) when a technology center would make use of that hub up on a wekly 9-5 basis, bringing in people from LI and all parts of brooklyn. When you say the arena will bring jobs it pales to the jobs (and quality of jobs) which other development would bring. Your post supports the arena more than the out of scale development, the Extell bid also presented and Arena option, do you not support their bid as well?"When Things should but dont work,
thats the work of all these Governors"
-The Evens -
Escap, where in the world did I say that I want to keep the yards as is? Talk about projecting onto what I wrote what you want to read. And for the record, I'm not a brownstoner either. But, I suppose it works to your advantage to visualize me as a brownstone-owning yuppie with 2.3 kids in order for you to think of me as a NIMBY. And you, of course, would be wrong and generalizing. I don't think there is any logic in a monolithic structure chopping off a section of the neighborhood. Especially something that the neighborhood can not support. Ever stood in the Atlantic Ave Station during rush hour? Imagine it during Game Night. If Ratner/Markowitz/their ilk spent more time trying to improve existing infrastructure and creating something that the present community could use, I might be behind their project. Even your "vision" of the development hardly involves the people who actually live here now. Sure, NYC has cycles of residents, but my family has lived in Brooklyn in one form or another for 50 years. I resent the implication that Brooklyn needs to turn into a clone of some nondescript city somewhere else in order to be a draw for people to live and shop and work and develop. There's just not enough logical urban planning in that project because they're too busy thinking about making a buck.
-
Captain M - Thanks for your reply! Those are all very, very good points, and I should admit that I was thinking of the pre-arena Extell proposal. I also did not mean to imply that the neighborhood should have no say, just that the Atlantic Ave area did not belong to the neighborhood alone. Simply put, I think the idea of an arena or convention center, combined with mixed-use residential and large commercial space, is the best use of an area that is central to residents of the entire city. Any and all ideas are welcome and should be encouraged. But trying to keep things on a minute scale, or irrelevant to everyone but local residents, is far from a judicious use of the space. I am willing to make a bold prediction here - that in 10 years, residents of PH will have embraced the Nets as their local team, and that when they win the NBA Championship, the parade up Flatbush will be the biggest Brooklyn has ever seen - and PH residents will be the first to queue for spots. Jamie
-
Captain M, I agree with you that Eminent Domain is a highly controversial issue that should only be used as a last possible resort and that the victims should be generously compensated, taking into account not just market value but the severe imposition on their lives. I'd love to see Ratner scrap the Eminent Domain aspect of the plan. I also agree with you that there are better hypothetical uses for the land than an arena. A tech center sounds great (incidentally lots of people protested Metrotech too, let's not forget); the only problem is that there's no such offer on the table. There are three options: FCR, Extell, or Status Quo. It seems to me the FCR plan is the most likely to benefit the city economically, so that's the one the city should choose. And Candicissima, my assumptions of your situation aside, I'm still failing to see a coherent plan within what you wrote other than "something else". Fantasy ideas of some miraculous development that we could all love and rally around are no good w/out someone to put up the $. If your family has been in the nabe for 50 years, that means they've seen each and every year that the Atlantic Yards has remained a gaping hole.
-
escap » Fantasy ideas of some miraculous development that we could all love and rally around are no good w/out someone to put up the $.
Was it just me or was there some of sort of alternate proposal on the table like last week? Better ask the MTA. I might be mistaken about that. -
I assume that the new residents of these monoliths (polyliths?) will forgo their cars and reproductive organs since as it stands now the schools and the roads (parking etc.) can barely support the residents now. I know I'm sounding like a broken record, but as it stands now PS9 is not up to the challenge of an injection of say... 500 more students. I'm not even talking about qualitative, just infrastructure. Most will take the train, but some will drive. I'm trying to think what Atlantic & Flatbush is going to look like every morning at around 7:30-8:00am--not pretty. Also, jobs housing etc.. If you are not in tight with ACORN / BUILD right now all you're going get is a big helping of bupkis with a side of squat. And ... uh go nets
-
This is not a NIMBY situation. This is a problem with a developer who has a proven track record of developments (in the immediate area) that are NOT pedestrian friendly and NOT consistent with the neighboring communities. The area of land in question currently divides two neighborhoods, and could potentially bring them together if it was developed in a pedestrian friendly manner, not if it furthers the divide and cuts off the limited streets that currently connect the two. If Atlantic Terminal and Atlantic Center (The Target and the Pathmark) did not turn out the way they did (enclosed malls, architecture that doesn’t fit the surroundings, lack of pedestrian walkways, etc.) I don’t think the community would be as up in arms about this issue. The arena designed by Gehry is one thing, the wall of apartment buildings designed by architects experienced mostly in suburban projects is another.
-
Jamie » I am willing to make a bold prediction here - that in 10 years, residents of PH will have embraced the Nets as their local team, and that when they win the NBA Championship, the parade up Flatbush will be the biggest Brooklyn has ever seen - and PH residents will be the first to queue for spots. Jamie
Can't fault you for your boldness, but I can take umbrage with your aw-shucks approach to this issue. First of all, Ratner is a horrible franchise owner. He does not care about the game of basketball; the Nets are the public face of his private land grab. He's very much in the line of owners such as Wirtz (Chicago Blackhawks), Jacobs (Boston Bruins), McClatchy (Pittsburgh Pirates), and Angelos (Baltimore Orioles). Business men first, owners second, who parlay public affection into blackmail for getting a cash cow stadium, then do little to reinvest the money into the team itself. Here, for example, is part of an interview with Ratner that ran in the Times magazine. Q: How would you define the social value of the Nets? A: The players are terrific. They are of good character. They are incredibly charitable. They are family-oriented. They have integrity. I don't think I need to go into the well-documented off-court histories of nets players current and recently affiliated to show the ludicrous nature of Ratner's response. Just type the words "Jason Kidd wife abuse" or "bernard king assault" into google and see what comes up. (Bernard King, by the way, is the NBA legend and Brooklyn native adopted by Ratner as a spokesperson. He's even mentioned in Kurtis Blow's classic "Basketball".) Fact is, Ratner's cliche response betrays his utter ignorance of the basketball side of things. Then there's the juciest response of all. Q: Do you collect sports memorabilia? A: I'm not a collector. Honestly, I like to throw stuff out. I'm not acquisition-oriented. *snicker* Perhaps he's acquiring the prospect heights territory precisely in order to throw stuff out. Like the people who already live there. You are right about one thing, though. If the Nets ever do win a champeenship in their new arena, PH residents will queue up for the parade. Thing is, though, won't none of 'em be the same folks who live here now. To answer the original idea of this post, though, if I had Ratner's money and my desire to bring hoops to Brooklyn was real, I'd look into developing somewhere like Red Hook, a neighborhood that is relatively under-utilised and most certainly would benefit from increased public transportation and business investment.Smacks of affectation. -
Candicissima » Was it just me or was there some of sort of alternate proposal on the table like last week? Better ask the MTA. I might be mistaken about that.
I don't see how you think the Extell proposal solves your problems. You complained about increased traffic, tall buildings blocking your view, the creation of luxury apartments, monolithic structures, and the arena. The Extell plan includes all of these things. I'd be happy to see the Extell plan go through, I just would be even happier with the FCR plan. I'd like to see you admit that you consider the Extell plan the lesser of two evils, not your ideal. Then I'd like to see what you actually think an ideal plan would consist of, and then point to a development plan along those lines that has actually been proposed at some point in history by someone willing to pay for it. Over the years, there has been plan after plan, with or without eminent domain, skyscapers, or arenas, and they have been knocked down one after another. If Extell was the only plan out there, community activists would be demonizing them too. I guess if you are willing to compromise on the Extell plan, as boring as it is, that's better than nothing. Of course with the ULURP review and years of hammering out the details, I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up with nothing yet again. -
Jamie, I agree with your prediction. While this plan is controversial at the moment, I believe that once the stadium and housing are built, most people will simply adjust to the new look of Prospect Heights. Those that dislike it will move, only to be replaced by others. Gentrification will continue to spread eastward (as it is currently doing, judging from the recent posts about buildings on Park and Classon), and much of this tension will be a distant memory.
-
pensodyssey » To answer the original idea of this post, though, if I had Ratner's money and my desire to bring hoops to Brooklyn was real, I'd look into developing somewhere like Red Hook, a neighborhood that is relatively under-utilised and most certainly would benefit from increased public transportation and business investment.
Pensodyssey, you make some excellent points. That interview with Ratner was embarrassing for him. In fact, many of the arguments against the FCR plan are compelling, from eminent domain to his ugly architectural record to the lack of transparency and unfair exclusion of Extell yesterday. But I quoted the above paragraph b/c this is a perfect example of why I'm so skeptical of the opposition. In Red Hook, which you say is a good site for development, they are currently in the midst of a fierce battle to block an IKEA from going in. In fact, everywhere I look I see the same thing. Opposition to the expansion of NYU and Columbia, the Whitney and Met, the construction of housing in downtown Brooklyn and along the waterfront, the IKEA, a Fairway, a Whole Foods, the Nets stadium, the Jets stadium, a commercial complex in Queens, tall buildings in DUMBO and Fort Greene, the new building in Astor Place. I even recently saw a petition to block the FG farmer's market!!!! It never ends, and no plan is ever good enough to satisfy the anti-development crowd. Meanwhile unemployment rises, housing availability shrinks, train fares and the costs of everything else go up, and we wonder why. -
Jamie » I am willing to make a bold prediction here - that in 10 years, residents of PH will have embraced the Nets as their local team, and that when they win the NBA Championship, the parade up Flatbush will be the biggest Brooklyn has ever seen - and PH residents will be the first to queue for spots. Jamie
Let me make a bold prediction, In 10 years, NBA players deciding they shoudl recieve a bigger cut of the attendance and merchandise profit, go on stike at odd with the owners. The general public, sick of seeing NBA players flaunt their wealth selfishly only wanting more and having seen the ticket prices rise to $200 a game no longer return to the game after the strike breaks after a year. At the same time public thought embraces values, considerate thought, the the idea of wealth of knowledge over wealth of pocket (which the NBA really doesnt). The current state of the area use under low attendance, the public scrutizes Kalikow, Ratner, Markowitz, and Bloomberg and want to know why something that would truly benefit brooklyn was built. They are jailed for defrauding the public interest."When Things should but dont work,
thats the work of all these Governors"
-The Evens -
escap » no plan is never good enough to satisfy the anti-development crowd.
I support the Extell proposal."When Things should but dont work,
thats the work of all these Governors"
-The Evens -
I think it's disingenuous to call people who oppose this Ratner plan and all the others anti-development. Most of us are not against development, we'd like to have a say in the developments getting thrown in the middle of our neighborhoods and some sort of assurances that instead of imposing on the community that there are some sort of built in benefits to the project. Most developers don't even live in the places they want to bulldoze over, so they couldn't care less about the neighbors that might be a little unhappy about years of construction, traffic/transportation congestion, influx of new people, rising housing costs and all the day to day things that people have to deal with. And considering the new jobs available at the proposed stadium: How much does a hot dog vendor make? An usher? A janitor? Is that living wage that's going to keep up with the rising costs of the newly luxury neighborhood? Doubt it. Housing is especially important because we all know that most of these places they're building are especially created not to be affordable to most people currently living there. So what if you have 300 apartments at special rate when you have 1,000 misplaced or newly priced out people? Where are they supposed to go? Well, I guess according to Jack or escap, they can just go to hell, right?
-
Thank you both for the responses--it's good to get someone to debate with. If you support the Extell plan, at least that's something. I'd accept the compromise and just hold out a secret hope that they'd betray everyone and build double what they promised after all.
Incidentally, to add the list, I just read that there are two groups on the Upper West Side that call themselves "Stop Extell" and "Westsiders for Responsible Development". They are opposed to the construction of two condos about 30 stories high, far less than what Extell would do in Brooklyn. "Critics often cited increased traffic, the height of the buildings and an influx of a wealthier demographic that may drive out local businesses as reasons to stop the proposal." Sound familiar?
So what if you have 300 apartments at special rate when you have 1,000 misplaced or newly priced out people?
FCR proposes displacing a handful and creating several thousand new units. You have the numbers backward. -
escap »
I should've bolded "newly priced out" since that's what I'm trying to emphasize. Because we all know that once landlords realize that the going market rate is skewed higher for the nabe that they'll be raising the current rents through the roof to get some of that money. Everyone isn't lucky enough to be stabilized -- and some of us who are still are probably getting shafted.So what if you have 300 apartments at special rate when you have 1,000 misplaced or newly priced out people?
FCR proposes displacing a handful and creating several thousand new units. You have the numbers backward. -
"Well, I guess according to Jack or escap, they can just go to hell, right?" Well, not exactly hell. But, yes, people will be forced to move to other areas. Like it or not, not everyone can afford to live where they wish. I've been priced out of neighborhoods, and, while it sucked, I did what I had to do and moved on. People are much more resourceful than many think. Regarding minimum-wage jobs, their attractiveness depends on the circumstances of the applicant. To someone with an MBA who is accustomed to a six-figure salary (like our fellow poster, Rich Black Girl), a minimum-wage job is a nightmare. But to college student in need of a part-time job, to someone who has moved to the US from another country who needs to send money home to family members, or to any unemployed individual who simply wants to work, a minimum-wage job doesn't look so bad. That's why the application kiosk at Target is always occupied. Mimimum-wage jobs helped me save for and get through college, so I, for one, am not about to dismiss them.
-
Candicissima » Most of us are not against development, we'd like to have a say in the developments getting thrown in the middle of our neighborhoods and some sort of assurances that instead of imposing on the community that there are some sort of built in benefits to the project.
Very good point - and I think the public outcry is having an effect. Yes, there will always be some sort of opposition - much of it rational, some of it irrational - but the point is to hew the project into something that both offers the developer and the neighborhood incentives. Ratner has no incentive to build affordable housing other than to placate the neighbors. He has no incentive to do anything but squeeze the most money out of the space, except to placate the neighbors. And he may not live in Brooklyn, but he does have an operational base in the area - at 1 Metrotech Center. These projects remain at the drawing board - if one keep one's demands reasonable (less imposing buildings, more street space, more school infrastructure), they have a better chance of being met. If not, then you have a reasonable basis to scream out: "We wanted 5% of the space to go to public schools, but Ratner / Extell wouldn't even discuss it." Though if demands become so irrational as to force these guys to pull the plug, what will remain is an urban void in the center of one of the most dynamic places on the planet, which would be a waste. BTW - I know little about school funding allocations in the area, but I would imagine such a rapid expansion in the tax base would inherently lead to capital improvements in the school system. That said, these are public schools, and general common sense forces sometimes don't apply. Captain M - I wasn't trying to make a prediction about the NBA itself, but if I were, I would imagine the hockey strike has chastened them. Stern continues to rule with an iron fist, and he was just able to raise the draft age to 19(?) - something that speaks of a person firmly in control of the players' union. It's interesting that you predict the crisis that you do - one wonders if it's preemptory schadenfreude??? -je -
escap » In fact, everywhere I look I see the same thing. Opposition to the expansion of NYU and Columbia, the Whitney and Met, the construction of housing in downtown Brooklyn and along the waterfront, the IKEA, a Fairway, a Whole Foods, the Nets stadium, the Jets stadium, a commercial complex in Queens, tall buildings in DUMBO and Fort Greene, the new building in Astor Place. I even recently saw a petition to block the FG farmer's market!!!! It never ends, and no plan is never good enough to satisfy the anti-development crowd.
I thought this thread was really interesting and was wanting to post some sort of comprehensive response, but it's moving too fast, so let me respond to this list, which caught my eye. I would HAPPY to see a university, an Ikea, a Fairway, a Whole Foods or a farmer's market at the proposed stadium site. (I think what I would like most of all is more BAM, but okay, I realize that's kind of unrealistic.) When I wrote about this issue on my blog about a year and a half ago, I confessed that part of my opposition stemmed from the fact that I really don't see what's so great about professional sports. I don't feel any fondness for the players or their fans. An Ikea would attract young people and families. I can't help but feel that a stadium is going to attract drunk young men. At night. Yes, this is an oversimplification, but I don't see anyone really addressing the nitty gritty quality-of-life issues through the haze of all the sports boosterism.Jack Krohn » Mimimum-wage jobs helped me save for and get through college, so I, for one, am not about to dismiss them.
Okay, and I certainly have nothing against people who honest work of any kind, but I bet when you were able to actually save on minimum wage, the minimum wage was a LOT higher in comparison to the economic conditions surrounding it. I'm not trying to blame this on Ratner or anything, just pointing out that a bunch of minimum wage jobs isn't a panacea, even for the people who get them."Now if every newspaper editor had to deal with a reader like Emily, boy, would they think twice, or three times." --greg -
Jamie, Good points re: reasonable requests & schools. I'm glad that someone else brought this to the thread. The NYC school system as far as I know doesn't have a direct tax-base correlation. Some of the problems I have w/Ratner, Markowitz, ACORN, BUILD, cronies and other hangers on is that it's all about (BUILD's)jobs, (ACORN's)housing & (FCRC)basketball. To me this has been from the beginning a closed process. God forbid that any other groups bring anything to the table, they will be shouted down. The MOU to me is a sham, all smoke and mirrors. Let's say hypothetically, this project gets rubber stamped, construction begins and for some unforeseen reason FCRC goes back on it's word and builds all of the affordable housing in the middle of Bushwick. The only recourse ACORN has is to sue FCRC. Do you think that’s a fair fight?
-
EmilyM » I would HAPPY to see a university, an Ikea, a Fairway, a Whole Foods or a farmer's market at the proposed stadium site. (I think what I would like most of all is more BAM, but okay, I realize that's kind of unrealistic.) When I wrote about this issue on my blog about a year and a half ago, I confessed that part of my opposition stemmed from the fact that I really don't see what's so great about professional sports. I don't feel any fondness for the players or their fans. An Ikea would attract young people and families. I can't help but feel that a stadium is going to attract drunk young men. At night. Yes, this is an oversimplification, but I don't see anyone really addressing the nitty gritty quality-of-life issues through the haze of all the sports boosterism.
Hi! Can't believe I've been hanging out here all day - this site has really sucked me in (your motives, and actions, really are totally nefarious!!!!). I guess I should register, but that would only make my intrusions into your neighborhood official.... Of all the things you listed above, the only ones that would be logistically more sensible are a university or an expansion of BAM. And an arena would certainly host some musical acts - if you're not too cool for arena rock . IKEA, for example, is totally automobile-dependent - hence the choice of Red Hook for its location. Indeed, IKEA chooses sites based on their proximity to freeways, both for distribution and for customers. This is just as true in Europe as it is in the States - it's a core part of their business model. Supermarkets are generally for local use only, and if they're destinations (such as Stew Leonard's), then they need automobile capacity as well. An arena, a performing arts center, or an expanded university are the only options that would take advantage of the mass transit options - attracting people from far and wide whose purposes would not require the use of automobiles. They also would use up the majority of the yards, which are much larger than what any single store could cover.
While your concerns about drunks spilling out into the neighborhood are well-founded, keep in mind that basketball games are shorter than baseball games, and those people who can rustle up the ticket price would likely be less inclined to get hammered on weeknights. I also imagine that the impact, if any, would be severely limited on residential streets. There are defined thoroughfares onto which most foot traffic - that which doesn't take the subway - would fall. 33rd and Madison is very close to MSG, as are the London Houses (name?) at 25th and 8th, but there's almost no impact from the arena. Yes, you might get a loud group outside once or twice a season or so (probably no more than standard city living). Honestly, hearing a couple of drunks outside wasn't much of a downside compared to having so many big things going on so close by growing up. And - here again the power of persuasion - the neighborhood could ask the arena not to sell alcohol in the 4th quarter, a policy that I think is standard practice in most arenas nationwide anyway.
Eminent domain - I agree with everyone on this. Let the market, not government, work. Buy everyone out, and if someone doesn't have a price, then build around them. Those little quirks form the great palimpsest of the urban fabric.
-je -
quig » The MOU to me is a sham, all smoke and mirrors. Let's say hypothetically, this project gets rubber stamped, construction begins and for some unforeseen reason FCRC goes back on it's word and builds all of the affordable housing in the middle of Bushwick. The only recourse ACORN has is to sue FCRC. Do you think that’s a fair fight?
Great point, and it wouldn't be that easy a fight. But FCRC's ability to build with the cooperation of the government would be done, over, finished. They've made the public some promises, and it's our responsibility to hold them to it. So let's do it. Of course, it would be interesting to see what Governor Spitzer would have to say if they went back on their promise, but that's a whole 'nother thread... -je -
Jamie » Hi! Can't believe I've been hanging out here all day - this site has really sucked me in (your motives, and actions, really are totally nefarious!!!!). I guess I should register, but that would only make my intrusions into your neighborhood official....
Jamie, what's your neighborhood? Sorry to go off-topic, but I'm trying to get a sense for who reads this board and whether it makes sense to add boards for other neighborhoods. We opened up a board for Crown Heights this week, and I just got an e-mail today from someone requesting a Boerum Hill board.Brooklynian on Twitter: http://twitter.com/brooklynian
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brooklyniancom/35509627419 -
Jamie is my college drinking buddy who lives in Manhattan.
We've been trying to get him to move to Brooklyn, but thus far without success. You can tell he's a cool Manhattan person, though, because he'll come out and have drinks with us at Half on a weeknight."Now if every newspaper editor had to deal with a reader like Emily, boy, would they think twice, or three times." --greg -
If I'm not mistaken the MOU is with ACORN & BUILD oops..ahem.... I mean the community. Not with NYC. It's a private contract between two parties.
-
There are lot of people who are claiming to be in support of certain types of development, and I hope this is true. I hope you are all the exception to the general trend of opposing everyone who wants to do so much as plant a tree. I think neighborhood advocates are suffering from crying wolf too much. By protesting every possible idea that's ever brought up, you just alienate city officials and make them think that nothing will ever please you. The criticisms of the Ratner plan that go, "This has some good elements but the following areas need improvement," are great and constructive, and I think officials would be willing to listen to them. But most of the tone has been more like, "Ratner is EVIL!!!!! This is a capitalist conspiracy!!! This will DESTROY our neighborhood!!!" Note DDDB's choice of words. They say the arena is just a front for Ratner's true agenda--not to build profitable housing--but rather for a LAND GRAB. This makes it seem like Ratner's true motive is not profit, but rather to satisfy some maniacal lust to seize other people's property for the sake of pure sadism. This kind of vitriole and hype just alienates officials and leads to less community involvement, not more.
-
I will say about Ratner that I feel about him sort of the way that I feel about George Bush: even when he says something that sounds good, I can't help but believe it will turn out badly because I trust him so little; while realizing that he is not ultimately responsible for everything, he is in charge of a lot of bad stuff."Now if every newspaper editor had to deal with a reader like Emily, boy, would they think twice, or three times." --greg
-
quig » If I'm not mistaken the MOU is with ACORN & BUILD oops..ahem.... I mean the community. Not with NYC. It's a private contract between two parties.
Perhaps it isn't NYC, but if it's the community, it's still a form of the public trust. Simply put, FCRC has made some public promises to the public, and the public can hold the firm accountable. Glad to see I'm nothing more than a drinking buddy around these parts, but I'll take it as a compliment anyway....... -je -
EmilyM » I will say about Ratner that I feel about him sort of the way that I feel about George Bush: even when he says something that sounds good, I can't help but believe it will turn out badly because I trust him so little; while realizing that he is not ultimately responsible for everything, he is in charge of a lot of bad stuff.
has bush ever said anything good? just yesterday he flipped the bird to the press. http://movies.crooksandliars.com/bush-flips-press.mov -
Here is what I would do. I would build a pedestrian mall, with the floor levels being retail space and hopefully get a lot of small businesses to set up shop. The buildings could be as much as high as 6-10 stories. Maybe a movie theatre. Some music venues. Gardens. Perhaps a community center. A nice place that people will actually want to go to while still generating revenue and letting Prospect Heights and Fort Greene remain nice cozy neighborhoods.
-
Isa » Here is what I would do. I would build a pedestrian mall, with the floor levels being retail space and hopefully get a lot of small businesses to set up shop. The buildings could be as much as high as 6-10 stories. Maybe a movie theatre. Some music venues. Gardens. Perhaps a community center. A nice place that people will actually want to go to while still generating revenue and letting Prospect Heights and Fort Greene remain nice cozy neighborhoods.
Great idea - but it gets back at the fundamental question of the transportation center. A retail network that would be a fair utilization of the resources of Atlantic Avenue subway and LIRR would have to be at least on the scale of a SoHo / Nolita. And you think traffic would be a mess with an arena... If there's a tabula rasa for development, and you already have the transportation network, then it would be unfair to the entire city not to use it. In an era where mass transit isn't used nearly enough, it's tough to justify the use of one of the largest hubs in the region for anything that is local in scale. -je -
escap » Captain M, I agree with you that Eminent Domain is a highly controversial issue that should only be used as a last possible resort and that the victims should be generously compensated, taking into account not just market value but the severe imposition on their lives. I'd love to see Ratner scrap the Eminent Domain aspect of the plan. I also agree with you that there are better hypothetical uses for the land than an arena. A tech center sounds great (incidentally lots of people protested Metrotech too, let's not forget); the only problem is that there's no such offer on the table. There are three options: FCR, Extell, or Status Quo.
I disagree that just becasue there is some offer on the table we should just take it. Thats just stupid, did you marry the first person you dated. You are in such a rush to develop but fail to see the repercussions that will last at least 60 years, waiting 5 years for the right development, with no eminent domain, when the yards space is worth even more, when there are more people living in brooklyn, a developer not looking for taxpayers to finance the project, that is when the right opportunity will present itself. If you actually think if the Ratner deal doesnt go through nobody will touch that land, then thats idiotic too."When Things should but dont work,
thats the work of all these Governors"
-The Evens -
If you actually think if the Ratner deal doesnt go through nobody will touch that land, then thats idiotic too.
Whoa, strong and harsh words, given that I have history on my side. It has been 50 years and nobody has touched that land. You do a lot of name calling but give me no reason to believe anything has changed. You think in 5 years the perfect plan will come along? Maybe you're right that I shouldn't be desperate to jump on the first proposal that comes along, but all I ever hear about is why we shouldn't do this or that. Schumer was right when he described a "culture of inertia" that exists in this city. It's easy to pick apart every proposal, but sometimes you have to just say a flawed plan is better than no plan, and take what is available. Lots of criticized ideas turn out great once we give them a chance. I'm sorry, but they were really protesting the farmer's market over here in Fort Greene--too much traffic. That was the straw that broke the camel's back; now I'm willing to take whatever I can get. -
Subject: tech center?
there's already a tech center on vanderbilt/atlantic: http://www.470vanderbilt.com/ -
escap »
Extell?If you actually think if the Ratner deal doesnt go through nobody will touch that land, then thats idiotic too.
Whoa, strong and harsh words, given that I have history on my side. It has been 50 years and nobody has touched that land. You do a lot of name calling but give me no reason to believe anything has changed. You think in 5 years the perfect plan will come along? Maybe you're right that I shouldn't be desperate to jump on the first proposal that comes along, but all I ever hear about is why we shouldn't do this or that. Schumer was right when he described a "culture of inertia" that exists in this city. It's easy to pick apart every proposal, but sometimes you have to just say a flawed plan is better than no plan, and take what is available. Lots of criticized ideas turn out great once we give them a chance. I'm sorry, but they were really protesting the farmer's market over here in Fort Greene--too much traffic. That was the straw that broke the camel's back; now I'm willing to take whatever I can get."When Things should but dont work,
thats the work of all these Governors"
-The Evens -
Anonymous » [quote="EmilyM"]I will say about Ratner that I feel about him sort of the way that I feel about George Bush: even when he says something that sounds good, I can't help but believe it will turn out badly because I trust him so little; while realizing that he is not ultimately responsible for everything, he is in charge of a lot of bad stuff.
has bush ever said anything good? just yesterday he flipped the bird to the press. http://movies.crooksandliars.com/bush-flips-press.mov/quote I'm not sure whether that was a rhetorical question or not, but I will elaborate. Sometimes Bush will say something like "Let's devote millions of dollars to AIDS prevention in Africa." Now, that's normally something I'd be very much in favor of, but because I trust Bush so little, I expect it to turn out in a way I disapprove of. And sure enough, the administration has forked over very little money, plus they're still trying to force the UN to embrace abstinence-only education and so forth. Similarly, if Ratner said something that sounded good, I would assume that it was either PR or something that would backfire on us. That's how little credibility he has with me. If someone with a record of not mooching off of taxpayers, building beautiful edifices, and not relying on eminent domain proposed a similar complex, I'd feel a lot better about it."Now if every newspaper editor had to deal with a reader like Emily, boy, would they think twice, or three times." --greg -
EmilyM » I'm not sure whether that was a rhetorical question or not, but I will elaborate. Sometimes Bush will say something like "Let's devote millions of dollars to AIDS prevention in Africa." Now, that's normally something I'd be very much in favor of, but because I trust Bush so little, I expect it to turn out in a way I disapprove of. And sure enough, the administration has forked over very little money, plus they're still trying to force the UN to embrace abstinence-only education and so forth. Similarly, if Ratner said something that sounded good, I would assume that it was either PR or something that would backfire on us. That's how little credibility he has with me. If someone with a record of not mooching off of taxpayers, building beautiful edifices, and not relying on eminent domain proposed a similar complex, I'd feel a lot better about it.
Good example. -
Yeah, it seems like nothing changes on this board. I was forbidden to enter this domain for a while (72 hour slap-on-the-wrist), but I did not miss much. Boohoo, Ratner wins and you guys lose. So what. The sun will come up in the east and disappear in the west. Just like many of you who have migrated continentally or intercontinental, you can continue this trend. We've been a migratory predator for millions of years. Yeah, so what if you have become emotionally attached to your local hip bar. The idea is to take advantage of the location (Don't you know that location, location, location only matters for sure developments) and it's subterranean amenities. Someone posted before (Too tired to quote you directly) that the MTA is not used enough? I'm sorry, but 3 million train and bus riders are not enough? It's bad as it is that we take advantage of the fucker to the point where we're using the analogy of canned sardines ad nausea. Sure there is an abuse of eminent domain, and there might have been a backroom deal between politicians and developers, but it happens (Some might seem shocked by this statement). As a matter of fact, it continues to transpire. The irony is that there are never any witnesses. Taxes are a way of life (The other famous saying Two things in life are definite...) and if this project uses the taxpayer’s money to help subsidize then I say go for it. The city is in the red forever and we'll never resolve fiscal budgets or satisfy the economics of our public schools or pay our brave enforcement agents more money than they deserve. If you love this fuckin city do something about it. If you want to see a school achieve a certain goal in your neighborhood, donate some of your time and or money. If someone's dog craps in front of your home or while your walking and they do not pick it up, find a bag and pick it up. I have yet to see anyone (Other than myself) that will pick up a bottle that's in the middle of the street (A potential hazard) and toss it in the nearest container. You guys think that someone will mistake you for being poor and think you picked up the bottle to earn a 5-cent credit. Some just wear their ipods and sunglasses to notice anyway, but whine about quality of life issues all the time on this board. That's the difference between Ratner and the rest of you. You guys seem to have the attributes of politicians. You disagree about this development because your liberally correct neighbor does or because it's the politically correct side to take (Taking sides with social issues is the norm). Because they read a fuckin paper by some Columbia shmuck who is trained only in theory. A shmuck that has never built anything, but a resume for himself and not his community. So what if these issues are not relative to you. They are, though, to the developer. And the developer will pick up the fuckin litter off the street, figuratively or literally, because you whiners have done nothing. This Atlantic Yards project did not develop overnight, but many decades ago. Multiple developers have hired professionals to draw up a plan, only to have recessional periods stop it from developing. And now that someone seizes a moment, you guys are at it with your eminent domain, architectural and traffic issues. The real credit goes to Ratner. He has to read these insults and protests. What will be next, maybe the Eastern Pkwy development? There was a time when ignorance was thought to be blissful. This is a moment where it is warranted. You want to resolve many of the issues on this board. Go and introduce yourself to your neighbors and say hello once in a while when you walk by someone (this might not register with the hip cool cats in the hood). That's what a fuckin neighborhood is.
-
Anonymous » Boo-hoo. Ratner wins and you lose.....Someone posted before (Too tired to quote you directly) that the MTA is not used enough? I'm sorry, but 3 million train and bus riders are not enough?
I think you'll find the the proponent of using the subways and LIRR more efficiently (me) is also one of the biggest defenders of Ratner on this thread. Indeed, the two go together like peanut butter and jelly. I think you'll also find that I'm not the only defender of Ratner on this thread. Have a go, it's worth a read. -
Jamie (again) » [quote="Isa"]Here is what I would do. I would build a pedestrian mall, with the floor levels being retail space and hopefully get a lot of small businesses to set up shop. The buildings could be as much as high as 6-10 stories. Maybe a movie theatre. Some music venues. Gardens. Perhaps a community center. A nice place that people will actually want to go to while still generating revenue and letting Prospect Heights and Fort Greene remain nice cozy neighborhoods.
Great idea - but it gets back at the fundamental question of the transportation center. A retail network that would be a fair utilization of the resources of Atlantic Avenue subway and LIRR would have to be at least on the scale of a SoHo / Nolita. And you think traffic would be a mess with an arena... If there's a tabula rasa for development, and you already have the transportation network, then it would be unfair to the entire city not to use it. In an era where mass transit isn't used nearly enough, it's tough to justify the use of one of the largest hubs in the region for anything that is local in scale. -je[/quote] So the only problem you have with my wonderful well researched plan is the traffic? I think a place that I described would be well utilized by people who do take public transportation. It's a better idea than an arena. Now give me 5 billion and let's start building.
Welcome! Please log in to post, or register a new account!