ay-demo-03-2008.jpg
This morning Clyde Haberman has an op-ed summing up how a lot of New Yorkers feel right now about the city’s grand development plans: Most believe they’re not gonna happen anytime soon. For Brooklyn, the big maybe-never is Atlantic Yards, but there’s been a pileup in the past couple of weeks of other fading prospects: the MTA’s promise to extend service is on hold; Moynihan Station is looking to be a bust; and no one knows whether the long-planned Javits expansion will occur. But it’s not like New York hasn’t faced shattered visions before, and often for the better. Haberman quotes CUNY poli-sci professor John H. Mollenkopf as saying huge projects frequently go through several design phases over many years, and so, “‘New York will come back, and we will get another crack at all these things.'” On a related score, Metro’s Amy Zimmer reports on how there are worries that a stalled AY means empty space at the site will be used as parking lots for years to come. Councilmember Letitia James says parking lots are “a revenue generator and right now [land is] sitting fallow, arguing that Forest City Ratner should not allow the property, which is now attracting the homeless and illegal dumping, to be used in such a fashion.
As Builders’ Grand Visions Dissolve, So Does Our Faith [NY Times]
Visions of Parking Lots at Stalled Atlantic Yards Site [Metro]
Photo of demolished building in AY footprint by threecee.


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

  1. “Nowhere in my post do I make a negative comment about the core political processes: the City Council, zoning regulations, building codes, etc.” – The only problem is that AY was exempted from zoning regulations, building codes, and any effective city codes etc because of the state – We support the city process – but it never took place.

  2. Benson, Thanks for the voice of reason telling it like it is. Never mind the comments from the NIMBY loosers, in the end it will turn out worse for them and they will always be the bitter, jealous, sorry, looserd they are.

  3. BENSON:

    When I just read your last post I was a little flabbergasted.

    Whatever happened to our tradition, as put forward by Lincoln:
    that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
    ???

    Don’t you realize that much of the mess we are currently in is not because some so-called Luddites (oh, and *they’re* really overrunning us!!!ha!) or Not-in-my-backyarders stalling whatever you conceive of, in your brainwashed way, as “PROGRESS”… The mess we’re in is happening SPECIFICALLY because the people are NOT able to participate.

    Look, the people who have opposed being ramrodded by Ratner are not some “mob”, some “rabble”. They are well-meaning, participatory and usually intelligent taxpayers in the process of getting ripped off…and there are some some elected officials in the mix too who are shocked and disgusted by the steamrolling of the AY meglomania. You hold up as the boogey man, that is, China. Hello, don’t you realize the whole boondoggle that is the Atlantic Yards daydream is more in line with the bahavior of top-down and corrupt regimes?

    Hell, the AY idea certainly doesn’t even hold up to the ideals of the “Free Market” for G*d sake. It is a b-o-o-n-d-o-g-g-l-e massively ramrodded and ripping us off.

    You just don’t get it…so go back your daydreams over Robert Moses.

  4. 12.32 PM;

    Regarding your comment: “You knock-it-all-down guys are hilarious. You’d love China – the citizens have no say there. Try it out. Please”, I suggest you re-read my post. Nowhere in my post do I make a negative comment about the core political processes: the City Council, zoning regulations, building codes, etc. If you’ve got a beef with a proposed development, take it to your local elected representative, the DOB, etc.

    What I am knocking is the cadre of losers and Luddites who have created a parallel semi-political process (i.e. “community reviews”, calls for “Contextual design”, “community benefit agreements” or “affordable housing set-asides”) for no other reason than to squash development.

    Benson

1 2 3