Quote of the Day
The final dots that need to be connected are left unconnected by Ourossoff. Bait-and-switchers don’t just bait-and-switch once, it is a pattern. And if Ratner’s Gehry bait-and-switch is stunning, so is the bait-and-switch on “affordable” housing, “publicly accessible open space,” job creation, commercial space, reneging on a contract with the MTA, and changing the project…
The final dots that need to be connected are left unconnected by Ourossoff. Bait-and-switchers don’t just bait-and-switch once, it is a pattern. And if Ratner’s Gehry bait-and-switch is stunning, so is the bait-and-switch on “affordable” housing, “publicly accessible open space,” job creation, commercial space, reneging on a contract with the MTA, and changing the project timeline from 10 years to, unofficially “decades” and officially 6 years to build just the arena according to state financing documents. Atlantic Yards itself is a monument to bait-and-switch.
— by DDDB in Ratner Cans Gehry For Good
MM – “Lastly, I am so tired of the argument that a stadium is perfect at the AY site because of the intersection of subway lines. Only having one or two lines available never dissuaded anyone from going to Yankee Stadium or Shea.”
Really? How would you know THAT? Have you polled the entire city? or even just the thousands of people who choose to drive to Yankee Sta and Citi/Shea Field?????
“More importantly, these lines are already overcrowded now.”
And again you base this on what??? Which lines are you talking?; at what time?? Which would add more overcrowding – a 20K seat stadium along 1 or 2 subway lines or along 10 subway lines?
“The MTA has no plans of extending the platforms, which is the only way to get more passengers on what would have to be longer trains. Is it possible or safe to even have longer trains. They say they can’t run more trains than they do now, that the tracks are full to capacity, and runner more trains runs a higher risk in safety concerns.””
You think the tracks have the maximum trains during off-hours & weekends???? (many games/events are at least partially starting or ending during off-hours and weekends).
How about more frequent trains even during rush hour -possible with better signaling – (which is planned) or faster trains (also possible with eventual upgrades) – point is – if you build stuff far from most mass transit then these changes/upgrades wont help relieve congestion & traffic – if you plan ahead you can take advantage of mass transit now AND in the future….BTW are they planning more roads in the Tri-state region? because while the subways may seem crowded – so do the roads
MM – sorry but you are just WRONG – there is no logical argument that says placing development next to Mass transit is not more efficient than far away – no matter the current capacity or usage.
JPD-
1. Brownstones were not only built for the upper middle class. If you look at different brownstone and/or rowhouse nieghborhoods you will see those that were built for richer families and those built for lower middle and working class families. The fact that they seem more luxurious in their details is because they were built with a different aesthetic, and they had the trained labor. What you’re actually saying is- gosh- even the cheap buildings for working class families looks a hell of a lot better than the crap they put up today.
2. We have touted how much better our technology is today- that we can build cheaper, bigger and better than previous generations. And yet- quite obviously we can’t. Even going back as late as the 1930’s- it’s obvious. The Empire State Building was built in a year and 4 months- with out the technology or equipment we use today. That building is a marvel of great construction. But today you claim we can’t afford to put up a better looking profitable building in a working class neighborhood? So much for our modern improvements.
3. Fedders buildings are for the most part put up on empty lots- of course they’re empty. The previous building has been torn down to make room for the new one. Why else do you think preservationists are fighting so hard to get landmarked? Because beautiful, well built structures that could be saved are being torn down to make way for ugly fedders sh*t.
4. Many people have pointed out the truth about design. It doesn’t have to be overly expensive. It just has to have forethought- ask any architect. There is a difference between making a profit and maximizing profit to the point of undermining the quality of your product. Stories abound about the quality of new construction- it’s poor. I have a friend who is a contractor- most of her work is repairing new construction.
5. If your point about how much a developer can reasonably spend in a poorer neighborhood is true, then why do most of them try to market their poorly made crap as “luxury” apartments? A little truth in advertising please.
JDP, you are grossly misinformed in most of your points. First of all, ALL row houses were NOT built for the upper middle classes. Even a casual perusal of building materials, styles, interior materials and trim, size and location show that they were built for different income levels, different markets. If what you said were to be true, then the entirety of brownstoner Brooklyn, which is a lot of territory, was inhabited by an enormous upper middle class. Obviously, that was never the case. Apartment buildings, which began as upper class housing, before trickling down to the lower classes, are a rather later development, and there just aren’t enough tenement buildings, or even shacks in any part of Brownstone Bklyn that would have housed all the people needed to support this enormous upper middle class. That would be way too many chiefs, not enough Indians.
Secondly, I hope many of these formerly empty blocks NEVER become “fully upper middle class”. That’s what’s wrong with a lot of thinking in Brooklyn now. Regardless, lack of money is no excuse for poor architecture. One need only look at the row of townhouses on Greene Ave between Wash and St James, or the Ratner built houses along Fulton St, in Clinton Hill/Ft. Greene. Contextural design, real brick bricks, classic detailing, yet still 3 family. Why is it so hard to do now?
If I had any money whatsoever, I’d take you up on your challenge. I am sure I could do it.
On another note, I also don’t see why central air is so much more expensive when you are doing new construction. The ductwork goes in with the plumbing and the electricity, while the walls are still open. What’s the big deal?
Lastly, I am so tired of the argument that a stadium is perfect at the AY site because of the intersection of subway lines. Only having one or two lines available never dissuaded anyone from going to Yankee Stadium or Shea. More importantly, these lines are already overcrowded now. The MTA has no plans of extending the platforms, which is the only way to get more passengers on what would have to be longer trains. Is it possible or safe to even have longer trains. They say they can’t run more trains than they do now, that the tracks are full to capacity, and runner more trains runs a higher risk in safety concerns. If people already have to let 2 or 3 trains go by, as I often have to do when I’m there during rush hour, how is adding thousands upon thousands more going to work? NO ONE from FCR, the MTA or the city has ever decently answered that question.
Benson, I’m right there with you.
Brownstones were built for an upper-middle class. Today, not all brownstones are inhabited by upper-middle class. “Fedders” buildings are NOT found on PPW for a reason–THAT IS AN UPPER-MIDDLE CLASS STRIP! “Fedders” buildings were mostly built on formerly VACANT lots in poorer neighborhoods/blocks. Until those blocks become FULLY upper-middle class, there are heavy constraints on what building materials can be afforded for the rent/resale that those buildings can command.
I’D LOVE TO SEE SOMEONE ON HERE TRY TO BUILD/PLAN A BUILDING IN A POOR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS TO EVERYONE’S AESTHETIC SATISFACTION AND HAVE IT BE PROFITABLE. BRING IT!!!
Of course, DDDB is against the arena because their main concern at the beginning was the use of eminent domain. The arena sits right on top of homes and businesses that have been or will be seized in this manner.
I can’t speak for DDDB, but when you try to go through the proper channels and hit nothing but brick walls, you get a little frustrated and angry. There is no working with FCR when they won’t even respond.
Isn’t Adam Goldstein founder of DDDB fighting for his home? How is that being a NIMBY?
Havelc,
Not sure if you are asking if public money should be used to clean up health hazards (in which case my answer is ‘yes’) or to further develop Gowanus with apartments etc(in which case it is ‘no’). The money is better used to lower the overall tax burden in my opinion, which would increase investment across the city rather than in just one area.
(Also I am very likely in the minority on this site that thinks that most things currently being done by the Obama administration are wrong. But the couple that I know would agree with that statement tend to be AY supporters, and many that would strongly disagree are AY opponents).
So we disagree but at least I am consistent in the terms you set out.
I actually respect DDDB post – it finally includes some long missing honesty –
You see DDDB is simply a NIMBY organization and today’s post comes closest to admitting it.
It doesnt matter that people (in Brooklyn and NYC) like seeing professional basketball and other mass entertainment events like concerts, circuses, comedians, etc….Just dont put it in my backyard – We dont care if the best place in NYC and maybe in the country is at AY (b/c of the convergence of so many train lines), we dont care that in the alternative that people will be driving all over the city and inner suburbs to these kind of places , creating pollution and traffic – as long as our little neighborhood (if you want to call that $hithole a neighborhood) is preserved just as we liked it when we moved here (2yrs ago) we dont care about anyone else.
And it doesnt matter that if you build large residential bldsgs and offices at AY, you can maximize the mass transit and pedestrian options, reducing sprawl, traffic, pollution etc…. We want things the way we want them – to hell with the general good!
When I read DDDB post I have to say AMEN – finally a bit of clarity about what they are really about…..
As for AY – there was no bait and switch – it was simply a case of stall, mislead, exaggerate and sue – that plus a financial meltdown and the NIMBYs won a big victory – but the real tragedy isnt that Gehery is out (I frankly thought his stuff was ugly anyway – and I werent all the NIMBYs screaming how ugly it all was too?) – no the real tragedy is that all the delay and frivolous litigation will result in, is years more with a ugly hole at Atlantic & Flatbush and then we will have years of an arena surrounded by parking lots and it will probably be another 50 years before we have anything to be proud of in the heart of our city.
As usual – lies, exaggerations and general F-U-D results in the worst outcome possible – it isnt that there wasnt anything to yell about or demand when it came to AY – its that NIMBY egomaniacs couldnt see the real issues through the lenses of their selfish agenda – and btw go back and look at my posts even 3 years ago on this – I always predicted this was a destinct possibility.
For me Minard Lafever gets the QOTD with his post and Soundfreak please read about DDDB b/c the one thing they are/were and insist on – is no arena.
Here’s a question for the no public money crowd:
Should public money subsidize the (eventual) private development of Gowanus, either as a Superfund site or not? As is, there is no project there that stands on its own economically, yet Brooklyn would be far better off and as a city reap far greater long term benefits by cleaning that thing up.
AY isn’t exactly a Superfund site, but there can be little doubt that Brooklyn would be better off if there was something there.
If you think Gowanus should be left until there’s some magical, economically free-standing option there, then cool, shout about the evils of public subsidy all you want. But if you think that government subsidy, whether Gowanus, or everything currently being done by the Obama admin, has a place… then we’re just talking about a difference of degree and relative benefit, which is a very different convo– and one you cannot be so indignant about as an AY opponent.
As I mentioned, soundfreak, there are legitimate concerns, and I agree that some of the ones you mention above are in that category. Perhaps you have been “trying nicely” but much of the commentary from the DDDB side has been vitriolic and personal. There’s nothing “nice” about it. I lived at 521 Dean for several years so I’m aware of the potential challenges, but I happen to believe they could all be addressed. However I feel that the anti-AY forces aren’t interested in negotiating these aspects, they just want Ratner out and the faster the better. No developer has been interested in this area for more than 40 years. I know, I’ve been in Brooklyn all of that time and that lot doesn’t look much different than it did then. I’m not saying Ratner’s motives are 100% altruistic or that we shouldn’t have independent review of his plans, particularly since it involves public funds. But based on what I’ve read, I believe DDDB simply considers the project something of a personal affront, and as a result want it ended on that basis. I’d prefer if they were a bit more pragmatic in their approach and spent their energy on ensuring this project addresses the concerns you mention above. Instead, in my view, they have chose to simply demonize the Ratner and describe project as one that will “destroy” Brooklyn. Again, that’s a ridiculous notion.