DDDB Holds Fifth Fundraiser Against the Yards
Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, the Atlantic Yards watchdog organization, held its fifth annual Walk Don’t Destroy fundraiser on Saturday, which raised over $40,000 according to the Atlantic Yards Report. City Council Member Letitia James, DDDB spokesman Daniel Goldstein, actor John Turturro, and about 200 others walked the 2.3-mile route, which included a stop at Borough…
Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, the Atlantic Yards watchdog organization, held its fifth annual Walk Don’t Destroy fundraiser on Saturday, which raised over $40,000 according to the Atlantic Yards Report. City Council Member Letitia James, DDDB spokesman Daniel Goldstein, actor John Turturro, and about 200 others walked the 2.3-mile route, which included a stop at Borough Hall, headquarters of Borough President Marty Markowitz, a supporter of the Atlantic Yards development. This is about working-class people, Ms. James said as she marched across Atlantic and Flatbush Avenues, according to The New York Times. This is about saving our homes and businesses against billionaires. We want our community back. The cash raised by the event will presumably go towards DDDB’s efforts to prevent the Atlantic Yards stadium and residential development project, such as its current lawsuit against the MTA for negligence of due process in its sale of land to developer Forest City Ratner.
Staying Power at Fifth DDDB Walkathon [AYR]
Walking Against the Bulldozers [NY Times]
Atlantic Yards: Suit Filed Against MTA [Brownstoner]
Photo by Tracy Collins
be_rude: a few corrections/comments:
1. there *was* a beautiful landmark (in my opinion and that of the landmark commission) that has been torn down: the ward bread bakery building. and there are beautifully restored buildings (atlantic arts, spaulding building) and others that could be restored (475 dean) that would be demolished. i don’t think anyone is against development over the railyard.
2. call them what you want, but DDDB fighting eminent domain abuse, cronyism, zoning overrides, backroom deals, various tax and subsidy shenanigans, etc, etc is the kind of NIMBYism that i’ll support every day. don’t you care that we’d be getting such a bad deal for the nearly $1B it will cost us, and the lost opportunity to actually build something we can afford?
3. i don’t believe it’s clear that if ratner had no opposition that he’d have built what he said he’d build, as there was and still is no obligation for him to build what he says he’ll build. and, the entire project could not have been built before the financial crisis, even with his initial optimistic schedule, so right now we’d most likely be left with some partially complete project for some undetermined very long amount of time. i’m happy that we still have a clean slate instead of being locked into whatever ratner may have started.
4. the dodgers didn’t want to build on the atlantic yards site. they wanted to build on the atlantic terminal and atlantic mall site. why doesn’t ratner just tear down those eyesores and build his arena there, free and clear of eminent domain?
5. make no mistake: the project *might* happen, whatever it may become. but thanks to dddb’s continued opposition, we just might avoid being saddled with a money-losing, eminent-domain abusing, ratner monopoly on 22 acres of prime brooklyn real estate.
6. thanks guys for looking out for our community.
a “long time, first time” here, in the parlance of sports talk callers… Guess it is just the insanity — admittedly, on both sides — that finally prompted me to join the fray.
A few random comments first. 1) “NotIgnorant” has to be the most ironic moniker on this blog given his/her oh-so-intelligent offerings on this topic. 2) 10:36 last night, BrooklynLove, effing hilarious … right on.
It is an understatement to call this issue divisive, and no one is going to convince the most entrenched to switch sides, but let’s call a spade a spade. As someone already noted yesterday, this whole DDDB campaign really smacks of a whiney NIMBY objection to progress that’s cloaked itself in all sorts of socially responsible claims to seem more palatable to new members/donors, keep the trendy $$ flowing, and keep the legal fight alive. Let’s not kid ourselves, though, this isn’t Jackie Kennedy fighthing to save Grand Central. There is no beautiful historic landmark in danger of being torn down, rather there is a desolate rail yard (as has widely been noted). And no, NotIgnorant, this urban “wasteland” was not created by Ratner, it’s been around for years. Will some people be inconvenienced, unfortunately yes. Is Ratner the best man for the job, maybe/probably not. Will the subways be more crowded, yes. But in the end, will an urban wasteland be transformed into something actually useable and hopefully pleasant… YES. That’s progress, folks, and from the tone of things you’d think none of us live in New York City, where all this stuff is commonplace.
We can debate ad nauseum about whether the design is good or not (one thing’s clear, it would have been much _better_ had the project started on schedule, without delay by DDDB: the Frank Gehry design became too expensive after groundbreaking was delayed into the credit crisis and beyond due to all this senseless legal posturing), but in a few years I for one will happily walk the few blocks from my home to see top-tier sports back in Brooklyn. The Dodgers wanted to build on the very same site many years ago, precisely because it is conveniently right on top of an LIRR station and just about every subway line in the city (so will it really bring all that much more auto traffic??), and if Robert Moses had let them perhaps they’d still be the Brooklyn Dodgers today, but I digress.
Make no mistake, folks, the writing is on the wall. This project will happen, but thanks to DDDB’s continued naive opposition, the site will just stagnate for longer and the design will become more watered down. Thanks guys, way to look out for our community.
It is a “wasteland” because Ratner made it so. Simple. The “movie set” you see was created by Ratner, he is director, and he is controlling you all quite well. The buildings that were there, were not falling apart.
As for coverage “on the other side,” they get to be in bed with the NY Times enough said. If you don’t like that, take it up with Bloomberg who wants to get rid of the Public Advocate.
Boo hoo rich developer and Russian Oligarch are not getting their just coverage on Brownstoner? Spare us.
working class – at least one household member, more often than not two to make ends meet, working in a manual or low paid office job. Welfare class – not working class.
AY is a big scam. I don’t care how many stats you try to pimp.
ratner’s a scumbag, period. Mark Twain said that there are 3 kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics…
I live in Brooklyn as I have all my life and the infrastructure of the area will not sustain the additional traffic, that’s commomn sense that anyone can see w/out reading a report. So, who’s going to pay to widen the street? Oh, I forgot they’re saying everyone is going to be using public trans… have you ever been on the platform at Atlantic in the morning, there’s people practically falling off it’s so crowded, it’s simple common sense to say that a huge new Super-Development would add to this problem. Who cares about these dangerous crowding conditions? Not the city, not Developer-blowing Bloomberg, not Ratner, not the MTA who actually sold the land for less than another bidder offered. So tell me contrstruction lobby guy, wtf? and that’s not a rhetorical question Nelson…
several thoughts:
1. eminent domain would be used to take property from owners (residents and businesses) as well as to move out renters.
2. i think eminent domain is abused when it transfers private property from one private entity to another private entity in the pursuit of increased revenues or some subjective “public benefit” as opposed to an explicit public use, like a public school or railway. this is a slippery slope that could leave all property owners at risk if someone only needs to convince the state that they could make more “productive use” of your property than you. “public benefit” is too vague and open to interpretation.
3. i want development over the rail yards, but not if it means we (taxpayers) are paying far too high a price with little or no benefit.
4. i think the rail yards should be divided into smaller parcels that multiple developers bid on for the right to develop, like battery park city. i think it’s a bad idea to have one man, bruce ratner, in control of such a large piece of central brooklyn (atlantic yards is 22 acres + atlantic terminal mall + atlantic center + metrotech)
5. an arena in the middle of a residential neighborhood is not a good idea. ny city zoning forbids this, but this zoning was overridden by the state.
6. redevelopment of the area was underway (newswalk condos, atlantic arts building, spalding building, 475 dean, etc) before atlantic yards. the ward bread bakery was being considered to be turned into a hotel+shops. once the ED cat was let out of the bag, this all ground to a halt. no sane developer is going to risk having their property taken, so most will sit on the sidelines to see what happens. who knows where we’d be today if the threat of ED never existed? i suspect that many of the now vacant lots would have already been built on, the historic ward bakery might have been renovated. i know that i would not be in such strong opposition if there was no threat of ED.
if brownstoner doesn’t give the same volume of coverage to the other side of the coin – lawsuits defeated, bonds sold, constuction updates, then i’m taking a virtual corn-studded dump on this blowg. if i see you at a nets game ill gut you.
i used to live right near AY and this last year had to go around the corner once a week. while i’ll buy that there was some uptick in the hood prior to ratner, nothing but something big was going to fix empty railroad tracks and desolate streets. the area is just a big nothing. it looks like some movie version of an inner city wasteland. living around there was somewhat scary – threats weekly or more and it was just unpleasant.
totally agree with Benson that few if any could manage to get through the city nonsense to change this area to something positive. there’s nothing to save there – it’s crap.
ratner plays the system well, that’s part of the deal – knowing people, getting favors, whatever. i just don’t care! i wasn’t gonna do it and few could.
let progress continue. bring on new buildings and the stadium! this will put Brooklyn front and center in the national mindset and it will help all our property values.
antidope
“i also am a bit mystified by the uproar that moving a renter seems to cause. i’m for old folks and all but i don’t understand why living as a renter somewhere for 10-, 20-, or 40-years entitles one to live in the same place ad infinitum. RS laws take care of these situations. if we don’t like the results let’s start by changing RS rules.
this of course also makes me a bull on AY.”
Perhaps it does not entitle you, but when the argument by the so called “community” that is all for the taking, to build an arena, cry out, “we were born and raised here,” etc. ad finitum” blah blah blah it kind of puts a hole in the public opinion.
Tenants have no rights what so ever, they will be no “taking care of.”
Not everyone can be bought, but many folks on here think that is the bottom line. If you get “paid” then bend over for a rich developer from Cleveland, who resides on the upper east side, who has bought the part of the community that he needed to (BUILD) in order to make you believe that you and the public will benefit from this.
Partnering with ACORN was just a disguise to look like he gives a crap about low income people, or even basketball for that matter. Take the usual protestors, pay them off, shut them up and there you go.