Worries Aired About Stack Parking Next to Arena


Today the New York Post reports that Atlantic Yards critics commissioned renderings showing it’s impossible for Forest City Ratner to fill the 1,100-spot parking lot mandated by the state next to the Barclays Center without using stacked parking. This doesn’t sit well with some in the area: “The concern, neighborhood residents say, is that hydraulic systems and valet service associated with stack parking slow the entry and exit of cars from the lot, potentially creating bumper-to-bumper traffic on surrounding streets and sending antsy drivers to seek the area’s few remaining curbside spaces.” A rep for Forest City says the developer is “conducting an analysis that we hope will allow” the firm to avoid using stack parking. Atlantic Yards Report takes this “analysis” to mean that Forest City is considering using “a modular system that’s never been tested. And that was discussed more than eight months ago, though no formal plans have never been announced.” The surface-lot block is bounded by Carlton, Vanderbilt, Dean and Pacific; the Post notes that it’s “expected to exist at least a decade” because of the delays with the other Atlantic Yards buildings that have also held up plans for a permanent, underground lot. Meanwhile, Atlantic Yards Watch runs the rendering shown above, depicting how the stack parking could look, and contrasts it with another rendering, reproduced on the jump, that shows how the lot might look if it had to comply with New York City design standards for surface lots. The lot doesn’t have to comply with those standards—which would require landscaping and reduce the number of cars the lot could hold to around 500—because it will be considered temporary, rather than permanent, parking.
Barclays Center in Brooklyn Will Create Parking and Traffic Problems [NY Post]
What if the Barclays Center Parking Lot Was Required to Meet NYC Design Standards? [AY Watch]
The Peril of Car Stackers on the Arena Parking Lot [AY Report]

46 Comment

  • If there isn’t going to be permit parking for those of us who live near the belly of the beast, it will be the biggest FU ever.

  • The real FU is the one that DDDB did on pursuing an all or nothing approach that simply delayed and ran up FCR costs and got nothing for the community (but did enrich Dan Goldstein with $3M)

    Frankly 1100 spots no matter how you lay it out really isnt that much and wont cause much traffic impact

    • Oh really, fsrq? That’s the FU?

      I’ve followed this whole AY saga from the beginning, and the biggest FU was from Marty Markowitz who spent the first year from the 2003 announcement saying “we want to hear from the community” – but what that windbag was really saying was “i only want to hear from people who blindly support the project.”

      Like many of my neighbors, we tried for years to have our voices heard, have improvements made, have community concerns addressed — and “the real FU” is that Marty, Ratner and their stooges snowjobbed everybody and created something that only some gray, paunchy suburbanite politicians can be proud of.

      Try keeping a little perspective before you trot out that $3M Goldstein stat.

  • The more of a hassle is it for people to drive = the less people will drive.

  • The more of a hassle is it for people to drive = the less people will drive.

  • MM is the borough president, which means he has zero real power so if thats who gets your ire up, well so be it – but it is a ridiculous position.

    The only organized opposition had one fundamental position – no arena, at all costs. And pursued that position through years of baseless lawsuits and FUD. That is a fact; and in my opinion that is why now all we see being built is an arena. Had a legitimate strategy been pursued things would have been completed faster, nicer and with more concessions to local residents.
    Regardless of the past – 1100 parking spots is frankly tiny and great news for the neighborhood.

    • Have you been paying attention the last eight years?

      Are you saying there are only two camps? FCR and “the opposition”? Well then what do you expect from an organized opposition except to totally oppose it?

      The reality is that plenty of other groups (Brooklyn Speaks, Municipal Arts Society, Pratt come to mind) and a few politicians tried to improve the project. Plenty of local residents, too. Tried to get other voices heard. Sent letters, attended meetings.

      Every voice that wasn’t bankrolled by Ratner was shut out of the process. So again, what do you expect the “opposition” to do? Sit back and wait for the nice developer to toss some concessions our way?

      I agree that 1100 parking spots is tiny – but there could/should still be less. There are already about 1500 more spots in garages/lots within walking distance of the arena – that’s the big fear.

  • MM is the borough president, which means he has zero real power so if thats who gets your ire up, well so be it – but it is a ridiculous position.

    The only organized opposition had one fundamental position – no arena, at all costs. And pursued that position through years of baseless lawsuits and FUD. That is a fact; and in my opinion that is why now all we see being built is an arena. Had a legitimate strategy been pursued things would have been completed faster, nicer and with more concessions to local residents.
    Regardless of the past – 1100 parking spots is frankly tiny and great news for the neighborhood.

  • The real result of this kind of parking will be a lot of cars double parked or parked on the sidewalk. Lot operators will take keys from patrons who need to get inside for the start of a game or event and promise to park their cars for them.

    Good luck walking around this area with all of the cars that will be blocking sidewalks once this behemoth opens.

  • no chuck i wasnt paying attention, in fact this is the first i have heard or thought about AY

  • A comparison of the two Barclays Center lots: one with stackers and the other meeting the landscape requirements NYC DCP sets for surface parking lots can be found at http://www.atlanticyardswatch.net/what-if-barclays-parking-lot-met-nyc-standards.

    The concern is not just about the use of stackers, it is about both the impact of a larger surface lot with an extended life-span on an existing residential community, and the affect of the lot as a magnet for pedestrians and cars in a way that was never analyzed in any environmental analysis.

    It is not just the stackers. There hasn’t been any analysis of the locating of all the arena patrons’ parking in this one lot either. And Barclays Center will have fewer lay-by lanes, fewer travel lanes and narrower sidewalks. In other words, the environmental analysis is open, but the State is changing the project’s plans to suit the developer even if it increases the degree of risk adverse impacts will be worse for both the community and arena patrons.

  • Dean St. is already double parking central. Why does the city look the other way at the endless double parking between 6th Ave. and Carlton? What’s going to happen on game days when the arena is open?

  • Dean St. is already double parking central. Why does the city look the other way at the endless double parking between 6th Ave. and Carlton? What’s going to happen on game days when the arena is open?

  • When stuff like this comes up, I can imagine FCR executives repeating to themselves over and over again: “This is the cost of monopoly power over the development of 22 acres in a desirable part of Brooklyn” as they close their eyes and try to stay focused on the task at hand, tuning out the criticism that comes from others.

    The trouble is, for local residents, the headache is far from temporary. The form of the development is obviously flawed, and the timeline is obviously a fiction. In fact, as this issue demonstrates, there are numerous details that have not been thought through by FCR, despite the attempts at enlightenment and education put forth by other groups, including the Community Boards, the Pratt Center, the MAS, etc.

    I think that FCR’s reputation as a company that is bottom line focused and not at all above cheating, fudging the facts, and engaging local communities with bare-knuckle tactics is well earned. It’s hard to bring government to account for large developments such as this one, but even harder get a privately held company to take responsibility for the public good. It is laughable that commenters like FSRQ demonize people in opposition to a company that is so plainly thuggish.

    But, as they say, it’s a done deal, and it’s our problem now, and I suspect that FCR will find themselves subject to constant second-guessing and criticism such as this for the duration of the project. I am sure that FCR will spend money to hire people to deal with these issues full time, and that they will employ dishonest tactics as necessary to deflect responsibility, defer commitments, and mollify and fragment community opposition over the life of the development. Every penny that FCR spends on this effort will yield a dollar once the development is finished.

  • Point of clarification:

    “The lot doesn’t have to comply with those standards—which would require landscaping and reduce the number of cars the lot could hold to around 500—because it will be considered temporary, rather than permanent, parking.”

    No, the lot doesn’t have to comply with the Zoning Resolution because, as a state project, Empire State Development overrode the zoning, including this provision.

  • I’m a bit confused. Wouldn’t a parking garage attached to the stadium pay for itself in like a year? Is it that difficult to build one?

  • I really think blaming Dan Goldstein for all of this is ridiculous. He wasn’t the only person on the planet who was against FCR and their vision of AY. Even his settlement is peanuts compared to the money that’s been spent to sell this to people who have had their eyes open to the reality of the shadiness of the whole process. And it’s the gift that keeps on giving, more and more excuses, backpedaling, “explanations” and the like.

    Lest we forget, in the beginning, the stadium/arena was the icing on the cake, not the cake itself. Now it seems it will be the whole party.

  • A few points to clarify the full scope of the parking and traffic problem the arena will generate:

    - 1100 parking spaces are the number that FCR is required to provide on project site not the number of parking spots in the neighborhood or the number of cars driving to the arena.
    - FCR also owns a 650 spot lot (only 25% full in the evening) at Atlantic Center.
    -1400 vacant spots exist in other garages within a 1/2 mile.
    -About 3,000 car and taxi trips will occur pre-game (6-7 pm) through some of Brooklyn’s most congested streets at rush hour according to the FEIS.

    If you read the linked article on Atlantic Yards Report you’ll see that FCR’s own traffic consultant, Sam Schwartz Engineering, believes that the concentration of 1100 cars on block 1129 will not work because it will cause excessive queuing.

  • MM DDDB was the main litigant in virtually all the (ultimately dismissed) litigation. From the (ridiculous) ED lawsuit to the attack on the Environmental Impact Statement, DDDB and Dan Goldstein were the main protagonists.
    I am not blaming Dan Goldstein personally for every delay and development, but it is undeniable that DDDB was essential in delaying this project for a few critical years….and in the end (which is the most important part), got no positive change that I can see.

    Compare that to what happened at Dock Street for example or the rezoning of Park Slope or Hudson River Park, etc…

    • Fsrq, we’ve been doing this argument on this site for 5 years, and you’ve been a steady backer of FCR the entire time. Which is fine, but let’s not muddy the waters by changing history. DDDB was the public voice of the opposition, and DG was its public face, but they were backed by surrounding community groups, politicians, other grass-roots groups, and many, many more people.

      That was, and is, because this whole project has been tainted by scandal and influence peddling, and back room deals from the beginning, and people said, “enough”. I think history will show that because of DDDB and its supporters, no other developer, at least not in this city, will try such overreaching and underhandedness again. Our tax dollars are not an ATM for powerful RE concerns. They may have lost the battle, but they didn’t lose the war. Lots of things have gotten built here since AY began, so it’s not like it’s not possible to build in this city. But it should be impossible to do another project in this manner.

    • It is precisely because of DDDB that the other developments you cite actually had more positive outcomes.

      AY may have been to corrupt from the beginning, but, like MM says, the opposition to it (thanks mostly to DDDB) has ensured that the city and developers don’t try the same underhanded tactics on the same scale.

      Or, at least, it has made the impacted communities more aware — either way, same effect.

  • MM DDDB was the main litigant in virtually all the (ultimately dismissed) litigation. From the (ridiculous) ED lawsuit to the attack on the Environmental Impact Statement, DDDB and Dan Goldstein were the main protagonists.
    I am not blaming Dan Goldstein personally for every delay and development, but it is undeniable that DDDB was essential in delaying this project for a few critical years….and in the end (which is the most important part), got no positive change that I can see.

    Compare that to what happened at Dock Street for example or the rezoning of Park Slope or Hudson River Park, etc…

  • MM it may be arguable how much DDDBs agenda was controlled by Dan Goldstein and how much was dictated by the “community” but the idea that DDDB and AY had any affect on how RE deals get done in this city is ludicrous.
    How can you explain Coney Island or Willets Point or the tax dollars backing up Hudson Yards or Kingsbridge. Please point to one project that in your estimation has been affected by what went on at AY?

    • Ludicrous to you perhaps, fsrq, but not to the rest of us. Do you really think any other intelligent big developer, or even FCR, will chance having their huge projects held up by a bunch of rag-tag community organizers again? Everyone reads the papers, or the blogs. People in affected communities are going to want to see an above board process if public moneys or public land is on the table, and developers are not going to want to spend their money on lawyers.

      No one said there will never be projects with taxpayer’s money ever again. Or that there shouldn’t be such projects. I’m just saying that they won’t be rubberstamped again, without public scrutiny, and communities won’t just think they can’t stop city hall. That’s a good thing.

      • ” I think history will show that because of DDDB and its supporters, no other developer, at least not in this city, will try such overreaching and underhandedness again. Our tax dollars are not an ATM for powerful RE concerns. They may have lost the battle, but they didn’t lose the war.”

        “I’m just saying that they won’t be rubberstamped again, without public scrutiny, and communities won’t just think they can’t stop city hall.”

        You are dillusional, history will only show that it has been and will continue to be repeated.

        As long as we are throwing out emminant domain abuse, add your precious NY Times HQ to the list.

  • So in other words you can not cite a single development where the circumstances of AY had a significant impact.

    • Moynihan Station
      Hudson Yards
      Willets Point

    • Moynihan Station
      Hudson Yards
      Willets Point

      • Moynihan Station – unfunded and inadequate, nothing related to AY has impacted this development. – if I am wrong please tell me SPECIFICALLY how AY set any precedent for this (as it stands now)
        Hudson Yards – Almost the exact same situation as AY – sold to a single developer for ‘below market’ with hundreds of millions of tax subsidies and billions more in infrastructure expenses for the city, to ultimatley build 26M sq ft of residential and office space all owned by a single developer – please tell me how DDDB set a precedent that “changed large scale development in this city forever???”
        Willets Point – mired in years of expensive litigation with property owners claiming abuse of Eminent Domain. So far no funding or plan brought forth. again how did DDDB have a positive effect?

  • tons of public money used for this AY project sucks big time. Peeps need to make those politicians involve pay big time (vote their behinds out if not already done so). but stadium is way better than the big open hole in the ground

  • The zoning overrides were provided in order to create a project built in full in ten years, and DCP landscaping guidelines were not detailed as overridden in the project agreements.

    There are a host of reasons why changes to the lot will likely alter anticipated conditions in the neighborhoods around the project — and for some make them worse. In one single not well-known example, the number of arena patrons driving through Fort Greene and Clinton Hill streets may be increased because they are now going to be parking several blocks further east than originally anticipated.

    The project’s environmental analysis anticipates drivers headed to the lot from CT, Westchester, and the Bronx are more likely to drive through Fort Greene and Clinton Hill than if they were to park in the now delayed (and smaller) permanent underground arena parking in the arena block.

  • BTW, the lawsuits against AY are not at an end. In July of 2011, the NYS Supreme Court ruled that the revised timeline, going out to 2025, required a Supplemental EIS (so that original lawsuit apparently wasn’t rubbish FSRQ) and ordered the ESDC to perform one.

    Needless to say, FCR and the ESDC have appealed – the hearing is tomorrow at 2 PM. Happy VD, FCR!

    And then, of course, you have the ongoing lawsuit against BUILD and FCR filed by job seekers (and AY supporters) promised employment they didn’t get, not to mention the urging by three elected officials (including one, Karim Camara, who admitted his past support of the project) of the establishment of an oversight corporation between the ESDC and the project.

    The more the Rat’s crap comes to light the fewer friends this project has – deservedly. It’s just a shame that it’s come this far.

  • BTW, the lawsuits against AY are not at an end. In July of 2011, the NYS Supreme Court ruled that the revised timeline, going out to 2025, required a Supplemental EIS (so that original lawsuit apparently wasn’t rubbish FSRQ) and ordered the ESDC to perform one.

    Needless to say, FCR and the ESDC have appealed – the hearing is tomorrow at 2 PM. Happy VD, FCR!

    And then, of course, you have the ongoing lawsuit against BUILD and FCR filed by job seekers (and AY supporters) promised employment they didn’t get, not to mention the urging by three elected officials (including one, Karim Camara, who admitted his past support of the project) of the establishment of an oversight corporation between the ESDC and the project.

    The more the Rat’s crap comes to light the fewer friends this project has – deservedly. It’s just a shame that it’s come this far.

  • This is all much ado about nothing. Will there be traffic? Yeah! But this is NYC. There are traffic jams all over! People will adjust.

    Meanwhile I’ll be there for Nets v. Knicks. Linsanity, baby!

  • Traffic in this area is already the biggest nightmare in Brooklyn. The idea to build a stadium here was moronic.

    The stadium in downtown San Francisco has turned out to be an asset that has improved the neighborhood (the design and location are beautiful) but traffic was not particularly bad in those few blocks to start with.

  • Traffic in this area is already the biggest nightmare in Brooklyn. The idea to build a stadium here was moronic.

    The stadium in downtown San Francisco has turned out to be an asset that has improved the neighborhood (the design and location are beautiful) but traffic was not particularly bad in those few blocks to start with.