« Foreclosure Trend In Brooklyn: Flat to Down The Real Deal: A Dose of Reality for Crown Heights Market »
December 6, 2007
Extell on the Atlantic Yards Process
The Observer's Eliot Brown sat down earlier this week with Extell Development's Gary Barnett. Among other topics of conversation was the company's failed bid (rendered above) for the Atlantic Yards project.
With regard to Atlantic yards in Brooklyn—you put in the only rival bid to Forest City Ratner’s $4 billion proposal. Why did you enter the bid?
The MTA put out an RFP [Request for Proposals] in the same way they did on the Hudson Yards, we responded the same way.
But a lot of people viewed that as a foregone conclusion before the RFP was even issued. Did you not agree with that?
I hope we don’t have a foregone conclusion on the Hudson Yards. That would make at least four bidders very sad.
The city and the state haven’t partnered with a developer publicly beforehand. What type of chance did you think you had on Atlantic Yards? Did you think that was something of a long shot? You said so, if I remember, in your cover letter [for the bid].
We are shocked—shocked—that we bid $150 million, [Forest City Chairman Bruce] Ratner bid $50 million, yet he somehow managed to get it.
In almost any community meeting for Atlantic Yards, Extell’s name comes up—still.
I think we had a very nice plan and use for that space as well then, but we know when we’re beat.
Ever the politician himself, Barnett goes on to refuse to be critical of the government's handling of process.
Interview with Extell's Gary Barnett [NY Observer]
Extell Bid for Yards Three Times Greater than FCR's [Brownstoner]
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/3138
Comments
shocked, yes, but not surprised given that it was rigged
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 10:31 AM
That proposal was "ick" too. At least it looks lower-rise.
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 10:42 AM
That proposal just looked soooo much nicer (and realistic in terms of size) than Ratner's corrupt sky city...
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 10:45 AM
Yawn. D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!!!
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 11:10 AM
God how I wish we could travel to alternative universes....It would be so fun to see all the people who are know extolling the Extell plan yelling and complaining about how horrible it is if Ratner wasnt around.
Extell=Red Herring for NIMBYs
FSRG
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 11:31 AM
The Extell Plan contains buildings of 20+ stories and is out of context with the surrounding area, one of the biggest complaints of AY opponents. Yet they still support it. Go figure.
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 11:44 AM
To the previous poster - do we really deserve the densest development in the US? Do we really need a glass sheathed building 20 feet from a traffic choked intersection. Should this project has been approved with a ULRUP (sp?). Should taxpayers be paying 2 Billion dollars to FCR. By the way, Mr. Done Deal - when you pay your taxes this year throw in a few hundred dollars for Ratner since you are such a fan.
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 11:54 AM
11:31 AM & 11:44 AM,
guess again! take a minute and use your brain for one second before you burp and fart all over in support of the ratner scam job.
what anti AY people are in support of is a fair bidding process. a process which was clearly subverted and corrupted. why shouldn't Extell have gotten the site considering they offered 3 times the money?
whether they support Extel or not, most people i know support fair play, transparency and legal process. this is what the Extel deal offered and, SURPRISE SURPRISE, it was turned down by the MTA in favor of the opposite. i do think RIGGED is the right word for it.
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 11:56 AM
So let me get this straight, the MTA, who keeps saying they don't have enough money and raising the transit fares, turned down a $150 million bid for a $50 million bid?
So that is $100 million less that MTA has and all the commuters have to foot the bill for the insider deal that Ratner got?
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 12:18 PM
Yes to all questions, 11:54.
AY opponents stand for nothing, but are seemingly opposed to everything.
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 1:20 PM
Not true 1:20pm
AY opponents stand for lots of things, and the number one thing is a fair and legal process.
Ratner stands for a couple of things too. one is greed, one is stealing taxpayer money, one is corruption, and the last is lying.
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 1:50 PM
Ratner's two biggest projects in Brooklyn, MetroDreck and Atlantic Yards both require(d) eminent domain, whereas the Extell plan...didn't. How about that!
Just that alone is enough evidence that Ratner is about greed and abuse.
PLUS Ratner's crapchitect Gehry isn't doing anybody any favors.
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:51 PM
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......
wake me up at the tipoff.
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:36 PM
is that rip van winkle?
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:44 PM
11:56 - the 'true' AY opponents (DDDB et al) were simply against the arena (under any circumstances) and picked up every issue they could find (ED, context, terrorism, Sewage treatment, traffic, shadows, etc, etc,) to forward their NIMBY agenda.
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 5:00 PM
Whatever you feel about DDDb (personally, while I admire their continued resistance to the Ratner plan, I believe they've been deeply divisive within the local community), you really can't accuse them of being against development at the railyards site "under any circumstances" -- per 5:00pm poster. They played a role in convincing Extell to submit a bid. I haven't spoken to anyone in the neighborhood (where I've lived for 8 years) -- with perhaps the exception of some Newswalk residents whose views would be wiped out -- who is against development there. The NIMBY argument is really just a red herring by those who are apparently unconcerned about the lack of public process and the use of taxpayers' monies to fund a private, for-profit developer.
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 5:35 PM
Donedeal? That's funny... then why aren't they building yet?
Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 6:23 PM
Because they are still in the process of demolition.
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 2:22 PM
dddb has been divisive in the community?
are they the ones stealing people's property and state monies?
Posted by: guest at December 8, 2007 12:30 AM
They are not stealing. All processions are legal. In case you hadn't heard, eminent domain is part of the US constitution.
Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 2:08 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.