« Catsimatidis, the Credit Crunch, and the Future of Downtown 73 Pineapple Gets Unanimous Thumbs-Up at LPC »
February 22, 2008
Atlantic Terminal Station Gets Glassy
Progress on the LIRR station at the Atlantic Terminal continues to ever so slowly inch forward. As shown above, workers have started to install some of the the structure's glass panes. The rendering beneath the photo is what the finished product is supposed to look like, according to the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership.
Atlantic Terminal Station Starting to Show its Face [Brownstoner] GMAP
Rendering from the DBP.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/3929
Comments
This has been the slowest construction I've seen in life. It's not like building a new subway system, it's only a station. I don't want to suggest five years, but that's probably how long it will take to finally see the new facade.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 10:03 AM
If it takes this long for the terminal, how long will it truly take for AY?
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 10:07 AM
Lipstick on a pig.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 10:08 AM
Am I the only one who thinks that the slow progress and unbelievably labyrinthine subway access it creates are deliberate on the part of Ratner?
Maybe he just wants to get the neighborhood back for daring to oppose his will?
Posted by: etmthree at February 22, 2008 10:09 AM
Think, people! Why on earth would Ratner not have done this entrance at the same time as the rest of the building if it were within his scope, thus obviating the additional costs of a come-back operation? Could it be that the MTA hasn't been able to get its act together until now, that the responsibility for creating the entrance was always theirs and that the current entrance builders are contracted directly to the MTA? I've got $100 that says that is precisely the case.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 10:27 AM
but why, why, why does it all have to be so ugly? It's so enervating - this and all the terrible new development on 4th avenue really piss me off.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 10:36 AM
Third class fugly assed crap.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 10:44 AM
I'd like to see a futuristic shot of the corner of Atlantic ave going towards Pathmark.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 10:55 AM
Hmm- I usually agree wholeheartedly with those who decry new structures in BK as ugly and out of context. But somehow this one doesn't upset me in the least- it has (at lest from what I can tell from the rendering) a rather pleasant 1930's Deco train terminal look to it.
Agreed, though, that this project is moving at such a glacial pace as to be somewhat suspicious.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 10:57 AM
it truly is a labyrinthine station. very poor design. why does Ratner do these things to the people of Brooklyn??
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 10:58 AM
Don't worry. If the yards get built, you won't see this for 10 years because of the construction dust and after that, 'cause of the smog.
Posted by: Johnny at February 22, 2008 11:03 AM
I actually don't think the design is too bad (unlike the glass monstrosity behind it).
Posted by: Park Sloper at February 22, 2008 11:16 AM
I'm no Ratner fan but I gotta agree with the 1027am poster. Having lived near this station since 1984, I can safely say that there is no end to the MTA's complete incompetence in managing this location. I do appreciate that about 5 years ago they completed a hugely complex engineering task when the existing 2/3/4 lines had to be suspended over the pedestrian hallways beneath while the latter were renovated. But, still, phuleeze -- this station has been undergoing major work for 20+ years. Can't wait to see what happens when the residents of 6,500 new AY apartments start pouring through the entrances, passageways, and platforms of this nightmare station.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 11:18 AM
Has anyone checked out the sweet new "steakhouse" in Atlantic Center? That place is gonna be a DESTINATION!! Amazing that Tipsy McStagger's failed in the same spot.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 11:19 AM
You people are all a bunch of whining babies who will complain about anything (especially if it involves Ratner)
Ratner has NOTHING to do with the subway entrances, labrinth of tunnels or even the construction of this station. This is, was and will always be the purview of the MTA. This also includes the slow construction.
Additionally the station itself looks like it will be very nice and far better than anything thats been there in decades. For god sake what the f>ck makes you people satisfied except stuff built 100 years ago!
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 11:24 AM
The MTA is one big scam. I don't understand why no one has conducted a thorough investigation of their books. They have been defrauding New Yorkers for years. I wish some enterprising journalist out there would pick up the story.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 11:26 AM
The MTA and Ratner sleep under the same crack rock.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 11:37 AM
11:24, this is some generic metropolis POMO design that would have worked for a Superman comic in the mid 80's, not an actual city with people in current day. There's a lot of great new architecture being built in the city, and one great new building in Brooklyn. This is not it.
What if we were to treat all portals and terminals with great works of architecture?
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 12:30 PM
"There's a lot of great new architecture being built in the city,"
99% of the posters here would not agree - but you care to cite examples so we can know what you were hoping for/like as a frame of reference
also why doesnt this design "work"
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 12:44 PM
We've got buildings by Foster, Piano, Herzog and DeMeuron, Sejima, the Gehry IAC, The Standard Hotel, all the Meier buildings, the Nouvel building is beautiful and restrained, all of which have happened in just the past few years.
This generic station plan has glass, yes, but it is a Post Modern design straight out of a handbook. It looks symmetrical, soul-less, and arbitrary. It would be at home in a closed-down city center area when all the commuters have gone home for the day. Why is downtown Brooklyn being designed this way? Why not put in some effort, try something? Any young designer would salivate at the chance to tackle the entrance to a large transportation portal in a real city. You don't even need a big brand name!
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 1:01 PM
Looks fine to me. Less hideous than anything else that's been built in that area in years.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 1:16 PM
Oh Scott Templeton, you make me all warm and fuzzy with your assertiveness.
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 1:54 PM
why does the tall building behind this entrance keep its lights on all night long?
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 2:08 PM
Thanks so much, 1:54. Just doing my job. If you're interested, I've got an interesting story on some shocking murders of homeless men in Baltimore in current issues of The Sun.
Best,
Scott Templeton
Posted by: guest at February 22, 2008 5:26 PM
Hey, I gotta admit... that actually doesn't look all that bad. It's a more classic, Art Deco-ish facade rather than postmoderncrapism. I'll take classic approach over that any day.
I also got agree with 11:24... people who are whining and complaining about this building probably aren't old enough to know a time when for decades this space was first the cemetary plot for a post office, then a huge, gaping Ground Zero-ish hole. So honestly, put a sock in it, ppl.
Posted by: guest at February 23, 2008 2:18 PM
pathmark at the corner = crazy congestion!
Posted by: guest at February 25, 2008 10:46 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.