« Open Thread An Apple a Day Keeps Brokers from Staying Away »

January 26, 2009

Atlantic Yards Looking Increasingly Un-sexy

The Atlantic Yards plan has fallen a long way from the spectacular glass-and-steel arena designed by star architect Frank Gehry and surrounded by 16 high-rises," writes Rich Calder in today's NY Post, which commissioned the new rendering at right, above . "Gehry's 22-acre vision for Prospect Heights now comprises the arena, one or two high-rises and a lot of "temporary" surface parking and other empty space." Look on the bright side: The project design is getting increasingly contextual—it should blend right in with the Atlantic Terminal Mall!
Hoop-La Dies in Brooklyn [NY Post]
Original aerial photo by Jonathan Barkey

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/8114

Comments

What a cop out. That crazy tumble of building blocks was a great idea.

Posted by: dittoburg at January 26, 2009 10:02 AM

i much prefer the latest version's more traditional look than gehry's eyesores.

Posted by: goldie at January 26, 2009 10:07 AM

I'll support any design that has a pedestrian overpass or underpass to get across flatbush and atlantic...

Posted by: northsloperenter at January 26, 2009 10:10 AM

I was looking forward to seeing the all glass Gehry buildings, but this new design makes more sense. Honestly I'd hate to say it, but this brownstone looking design works better with the surrounding Parkslope/Fort greene neighborhoods.

Posted by: ReMiXxd at January 26, 2009 10:11 AM

I trust the taxpayers are still paying for the crappy version? A $2 billion bait and switch.

Posted by: Johnny at January 26, 2009 10:11 AM

A NIMBY would love it. After all that opposition, what do we get in the end - still the stadium now just really ugly. The last step towards complete abandonment.

Posted by: oldrte10 at January 26, 2009 10:11 AM

The design on the left would be known as "Bubble Architecture" in Japan. Anything erected in the 1988-1990 period. The design on the right is appropriate and realistic.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 26, 2009 10:13 AM

Except for the empty plaza and plans for surface parking - its an improvement.

Posted by: fsrg at January 26, 2009 10:17 AM

I think it looks like a 1970's urban renewal scheme in Philadelphia that didn't work, and now its scheduled for demolition. Hopefully it will fall on top of the Atlantic mall.

I'm all for contextual if its done right, but that is just lame. If you can't do contextual, do a great original.

Posted by: dittoburg at January 26, 2009 10:21 AM

I never thought I would hear myself say this but I think the original stadium design is a lot better than this new rendition which reminds me more of the BHOD than brownstone Brooklyn.

The truth is most of us so-called NIMBYs were never against development but against the sheer size and scale of it, and the tax payer benefits Ratner was getting. Not to mention the eminent domain issue and the destruction of some truly wonderful old buildings. I did hate the broken Lego look of some of the buildings but the glass arena could have been a fascinating contrast to the older buildings. Had ratner or Gehry been truly visionary they could have come up with a real plan that integrated new and old in new and eclectic ways.

But instead Ratner opted to be an ego-pig about it, he could have built something really amazing. The new design looks like a penitentiary.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 26, 2009 10:26 AM

Did I misread the article in the newspaper? It seems like we are comparing a design commissioned by the developer with one commissioned by the New York Post. If so, I think we are getting perilously close to jumping some shark.

Posted by: altervoce at January 26, 2009 10:34 AM

Am I missing something? If I'm not mistaken, this rendering was commissioned by the NYPost, not Ratner. If that's the case, it has no relationship to actual proposals on the table. Fairly disingenuous for the Post to do this -obviously everyone takes it literally.

Posted by: squaredrive at January 26, 2009 10:39 AM

The new version no longer looks like it's falling down.

The first thing we do, let's kill all the starchitects.

Posted by: BklynJace at January 26, 2009 10:39 AM

I prefer the old design. But the reactive nimbys will finally get what they wished for. A retrograde coliseum that will look like the old Columbus Circle desired only by philistines.

Posted by: cb6 at January 26, 2009 10:40 AM

Come on - a "brownstone" stadium? How in the world is that contextual? I guess if you consider the Court St. cinema/Barnes & Noble contextual, this would be too. Thing looks like a big shitty birthday cake. Please don't let Marty and the Post play architect. At least Ratner had the good sense to hire (a talented) one, maybe they should too.

Posted by: neilw at January 26, 2009 10:41 AM

Most NIMBYS were not against development. You're simply perpetuating the nimbyism myth instead of thinking in terms of responsible, sustainable area development. Which is all "nimbys" were asking for. And not getting.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 26, 2009 10:43 AM

if they tear down Freddy's im gonna be pissed.

Posted by: Santa at January 26, 2009 10:53 AM

santa--i am with you. what a cool bar.

Posted by: wasder at January 26, 2009 11:00 AM

c'mon let's get this arena construction moving. this will be great for brooklyn.

Posted by: martis at January 26, 2009 11:00 AM

Everyone please read carefully. Both the Post and Brownstoner clearly state that the 'new' rendering is not a new Ratner design - it is commissioned by the NY Post.

"..because knowing is half the battle..."

Posted by: Knickerbocker at January 26, 2009 11:02 AM

Could have had gehry - gonna get more atlantic mall. Good Job Norman! "mission accomplished"

Posted by: lalaland at January 26, 2009 11:30 AM

The Post Building is just a copy of Madison Square Garden. A thing of great beauty in a beautiful neighbourhood.

Posted by: oldtimer at January 26, 2009 11:32 AM

Atlantic Yards opponents were not and are not monolithic. The primary objections stem from the project being crammed down a neighborhood who was (is) in the process of successfuly ridding itself of the nontaxable activities in the arena area. The only parcel that was blighted was the railyards themselves. The culpability lies with the MTA's absence of regard of how the condition of the railyard affects the surrounding activity. Pair these facts with the demolition of landmark worthy strucutres such as the Ward Bakery, Ratner created astroturf (faux grass roots)organizations such as BUILD and the willingness to play the race and class card pretty much sums up why there were so many opponents. Oh yeah, one more thing. The complete absence of community input.

Posted by: BrooklynIsHome at January 26, 2009 11:35 AM

uh, if i may, D-E-A-D D-E-A-L.

Posted by: brokeland at January 26, 2009 11:49 AM

oldtimer, I think it's a cross between MSG and CitiField.

Posted by: altervoce at January 26, 2009 11:53 AM

Frankly, I think they're both hideous. DDDB had a rendering at one point featuring lovely mixed-use buildings with tons of green space that looked awesome.

I think putting an arena at that part of Atlantic is insane. For one thing, it's been statistically proven over and over again that building an arena on taxpayer money DOES NOT BENEFIT THE TAX PAYERS. Arenas do not bring more money into an area than they cost. Period. No matter what the old, white, rich people tell you.

For another thing, the traffic there is already a nightmare. Now you're going to try to bring 60,000 people there every night? Good god.

Posted by: cwbuecheler at January 26, 2009 11:55 AM

I think the real point (and danger) is that at the end of the day, we're going to end up with either a schlocky development that looks more like the hideous existing Ratner-built Atlantic Mall than like anything designed by Frank Gehry, or that nothing gets built at all and we have another 20 years of abandonment and blight at one of the borough's most important intersections (and after families were displaced for no good reason ... although a lot of them made a killing and are probably laughing now at the likes of Daniel Goldstein, whose property is probably worth less today than he paid for it, and a LOT less than he could have sold it to Ratner for a couple of years ago).

Posted by: Park Sloper at January 26, 2009 12:09 PM

The NIMBY's claim that they had any influence over this project good or bad is laughable at best. But I second the notion that this project needs walkways across Flatbush and Atlantic, otherwise it is a giant clusterf*ck.

Posted by: billyboomer at January 26, 2009 12:51 PM

A venue for for a professional sport's franchise in Brooklyn (Again!) as well as for concerts and other attractions within walking distance. That's priceless.

We should have built the west side stadium too and gotten our Giants and Jets back. We'd be taking the "A" Train to the games instead of the turnpike.

Posted by: ou812 at January 26, 2009 12:59 PM

"The NIMBY's claim that they had any influence over this project good or bad is laughable at best."

so your point is that Ratner is a failure or an incompetent boob? which is it?

Posted by: brokeland at January 26, 2009 1:27 PM

the fight to save brooklyn is resulting in:

1) prolonged construction time

2) increasing costs

3) diluted asthetics

thank goodness we have such concerned citizens, what would we do without them?

Posted by: BrooklynLove at January 26, 2009 1:58 PM

hmmm....probably wind up with overpriced, overbuilt, overly ugly developments everywhere. Nothing like arguing against rational, responsible development than by whining over a a badly thought out project now being made worse- by the same developer.

Posted by: bxgrl at January 26, 2009 2:05 PM

"now"???

That doesn't look like 'The Rock'.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 26, 2009 2:28 PM

hmmmm...Probably would have been sitting in the arena by now watching the Brooklyn Nets playing a home game.

Posted by: ou812 at January 26, 2009 3:03 PM

Looks like the parking lot will make a great dog run!

Posted by: Heather at January 26, 2009 3:23 PM

Tell me again why We The Poeple are buying a stadium for Bruce Ratner's team?

Posted by: SnarkSlope at January 26, 2009 3:48 PM

Brooklyn Nets? HA ha ha ha ha ha ha.....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Posted by: bxgrl at January 26, 2009 3:51 PM

From Bold to Bad.
It looks cheap and lacks ambition. It adds nothing. A waste of money.

Posted by: ana belen at January 26, 2009 4:10 PM

Hideous. Yuch.

Posted by: donatella at January 26, 2009 4:40 PM

I suppose those opposed would rather consider a pedestrian mall or community gardens as a viable aletrnatives, maybe an open air fle to sell your junk, all worth the taxpayer expense, contextual, blah, blah, blah. Well, good thing its going to happen anyway, one way or the other. Once it's done you can find something else to complain about to make your lives fulfilled. Go Ratner! Go Nets!

Posted by: ou812 at January 26, 2009 4:57 PM

i suppose those in favor prefer fleecing the public and eminent domain. go figure!

btw, the rendering on the right is not Ratner's on the "Nimbys" it is Murdoch's.

Posted by: brokeland at January 26, 2009 5:42 PM

Brokeland,
You should ask the NY times about fleecing the public and eminent domain. I guarantee you I will be inside this arena, but doubt I will ever set foot in thier shiny new headquarters. Wow what Hypocrasy!

Posted by: ou812 at January 26, 2009 6:09 PM

brokeland - you and johnnyboy need to get together and trade lack of facts.

Posted by: BrooklynLove at January 26, 2009 9:01 PM

lack of facts? let's debate facts. give me your facts and i'll swat them down. ask me for a fact and i'll dunk.

Posted by: brokeland at January 26, 2009 11:40 PM

fact: you haven't cited any.

Posted by: BrooklynLove at January 27, 2009 7:44 AM

it is a fact that ratner is fleecing the public.
it is a fact that ratner is using eminent domain.

what's the dispute there?

Posted by: brokeland at January 27, 2009 9:19 AM

the presence of eminent domain is a fact. ratner is not using public domain, the govt is.

fleecing the public is not a fact. it's your ill-informed opinion.