Gehry Officially Off Yards Project

As usual everyones knee jerk hatred of Ratner blinds them from the real issues here.
Frankly look at the Firms website - 11217 posted it above

Virtually everyone of their designs is as attractive or MORE attractive than Gehery - sure they dont have the "name" but who the F cares about the name. We want a nice arena that fits into the area and maintains the streetwall - it looks as if most of their designs do just that.

The REAL issue is simple - will Ratner be allowed to build massive parking lots around this arena. If DDDB and the rest of these NIMBY idiots cared at all for Brooklyn (as opposed to their own self-aggrandizement) they would be rallying to prevent this arena from becoming a 'suburban' arena surrounded by parking, instead of complaining about the loss of a design they originally said was ugly, dangerous (from terrorists I believe) and too expensive.

While I acknowledge Ratner's Atlantic Mall was horrible - he actually has amassed a decent portfolio of nice buildings including the two towers he is building now (Dekalb and Beekman) not to mention that he built probably the most iconic Brooklyn Building in Downtown Brooklyn. So stop worrying about architechture and focus on parking - it is FAR more important

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 10:36 AM

One Pierrepont Plaza

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 10:52 AM

"Did anyone really think that rich people buying top of the line luxury apartments would do so in the same building as those with affordable housing? No rich person I ever met. They don't pay that kind of money to be part of the community- they pay to be away from it."

BxGrl - you clearly dont know too many "rich people" (not that Ratner's residential buildings were really going to be marketed to the truly "rich" - unless you are like all the politicians that say anyone who makes over 250K is rich (unless we are talking about Rent Stabilization, then it is middle class)

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 11:01 AM

Brklyn Chicken - by Ratner? are you kidding...Are you paid by DDDB or the Knicks -
no offense but when you say stuff like that you make yourself sound like a total moron.

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 11:09 AM

Oldtimer - Lets do a fair walk ok......

Walk from the subway down Atlantic, right on Carlton, Right on Pacific - up to Flatbush and back to Atlantic - Frankly if MSG was the future for this site (which it is not) it would be an improvement (and before the anti Ratner people get in an uproar - the above route has been $hithole for the last 40yrs - long before Ratner was involved)

BxGrl - all I am contending is that you are way wrong that people who could afford the "Luxury Apartments" that Ratner proposes (i.e. Market rate which at the time was around $650sq ft give or take) live near, next to and on top of the same demographics as the people who would qualify for the affordable housing component. There are millions of examples of such groups living side by side all over Brooklyn and the rest of NYC

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 11:27 AM

In order:
The present rail yards are ugly and difficult to navigate

Yes we agree HORRIBLE is a better word

The new shopping malls are eyesores.

No the Atlantic Mall was originally an eyesore and is now just really really ugly - the Atlantic Terminal and BONY building is attractive and a vast improvement.

The Flatbush/Atlantic Avenue is a dangerous road to cross

Yeah I guess - all 6 lane roads sort of fall in that catagory

PC Richard building ? How was that ever allowed to be built?

Cause he owned the land...but yes HORRIFIC is a good description

Frank Gehry is not all that, he keeps doing Bilbao over and over and they are not well constructed.

He has some nice buildings IAC, Beekman Tower but I agree its just a name brand

Gehry was never going to do the working drawings anyway.

I have no idea - how do you?

The streets will be gridlocked during games and shows.

Maybe - lets block the building of Parking Lots ok?

Jobs created will be in security and selling popcorn.

And Building management and event coordination, and in technology infrastructure, and Advertising sales, and lighting & sound engineering, and in the trades and in lots of other stuff too

Architectural drawings will take a year and construction five, so we are looking at 2016 before the games begin. Unless we get the Olympics then stuff gets fast tracked.

Maybe - although Yankee Stadium and Citi field were done much faster

The bottom line is money. It is what Ratner (Is that a made up name)Bloomberg, Paterson and Markowitz want.

Stupid comment - do you really think Patterson or Bloomberg are going to get $ out of this???? - Patterson had ZERO to do with AY development (he is a temp and accidental Governor) and I dont think Bloomberg is looking for $

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 11:40 AM

Bxgrl - people who qualify for affordable housing under the tax abatement laws are FAR from the same demographics as the homeless.....further they are generally higher economically than the average family living in the "projects" - yet all across this city including only a few blocks away, Million dollar homes are literally within spitting distance of projects....

I think you should just drop the argument Bxgrl - because there is ZERO evidence in this city that buyers of expensive apartments (as opposed to the mega rich) wont (or even do not want) to live and be involved in communities that have significant portions of working but relatively poor people.

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 11:46 AM

oldtimer - cynicism is fine but you have to keep it in reality; alleging that politicians are supporting AY for personal financial benefit seems a bit over the top - especially when you talk of Patterson, who has had essentially nothing to do with AY and Bloomberg who by virtually all accounts made his $ honestly and has given away enough $ while being mayor to build Atlantic Yards all by himself. And he does so mostly quietly and other than at Johns Hopkins, off the top of my head, I can think of no things he has had named for himself either.

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 12:00 PM

grip100692 - Huh?

I am not saying No affluent people want to be secluded but seriously - except for the western part of the upper east side, the core of the west village and along the park on the west side - even in the neighborhoods you cited the "rich" people are far from secluded from much poorer people.

Obviously virtually ALL people, if given the choice - would chose not to live in a ghetto made up of the urban underclass - but that is FAR from the issue I am disagreeing with BxGrl about - people who qualify for affordable housing are all WORKING people and often far from "poor", and in virtually every neighborhood in this city (except for a few pockets) affluent people live side by side with such people and LOVE it.

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 12:09 PM

"your relentless promotion of said design"

Not sure that is even possible - since the design has now changed.

So does your relentless opposition indicate that you are a build-nothing NIMBY???

Here is my general position so you know:

Having a hole in the ground and abandoned lots in the middle of our boro and next door to the largest transportation hubs in the country (by number of lines) is entirely unacceptable to me.

Such a location should be developed as densely as possible to take advantage of the mass transit that is there and could be added in future generations (this is the only sustainable way to develop to minimize sprawl and traffic). AY is a once in a 100 yr opportunity - we will likely never again in our lifetimes see such a large parcel available for development in such a central (walkable) and mass-transit accessible area.

Having large/tall buildings near (not necessarily next to) low rises is not a big deal - Brooklyn Heights is a perfect example as is plenty of neighborhoods in Manhattan -

Having a mass entertainment facility in a walkable and mass transit accessible location is a great amenity and the proper place to build such a facility.

Ratner has had some major success in helping Brooklyn develop from a place once viewed as in permanent decline to one that is considered a viable city of the 21st century...he has also had some failures, that being said - he is not the anti-christ and therefore I instinctively react negatively to people who try to say such things with zero evidence.

I believe their is a contingent of people in this city that oppose all change and will stop at nothing to derail progress and development - I find these people to be short-sited and selfish.

I call things as I see them and have no hidden motive, I will derive no economic benefit from AY - unless my residence (within 10blocks) appreciates in value - which I do not predict - AY or not.

I appreciate historical buildings and landmarks and believe they should be preserved whenever possible, but I also know that change, and development is essentially to maintain NYC as a viable place for my offspring and their offspring.

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 12:31 PM

grip100692 - The luxury apartments that Ratner plans for AY by in large were not aimed at people who make north of 400K a year, nor would virtually ANYONE making 20K or less qualify for affordable housing under the guidelines currently in place. A 1M apartment (the high end of Ratners plans from what I understand) is affordable at current interest rates to a family making significantly less than 400K (round numbers a 1M apartment, financed should have a carry charge of around 5500 a mo give or take)

As for the aesthetics -the past and continued (albeit slower) sales of fedder apartments and the virtually universally decried 4th Ave Condos belies you assertion that people wont buy in (generally considered) "ugly" buildings.

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 12:38 PM

MM - the "cap" you cite refers to a relatively large family. No childless couple making 110K is going to come anywhere near qualifying for the affordable component. And while I appreciate your concern for the truly poor, the fact that a teacher (for example), with kids could still live in a brand new apartment in our boros center - is frankly not "bogus"

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 12:47 PM

Bxgrl - I originally opposed the "unity" plan because IMO it was not dense enough given the location, had no commercial component and I wanted an arena (for the reasons stated above) - was it viable - I do not know but building over the railyards is definitely expensive and I suspect that the upside might not have been there as conceived. Also it seemed a bit too beloved by the AY opposition who generally would have been expected to oppose something like that - and I suspect that it was touted as a tactic to stop Ratner, and had it been pursued, groups would have bitterly fought building that plan as well. That being said - given where we are now - I would take that plan if it was on the table (its not and wont be)

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 12:55 PM

grip100692 - your arguments are getting desperate now.....your original premise was that people who are rich enough to afford to buy in Ratner's buildings wouldnt live with "poor" people. Now you are changing it to say that AY will push out the poor people.

Well 1st you cant "push" out the projects, they are protected as low income housing; second in virtually every "rich" neighborhood you cited, except maybe the upper east-side there are 'projects' alongside very expensive homes - ever been to boreum hill? and you know what - for the most part people seem to manage fine. Finally AY is nowhere near the projects on Myrtle Ave

Posted by: fsrg at June 5, 2009 1:31 PM