« Thursday Links Open Thread »

September 3, 2009

Atlantic Yards Taps New Arena Architect

atlantic-yards-b-090309.jpgForest City Ratner, the developer of the Atlantic Yards project, has found a new architect for the arena to be built for the Nets, reports the Observer. After dropping Frank Gehry, the firm has been on the lookout for a new architect as well as for a way to save face. They settled on SHoP, a New York-based firm that is young and in demand; since SHoP has no arena experience, Forest City Ratner will continue to work with institutional design specialists Ellerbe Becket as well, so that the final product for the $800 million arena will be a collaboration between the two firms. The developer will make renderings available later this month, which will be essential for the next stage of the Atlantic Yards project: selling $700 million in bonds to investors before 2010 in order to qualify for tax-exempt status. And while Forest City moves forward with planning, design, and funding, there is still a major legal hurdle—an October court case regarding eminent domain. The Observer notes, "While Forest City has been victorious at every opportunity thus far, a victory for opponents and affected landowners in that court would certainly doom Mr. Ratner’s years-long efforts."
Nets Arena To Be Designed by SHoP [NY Observer]
Photo by Tracy Collins




Posted by jscheff at 9:00 AM | Comments (17)
Categories: Atlantic Yards

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/11275

Comments

Given the short timeframe (end of the year) to get this thing started and qualify for the $400 million (?) in tax-free bonds, what kind of impact can SHOP possibly have on the design? It ain't like the basic shape of the hanger is gonna change. It'll be simply a matter of putting lipstick on a pig.

Posted by: helluvajob at September 3, 2009 9:29 AM


It's amazing that Ratner will still qualify for the tax-exempt status.

Why is comptroller candidate, David Yassky bragging on his commercials that he stopped tax loopholes for developers when Ratner is still qualifying for it?

Posted by: queenoftheclick718 at September 3, 2009 9:41 AM

About the only experience SHoP has is wowwing rich people with their slick, Pratt kid computer renderings ...That place can't put a drawing package together to save their lives!

Posted by: bowl of dicks at September 3, 2009 9:48 AM

BoD, who put the curdled milk in your coffee this morning?

Posted by: vanessa at September 3, 2009 9:57 AM

the reason David was able to close the loophole he is talking about is that it was controlled by the City Council. Unfortunately, the Atlantic Yards is a State project controlled by the ESDC a state agency. The State Legislature and the Governor have consistently done whatever Ratner wanted. The MTA is a state agency as well. The loophole David closed was allowing city real estate exemptions on apartment developments that did not have affordable housing as a requirement. Atlantic Yards would meet the requirement for tax exemption as it has enough on site affordable housing planned(although my self as many others question the affordability as well as whether it will actually be built or not)

Posted by: smeyer418 at September 3, 2009 10:57 AM

At least if the damn thing is built [and I very much hope it isn't] it might look slightly better than an airplane hanger. People waiting for hours to drive past the stadium on game nights should have something a little better than the old Floyd's department store to look at while their cars overheat.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at September 3, 2009 11:10 AM

smeyer418- isn't there a loophole in the on site provision? Somewhere in the agreements is clause that says on-site or elsewhere, I believe. There were a number of write-ups about it.

BTW- having had dealings with Yassky in the past, I can say that Yassky works only for himself and will sell his constituents out for a buck. First hand experience with that aspect of his character.

Posted by: bxgrl at September 3, 2009 11:12 AM

The tax exemption referred to above is an IRS determination that the interest on the bonds (payable to those who purchase them) would be exempt from state and federal taxes. Nothing to do with the construction of affordable housing or the state 421-a tax abatement program.

Oh, and if you have to kiss a pig, lipstick can only help.

Posted by: g man at September 3, 2009 11:53 AM

for chrips sake--let him build already!!!!!.
Only Brooklyn has itself to blame for losting out by stalling this project----you have no one else to blame for the loss of Frank Ghery and his designs

Posted by: bobbyd at September 3, 2009 11:58 AM

bobbyd,

If you think that a design by Gehry, with his notoriety for valuing his egotistical style over the limitations of an owners budget, would have ever fitted Ratner's financial pro-forma for the project, then I've got a beautiful bridge to sell you.

Posted by: helluvajob at September 3, 2009 12:39 PM

g-man- don't forget, the shade of lipstick also helps :-)

Posted by: bxgrl at September 3, 2009 12:55 PM

I'm happy to hear this, it gives me a sliver of optimism about the results.

ShoP are innovative and thoughtful designers, (and not least of all, in New York City!). There is plenty of time and opportunity for them to influence the design. Certainly the results will be better than with Ellerbe alone.

Posted by: squaredrive at September 3, 2009 1:16 PM

If you are curious about Shop, have a look at the horrendous condo tower they designed at the corner of Mulberry and Houston. They managed the usual trick of getting a 7 story building morph into 10, with the obligatory 3 level penthouse. This particular one is cantilevered over the next building. It manages to be ugly by itself, an affront to the neighborhood ( a particular feat at this corner), taller than the Puck building, and a dismal commercial failure. I think they will be perfect partners for Ratner.

Posted by: Maly at September 3, 2009 3:19 PM

Saw that too Maly- awful.

Posted by: bxgrl at September 3, 2009 3:23 PM

The normal wish for bad architects is that they spend an eternity living in their own building, but in this particular instance, I hope they get beat with 2X4's in the 7th circle of hell for uglifying the world.

Posted by: Maly at September 3, 2009 3:30 PM

ROTFL, Maly.

What I don't understand is for what purpose is designing a horribly out of context, heinous building in an old historic area? All that building says to me is "Look- I have a bigger penis than yours. And its uglier too!"

Posted by: bxgrl at September 3, 2009 3:44 PM

D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L!!!

Posted by: Big Jugs at September 3, 2009 7:04 PM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions