Why Architecture Matters: Paul Goldberger and AY

Here's the problem with the debate.

Proponents argue AY vs. 30 more years of rail yards with nothing on top. That's an easy argument to win, but it drowns out any meaningful discussion of scale, planning, impact, etc.

Opponents argue AY vs. the road not taken -- smaller scale project with fewer public subsidies. That deal was on the table and the powers that be did not take it. I am largely sympathetic to this argument, and would have preferred a plan that came out of a meaningful process and that fit better in the community in which it will be placed. But I struggle with the question of how to get there, because it seems clear the deal is not going to get blown up. Opponents need a present tense answer to proponents AY vs. yards only argument.

I don't think, however, that Rock Center, BPC and MetroTech are fair comparisons. None of them butt up against lower density residential neighborhoods the way this one does. Where BPC is, there used to be water. It is built on landfill, separated from everything else by the West Side Highway (boulevard??), and is adjacent to large office buildings. It did no harm to existing communities. Rockefeller Center is right in the middle of Midtown Manhattan. Metrotech is farther removed from Brooklyn Heights and Boerum Hill than this one is from FG and PH. And for me that's one of the real planning disasters. A smaller scale development that maintained and enhanced the street grid would have helped knot the two neighborhoods closer together and respected the scale of each. This just puts up a big, high density wall between them -- like plopping Battery Park City around Court and Atlantic. Although i struggle to see a way to get to that kind of result now, it was an option once, not mere fantasy.

benson, I have no problem with developing housing at that site, and not limited to brownstone scale. I would have liked to see some real planning go into this that allowed the development to coexist with and enhance the surrounding neighborhoods without boxing them in. Less density and better use of the street grid, and you could have something that works. I also have no problem with the zoning swaps along the lines of those we've seen over the last few years -- opening up avenue corridors (4th, e.g.) in exchange for preserving a sense of scale in existing neighborhoods), so long as planning for amenities (retail, schools, recreation etc. is part of the mix). I think growth can continue to be accommodated with a mix of smaller scale infill and larger scale along well-selected corridors -- not to mention in other boroughs that have had less recent develoopment than Brooklyn (Queens and Bronx, in particular). There are lots of vacant and underutilized lots in various Brooklyn neighborhoods. I don't think the choice is between AY as planned or another Starret City in the middle of nowhere.