Closing Bell: DDDB's Letter to SHoP
After Atlantic Yards developer Forest City Ratner released the new design renderings for the Barclays Center arena, Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn took the opportunity to write an open letter to the arena’s co-architects, SHoP. The gist of the letter is that SHoP, by accepting the Barclays Center commission, is also attaching the firm’s reputation to…
After Atlantic Yards developer Forest City Ratner released the new design renderings for the Barclays Center arena, Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn took the opportunity to write an open letter to the arena’s co-architects, SHoP. The gist of the letter is that SHoP, by accepting the Barclays Center commission, is also attaching the firm’s reputation to the Atlantic Yards and condoning the actions of Forest City Ratner: “We think that as responsible professionals, you must be aware that your designs are being used in an attempt to mask the political, planning, economic and aesthetic failures of Forest City Ratner’s corrupt Atlantic Yards development proposal … On these grounds, we urge you to reconsider your involvement. And we will be pleased to meet with you and discuss these issues.”
An Open Letter to SHoP Architects Regarding Atlantic Yards [DDDB]
DDDB—go away–your time to move out is NOW!—It’s going to get built
you know, maybe DDDB are blow hards, but you know who the BIG blow hards are:
Bruce, Gregg and Frank.
how pathetic is that whole Ratner crew and hangers on if “one guy and his wife” are brining them to their knees? get real.
you know I posted something against the new design when I first saw it. I went to the presentation tonight and saw the model. I must say I was impressed that they had transformed what I thought would be horrible to much less so. I thought they toned down the light pollution very well.
As for DDDb letter…its a nice well written letter. those who are opposed to the project will see many things they like in the letter. Those that support it will see it as meddling and grandstanding…yet its the same letter.
babs, that’s not how standard architecture contracts work. Architects are paid progressively based on work completed. Many building projects die off or don’t come to fruition; architects are not THAT stupid.
The big payments for architecture jobs come once construction is in process and at completion. Anybody know how much Ratner actually paid Frank Gehry? And denton you’re luckier than the MTA in that respect — but they’ve willingly gone along with his crap so I guess they get what they deserve.
ahh beer- takes one to know one, I guess.
lord the DDDB are heinous blow hards
> One obstinate azz is more important than the tens of thousands
Uh, so you really believe he is the only person against AY?
> Did I miss anything?
Apparently the the tens of thousands who are – and have always been – against this project moving forward.
“This is a young firm, without the financial resources that allowed Frank Gehry to devote years (and considerable staff members) to this project only to be dumped in the end. SHoP can’t really afford all that — they really need to look more closely at how much and when they can expect to get paid…”
I’m sure they greatly appreciate the condescending business advice…a building doesn’t have to be built in order for the firm to get paid, you realize that, correct? It’s a boon for a young firm to have this kind of project and money flow through the office, built or not.
While I’m not insensitive to DDDB’s arguments, they are barking up the wrong tree. While it’s nice to be high-minded, architects in the city are suffering. If the project is successful it exposes SHoP to more arena work in the future, long after this debate is over. In my view, leaving the job would give them an enormous black eye to other developers and potential clients.
DDDB would be better off lobbying SHoP to improve the proposal. Architects can’t control whether or not a project happens, but they can make it better.