Quote of the Day
The final dots that need to be connected are left unconnected by Ourossoff. Bait-and-switchers don’t just bait-and-switch once, it is a pattern. And if Ratner’s Gehry bait-and-switch is stunning, so is the bait-and-switch on “affordable” housing, “publicly accessible open space,” job creation, commercial space, reneging on a contract with the MTA, and changing the project…
The final dots that need to be connected are left unconnected by Ourossoff. Bait-and-switchers don’t just bait-and-switch once, it is a pattern. And if Ratner’s Gehry bait-and-switch is stunning, so is the bait-and-switch on “affordable” housing, “publicly accessible open space,” job creation, commercial space, reneging on a contract with the MTA, and changing the project timeline from 10 years to, unofficially “decades” and officially 6 years to build just the arena according to state financing documents. Atlantic Yards itself is a monument to bait-and-switch.
— by DDDB in Ratner Cans Gehry For Good
East New York,
What you don’t understand is that we’ve been trying nicely for 4 years to get FCR to answer our legitimate questions and concerns. We’ve gotten nothing. I personally have no problem with a development over the rail yards, but why do they need the 2 extra blocks of peoples homes and businesses. The project is just too dense. Instead of office space for 10,000, how about 5,000; Instead of housing for 15,000 how about 7,000. The arena I have no problem with. As it is, the population would would be the densest in the country. There aren’t enough schools, transportation or grocery stores in the area to support 15,000 extra people in 22 acres. The electricity grid is at capacity. I live 1 block away and spent last summer with only one outlet and a fridge running, due to brown outs. We have manhole covers exploding all the time. There’s no plans to fix this except for in the actual footprint.
The 4 train is packed to the gills during rush hour, sometimes you have to wait for 2 or 3 trains to get on one. These concerns have not been addressed.
> these buildings are not at a price point to justify central A/C
Why is that?
Every new building everywhere else in this country is built with central A/C.
Seriously, how difficult or expensive can it be?
“It has always been AY supporters’ method to ignore what anti-AY people are complaining about. Knee-jerk response: NIMBYISM! I have yet to hear a pro AYer address the many legitimate complaints and concerns the public has.”
-bxgrl just made the point I was trying to, and did it more concisely.
“Petunia lists all the reasons against development and progress.” Uh, no, I listed concerns that should be addressed esp. by a project of this magnitude – once the developer makes his money and leaves, let’s make sure the actual residents of his development as well as those in existing ones nearby don’t have to struggle with overburdened schools, streets, etc. Sorry to be fashionable about that.
Are you saying none of the things people were worried about would have been an issue if the project went up as planned? Ratner had it all figured out, so he figured he may as well skip the review process? There was no public input – hysterical or otherwise – that was the problem. It seems as though you’re saying just let him build, give him all the tax breaks and forget the oversight because that’s the only way something spectacular will happen – that seems a little knee-jerk to me.
There has been decent new development in the borough, but obviously the scale of AY, not to mention the wheelie-dealing behind it, puts this discussion in whole other category. Some, like Minard above, are untroubled by the scale of the original design – even so, I don’t see how you can brush off questions about impact and context as irrational negativity. I think a good, well-thought out design can stand up to these questions and take its surroundings into consideration. It still wouldn’t appease everyone of course, but FCR spent far more effort on behind-the-scenes nonsense and hiring people to disrupt meetings, than doing the least little thing to address these questions.
I haven’t followed all the ins and outs of AY, but bxgrl makes an excellent point at the end of her post. Public money should not be subsidizing private developments. If developments are good enough they should stand on their own economically.
Also, of course developers are trying to maximize profit. I don’t have a problem with this, but their motives are always going to be economic more than philanthropic. Thus it is reasonable to hold their feet to the fire on any public amenity aspects they promise, as their natural inclination will be to cut corners or renege on them.
I’m not anti new development either – love the Meier building and Toren, think Forte is OK, can’t stand Oro..
Nope, I’ll let them speak for themselves.
Winning price is tour of the construction site – that sounds like lame gimmick marketing ploy (regardless if that was their intent or not). Put out content on a blog, you get a reaction. Some good. Some neutral. Some bad. I highly doubt there would be NO marketing pitch thrown out during the tour. lame mktg + snarky comments = understandable
Benson,
You are absolutely right that it would be a valuable exercise to get a couple of the Fedders developers around a table with a couple of fancy architects and someone who writes the code at DOB.
I agree with Minard Lafever. This is the logical place for a project of this sort, and although some of their concerns are legitimate, the anti-AY, DDDB forces have, in my view, undermined their argument with unnecessary personal attacks on Ratner, along with their insistence that the project will somehow “destroy” Brooklyn or the immediate area. Ludicrous.
I also agree with Benson. Rather than simply lampoon individual buildings that don’t meet his aesthetic vision, it would be interesting to instead see Mr. Brownstoner interview one or two of these developers to provide some insight into how/why they chose to build in this manner. Maybe we can all learn something. Posting pictures of these homes simply to invite derisive commentary is childish and counter-productive.