A Look Back at the Atlantic Yards Groundbreaking

“8 acres is 8 more acres than exist today”

You could just as well say that 4 acres would be 4 more acres than exist today. Your argument does not address the fact that by building a housing tract twice as dense as the densest housing tract in the United States, AY will actually REDUCE the open space per person ratio of the surrounding neighborhood below what it is today.

Government property is involved here. Government power is involved here (eminent domain). So why isn’t the government following it’s own policy vis a vis open space ratios?

“central park is a “courtyard” too”

I’m guessing you’re not actually so stupid as to think this is a good argument in favor of the type of open space (and in your earlier post you called it a “public park” — why the change?) that AY will bring.

“Guess what, you live in the biggest city in the world. If you don’t like density I’m not sure why you live in New York.”

I never said anything about not liking density. But what’s the limit? Or is there no limit in your opinion? Wouldn’t TWICE AS DENSE as any existing development count, in most people’s book as beyond some kind of limit? Look, I’d be delighted to see 12 story buildings lining 4th Avenue all the way to Sunset Park. I’d be delighted to see 16 story buildings lining Atlantic Avenue all the way to East New York. What I’m not happy about is a 40 story building at the corner of Dean and Carlton.

affordable – you are damn right the middle class needs subsidies. a teacher and a firefighter with 2 kids who combine make about $100k would qualify for this housing. you bet i think they deserve it.

I disagree. I think that a couple with a combined income of $100K can rent an apartment or save to buy.

” You said, “The vast majority of the so-called affordable apartments are not even slated to be built until “Phase 2”, which might not happen for 10-15 years”…so, what is your point? do you want density immediately or do you hate density?

I don’t want a housing tract that is twice as dense as any other housing tract in the United States. And I want a REAL park as part of the development of 22 acres. AND, if there is going to be affordable housing, I want it built AT THE SAME TIME as the luxury housing, not 20 years later.

“Yes, thousands of high paying union construction jobs. what is wrong with that? How many projects are being slapped together right now in Brooklyn not using Union labor, but using the cheapest labor they can find?”

I support unions. I truly don’t see how that’s in conflict with opposing AY. I support mid-rise construction in the AY footprint and I would be happy if it were done with union labor.

“I don’t know exactly, but just think about it, sure some will be selling hot dogs, others will be managing buildings, plumbers, electricians, fixing elevators, mowing the lawns, office jobs, not to mention I’m pretty sure that having thousands of more people in the area may help some of the local businesses.”

Like I said, just because an arena will generate a certain number of jobs doesn’t mean that the intersection of Flatbush and Atlantic is the best place for it — ie, that the best place for it is the busiest intersection in Brooklyn.

Even if the consensus is that Flatbush and Fifth Avenue is a great place for an arena, where the planning around traffic and parking? Many analyst of the environmental impact statement pointed out possible ways to ameliorate traffic that should be part of the plan.

As for whether having thousands of more people in the area will be good for business — wouldn’t those thousands of more people spread out along 4th Ave and spread out along Atlantic and as part of additional development throughout Brooklyn also be good for business? Isn’t this a bit of a zero sum game? Or do you believe that Atlantic Yards will induce people to move to NYC who would not have otherwise?

Finally — “mowing the lawns”???

“You have an entire newspaper dedicated to trying to stop the project (the Brooklyn Papers, who really has lost any credibility it ever had with it\s complete lack of journalistic integrity), you have had articles written like every other day in the daily papers.”

There is a small local FREE paper that covers AY. There ARE NOT “articles every other day in the daily papers.” The New York Times has had very flawed coverage.

“People have voiced their concerns. Questions have been asked. Accretions have been made and rebuked and made again, from all of it changes have been made from what I have read. I don’t know about heights, and what not but sure seems like there have been a lot concessions on both sides.”

Thanks for admitting that you don’t know about heights. Now perhaps you might admit that you actually don’t know anything about “a lot of concessions on both sides”, because the fact is that there haven’t been any concessions by FCRC. They are building exactly the project they proposed in 2003. And, since you are apparently a supporter of AY, it might behoove you to “know something about heights.”

“at the end of the day these same politicians believe the benefits outweigh the concerns. Not to mention there are even more outside of the area that do not want any changes, which again proved what a NIMBY issue this is. Hell, even your fearless reporter and leaders (oder and goldstein) said this whole thing would be fine in Coney Island…in other words, it’s great, just not in my backyard.”

I don’t know which politicians you are referring to. Bloomberg and Pataki wanted this thing. Marty Markowitz (who is basically a clown) was happy to be a booster. What other politicans believe that the benefits outweight the concerns? And why does any politician have the right to completely by-pass existing City land use regulations, which mandate a very different sort of process than AY went through?

As for the NIMBY issue and Coney Island — here you can only be referring to the arena. There are reasons to put an arena at the AY location and there are reasons to put it in Coney Island. Was there ever a public debate about the pros and cons of each? And where is the plan to make the AY site workable in terms of transit and traffic? If we are going to have a “transit-oriented” arena, then where are the transit-oriented plans? Lots of things have been proposed (you can read about them on the Brooklyn Speaks website). But again, because the City land use process was by-passed for this project, there is no leverage on the developer or on the City to adopt these proposals.

To those sliming me:

One anonymous poster wrote that “Oder constantly misquotes people and uses half the facts to make up stories.”

I infrequently make errors. Unlike others who make errors, such as Errol Louis of the NY Daily News/Our Time Press, I endeavor to correct them.

Another anonymous poster wrote that I “fail to acknowledge the fact that a federal magistrate recommended on Friday that DDDB’s federal lawsuit SHOULD BE DISMISSED!!!”

Obviously, that person didn’t read the first sentence of my article, which stated, “In a setback for plaintiffs in the Atlantic Yards eminent domain case, U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy yesterday recommended that the federal case be dismissed without prejudice…”

http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2007/02/magistrate-says-eminent-domain-case.html

“some will be mowing the lawn” 🙁

What’s really sad to me more than the eminent domain issues are the supporters of the Slaverena shucking and jiving about the jobs they’re getting and not careers. Then it’s announced that stadium will be named after Barclay. And Barclay will use his his stolen money to repair basket ball courts thru out Brooklyn instead of repairing schools or opening up career centers.

How naive we are.

The “Public Park Space” claim:

Are you aware that AY will be twice as dense as the densest housing tract in the entire United States? Are you aware that the area in front of the ticket booth of the arena is being counted as part of the supposed “open space”? Are you aware that the “open space” is below grade and enclosed by high rises, meaning that it will be more like a courtyard and nothing like a park?

“Affordable” apartments — only 900 of those apartments are going to be for people who earn less than the median income in Brooklyn. Many of the so-called affordable apartments will be at rents comparable to existing rents in adjacent neighborhoods. None of the apartments will be for people with very low income. Tthe vast majority of the so-called affordable apartments are not even slated to be built until “Phase 2”, which might not happen for 10-15 years. And, most importantly, there is no transparency as to the subsidies being given to the developer for these “affordable” apartments. Do we really need to be subsidizing apartments for households earning 115K a year??? Yes — the top of the “affordable” income bands goes up to 115K. I don’t object to creating affordable housing. I object to obfuscation about what’s affordable and obfuscation about subsidies. How do we know we are getting a good return on the investment of public dollars vis a vis affordable housing? Could we achieve more affordable housing using competitive bidding? (The AY site is being transferred to Ratner with no competitive bidding at all.)

“Thousands of jobs” —
What jobs? Construction jobs? We would have those with any development project in the area, doesn’t have to be Ratner’s. Jobs at the arena? Sorry, I don’t consider selling hot dogs to be a quality jobs. And the arena doesnt need to be built at the busiest intersection in all of Brooklyn in order to generate those jobs. Office jobs? But there’s scarely any office space in the project plan any more. Sheldon Silver saw to that.

Community support — EVERY SINGLE elected representative from the project area and surrounding neighborhoods have asked that many aspects of the project be reassessed. EVERY SINGLE community board in and adjacent to the projectc asked that the environmental impact statement not be approved. So what is this community support you are talking about? It is a FACT that FCRC created BUILD, and it is a FACT that FCRC has been greasing palms around Brooklyn.

“This project has been under a ton of scrutiny and has been subjected to public debate” —

The politics and the financing of this project have been GROSSLY underreported on and misrepresented by the local newspapers. Please check atlanticyardreports.com for extensive documentation of this. How can we have a meaningful public debate when the media is not doing its job of scrutinizing the claims of elected officials? If you’re an opponent of the Iraq War (Anon at 4:44), perhaps you’ll notice a certain resemblance to how we got bamboozled into that (compliant media) and how AY got pushed through. (And by the way, it’s the dirty f*ing hippies who are in the forefront of the opposition to the Iraq War.)

Yes, there’s been debate. But the people who are making this project happen — a handful of men who are happily scratching each other’s backs — have never cared what the community has had to say about the project, and have simply gone ahead anyway, not changing a thing. Please — don’t point to the 8% “reduction” in the size of the project. If you were truly informed, you would know that this reduction simply brings the project back down to the size originally proposed, and was not a concession to community concerns but rather a strategic ploy.

In move’s opinion, we should drop the “vitriol” and “make sure this thing brings as much good as it can”. That’s great, except what leverage does anyone have to “make sure” of anything? Where, exactly, is the leverage for the public? That’s precisely the problem. Where are the public officials who are doing the hard-headed negotiations with the developer on behalf of the public good?

Anonymous at 4:44 — I don’t believe the Empire State Building received public subsidies! And I don’t believe eminent domain was used to get it built! Please direct me to documentation to the contrary if I’m wrong…