Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project
Even though he lives within a few blocks of where the Nets arena would be built if Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards project gets the go-ahead, writer Chris Smith had been long in forming an opinion on the subject. Partly in denial and partly in the interest of maintaining some kind of journalistic neutrality, it was…
Even though he lives within a few blocks of where the Nets arena would be built if Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards project gets the go-ahead, writer Chris Smith had been long in forming an opinion on the subject. Partly in denial and partly in the interest of maintaining some kind of journalistic neutrality, it was not until he jumped head-first into researching this article–and witnessing first hand Ratner’s “truly chilling” manipulation of the political process–that he found himself standing firmly in the opposition camp. It’s a long, personalized article with lots of color, but his Bertha Lewis encounter was arguably the most histrionic, providing the article’s money-shot of a race-baiting quote (equalled only by the class-baiting of Assemblyman Roger Green):
“You want to talk to me about traffic, you want to talk to me about density, you go right ahead,” she says, implying she considers it all a pretext. “Talk to me about what your resolution is to the resegregation of Brooklyn. Black and brown folks have been driven out of central Brooklyn!” Lewis ladles on the “street” theatrics as she warms up, shimmying in her chair and dropping her g’s. “We’re looking at the gentrification—I don’t see a lot of black and brown folks in the wave runnin’ up in here! The overwhelming folks who are opposed are white people and wealthier people and more secure people and people who just arrived. Come on! This is about the power dynamic of who in fact is going to be living in Downtown and central Brooklyn and where the power Âreally is going to be. And we’re down to get it on! We’re tired of being pushed out. If we can stop one iota of gentrification, we’re gonna do it!“
For what, 900 apartments for the $35K-and-under set? What about all the people who will be waiting longer on crowded subway platforms and whose children will see their public school class sizes balloon? Certainly many of them will be “black and brown,” no?
Battle for the Soul of Brooklyn [New York Magazine]
NY Mag Weighs in on Atlantic Yards Saga [Brooklyn Record]
Mr. Lomez- I think your approach is more on the order of an intellectual exercise, rather than a reality-based assessment of the issues.Nor does it serve your argument to assume anything about who is in opposition to AY. You cannot fit the facts to the argument- you have to fit the argument to the facts.
So far you’ve stated a number of stats, but no information on where they are from. Especially with traffic numbers, you seem to be laying out the best case scenario- overly optimistic and not grounded in reality.
You say:”The AY project has long lead time and an exhaustive review process. This is how planning is supposed to work.”- yet all reports show very clearly that Ratner was able to use his contacts to circumvent the review process and bulldoze ahead. I don’t think this is how planning is supposed to work. I wouldn’t even put the blame on the developers for Williamsburg. Are suggesting everyone should crowd into a 5 block area surrounding subway stations? That’s an impossibility. And the problem isn’t even the number of trains- its the number of stations, and services.
Of course we should be pushing for more planning, schools, etc. But to just barrel ahead with a project of this magnitude before your ducks are in a row is only asking for trouble once it’s built. Then they’ll slap a few band-aids on the problem and forget about it. Planning has to be proactive, not mitigated after the fact.
High urban density is good up to a point. The your problems start to tip the other way. Environmental quality levels go down, traffic gets worse, as does mass transit, area resources are stretched to the vanishing point. And lets also not forget there is a very real psychological/stress factor to be dealt with. Studies have shown that the more crowded rats in a cage are, the more violent they become. Rat race indeed!
You make a good point about zealotry, and DDB’s biggest problem has been that- their attacks have hurt, rather than helped. Yet I wonder at the deafening silence regarding Ratner and his cronies’ bullying, hardball tactics from the pro-AYers.
No need to get personal CHPu.
I’m not carrying anyone’s water. I’m just trying to cut through the hysteria and the hyperbole.
As a product of NYC public schools of the 70s and 80s, please don’t lecture me on class size. I’m aware of the perils, but believe these can be dealt with effectively in the medium term.
I framed the additional vehicular traffic in terms of current levels. My figures showed a 7% increase in east river bridge and tunnel traffic on game nights. I don’t see a parking lot. Sorry.
As for mass transit, Williamsburg is actually an excellent example of what happens when the projects are diffuse and not centrally planned. All the medium sized developments in the ‘burg have created this problem because there hasn’t been planning. The AY project has long lead time and an exhaustive review process. This is how planning is supposed to work.
I can’t help but hear alot of the arguments in the AY debate that one hears about zoning ordinances in leafy suburbs that ban multifamily developments. The arguments always seem to center around traffic and schools. I don’t think it’s an accident that the most visible leader of the anti-AY forces is from a wealthy suburban background. I’d go even farther and suggest that the most committed opposition comes from folks who didn’t grow up in Brooklyn. This doesn’t make their views less valid, but it tells me a bit about what has instructed their opinion.
Maybe I missed some new thinking in the urban planning world, but I always understood density to be a good thing. While there are adjustments that must be made, high density urban development is good for regional traffic, mass transit, the environment, etc.
Much of the opposition has a very suburban tone. I believe that more energy should be focused on planning, instead of opposition. Let’s push for a new school. Let’s push for a mass transit plan. Let’s push for a traffic mitigation plan. I think we cede authority by becoming zealots.
I don’t have a car and I use mass transit everywhere. That said, while it is possible and realistic to deal with mass transit if you have kids, the truth is it can be very uncomfortable, difficult and sometimes unsafe. It also puts pressure on you to plan your day around rush hours because of the crowding. And carrying strollers, with the baby in it, up and down the stairs is dangerous but done all the time. I think it’s unfair to fault families who would rather drive under those circumstances. Everyone has their comfort level when it comes to their kids.
But the trade-off is the environment. I think it would be illegal on some level to say only families with kids can have cars in the city, but what would it be like if the city imposed limits on the kind of car you can own- ie, has to be built to environmental standards, must get a certain amount of mileage per gal, can’t be larger than a certain size and must use alternative fuels? ANd NO HUMMERS!
I have two kids; my wife and I work full time; we have two daycare drop-offs; and we have no car. Believe it or not, there are lots of people just like us, riding the buses and subways with their kids every day.
So please don’t give me the “kids change everything” line (forgive me, Brownstoner). Anyone have tough parents or grandparents who were raised in the city?
What’s the big deal with mass transit and kids? The “inconvenience”? The “germs”? The “strangers”? C’mon, you’re from Brooklyn!
MrLomez, I’m so glad you don’t lose sleep over issues that don’t concern you. However, they do concern thousands of other people who are either personally affected, or are more civic minded that you seem to be.
What on earth makes you think that even 5000 additional cars on the road at certain times is not going to make an impact? Self correcting? I’m still trying to imagine another 1000 cars on Atlantic and Flatbush Aves between the Mall and Boerum at any given time, and that is giving me the willies. 5000? Parking lot.
“These new residents are paying taxes and the Board of Ed should make sure there are enough resources.” Waahh! ROTFL! When has that ever happened? Please! Why start now, when they’ve never been able to before?
“Once again, the new residents pay taxes and fares, so the MTA can add train cars if necessary.” Uh, can you say Williamsburg? The L line has experienced a marked increase in riders since the place got hip and happening. What has the MTA done about that? Where’s the increased service there? There are no plans on board to increase service to the lines around AY, in any kind of meaningful way, and I’m not just talking about at game time, either.
Someone’s blocked sunlight may not mean a damn thing to you, but your arguments don’t even make sense. You can be as dismissive as you want about only 3 more kids in a class, but your “facts” and figures have about as much meat to them as the shadow of Miss Brooklyn. If you want Ratner’s AY, just say so, you’re entitled to your opinion, as we all are. Insulting our intelligence is not necessary.
Traffic is indeed not a self-correcting problem. It simply gets worse. If that’s science, its the science of creationism, not Einstein. And insofar as the transport hub- it’s a hub in downtown. The people living in the rest of the borough find subway stations few and far between-ever look at a subway map? Maybe the transportation problem doesn’t worry you because you don’t think cars are a reliable form of transport but reality trumps your opinion.Cars are here to stay and then some. 5000 additional cars aren’t a big issue? You have drunk the Kool-aid. By neither acknowledging the strain on area resources, or assuming they will “self-correct.” I can only think that your source of information must have been the AY flyer Ratner put out. And actually it is about democracy, economics and class. Foremost is the cynical assumption that Ratner could sell the project to the Black community by preying on their biggest needs. As some pointed out, Blacks were in the forefront of gentrification in the surrounding neighborhoods. Blacks, the working poor, the elderly- they will all be affected. You say residents just don’t want to share their little bit of heaven with new residents. I think the question is why should they want to see the character and quality of life in their neighborhoods be destroyed when they have worked so hard to bring these neighborhoods back? The democratic issue is whether or not a developer with friends in high places should be allowed to circumvent laws and regulations. It’s a question of why the people who pay taxes are made voiceless by the very people they elect. It’s a question of why the people we elect care so little about us that they are more than happy to give our tax money to a man who truly doesn’t need it to overbuild an area that will be badly impacted in a negative way.
All in all I get the impression that you feel if everyone can’t have the same quality of life, then no one should have any.
Chuck:
This isn’t responsive.
Traffic is a self-correcting problem. This is not conjecture at this stage, this is science. I have stated that I am not particularly troubled by traffic arguments anyway, since I do not consider private automobiles to be a reliable form of transportation for residents anyway.
What are the consequences of not building an additional school? A 10% increase in class sizes at surrounding schools? 3 more kids in each class? I’m not losing sleep over this.
You seem to acknowledge that the subway capacity is neither fully utilized nor has hard constraints. The MTA deals with shifting population all of the time. AY would seem like a particularly resilient place in the system for a big jump in ridership (as opposed to Williamsburg which is served by one line.)
There are numerous elected officials that have supported this project including, the governor, the mayor, several assembly people and state senators in and out of NYC. Many of these have stood for election during this debate and won handily.
Development of state lands is not governed by referendum. There are plenty of people in the Adirondacks who resent the strictures of the “Forever Wild” designation as supported by many New York City legislators. Fortunately, they don’t get to develop wilderness that belongs to all of us. If you want to place state land use decisions in the hands of the people who happen to live closest to the project, get your elected officials to introduce legislation. I don’t think it’s a good idea.
Nobody “needs” a car in Brooklyn. My parents managed to transport us around just fine without a car. Just admit it…you “want” the car because it’s convenient. I have a car and use it around Brooklyn for transporting my dogs, Home Depot runs and large shopping trips. I am a lazy American! Stop making excuses and just admit that you are too!
MrLomez –
Have you read the DEIS? I haven’t finished it yet, but I can tell you:
Arena Traffic > something like 68 out of 97 intersections will be worse off, with the ones closest to the arena impossible to mitigate. [Besides that, when traffic is bad, what do you do? You leave earlier. There will always be people driving in, some new ones, some earlier, creating the same traffic impact.]
Schools > DEIS notes that Ratner isn’t planning to build the one or two new schools they will need. Why, if the city is subsidizing the development, should the city then have to fund a new school?
Subway Traffic > Again, DEIS says that the MTA has no plans to increase subway service.
And I disagree. This is exactly about Democracy. It’s about tax-paying citizens being force-fed a project they have had NO say in. I can’t wait until the next election.