NY Sun Makes Some Conservative Sense
If you’re going to be a conservative publication, at least get your principles right. Unlike the NY Post, The Sun has the good sense to stick to its ideological guns in the Atlantic Yards debate. And while we don’t share the paper’s lack of concern about the density of the project, it’s refreshing to see…
If you’re going to be a conservative publication, at least get your principles right. Unlike the NY Post, The Sun has the good sense to stick to its ideological guns in the Atlantic Yards debate. And while we don’t share the paper’s lack of concern about the density of the project, it’s refreshing to see an editorial position shaped more by ideals than political pettiness:
We start out from a position of favoring private-sector building and investment in New York City.We have no objection to the density of the $4.2 billion plan by developer Forest City Ratner to build a Nets basketball arena and housing designed by Frank Gehry near the Atlantic Avenue subway stop in Brooklyn. Initial indications were that the project would be primarily privately funded and that, because most of the land for the project was either owned by the Long Island Rail Road or had been privately acquired, the use of the government’s power to condemn property through eminent domain would not be needed. It is good news that Forest City Ratner is interested in investing this much money in Brooklyn.
The project, however, has evolved considerably since it was first announced…
…First, as Mayor Bloomberg kissed Bertha Lewis, the New York executive director of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, developer Bruce Ratner agreed to devote half of the rental units on the site — 2,250 of 4,500 apartments — to affordable housing. That opened the door for Forest City Ratner to seek subsidies for those units in the form of tax-exempt financing. The project started to look less like free-market investment and more like a classic market-distorting income-redistribution scheme in which the hardworking taxpayers of New York pay the price for those few lucky enough to score an affordable apartment.
Now comes the news that Mr. Pataki’s Empire State Development Corporation is moving to evict what the New York Post reports are 60 households and 13 businesses using eminent domain power. With the notable exception of the Brooklyn Papers, a chain of weeklies in Kings County, the press has been cheering on this trampling of property rights. The Daily News ran an editorial in support of the project, and a New York Post editorial this past week sneered at the project’s opponents as misguided, ivory-tower, eminent-domain purists.As for the New York Times, Forest City Ratner is the New York Times Company’s partner in building the paper’s luxurious new affordableheadquarters near the Port Authority bus terminal in Manhattan, which itself involved the use of eminent domain condemnation.
We’ve sat through the Bloomberg administration’s presentation on the importance of eminent domain as an urban development tool,and we don’t mind saying we were unmoved.The administration itself trumpets as an eminent domain success story Forest City Ratner’s own Metrotech center in downtown Brooklyn. That development is lifeless after 6 p.m. and integrates poorly with the surrounding neighborhoods. Everything that Mayor Bloomberg did not like about the World Trade Center is on display at Metrotech.The strongest argument made by proponents of using eminent domain for private projects is that if the practice is barred, the illogical result is that it would be legal to seize homes for a new jail or a new public housing project, but not for projects that might be better for a neighborhood, such as restaurants, hotels, or luxury condominiums.
The problem is that the concern about property rights is bedrock. It’s Locke. It is one of the ideas upon which this nation was founded. It is also essential. Who would plunk down $1 million or more for one of Mr. Ratner’s condos knowing that some powerful developer allied with the government could come along and roust him for some better project? It isn’t only Atlantic Yards and the Times headquarters. Justice Thomas warned, in his dissent from the Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. New London, of the far-reaching, and dangerous, result of the court’s majority opinion.
Eminent Danger [NY Sun]
Photo by silkcut
As if any of it mattered… the politicians are whores, everyone of them, from Bloomberg to Markowitz to Silver.
“Atlantic Yards project wins board approval
The state Public Authorities Control Board voted unanimously to authorize the Atlantic Yards development.”
… READ FULL STORY in Crains NY
Published: December 20, 2006 – 5:49 pm
Just wait until this “vision” is realized. Bend over and kiss Downtown – and all it could’ve been – goodbye!
“unintegrated into the surrounding communities”
ratner’s style of building is create ‘urban gated communities’ he’s really a dinosaur of urban planning and transparency of government. As another sun editorial said -the AY project represents a little bit of everything wrong in new york state right now…
Re: density. The poster above who seems to think the density of AY is no big deal is seriously uninformed about the project. I suggest that this poster do a little internet research. S/he will learn that AY as proposed would be the densest housing tract in the entire United States by a factor of 2. 22 acres of extreme density plopped down in the midst of low-rise Brooklyn neighborhoods! This project shows an astonishing a lack of respect for the existing urban environment.
Yes, of course urban environments are densely populated. And I think most would agree that very broad avenues like 4th Avenue and Atlantic Avenue are good opportunities for higher density that small side streets. But in any environment, natural or man-made, there are limits to what can be done without losing the characteristics of what is there.
I don’t think most Brooklynites really understand what is being proposed for AY — if they did, they would know that the current project is indigestible — that those towers, if built, will forever be an exclusive high rise enclave, unintegrated into the surrounding communities.
<>
Um… the best (highest scoring) public high school in all of Brooklyn — Brooklyn Tech — is a few hundred yards from the epicenter of Atlantic Yards.
As far as what’s the problem with density, there isn’t one in general. The problem is when density is out of scale with the immediate surroundings. Imagine if Times Square sat directly next to the townhouses of Greenwich Village’s Horatio Street. That will be the result of 40+ story towers 1 block away from 3 story brownstones.
anyway – no vote till next year on AY says news stories this morning.
sorry, isn’t moonie paper but Litsky’s – anyother nut job. But be sure he would have no problem with any landlord tossing out the regulated tenants and would allow to build whatever and however ugly they wanted.
So be careful about highlighting someone like that.
love the sun so much more than the times.
anon 1022: the sun isn’t a ‘moonie ‘paper…. anyway there is nothing ‘generous’ about a private developer bribing officials to kick people out of their homes then using taxpayer money to fund it. next to nothing is coming out of ratner’s pocket.
‘density’ – is an issue. Brooklyn is not manhattan, the residents don’t want it to be manhattan we have zoning laws that communities fought for so it wont’ be manhattan…bloomberg said ‘screw you’ to all that.
Mr. Brownstoner,
Why the kneejerk on density? Urban centers are inherently dense. Moreover, densely populated areas of the NYC ( e.g. the upper Westside) have wonderful amenities such as mass transit, great commercial services and top-rated, integrated public schools. I have often hear you opine the lack of these very things in Clinton Hill. What if AY leads to better public schools along the FG/CH corridor? Wouldn’t it be nice to send your kids to the local public school instead of of schlepping across Brooklyn? Just food for thought.