Ratner's Heavy Hand Cuts Both Ways
Concern over the scale of the proposed Atlantic Yards development and the use of eminent domain tend to dominate the discussion, and rightfully so. However, what is often overlooked is how well a few people did in their buyouts. At 636 Pacific Street (photo), for example, The Times reports that most people received more than…
Concern over the scale of the proposed Atlantic Yards development and the use of eminent domain tend to dominate the discussion, and rightfully so. However, what is often overlooked is how well a few people did in their buyouts. At 636 Pacific Street (photo), for example, The Times reports that most people received more than twice what they paid only a year or so earlier. “We got a premium on this lemon of a building that turned into a great investment for us,” said Mark Klein, the former president of the condominium board. The last hold-out at 636 is DDDB’s Dan Goldstein, who’s reportedly facing condemnation by the state if he doesn’t play ball. Renters, however, have had their lives disrupted often with only a few thousand dollars in compensation.
In other Ratner news, Bruce gets a shout-out in the new theme song rap for the Nets:
    We brought Kidd from the Suns/Vince from the Raptors
    Elite in East/Since Erving was in the rafters
    Check the skybox/Blackberry active
    Making transactions/ It’s Bruce Ratner.
Cringe.
Some Find Greener Grass [NY Times]
A Rap for Nets Owner [NY Post]
Please reread my first sentence of my last post. And if you read further back you should also see that my posts were not about Ratner being unfair to renters- I was responding to the posts that said tenants should not get anything. It was anon at 12:57 who posted they thought the 5k given by Ratner to a renter was low, not me.
And for the record I am not tired of discussing issues- I am tired of bashing. Yes we all do it. SOme of us in defense, some because they like to and others because they have no better way to express themselves (I don’t mean you, David). But there is a pretty thin line between bashing the Anti-AY position and anti-AY people.
If you had simply said why you think the alternatives are not feasible and why I would have been happy to hear your opinion. I wouldn’t be reading or posting on the forum if I wasn’t here to learn something too.
Bx2Bklyn – I dont want to turn this thread into a personal discussion but you have to be kidding….
yes I sarcastically anticipated the response to a seemingly pro-Ratner artice (correctly I might add see post at 107) and somehow this is “baiting” yet you calling and actual poster money grubbing and ignorant is okay and we should “leave it at that”
You are correct that the other proposals dont satisfy me – and I have never denied that they may satisfy you, but I will point out why I dont think they are feasible or desirable – sorry if you find it ‘tiresome’ – often hearing a counter argument in opposition to your own can feel tiresome.
Finally back to the original article, what would YOU consider a fair settlement for the tenants who will be displaced by development at the site.
Go Nets!
Not denying anything. However in that post I was responding to statements that were perceived as tenant-bashing. That poster and I have had our discussion so leave it at that.
Fair, by the way has to be perceived by all sides in an argument or agreement. So one person’s definition may not be another’s. That’s where compromise comes in.
I honestly don’t have time to go back and list every comment you’ve made but your first post (the 2nd on this thread) starts it off. You sarcastically anticipate that someone will point out the association between the Times and Ratner, as though it’s unthinkable that the Times be questioned and only anti-AY people would stoop that low. But the issue is a legitimate one. It casts doubt on the objectivity of the Times.
As far as what gets built, there have been lots of proposals besides Ratners and none of them seem to satisfy you. I would love to see something wonderful at AY- I don’t care if Ratner builds it so long as it is not the monstrosity it is now. He has Frank Gehry- if Gehry can’t create something that addresses all these issues I don’t know who can.
Yes fair as I define it – and I asked you what would you consider fair for the renters – which I would be interested to hear. And again if some renters werent treated fair (under any definition), please show me where that is written b/c again I would be interested.
I dont know where I have said that you (or anyone else) dont want anything built at AY – I have said (yes repetedly) that [IMO] what opponents seem to advocate being built is generally not realistic (or not enviromentally conscious) and wont be built (thereby resulting in nothing being built) but I recongnize that you do want development.
Please provide me an example where I have “baited” anyone – unless you consider posting a view different from the majority “baiting” I really dont see where I have done so…but seriously if I have – show me and I will address it… but b/4 you do, I hope the standard you apply to my posts acknowledges your own – where for example @111 you ask if another poster is “ignorant”;say his ways are “moneygrubbing”; and “suggest another line of work”
If anyone is doing drumbeating it’s David. And there have been quite a few pro-AYers on this board. So what “fresh balance” do you refer to?
he’s baiting- even if no one says anything anti-AY, he makes a comment. And frankly I find him tiring- and I haven’t read all that much anti-AY drumbeating here. Most people just want answers to crucial questions. Why should they be called anti-AY just for asking?
David is not “baiting”, he’s being emphatic, which is precisely what you do, Bx2Bklyn. Personally, I find David’s commentary to be a fresh balance to the usual anti-AY drumbeats.
David-
Fair as you define it? And from what I read it doesn’t seem that all of them were, and they certainly had to fight for it. And stop telling me what I do or don’t want at AY.You wouldn’t know because you don’t bother to read what people actually write. I’m not repeating again what I’ve said many times about AY- you obviously don’t want to hear it and you seem to think that anyone who has a criticism of AY automatically doesn’t want anything built there. I guess if you write it enough times you think you’ll get everyone to believe it. You make a point of baiting at every opportunity- no wonder it’s hard to have a civil discussion on the boards.
Crimea River- I didn’t see where feeling puckish denied repeating statements either. But he or she does so in response to David’s baiting.