The War For Brooklyn
While new towers are regularly raised across Manhattan with little comment, changes afoot in Brooklyn have sparked fighting of an intensity rarely seen since the Battle of Long Island was waged on this turf in 1776. The Atlantic Yards complex, designed by Frank Gehry for builder Bruce Ratner, is simply the most conspicuous front in…
While new towers are regularly raised across Manhattan with little comment, changes afoot in Brooklyn have sparked fighting of an intensity rarely seen since the Battle of Long Island was waged on this turf in 1776. The Atlantic Yards complex, designed by Frank Gehry for builder Bruce Ratner, is simply the most conspicuous front in what some see as an all-out war for the soul of the borough. Gentrification per se isn’t always the issue; the argument centers often on the appropriate scale for Brooklyn. Is it big-box discounters and midtown-sized skyscrapers, or mom-and-pop stores and low-rises yielding unimpeded views?
So begins Time Out NY’s latest cover story on the battle for the soul of Brooklyn. Regular readers of this blog and others won’t find too many surprises in the seven neighborhood discussions, but the issue does provide a decent overview of the most significant points of contention in the borough’s growth spurt. Unfortunately, you’ll need a subscription and log-in to follow any of the links below.
Battleground: Atlantic Yards [Time Out NY]
Battleground: Gowanus [Time Out NY]
Battleground: Brooklyn Bridge Park [Time Out NY]
Battleground: Downtown [Time Out NY]
Battleground: Bed Stuy [Time Out NY]
Battleground: Williamsburg/Greenpoint [Time Out NY]
Battleground: Red Hook [Time Out NY]
Dreadnaught,
Your exact words were “MOST BROOKLYNITES don’t want this…” Funny, when you’re called upon to provide evidence, you can’t do so (because you don’t have any) and you then proceed to reword your original statment to better suit your needs.
One asepct of AY opponents that I find amusing is their silly belief that this war will be won with facts and overblown language. Folks, this is entirely about power and we all know which side has more of that.
6 out of 12 posts today?
hhhhmmmmm…..
Turned yesterday’s “Civil War Era Gem Facing Wrecking Ball” thread into an all out rant against Ratner and AY.
hhhhmmmmm…..
“highjacking another thread, huh?”
Gee I gave info about AY developments in a thread about….developments in Brooklyn…what should I post about, Jane Austin’s impact on 20th century feminism?
“Brooklyn will survive one way or the other whether the project gets built or not.”
Survive yes…what sort of place it will be is the question. A place more pleasant to live in, or less so. What if Robert Moses got his way and ploughed the BQE through Brooklyn heights…Brooklyn would have ‘survived’ but what sort of place would it be?
“the borough’s best interest will be served by the final outcome.”
really? Were all of Robert Moses’s destructive projects serving the New York city…or his ego? If Bruce Ratner is buying off politicians and undermining the democratic process – which his project clearly does that’s ‘serving our best interests”
dreadnaught (aka DG?), highjacking another thread, huh? man, talk about being fanatical! give it a break, brah. life doesn’t begin or end with ay. brooklyn will survive one way or the other whether the project gets built or not. take a deep breath and then exhale. whoah! i live in the “impact area” and though my support of the project has waned a bit in the past few months, you don’t speak for me or anyone else i know. many people support this project and many people don’t. in the end, the borough’s best interest will be served by the final outcome.
“If the project was a shopping mall, a museum, an opera house, an industrial park, or an exclusively office complex, there would be increased traffic.”
Yes, but there is a difference between developement in scale with the community, as proposed here:
http://dddb.net/php/community/extell.php
this plan actually bid MORE for MTA’s property but the proposal was given to Ratner; 100% croynism/corruption
and Ratner’s proposal which is clearly out of scale with the community:
“But in its present form, the Forest City Ratner plan does not work for Brooklyn. To work, the project’s design, size and scale should be altered to fit with the borough’s historic character and its promising future.
Brooklyn is appreciated for its human scale, but the current plan would overwhelm surrounding neighborhoods with massive new towers and create a private park on what is now publicly owned land. Brooklyn is celebrated for its lively streets, shops and restaurants, but the current plan would eliminate existing streets, divide communities instead of uniting them, and add 40,000 new vehicle trips every”
http://www.mas.org/
When I think about Atlantic Yards, I keep coming back to traffic. Aesthetic objections are impossible. Most infrastructure objections (sewer, schools, etc.) are manageable. The problem with the traffic objection is that any development creates traffic. The more successful the development is in terms of people served, the more traffic the project creats. If the project was a shopping mall, a museum, an opera house, an industrial park, or an exclusively office complex, there would be increased traffic.
High density cities are increasingly seen as the solution rather than the cause of many environmental problems if not for the traffic.
We have to deal with traffic as a problem in its own right, not as an objection to high-density development. Congestion pricing, east-river tolls, higher gas taxes, higher parking taxes and fees, etc. is what we should focus on. The low cost of using cars to reach new developments is the cause of traffic, not the development itself.
I think the AY debate is an opportunity to negotiate for traffic solutions, rather than development “solutions.”
Oh and one more thing the MTA, who claims they are cash strapped and need to raise fares, are giving him the property at 100 million UNDER its value.
I should also mention to anyone who supports Ratner’s Atlantic Yards development: it relies on eminent domain and taxpayer subsidized loans and grants. You are essentially lining the pockets of a millionaire AND taking people’s homes from them. and it’s allowed to happen there, it can happen in your neighborhood too.
He gets 200 million from the state, 4 billion in low interest loans and a 30 year property tax break – who do you think pays for that? you and me. And what do we get? it brings $7.00 target jobs and drive out home grown businesses.
“Please provide some statistics to verify this claim.
Maybe in areas like Fort Greene or Park Slope this might be true. ”
Yes the people in those neighborhoods (thus effected by it) don’t want it. And as I mentioned that is completely disregarded by Gargano. All things being equal, those further removed from it will care less.
And folks its not just about the stadium the development will make that area the most densely populated area in the United States…I don’t see how anyone can seriously want this, unless you’re on Ratner’s payroll