Yards Scale-Back: Token or Meaningful Move?
Big news on Atlantic Yards on Friday. First, Ratner announced that he was axing 440 market-rate condominiums for a total of 475,000 square feet. According to James P. Stuckey, the new plan “allows for more open space, narrows the scale of the buildings and reduces overall bulk and density, but it also gives us the…
Big news on Atlantic Yards on Friday. First, Ratner announced that he was axing 440 market-rate condominiums for a total of 475,000 square feet. According to James P. Stuckey, the new plan “allows for more open space, narrows the scale of the buildings and reduces overall bulk and density, but it also gives us the flexibility to maintain our commitment to affordable housing.” While the overall number of floors would shrink, some buildings would be even taller than originally planned. (Hmmmm.) Separately, the Empire State Development Corporation said it would expand the main geographic area under study and increase the number of intersections where the traffic impact will be examined. Marty says he’s “delighted” by the changes but not so Dan Goldstein: “The whole thing is still bigger than it was when it was announced.”
Arena Complex Shrink by 5% [NY Times]
Final Scope Document [DDDB]
A good friend of mine had the best comment on this I’ve heard: “It’s like saying, ‘I’m not going to shoot you in face with a 12-gauge shotgun anymore; I’ll use a 10-gauge’.” Whoopee! And this is still bigger than the original proposal.
Any narrowing of roads in downtown brooklyn, even if it’s a two-three block strip on eastern parkway, is going to lead to more and more bottle necks. So much for hopping into your car and driving to target, or lowe’s or home depot or the grocery store, etc.
jps- Clearly you have not been paying close attention. Opponents are complaining about those big issues, as well as the quality of life issues. And David- explain how this outsized monstrous project is going to do anything for Brooklyn except increase traffic congestion, steal homes and businesses through eminent domain, and hugely increase the burdens on infrastructure. Moderate or low income housing alongside luxury apartments? I’ll believe it when I see it. Opponents are not obstructionist- they are demanding honesty, fairness and responsibility. So far Ratner is being given a good deal- thanks to the butt-kissing MTA, and numerous funds and taxbreaks. I pay taxes- do you? Don’t I have a right to say what happens with them? Especially when they are being used to push out people and businesses in the area. As I’ve said before- if it ain’t your house, you can talk. But when it is your house (or business), you’ll be the first one out there with the placard.
I have nothing against responsible, community friendly and imaginative development- this project doesn’t relate to any of those.
Hadn’t heard about Eastern Parkway being narrowed, but I do know that Vanderbilt from Atlantic to the circle is going down to one lane in each direction with a traffic median and bike lanes.
Problem with the reduction in vehicular traffic is that there is no corresponding INCREASE in mass transit into and out of this neighborhood. The existing transit hub is great for the current demand, but what happens when you double the number of people using that train station. Are they going to run additional trains throughout the system to respond to this?
Now would be a great time to have the discussion about the LIRR link to lower Manhattan and Grand Central that has been talked about for years with no action. Instead all I hear transportation alternatives folks espousing is bikes and pedestrian alternatives. Where exactly are all of these new Brooklynites supposed to work that they can walk or ride their bikes to work?
an,
If the opponents of AY were focused on preserving the street grid, improving pedestrian traffic and avoiding the “superblock” — and opposing or reducing use of eminent domain — I’d be with them. But here, on their own blogs, in the press, the AY opposition focuses largely on the height of the buildings, the amount of square footage built, and, yes, protecting their light and their views. Nobody is making that up.
I don’t know…got pretty frustrated getting around in Brooklyn during the transit strike. Also, have you ever tried driving along atlantic ave or flatbush during peak hours. Or driving in Brooklyn Heights on the weekend. That situation will be magnified 10 times. Looks like we’ll all be riding our bicycles…which might not be a bad thing. At any rate, I’m prepared to give up driving (except for out of town trips) once the Atlantic Yards gets built.
10:51am,
Losing roads in and around Downtown Brooklyn is a good thing. The less roadway capacity you give to motor vehicles, the less traffic congestion, air pollution and other negative impacts you get. This is proven again and again in cities all over the world. We have one of the last DOT’s of any major western world city that acts like increasing roadway capacty for cars is a mitigation for traffic. The future of Brooklyn transpo, in light of Atlantic Yards in particular, is better buses, bike lanes, improved ped zones, and more subway cars. Narrowing Eastern Parkway is a great thing. We need more of that.
10:51, what proof do you have that Eastern Parkway is “supposedly getting narrower”? EPKWY runs all the way out to East New York and seems to be the same width as always. A very short section of the walkway will be renovated between Plaza St. and Washington, but that’s it.
The oppostion is clearly running out of time and money. Tag sales and sing-a-longs to raise funds? That can’t have raked in very much cash.
David and Anon,
First off, the project is 1 million sf bigger than when it was unveiled to the community a couple of years ago. Just because FCR’s midtown development partner, the NY Times, says the project is 5% smaller does not make it so. The project is significantly bigger than it was when originally announced.
Second, FCR’s redesign is going in the wrong direction (aside from the reduction in luxury condos maybe). The designs that we’re getting from this developer are similar to the discredited urban planning ideas that brought us deadened, high-rise housing projects and the WTC “super block” between the 50s and 80s. Here is a nice description of that problem: http://brooklynviews.blogspot.com/2005/12/private-public-space.html#links . Municipal Arts Society is also about to come out with a statement on this. It’d be better for the developer to go more low rise, have less fenced-in useless “open space” (pocket parks instead), and preserve the street wall along the avenues.
Finally, you guys are just consistently wrong in your portrayals of the opponents of this project. Go to a meeting of the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods and you’ll see that for yourselves. These people are totally reasonable and pragmatic. They’re working to get community involvement in a process that absolutely stinks and is not likely to produce good long-term results for Brooklyn. Community involvement would lead to a much better project — that is the stance of the vast majority of “opponents” at this point.
Anyway…Sorry to interrupt your flacking for FCR. As you were.