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]
There are 3 owners left. It didn’t start out that way. Selling out would have been your choice. That’s fine- for you. What if you didn’t want to sell? Eminent domain is not about numbers, it’s about how loosely you will interpret it to take property from one person to give to another. It’s a slippery slope. ANd to repeat myself- anti-AY people are not saying don’t build. They are saying do it responsibly, and intelligently. But of course those who want their basketball nearby don’t care about anything except that.
David-Manhattan and NYC did just get low marks again for the air we breathe- what does that tell you?
There are 100s of thousands of people living in subsidies in Manhattan- which Manhattan are you talking about? And in case you have forgotten- Manhattan has the most densely packed transit and utility systems. The outer boroughs don’t have more of anything except potholes because the City concentrates on Manhattan first. It’s an ecological nightmare.
Pucky,
My home is not in the footprint, but if it had been, I would have gladly sold to Ratner for double the value.
Your Bronx analogy does not match up. The location of those properties does not allow for the superb access to public transportation that the AY site has. Hence, access to the housing near Atlantic and Flatbush will be a snap.
If eminent domain is the issue, then I’m with David: three owners does not justify stopping this development.
Puck based upon your post one would think Manhattan would be a disaster with huge vacancy rates, low prices and millions of subsidized tenants – since Manhattan is essentially filled w/ “people warehouses” that are beyond any enviromental systems capacity. Yet Manhattan has the highest prices and rent anywhere in the country (except maybe SF).
And I dont know how eminent domain can be the main issue since there are only THREE owners left on site.
Well the EIS is in it seems, according to the posts from today. I love how all you apologists for Ratner hoot and howl like a bunch of kids around a campfire. David- c’mon! I’ve read enough of your posts to know that you are not that idealistic, I’d do anything for the good of Brooklyn sort of guy you want us to believe. What you really care about is development at any cost. I assume you are in the business because you have never met a development you didn’t like and you’ve claimed that new construction is better than old (but YOU LIVE in an old house. Why haven’t you put your money where your mouth is?)
ANon 12:07- since you don’t have to worry about it, obviously you don’t care. As another poster said, the real issue is eminent domain. Anyone who is a property owner (fyi- I’m not) should be worried. Your property can now be taken pretty much for any excuse the even remotely pretends to be about improving the community (oh yes, having a Gap store will make life so much better! Ooooh the Nets! They’ll do so much for Brooklyn- We have pride ya know!) What Ratner is building is a people warehouse- David may think it’s ecologically sound to warehouse people over a transit hub.
To a point he is right- the problem is Ratner’s complex goes way beyond what the area can bear. There’s a tipping point in environmental systems, after which they cannot sustain themselves and degrade. All of these high density developments going up along Brooklyn’s waterfront and in other neighborhoods will pack an ecological and financial whallop. Want to see the future? Take a look at the huge apartment complexes put up in the Bronx along the Hudson. Cut off, hard to access, much of it is now subsidized because people with a choice don’t want to live in the equivalent of an ant’s nest.
Intelligent planning deals on a human scale. Claiming 900 units of “affordable” housing as good enough reason to create people storage says several things. Developers don’t really care about the people they build for. They don’t care about how livable the space is. They don’t care that they will ask for and get public funds to fund their projects- after all, it’s all about the money. And they don’t care about how it affects the neighborhoods or Brooklyn.
So please- all you Pro-Rats, stop the doublespeak about “affordable housing.” Like you really care.
I know a bit off topic, and not to add insult to injury here, but the City Council today voted 44-3 with two abstentions for the new Yankee stadium…Brooklyn Councilmember Letitia James, long time DDDb supporter, abstained.
Can we now finally put to bed Dan Goldstein and DDDb dreams of becoming the next great NYC powerbrokers? Enough ego already…
http://www.nolandgrab.org/archives/2006/04/develop_dont_de_3.html
“All you Ratner supporters and apologists, TIME TO PULL YOUR HEADS OUT OF YOUR A***S! You could well be the stupidest collection of dumbs***s I’ve ever come across.”
It’s always amusing to witness an AY opponent having a meltdown 🙂 Take your medication, dude.
All you Ratner supporters and apologists, TIME TO PULL YOUR HEADS OUT OF YOUR A***S! You could well be the stupidest collection of dumbs***s I’ve ever come across.
“Finally I wish people would stop citing displacement of residents as if it was the “Trail of Tears” > as of the last final scope for the EIS – there were THREE condiminium owners and 57 renters on site.”
That’s it? I thought that the numbers, especially the owners, were higher than that. Obviously, I was mistaken.
Actually my property wouldnt be “taken” b/c I would have gladly accepted doubling my $ after owning my condo for approx 1yr (the reality for the THREE holdouts).
But if I didnt want to take the $ I still wouldnt be so presumptious to think that an entire cities development should revolve around my particular desires.
and BTW the Govt takes my property pretty consistently – bi-weekly; quaterly; and if I missed anything – annually.