« ACTRESS IN BATTLE TO FOIL NETS' ARENA BID | Main | Battle lines drawn over Nets arena in Brooklyn »

November 14, 2005

The Project That Ate Brooklyn

In a Sunday New York Times City Section Op-Ed piece, the author, John B. Manbeck, accuses all sides of "overkill," then fumbles the facts, before making some good points.

FUMBLE

  

FACT

The project is being proposed "on the very site that was denied the Brooklyn Dodgers 50 years ago."

  

Ratner's failing mall sits on that site (let's put this Brooklyn myth to rest already).

"The arena would stimulate construction on Boerum Hill's vacant lots."

  

Boerum Hill is booming thanks to the already approved Downtown Development plan.

8,300 new housing units

  

It's 7,300, unless Manbeck knows something the public doesn't.

The TimesRatnerReport points out some other problems including the fact that the "bio box doesn't mention that [Manbeck] has written for both issues of Forest City Ratner's Brooklyn Standard p.r. sheet."

It's regretful that there are these holes in Manbeck's piece because he brings up three important points: * "a project that relies heavily on subsidies rarely works," * "Officials need to consider the existing profiles of neighborhoods as well as the immediate goals of developer" * Brooklyn developers typically unveil overly ambitious projects that are eventually scaled back, resulting in a project "that satisfies his true ambitions while allowing the public to feel that it has staved off disaster."

Posted by lumi at November 14, 2005 11:30 AM