« Did the ESDC board fully consider the changed terms and revised timetable of the MTA deal? Despite responses in pending lawsuit, the record says no | Main | Double Dee Double Dip »
December 22, 2009
It came from the Blogosphere...
NYGeog, Atlantic Yards protesters, some top tens of 2009 & Mapping New York
Not far from my neck-of-the-woods, some Atlantic Yards resistance took a practice run at what could be the most easy form of protest - handcuffing oneself to a bar. When the wrecking-balls come in they'll do it for real protesters say.
eOculus, 2000s: Decade of Decadence or Decency?
By Jessica Sheridan, Assoc. AIA, LEED AP
As the decade comes to a close, many stories highlighting the architecture of the “aughts” seem to be focusing on starchitecture and a supposed era of design gluttony. Those stories claim that the 20-teens will bring an end to the big dreams and excessive indulgences of developers riding the coattails of Robert Moses. However, while I agree that there were plenty of large-scale proposals that could prove to change the face of future development — from the World Trade Center to the West Side Rail Yards to Atlantic Yards — many of those proposals have been put on hold, placed aside (temporarily?) and replaced by watered down compromises.
Queens Crap, Broadway Triangle tweeding plan passes City Council
“This is not an Atlantic Yards project that circumvented [the process],” Councilman David Yassky (D-Brooklyn Heights) said at what would be his final hearing in office. The Triangle is in his district and, as such, he played a large role in seeing it get through the Council.
“We’re going to have 800 affordable apartments. We went through the process and had public input.”
1) The Atlantic Yards scheme did "circumvent the process" on many levels.
2) Both AY and the Broadway Triangle rely on eminent domain abuse, something not mentioned in any of the articles I have read thus far regarding this rezoning vote.
3) David Yassky is an asshole.
Real Estate News, Opinion, and Commentary, The Gambit of Eminent Domain
By Dan Krell
Many contend that the use of eminent domain is increasingly abusive, as highlighted by the case of Kelo v. New London. If you recall, Kelo v. New London involved the taking a private land to be used by developers to revitalize a Connecticut waterfront into upscale homes, a commercial district, and a large (private) research campus. The case was fought through the court system all the way up to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). In 2005, the SCOTUS ruled 5-4 in favor of the municipality, New London, CT, with the majority accepting an expanded interpretation of “public use.”
...
Since the case of Kelo v. New London, similar cases have emerged up across the country. Two high profile cases in New York are being fought and again raising the question about eminent domain abuse.
A case ruling in favor of the State involves the development of a Brooklyn neighborhood into “Atlantic Yards” (Atlantic Yards is to include commercial and residential development, including the Barclays Center- where the New Jersey Nets will call home). Property owners who fought the condemnation of their property for the development of Atlantic Yards were thrown a major obstacle in their fight when they learned that the New York Court of Appeals upheld the condemnation. Additional appeals are probable.
...
Eminent domain continues to be a complex and deeply debated issue. If eminent domain’s expanded definition is to allow commercial development for the public good, then consider a recent Wall Street Journal report (November 11, 2009; “Pfizer and Kelo's Ghost Town”): The local and state government spent $78 Million to raze the Kelo neighborhood, only to find out that developers pulled out. The land is now vacant and without any tax benefit.
Brooklyn History 413, One Page Position Paper: Due 12/22
This paper will include the following: 1) A statement introducing your position
2) Three well-founded and informative arguments that support your position
3) One argument against your position that you refute
4) A conclusionExample:
The Atlantic Yards stadium should not be built! The idea to build a stadium is ill-conceived, expensive and harmful to an already over-crowded community.
Bruce Ratner bought the New Jersey Nets not because he was a basketball fan but because he wanted a reason to build a money-making stadium in Brooklyn. Ratner plans to build this stadium at one of the busiest and most dangerous intersection in the entire city. It is already incredibly dangerous to cross the street at the corner of Atlantic and Flatbush and here Ratner wants to add 10 new apartment buildings and a stadium that will attract drivers from all over New York City and New Jesrsey! The children playing in the area will be at risk and the traffic will create new air pollution!
Bruce Ratner is receiving tax breaks to build an un-needed project for the city of New York. Mayor Bloomberg and the Governor Patterson are actually using taxpayers’ money to support this project when we are in a recession and our schools budgets are getting slashed! Bruce Ratner is trying to convince the city the neighborhood in which he wants to build is “blighted” and that the government should use the power of eminent domain to kick people out of their homes! This was a well-kept neighborhood with a mix of luxury and middle and low income apartments that Ratner has bought out and torn down, now blighting the community! Ratner has blighted the area that was once a completely viable neighborhood! Now he wants to claim that the area is useless except for his project.
People are excited about the idea of professional sports coming back to Brooklyn but what they don’t understand is that Ratner doesn’t even care about sports. He is using the arena as an entry-point into building luxury condominiums that help no one but the already well off.
As a long-time community resident I am strongly opposed to Bruce Ratner’s plans to build this arena. The city should stop the plans and leave the community as it is. The money the tax payers are giving towards this project should be diverted towards social services.
Posted by steve at December 22, 2009 4:31 PM