July 22, 2008
Top Ten Reasons why Kensington is better than Park Slope
Kensington Stories
Kensington Stories blogger Ron Lopez included this curious item among the "reasons why Kensington is better than Park Slope" (debatable, but we do believe in pride of place) in a post last week:
4 We know that “ugly” train yard on Atlantic Avenue is actually ugly, and are not fooled by the “Develop don’t destroy Brooklyn” people.
NoLandGrab: We're not quite sure how DDDB is fooling anyone, and as far as we know, nobody ever said the train yard wasn't ugly. We're also pretty certain that neither DDDB nor yours truly would be around to fool people if Bruce Ratner had proposed building a project only above the 8.3-acre railyard. It's a safe bet that had Bruce and the ESDC targeted Mr. Lopez's Kensington community, they'd have found "blight" where Mr. Lopez sees a great neighborhood (is that lovely house pictured above built to at least 60% of its available Floor Area Ratio?).
Posted by eric at 12:36 PM
July 12, 2008
Cracks in the Facade
The Footprint Gazette
I know I voice a lot of complaints on this blog about the way the long term residents of this neighborhood continue to get harassed and demeaned by Bruce Ratner, Marty Markowitz and every other complicit sell out involved in this boondoggle.But the real victim here is the structural integrity of a good strong building. One built the way they used to build them. Not like these bland Home Depot jobs that are so common. Here are some photos of some of the more recent cracks that are showing up in our building. It don't take no sleuth to recognize that that ain't good. There are also cracks extending from floor to ceiling in my apt. and I've been told by other folks in the building that they have the same cracks in theirs.
But you know what, I take it back. The real victim is us. This morning I woke up to find the gas had been turned off in our building. Earlier in the week it was the water. No notice, no nothing. Last week when they turned our water back on my toilet filled with dirt leaving it unusable for most of the long weekend. I had to have a super unlock a vacant apt. so I wouldn't have to hold it in in celebration o four nation's independence.
Posted by amy at 9:20 AM
July 2, 2008
Don't Go Chasin' Waterfalls...Not These, At Least
Fans for Fair Play
That's not a rainbow FFFP sees through the mist... it's Atlantic Yards.
Not a day goes by without a clear example of why Bloomberg's New York is such a maddening, offensive and increasingly soulless place to live.
For today's example, we offer you this:
Olafur Eliasson's "Waterfalls" -- four Erector Sets leaking water into the East River -- cost $15 million (say that with a Dr. Evil voice, especially over the $2 million in public money). The vampiric steward of our decaying city (above, right) blathered something about $59 million being generated for the city's coffers. That's government officials like Bloomberg's go-to excuse for wasting money and resources. All of NYC's new stadiums (and the one not going up in Brooklyn). Big "because we can" fartworks like this or last year's "Gates" in Central Park. The Bon Jovi concert just announced for the Great Lawn, where Mayor Mike's construct is that what's good for white rock'n'roll fans isn't good for RNC demonstrators.
...River water tumbling meekly off scaffolds isn't nearly the problem that the Atlantic Yards is, of course. Dopey and disappointing as Eliasson's efforts are, they're not really hurting anyone. Well, not counting whoever could've used the $2 million the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation stuffed in Eliasson's pocket, likely at the mayor's behest.
Part of the problem is timing, as it always is with Atlantic Yards. The economy's crashing, so Ratner asks for more public money for his failing luxury-condo development. The AY arena is a billion-dollar money pit, so Ratner declares his Nets are "rebuilding," sports-world code for "we'll really blow the next few years."
...Ratner, emboldened by state officials he counts as both pals and sugar-daddies/mommies, keeps pushing Atlantic Yards as though it's still 2003, when the economy, at least, wasn't one of the dozens of reasons the Atlantic Yards superblocks are such a bad idea on so many levels.
Posted by eric at 5:35 PM
June 20, 2008
Local Coverage of the Atlantic Yards Governance Act
Two local weekly papers note the proposed Atlantic Yards Governance Act legislation. This bill would cause oversight of the proposed Atlantic Yards project to be taken away from the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) and moved to a trust.
The Brooklyn Paper: Pols want more Yards scrutiny
By Sarah Portlock
State legislators want to take oversight of Atlantic Yards away from a development agency controlled by the governor’s appointees and give it to … a new agency controlled only slightly less by the governor’s appointees.
The bill, drafted by Assemblymembers Hakeem Jeffries (D-Fort Greene) and James Brennan (D-Park Slope), would replace the Empire State Development Corporation’s ongoing oversight of Bruce Ratner’s approved mega-development and hand it over to a new, 15-member panel.
It’s unclear whether the new body would have any real power to alter the $4-billion development, as Gov. Paterson, who supports the project, would have seven appointees.
Brooklyn Downtown Star: Group Wants to Put Trust in Yards Project
By Shane Miller
As plans to build a new arena for the New Jersey Nets and several residential towers in Prospect Heights flounders due to community opposition, legal troubles, and a tanking real estate market, elected officials and civic groups from the area called on a new levels of oversight and governance for the project.
The Campaign to Reform Atlantic Yards held a press conference on the steps of City Hall Monday morning to address what the coalition feels is a lack of transparency, accountability, and public involvement in the massive development project.
To meet those aims, Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries has introduced a piece of legislation called the Atlantic Yards Governance Act. The bill is modeled after the Hudson River Trust Act of 1998, and it would create the Atlantic Yards Development Trust to oversee the project. The Trust would be comprised of state and city appointed officials.
The bill would also create a Stakeholders Council made up of local residents who would be appointed by elected officials, and whose task it would be to advise the Trust. “Every major state project in New York City, except Atlantic Yards, has a governance body similar to the one this legislation creates,” said Jeffries. “The best way to assure this project’s public benefits are realized, including the creation of affordable housing, is to have real oversight on the project.”
...
Councilwoman Letitia James threw her support behind the bill, but also reiterated her opposition to the project as a whole.
“I continue to believe the plan put forward by Forest City Ratner and the ESDC is bad for my district and for Brooklyn,” she said. “The outcome of the Atlantic Yards project is far from certain, and the current plans may be scrapped entirely, but it will always be critical to have local representation in decision-making on such a significant project.”
Posted by steve at 4:19 AM
June 15, 2008
Graphic Images from Atlantic Yards
Brit in Brooklyn
Posted by amy at 11:05 AM
May 26, 2008
Memorial Day, 2008
The Prison Ship Martyrs Monument in Fort Greene Park, Brooklyn.
Posted by steve at 10:59 AM
April 12, 2008
It Came from the Blogosphere...
Museum Hours, Museum Hours
Also wrong were the Museum's decision at the show's gala party to honor bulldozer developer Bruce Ratner and to invite Louis Vuitton to create a faux knockoff handbag bazaar. In Marie Antoinette style, VIP guests were invited to pretend they were a poor plebian purchasing an imitation purse while paying 100 times the cost. And, get this, a portion of sales was donated to maybe the least-deserving charity ever -- the Federal Enforcement Homeland Security Foundation.
Michael Leonard Photography Blog, THE BROOKLYN MUSEUM TO “HONOR” BRUCE RATNER
The Brooklyn Museum to “honor” Bruce Ratner, the developer who is making NYC unaffordable to average joes (and building fugly-ass malls). This comes a little more than a week after the Museum decided to donate a portion of its proceeds from Murakami’s Louis Vuitton boutique sales to the Federal Enforcement Homeland Security Foundation. (Because what we really need is more surveillance.) I’m just waiting for someone to tell me that they’ve hired Rudy Giuliani as a curator.
Curbed.com, The Atlantic Yards Ombudsman is Not In
When last heard from, the Atlantic Yards Ombudsman had finally been hired and was on the job, but today's Daily News reports that he hasn't been easy to get to see. Since November when Forrest Taylor was hired, "office renovations and ongoing meetings with city and state officials have delayed his advocacy duties." Only 60 percent of the Ombudsman's job is supposed to be spent "addressing community concerns" such as construction safety and other issues related to the big project. (Speaking of which, some work on the project was hit with a Stop Work Order yesterday by the Department of Buildings for unsafe conditions, among other things.) In any case, the Ombudsman's office on Hanson Place will open to the public, but no one can say when. And the Ombudsman himself is on vacation right now.
Posted by amy at 9:38 AM
March 29, 2008
It Came from the Blogosphere...
Who Walk In Brooklyn, Death In Gowanus: Electric Switchboard Co. RIP
WWIB mourns the coming death of one of their "favorite buildings in all of Gowanus: Electric Switchboard Co" and makes the connection between Gowanus developer Marc Freud and Atlantic Yards, as well as heaping praise on Atlantic Yards Report.
Seriously tho’, Norm’s has been on fire lately, hilariously busting the Daily News, the Brooklyn Daily Eagle manque & the unbelievably naive (or just plain dopey) yokels at ACORN, who were played so hard by Bruce Ratner but they won’t stop singing that tune for fear of admitting they were wrong from the start: oops upside your head indeed.
CultureGrrl, Brooklyn/Murakami/Vuitton: It Keeps Getting Worse
CultureGrrl connects The Brooklyn Museum, a French luxury fashion and leather goods brand, Kanye West, Rudy Giuliani, the Federal Enforcement Homeland Security Foundation, Nicolai Ouroussoff, Frank Gehry, and of course, Bruce Ratner. Phew...
The honoree of Brooklyn Ball is real estate developer Bruce Ratner, whose company, Forest City Ratner, was just taken to task by the NY Times architecture critic for "a betrayal of public trust" in planning (for economic reasons) to downsize Frank Gehry's "bold ensemble of buildings" for Brooklyn's Atlantic Yards---a move that Ouroussoff declared would "only confirm our darkest suspicions about the cynical calculations underlying New York real estate deals." Isn't he the same guy who's taking the N.J. Nets out of my home state?
New Penn Station, Listen to MAS President Kent Barwick on WNYC
Today on WNYC’s Morning Edition, MAS President Kent Barwick described the public benefit of Moynihan Station and suggested that the State should consider using its powers of eminent domain to take the Garden's property. From WNYC:“The state has been willing to use its powers to take land for Bruce Ratner in Brooklyn to do Atlantic Yards or to take land in Morningside Heights away from private property owners to give to Columbia. Those are arguable public benefits, but there’s no question about the public benefit of having a great new rail station. This is the most important project in New York and is the single most important step in getting the West Side developed which we need for the future of the city. And so the public benefit is clear and ultimately if the private property owners who everyone has been trying to deal with for years can’t be brought into a realistic arrangement then the state should consider using its powers to take the property.”
Posted by amy at 9:46 AM
March 16, 2008
The Atlantic Yards - Oil on Linen by Edward Minoff
Posted by steve at 8:40 AM
March 7, 2008
Yes, Atlantic Yards is the source of the "bloggiest" claim
Atlantic Yards Report
On the Brian Lehrer Live show, Steven Berlin Johnson, co-founder of Outside.in, notes that Atlantic Yards is the reason he proclaimed Clinton Hill as the "bloggiest" neighborhood.
At about 24:00, Johnson explained, "We did a survey of America's bloggiest neighborhoods... We ran the numbers, most posts per neighborhood in all these cities. When it came back, the top five neighborhoods were all in Brooklyn. We decided Brooklyn could have only one neighborhood. So I think it was Clinton Hill, because however we defined Atlantic Yards, it was in there."
As I wrote last April, if the source of Clinton Hill's stature was Atlantic Yards, the bloggiest neighborhood should be Prospect Heights, home to almost all of the project footprint.
NoLandGrab: If ever there was a topic in Brooklyn that deserves coverage in the blogs, it's Atlantic Yards. After all, coverage of this boondoggle has been sorely lacking in the mainstream media. If only Outside.in would notice that the neighborhood being most directly threatened is Prospect Heights and not Clinton Hill.
Posted by steve at 8:16 AM
Wired Deals
Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn reprints a thoughtful commentary, originally posted to Atlantic Yards Report, about how judges can fail to do an independent assessment of a project like Atlantic Yards after public officials have fallen into line to endorse it.
Though they may not want to, there is no doubt that our New York justices know that they can second-guess analysis of a public agency. They don’t want to because it is an uncomfortable thing to do. Essentially they are required to make an ad hominem finding about how the public officials have conducted themselves; the courts will have to say that what they see is “unreasonable,” “in bad faith” or “arbitrary and capricious.” Either that or they need to change their presumptions- which in cases of developer-initiated, developer-driven condemnations like Atlantic Yards they probably should.
The public officials who know that a deal like this one was wired should not be surprised to be called off base. An important thing to understand is that not all deals are “wired.” Most deals handled by public officials are not. It may be strange to think that all deals, whether they are wired or not, may be subject to the same standard of judicial review, but if our judges choose not to deal with reality that may indeed be the case.
When a deal is wired, process breaks down and rationalization sets in. Public servants don’t stand up for proper process because they might lose their job or not get promoted as fast. They may believe in taking orders. But they don’t want to acknowledge that there is real harm in this. If a deal is small, a public official may disregard the skip in process as too small to pay attention to. If a deal is big, like Atlantic Yards, then the breakdown in process will lead to cumulatively bad results. Through rationalization, these bad results are probably not even acknowledged by the very public servants who have ushered through a wired deal.
...
Last in line to say whether the fantasy-land mis-processing of a wired project should be rejected as an unreasonable version of reality is the reviewing judge. The judge can side with reality and reject the work of the public officials. Again, it is uncomfortable to do so- Honestly speaking the public officials who did the work will acknowledge that wired deals are a very real thing- but that doesn’t mean a judge is going to want to render a real opinion that acknowledges this failure of process.
Posted by steve at 6:55 AM
February 17, 2008
Yellow-bellied Sapsucker vs. Yellow-bellied Developer
Dope on the Slope
NoLandGrab: When Jon Crow of the Brooklyn Bears Garden started telling us about the threat of the Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, we were all "yeah Jon, we already know about that." Then we realized he was talking about a bird...
Sapsuckers makes two kinds of holes: deep drilled narrow openings and the larger shallow patches shown here. These holes are just deep enough into the bark tissue to allow exuding of sap. The sap, as well as any insects attracted to it, is eagerly lapped up by the bird. Many other species of bird take advantage of this "strip mining" (the lousy parasites), so the yellowbellied sapsucker could be considered a keystone species.Do the holes hurt the tree? While it's possible that a tree could be seriously damaged by such treatment, it would not be in the sapsucker's long term interest to kill its food source. As several of the gardeners present last Sunday pointed out, not one branch was girdled, so it's possible the damage will be repaired by the tree itself.
If only the yellowbellied real estate developer (Agripeta maximus1) followed a similar strategy. Unfortunately, the neighborhoods that are being pecked to death are not a meaningful resource for this wily species. There is no incentive to preserve anything, because it has no bearing on the species' future success. Our local government will always be there to toss out more seed.
Posted by amy at 12:36 PM
January 25, 2008
Bloomberg's Budget Cuts
Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn
These two items make the point that the sweetheart deal made with developer Bruce Ratner looks particularly foolish when the economy calls for belt-tightening.
Mayor Bloomberg proposes key service cuts and cutting $180 million from the Department of Education while handing over $205 million in direct cash subsidy to Forest City Ratner's Atlantic Yards project, as well as a blank check from city taxpayers for "extraordinary infrastructure costs."
Will the Council go for it?
Bloomberg: Economy is Highly Volatile
Bloomberg Proposes Budget Cuts Across City Agencies NY Times City Room Blog
...“No boom goes on indefinitely today,” the mayor said in a noontime news conference in the Blue Room at City Hall. “I think it’s fair to say that both the national and international economies are in a state of high volatility.”...
The Knickerblogger comments (correctly):
Yeah, Bloomberg, great time for the city and state to subsidize a billionaire developer with a poor track record's ill conceived attempt to build a highly speculative, poorly designed luxury condo/stripmall/arena complex.
Posted by steve at 4:30 AM
January 20, 2008
taking a break
The Poem A Day Project does Atlantic Yards...
she rests in a separate room, local
newspaper folded across one knee
the atlantic yards, coney island,
someone else fighting something
without a point we’ve just finished
fighting something without a point
Posted by amy at 11:52 AM
what's going on Brooklyn? (part 2, the insight)
everderame stumbles upon local politics through art...
The message was there, and somewhat clear (quite clear compared to the idiche letterings), definetly someone was trying to call attention to the dark side of the changes the area was passing through.But What is ATURA, who is Mayor Moo Moo (hehehe) and what about the 'Ratner Plan'. Well it seemed that I need some more information now. But I knew that on the wrong side of the Brooklyn I could gather something to undestand it as a whole. On the way back - through Lafayett Ave. to Atlantic Ave. I could see more of the area development and take a glimpse of what was written in blue on the wall: the whole area was under severe remodelling.
Posted by amy at 11:30 AM
December 22, 2007
DDDB/NY Daily News on Pilots
The Knickerblogger
The Daily News's Juan Gonzalez takes a much needed look at the City's use of PILOTS (Payments in Lieu of Taxes). These PILOTS enable large corporations to avoid paying their property taxes. Of course PILOTS are a huge part of Forest City Ratner's Atlantic Yards project. These payments they'll make in lieu of property taxes, instead of going into city coffers for the common treasury, will go to paying off the construction bond debt for their Barclays Center arena and to the State of New York. One year to the day since the poiltical approval of Atlantic Yards by the Public Authorities Control Board and still nobody has any idea what the amount of Atlantic Yards PILOTs will be. Nobody.
Posted by steve at 5:00 AM
November 16, 2007
CBN's open letter to ESDC: What happened to AY promises?
Atlantic Yards Report
The Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods has issued a public letter to the ESDC asking that the agency honor its promises.
Norman Oder summarizes the issues addressed in the letter:
1) An ombudsperson to provide the public with information and to enhance the cooperation of various government agencies involved in this project has not yet been appointed. (Last month, the New York Daily News reported on the delay.)
2) The ESDC has contracted with Henningson, Durham and Richardson Architecture and Engineering, to serve as the Environmental Mitigation Monitor for the project, CBN said, but the firm's "responsibilities and activities have not been reported to the public or to elected officials." Nor has there been a public report about the Owner’s Representative for Construction Activities announced by the ESDC.
3) While the ESDC promised the creation of an Interagency Working Group "to review approved and planned work on a monthly basis," CBN said that it assumed the group has not been formed, since it would "hold open meetings to ensure that community interests are served." (It's not clear that such a group was expected to hold open meetings.)
4) The promised Transportation Working Group has met only once, to CBN's knowledge, but neither CBN nor its traffic experts from Community Consulting Services were invited.
5) While the ESDC promised to hold regular meetings with elected officials about overall progress and key project milestones, the schedule is unclear, and City Council Member Letitia James, whose district includes the largest chunk of the project site, was not invited to a recent meeting cited by Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries regarding transportation issues.
Click here to view CBN's "Open Letter to the ESDC - Is Anybody Out There?"
Posted by steve at 7:38 AM
October 21, 2007
Desktop Day Double: Atlantic Yards, No
Brit in Brooklyn
Posted by amy at 10:32 AM
September 29, 2007
It came from the Blogosphere...
Gothamist: Extra Extra
An interview with the creators of a multimedia presentation that represents a post-Atlantic Yards development Brooklyn.
PRNewser: Dan Klores to continue ‘The War’
Ever wonder what happened to Joe DePlasco? He' s now working on publicity for the less controversial Ken Burns "War" documentary for PBS:
This is a huge PR buy for PBS, with Klores Managing Director Joe DePlasco leading the account with a staff of four (an SVP, VP, AS, and one other). It seems like relatively easy sledding for DePlasco, whose name is strewn all over articles about the plan for a Nets stadium in Brooklyn (DKC represents Forrest City Ratner developers). The only controversy over the Burns film was the drumbeat to include Latino and Native American subjects in the final cut, which added to the quality.
Posted by amy at 10:00 AM
September 9, 2007
Chris Owens: Do Not Go Gently
Brooklyn Vs Bush
. . .with John Pinamonti and the Atomic Grind Show. The Atlantic Yards "done deal" keeps on doing it to the people of Brooklyn. But Brooklyn keeps fighting back. Make the crooks who have force fed the disasterous deal pay plenty. Freddy's and the people of the neighborhood are faced with removal by Eminent Domain Abuse and would appreciate any money you might like to donate to Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn's legal fund to fight to save Brooklyn in Court.
Posted by amy at 8:52 PM
August 19, 2007
Concert Review: Blow This Nightclub Reunion (Sort of…) at Freddy’s, Brooklyn NY 8/12/07
Lucid Culture visited Freddy's for a recent reunion of the Zombies
Since Freddy’s is in the “footprint” for the Atlantic Yards luxury housing/basketball arena complex, its days are numbered. Tonight’s show, more than just a great moment in obscure rock history, is yet another reminder of what New York stands to lose from the explosion of luxury housing. For not only are all those cheaply prefabricated, plastic-and-sheetrock Legoland highrises displacing music venues, they’re displacing the people who play there. And raising rents to the point where musicians and other artists can’t afford to live here anymore. Cities have always served as a cauldron for great artistic alchemy, and we’re witnessing their extinction on a scale greater than any other time in history. If Ratner and his cronies get their way, what was once arguably this nation’s greatest musical metropolis will become a vapid highrise suburb devoid of anything edgier than American Idol. New York is already in the midst of an artistic brain drain, and it will only get worse. Ask yourself, when’s the last time you discovered a good New York band (or artist, or filmmaker, etc.) under thirty years old? This city was once a magnet for great talent, but now nobody can afford to come here. In the absence of some cataclysmic event (or voter initiative) that puts an end to the luxury housing boom, what’s left of a vast and fertile scene won’t last much longer. Get out to Freddy’s – or Lakeside or Magnetic Field or wherever else something good is still happening – while you can.
Posted by amy at 9:27 AM
July 29, 2007
Friday Reflections: Whaddaya Mean, Brooklyn?
The Written Nerd contemplates where in Brooklyn to put a new bookstore - and in the process considers what "Brooklyn" means...
Brooklynites, both natives and those who moved here from elsewhere, are often incredibly passionate about where they live. It shows up in their willingness to engage with local issues like the Atlantic Yards project. It shows up in fierce, joyfully irrational neighborhood loyalties – how do you think Neighborhoodies got so successful? But it shows up sometimes in a sort of shamed defensiveness about the changes happening in the borough – about the fact that Brooklyn's cultural vitality can sometimes mean development that pushes out those without money to spend. Just look at the Brooklynian boards sometime for a sampling of the names those tech-savvy Brooklynites are calling each other: yuppie, gentrifier, scared white liberal. In a place with so much diversity, where the breath of fresh creative juices often means the potential for commercial exploitation, tensions are bound to exist, along with some jockeying for authenticity. It can be a challenge to navigate that. Call me naïve, but I think generally not being jerks to each other is a good place to start.
Posted by amy at 11:41 AM
July 21, 2007
Atlantic Yards, Baghdad.
KnickerBlogger
Perhaps our so called elite realize they are so increasingly out of touch with 'the people' that the new architecture- knowingly agoraphobic and standoffish - is an attempt to grab as much as possible, and have a quick way to close the gates before all hell breaks loose. That is certainly the mentality of Bruce Ratner in Brooklyn - consistently he does as much as he can to carve out a chunk of territory and make sure there's no public access...and it seems with our embassy in Baghdad- what kind of country has to build an embassy like this...
Posted by amy at 9:16 AM
June 8, 2007
Opponents Of Atlantic Yards Vow To Appeal Ruling
NY1
By Roger Clark
Activists in Brooklyn say they're not giving up the fight to derail the massive Atlantic Yards project, despite yet another defeat in the courts.
...
The judge said the suit lacked merit, but opponents vow to appeal, arguing the project doesn't serve a public purpose, a requirement for the use of eminent domain.“What the judge said was that even if everything that we said is true, that the project had primarily private benefit and only a small public benefit, that we would not be successful on a constitutional claim because it was sufficient for them to have a small amount of public benefit,” said Candace Carponter of Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn.
...
Some local residents NY1 talked with said opponents of the project should keep up the battle."Absolutely they should keep fighting,” said one area resident. “I mean this is an unjust situation."
"I think [Ratner’s] going to get his way,” said another. “We might get a five percent compromise on the plan, but I think it's worth fighting because it's the right position."
Project opponents are fighting with another lawsuit in state court, challenging the validity of the state's environmental impact study of the project. A decision is expected in the coming weeks.
article/video (dialup/broadband)
Posted by lumi at 7:29 AM
June 3, 2007
Atlantic Yards......a bad idea
Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn
Steve Gilliard, one of the most widely respected and beloved bloggers in all of blogdom, passed away yesterday at the age of 41. Steve always wrote with passion and with a deeply historical point of view on whatever topic he tackled. On December 22nd, 2006 Steve blogged about "Atlantic Yards," in a piece he titled "Atlantic Yards......a bad idea." His starting point was a NY Daily News editorial crowing about the project, titled "A groundbreaking coalition." After excerpting a piece of the editorial, Steve went into his analysis, concluding:...Why do you need this monstrosity in downtown Brooklyn? Who does it serve? The five Nets fans in Brooklyn? Or rich developers, gullible "community activists" and even more gullible newspaper columnists.His voice will be missed. May he rest in peace.
More commentary from The Daily Gotham: Remembering Steve Gilliard: Steve on Atlantic Yards
Posted by amy at 11:31 AM
May 13, 2007
Freddy’s Bar, Donald O’Finn, and Underground Video Art
bavatuesdays
One of the many, many things I miss about Brooklyn is Freddy’s Bar. This storied speak easy represents the best combination of dive bar and underground cultural mecca. Unfortunately, Freddy’s very existence is currently being threatened by Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards Project which, among other things, plans on bringing the New Jersey Nets to Brooklyn and making tons of money while ruining the spirit of this fine city in the process (read more about this at Fans for Fair Play).There are many great things about Freddy’s and a million reasons to save it, but one that I want to focus on in particular is the underground video art of its manager Donald O’Finn. Having a drink at Freddy’s is not only more pleasant and significantly cheaper than any where else in NYC, but you also get a lot more than a few drinks for your visit. The television on the wall behind the bar often offers an ongoing collage of clips from various films, the pacing of which is simply mesmerizing. I was originally attracted by the videos because of their use of innumerable clips from obscure b-movies. I found myself trying to name the movie, or find some kind of reference so that I could somehow get my hands on it. After watching these videos a number of times, I began to notice a some thematic patterns for these collages. They were not meaningless montages (is there such a thing?) but rather narrative sequences that tell a series of compelling stories. In short, brilliantly imaginative stuff!
Posted by amy at 11:22 AM
March 19, 2007
The Motion carries, but what does it say?
A closer examination of what went on after the presentation of the Department of Transportation's plan to convert 6th & 7th Avenues in Park Slope to one-way thoroughfares
By Kevin Burget
Filmmaker, WideIris.net
Park Slope, Brooklyn
BrooklynPapers.com posted a nice upbeat video of the Community Board 6 Traffic and Transportation Committee meeting, but having more footage from that meeting might be useful. There were many good speeches with politicians going emphatically on the record. However, more importantly, none of the triumphalism of the Brooklyn Paper's piece made its way into the single most important consequence of the meeting — the written Motion that becomes the salient part of the record.
It turns out this Motion didn't, as The Brooklyn Paper reports, "vote the proposal down." It said the proposal requires "further study."
HOW THE PRESS GOT IT WRONG
This wasn't the impression given to those in attendance. The proposer of the Motion did actually say "we ask that the DOT [Department of Transportation] withdraw this proposal at this time; there are many questions, we want to get a lot of data." But when the meaning of the Motion was unclear to some who spoke up in the house, the Meeting Chair recapped by saying the Motion "is basically, to withdraw this proposal for 6th and 7th." This clarification met with huge applause in the end, as people did take it to be an unequivocal rejection, or statement of an intention to reject the DOT proposal at the next meeting.
The text of the motion that came out of the meeting, it turns out, makes no such intention clear, and may be reflecting the idiosyncratic bias of the motion's writer, which was neither in accord with unanimous opinion in the room, nor indeed with the definition given by the Meeting Chair. This is not a subtle distinction, as sending it back to the DOT for more study implies that people had lingering questions that were unanswered, and therefore could not decide, up or down, on the proposal.
The very purpose of this meeting was for the DOT to make a proposal and for people to ask questions. The proposal was made, all the local politicians asked questions and then gave their impressions, uniformly negative. No one asked questions about the proposal that the DOT said it could not answer at the time. There simply were no more questions, no lingering doubts.
While clearly people had much to say further against the plan and were forestalled by this precipitous calling of a Motion, all were eventually satisfied by the explanation that the Motion meant CB6's rejection of the plan to convert 6th and 7th to one-way avenues in Park Slope.
It is inaccurate and spurious of the author of that Motion to have written something less definitive. It misrepresents the community, the "ayes" of the Board Members present, and it now misleads the community at large.
I'd go so far as to say it's even a loophole for the DOT, which can go back and "study the issue" some more and come back with the very same recommendation, only now they can say they listened to the community. I do hope I'm over thinking this, but the wording of this Motion in no way says CB6 will reject this Plan, and I hope it can be corrected and a New Motion raised at the next meeting that reflects the truly universal opposition to this plan by the Park Slope community.
Footage of the meeting excerpt in question:
Wide Iris (QuickTime)
YouTube (Shockwave Flash)
Posted by lumi at 8:07 AM
March 9, 2007
Atlantic Yards, Invisible Borders
adaptivelandscapes.com
A cool (in all senses of the word) slideshow, documenting the border of the Atlantic Yards footprint. Link
Artist, Christian Marc Schmidt:
Using sequenced still images, I trace paths around political and/or historical boundaries within cities, borders which may have had, or will have, a profound influence on the urban morphology of a city.
Further explanation from the artist.
My interest lies in the boundaries of the area, within which this tension is inherent. The border itself is the interface between old and new, between reality and idea. It is an anticipatory space, in which one can experience the friction or harmony resulting from the collision of ideas—the idea of now, of what the place is, and the idea of possibility, of what it could become. Programmatically, boundaries shape any future development, yet also contain the memory of what a place used to be, or what it might have been.
Posted by lumi at 10:44 AM
December 16, 2006
INTERVIEW: STEVE BUSCEMI (CHARLOTTE'S WEB)
Cinematic Happenings Under Development
Q: As a Brooklyn boy myself it’s been interesting to see the borough change over the last few years – what’s your take?Buscemi: I read something heartbreaking today – developers in Coney Island are going to take away Astro Land, and we’re going to lose the Cyclone. My first thought was, ‘That’s it, I’m moving.’ I can’t take it anymore. There’s been so much development. This whole thing with Atlantic Yards, the stadium coming in with sixteen high rise towers… it’s changing too much. I just think I hate to lose the character of what makes Brooklyn different from Manhattan. Manhattan’s a great city, but Brooklyn should be different from Manhattan.
Q: Is there any turning back, or is it too late?
Buscemi: We’re trying to stop it. I do work with this group, Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, and there is a lawsuit right now concerning the eminent domain. Hopefully if it can’t be stopped it can be scaled down considerably. But so many politicians are for it. Hopefully Spitzer, who I think is great, hopefully when he gets in it can be revisited and maybe some of the things can be reversed and it can at least be scaled down a lot.
Q: Yeah, I live in Prospect Heights. It’s depressing to imagine those big high rises looming overhead.
Buscemi: So you know. I think it’s a bad idea. It gets hard because we want employment and we want jobs, but I think Ratner has been exploiting that. I think there are ways to have jobs and affordable housing without this huge, mammoth development.
We're not sure what the Daily Graboid is on this site, but the graphic somehow seems appropriate...
Posted by amy at 10:21 AM
December 10, 2006
Hot Seat: Steve Buscemi
New York Post reminds us why Steve Buscemi is so cool - as if we needed a reminder...
Q: You've lived in Park Slope for ages. As it gets more gentrified, do you get more autograph seekers?A: Nope, it's rare that somebody will stop me and ask for an autograph. Usually if somebody recognizes me, they don't say anything, or they just say "Hey." I'm able to live as close to a normal life as I can.
I am nervous about the Atlantic Yards going through, though - how much that'll change the whole area. I think it's just an unfortunate situation, and it's divided a lot of communities. We need jobs and housing, but I'm not convinced [this is] the solution. I hope there's a way that everybody can get what they need, but environmentally it's gonna be awful.
Q: You've been pretty active in the fight against the project.
A: Yeah, I've been involved with Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn. Every politician is for this project except for a few very brave ones, like Letitia James and some others in Brooklyn who aren't afraid to speak against it. Even Elliot Spitzer said that it's too big, and I'm hoping that [he] can be a positive force in either scaling this down or, you know, just changing the direction. Marty Markowitz [also] says that it's too big, and having people like that say that it's too big, and that maybe this isn't such a great idea, helps.
It's just way oversized and overwhelming, and I just don't see how it's going to be good for Brooklyn.
Buscemi will ironically be playing a rat in his newest film, "Charlotte's Web."
Posted by amy at 7:29 PM
October 24, 2006
The Long, Long Arm of the “Kelo Plus” Initiatives
by John Ryskamp
A legal analysis of "Kelo plus" ballot initiatives which seek to rein in governmental regulation under the guise of property rights by eminent domain legal scholar and activist John Ryskamp.
The assault on the scrutiny regime established by West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1937), continues apace. To the amazed incomprehension, blustering, handwringing—and loss—of advocates of the scrutiny regime, state propositions have moved further to destroy the underlying doctrine of the Constitution that law rationally relates to a legitimate government purpose. The effect of these initiatives—extending the assault on government power beyond eminent domain in response to the Kelo case—is to substitute a new Constitutional doctrine: every law maintains an important fact. The initiatives—here we will discuss the representative California initiative, Proposition 90 —are not restricted to real property, and they are not restricted to fair market value. Thus, they open up the factual inquiry to evaluating and ranking facts in terms of each other, and reconciling them with each other on the basis of the concept of maintenance: this is the new Constitutional doctrine in action. We are being drawn irresistibly into a new Constitutional era, without its true significance ever being recognized, either by those who are bringing it into existence, or by those who oppose it coming into existence.
NOT RESTRICTED TO REAL PROPERTY
A good measure of the incomprehension of the scrutiny regime, can be taken by reading the California Legislative Analyst’s discussion of Proposition 90. Section 3, Paragraph 8 of the initiative states: “Except when taken to protect public health and safety, ‘damage’ to private property includes government actions that result in substantial economic loss to private property. Examples of substantial economic loss include, but are not limited to, the downzoning of private property, the elimination of any access to private property, and limitations on the use of private air space. ‘Government action’ shall mean any statute, charter provision, ordinance, resolution, law, rule or regulation.” Proposition 90 contains many definitions, but it does not define “property.” The Legislative Analyst does not note the absence of a definition, nor of course is there any analysis of the extension of the proposition to non-real property situations. Nor is the section of itself restricted to real property. Of course, modernly, property under the Fourteenth Amendment is regarded as “property interest” and is vast indeed. It is not even clear whether proponents of Proposition 90 knows this. But everyone will know it soon enough, once Proposition 90 passes, as it is expected to do.
Opponents of Proposition 90 consider the Proposition a “stealth” initiative because it contains the Paragraph 8 clause in addition to restrictions of eminent domain to public use. But that is not the real grounds of concern. Such anti-Kelo initiatives run into problems—not solutions—because they attempt to restrict eminent domain with respect to generalities, rather than with respect to facts. Proposition 90 is illustrative in this regard. We never get a definition of what “public use” is, only of what it is not. Section 3, including the proposed new Constitutional language, states: “(1) ‘Public use’ shall have a distinct and more narrow meaning than the term ‘public purpose’; its limiting effect prohibits takings expected to result in transfers to nongovernmental owners on economic development or tax revenue enhancement grounds, or for any other actual uses that are not public in fact, even though these uses may serve otherwise legitimate public purposes. (2) Public use shall not include the direct or indirect transfer of any possessory interest in property taken in an eminent domain proceeding from one private party to another private party unless that transfer proceeds pursuant to a government assignment, contract or arrangement with a private entity whereby the private entity performs a public use project. In all eminent domain actions, the government shall have the burden to prove public use.” The confusion here is compounded by the Supreme Court’s finding, in Kelo itself, that the term “economic development” has no logical content whatsoever, it doesn’t distinguish between one kind of eminent domain use and another. So it is unclear that Proposition 90 “hides” something in its restriction of eminent domain, because that restriction is in itself problematic.
No, the cause for concern for opponents of Proposition 90 is that Section 8 applies in situations which have nothing to do with eminent domain. Section 8 is not “hidden” by the eminent domain reform—the point is that it doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with eminent domain reform. It is a freestanding assault on the scrutiny regime. Consider this very brief discussion of a few interest currently considered “property interests” under the Fourteenth Amendment:
Beyond employment the Court found “legitimate entitlements” in a variety of situations. Thus, because Ohio included within its statutes a provision for free education to all residents between five and 21 years of age and a compulsory–attendance at school requirement, the State was deemed to have obligated itself to accord students some due process hearing rights prior to suspending them, even for such a short period as ten days. “Having chosen to extend the right to an education to people of appellees’ class generally, Ohio may not withdraw that right on grounds of misconduct, absent fundamentally fair procedures to determine whether the misconduct has occurred.” The Court is highly deferential, however, to dismissal decisions based on academic grounds. The most striking application of such due process analysis, to date, is Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., in which a state antidiscrimination law required the enforcing agency to convene a factfinding conference within 120 days of the filing of the complaint. Inadvertently, the Commission scheduled the hearing after the expiration of the 120 days and the state courts held the requirement to be jurisdictional, necessitating dismissal of the complaint. The Court held that Logan had been denied due process. His cause of action was a property interest; older cases had clearly established causes of action as property and, in any event, Logan’s claim was an entitlement grounded in state law and it could be removed only ‘for cause.’ That property interest existed independently of the 120– day time period and could not simply be taken away by agency action or inaction. Beyond statutory entitlements, the Court has looked to state decisional law to find that private utilities may not terminate service at will but only for cause, for nonpayment of charges, so that when there was a dispute about payment or the accuracy of charges, due process required the utility to follow procedures to resolve the dispute prior to terminating service.
Currently, there is no awareness at any level that the “Kelo plus” initiatives have implications for these types of cases.
NOT RESTRICTED TO FAIR MARKET VALUE
Most anti-Kelo proposals try to capture, for the party subject to a taking, some of the enhanced value expected from the government purpose for the property. Proposition 90 is no different in this regard. The new Constitutional language in Section 3 attempts to give force to this concept: “(5) If a public use is determined, the taken or damaged property shall be valued at its highest and best use without considering any future dedication requirements imposed by the government. If private property is taken for any proprietary governmental purpose, then the property shall be valued at the use to which the government intends to put the property, if such use results in a higher value for the land taken. (6) In all eminent domain actions, ‘just compensation’ shall be defined as that sum of money necessary to place the property owner in the same position monetarily, without any governmental offsets, as if the property had never been taken. ‘Just compensation’ shall include, but is not limited to, compounded interest and all reasonable costs and expenses actually incurred. (7) In all eminent domain actions, ‘fair market’ value shall be defined as the highest price the property would bring on the open market.” This definition necessarily brings us back to the issue of “public use,” because the initial determination of “public use” also included the way government “valued” the property. From the point of view of the scrutiny regime, this means that compensation and government purpose are mutually exclusive.
But that is not the meaning if we are not viewing things from the perspective of the scrutiny regime. In the new Constitutional epoch, the valuation section, coupled with Section 8, gives rise to the question, does the law maintain property? It’s simple enough, but does that eliminate all ambiguities? By no means. One of the first things to notice about the new Constitutional doctrine is that disputes are now being fought out along new lines. Instead of arguing about government purpose, or whether—at the level of intermediate scrutiny, for example—a law furthers an important government purpose, we are now arguing about what, in fact, is property. This inquiry was basically forbidden by the scrutiny regime, which left that determination to the political process and ratified what the political came up with in terms of a factual finding.
The interaction of the two dimensions of the “Kelo plus” initiatives, makes that impossible. It appears to make government chase its tail, but that’s fine with public opinion, as long as government does not operate on facts public opinion considers important. When government does feel it can break out of a circular argument and make a case of having an impact on an important fact, then determination becomes an inquiry into facts. This is the new Constitutional doctrine in application. All unawares, we are getting our first marching orders from the new Constitutional regime.
Posted by lumi at 8:16 AM
October 20, 2006
It came from the Blogosphere...
Landmark This!, Officer's Row, Oh No!!!
An update on the fight to save the Navy Yard's Officer's Row from the wrecking ball explains many of the PR techniques being used by forces who support tearing down the historic buildings:
Another issue with this is the argument that it will benefit the Farragut Housing residents. As I said, they do need a supermarket. But is this just developer using the poor to their advantage? Make the preservationists out to be anti-poor is the method they're using (reminiscent of Atlantic Yards proponents no?).
fluxed.net, big ups brooklyn
An artist comments on the Footprints exhibit and the contributions of his friends Mike and Eliza:
but more importantly, this show was about the proposed atlantic yards project in brooklyn. it is a massive project that includes a sports stadium and PLENTY of luxury apartments. i dont live in brooklyn and i dont know the history of the place, but having been there its really fantastic and it would be a shame to increase its density so quickly.
Fans For Fair Play, A called third strike
A Mets fan finds life lessons in a called third strike (something that Nets owner "Caring" Bruce Ratner probably wouldn't understand):
A called third strike.
Every baseball player knows you guard the strike zone.
Magic doesn't happen unless you make it happen.
City Hall isn't fought unless we do the fighting.
Posted by lumi at 6:38 AM
October 8, 2006
Welcome to the Atlantic Yards Blog
David's Atlantic Yards Blog
In the month and a half since I covered this beat I have experienced divisive opinions between different groups of people who feel so strongly passionate about this project, pro and con. There are people who feel very strongly about Atlantic Yards changing the character of their neighborhoods, and there are those who see this as an opportunity for more jobs and affordable housing. AY is a David vs. Goliath story between the little guy, the big real estate developer and government. How it all turns out remains to be certain.As someone who is not from those neighborhoods but has been a longtime Brooklynite, I am totally neutral over this issue. I think that's a good attitude as a reporter because it won't cloud about how I feel. I think both sides make valid arguments but I can definitely step back and look at things with a slightly more objective viewpoint (although absolute objectivity is impossible).
NoLandGrab: Atlantic Yards blogs are like stores on Smith Street lately - a new one every day. Welcome to the neighborhood!
Posted by amy at 1:45 AM
September 23, 2006
My Extroverted Introversion
Some of you might be following the controversy over BrooklynSpeaks and trying to figure out, who is this Brooklyn and what is she saying? Problem solved. BrooklynSpeaks has a blog. Following are excerpts to help you get the bigger picture...
I can see it both ways, and the fact that I can see it both ways makes me uncomfortable.
...
It makes me feel very very sick.
...
And maybe I'll just have to move out west.
Maybe BrooklynSpeaks doubts can be explained by her interests: playing basketball, coaching basketball and watching college basketball.
Posted by amy at 10:43 AM
August 27, 2006
It came from the Blogosphere...
Gumby Fresh, Hoop Drools
This came back to me as I watched Vince Carter and top wife-beater Jason Kidd mumble their way through a press conference organised by their boss Bruce Ratner aboout the stadium. Here's the low-down (Realplayer link) from Kidd on why he just loves his boss' project:""He's doing it not just for the Nets, but for the community, for the youth to have role models tobe able to look up to not just for ten years but for longevity."
Carter's statement, which I haven't been able to hunt down, was if anything even less coherent than Kidd's. It's a tribute to Ratner's cynicism that he thinks that merely hauling two athletes onstage to repeat "Youth", "Goal" and "Unity" in an indeterminate order will provide the requisite publicity boost.
Capitoilette, Survivor: Atlantic Yards
Well, on the same day that CBS unveiled its brilliant new Survivor format, Bruce Ratner and friends also decided to showcase just how good a marketing strategy it is to play the race card.By buying-off construction workers with phony claims about jobs, and housing advocates with phony claims about affordable housing (and by simply buying Rev. Herbert Daughtry), Forest City Ratner has managed to paint a portrait of a passionate and predominantly African-American pro-AY team facing off against a rather bloodless group of Anglo anti-Yarders.
It’s a powerful picture, and one that has made many a local elected official a tad antsy about weighing in against the development (Letitia James, to her credit, is a notable exception). No one in Borough or City politics wants to be against minority jobs or affordable housing, and few would want to be seen as anti-African American. I’m sure Ratner and his consultants had some idea all along that they might get so lucky.
vidiotspeak, Sorry for the light posting,
Nobody said what was really going on. Nobody talked about the fact that there is a myth called "private property" in this country. There is no such thing as private property. You may THINK you own your home. But you don't. The bank does. And even if you pay of the mortgage, you still don't own it. Just try to not pay your property taxes and see how long you get to live there. The crux of the Ratner project is the way he acquired the land -- through guise and eminant domain abuse.Mr. Vidiot has coined a really good term for this and he doesn't want me say too much about it yet, and hopefully, he will blog about it soon. (He doesn't blog much. He'd better start. Hint hint.)
We're anxiously awaiting...NoLandGrab loves to propagate new words!
Daily Gotham, onNYTurf: Gmaps for Atlantic Yards and Williamsburg Waterfront development proposals
OMFG! I almost forgot about Will's maps. If you have not seen them, run ASAP. They totally kick ass and are an example of exactly the kind of information the city ought to be putting out for us constituents to review.Why is it that even if we have a mayor who happens to be one of the biggest digital moguls of our era; New Yorkers cannot count on having this kind of information available on the internet and in kiosks around the city for "We The People's" review?
Dreadnaught, "Bruce Ratner promised us housing and all we got were these lousy T-shirts"
Posted by amy at 8:12 AM
August 3, 2006
Community Commentary: John Ryskamp, Open Letter to The Village Voice
Immigration attorney and frequent eminent domain commentator John Ryskamp follows up this week's Village Voice cover story on residents in the Atlantic Yards footprint with a letter to the editor that outlines the legal case against eminent domain for Bruce Ratner's private development plans.
John Ryskamp concludes:
I don’t think it will take a genius to find out that private purpose has been substituted for government purpose in the Atlantic Yards case. There is already so much evidence of it in the press that it seems impossible that a judge would not grant an injunction—even at this relatively early stage—against the project on the basis that it violates minimum scrutiny because there is no government purpose, only private purpose.
Your article on the Atlantic Yards project mentioned the fact that in the Kelo case, the Court said the project could not be developer driven. My book on the response to the Kelo case, The New Constitution: The Eminent Domain Revolt and the Fourth Constitutional Epoch, will be published this fall by Algora Publishing. It contains a discussion of this important point, and perhaps your readers will find it useful for me to describe the legal struggle going on over the notion of a project being “developer driven.”
Eminent domain can be used if there is
- a rational
- relation
- to a legitimate government purpose.
That is, eminent domain need only pass this “minimum scrutiny” test. In the past, “government purpose” was construed so broadly by the Court that people felt they could never use it as a defense against eminent domain. In the 1984 Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff case, the Court said that the purpose need be “conceivable.” This led people to conclude that there did not, in fact, have to be a government purpose, that if government did not even have a purpose, the Court would step in and supply a government purpose.
However, the Court then realized that if there is in fact no government purpose, there is in fact no government, and the famous case of Marbury v. Madison established that under the Constitution people have a right to government. Not wanting to overrule Marbury and destroy the Constitution, the Court rethought the idea.
The Court then indicated that, in fact, there had to be a government purpose. It began in two 1996 cases. In U.S. v. Virginia the Court said that government purpose “must be genuine, not hypothesized or invented post hoc in response to litigation.” In Romer v. Evans, the Court expanded on this idea, saying that the government purpose must be “an independent and legitimate legislative end....”
Your article indicated that in the otherwise unfavorable Kelo case, there might be wording favorable to Atlantic Yards residents. There is. It is in Justice Kennedy’s concurring opinion. Here’s how to determine if there is in fact government purpose. It is a list of evidence those opposed to Atlantic Yards will now obtain by deposition and document subpoenas:
“A court confronted with a plausible accusation of impermissible favoritism to private parties should [conduct]….‘a careful and extensive inquiry into ‘whether, in fact, the development plan [chronology]
[1.] is of primary benefit to . . . the developer…, and private businesses which may eventually locate in the plan area…,
[2.] and in that regard, only of incidental benefit to the city…[.]’”
Kennedy is also interested in facts of the chronology which show, with respect to government,
“[3.] awareness of…depressed economic condition and evidence corroborating the validity of this concern…,
[4.] the substantial commitment of public funds…before most of the private beneficiaries were known…,
[5.] evidence that [government] reviewed a variety of development plans…[,]
[6.] [government] chose a private developer from a group of applicants rather than picking out a particular transferee beforehand and…
[7.] other private beneficiaries of the project [were]…unknown [to government] because the…space proposed to be built [had] not yet been rented….”
In the Kelo case, the New London newspaper The Day discovered that none of these conditions had been met and, several months AFTER the Kelo decision, published an account which showed that Pfizer—the drug company which wanted the land—had approached New London and THEN New London announced it wanted to “redevelop” the area. In short, New London had simply abrogated government purpose and substituted Pfizer’s purpose.
What difference does that make? Justice Kennedy is concerned about government entities substituting private purpose for government purpose. That is why he wants litigators to go back and find out such things as, who contacted who first, what facts went into the decision-making process, and so on. Substituting private purpose for government purpose is so common now that it even has a name in political science: “capture theory,” in which private actors simply do whatever is necessary to prompt government officials to adopt their purpose. But just because it is common, doesn’t mean that it is Constitutional. When it substitutes private for government purpose, it violates minimum scrutiny and cannot be allowed.
I don’t think it will take a genius to find out that private purpose has been substituted for government purpose in the Atlantic Yards case. There is already so much evidence of it in the press that it seems impossible that a judge would not grant an injunction—even at this relatively early stage—against the project on the basis that it violates minimum scrutiny because there is no government purpose, only private purpose.
However, when attorneys defending the Atlantic Yards residents go into court to make that motion, they better come prepared to show that they have done their homework: they better take the depositions and subpoena the documents implied by Justice Kennedy’s remarks. Attorneys have become so lazy under the former lazy definition of government purpose, that they don’t do their work. The Atlantic Yards residents should bring heavy pressure on their attorneys to do the work Justice Kennedy demands.
Cordially yours,
John Ryskamp
Berkeley, CA.
Posted by lumi at 10:37 AM
July 31, 2006
Community Commentary: Law prof disputes Daily News
Native Brooklynite David Reiss — Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School and Community Board 6 member (Chairperson, Budget/Community Development Committee) — responds to the Daily News Editorial Board's assertion that community groups and critics of Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards project are "barking up the wrong legal tree," by explaining that these groups, according to the NY State legislature, are actually fulfilling their responsibility.
The editorial board of the Daily News took the members of Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn to task last week because they were “scouring” the Atlantic Yards Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), required by New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), for flaws.
The problem with that position is that that is exactly what SEQRA contemplates what members of the public are to do with a DEIS.
When enacting SEQRA, the New York legislature found that, “Every citizen has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the quality of the environment.” One of the ways that SEQRA contemplates that citizens were to contribute to the protection of the environment was by participating in the environmental review process.
SEQRA provides two important ways that members of the public can participate: by commenting on the DEIS and then by commencing litigation if they believe that SEQRA has not been complied with. It is important to note that the community has an uphill battle in any SEQRA litigation: less than 15% of SEQRA challenges to Environmental Impact Statements are successful. But – and it is an important “But” -- where a court finds that the government has failed to take a hard look at areas of serious environmental concern, it may, indeed, rule in the favor of the challengers.
Given that in New York, citizens have very few ways of making themselves heard through official channels (particularly when New York City’s Uniform Land Use Review Procedure has been suspended by the Empire State Development Corporation), it seems uncharitable for the editorial board of the Daily News to begrudge members of the public this one official outlet for their concerns, even if it disagrees with their position on the merits of the project.
Posted by lumi at 8:24 AM
July 20, 2006
COMMUNITY COMMENTARY (Open Letter): NEW TERROR TARGETS FOR BROOKLYN
You've already heard it in the press: the Draft Environmental Impact Statement doesn't cover terrorism and security issues, despite their impacts on post-9/11 urban design and the fact that Bruce Ratner and Frank Gehry are proposing to build the 60-story glass-and-steel "Miss Brooklyn" atop a major transportation hub.
While the State won't study or reveal the potential impacts of putting the densest residential project in the entire US over a major transportation hub, Prospect Heights resident Alan Rosner keeps asking the tough questions and entreating the press to get some answers.
Glass-clad skyscrapers, next to a glass sports arena, above the third largest transportation hub in the city, may soon be coming to… Brooklyn. And no one has assumed responsibility for the risks Brooklyn is being told to swallow.
The State agency in charge, the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC), declares it will NOT address post-9/11 security issues — issues that were raised by local elected officials, the three affected community boards and more than 30 community groups, as well as at official Boro Board meetings with the ESDC in attendance.
Governor Pataki will soon be leaving Albany. Has even one reporter asked any of the candidates vying to replace him about their positions on the ESDC’s disregard of the public’s safety concerns? Somehow, the press seems to have decided there’s no story there.
Meanwhile, public officials outraged over the 40% cut in New York's Department of Homeland Security grants have remained silent on security in the heart of Brooklyn: Mayor Bloomberg, who gave over control to the State, silent; our own Mr. Security, Senator Schumer, silent.
In high-profile Manhattan, publicized security problems at the Freedom Tower led to a re-thinking of that project, ultimately resulting in a far smarter design. Terrorism concerns did not prevent development from going forward. Here in Brooklyn, the Atlantic Yards project, roughly as big, easily as consequential … well it’s … fuggedaboudit!!!
Due to the ESDC’s unique understanding of due diligence, the developer, not the State, could easily end up being the party making the following crucial public safety decisions, behind closed doors, with no oversight: * How strong should all that glass be? * Should there even be that much glass there?
* What fire ratings ought the structural steel have?So, when do we learn who will determine our safety and well-being? And, how come no one appears interested in finding out?
What Ratner Wins By Ignoring Security
Fortunately for Ratner, project financials will not have to include 30 years of costly Terrorism Insurance premiums. For 16 towers and a sports arena, premiums could easily run into the hundreds of millions of dollars.Will the public perhaps have to step in to cover this “unanticipated” cost? No one has addressed this question.
Also, the ESDC will never have to acknowledge that this project concentrates so much additional risk at this particular location, nor that it irreversibly alters Brooklyn’s existing risk profile. Neither will the ESDC be compelled to indicate that the alternative project proposals, without skyscrapers or sports arenas, would not create those concerns!
Finally, with State control trumping city building codes, we may be left with Ratner helping to determine: * standards for exterior glass blast resistance, * the fire ratings for the structural steel, * emergency stairwell sizes, * whether or not Fire Department radio repeaters will be installed in the high rises, * whether there will be bio-chemical detectors and proper air-circulation systems, * and a host of other critical design and construction standards.
Will cost or public safety prevail? And if “standards” are belatedly announced, will they include appropriate post-9/11 enhancements?
How Brooklyn Loses
Indirectly, the biggest cost to Brooklyn communities could be that increased risks lead property- and small-business-insurance providers to raise premiums or withdraw from the market altogether (See NY Daily News, So this is a terror target? 03/27/06).Issues of uninsurability could affect affordable housing in ways that dwarf Ratner's pledges for the Atlantic Yards. Allstate’s response to Hurricane Katrina was to reduce its share of Brooklyn’s homeowners' insurance market (See, AP, HOMEOWNERS FAR AWAY PAY KATRINA'S DAMAGE, 06/22/06). Could this become one of those “who could ever have imagined” scenarios?
The greatest ongoing impact will likely come from the ESDC's ignoring of the traffic implications of the need for security barriers and vehicle inspections when the arena is in use, or when the Feds raise the Terror Alert Status. Likewise, since the NYPD can close streets for any security reason, the ESDC will not have to model those impacts, either. We, however, will have to live with whatever the ESDC’s Environmental Impact Statement ignores.
Indeed, the ESDC won’t have to address the implications for evacuations — or for that matter, NYPD and FDNY response times — in any sort of emergency situation. Given Brooklyn’s development-driven infrastructure overloads at the Atlantic Avenue transit station and the Flatbush, Atlantic & 4th Avenue intersections, such consequences would likely be unacceptable if publicly acknowledged.
What I haven't yet mentioned — just two years after the Madrid train bombings, a year after the London Metro bombings, and days after Mumbai’s rail bombings — is that the Atlantic Avenue station was the target of a failed suicide bomb plot in 1997.
One positive development: Ratner’s arena was originally to have sub-surface parking beneath the arena. The community protested and suddenly, it’s gone. However, it now appears that it was the NBA that determined it is unsafe to have parking beneath an arena, not any state or city agency — another story the press missed.
Alan Rosner
July, 2006
Posted by lumi at 12:23 AM
July 8, 2006
"I've been to hell, I spell it...I spell it DMV"
From an anonymous source:
I had to unfortunately go to the DMV this afternoon, which I usually do in Manhattan, but decided it might be easier to visit my local branch situated in the hideous hulking mass called the Atlantic Mall. I have only been in this mall once and as I made my way through the labryinth, I was stopped 3 times by teenagers with petitions to bring the Atlantic Yards, & NBA basketball to Brooklyn! When I got to the DMV office, there was another kid in there asking people who were standing in line to sign his petition. Of course all of them only mentioned the basketball. I told the kids I couldn't sign because I'm opposed to the plan, and also advised the three people standing near me who were about to sign not to. From what I could see, very few people were signing. And the ones who did probably just wanted to help out the kids like the way you buy M&Ms when you don't want them.My next visit to the DMV will be in Manhattan.
Posted by amy at 9:40 AM
June 18, 2006
LEMON-AID: When life gives you skyscrapers...
For immediate release
by Peter von Ziegesar
When eight-year-old Maya von Ziegesar attended Dan Zane's concert at the Hanson Place Church last month, she learned to her dismay that the 16 new skyscrapers going up near her Fort Greene home would cast a shadow over her window in the morning. She decided to join the fight against overdevelopment in Brooklyn by setting up a lemonade stand on her stoop one Saturday morning. Two hours later, Maya and her friends Leah and Lina, had raised over $30 by passing the word and selling ice-cold lemonade to friendly passersby -- mostly local residents on their way to or from the Fort Greene farmer's market. She carried the cash donation next door to a member of the Fort Greene Association committee on the Atlantic Yards.Pictured is Maya von Ziegesar, who with two school friends set up a lemonade stand on her South Portland Avenue stoop to benefit DDDB. Maya is eight and a Ft. Greene resident. She says: "I don't want those buildings to go up, because I don't like skyscrapers and I like waking up in the morning with lots of light."
Posted by amy at 11:49 AM
May 16, 2006
Some Views on Two Forest City Ratner Developments
Attorney Debra Cohen explains how Forest City Ratner systematically ignores the concerns of people who presently live in the communities near two local controversial project proposals, Yonker's Ridge Hill and Brooklyn's Atlantic Yards.
At a recent Yonkers City Council meeting a member of the public pointed out to a developer, who was there seeking approval to build an apartment building along the Hudson River, that he had neglected to provide schematics of the view commuters at the nearby train station would have of the river and the Palisades after his project was completed. A city official standing in the wings was overheard to snort somewhat disdainfully, “What’s the big deal? When I’m at the station, I’m watching for the train not looking up at the view”.
I was reminded of this incident while reading two articles in this morning’s papers that both discussed problems developer Forest City Ratner is having with developments in Brooklyn and Yonkers. They both provoked thoughts of how one’s vantage point changes one’s “views”.
In an article in The New York Times, “Developer Defends Atlantic Yards, Saying Towers Won’t Corrupt the Feel of Brooklyn”, FCR defends its plans for a massive redevelopment that includes a sports arena and commercial and residential buildings. The developer’s world-famous architect described his vision as creating “different levels of iconicity”. A spokesman for a coalition of neighborhood groups who have joined together in response to the project say that 16 skyscrapers will be “slammed on top of and next to low-rise, historic neighborhoods. The architect calls it progress and says the project’s critics “should’ve been picketing Henry Ford”. The community people call the developer’s vision for the neighborhoods an “urban planning disaster” because the architect and the developer “continue to ignore the community”.
Traveling 20 miles north to Yonkers, the headline in today’s Journal News reads “Ridge Hill Project Proceeds Despite Court Ruling Against It.” Again developer Forest City Ratner has put forward an ambitious development plan that the surrounding communities believe must be altered or it will permanently destroy the character of their neighborhoods and quality of life of local residents.
The article describes how FCR is “forging ahead with its Ridge Hill Village proposal seeking regulatory approvals” despite a successful lawsuit by local residents that invalidated a zoning ordinance necessary for the project to move forward. FCR’s spokesman justifies their aggressive approach because, “We feel we have vast support of the vast majority of Yonkers residents and taxpayers and we are confident we can get it approved”. This in spite of the fact that critics include thousands of residents represented by every neighborhood association encircling the perimeter of the 81 acre project, who say that the developers have isolated themselves from the public and refused to give serious consideration to their concerns that the project, as presently planned, will overwhelm the area with traffic and fails to accurately delineate the economic costs and benefits it will bring to the City.
How do we reconcile the differences between Forest City Ratner’s visions for the neighborhoods in Brooklyn and Yonkers from those of the people who presently call them home? What do its executives see when they look out the window of the top floor of their massive Brooklyn headquarters? Does their view from the executive suite include the people sitting on their front stoop, watching their children play, while sharing a cup of coffee with friends? Similarly, what do they see when they look down from the top of Ridge Hill in Yonkers? Does it allow them to understand what makes each neighborhood surrounding their proposed “village” unique and strong?
Perhaps Forest City Ratner has the money and power to bulldoze its vision over the will of the people whose communities they seek to change forever. Maybe they are willing to risk their projects’ futures on the chance that people power can’t triumph over money and political connections. On the other hand, they could discover that this way of doing business is as outdated as Henry Ford’s Model T. Perhaps “progress” would be to stop “developing” communities by waging war with the people who will be their future neighbors, tenants and customers. And perhaps better developments would be the result if they came down more often from their executive suites, and the top of the hill, to appreciate the perspective of the people who look up to enjoy the view.
Also posted on YonkersTribune.
Debra Cohen is an attorney based in White Plains, N.Y. who has worked with many community groups in Westchester and New York City to support their meaningful participation in the development process.
Posted by lumi at 1:09 PM
May 6, 2006
Letter to Ratner
Dear Mr. Ratner:
I received in the mail today your awesome, multicolored, multi-photographic brochure. But, there were a number of serious, and necessarily deliberate omissions. Your publicist/PR firm/spin doctor failed to include the most important and revealing item: a pictorial rendition of your project! To be clear, there is no image whatsoever in your beautiful, utopian and, I bet and hope, very expensive mailing (how many lucky Brooklynites were targeted?), of the actual visual appearance of the buildings you are planning for the site. There are two further, glaring and deliberate omissions: (1) any discussion of, or proposal/planning for the enhanced infrastructures that would be needed to support the high influx of new residents, new office workers, new cars, etc. that your project would generate; and (2) what the cost of that indispensable infrastructure -- sewers, roadways, parking, public transportation, schools, etc. -- would be, and who would shoulder it (we the taxpayers, perhaps? You don't say!). Finally, I really appreciate the prepaid "survey" card. Too bad that it does not provide for any dissenting answers! You must really think that you are dealing with a bunch of illiterate, uninformed and disenfranchised, blighted-neighborhood dwelling Brooklynites! WRONG on all counts!
And why, pray, should we support you and your ill-designed and ill-conceived project, given what you and your pseudo architect/s have already bestowed upon us? The horrendous shopping mall at Atlantic and Flatbush? No self-respecting person could ever claim title to that abomination! The hideously ugly, irredeemably offensive Court Street Movie Theaters? C'mon!
Please delete me from your mailing list, it will be a saving to you and one less piece of junk mail I have to recycle. Thank you.
Beatrice Beccari
Posted by amy at 12:42 PM
April 2, 2006
If it looks like a boycott...
Brooklyn Papers letter to the editor:
Posted by amy at 3:25 PM
March 12, 2006
Follow the Shoes
panopticonman takes us through the newfound complexities of buying sneakers in Brooklyn:
And so what that means is I’m buying shoes made in China from a corporation whose headquarters is possibly in Europe, but like Haagen Dazs could be in located in New Jersey, buying them from a discount store located on the site once offered by the Borough of Brooklyn to the O’Malley’s for a new Ebbets Field, but which, in fact, was never really seriously considered by same as secret talks were nearing completion with Los Angeles.And right next door to that shopping center there probably is soon to be a Trojan horse of a basketball arena erected by a canny real estate speculator named in fine Dickensian fashion, Ratner, a project which is being sold to us as a means to bring Brooklyn back into the world of major league sport where we are told that we the people of Brooklyn belong and which some of the more gullible believe.
Posted by amy at 11:08 AM
Remembering the Underberg
Muckraked! rounds up locals reminiscing about the Underberg building online:
The first building to go - brick by brick - is the Underberg Building, named for Samuel Underberg’s kitchen and grocery supply company, which sits on a roughly triangular plot of land at the intersection of Atlantic Avenue and Flatbush Avenue. (Photo credit: Curbed.com) The hulking structure was immortalized in Jonathan Lethem’s 2003 bestseller “Fortress of Solitude.”Ratner hopes to turn the site into a public plaza at the heart of his 22-acre residential and commercial complex, which includes the Nets basketball arena.
Posted by amy at 10:48 AM
February 13, 2006
Also sprach Bubbathustra
The Real Estate Observer has relaunched with a new look and a section for comments.
First out of the box to comment on the first two Atlantic Yards entries is "Bubba," who warns that "the thugs will be back" if the project falls prey to a downturn in the market and high costs for approval.
Upon word that plans for the Nets' move to Brooklyn has been delayed, the project supporter grumpily predicts that "the naysayers, NIMBY-ites and anti-everythings are losing the battle but winning the war.
Posted by lumi at 8:47 AM
January 24, 2006
"Ludicrous" lawsuit against Bruce Ratner
Daily Heights Forum
At the risk of being slammed by Errol Louis and others for cross-referencing other "world wide web" sites (see, "hyperlinks") covering Ratnerville, permit us to call attention to commentary on this weekend's Daily News editorial on Daily Heights Forum.
Posted by lumi at 2:26 PM
January 22, 2006
Must've Lost Their Train of Thought
andrewjlederer.com points out that the photos at the Atlantic Terminal Mall are not what they seem:
However, I noticed - as I have before - that the vintage train photos they have in some of their windows are of New York Central trains, while the LIRR's affiliation was with the Pennsylvania Railroad (its one-time owner) and Penn Station.
...
The pictures are wrong. They're perfunctory; the result of the kind of ignorance that comes from not caring.Does it matter? Of itself, probably not. But it represents lapses of social memory that really are troubling.
Would Caring Bruce Ratner really make this mistake?
Posted by amy at 10:53 AM
METS GET A LITTLE CLOSER TO A NEW PALAITIAL (sic) PALACE
The Eddie Kranepool Society
The worst are the schmucks in Downtown Brooklyn who are against Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards project. As someone who grew up just a few miles from that area let me tell you, that back in the day, the only reason you went to that part of Brooklyn was to either go to the dentist, (One Hansen Pl) to score heroin, or eat cheesecake at Juniors. And as a person of the Caucasian persuasion, as the sun went down, you better get out of town. That has all changed. The same way you can walk down Times Square with a $1,000 camera and not get a knife in your back, you can walk the streets of Downtown Brooklyn and not need mace, brass knuckles or hardware from Smith & Weston. A new arena with a hotel and shops and restaurants will be a huge boon to Brooklyn.
Hmmm...a neighborhood (not Downtown Brooklyn incidentally, which someone who "grew up just a few miles from the area" should know) comes into it's own. Knock it down!
Posted by amy at 10:44 AM
January 2, 2006
Brooklyn wildlife
From Flickr:
These were made in response to the proposed Nets arena; a lot of the discussion in support of using eminent domain to seize property and make room for the stadium centered around the idea that the area was "blighted". The plants depicted all grow in the area: the idea was [to] show the natural beauty of the area and challenge the idea of a neighborhood being blighted and expendable.
Posted by amy at 10:06 AM
January 1, 2006
It came from the Blogosphere...
Three Days in December The News Blog draws a connection between the TWU strike and Ratner's methods.
Tearing Down Brooklyn No Better Place takes a walk down Dean Street.
Mike Lupica: When Bloomberg and Pataki Say They Are Trying To Save The Gov't Some Money, Hold Onto Your Wallets reality-based educator calls out the media for missing the link between the MTA's attempted land give-aways and the strike.
Anti-Ratner Crowd Changes Its Tune Brooklyn to Harlem sees irony in Ratner foes supporting TWU workers, but not in the MTA itself.
Blogging The Telecommute Gumby Fresh is forced to shop at the "vile Ratner mall" during the strike.
Posted by amy at 11:40 AM
November 25, 2005
More on the Stuckey, Gehry, Olin AIA presentation and discussion
Some of NLG’s observations at the Stuckey/Gehry/Olin show, from the community’s perspective:
On Tuesday night Frank Gehry did something Bruce Ratner has not dreamed of doing – met with community members face to face in a public forum. Unfortunately no one had informed the starchitect of the nature of this meeting, as evidenced by Mr. Gehry's frequent statement that he thought he would be meeting only with his peers.
Although the hoi polloi was only allowed one comment during the proceedings, other architects and urban design professionals in the crowd took up the task of looking through the presentation of the design for the arena portion of the project, and asked the tough questions about why the design has not taken into account the community or traffic on any level. Ratner PR henchman, Jim Stuckey had his answers ready.
When asked why FCR should be allowed both density and subsidies in return for including some affordable units, Stuckey replied that the density of the Atlantic Yards project is much lower compared to the downtown Brooklyn plan (which, unfortunately, may not be studied concurrently with the AYP for EIS purposes).
Stuckey was also asked why FCR has not made any models of the impact of traffic on the busiest intersection in Brooklyn, to which he replied that FCR has been busily videotaping the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush. When it was pointed out to him that taking video is not making a model, Stuckey replied that he SAID they had made models and the audience was just not listening.
Notable additions to the presentation seemed to focus on Lauri Olin's landscape design: varieties of tree species, ponds made from runoff, and bocce and volleyball courts. The latter two items were said included as examples of activities that would not cause a disturbance near apartment buildings. In contrast to non-disturbing recreation, Olin joked that the universal threat to safety is teenage males, justifying the placement of the basketball courts in an area said to be visible from the street, so that "mothers and babies" could feel safe.
The one community question that slipped through came from Peter Krashes the president of a block association on Dean Street. He asked a traffic circulation plan, specifically where all of the traffic originating from and servicing the arena was going to end up in surrounding neighborhoods. Although he did not receive a formidable answer, he summed up community sentiment with the following statement:
"The red dot you put on the map with the pointer, Mr. Gehry, and said you don't know what that is? That's my home."
Posted by lumi at 10:16 AM
October 24, 2005
Letter to the Editor: Daily News
To the Editor,
I am one of those Brooklynites you falsely mischaracterize as a "not-in-my-backyard" "complainer" in your editorial of October 24th, entitled "A Neighborhood Grows in Brooklyn."
I, along with scores of concerned Brooklyn residents, provided thoughtful and well-researched testimony in a forum mandated by state law. The hearing lasted hours longer than planned because the Empire State Development Corporation's draft scoping document was woefully incomplete.
No one who testified at the hearing is "anti-development." Rather, we favor development that respects existing neighborhoods, doesn't rely on the abuse of eminent domain to transfer property to another "better" private owner, doesn't cheat the taxpayers, creates careers rather than dead-end jobs, and provides truly affordable housing rather than luxury condominiums.
And let me make one more thing perfectly clear: I wouldn't wish this project on anyone's backyard, let alone my own. Perhaps the Daily News's publisher, a billionaire real estate developer himself (surprise!), would like it in his?
Eric McClure
Brooklyn, NY
Posted by lumi at 9:47 PM
Daily News scoffs at Scary Gehry warnings, and misses the point
The Daily News editorial board attacked "the bizarre notion" that Gehry's Disney Hall neighborhood-heating debacle could happen at Atlantic Yards, a point I brought up as a member of Park Slope Civic Council, a group that is far from NIMBY-istic, and still has yet to take a stand on the project.
The board failed to understand that Gehry's experimental forms have often been deemed environmental hazards in themselves. The Draft Scope Environmental Impact hearing was just the place to make that point.
THE CASE OF CASE WESTERN
Consider Case Western Reserve University's Gehry project. In the winter of 2003 students and faculty found the building to be downright dangerous.
From the an Associated Press report:
In its first winter, snow and ice have been sliding off the long, sloping stainless-steel roof, bombarding the sidewalk below. And in bright sun, the glint off the steel tiles is so powerful that standing next to the building is like lying on a beach with a tanning mirror.
''You might have to walk on the road to make sure you don't get hit by ice,'' said Adam Searl, a junior at Case Western's Weatherhead School of Management. ''Maybe they should have thought about it before they had built the building. It's Cleveland. We get ice. We get snow. We get rain.''
That's falling chunks of ice and sliding snow, plus the tanning-mirror effect in "sun-drenched(?)" Cleveland. Could it happen here?
ARCHITECTURE FOR ART'S SAKE
Gehry's emphasis on experimental "forms" flirts with the arrogant notion of "architecture for art's sake," a dangerous precedent that ignores people and environment, things that used to be foundation principles of architecture.
THE BIG QUESTION
Should master builder of unintended consequences Frank Gehry be allowed to experiment on skyscrapers, highrises and a glass arena in the heart of Brooklyn? In the very least, the environmental impacts of his architecture should be anticipated and scrutinized.
— Lumi Michelle Rolley
Not-In-Anybody's-Backyard-Unless-Without-Eminent-Domain-Taxpayer-Subsidzied-
Arena-On-A-smaller-Scale-And-Through-ULURP-With-Real-Community-Input-And-
a-Proven-Masterbuilder
(NIABUWEDTSAONASSATULURPWRCIAPM)
Posted by lumi at 7:27 AM
October 23, 2005
NOTES ON A NEW YORK SCORECARD (R.I.P. ALLAN MALAMUD) -- A GUARANTEED SEX-FREE POST #69
From Kelso's Nuts:
And at the nexus of basketball, education, and Jews that aren't fun, we have Bruce Ratner, Mayor Bloomberg, and schools chancellor Joel Klein. Want to earl? Take a look at Klein's hideous face someday. Ok, here's where it all fits together in a nice package. Bloomberg and Klein (and Levy before him: not as ugly but just as mean) have no problem cutting holy hell out of the public schools budget, but are pleased as punch to offer Ratner all sorts of incentives to build his Brooklyn arena and mall. Make no mistake about this, Kelso is a capitalist. He respects anyone with the brains and balls to make bundles, but not on the public dole and not at the cost of Kelso's child's education, when Kelso is paying ALL his taxes. Kelso couldn't give a shit if the Nets play in New Jersey or Brooklyn, but he wants his son to have the full complement of after-school activities from theater arts (now gone as of Sept 2005) to all sports. So, the privatization fantasy marches on, this time through the back door, as the Kelsos of the world have to write five-figure checks to their local public schools and toss around hundred dollar bills at bake sales so the Bruce Ratners of the world can get even richer and more self-important and build even bigger, more vulgar waterfront property in Bridgehampton.
Posted by amy at 1:07 PM
NIMBY Update
From Tony Fletcher's iJamming:
The proposed Forest City Ratner “arena” at Atlantic Yards is No Longer In My Backyard, but that doesn’t mean I’ve stopped caring about it. To be frank, this proposed mini-city in the midst of Brooklyn’s busiest intersection was a contributory factor in our decision to sell up and move out. Only one of many factors, mind, and I would never roll over and admit defeat just like that, but honestly and truly, if the project gets built to its current design, I’ll be happy I’m no longer living nearby to reap the undeserved punishment.
And NoLandGrab just can't resist the temptation to include this quote:
Such was the scale of discontent at Tuesday’s hearing that even Borough President Marty Markowitz, who instigated the very idea of a baseball arena in Brooklyn and has served these last two years less as a people’s representative than as public cheerleader for developer Bruce Ratner, was heard to say that the project needed “scaling back.” (Was that a pig flying over Atlantic Yards? No, just Marty’s hefty ego in free fall.)
Posted by amy at 1:00 PM
It came from the Blogosphere...
The Real Estate: BUILD gets a raise
TimesRatnerReport: "Modern blueprint"? Evidence points to increased BUILD/Ratner payments and collusion
Curbed: Atlantic Yards Brouhaha at City Tech
Field of Schemes: Nets arena gets noisy welcome
Daily Heights, 750 People Show Up For Atlantic Yards Public Hearing
Big Cities Big Boxes: Times Reports Widespread Opposition to Ratner's Atlantic Yards Project
Bag of Rocks: Save the Clock Tower
TrueHoop: Messy Doings in Brooklyn
Gurgly: Atlantic Canards
Stay Free!: Astroturf for Ratner
Brownstoner: BUILD Finally Fesses Up to Ratner Funding
Retire Mike Bloomberg: Bloomberg & Ratner Inc.
Posted by amy at 12:43 PM
October 20, 2005
The Times follows up on project opposition, but misses some angles
TimesRatnerReport analyzes today's Times story:
It's chancy to consider the significant presence of middle- and upper-class Brownstone Brooklynites--many part of community boards and civic groups charged to address the project's impact--a referendum on the project. Similarly, the press shouldn't have made too much of the predominance of Ratner supporters at previous events. What if, on Tuesday, the two dozen union members had all signed up to testify? What if BUILD and ACORN decided to bring groups of supporters, as they did for a November 2004 hearing in the same venue?
Posted by lumi at 11:11 PM
Newbies miss Millman?
It just occurred to NLG that all three reporters from the daily newspapers who covered last night's hearing were relatively new to the beat and probably are still getting up to speed on the developing story.
That would explain the fact that they all missed the significance of Assemblywoman Joan Millman's testimony.
Why all the fuss about Millman?
The Atlantic Yards project has expanded across Flatbush Avenue. That portion is in Millman's district, thus making her a strong voice in the NY State Assembly's Brooklyn coalition. Last night, she stated that she "will ask [her] Assembly colleagues, including Speaker Sheldon Silver, not to support" the project.
For your reading pleasure, you can check out Assemblywoman Millman's full statement after the jump.
October, 18 2005
Testimony Presented to:
Empire State Development Corporation
Submitted By:
Joan L. Millman
Member of Assembly, 52nd Assembly District
Re: Atlantic Yards Arena and Redevelopment Project Draft Scope of Analysis
Thank you for the opportunity today to comment on the Atlantic Yards Arena and Redevelopment Project Draft Scope of Analysis for an Environmental Impact Statement. As the Assemblymember for the 52nd Assembly District, representing Brooklyn Heights, Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens, DUMBO, Vinegar Hill, and Park Slope, I would like to voice my objections to the overwhelming scale of the proposed development and then comment on the need of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement to fully study the potentially harmful effects this project will have on the surrounding neighborhoods in my district.
First and foremost the preliminary plan for the proposed redevelopment at the Atlantic Yards is too large. From the time of this project’s inception we have seen a plan that brought an arena to Brooklyn with some housing attached, turned into a mega development with an arena attached. Seventeen high rises and an estimated 18,000 residents dropped into the middle of a neighborhood with low scale development will not merely change the character of that neighborhood, but will overload the existing infrastructure and impact the general quality of life for my constituents.
Thus far I have yet to see a detailed and adequate plan that will address such concerns, and I am not convinced the Environmental Impact Statement will do so. We need to take a hard look at what the potential effects of this project will be, and not just in the 1/2 mile radius as indicated in the Draft Scope, but within at least a 3/4 mile radius. Let us accurately look at the effect 18,000 people plus an arena will have on our sewer capacity, the effect 18,000 people plus an arena will have on our already crowded subways, the effect 18,000 people plus an arena will have on police and fire personnel demands, the effect 18,000 people plus an arena will have on the schools, and the effect 18,000 people plus an arena will have on already overburdened postal service. These are just some of the issues that will impact the quality of life for downtown residents.
I also want to specifically ensure that the potential effect of storm water runoff flowing into certain parts of my district is addressed. The community is fighting a long battle to improve the environmental condition of the Gowanus Canal. We need to ensure that any excess storm water runoff from the proposed project is mitigated and prevented from erasing the years of hard work that went into improving the Canal.
Also, an important concern is the sharp increase in traffic that will result from the arena, commercial development, and the thousands of units of housing. The analysis needs to evaluate how to mitigate traffic in Boerum Hill and Park Slope past the 1/2 mile boundary of study.
I would also like to address the recent addition of the proposed project that is located within my Assembly district. Site 5 is slated for construction located on top of or