Atlantic Yards Development - Commercial, Residential, Retail, NBA Arena

[NoyokA]

What I want to know is why corrupt goons like Silver and Bruno have unattested power to block such projects? I know who these people are, but why do they get a say over such things, something seems wrong...

[NYguy]

Moer people will go see the NEts since there ticket prices will be much better then the Knicks and there team will be much better!

Perhaps. Both pretty much suck right now.


amny

Silver, Pataki to support Atlantic Yards plan

By Michael Clancy
December 20, 2006

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Gov. George Pataki apparently have an agreement that will lead to approval of a giant redevelopment project that could reshape Brooklyn.

Silver said he will cast his vote for the Atlantic Yards project Wednesday afternoon if Pataki doesn't tie it to other projects, a Silver spokesman said.

"The Atlantic Yards project will be advanced as a stand-alone resolution for consideration by the board's members," Pataki spokesman Scott Reif said moments later.

An obscure state panel controlled by Silver, Pataki and Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno (R-Brunswick) meets to discuss it today.

Through his vote on the Public Utilities Control Board, Silver has killed Mayor Michael Bloomberg's West Side Jets stadium project and indefinitely delayed plans to convert the James A. Farley post office on Eighth Avenue into Moynihan Station.

Opponents of the 22-acre, $4 billion Brooklyn project were hoping Silver mad it a triple play and stopped the Atlantic Yards.

Outside of pending litigation, the five-person panel, which was created to oversee how public authorities spend money, represents a final hurdle for Bruce Ratner's 8-million-square-foot arena, housing and office complex. The panel's approval must be unanimous.

Earlier this month, the Empire State Development Corp. approved the overall project, its environmental impact statement and its use of eminent domain.

Opponents of the plan question it financing and are asking for a delay for the 10-year project so it can be reviewed by the incoming administration of Gov.-elect Eliot Spitzer. The development corporation recently scaled back its estimate of tax revenue created by project from $1.4 billion to $944 million.

State lawmakers have also asked the development corporation to turn over an cost-benefit analysis done by the accounting firm KPMG detailing the profits Ratner stands to make on the project.

[Transic]

http://www.newyorkbusiness.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061220/FREE/61220016/1040

Silver backs revised Atlantic Yards plan

By: Erik Engquist (http://www.newyorkbusiness.com/apps/pbcs.dll/personalia?ID=18&category=contact)
Published: December 20, 2006 - 12:42 pm

Forest City Ratner Cos. has revised its Atlantic Yards project -- including trimming the project's signature tower -- to win the support of Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.

While Mr. Silver is prepared to approve the $4 billion development at Wednesday afternoon's Public Authorities Control Board meeting, he will do so only if the governor separates the project’s financing plan from unrelated items on the board's agenda. As of Wednesday morning, the Atlantic Yards financing was still grouped with $8 billion in "pork" for various projects across the state, sources say.

Forest City agreed early Wednesday to reduce the height of Miss Brooklyn, a proposed 620-foot office tower, so that it will not rise higher than Brooklyn's tallest building, the nearby 512-foot Williamsburgh Savings Bank building. The developer will also change 200 of the market-rate condominium apartments into "affordable" units, and will also build 400 to 800 more elsewhere in the borough.

The concessions fall far short of what critics of Atlantic Yards have sought. Four local Assembly members had sent letters to Mr. Silver asking him to delay today's PACB vote so that more substantial changes could be negotiated. But other Brooklyn members of Mr. Silver's caucus are ardent supporters of the project and wish to see it proceed without further delay.

In addition to office space, stores and nearly 6,500 apartments, the project would include a 19,000-seat arena that would be home to the Nets of the National Basketball Association.

The Assembly speaker controls one of the three PACB votes, and since board votes must be unanimous, he has effective veto power. The holders of the other two votes, Gov. George Pataki and state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, favor the Atlantic Yards project.

Mr. Silver's vote for Atlantic Yards had been in doubt not only because of pressure from some of his members, but because the speaker had not been given all of the information about the project he had requested from the Empire State Development Corp., the agency in charge of the state approval process. Ultimately, the speaker retrieved the information he was seeking directly from Forest City.

[Fahzee]

Silver is approving it only because Dolan told him to. I find it funny that MSG was afraid of a football stadium and convention center but dont feel moving a team that is better run and managed like the Nets wont hurtthem . Moer people will go see the NEts since there ticket prices will be much better then the Knicks and there team will be much better!

I've always suspected that "the brooklyn nets" (and therefore the loss of Basketball in NJ) actually gives the Dolans a bargaining chip.

Think about it - Cablevision wants a new MSG, but only if New York gives them various tax breaks. Once NJ loses the Nets, the state could be looking to recruit a new franchise. So the Dolans threaten to leave NYC if their demands aren't met.

And a close move like that would keep the team in the same advertising market

The Patriots pulled the same move when they wanted a new stadium - threatening to move to Hartford

[Dynamicdezzy]

damn, shorter than the Williamsburgh Savings Bank building...

[BrooklynRider]

I'd be able to live this these yes votes had the revelations of the cooked books not come to the fore. Regardless of where one stands on this project, such a deviation in financial projections on a project set to receive so much public (tax-payer) money would seem reason enough to hold it up until the books are audited.

I never really formed an opinion of Sheldon Silver, but I sure have one now. Corrupt and willing to use his Assembly-leader position to sell out other parts of the city to his own districts advantage.

I do hope we see an insurgency in the Assembly in 2007 that replaces him once and for all.

[Xemu]

Like most I have mixed feelings about this project, but the one thing I DID NOT want to see was them shorten Ms. Brooklyn. It's stumpy as it is and now they're gonna make it shorter than the WBT? Just seems so foolish...

[BrooklynRider]

I actually think the height made less difference to opponents than the bulk - which sadly remains. It could've gone taller and lost some bulk in my opinion.

[NYguy]

^ Guess you can blame that on the people who screamed about the height...


Forest City agreed early Wednesday to reduce the height of Miss Brooklyn, a proposed 620-foot office tower, so that it will not rise higher than Brooklyn's tallest building, the nearby 512-foot Williamsburgh Savings Bank building.

Never understood the logic to that. There's at least one taller tower planned for Brooklyn. What kind of victory is this that Miss Brooklyn won't be taller than the Williamsburgh? Exactly how old is the Williamsburgh? And more importantly, does it really show progress that Brooklyn's tallest was built so many years ago? We're in a time when many cities are producing new tallest of their own, yet some in Brooklyn want to remain in the dark ages. As if 100 years from now, the Williamsburgh should still be the tallest in Brooklyn.

[kliq6]

I've always suspected that "the brooklyn nets" (and therefore the loss of Basketball in NJ) actually gives the Dolans a bargaining chip.

Think about it - Cablevision wants a new MSG, but only if New York gives them various tax breaks. Once NJ loses the Nets, the state could be looking to recruit a new franchise. So the Dolans threaten to leave NYC if their demands aren't met.

And a close move like that would keep the team in the same advertising market

The Patriots pulled the same move when they wanted a new stadium - threatening to move to Hartford


If i was the city id let the Knicks move, that ownership has completely disgraced a once proud franchise, there not worth the tax breaks

[Transic]

Like most I have mixed feelings about this project, but the one thing I DID NOT want to see was them shorten Ms. Brooklyn. It's stumpy as it is and now they're gonna make it shorter than the WBT? Just seems so foolish...

Or it could imply that both would end up at the same height, maybe one a few inches shorter than the other. Whatever it may be, it's a sop to the politicos who run the state, nonetheless.

As for the Dolans, while they've shown to not know much about running a basketball franchise, I don't know if they're so stupid as to actually go across the river over $10 million/year, unless NJ offers them a ridiculous amount in incentives. I just don't see NJ doing that when they wouldn't do it for the Yankees and Mets and they're not putting up any major roadblocks on the Nets possibly going to Brooklyn or Queens.

[ramvid01]

That means that Ms Brooklyn will rise barely over 500 feet and lose ~120 feet. Yuck.

[Strattonport]

I'm happy the project has finally been improved by the height reduction is a major disappointment. Mindless NIMBYism rules again.

[SilentPandaesq]

Meh...512 feet or shorter, but still as bulky. Oh well, I guess Miss Brooklyn shops at Lane Bryant....fatty Mcfatfat.

[ablarc]

damn, shorter than the Williamsburgh Savings Bank building...
The worst possible outcome.

Bad for the aesthetics of the Brooklyn skyline.

Bad for the appearance of Miss Brooklyn.

Terrible for the spirit of economic momentum in Brooklyn.

Brooklyn the Forever Second-Tier.

Philadelphia was like that as long as no one built higher than William Penn's statue atop City Hall.

Then finally someone did.

Nearly overnight the skyline shot upward projecting an image of progress.

Center City Philadelphia thrives.

[ablarc]

I actually think the height made less difference to opponents than the bulk...
Don't kid yourself.

If those morons had been smart enough to see --as you do-- that the problem was bulk, they would have said "bulk."

They didn't say "bulk." They said "height."

[Transic]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/nets/2006-12-20-atlantic-yards_x.htm?POE=SPOISVA

N.Y. board approves project that could usher Nets into Brooklyn
Updated 12/20/2006 5:20 PM ET

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — A $4 billion redevelopment project that could reshape Brooklyn with an NBA basketball arena, office towers and thousands of apartments was approved Wednesday after months of maneuvering among New York state's top political leaders.

The state Public Authorities Control Board voted unanimously to authorize the Atlantic Yards development, a sprawling reuse of a downtown Brooklyn railyard that would include a new home for the New Jersey Nets.

The state would pay $100 million and New York City would pay $100 million toward the project.

The development of 16 buildings including 6,000 residential units is projected by its supporters to create thousands of jobs in what is now a blighted area.

Nets owner Bruce Ratner is the developer of the project designed by renowned architect Frank Gehry.

The first phase will include an 18,000-seat arena to return big-time pro sports to Brooklyn for the first time since the Dodgers bolted in 1957 and four towers of commercial and residential space around the arena. The first phase will also include a fifth, mixed-use tower.

Half of the residential units will be priced for low and moderate income residents, providing 2,250 affordable apartments. In all, the project will have 8 acres of open space.

A second phase will include an improved Vanderbilt train yard and improvements to the subway station, according to the resolution approved by the state Public Authorities Control Board.

Gov. George Pataki, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the vast majority of the City Council, state Assembly and Senate support Atlantic Yards. But Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, a Manhattan Democrat, had insisted against linking the development to any other projects that the Republican governor and the Republican-led Senate have sought.

On Wednesday morning, Pataki agreed to allow Atlantic Yards to stand alone.

The project would also include a hotel and retail space and the tallest building would rise 58 stories above the railyard.

Atlantic Yards has spawned contentious public hearings and endless debate. It faces a federal lawsuit from Brooklyn property owners and tenants who have charged that the seizure of their property under eminent domain was unconstitutional.

Opponents say the project's scale and striking design — with undulating glass towers of varying size and angles — would transform the image of predominantly low-rise and brownstone Brooklyn neighborhoods while creating a traffic nightmare.

Supporters suggest the opposition is distinctly local and fueled by transplanted Manhattanites. They note that the project is expected to generate nearly 22,000 construction jobs and 5,000 more permanent jobs once the project is finished, as well as $944 million in state tax revenues.

In addition to political leaders, the developers have a key ally in the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a national advocate for low- and middle-income urban families.

[lofter1]

Re: "Miss Brooklyn"

Before she was a tall ugly mess.

Now she's a shorter ugly mess.

Anyway you look at her she's still an ugly mess.

[ablarc]

...and the tallest building would rise 58 stories above the railyard.
At less than 512 feet?

Not bloody likely.

[investordude]

We all knew in the back of our minds there was going to be some negotiation on NIMBY issues by Silver. I don't like the height reduction either, but its a survivable sacrifice.

I hope downtown Brooklyn still rises 600 feet with something interesting though, that isn't a Walmart preferably :)

[sfenn1117]

Midtown has a 700-800 foot tabletop, seems like Brooklyn will have the 400-500 foot tabletop.

[Transic]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/nyregion/20cnd-brooklyn.html

State Board Approves Atlantic Yards Project

By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/nicholas_confessore/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
Published: December 20, 2006

A state oversight board voted this afternoon to approve the Atlantic Yards project near Downtown Brooklyn, knocking down the last regulatory hurdle for the biggest real estate project in Brooklyn history.

The vote by the Public Authorities Control Board capped three years of bitter battles between opponents and supporters of the $4 billion project. The version approved today — 8 million square feet over 22 acres along Atlantic Avenue — includes a huge residential housing complex with about 6,400 market-rate and subsidized apartments, a basketball arena for the New Jersey Nets, and a smattering of office space, with the design punctuated by elaborately designed towers that dwarf nearby residential neighborhoods.

Approval of the project, which is to be built by the Forest City Ratner Companies, also ended an ever-lengthening dry spell for ambitious developers in New York City, where in recent years other major projects — including the West Side Stadium and the Moynihan Station — have been killed or delayed by community opposition and political rivalry. The Brooklyn project still faces two lawsuits, with more on the way, but Forest City executives are confident that they will prevail in court.

Today’s vote followed days of intense negotiation between officials at the Empire State Development Corporation, which is overseeing the project, and aides to Sheldon Silver (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/sheldon_silver/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the speaker of the State Assembly, who controls one of three votes on the control board. Gov. George E. Pataki (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/george_e_pataki/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and Joseph L. Bruno (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/joseph_l_bruno/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the Senate leader, control the other two votes on the board, which must vote unanimously for a project to be approved.

Though Mr. Silver has long said he supports the project, he has had a tempestuous relationship with Mr. Pataki and Charles A. Gargano (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/charles_a_gargano/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the chairman of the development corporation, whose 12-year tenure he recently described as “a dismal failure.”

Earlier this month, Mr. Silver delayed the Moynihan Station project, citing concerns over its financing, and in recent days he had made clear that he had similar concerns about Atlantic Yards, saying that Mr. Gargano’s aides had not yet provided him enough information to make up his mind. But on Tuesday, the development corporation allowed Mr. Silver to examine a closely held audit of the Atlantic Yards by the consulting firm KPMG, and today Mr. Silver indicated that he was satisfied that the project would be viable.

According to the audit, a copy of which was provided to The New York Times, Forest City estimates that the overall rate of return on $4 billion project, excluding the arena, at about 10 percent over 30 years.

The Forest City has never publicly said precisely how much it expected to earn from the project, and questions remained today regarding a recent decrease of about half a billion dollar in projections for the amount of tax revenue that Atlantic Yards is expected to generate for the city and state.

Mr. Pataki said in a statement that the project would provide “critically needed housing including affordable housing, new community facilities, grand open spaces and increase economic development all across Brooklyn.”

The project, designed by the noted architect Frank Gehry (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/frank_gehry/index.html?inline=nyt-per), evolved considerably as Forest City worked to dampen opposition and build a base of support in Brooklyn and beyond. (Forest City Ratner is also the development partner in building a new Midtown headquarters for The New York Times Company.)

A once-sizable chunk of office space was given over to yet more apartments, to attract Brooklynites eager for housing and to allay any potential concern by Mr. Silver that the project would compete with commercial properties in the speaker’s Lower Manhattan district. On paper, the project grew to a peak of 9 million square feet, before shrinking back down to the 8 million square feet originally planned — a decrease that did little to allay concerns among many residents and local officials that the project had been far too big and dense from the very beginning.

As today’s vote approached, the developer offered still more concessions to sweeten the deal. The project will include 200 subsidized condominium apartments for first-time homeowners, and Forest City will also build hundreds more such units near the project site. To make up for the project’s relatively small allotment of park space, the company will spend money to improve existing parks nearby. And the complex’s tallest tower — the high-concept, 58-story building dubbed “Miss Brooklyn” by Mr. Gehry — may be reduced in height.

“They changes are positive, but they’re small,” said James F. Brennan, a Brooklyn assemblyman who with several colleagues had pushed for a much greater reduction in the project’s size.

In the end, Mr. Silver rejected those calls, a testament in part to the unusually broad base of support that Forest City built for the project, including Mr. Pataki, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/michael_r_bloomberg/index.html?inline=nyt-per), several construction trade unions, dozens of elected officials, and Acorn, the advocacy group for low-income people.

The project has drawn an energetic and determined opposition, centered around the group Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn and including elected officials representing neighborhoods near the project. But the group lacked the resources for a protracted battle against Forest City, which spent millions of dollars on lobbying, direct mail and public relations.

A second and broader coalition, known as Brooklyn Speaks, later emerged to push for changes to the project, and included an array of influential civic groups, such as the Municipal Arts Society and the National Trust for Historic Preservation (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/n/national_trust_for_historic_preservation/index.html?inline=nyt-org). The coalition mounted its own direct mail and public relations blitz this month, but its efforts appeared to come too late to sway Mr. Silver.

[macreator]

The loss of office space is a big disappointment. Will there be any built as a part of this project? It would be a shame if there wasn't any included. Damn Silver...Downtown's doing just fine, more office space in Brooklyn would be good for the City and not much of a threat to Downtown at all.

[BrooklynRider]

Never understood the logic to that. There's at least one taller tower planned for Brooklyn. What kind of victory is this that Miss Brooklyn won't be taller than the Williamsburgh? Exactly how old is the Williamsburgh? And more importantly, does it really show progress that Brooklyn's tallest was built so many years ago? We're in a time when many cities are producing new tallest of their own, yet some in Brooklyn want to remain in the dark ages. As if 100 years from now, the Williamsburgh should still be the tallest in Brooklyn.

I do think that one concern was that by placing the tallest building in Brooklyn at Atlantic Yards the "center" of Downtown somehow got shifted. I don't agree with reducing the height, but neither do I think Ratner will abide by any "agreements" once he gets his approval. He is not a very good corporate citizen.

Also, the "tallest building" planned for Brooklyn was to be the Thor equities project at 120 Willoughby / Albee Square. It was announced that Thor is flipping the property - in effect killing that plan for the borough's new "tallest." We'll have to see what the new developers come up with. The city is struggling to attract commercial tenants. The best we can probably hope for is hotel/residential and that will likely top out in the 500ft range if we are lucky.

[antinimby]

Don't kid yourself.
If those morons had been smart enough to see --as you do-- that the problem was bulk, they would have said "bulk."
They didn't say "bulk." They said "height."That leads to the usual question: why do NIMBYs hate tall buildings?

What is it about the height of buildings that are so offensive/threatening to them?

Why do people in some places (Asia, Middle East, etc.) have no problem with tall buildings yet here, people see them as something evil?

Is it a race thing?

Is it a cultural thing?

What is it??!

[Transic]

Originally Posted by BrooklynRider
I do think that one concern was that by placing the tallest building in Brooklyn at Atlantic Yards the "center" of Downtown somehow got shifted. I don't agree with reducing the height, but neither do I think Ratner will abide by any "agreements" once he gets his approval. He is not a very good corporate citizen.


So you're saying that Ratner might build "Miss Brooklyn" taller, anyway? You're saying that the head honchos would look the other way should he do that? Well, that's possible but if I were him I don't want to take that chance, despite the desires of many here.

Anyway, the article from Bloomberg News:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aAsHbVWErj9c&refer=home

New York Board Approves Brooklyn Atlantic Yards Plan (Update2)

By Michael Quint and Sharon L. Crenson

Dec. 20 (Bloomberg) -- A New York state board approved a $4 billion development project for downtown Brooklyn that would include a basketball arena for the National Basketball Association's Nets and thousands of units of housing and office space.

The Public Authorities Control Board, whose actions require unanimous approval by Governor George Pataki and the State Senate and Assembly leaders, approved the project in an Albany meeting after Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said he was satisfied the developer, Forest City Ratner Cos., had answered community concerns.

The project "will create tens of thousands of construction jobs and thousands of permanent jobs, and bring professional sports back to Brooklyn for the first time since the departure of the Dodgers to Los Angeles nearly 50 years ago,'' Pataki said in a statement. The Nets now play in New Jersey.

The plan calls for razing buildings and redeveloping property atop a Long Island Rail Road hub and includes part of the Prospect Heights neighborhood. Architect Frank Gehry, best known for his sculptural approach to buildings such as the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain, designed a 22-acre, 16- building site with 336,000 square feet of office space, 247,000 square feet of retail shops, 6,430 residential units including 4,500 rent-stabilized rental apartments and a 180-room hotel.

Scaled Down

Forest City Ratner spokesman Loren Riegelhaupt said the developer revised plans for the project's tallest building. It will be 511 feet, one foot shorter than the Williamsburgh Savings Bank Tower, the borough's biggest. A company press release said it has agreed to build another 1,000 units for low- and middle-income first-time homeowners in the vicinity.

Bruce Ratner, the company's president and chief executive office, said in a statement he expected to move the Nets to their new Brooklyn arena for the start of the 2009-2010 season.

Silver, in a statement, said "I am pleased the developer is committed to addressing numerous community concerns through several specific actions that will result in significant neighborhood improvements.'' Those include affordable housing, open space, park upgrades and "conforming building heights to those of existing structures in the surrounding area,'' he said.

Ratner and New York City were sued Oct. 26 by 10 tenants and landlords seeking to block the project because it would destroy their homes or businesses. The landlords and tenants said local and state authorities violated city laws by failing to conduct open and fair bidding on the project.

Court Action

The plaintiffs have asked a judge to block the city and state from using eminent domain, a law allowing government agencies to buy land forcibly and use it for public projects. The Empire State Development Corp., which helps decide on state funding for such plans, agreed Dec. 8 to allow the use of eminent domain if necessary.

Daniel Goldstein of the group Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, said the fate of the Atlantic Yards project will be determined in court. "Except for a few courageous and principled elected officials, the fix has been in for a long time on Atlantic Yards,'' he said.

Patti Hagan, a member of the Prospect Heights Action Coalition, said the group had pleaded with Silver to delay action until after Governor-elect Eliot Spitzer took office on Jan. 1. "The three men in the room today who voted this, they don't represent us,'' she said.

The city and state have each committed to provide $100 million to the project.

Record Investment

The Public Authorities Control Board also approved $650 million in financing for a new computer chip factory near Albany for Advanced Micro Devices Inc., based in Sunnyvale, California.

The factory would be the largest private investment in the state's history. The company also receives $256 million of tax benefits and is expected to spend about $2.9 billion of its own money.

Pataki and legislative leaders announced in June the aid package, which the state offered in competition with Dresden, Germany, where AMD has a large factory. The factory near Albany is supposed to employ about 1,200 workers directly and 3,000 indirectly, according to state officials.

The $650 million will be raised by the sale of bonds backed by state personal income tax revenue.

The board authorized $4 billion of bonds for other projects. The largest include $656 million for a multi-family housing development on West 42nd Street, near the Hudson River, and $636 million to be sold by the state Environmental Facilities Corp. on behalf of New York City's Water Finance Authority.

Surge in Approvals

Another $630 million of bonds were authorized for mental health services facilities and $515 million were for various projects not disclosed in the public agenda, and backed by the state personal income tax.

The end-of-year surge in bond approvals, just before Pataki leaves office Dec. 31, was criticized last month by state Comptroller Alan Hevesi. He said that the control board was rushing through projects that could tie Spitzer's hands.

The board didn't act on another pending project to convert the Farley Post Office building across the street from Pennsylvania Station into a new rail terminal. Silver has blocked the plan, calling for changes.

To contact the reporterS on this story: Michael Quint in Albany, New York, at mquint@bloomberg.net (mquint@bloomberg.net) ; Sharon L. Crenson in New York at screnson@bloomberg.net (screnson@bloomberg.net) ;

Last Updated: December 20, 2006 18:30 EST

and from metro NY:

http://ny.metro.us/metro/local/article/Net_gain_for_Atlantic_Yards/6274.html

Net gain for Atlantic Yards

Ratner’s Brooklyn development project approved

by amy zimmer / metro new york
DEC 21, 2006

BROOKLYN — The New Jersey Nets will have a home in Brooklyn.

The Public Authorities Control Board yesterday approved developer Bruce Ratner’s plan to construct an arena and 16 high-rises over the Atlantic Yards. It is the largest private development deal in the borough’s history.

Since the project’s inception in 2003, it has gone through several iterations. Yesterday, the PACB — comprised of Gov. George Pataki, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno — unanimously authorized the 8 million-square-foot project with some recent modifications. For example, its tallest tower, dubbed “Miss Brooklyn” by its architect Frank Gehry, will now be shorter than the neighboring iconic 512-foot-high Williamsburgh Savings Bank tower.

Project foes worried the PACB would push the plan through before Pataki’s term expires at the end of the month and looked to Silver — who had killed the West Side Stadium and delayed Moynihan Station — to delay the vote or kill the project. Early yesterday, however, Silver revealed his affirmative intention. After the vote, he issued a statement saying, “I am pleased the developer is committed to addressing numerous community concerns through several specific actions that will result in significant neighborhood improvements.”

The plan faced fierce oppostion, and two lawsuits — one federal and one state — have been filed.

Forest City Ratner issued a statement saying the project will create thousands of construction, office and retail jobs and projected hundreds of millions in revenue. But that came with a caveat: “Statements made in this news release that state the Company or management’s intentions, hopes, beliefs, expectations or predictions of the future are forward-looking statements. It is important to note that the Company’s actual results could differ materially from those projected in such forward-looking statements.”

[ablarc]

What is it??!
Received wisdom.

Grade school teachers.

Populist Zeitgeist.

Remnants of flower-child ethos.

[investordude]

I think the reality is most people don't understand that tall buildings don't necessarily involve more density than shorter bulkier buildings. It's too subtle an issue for most people to get.

As for Ratner breaking the agreement, he's not going to break the law in a way that anyone within 10 miles can visually observe. He may try to sneak out of agreements on affordable housing percentages, for example, but there's no way he's going to build taller.

[ablarc]

As for Ratner breaking the agreement, he's not going to break the law in a way that anyone within 10 miles can visually observe. He may try to sneak out of agreements on affordable housing percentages, for example, but there's no way he's going to build taller.
Oh, the powers-that-be might come to their senses; Miss Brooklyn needs to get tall, slim and leggy. Right now she's the fat broad.

Given the chance, I'm certain Gehry will oblige.

[ZippyTheChimp]

The building was a disappointment from day one.

[ablarc]

The building was a disappointment from day one.
It was ... but mostly because of its proportions.

[ZippyTheChimp]

And if floors are taken off the top, they should rename it:

SS Brooklyn

[NYguy]

Don't kid yourself. If those morons had been smart enough to see --as you do-- that the problem was bulk, they would have said "bulk."

They didn't say "bulk." They said "height."

And they're still angry. (Are they always angry?) It's like the folks over on the Eastside who complained about the development for the Con Ed site. The towers were cut down in height, but the number increased, the bulk the same. Some victory.

I wonder if Thor's 60-story tower will meet the same fate as Miss Brooklyn.

[NYguy]

NY Post

THE NETS WIN!
$4B B'KLYN COMPLEX CLEARS LAST GOV'T HURDLE

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12212006/photos/news009a.jpg

By RICH CALDER
December 21, 2006

Swish! Nothing but Nets.

A state board yesterday gave final approval to developer Bruce Ratner's $4 billion Atlantic Yards project, setting the stage for Downtown Brooklyn to be reshaped with an arena for the NBA's Nets and16 skyscrapers filled with residential and commercial space.

"This is a tremendous day for the Nets and a tremendous day for Brooklyn," said Ratner following the Public Authorities Control Board's unanimous approval.

The Frank Gehry-designed 22-acre project - with monolithic brick, glass and steel high-rises - will create a new borough skyline.

Ratner plans to break ground next month, have the team now known as the New Jersey Nets playing in the arena by 2009, and complete the entire development by 2017.

Bertha Lewis, executive director of the advocacy group ACORN, called the PACB's decision "a holiday gift for Brooklyn families."

"The Atlantic Yards project represents a historic 50/50 commitment to affordable housing and jobs and will help in the ongoing revitalization of Brooklyn while ensuring that longtime residents also benefit," she said.

Chris Gullian, of Fort Greene, said, "I'm psyched that I'll soon be able to watch pro basketball in my neighborhood."

After months of political maneuvering by state leaders, project opponents had still been holding out hope yesterday that Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver would order his PACB appointee to block the project, as he did with another sports project: the Jets' West Side stadium.

But Silver agreed to support Atlantic Yards once he was assured Gov. Pataki wouldn't try to combine the $100 million in state funds for the development with money for other projects Silver opposes.

Hours before the meeting, Ratner agreed to trim the project's signature skyscraper, the 620-foot-high "Miss Brooklyn" tower at Atlantic and Flatbush avenues. It will be redesigned so that it is a foot shorter than the 512-foot Williamsburgh Savings Bank tower , the borough's tallest building.

The development, to be sandwiched between bustling Fort Greene and Prospect Heights, will include 16 towers featuring 6,430 residential units, a hotel, and 583,000 square feet of retail and office space.

Atlantic Yards has spawned contentious public hearings and bitter debate. It still faces two federal lawsuits from Brooklyn property owners and tenants who say the planned seizure of their properties under eminent domain would be illegal.

Daniel Goldstein, spokesman for the opposition group Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, said he still thinks the courts will deem Atlantic Yards unconstitutional.

"The fix has been in for a long time on Atlantic Yards," he said.

[MidtownGuy]

Watching project after project be neutered by idiot members of the public and even more idiotic politicians is becoming too frustrating to express in the polite language of this forum.
:mad: :mad:

[ablarc]

The Frank Gehry-designed 22-acre project - with monolithic brick, glass and steel high-rises - will create a new borough skyline.
Journalists should be required to look up the words they use.

[BigMac]

New York Sun
December 21, 2006

Court Is Next For Atlantic Yards Plan

By DAVID LOMBINO
Staff Reporter of the Sun

The battle over Brooklyn's biggest development project is heading for a showdown in court after the $4 billion project received final political approval yesterday from an Albany board.

A handful of lawsuits are now the last line of defense for opponents of developer Forest City Ratner's plan to build a basketball arena and 16 mostly residential towers on 22 acres in Prospect Heights. The plans would remake the low-rise neighborhood with 8 million square feet of development, including more than 6,000 apartments, "affordable" housing, and office and retail space in a soaring complex designed by architect Frank Gehry.

Yesterday, the Public Authorities Control Board, made up of representatives appointed by Governor Pataki, Senate Majority Leader Bruno, and Assembly Speaker Silver, signed off on the project after some last minute changes were made to the plan. The height of the project's tallest building will be lowered, below-market-rate condominiums were added, and an agreement was reached that the developer would build more "affordable" housing elsewhere in the surrounding area and work with community leaders to build a local high school specializing in technology. The state's development agency says the project will cost the city and state about $450 million.

The vote late yesterday afternoon brought a flurry of praise from Mr. Pataki, Mayor Bloomberg, and civic organizations that supported the project, citing jobs and the creation of "affordable housing." In a statement, Mr. Bloomberg applauded approval of "the biggest private sector investment in Brooklyn's history."

Mr. Bloomberg said the vote shows that "we can still achieve projects on a grand scale and ensure that New York remains a city where big things happen."

In a statement, a housing and community activist, Bertha Lewis, of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now called the vote, "a holiday gift for Brooklyn families."

For opponents of the plan, including several groups from surrounding neighborhoods, some property owners in the development footprint, some urban planning groups, and opponents of eminent domain, yesterday's vote shifted the battlefield to the courts, a seeming inevitability since the project has enjoyed broad support from many elected officials since its announcement about three years ago.

City Council member Letitia James, an outspoken project opponent whose district includes some of the project site, said in a statement, "Today is a sad day for democracy, and for the community I represent. But our fight is far from over."

Lawyers say it is still unclear how two existing lawsuits, and several more that are expected to follow, will affect the developer's timetable.

A statement by the developer said the New Jersey Nets, which is owned by the developer, would play their 2009-2010 season in the planned Brooklyn arena. A spokesman for Forest City Ratner, Jeffrey Lerner, said work would begin next month on preparing site infrastructure, and construction would begin on the arena sometime in 2007. Mr. Lerner would not comment on the pending legal challenges.

Earlier this month, the state notified dozens of property owners who have not sold to Forest City Ratner that they have until January 11 to file a proceeding with the Brooklyn Appellate Division for a judicial review of the state's finding that condemnation can be used. Several property owners living within the project footprint had already filed a federal legal challenge to the state's use of eminent domain.

A lawyer representing Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, Jeffrey Baker, said the federal suit addresses unanswered questions from last year's U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Kelo v. New London, which allows a city to invoke eminent domain for the sake of private economic development. Mr. Baker said the decision did not permit a state to condemn private property for a developer-driven project.

"Here there was no organic planning by a state or city body. This is a vision that was developed in the mind of Ratner. He went to his buddies in government and said, ‘let's make this happen,'" Mr. Baker said. "We think eventually this can end up in the Supreme Court."

The developer, the city, and the state have filed a motion to dismiss, and the case could also end as early as January, Mr. Baker said. Moving forward with construction while the suits are still in court, Mr. Baker said, could make the developer's acquisition of private financing more expensive and be devastating if project approval was overturned.

"It is up to him what kinds of risk he wants to take," Mr. Baker said.

A senior attorney at a libertarian law firm, the Institute for Justice, Dana Berliner, said the opponents' federal lawsuit raises new and important issues that the federal courts should consider in the wake of Kelo v. New London, and she expects the lawsuit will be time consuming.

"Cases can take at an absolute minimum a year, and can easily take five," Ms. Berliner said.

A spokesman for Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, Daniel Goldstein, said the group would soon file another lawsuit in state court challenging the project's review process.

Mr. Baker, the group's lawyer, said the state failed to properly navigate the elaborate environmental review process, had exceeded its jurisdiction, and had virtually ignored public comments and concerns.

It is still uncertain how other critics of Atlantic Yards will react to yesterday's final approval. While several neighborhood and civics groups did not oppose the project outright, they sought to reshape the plan to make it more amenable to the surrounding community. But throughout the long approval process, few substantive changes were made.

In the days leading up to the vote of the Public Authorities Control Board, several local elected officials and civic groups had hoped that Mr. Silver would delay final approval because of unanswered financial questions and recent changes to state cost and benefit projections. Mr. Silver was satisfied with an independent financial review of the project by the consulting firm KPMG, but critics said financial questions still remain.

Assemblyman James Brennan, of Brooklyn, said he was considering a lawsuit that would aim to force the developer to produce a more complete disclosure of its finances. Mr. Brennan said the financial information is required to see if Forest City Ratner could build the project at a lower density and still make a profit.

An alliance of opponents, Brooklyn Speaks, said in a statement they would rely on the incoming Spitzer administration to force changes to the approved project.

Some political analysts said that Mr. Silver's vote yesterday signaled Mr. Spitzer's tacit support of Atlantic Yards. If the governor-elect had concerns, they said, he would have asked Mr. Silver to delay the vote until after his inauguration next month.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Spitzer, Christine Anderson, did not respond to e-mails or telephone calls inquiring about the governor-elect's position on Atlantic Yards. In the past he has said he supports the project in general but has some financial questions.

© 2006 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC.

[investordude]

I think the lawsuits are a long shot, because they all bring up anticipated arguments which Ratner's lawyers have already figured out they can beat in court presumably. Still, of the issues raised, I think the use of eminent domain still deserves some scrutiny.

[lofter1]

... Ratner agreed to trim the project's signature skyscraper, the 620-foot-high "Miss Brooklyn" tower at Atlantic and Flatbush avenues. It will be redesigned so that it is a foot shorter than the 512-foot Williamsburgh Savings Bank tower

A difference which will be totally imperceptible from anywhere ... and result in a less "pleasing" table-top :mad:

[BrooklynRider]

So you're saying that Ratner might build "Miss Brooklyn" taller, anyway? You're saying that the head honchos would look the other way should he do that? Well, that's possible but if I were him I don't want to take that chance, despite the desires of many here.



Actually, yeas, I am saying that. Once they move forward and evict people and steal people's property using eminent domain, we can all say "there goes the neighborhood." I have no doubt that Ratner will push the height back up again. Now that he has a green light to build low income housing offsite, he can negotiate to add a few stories to those buildings, increasing the low income housing, in exchange for increased height. (Poor people can be very stupid - fighting for this project only to find the homes built for them are far removed from this project.)

And let's not forget, that the state administration changes shortly. Anything can happen. Pray god that Garfano is removed and Pataki will be gone, Bruno is under investigation by the FBI. So, who does that leave? Bloomberg? He is the most pro-development (at any cost) mayor this city has every had. One day we will see how the public subsidized this project with no true ROI and Ratner pocketed millions.

This is still going to be locked in litigation specifically tied to eminent domain abuse and the plaintiffs have some heavy hitters on their side, so I think the vote is a bit of a non-starter.

[SilentPandaesq]

(Poor people can be very stupid - fighting for this project only to find the homes built for them are far removed from this project.)

Hey now, that is a little uncalled for. Comments like that is what made the discussion so polarized in the first place. Some poor people fought for the project because they believe that it will provide construction jobs.

Also, consider this, perhaps they just wanted the homes, they did not care that they would be built in trendy Brooklyn. They just wanted something they could afford. There was always this assumption that these poor people wanted to come live in that part of Brooklyn (which I think was part of the Slopster resistance to it, but thats just me )

Rich people can be very stupid concerning this issue as well. They will settle for a short ugly building because it is contextual, but rail against a new slender building (I am think of the UES tower, not Miss Brooklyn) because it is scary and new and makes their hood look less old money.

[BrooklynRider]

I get what you are saying, but Ratner had Acorn and its pre-rehearsed protesters front and center (anyone see all the news broadcasts last night). The protesters might have well been single Christmas Carols for all the perfect unison and harmony of their collective voices.

If the discourse gets polarized, it is not sue to one comment but rather the nature of the project. Rtner got his approval. As I said, the real community that exists in the footprint of this community will exist no more. It's going to be pretty intersting to see all these people currently cheering about the jobs and housing later on hawking peanuts and popcorn at the arena on event nights and having to commute to the arena from the off-site low income housing Ratner got permission to build.

I am very sympathetic to the economic straits these people find themselves in, but they aren't going to get construction labor jobs - because the project committed to using union labor. Ratner did not commit to a job training program either. He just said I'm building housing and bringing jobs. This development is going to attract people from all around the region and that group from ACORN and BUILD are suddenly going to be out numbered by all the OTHER poor people looking for a piece of the pie.

The most important piece of reporting we will hopefully see is where the head of ACORN and BUILD currently live and what luxury unit they will be in at this development in the next ten years (on their non-profit salary.)

To his credit, Ratner was able to get the sheep bleating at every meeting and demonstration on this project. He sold the project as "salvation" to hundreds if not thousands. Let's see what happens in the future.

Additionally, I need to add that this vote does not end the polarization on the issue. People are losing their homes - not just renters, who you can argue have no "right" to their apartments, but also people who bought and outright own their property. Opinions will always vary, but I still come down on the side of the property owners whose property is being stolen for private use - not public benefit.

[BrooklynRider]

AY approved by PACB in five minutes; DDDB, James, Jeffries respond

Ignoring the calls for delay from the four Assemblymembers closest to the Atlantic Yards site, as well as several civic groups, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, a Democrat, joined the other two controlling members of the Public Authorities Control Board (PACB) and approved Forest City Ratner's Atlantic Yards project this afternoon.

That leaves the courts as the remaining barriers to project; lawsuits have been filed in state and federal court challenging the use of eminent domain for the project, and another is expected to be filed challenging the legitimacy of the environmental review conducted by the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC). "Fortunately, we still have three branches of government,” said Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn (DDDB) spokesman Daniel Goldstein in a press release.

City Council Member Letitia James, a staunch opponent of the project, offered a list of unanswered questions and commented, "I hope Governor-elect [Eliot] Spitzer will be in a position to further amend this project. The project now lies in the hands of the judicial system. I trust that the courts will give the constitutionality, legality and the merit of this project a thorough review, something that has not happened in any legislativebody up to this point. Until the courts rule on pending and upcoming cases, Atlantic Yards, as we know it, cannot be built. Today is a sad day for democracy and the community I represent. But, our fight is far from over."

Assemblymember-elect Hakeem Jeffries, who had called for delay, was diplomatic, as he got a portion of what he'd requested: "The inclusion of affordable home ownership in the Atlantic Yards project is a significant step forward for our community, and will provide hundreds of working families in Central Brooklyn with a piece of the American dream. I hope and expect to work closely with the Spitzer administration to address the quality of life and density concerns that many in the community, including myself, continue to have.”

His statement today did not reference his request that the project be delayed until the eminent domain case was resolved.

BrooklynSpeaks, a coalition that said the plan should be changed substantially or rejected, stated: "We believe the incoming Spitzer administration must seize the opportunity in the new year to fix the project. The plan, particularly its second phase, must be changed to address its overwhelming scale, superblock design, lack of a transportation plan, and public process that has alienated rather than involved New Yorkers. "

Less than five minutes

The PACB's public consideration of Atlantic Yards took less than five minutes, according to Jeff Baker, attorney for DDDB, who was in the conference room for the PACB meeting, which began at 4:30 p.m. (Other issues were on the agenda, as well.)

Baker noted that the PACB did not approve the project financing, because that comes from a $100 million legislative authorization to the budget of the ESDC. "They did not approve any bond financing through ESDC, because they're going to set up an LDC [Local Development Corporation]. It's a way of avoiding PACB approval. A lot of the questions of financing we raised were not addressed. Our position is that the PACB has overriding authority to make sure the project makes sense."

There was no discussion of new tax revenue, a contentious issue raised in the press and at an Assembly oversight hearing on Monday.

Two months til groundbreaking?

Steve Matlin, an ESDC attorney, told the PACB that the developer was not expected to break ground for at least two months, according to Baker. As for taking title by eminent domain of properties the state must acquire, that could take at least four months.

Baker said that there was no public discussion that indicated, as had been reported by Crain's New York Business, that the flagship Miss Brooklyn tower had been reduced and that on-site for-sale affordable co-ops had been added to the project.

Unanswered questions

"It was not a pretty sight," Baker told me of the PACB meeting in general, "because when you look at the amount of indebtedness and the scope of projects approved, and how little care and discussion occurs, it raises a question as to whether there is any meaningful oversight."

DDDB pointed out that "the PACB still has not received a full accounting of the true public cost of the project or a realistic projection of the project’s new net revenue for the city and state," as well as details about enforceability of the affordable housing agreement.

Challenges remain

"The approvals by ESDC represent egregious violations of multiple state laws and the public trust. While [ESDC Chairman Charles] Gargano may claim there has been extensive public review, the facts show otherwise,” Baker charged in the press release. “The New Yorkers whose trust was betrayed by the Governor, Mayor and Mr. Gargano will now place their trust in the courts to assure that the laws are followed and this project is sent back for the review that was required.”

The role of incoming Gov. Spitzer, like Silver a Democrat, was unclear, since Spitzer, an Atlantic Yards project supporter who nonetheless may face headaches regarding the project, remained silent. DDDB's Goldstein said, "'Day one’ is just around the corner, and we look to incoming Governor Spitzer to make sure that everything truly will be different.”

For now, however, Spitzer--who could have lobbied Silver--apparently passed on the chance to stall or change Atlantic Yards.

http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2006/12/ay-approved-by-pacb-in-five-minutes.html

[TREPYE]

Journalists should be required to look up the words they use.

Its the NYPost, what do you expect?

[SilentPandaesq]

BK - I am by no means a supporter of the way and means of the project. All I am saying is that those poor people arn't foolish enough to have blind faith. They are New Yokers after all, they did not just fall off the turnip truck. They are gambling with your hood, not theirs. So for them it is Win Win. If the construction goes down they might get a job. If there was no contruction they would not get a job. If the area is unlivable, it is not their problem, its yours.

All I am saying is that just because they are poor, dosen't make them suckers, just cause Ratner is rich, dosen't mean that he is a succesful arch-manipulator. ACORN might have played everybody by getting something for nothing.

[TREPYE]

MSG boss Jim Dolan is being way too calm about this. I could still see him adamant and squealing like a stuck pig when Cablevision had that dispute with the YES network and when the Westside Stadium was lurking. Now that there is another arena/team (bigger threat than a Football stadium) that is going to be part of the NYC scene he has this calm aura about him as if he was saying "I got a 'Silver' bullet in my barrel ready to shoot it down."

I guess I'm eating crow for this comment, LOL. Mmm.....tasty!

In all seriousness, I cannot understand why Dolan did not fight this project. All future garden dates (concerts etc.) will be split with this new areana. The Knicks dont look to get any better soon and the Nets may take away some of their fan base.

[ZippyTheChimp]

^
Dolan fought the westside stadium because it was a threat to MSG as a venue for events due to its size.

Today, sports franchises are more in competition with each other over media outlets than stadiums. The success of YES prompted the Mets to launch SNY.

Two arenas in different boroughs can easily sellout. Dolan should focus his efforts on a new coach to rebuild the Knicks.

Another possibility is that Dolan was advised to keep quiet or risk collapse of a deal to move MSG to the Farley building.

[TREPYE]

^
Dolan fought the westside stadium because it was a threat to MSG as a venue for events due to its size.

Meadonwlands Arena did OK with Giant Stadium next to it. Two different venues two diffrent functions. Gehry arena and MSG are virtually the same thing.


Today, sports franchises are more in competition with each other over media outlets than stadiums. The success of YES prompted the Mets to launch SNY.

Dont the Nets televise their games on YES? Arena plus media outlet whos exposure is going to increase along with some Broolynites interest in the Nets.


Two arenas in different boroughs can easily sellout. Dolan should focus his efforts on a new coach to rebuild the Knicks.

You think Billy Joel or Bruce Sringsteen are going to do 13 shows at each at MSG and the Gehry Arena? And yes he should be more focused on the Knicks coaching position (How bout that incredible tip by David Lee with 0.01 seconds left? WOW!)


Another possibility is that Dolan was advised to keep quiet or risk collapse of a deal to move MSG to the Farley building.

Perhaps, but I think it is still dependent on wether or not he gets his tax break; which he shouldnt get.

[kliq6]

Knicks Suck, Nets in brooklyn with there smart managment will steal plenty of fans and result in many many more empty blue and purple seats atthe Garden. Im a Knicks Season Ticket holder and when Nets move thats it for me, back to my roots in BK

[kliq6]

Hey now, that is a little uncalled for. Comments like that is what made the discussion so polarized in the first place. Some poor people fought for the project because they believe that it will provide construction jobs.

Also, consider this, perhaps they just wanted the homes, they did not care that they would be built in trendy Brooklyn. They just wanted something they could afford. There was always this assumption that these poor people wanted to come live in that part of Brooklyn (which I think was part of the Slopster resistance to it, but thats just me )

Rich people can be very stupid concerning this issue as well. They will settle for a short ugly building because it is contextual, but rail against a new slender building (I am think of the UES tower, not Miss Brooklyn) because it is scary and new and makes their hood look less old money.


Funny thing is a i KLnow for a fact bloomberg's "close friend" on that east side CB voted against the Madison Tower, Bloomy is a a big NIMBY

[SilentPandaesq]

Bloomy is a a big NIMBY

Not surprising. Its all fun and games until people want to do something you don't like. Rich people live in Manhattan because there is a cache to living in Manhattan (Cosmopolitan, close to work, etc...but they don't live here because it is best use of their money, cause the same amount of money would buy an estate in Jersey or Conn or Westchester).

Part of that cache comes from having a very particular looking hood. Brownstone Brooklyn, Townhouse UES, Pre-war park ave, Loft SoHo. When someone comes along and tries to change the way a place looks it freaks them out. Regardless of whether or not artistically it is a bonus. It is different, so it is bad. Period.

(Not to say that everyone that lives in these areas are like that, but the ideas espoused in the board meetings are telling )

[ZippyTheChimp]

Meadonwlands Arena did OK with Giant Stadium next to it. Two different venues two diffrent functions. Gehry arena and MSG are virtually the same thing.Giants Stadium does not have a roof, and is not configurable like the proposed Jets Stadium.


You think Billy Joel or Bruce Sringsteen are going to do 13 shows at each at MSG and the Gehry Arena?You could make the same argument if the Nets didn't move and a new arena was built in New Jersey.

It's all conjecture, but I think that Dolan saw a big domed configurable stadium a few blocks away as as a threat. He may have also gauged the difference in political and public support for AY that wasn't present at the westside.

[Transic]

One thing that we can almost be sure of. If (once) the Nets do come to Brooklyn, there WILL be a true division of fan loyalties among New Yorkers, vis-a-vis, professional basketball in this city, just as there is between the Yankees and Mets (or Dodgers and Giants in the old days). This will be fun to watch in the coming years. :p

I wonder who will call himself/herself a true, diehard Knickerbockers fan and who will not.

[JCMAN320]

Well you got the diehard New Jersey Nets fan here for 14 years now since the 92/93 season. I will make the jump in the 2009-2010 season. Go Nets! :)

[antinimby]

They should be the Brooklyn Nets by then, right?

[JCMAN320]

Yes, but they will always be the New Jersey Nets to me. :)

[Kris]

December 22, 2006
Atlantic Yards Enters New Phase, and Faces Next Hurdle: Lawsuits
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE

If all goes according to plan, work will begin within weeks on the $4 billion Atlantic Yards project near Downtown Brooklyn, which won final approval from a state oversight board on Wednesday after three years of furious debate.

But large development projects rarely go according to plan — even when they do not face multiple lawsuits, which the project, one of the biggest in the city’s history, already does. And months or years may pass before anyone will be able to divine the precise gap between the plan for Atlantic Yards and the reality of it.

On paper, the project’s developer, Forest City Ratner Companies, expects to begin construction sometime next month, though much of the early work will take place below street level, amid the Vanderbilt railyards along Atlantic Avenue. The plan calls for the eight-acre area to be rebuilt, then covered by a platform from which portions of the project would rise.

Forest City has privately purchased much of the property it needs to build the project. But it faces a federal lawsuit by some residents and business owners on the site, who refused to move or sell their properties to Forest City and now face condemnation from state officials.

Among the plaintiffs is Daniel Goldstein, the spokesman for Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, a coalition of community organizations and elected officials opposed to the project. Mr. Goldstein’s apartment building, of which he is the sole remaining owner, would need to be torn down to make way for the arena.

City and state officials last year rebuffed alternative proposals that would not have required eminent domain, and now Mr. Goldstein and others say they are left with no choice but to fight in court.

“We’re confident we will win this lawsuit,” he said yesterday. “Our victory will force a reshaping of the project, while protecting owners and renters nationwide from abuses of eminent domain.”

A second lawsuit was filed two weeks ago by tenants of rent-stabilized apartments owned by Forest City on the project site. The lawsuit claims that the Empire State Development Corporation, which is overseeing the Atlantic Yards project, illegally approved the buildings’ condemnation without first obtaining permission from state housing officials to erase the tenants’ leases.

City and state officials are pushing to have both lawsuits dismissed. But George S. Locker, a lawyer for tenants in the second suit, said that was unlikely. “I’ve never seen cases that have such substantial legal issues, in such a variety of state and federal forums, with such enormous consequences, speed through in less than a year and a half,” he said.

By 2010, lawsuits notwithstanding, Forest City hopes to have completed most of the structures on the western portion of the 22-acre project site, near Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues. That includes the 18,000-seat basketball arena for the New Jersey Nets, which Forest City hopes to begin building next fall and open in time for the 2009-10 season.

In the same time frame, the developer also hopes to complete the project’s signal tower, called Miss Brooklyn, and more than 2,000 apartments, about 30 percent of which would be subsidized.

In the second phase, scheduled to end in 2016, Atlantic Yards would creep eastward toward Vanderbilt Avenue, adding the bulk of the project’s roughly 6,400 rental apartments and condominiums.

Forest City officials said it was possible that vacant buildings on the site that are already controlled by the company might have to be demolished in the coming months, but that it was unlikely they would move to demolish any of the buildings figuring in the lawsuits.

A broader group of elected officials and community and civic organizations, centered on the Brooklyn Speaks coalition, remains hopeful that it can force more changes to the project next year, after Governor-elect Eliot Spitzer takes office. Although the project has formally been approved, officials at the development corporation have signaled they are willing to entertain further alterations to the second phase.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

[NYguy]

A difference which will be totally imperceptible from anywhere ... and result in a less "pleasing" table-top :mad:

Maybe it's Ratner's way of "sticking" it to the people who complained about the tower being taller than the Williamsburgh. But it's a bad idea, and Ratner probably didn't have to do it to get Silver's support. The idea that the Williamsburgh should be Brooklyn's tallest forever is foolish. Magic should put flashing disco lights on top, annoying the hell out of everyone already complaining about the Atlantic Yards signage.

[NYguy]

Yes, but they will always be the New Jersey Nets to me. :)

I know Nets fans who say they won't support the team when it leaves, but what are they gonna do? The NBA says the state cannot support a team, so another won't be coming. I say if you're already a fan, then you stick with it. But there's a whole new window opening in New York now. People who never figured to go to an NBA game, or had no interest in the Knicks may now find themselves wanting to check it out. And why wouldn't they? It's a brand new arena, in Brooklyn no less. We sometimes forget that we are just passing through, but there will be entire generations that grow up with the Brooklyn Nets. Things will be very different 20 or 30 years from now.

[BPC]

Maybe it's Ratner's way of "sticking" it to the people who complained about the tower being taller than the Williamsburgh. But it's a bad idea, and Ratner probably didn't have to do it to get Silver's support. The idea that the Williamsburgh should be Brooklyn's tallest forever is foolish. Magic should put flashing disco lights on top, annoying the hell out of everyone already complaining about the Atlantic Yards signage.


Thw Williamsburgh Bank tower is hideous. The fact that Ratner wanted to build something taller than it, and possibly block the view of it, was the LEAST offensive aspect of his plan.

[lofter1]

... Williamsburgh Bank tower is hideous.

???


http://seepocke.com/archives/williamsburg-bank.jpg

[JCMAN320]

I know Nets fans who say they won't support the team when it leaves, but what are they gonna do? The NBA says the state cannot support a team, so another won't be coming. I say if you're already a fan, then you stick with it. But there's a whole new window opening in New York now. People who never figured to go to an NBA game, or had no interest in the Knicks may now find themselves wanting to check it out. And why wouldn't they? It's a brand new arena, in Brooklyn no less. We sometimes forget that we are just passing through, but there will be entire generations that grow up with the Brooklyn Nets. Things will be very different 20 or 30 years from now.

NYGuy your absolutely right. I know people that are friends of my family that in their 50s and 60s that are still fans of the Giants and Dodgers, even though they moved couple thousand miles away, they are still fans because they were fans when they were young and rooted for the teams when they were in Manhattan and Brooklyn. It will be the same way with the Nets.

Loyal die hard New Jerseyans, like myself, may not like that New Jersey is loosing the Nets, but they will always be the Nets to us no matter where they play. They will always be the team we grew up to love. Just like there are millions fans of the from California that only know the Giants as the San Franciso Giants and the Dodgers as only the Los Angeles Dodgers, they're will be new generations fans who will know them as the Brooklyn Nets.

Still they're will always be long time fans like my self and millions of other who will forever remember the team as the New Jersey Nets and even the New York Nets of the ABA and even some that remember when they started as the New Jersey Americans back in the organizations first humble year in the ABA in 1967 at the Teaneck Armory.

Point is no matter where they go they will always be the Nets to me. N-E-T-S NETS NETS NETS!!!, LET'S GO NETS; LET'S GO NETS; LET'S GO NETS!!! :)

[TonyO]

???


http://seepocke.com/archives/williamsburg-bank.jpg

It may not be hideous, but there's no reason a 1920's tower should remain the tallest anywhere - its just nostalgia gone wrong. It's insane and I cannot believe they caved on this or that its even an issue.

[BPC]

Nice shot. The reality is something less. I've seen the building a 1000 times and never seen it all bathed in shiny red light like that. But even with the trick photography, it still ain't no beaut.

[fluffypolly]

thats not photshop, thats sunset. matter of fact your insults of such a stunning building is unwarranted, and is merely your opinion.

[BPC]

All my posts (except for when I repost news articles and such) are "merely my opinion." And my opinion here is that building is fugly. Until now, I've never heard anyone claim otherwise. Rather, the argument has always been that it is a Brooklyn landmark, because: (a) it sits on the intersection of two major avenues; and (b) it's way taller than anything else around it. Both of those are undisputable facts. But I don't find them particularly compelling in the context of the whole Ratner debate.

[DarrylStrawberry]

For what it's worth (not much), I agree with BPC. The massing of this building is somewhat lacking, especially when compared to some of the other classic towers of its day...go ahead Ratner, make my day.

[ablarc]

^ Base and tower are ill-matched on Williamsburgh; look like they come from buildings of differing size. This building is a clumsy and lovable relic. It doesn't deserve the elaborate kowtowing it gets.

[pianoman11686]

Wow, this is news to me. Very disappointed to hear that Ratner caved to Marty and the heightophobiacs.

[ablarc]

Very disappointed to hear that Ratner caved to Marty and the heightophobiacs.
Another flattop "skyline" in the making: Table Mountain, Brooklyn.

[BrooklynRider]

Well, let me chime in with agreement for a change.

It is worth noting that the Williamsburg Bank Building was the only thing of any note (and really not all that bad) for an area that is and was trash-strewn and forever frozen in the bank developer's vision of being in the center of something that never materialized.

I loathe the Ms. (Mrs. Mssrs' Mr.) Brooklyn design, but I would've held out for sleeker and taller not the bulky, massive "mall" derivative junk that seems to be moving forward. Ratner has managed to bring the design of this development (love it or hate it) into architectural alignment with Atlantic Center. Ugly, even more inappropriate, and laughable. Whatever sliver of "brilliance" the overrated Gehry might have brought to this bood-doggle has surely been neutered.

This building will be a sadly perfect endline for the non-descript, horrendous corridor of bland, boring and, in some cases, offensive development built or being built along Fourth Avenue.

[antinimby]

Whatever happens, the NIMBYs will say they were right all along.

If this project is successful, they will claim that is the case only because of their efforts to scale the thing down.

If this project fails, they will claim that they were right and that the project should've never been done.

[BrooklynRider]

Whatever happens, the NIMBYs will say they were right all along.

If this project is successful, they will claim that is the case only because of their efforts to scale the thing down.

If this project fails, they will claim that they were right and that the project should've never been done.

Yet your arguments do the same thing.

If the project fails, it is the NIMBY's fault.

If the project succeeds, then just imagine how much more successful it could have been if not for NIMBY objections.

Both ways of looking at it are narrow and exagerrated.

It's called community input and it works when it is integrated into the process and executed transparently. I'm not fan of the alterations, but I think this could have been a magnificent project and a infinitely more appealing (and taller and more creative) had the area residents been invited to discuss it early on. The process design they went with and methodology they employed could only have one result: adversarial relationships all around.

I think there are very few Brooklynites and even New Yorkers at large that don't have some sort of reservation about this project whether it be huge traffic increases, public subsidies, tax generation, infrastructure stress, public transit impacts, eminent domain abuse, and so on.

We have arrived at a point where both the supporters of the development and those opposed to the development are at a crossroads: all are disappointed and think the project as approved is lousy for a variety of reasons.

[antinimby]

Oh come on, you know an earlier engagement with residents wouldn't have yielded anything different.

They would've opposed the density and height of the project no matter how early you announce your plans to them.

It's that plain and simple.

And we've beaten that traffic, transportation, eminent domain, etc. horse to death already.

I do however, agree with your last paragraph, this no-man's-land design is not looking very good at this point.

[Teno]

Seeing as the final plans for one tower on Beekman Street have not been released yet.

Most certainly they are still tinkering with the Atlantic Yards plan. I do agree Ms. Brooklyn would look quite horrible in its current girth and squat height.

[ablarc]

I do agree Ms. Brooklyn would look quite horrible in its current girth and squat height.
Diana DeVito ?

[Teno]

Brooklyn Papers

Marty’s humble opinion
Beep sits down with The Papers, says we’re biased

When Borough President Markowitz agreed to sit down for a year-in-review interview with our editor, Gersh Kuntzman, the fur started flying from the moment Kuntzman pressed “record” on his MP3 player. Markowitz didn’t waste any time getting into the year’s biggest story — Forest City Ratner’s Atlantic Yards development.

Q: Did you see our banner headline on the front page this week? “APPROVED.”

A: Look, The Paper, in my humble opinion — and I have a right to criticize — is overwhelmingly anti-[Atlantic Yards]. Not just the editorials, which you have every right to do, but the stories are tilted every freaking time. That’s my humble opinion. I’m sorry, it is NOT a balanced newspaper. It’s not.

Editorially, you can blast away ’til Kingdom Come. But it is so overwhelmingly against Atlantic Yards. Everyone knows that if there is any way to attack the project, The Brooklyn Papers will be there to do so.

Q: Do you think any paper in the city has analyzed this project credibly and with integrity?

A: I think the Times has. They have seriously written things that were definitely pro, middle and anti. Whatever issues that the antis have raised, they have definitely not ignored it. Your paper says, “We’re against it, so f— it.”

Q: Has there been a story in The Papers that had a factual inaccuracy?

A: What is fact? If you’re going to put in your paper that Ratner put up [surveillance] cameras on his building —

Q: We never wrote a word about that!

A: He has a right to put up cameras and protect the area. One of those nut jobs — you don’t know who can come by [and cause a] fire — and then put the blame on him!

Q: Did we write about that?

A: I didn’t say you wrote about it! But all I can tell you is that he has to protect what he has there. But let’s get on with your questions.

Q: I didn’t bring it up. I merely said I thought our headline last week, “Approved,” was a good headline.

A: You were being factual. OK. Great headline.

Q: What were the three best things that happened to Brooklyn this year and why?

A: The cruise ship terminal opening in Brooklyn. Promise made, promise kept. It will be a growing industry and opens the doors to a lot of tourism opportunities, making Brooklyn a destination of choice, especially if the cruise ship industry expands to the other pier … And someday, Brooklyn will be a port of call.

The second thing of course is Democratic control of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Brooklyn, like most urban centers, is impacted by federal policies as they relate to health care and under-employment and affordable housing. Also, we lost a significant number of men and women in the war in Iraq … It all impacts the quality of life that we want to improve in Brooklyn.

And Atlantic Yards! I feel it is the project of the early part of the 21st century. It will propel Brooklyn into the 21st century and will create, in my humble opinion, a fantastic new city center and create synergy between the downtowns.

Q: OK, on that subject. Many Brooklynites do not like this project’s aesthetic, scale, impact on traffic in and around Downtown Brooklyn; its overriding of existing city zoning; and the manner in which Bruce Ratner was selected by state officials. What convinces you that it is going to be a net gain for Brooklyn?

A: An arena with a national sports team that calls Brooklyn home. That’s a big thing. Maybe not for your readers, but it’s big. And the thousands of jobs we anticipate, not just in the Atlantic Yards development itself, not just in the arena, not just in services to the arena, but what the impact of 6,000 new apartments will mean to families living in and around Atlantic Avenue that will propel life along Vanderbilt, Washington, Atlantic, Flatbush avenues.

And that will inspire [development] further east on Atlantic Avenue … And there are thousands of affordable units for very low income as well as working people, teachers, civil servants, and middle-income [tenants]. And even the market-rate rentals will attract the richness of diversity, making Atlantic Yards one of the most successful developments.

All of that overwhelms, significantly, some of the impacts that might result. I am confident that between the city, state, local elected officials and the developer — who wants this project to work because he has billions riding on it —

Q: Billions of our money, too.

A: They have billions of dollars of their own riding on it! Yes, they got some public subsidies. But let me say this: Some, including some elected officials, said, “If he’d cut down the affordable housing, we could cut down the size of the buildings.” I don’t buy into that argument. Some people would rather see the affordable housing cut significantly [to] cut the size of the buildings. And I call that selfish!

Q: I think you’re putting words in the opponents’ mouths. I don’t think anyone called for less affordable housing.

A: If you spoke to them privately and said, “If we reduce the buildings size in half, but have to cut the affordable housing, how do you feel?” it would be interesting to see what they’d say. They won’t be honest! … I’m sorry, Gersh, but there is a demand for housing in our borough. And [you can] build high-rise buildings only in certain areas. And this is a prime area … because it works here.

The benefits — the creation of eight acres of open green space, which will provide a tapestry that will knit together Prospect Heights and Fort Greene, as opposed to a moat that we’ve had for 100 years — overwhelm those who say the buildings are too high.

Q: You realize that’s not their only argument against the project.

A: Listen to me, their arguments come down to the following: the heights of the building, the shadows they cast and the traffic.

Q: And the public subsidies!

A: The public subsidies are appropriate. Every project in this city, the government does provide infrastructure. [The Atlantic Yards subsidy] goes above that to assist the affordable housing component. If we didn’t have the affordable housing, this wouldn’t be necessary.

But it’s all a ruse. When they raise the fight about public subsidies, bop bop bop bop bop, they’re really saying, “We don’t want this project.”

Q: They don’t.

A: Some say they can live with the housing, but don’t want the arena. It’ll bring traffic and riffraff and bop bop bop bop bop.

And then some people tell me they can live with the arena, but there is too much housing and it’s too tall, there’ll be shadows, I’ll get in my car … I don’t know why they need a car in Brooklyn, with the greatest public transit system in the world, but it’s their right; I have a car. But, yes, it may take a minute or two minutes longer to transverse Atlantic Avenue [but] you know what, it’s a public benefit to the city. And I’m convinced that there will be enormous steps taken to mitigate the traffic issues. It’s important for the city and the developer for this project to work.

Q: Are you’re taking that on faith?

A: More than on faith, but because of my conversations with the developer and the city. We’re all pulling together to mitigate the traffic. You know, in the mornings, it’s not going to impact at all. During rush hours, if you’re driving, perhaps right before the games, perhaps there will be additional traffic issues. But there will be additional traffic agents and off-site parking to get that traffic moving.

Q: When we talk about public subsidies, those traffic agents are part of that subsidy. Taxpayers pay for it.

A: We pay for it at Madison Square Garden, too! In order to make money, you have to invest money! You have to invest! … It’s all part of a vibrant, exciting downtown. The opponents even argue that Atlantic [Avenue] isn’t Downtown. It’s definitely Downtown! They think only the corner of Junior’s is Downtown.

(Pensively) I really regret that those who oppose the [Atlantic Yards] project rejected an opportunity to work together. They said no, we don’t want this project. They didn’t want the arena. Look at your notes. Develop Don’t Destroy never said they’d take the arena. They didn’t want the high-rise housing. They supported Extell because there was no arena. So there was never an opportunity [for compromise] — and I tried. My hand was always extended, seriously, to say, “How can we reason together?” They said, “We’re against it. We don’t want a modification. We don’t want it.” It’s difficult to find a comprise with people who say, “We don’t want it!”

Q: They don’t want the arena.

A: But that’s the line in the sand. The arena. That’s the anchor of the project.

Q: But then you’re the one being unreasonable [to compromise].

A: I regret the fact that some of the hostility and some of the anger could not have been overcome. But whatever names these people call me — and they’ve called me everything — I’m still glad they live in Brooklyn. They’ve brought excitement to Brooklyn. I have no hatred at all, but they don’t see what I see: Brooklyn no longer being a backwater to Manhattan.

Q: But does Brooklyn need to be some kind of mini-Manhattan?

A: This is the ultimate renaissance. And other renaissances only benefited the very affluent. But here is one where, for the first time, the renaissance will benefit people of every income. And we’re taking a space that was empty and barren and creating a project that will benefit everyone … I wouldn’t put it on Sixth Street and Eighth Avenue in Park Slope … But here, unlike other neighborhoods, you have the greatest public transit hub. … When we had Ebbet’s Field in the middle of a neighborhood, we had cars, but it worked!

Q: Not as many cars.

A: We had plenty of cars! And it worked. It worked. And it’s going to work again. And tomorrow’s kids will get to have the same sweet memories I had as a kid. And that’s what this is all about. I wish everyone a good year. All of this is immaterial compared to terrorism and world peace.

Q: Bring us up to date on your diet.

A: I walk five days a week for at least a half hour. I dropped about 25 pounds and now I’m down to 180 or 179. I’m not trying to get to 150 … I keep away from the foods I know I shouldn’t eat. I altered all my suits to make sure I won’t go back to the way I was. I can’t afford to re-alter all my suits.

[Teno]

Covering Atlantic Yards
Editorial
The Brooklyn Papers
Over the last 12 months, no story has been as important to Brooklyn — and, as a result, to this newspaper — as Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards mega-development.

With its 16-towers, 19,000-seat basketball arena, 6,000 units of housing and hundreds of thousands of square feet of office and retail space, Ratner’s mini-city is the biggest single-developer project in the history of Brooklyn.

As such, it deserved — and got — our attention, sometimes obsessively so. As we prepared our year-in-review issue, we noticed that not a single issue this year was devoid of coverage of some element of the Ratner proposal.

Yet our laser-like focus has earned us little praise and sometimes even outright scorn from local elected officials. In an interview in this week’s Papers, the project’s biggest booster, Borough President Markowitz, calls us “biased” because our coverage revealed the shocking density of the project, the traffic it would cause, and the subsidy-enriched sweetheart deal Gov. Pataki’s cronies cooked up in Albany to make this project work for Ratner.

Given how we’ve been attacked for such coverage — and the overwhelming support the project enjoys among city and state powerbrokers — many of our readers have wondered why we even bothered. Indeed, it would have been far easier for us to blow off Atlantic Yards, as did the daily papers, and our weekly competitor, the New York Post-owned, Sheepshead Bay-based, Courier-Life chain.

For most of the year, the supposedly ravenous local press corps took a pass on Atlantic Yards, swallowing whole such Ratner myths as the notion that the project would be a boon to the lower and lower-middle classes (actual state analysis shows it would hasten, not forestall, gentrification in Prospect Heights), and that Brooklyn needs lots of shiny new skyscrapers to feel good about itself (as Markowitz says in the interview).

For some reason, everyone seemed to accept Ratner’s economic projections, even as they dropped and dropped again during the public approval process. And everyone was happy to accept the already-inaccurate traffic analysis provided by Ratner’s state partners.

So why did we persist in our aggressive reporting? Markowitz contends in the interview that we did it because we simply hate Bruce Ratner. We actually do not hate Bruce Ratner. This isn’t personal.

Our obsession with the project’s taxpayer-supported financing, its outright lies about job creation, and its preposterous density is a reflection of exactly what journalists are supposed to do: question authority and ensure that elected officials are doing their jobs.

Yet the elected officials ignored our objective and non-biased reports, which week in and week out demonstrated the flaws of Atlantic Yards.

They did so at their own peril, setting the stage for a costly, permanent change in the heart of Brooklyn.

However this plays out, The Brooklyn Papers will continue to aggressively cover this story.

[NYguy]

Time to tie some loose ends...
(amny)

Atlantic Yards project foes take fight to court

By Michael Clancy
January 5, 2007

Having cleared all political hurdles, developer Bruce Ratner's plan to build the $4.2 billion Atlantic Yards complex is still facing legal obstacles from Brooklyn residents who will lose their homes.

Lawyers for the residents who are fighting the use of eminent domain to take the property will file papers in federal court today. Lawyers for developer Forest City Ratner and the Empire State Development Corp. filed motions in December to dismiss the lawsuit -- filed in October -- or have it moved to state court.

"We'll be explaining that the time to hear the case is now and the place to hear the case is federal court," said Matthew Brinckerhoff, an attorney representing the 10 Brooklyn residents who are fighting plans to build the arena and 16 commercial and residential towers.

Through generous buyouts, Forest City Ratner has already purchased most of the land it needs for the project but faces opposition from a handful of holdouts living on the 22-acre site.

The plaintiffs are hoping a 2005 Supreme Court decision in the case of Kelo v. New London will help them. Even though 15 property-owners lost that bid to stop the Connecticut city from taking their homes to build a commercial complex, the Brooklyn residents found a glimmer of hope in the opinion of Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Kennedy voted against the property owners, but did argue that eminent domain could not be used for deals that solely benefit one party with just incidental public benefit. The plaintiffs argue that the deal given to Ratner on the publicly owned MTA property is a clear case of such favoritism.

A spokesman for Forest City Ratner had no comment Thursday. Both sides are due in court on Jan. 19 for the beginning of oral arguments.

[antinimby]

Is there any way Ratner can just build around the holdouts.

I know there are some parcels that are right smack in the main area of the development, that is, the location of the arena and MB but as for the other areas, maybe he can just build around them.

[ablarc]

^ It was mistaken and megalomaniacal Modernist planning that made them go for a tabula rasa. An incremental approach would have yielded better urbanism and speedier completion.

[antinimby]

Exactly, and in the process they would've also had a chance to get back at the stubborn holdouts by making them live through the construction that would have been surrounding them.

[pianoman11686]

^Can't build an arena piecemeal.

[Teno]

And if you are spending over a billion to build a deck over railyards, why wait to recoup the profit?

[antinimby]

^Can't build an arena piecemeal.I know that. Wasn't talking about the arena.


I know there are some parcels that are right smack in the main area of the development, that is, the location of the arena and MB but as for the other areas, maybe he can just build around them.

[debris]

No way he gets so many people to sell (almost 90%) without threatening eminent domain. Watch Columbia U: they are masters at it. No way they'll ever actually use it, but just the threat let's them bully a few owners into selling low.

The benefits of power come from threats, not the actual use of it. The US Army is Exhibit A (stretching the metaphor a bit but you know what I mean).

[antinimby]

Good point but I disagree with the selling low part.

The intention, like you say, is probably to get people to sell but not necessarily sell low.

I've read where people were compensated handsomely by Ratner, above their market value.

[BrooklynRider]

^ It was mistaken and megalomaniacal Modernist planning that made them go for a tabula rasa. An incremental approach would have yielded better urbanism and speedier completion.

Holy Jesus! We finally agree on the Atlantic Yards! :D

[Teno]

^

The opposition could have attempted to negotiate with Ratner on this issue.

Agree to allow him to build the first stage then wait to see the results and the reality of the market to determine if high density for the next stage is needed or something downscaled would work better.

Instead of anything like this they staunchly opposed the entire project.

[antinimby]

Don't be naive Teno.

The opposition don't care about waiting to see how things turn out.

Their ulterior motive is more selfish and self-serving, that is, to stop development in their neighborhood and the increased population that comes along with it, not how successful a project will be for Brooklyn or the city.

Of course, they'll tell you differently, like protecting the neighborhood, traffic, noise, light, pollution, quality of life, affordability, neighborhood character, etc. because that sounds better and makes a better argument for their case.

After you build it and it turns out successful, they'll be just as against anything new as they would be now.

[NYguy]

After you build it and it turns out successful, they'll be just as against anything new as they would be now.

If Ratner had come out with a proposal at half the size of Atlantic Yards, you would have heard the same complaints. I only wish he hadn't reduced the height of Miss Brooklyn. Being a new tallest in Brooklyn added a little luster to the development. Instead, people want to stay in the last century. They have to be brought kicking and screaming into this one.

[ablarc]

If Ratner had come out with a proposal at half the size of Atlantic Yards, you would have heard the same complaints. I only wish he hadn't reduced the height of Miss Brooklyn. Being a new tallest in Brooklyn added a little luster to the development. Instead, people want to stay in the last century. They have to be brought kicking and screaming into this one.
Agreed. Whatever the size of a project, it's too big for a NIMBY.

[lofter1]

Whatever the size of a project, it's too big for a NIMBY.

ergo: Whatever the size of a project, it's too small for an anti-NIMBY ;)

[ablarc]

Holy Jesus! We finally agree on the Atlantic Yards! :D
We do indeed --on at least this point: that it should have been planned as bite size pieces on a more irregular and circumstantial field.

That would have yielded enhanced urban variety and interest, quirkier juxtapositions, better integration with surroundings, no need for eminent domain, more of a challenge for the very talented architect, and a much speedier start to construction.

If built, Atlantic Yards will be the borough's greatest boon since Brooklyn Bridge and Prospect Park, especially if it stays big and dense.

Miss Brooklyn should be as tall as the dismal science permits --certainly MUCH taller than the paltry and easily dismissed Williamsburgh Bank. It's a sorry Brooklynite who thinks so little of his borough as to consider this piffling trifle to adequately represent its glories as an icon. If that's so, then Brooklyn belongs in a class with Toledo.

[MidtownGuy]

Yeah!! ^^

[NYguy]

Observer

Earplugs, Anyone? Selling In Atlantic Yards’ Shadow

By Matthew Schuerman

http://www.observer.com/data/articleimages/photoimages/011507_article_schuerman.jpg

Atlantic Yards stares down nearby Newswalk, above.


Before the jackhammers, the bulldozers, the hoe rams and the cranes brought the borough’s largest real-estate venture to his Brooklyn neighborhood, Jacob Septimus wanted out. And so, last August, he put on the market for $1.5 million the 2,000-square-foot three-bedroom that he and his wife had bought just five years earlier.

They dropped the price once and then finally, this week, closed on it—for “a little over” $1.3 million—and moved out of earshot of Atlantic Yards.

“I waited as long as possible,” said the scruffy, leather-jacketed Mr. Septimus, 34, a filmmaker. (He recently finished a documentary, BIKE, about hard-core bicyclists.) “I didn’t want to leave. I was very happy there, but at the same time, I’m a realist. I have a lot of sympathy for the people trying to fight it, but I saw it was a great game, and there wasn’t anything to do except vote with your feet.”

Mr. Septimus lived in Newswalk, a 10-story former Daily News printing plant that’s been converted into condominiums over the past eight years. It will essentially be surrounded on three sides by the 190- to 511-foot-tall towers of Atlantic Yards, the eight-million-square-foot project planned for Atlantic and Flatbush avenues. While the other warehouses and apartment buildings—including two that had also been converted into condos—will be demolished, developer Bruce Ratner spared Newswalk and some adjacent rowhouses, in a prudent move that lowers his cost of having to buy out the residents.

“Ratner is literally going to build right outside what was my window,” Mr. Septimus said. “He is basically going to block the light of all of our sunsets. We didn’t want to live with that. We didn’t want to live with that construction.”

A Newswalk board member counts nine residents of the building who have moved in the past year because of Atlantic Yards, including Mr. Septimus. They and other property owners nearby haven’t exactly lost money; the robust, if sputtering, real-estate sales market has made sure of that. (Mr. Septimus more than doubled the $500,000 he paid.) Some people even believe that the project will be good for the neighborhood in the long run.

But sellers and brokers are warning that the prospect of 10-plus years of construction will complicate future sales, if it isn’t doing so already.

Jan Lattey, a neighbor, put a brownstone that she bought 24 years ago around the corner from Newswalk on the market in January 2006. It just sold in December; she blames the fact that it took so long—and that it didn’t fetch the $1.5 million asking price—on the imminent project.

“A lot of people were very, very hesitant because of what is going to happen across the street,” said Ms. Lattey, who is retiring and moving to a condo in nearby Park Slope. “They didn’t want to live with construction for 14 years.”

With December’s approval by the state Public Authorities Control Board neatly in hand, Mr. Ratner’s company, Forest City Ratner, can begin demolishing the buildings that it owns as soon as it receives permits. To go further and seize another 22 properties through eminent domain to complete the planned footprint, Mr. Ratner must contend with a federal lawsuit filed by landowners and tenants.

Once—or if—he prevails, Forest City would start with the environmental remediation of the eastern part of the 22-acre site, closest to Flatbush Avenue, where the Nets basketball arena will go, and prepare to move the Long Island Rail Road train yard further east.

Then, as the arena, the train yard and five other commercial and residential buildings get underway late next year, as many as 470 trucks will make deliveries each day during the peak period, in winter 2009, according to the final environmental-impact statement issued in November. An average of once or twice a week, workers would be on the job until 11 p.m. For 10 months, one of the lanes of Atlantic Avenue would shut down. Side streets would close for longer periods, some of them forever. The levels of fine particulate matter—soot and dust—would exceed the threshold level that the Environmental Protection Agency considers dangerous to human health along two different stretches around the construction site (including down the street from Newswalk) for year-long periods.

And the equipment would be noisy enough that, even with various technological (electric, not diesel) and geographic (move them farther away) mitigations, Forest City is planning on buying and installing air conditioners or double-pane windows for nearby residents in sensitive spots—a move that even ur-booster Marty Markowitz, the Brooklyn borough president, told the state economic-development agency “is not a solution for these problems, only a way to mask them while residents are inside their homes.”

It’s a wonder, given all of that particulate matter—and the draft and final environmental-impact statements and analyses and appendices—that anybody is buying anything at all anywhere near Atlantic Avenue. And yet they are.

Nalani Clark, the co-principal broker and co-owner of the brokerage Brooklyn Properties, said her agency just set the neighborhood’s record for a brownstone sale about two and a half blocks away. William Ross, the executive director of sales for Halstead Brooklyn, said that his brokerage just sold four large apartments on Pacific Street for about $800 a square foot right across the street from a couple of commercial buildings that Mr. Ratner has planned.

“Those are family-sized units,” Mr. Ross told The Observer. “Those are buyers who are going to be there for a long while. By the time they are sold again, the arena will be finished and the neighborhood will have improved.

“If someone wants to buy there and sell in a year or two years,” he added, “they might be in trouble for all of the construction; but if you are planning on staying for five or six years, by the time you are ready to move, the construction will be complete.”

Meanwhile, on the north (read: shady) side of Atlantic Yards, the Dermot Company is finishing up its conversion of the Williamsburgh Savings Bank Building, the once and (given a last-minute concession by Forest City) future tallest building in Brooklyn, at 512 feet. The Dermot Company has put about 35 percent of its 189 condominiums under contract since opening its sales office last July—right when the draft environmental-impact statement came out with images of a row of steel-and-glass buildings that would rise just 600 feet away from the former bank’s 78-year-old terrazzo lobby.

“More than anything, that’s what people are coming in and looking at: what sort of views they will have,” Dermot principal Andrew MacArthur said. “One of the things we wanted when we bought the building was to have great views in every direction. We knew about the project then, and one of the things we considered was what sort of impact [Atlantic Yards] would have, and we decided it would have a very limited one.”

Mr. MacArthur said that Atlantic Yards would be fully visible from just one out of four lines of apartments, and that those units had been selling just as quickly as any others—although, on second thought, maybe that wasn’t quickly enough.

“The way the building was laid out, we had tight, efficient units on that end, so it is fair to say that people are hesitating when it comes to that line,” he said. “Those are tight, efficient two-bedroom units which we thought we would have sold more of.”

Forest City Ratner wouldn’t comment for this story, but the final environmental-impact statement acknowledges: “Construction traffic and noise would change the quiet character of Dean Street and Pacific Street in the immediate vicinity of the project site.” As for longer-range impacts, the analysis, conducted by a private firm on behalf of the Empire State Development Corporation, the state agency that has both promoted and overseen the project’s creation, concluded that the project—some 6,430 rental and condo apartments, the basketball arena and 336,000 square feet of office space—would “not substantially affect residential property values in areas with at-risk population for several reasons.”

Opponents have long argued the opposite: that Atlantic Yards will bring an influx of affluence into the mixed-income neighborhood because of its 3,980 market-rate apartments and another 900 or so aimed at households earning more than the region’s median income.

What is more, the opponents in the eminent-domain lawsuit are using the strong sales at Newswalk and other nearby places as arguments against why a massive, planned, subsidized urban-renewal project is necessary to eliminate blight when, next-door, buyers are shelling out $800 or even $1,000 a square foot.

In its legal response, filed in mid-December, the ESDC argued that the open rail yard, owned by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, has blighted the adjacent three blocks (minus the part where Newswalk stands, apparently) to such a hopeless extent that eminent domain is justified, because “all prior plans to remediate the blight caused by this gaping hole in the Brooklyn landscape have fallen through.”

Brokers tend to agree that decking over the train yards will do only good for the neighborhood—but beyond that, they are reluctant to take a position, because their clients are as divided about the project as the rest of the public. After all, Mr. Ratner isn’t merely bringing lots of people and lots of traffic—and, his supporters say, lots of jobs—to central Brooklyn. He is bringing a little Madison Square Garden, complete with 150-foot animated signs, to a neighborhood that is warming up to boutiques that sell $4 handmade greeting cards.

“It is one of those things that is so hard to predict in the long term, frankly,” said Mr. MacArthur, the developer of One Hanson Place, the former Williamsburgh Bank tower. “I would like to stay out of saying whether things are going in a positive or a negative [direction]. It’s such a highly charged issue that we have nothing to gain from having an opinion.”

Meanwhile, Halstead’s Mr. Ross has an idea for how to get potential buyers into the spirit, especially when that jackhammer goes off across the street right during your open house: throw in a pair of season tickets to the Nets.

Or you could just buy them some earplugs.

[NYguy]

NY Post

BROOKLYN BOOMING
MEGAPROJECTS KEEP REAL-ESTATE MARKET SIZZLING

By RICH CALDER and PATRICK GALLAHUE
January 15, 2007

If 2006 proved anything, it's that Brooklyn's days of taking a back seat to
Manhattan in the real-estate game are over.

Bruce Ratner last month received final state approval to break ground on the
largest development project in Brooklyn's history: a $4 billion plan to build an
NBA arena and 16 skyscrapers along the Prospect Heights/Fort Greene
border.

Another hot-shot developer, Joe Sitt, continued to gobble up properties
along the Coney Island boardwalk - including the famous Astroland Park - as
part of his $2 billion bid to turn the rundown summer amusement area into a
Vegas-style, year-round entertainment complex.

And while Brooklyn's commercial real-estate market continued to boom,
residential sales did even better - despite a market slowdown nationwide.

"I don't think there's any question that Brooklyn has the hottest real-estate
market in New York City, and there's no reason to think it won't continue in
2007," said Brooklyn's biggest booster, Borough President Marty Markowitz.

But some say there is too much Manhattan-ization going on in Brooklyn.

Carolyn Konheim, an urban-planning consultant, said Brooklyn's roads,
highways and subways aren't equipped to handle the flood of new commuters
that projects like Ratner's Atlantic Yards and the planned Brooklyn Bridge
Park would bring.

"We're going to be hugely overcrowded," she said.

Mark Kessler, interim president of the Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce, said he
expects the borough's real-estate market to be even stronger in 2007.

"Since 2003, we've outpaced Manhattan in the construction of residential
units, and on the commercial side, projects like the Brooklyn cruise-ship
terminal have added to the momentum," he said.

Still, not every major development project had a rosy year.

For Swedish home furnishings giant IKEA, 2006 was a complete dud with
respect to plans for a new store along a historic drydock on the Red Hook
waterfront. Preservationists are using the courts to continue the delays for
IKEA's grand opening, which was initially slated for spring 2005.

But company officials say they expect to begin construction this year and
open in 2008.

It was also a tumultuous year for Whole Foods Market in its effort to open an
organic megastore in Gowanus.

After potentially contaminated gasoline tanks were unearthed at the
construction site during the environmental cleanup, the planned spring
groundbreaking was pushed to November.


http://www.nypost.com/seven/01152007/photos/news017.jpg

[elfgam]

The fact that Brooklyn has finally, and indisputably, rounded a corner in its development is great news. It can never slide back into the backwater to Manhattan that it had become from 1960 until 1990. The true success of many great European cities is how much quality growth happened in their outlying areas (look at London's expansion east and south, for eaxmple). Soon, brooklyn is going to take up much more than a token 30 pages in the back of most tour books...

I LOVE IT.

[antinimby]

^ Another "feel good" article gets elfgam feeling good.

[NYguy]

NY Post

NET$' NAME GAME
ARENA SETS RECORD

By RICH CALDER
January 17, 2007

The future Brooklyn home of the NBA's Nets will be named Barclays Center, in the most lucrative deal ever for an arena in the United States, The Post has learned.

London-based Barclays Bank has agreed to pay the Nets "hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 20 years" for the naming rights to the planned 18,000-seat arena in Prospect Heights that will house the franchise once it moves from New Jersey to Brooklyn for the 2009-2010 season, sources said.

The slam-dunk agreement is the "most expensive arena deal" in the country, exceeding the $9.3 million-a-year over 20 years that Royal Philips Electronics is paying to name Atlanta's Philips Arena, one source said. The exact dollar amount could not be learned last night.

The Nets and Barclays Bank plan to announce the agreement tomorrow during a noon conference at the Brooklyn Museum. The Nets declined comment and Barclays did not return a phone message.

Barclays is the largest bank in the world by total assets and is better known in England than the United States. It is also has operations elsewhere in Europe, and in Asia and Africa.

The Nets deal allows Barclays to put a major flag in the ground in its U.S. operations and could be viewed as part of grand expansion plan.

A confidential December audit conducted by KPMG indicated the Nets estimate earning $31.2 million annually through arena sponsorship and naming rights.

The Nets deal blows away the agreement reached two weeks ago by Prudential Financial to pay $105.3 million over 20 years for the rights to have an 18,500-seat arena in downtown Newark called Prudential Center.

Citigroup Inc. last year agreed to pay the most lucrative deal for naming rights to a stadium.

It will pay the New York Mets $400 million over 20 years to call the team's new Queens stadium Citi Field.

The $637 million Brooklyn arena is part of Nets owner Bruce Ratner's $4 billion Atlantic Yards project, which also includes 16 skyscrapers with residential and commercial space.

The Frank Gehry-designed 22-acre project - with its monolithic brick, glass and steel high-rises - will create a new borough skyline and could have a groundbreaking as early as in a few weeks.

[ablarc]

The Frank Gehry-designed 22-acre project - with its monolithic brick, glass and steel high-rises - will create a new borough skyline and could have a groundbreaking as early as in a few weeks.[/size]
There's that word again --used to describe the least monolithic of architects. Don't they own a dictionary?

[NYguy]

There's that word again --used to describe the least monolithic of architects. Don't they own a dictionary?

I don't care too much about that. I'm trying to get used to the name - Barclays Center - doesn't exactly roll off the tongue...

[ablarc]

^ Leave off the final "s" in the first word.

[NYguy]

^ Leave off the final "s" in the first word.

Better, but still not Brooklyn, or even New York. It doesn't matter I guess, the money is what talks....

[antinimby]

Barclay is very New York.

Barclay Street is one block north of Vesey St. at the WTC.

[NYguy]

Barclay is very New York.

Barclay Street is one block north of Vesey St. at the WTC.

I know about that, but when you say "Barclay" it doesn't exactly bring images of New York or Brooklyn to mind. New Yorkers will be puzzled by the choice without further explanation. That fact that it needs explanation is the point. CitiField was understandable.

[antinimby]

Well, when Shea first out, the name Shea didn't exactly resounded with New Yorkers either but we now know that stadium like the back of our hand, now don't we? ;)

It's just a new thing and like everything new, you'll get used to it eventually.

[NYguy]

Well, when Shea first out, the name Shea didn't exactly resounded with New Yorkers either but we now know that stadium like the back of our hand, now don't we? ;)

It's just a new thing and like everything new, you'll get used to it eventually.

Of course. They could call it Chicago Stadium, and you'd eventually get used to it.

[antinimby]

So then what's the problem?

There isn't any.

Just take Britain's Barclay's money.

[NYguy]

So then what's the problem?

There isn't any.

Just take Britain's Barclay's money.

Whoever said it was a problem? I said the name just doesn't roll off the tongue well and its not a name that New Yorkers will readily recognize. If that's your idea of a problem, then so be it.

[ablarc]

Who's on first?

[antinimby]

^ Who.

What is on second.

I don't know is on third.

:D

**********

Take it easy there NYguy, you made it sound like there was a problem, is all.

[NYguy]

Take it easy there NYguy, you made it sound like there was a problem, is all.

No problem, I'm just saying New Yorkers will be trying to figure out what it means. But like I said, money talks, BS walks...:)

(Daily News)

Nets banking on Brits
20-year deal would name arena for financial powerhouse Barclays

BY JOTHAM SEDERSTROM
January 18, 2007

In what could become one of the priciest naming-rights deals ever for a sports venue, a London-based banking giant has agreed to fork over millions to stamp its name on a yet-to-be-built basketball arena for the Brooklyn Nets.
Barclays Bank has agreed to a 20-year, nine-digit deal with the Forest City Ratner-owned Nets to call the arena the Barclays Center, sources said.

Officials from both sides - including Nets investor Jay-Z, NBA Commissioner David Stern and project architect Frank Gehry - are set to meet today at the Brooklyn Museum.

Coming less than a month after state officials approved Bruce Ratner's megadevelopment, the naming-rights windfall would eclipse a $9.3-million-a-year deal to name an Atlanta arena after Royal Philips Electronics.

Sports economist Andrew Zimbalist predicted profits, which could amount to hundreds of millions of dollars, would help pay for the construction of the Gehry-designed arena.

"Typically what happens is that the money would be used to pay off the debt," said Zimbalist, formerly a paid consultant for Forest City Ratner. "I suspect [Ratner] would do the same."

Officials for Forest City and Barclays Bank declined to comment on the deal.

But opponents of Ratner's $4.2 billion Atlantic Yards plan, of which the arena is a part, balked, saying the deal was made prematurely because of pending eminent domain lawsuits that threaten to delay or block the project.

"Barclays Bank is paying for what appears to be a violation of the Constitution," said Daniel Goldstein of Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, who lives in the footprint of the proposed 22-acre project and has refused to leave.

Since announcing the plan to bring 16 sprawling towers with residential and commercial space to Brooklyn, Ratner has made some strange bedfellows, including affordable housing advocates normally hostile to megadevelopers.

Barclays Bank, by total assets, is the largest bank in the world.

[TonyO]

"Barclays Bank is paying for what appears to be a violation of the Constitution," said Daniel Goldstein of Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, who lives in the footprint of the proposed 22-acre project and has refused to leave.

It's amazing anyone listens to this guy with statements like this.

[NYguy]

^ He'll go to the end still saying comments like that...

Star Ledger

Barclays to get name on Nets' arena

Thursday, January 18, 2007
BY MATTHEW FUTTERMAN

The planned Brooklyn arena will get a name today.

The Nets and Barclays Bank, the London-based international financial conglomerate, will unveil a deal to put the company's name on the team's future home, executives close to the deal confirmed yesterday. News of the agreement first appeared in yesterday's New York Post.

The deal is worth more than $10 million each year, making it at least double what Prudential will pay the Devils to put that company's name on the new arena in Newark, which will be called the Prudential Center.

The Nets and Barclays did not return phone calls seeking comment on the potential deal.

T.J. Nelligan, a sports marketing expert, said it was surprising that a British-based company would be interested in putting its name on a Brooklyn arena, rather than a company with a more hometown feel.

"Usually it's a homegrown company and there is a significant tie-in," Nelligan said. "But it's a copycat business, where everyone follows suit. You saw Citigroup putting its name on the Mets' stadium and Prudential in Newark. Now this."

[Eugenious]

^ He'll go to the end still saying comments like that...

Star Ledger

Barclays to get name on Nets' arena

Thursday, January 18, 2007
BY MATTHEW FUTTERMAN

The planned Brooklyn arena will get a name today.

The Nets and Barclays Bank, the London-based international financial conglomerate, will unveil a deal to put the company's name on the team's future home, executives close to the deal confirmed yesterday. News of the agreement first appeared in yesterday's New York Post.

The deal is worth more than $10 million each year, making it at least double what Prudential will pay the Devils to put that company's name on the new arena in Newark, which will be called the Prudential Center.

The Nets and Barclays did not return phone calls seeking comment on the potential deal.

T.J. Nelligan, a sports marketing expert, said it was surprising that a British-based company would be interested in putting its name on a Brooklyn arena, rather than a company with a more hometown feel.

"Usually it's a homegrown company and there is a significant tie-in," Nelligan said. "But it's a copycat business, where everyone follows suit. You saw Citigroup putting its name on the Mets' stadium and Prudential in Newark. Now this."


Barclays is actually a very respected company and has a long history. I'd rather have its name on the arena (which in my opinion makes it sounds very classy and upscale) then Home Depot Arena or Ikea Arena.

also...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barclays

On the global stage, Barclays PLC is the largest bank in the world by total assets (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asset) ($1.59 trillion)

Just think maybe they'll sponsor Shakespearean theater there!

[lofter1]

No problem, I'm just saying New Yorkers will be trying to figure out what it means. But like I said, money talks, BS walks...:)

(Daily News)
Nets banking on Brits

20-year deal would name arena for financial powerhouse Barclays

... Officials from both sides - including Nets investor Jay-Z, NBA Commissioner David Stern and project architect Frank Gehry - are set to meet today at the Brooklyn Museum.



Goody Bag from Thursday's announcement luncheon at the Brooklyn Museum (Mayor Bloomberg was on hand as well) ...

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p242/Lofter1/Gehry%20NYC/GehryAY_01a_Barclays.jpg

[lofter1]

As pointed out at http://dreadnaughtsphere.blogspot.com/ this \/ isn't a likely outcome ...



I don't care too much about that. I'm trying to get used to the name - Barclays Center - doesn't exactly roll off the tongue...



^ Leave off the final "s" in the first word.


For one obvious reason ...



http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/3847/736/1600/244547/02026.jpg

[Transic]

^Ha! Good one! :p

In all seriousness, as an admirer of the world game of soccer, I should be familiar with Barclays. They are the sponsor of the Barclays Premier League in England, considered to be the most popular soccer league in the world. I knew watching Fox Soccer Channel can be so educational. ;)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/19/sports/basketball/19sandomir.html?ref=sports

Sports Business

What's in a Name? $400 Million

By RICHARD SANDOMIR (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/richard_sandomir/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
Published: January 19, 2007

When the Nets (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/probasketball/nationalbasketballassociation/newjerseynets/index.html?inline=nyt-org) were a goofball franchise, it was impossible to imagine their owners consorting with a global financial power like Barclays. But the Nets aren’t laughable anymore, and yesterday, their principal owner, Bruce C. Ratner; some of his investors, like the rapper Jay-Z (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/jayz/index.html?inline=nyt-per); and a few of their players were at the Brooklyn Museum (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/b/brooklyn_museum/index.html?inline=nyt-org) to announce that Barclays will pay a record $400 million over 20 years to put its name on the team’s new arena. “Barclays is saying Brooklyn is the place to be,” Ratner said at a luncheon in the elegant Beaux-Arts Court, accompanied on a platform by Jason Kidd (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/jason_kidd/index.html?inline=nyt-per), Vince Carter (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/vince_carter/index.html?inline=nyt-per), Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/michael_r_bloomberg/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and N.B.A. Commissioner David Stern (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/david_stern/index.html?inline=nyt-per). (Ratner’s company is the development partner on the new headquarters for The New York Times.)

Given the Nets’ history, it is also difficult to comprehend that Barclays is paying exactly what Citicorp committed in November for the right for 20 years to name the Mets (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/baseball/majorleague/newyorkmets/index.html?inline=nyt-org)’ new stadium, Citi Field, which is expected to open in 2009, a few months before the planned opening of Barclays Center. The arena, designed by Frank Gehry (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/frank_gehry/index.html?inline=nyt-per), is part of the $4 billion Atlantic Yards development near downtown Brooklyn. It still faces a series of lawsuits before it can be built.

Several demonstrators protested outside the museum, accusing Barclays of participating in the state’s attempt to use eminent domain to condemn property for the project. They also said Barclays profited from the slave trade yet is aligned with Ratner, who is marketing his team to African-American fans. A company spokesman said Barclays had not been involved in slavery.

The mayor turned away any criticism of Barclays and said with a Darryl Dawkins-sized dollop of civic hyperbole, “People will be talking about the Barclays Center all the time, all year, for decades to come.”

It is possible that the London-based Barclays overpaid, but it can afford to, as the price it deemed necessary to accelerate its exposure in the United States as an investment banker and asset manager. Barclays appears to be paying a premium to be a part of the return of major league sports to Brooklyn more than a half-century after the Dodgers (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/baseball/majorleague/losangelesdodgers/index.html?inline=nyt-org) left.

“This goes across many areas,” said Robert E. Diamond Jr., the president of Barclays PLC. “You look at Barclays Center, the Frank Gehry design, the impact it will have on Brooklyn, the things we’ll do in our not-for-profit; there are many aspects beside the naming rights.” Its charitable works will include rebuilding basketball courts and staging tournaments, similar to its activities in England as part of its Premier League sponsorship.

Brett Yormark, the president of Nets Sports & Entertainment, targeted Barclays as a possible naming-rights buyer, with a New York-based fashion company, a bank and two telecommunciations corporations.

“We said, ‘Who needs a game changer here? Who’s got a footprint here, but isn’t big enough?’ and Barclays was on the list,” he said. “As we scoured financial institutions we saw Barclays needed a game changer, that they don’t have as big a presence or brand recognition here as in the U.K. And we saw that it got involved with the Barclays Classic in Westchester.” Barclays took over for Buick in 2005 as the sponsor of the PGA Tour event.

The size of the Nets’ and Mets’ deals should make the Jets (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/profootball/nationalfootballleague/newyorkjets/index.html?inline=nyt-org) and Giants (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/baseball/majorleague/sanfranciscogiants/index.html?inline=nyt-org) salivate as they look over the next year to sell the naming rights to their $1.2 billion stadium in the Meadowlands. They hired the Wasserman Media Group last year to handle the transaction, and yesterday, Jeff Knapple, the president of WMG Marketing said: “We’ve watched with a keen eye toward what the Mets and the Nets have done. It’s an indication of the power of the New York marketplace and its position in the nation and the world.”

Knapple negotiated the most expensive arena naming-rights deal before the Barclays Center, the 20-year, $182 million Philips Arena deal in Atlanta.

“Philips was a massive leap above Staples Center, and it’s held for seven, nearly eight years,” he said.

The New York market had, until 1996, barely entered the naming rights world except for the Continental Airlines, 12-year, $29-million deal to rename Brendan Byrne Arena in the Meadowlands.

Now, a combined $800 million is going to the Nets and the Mets. And in a deal announced earlier this month, Prudential Financial will spend $105.3 million to name the Devils (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/hockey/nationalhockeyleague/newjerseydevils/index.html?inline=nyt-org)’ new arena in Newark for 20 years.

The Yankees (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/baseball/majorleague/newyorkyankees/index.html?inline=nyt-org), who would probably reap the most from a hot local naming rights market, will not seek a corporate name when the new Yankee Stadium opens. “The Yankee brand is very significant and extremely in demand,” Randy Levine, the team’s president said, “and we expect to do many types of unique and creative sponsorships. But we will retain the dignity of the Yankee Stadium name.”

Fans will veer from the sober dignity of Barclays Center for a nickname. They could shorten the name to canine speech (“We’re going to the Bark”) or ally with a famous homonym, Charles Barkley (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/charles_barkley/index.html?inline=nyt-per). The Chuck?

“Absolutely not,” Yormark said. “The Barclays Center flows so well.”

E-mail: sportsbiz@nytimes.com

[NoyokA]

I have to hand it to Bruce. The stadium is going to cost about $550 million; Barclay's is essentially paying $400 million of it. That leaves Bruce with a $150 million tab. The price he paid for the Nets would have eventually paid for itself if they were to stay in New Jersey and will now pay for itself many times over with a move to Brooklyn. Think Television, think a sold-out house for many years after opening day, also basketball is an urban sport and Brooklyn has immense marketing capabilities, and think merchandise that will even outsell the LA Lakers. His $150 million tab will be paid in no time. Also throw in 8 million square feet of development in a trendy neighborhood that Bruce probably wouldn’t have been allowed to build without the stadium component; that might also help his situation. To say that Bruce will be nicely rewarded, would very much be an understatement.

[sfenn1117]

It looks like the first building at Atlantic Yards has filed for permits, my guess is that this is Miss Brooklyn....all 2.7 mil sq. ft of her :eek:

45 floors/475 feet/915 units

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/JobDetailsServlet?requestid=3&allisn=0001330239&allboroughname=&allnumbhous=&allstrt=

The fat, squat tower the nimby's cried for.

[ablarc]

Tragic.

Some people are such fools!

The toil of a fool so wearies him that he knows not how to go to the city.

[MidtownGuy]

Tragic indeed. What a missed opportunity other cities would kill for. That area, and yes I do consider it part of "downtown" Brooklyn when you look at the overall huge size of the borough, is crawling with development of towers all the way to the river. This was a chance to have a tall skyscraper by a world class architect to poke above them on the future skyline in a dramatic way.
And the other towers in the project are boring me to tears when I consider what might have been without the contextualists calling the shots.

[Strattonport]

Haha, this is what the NIMBY's wanted. Really short-sighted, especially limiting height to be below the clock tower. I hope Markowitz is happy.

[ablarc]

Really short-sighted, especially limiting height to be below the clock tower.
Monumentalizing bathos.

[NoyokA]

I think there has to be some sort of mistake or misunderstanding with that application. The latest on the office space is that there will only be about 500,000 square feet.

According to the document it will be residential. Also 45 storeys fits 475 feet as a residential building, but wouldn't fit a modern commercial building.

It was mentioned in another article the exact height of Miss Brooklyn, it was less that 512 but more than 500, the exact figure escapes me.

This is not Miss Brooklyn.

As for the 2,725,133 Square Feet figure I find it very hard to believe that is for one building, especially as residential building, as they tend to be on the narrow side, perhaps the tower component is connected to another component or components, mid-rise, or otherwise.

As an example here is the 48 storey Paramount Plaza which has 2.4 million square feet.

http://www.skyscraper.org/EXHIBITIONS/BIG_BUILDINGS/CONTENT/jumbos/Pics/j07.jpg

A residential tower will not have those humungous floorplates.

[sfenn1117]

^The 2.7 mil figure does seem very high, but this is still going to be a humongous building. Plus, the 475 feet figure from the DOB may just go to the top floor, and not the crown. Miss Brooklyn is to be 511 feet.

[NoyokA]

^The 2.7 mil figure does seem very high, but this is still going to be a humongous building. Plus, the 475 feet figure from the DOB may just go to the top floor, and not the crown. Miss Brooklyn is to be 511 feet.

As I said it wont be Miss Brooklyn because the application is for a residential development.

[ablarc]

^The 2.7 mil figure does seem very high, but this is still going to be a humongous building.
That's the whole problem. It will be this fat, waddling thing that no one will like --including the bozo NIMBYs, who are too stupid to recognize it's really their creation.

[NoyokA]

I think there will be some fat and ungainly buildings in this development. But in no way do I think that a single building both residential and under 500 feet will be built at nearly 3 million square feet.

[ablarc]

^ After they're built the NIMBYs will chant in chorus: "We told you so!"

Then they'll prepare to do the same thing to the next promising project.

[aural iNK]

A 45 floor residential sounds like building 4, located on the SW corner of Atlantic and 6th:

http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/3667/1536/320/93430/Jan180706.jpg

I wonder if the 2.5m GSF is for the entire block, including the arena and Miss Brooklyn?

[NoyokA]

A 45 floor residential sounds like building 4, located on the SW corner of Atlantic and 6th:

http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/3667/1536/320/93430/Jan180706.jpg

I wonder if the 2.5m GSF is for the entire block, including the arena and Miss Brooklyn?

That would make sense.

[sfenn1117]

This building is on 5th. The Plot for Miss Brooklyn if I'm not mistaken, that block of 5th ave is set to be decomissioned, right?

Maybe it's part residential on the bottom.....or it includes the arena. Really not sure.

http://propertyshark.com/mason/nyc/Reports/showsection.html?propkey=147791

[NoyokA]

http://www.barclayscenter.com/

[MidtownGuy]

Pardon me, but the buildings on that website look HORRIBLE to me. Where is the beauty?? Blech. Almost all of my enthusiasm for this project is gone. "Miss Brooklyn" looks a bloody mess. Put that floozy to bed.
If that's the best Gehry can come up with, NIMBY's or not, he's losing his touch.

[antinimby]

45 floors/475 feet/915 units. The fat, squat tower the nimby's cried for.Actually, that might still be too high for 'em.

Better still if it was only three stories.

[lofter1]

A Barclays grows in Brooklyn ...

***

[JCMAN320]

Nets fans are loyal to the end

Sunday, January 21, 2007
BY MATTHEW FUTTERMAN
Star-Ledger Staff

This week was a tough one for Allen Gross.

First he had to watch his Nets unveil their $400 million naming-rights deal with Barclays, all but sealing their move to Brooklyn in 2009.

"This is incredibly tough for me," said Gross, who lives in Fanwood. "This is the Dodgers going to Los Angeles, the Giants going to San Francisco."

As tough as it is, however, Gross, who has been pulling for the Nets since 1978, swallowed the pain to take his 6-year-old son Michael to the game last night against Orlando. The team may be abandoning New Jersey, but fans aren't abandoning the team.

"We're Nets fans through and through," said Gross, as he and Michael stood near courtside during warm-ups in search of a few autographs. "We love the Nets, and we love basketball."

Talk about gluttons for punishment.

Since 2004, the Nets and their new ownership group, led by Bruce Ratner, have been talking about Brooklyn as the Promised Land. And yet, chat up the faithful at their games these days and there seems to be little of the bitterness one might expect from a fan base scheduled to be abandoned in roughly 33 months.

Chalk it up to a lack of state pride, a love for stars like Jason Kidd and Vince Carter, or just a habit that appears hard to break, Nets fans seem to be sticking by their team. The team is averaging roughly 16,500 fans per game, up slightly from last year. Some 87 percent of season ticket-holders renewed their packages this year, and overall season ticket sales were up 27 percent, including 500 $199 full-season packages that sold out in less than a week.

It's the kind of behavior that used to befuddle former principal owner Lewis Katz, who is still a minority investor. Even as Katz pushed to sell the team to Ratner, fans would ask for his autograph as he sat courtside instead of dumping a beer on him, just as they ask Ratner for autographs these days.

"We've always said we are a metropolitan franchise," Ratner said. "We have great fans in New Jersey. I'm at the games, I love them. We want to keep them."

If anyone had any doubts about the planned Brooklyn arena or hopes the Nets might somehow remain in New Jersey, two major developments during the past month should have significantly diminished them.

Just before Christmas, New York state's Public Authorities Control Board approved more than $200 million in public financing for the project and approved the plan for the 8.6 million square foot development. The PACB's approval was the last major regulatory hurdle. Unless opponents prevail in a long-shot federal suit over Ratner's planned use of eminent domain, construction should begin within months.

Then last week, the Nets and Barclays announced the British financial conglomerate would spend $400 million during the next 20 years to put the company's name on the arena and the surrounding development, which will be known as the Barclays Center.

The announcement came during a gala lunch of filet mignon for 300 in the Beaux-Arts Court of the Brooklyn Museum, about a mile from the site of the proposed arena.

The guest list included New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Barclays chief executive Bob Diamond, Forest City Ratner patriarch Al Ratner, NBA commissioner David Stern, Nets owner Bruce Ratner and investors Vincent Viola and Jay-Z, and other members of New York's glitterati.

Already, the New Jersey existence of the Nets seemed like a memory.

"We are absolutely thrilled to be a part of the cultural renaissance of Brooklyn," Diamond pronounced.

As Nets television analyst and former NBA point guard Mark Jackson closed the ceremony, the team's remaining 2 1/2 seasons in the Garden State seemed as far from anyone's mind as Mike Gminski or Yinka Dare.

"Thanks for coming this afternoon," Jackson said. "We'll see you all in Brooklyn."

They will see the Lees of Parsippany -- they won't see them as often, but not because anyone is angry. It's just that Brooklyn is a hike from Morris County.

Gene Lee, 72, and his wife Maxine, 70, have been season ticket-holders for 18 seasons, and they were at the game last night. Gene even wore a crisp, crew-neck Nets sweat shirt, and while he admitted to minor depression about the team's departure, his love for the team and the game is far more powerful.

"It's business" he said. "But we're seeing good basketball here. You've got Jason Kidd, Vince Carter and Richard Jefferson. It's a pleasure to watch."

Up in section 243, 17-year-old Craig Solowski of Wall Township was taking the same pragmatic approach. Solowski, who wears a red cap covered with Nets autographs, earns $7 an hour working in a bagel store. It covers the $1,200 cost of his season ticket, which he bought for the first time this year.

"They already made all that money off their naming rights, so they'll have a better team," Solowski said. "I'd like them to stay, but if the move to Brooklyn is better for the team, I'd rather see them win than have them close to my house."

To Brett Yormark, the team's chief executive, none of this is unexpected, and he claims not to be worried about Nets fans bailing on the team now that the move to Brooklyn is all but inevitable.

"We've been honest with our fans the past two years," Yormark said. "We've been playing to two different audiences in two places, but we've invested in the franchise like never before and we've continued to give a quality brand of basketball."

And Michael Gross, the 6-year-old from Fanwood who came to last night's game wearing Jason Kidd's national team jersey, has no interest in giving that up, no matter which side of the river the team plays on.

"Brooklyn Nets sounds kind of funny, but I don't care," Michael said. "I'll go."

But will his father?

"I guess we'll cross that bridge, in more ways than one, when it happens," Allen Gross said. "It's painful."



Matthew Futterman may be reached at mfutterman@starledger.com or (973) 392-1732.

[ZippyTheChimp]

The Bark

[lofter1]

"The Brooklyn Barks" ...

or maybe ...

"The Brooklyn Bites" ;)

[BPC]

The Bark




Close. "The Bank." Has basketball and client connotations.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Maybe that's what a Barclay's exec would want, but fans and players nickname arenas.

I don't think a link to a bank would be wanted, and the bankshot image is lame, not like The Slam.

The Bark sounds hostile, and is unique. If you ask someone what they are doing tomorrow, and they say, "I'm going to The Garden," you know they are not talking about flowers.

"I'm going to The Bank" sound like I need a loan.

The nickname usually has a connection to the original name itself, not what inspired that name.

Astros - Stros.

76ers - Sixers

Madison Square Garden - The Garden

Devil Rays - Rays.

I don't know about the Mets stadium - Shea worked so well.

[ZippyTheChimp]

"The Brooklyn Barks" ...

or maybe ...

"The Brooklyn Bites" ;)Who knows?

It could start a team image. Works for the Cleveland Browns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawg_Pound)

[JCMAN320]

Us Nets fans will figure out something to call it. I already have thought of a nickname. Nets commentator Marv Albert: "Welcome to Nets Basketball at the Vault; also known as the Barclays Center here in Brookyln."

The Vault I think would be a great nickname. Devils fans are already calling the Prudential Center in Newark "the Rock".

[TREPYE]

Tragic indeed. What a missed opportunity other cities would kill for. That area, and yes I do consider it part of "downtown" Brooklyn when you look at the overall huge size of the borough, is crawling with development of towers all the way to the river. This was a chance to have a tall skyscraper by a world class architect to poke above them on the future skyline in a dramatic way.
And the other towers in the project are boring me to tears when I consider what might have been without the contextualists calling the shots.


Haha, this is what the NIMBY's wanted. Really short-sighted, especially limiting height to be below the clock tower. I hope Markowitz is happy.


Monumentalizing bathos.


That's the whole problem. It will be this fat, waddling thing that no one will like --including the bozo NIMBYs, who are too stupid to recognize it's really their creation.


I think there will be some fat and ungainly buildings in this development. But in no way do I think that a single building both residential and under 500 feet will be built at nearly 3 million square feet.


Pardon me, but the buildings on that website look HORRIBLE to me. Where is the beauty?? Blech. Almost all of my enthusiasm for this project is gone. "Miss Brooklyn" looks a bloody mess. Put that floozy to bed.
If that's the best Gehry can come up with, NIMBY's or not, he's losing his touch.


The Bark


What did you guys want....another SOM demoralizing box, Klondys beacon of cheapness, Kaufman square banality?? Fact of the matter is this is much better than what we get nowadays. These buildings do not follow some pathetic lame cookie cutter format; they are sculptural and interesting to look at, made by an artist not a no-talent corporate whore such as the aforementioned ones.

Yeah, Gehry was somewhat restrained by the NIMBY's but considering that they want to abolish this project all together giving in to a little height on Miss BKLN is no big deal when you look at the big picture. Gehry in a stray jacket is light years better than most of the architects that design towers in NYC on their best days.

I have confidence in Gehry coming through with something great for this project.

[ablarc]

Fact of the matter is this is much better than what we get nowadays. These buildings do not follow some pathetic lame cookie cutter format; they are sculptural and interesting to look at, made by an artist not a no-talent corporate whore such as the aforementioned ones...

Gehry in a strait jacket is light years better than most of the architects that design towers in NYC on their best days.
This is true.

[ZippyTheChimp]

What did you guys want.
I can't figure out why you included my post in your list of transgressions.

Not that I necessarily disagree with them, but it just doesn't fit.

[NoyokA]

I don't understand why most of the posts are quoted. Ablarc is a fan of Gehry. And Gehry is my favorite architect. I've supported Gehry through the whole process, the only people I have criticized are the community groups.

[TREPYE]

I can't figure out why you included my post in your list of transgressions.

Not that I necessarily disagree with them, but it just doesn't fit.

Calling something a bark is hardly a compliment. If you read the posts you realize that I singled out those of you who are all down on the project because Miss BKLN lost a little height; failing to see the big picture.


I don't understand why most of the posts are quoted. Ablarc is a fan of Gehry. And Gehry is my favorite architect.

Really??


I think there will be some fat and ungainly buildings in this development.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Calling something a bark is hardly a compliment. If you read the posts you realize that I singled out those of you who are all down on the project because Miss BKLN lost a little height; failing to see the big picture.
Sometimes a duck is just a duck.

I am not down on the project, just bored at every aspect of it. Sick of Bruce, Frank, that guy who's suing (forget his name) and won't shut up, too tall, too short, too big, too fat...blah, blah, blah.

You'd probably have to go back many pages to find an opinion I've made on the project.

If you think my thoughts on a possible nickname for the arena is derogatory, then I'm afraid you are The Bark (of a tree).

[NoyokA]

---
quote:Stern:

I think there will be some fat and ungainly buildings in this development.

---
Really??

Yeah fat an ungainly. Fat and ungainly because of the community groups that put a strict height limit on the site. 8 million square feet in a limited space with height limits is going to create some very fat and ungainly buildings. This is simply a fact. Its not Frank Gehry's fault as any other architect would face the same problem of having fat and ungainly buildings caused by NIMBY's restrictions and Ratner's high density program.

Next time instead of wasting our time, spend some time reading our posts. Ablarc and I have supported Gehry through the whole process and Zippy's post had nothing to do with Gehry at all, it had to do with the name of the stadium.

[finnman69]

http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/3667/1536/320/93430/Jan180706.jpg

Especially along the residential blocks, not the arena. I get the feeling that the side streets feel canyon like.

I'd like to see the view taken from a camera set at street level on that model.

[TREPYE]

Sometimes a duck is just a duck.

I am not down on the project, just bored at every aspect of it. Sick of Bruce, Frank, that guy who's suing (forget his name) and won't shut up, too tall, too short, too big, too fat...blah, blah, blah.

You'd probably have to go back many pages to find an opinion I've made on the project.

If you think my thoughts on a possible nickname for the arena is derogatory, then I'm afraid you are The Bark (of a tree).


Yeah fat an ungainly. Fat and ungainly because of the community groups that put a strict height limit on the site. 8 million square feet in a limited space with height limits is going to create some very fat and ungainly buildings. This is simply a fact. Its not Frank Gehry's fault as any other architect would face the same problem of having fat and ungainly buildings caused by NIMBY's restrictions and Ratner's high density program.

Next time instead of wasting our time, spend some time reading our posts. Ablarc and I have supported Gehry through the whole process and Zippy's post had nothing to do with Gehry at all, it had to do with the name of the stadium.

I see Chimpy got Sterny into throwing banana peels also....:p
What a bunch of hypersensitive pansies. :rolleyes:

I wasn't even trying to dis you or insinuate that you guys hated Gehry or anything all I was trying to say is that there is no reason to get down or bored about this project. It is still an exciting quality project IMO because with all of its kinks (height reduction, name of arena) it is still better than most of the stuff we get today due to the fact that a great architect is still the one designing it.

[Dynamicdezzy]

One thing I always wondered was why no transportation hub was included with this development? I'm not pointing fingers to anyone in particular (ratner, city, etc) but considering the magnitude of this project and the "traffic" concerns tagged with it, why wasn't a grand hub considered? With Grand Central (Lirr access) and a brand new penn/moynihan in future works for midtown, fulton and wtc hub for lower manhattan, why no hub for downtown brooklyn? With the Lirr and 11 lines at atlantic and 2 (C and G) nearby, it would definitely qualify for one.
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/6796/map4fb.th.jpg (http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=map4fb.jpg)

[Eugenious]

One thing I always wondered was why no transportation hub was included with this development? [/URL]


Brooklyn already has a grand train station at Stillwell Ave.

"Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue (also known as Coney Island Terminal) in Coney Island (http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=map4fb.jpg), Brooklyn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooklyn), is the world's largest rapid transit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_transit)terminal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_station) facility, and notable as the most energy-efficient mass transit facility in the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States). It serves as a terminal for four different lines of the New York City Subway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Subway), and is served by D (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D_%28New_York_City_Subway_service%29), F (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F_%28New_York_City_Subway_service%29), N (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_%28New_York_City_Subway_service%29), and Q (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_%28New_York_City_Subway_service%29) trains at all times."

[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coney_Island-Stillwell_Avenue_(New_York_City_Subway)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/Coney_Island_Stillwell_Avenue.jpg/800px-Coney_Island_Stillwell_Avenue.jpg

[kliq6]

In the end the funny thing is that ratner will probally only build the arena and maybe half the buildings planned and then sell the land for a huge windfall

[Dynamicdezzy]

Brooklyn already has a grand train station at Stillwell Ave.

"Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue (also known as Coney Island Terminal) in Coney Island (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coney_Island), Brooklyn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooklyn), is the world's largest rapid transit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_transit)terminal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_station) facility, and notable as the most energy-efficient mass transit facility in the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States). It serves as a terminal for four different lines of the New York City Subway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Subway), and is served by D (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D_%28New_York_City_Subway_service%29), F (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F_%28New_York_City_Subway_service%29), N (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_%28New_York_City_Subway_service%29), and Q (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_%28New_York_City_Subway_service%29) trains at all times."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coney_Island-Stillwell_Avenue_(New_York_City_Subway)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/Coney_Island_Stillwell_Avenue.jpg/800px-Coney_Island_Stillwell_Avenue.jpg



True. But why not another one within it's downtown area? If bk is going to be presented as a world class destination (in its own right) I say it needs to show it. Why should manhattan get 'em all?

[BPC]

The Pataki-planned JFK to Lower Manhattan train, which admittedly may be dead, would have made its only Brooklyn stop at Atlantic Yards as well.

[fluffypolly]

Downtown brooklyn already has one, "atlantic terminal" has been built for quite some time

[ablarc]

A, C and G lines need to be connected with D, M, N, R, B, Q, 2, 3, 4 and 5 at Atlantic Av.

[antinimby]

In the end the funny thing is that ratner will probally only build the arena and maybe half the buildings planned and then sell the land for a huge windfallThat might not be so bad after all.

Different developers and different architects will make it more diverse in appearance instead of having a uniform look to it.

[NoyokA]

Carroll Gardens/Cobble Hill Courier

01/26/2007
Gehry to unveil new and improved Miss Bklyn
By Stephen Witt

“Miss Brooklyn,” the cornerstone of Frank Gehry’s vision for the Atlantic Yards project, is undergoing major plastic surgery.

Gehry let his secret out at last week’s Brooklyn Museum press conference announcing the $400 million, 20-year naming rights deal between England-based Barclays Bank and Bruce Ratner’s Nets basketball team to call the proposed Brooklyn Arena Barclays Center.

Originally, “Miss Brooklyn” was a mammoth 600-foot, 60-story structure at the Flatbush/Atlantic Avenue intersection, dwarfing the borough’s current tallest building – the Williamsburgh Bank Building at 512 feet high and 34 stories.

However, Gehry’s hopes to create a new borough landmark were dashed in a last-minute deal to approve the 22-acre arena and 16 skyscraper project.

“Miss Brooklyn – she’s gone. She’s a new one now. I have a new Miss Brooklyn. I haven’t showed it yet and she’s better,” said Gehry, one of the world’s pre-eminent architects.

“I’ve always loved a reason to start over again and I did it,” he said.

Gehry also let out how the building got its name.

“Miss Brooklyn got named when one of my guys was bringing the model from LA to New York and they had to buy a seat on the airplane, and when they sold the seat they needed a name so he said, ‘call her Miss Brooklyn’ and it stuck,” said Gehry.

Gehry also took umbrage to critics who charge the Atlantic Yards project is the “Manhattanization of Brooklyn.”

“It will be the Brooklynization of Brooklyn not the Manhattanization. Things are changing and growing, and people are attracted to the center — the cities, and whether you like it or not it’s happening here,” said Gehry.

[Empire State]

I just can't wait for Goldsteins house to be demolished!

[ablarc]

“Miss Brooklyn – she’s gone. She’s a new one now. I have a new Miss Brooklyn. I haven’t showed it yet and she’s better,” said Gehry
New and improved. Hope she's slim.

But to get the square footage in slimly, there'd have to be TWINS. Where did the square footage go?


"I’ve always loved a reason to start over again and I did it,” he said.
I know that feeling.


“Miss Brooklyn got named when one of my guys was bringing the model from LA to New York and they had to buy a seat on the airplane, and when they sold the seat they needed a name so he said, ‘call her Miss Brooklyn’ and it stuck,” said Gehry.
Interesting story.


Gehry also took umbrage to critics who charge the Atlantic Yards project is the “Manhattanization of Brooklyn.”

“It will be the Brooklynization of Brooklyn not the Manhattanization."
This is obvious and shouldn't have to be pointed out. If critical Brooklynites were truly loyal to their borough they'd see its truth. As it is they're kneejerk bozos.

[BPC]

Carroll Gardens/Cobble Hill Courier

01/26/2007
Gehry to unveil new and improved Miss Bklyn
By Stephen Witt

Gehry also took umbrage to critics who charge the Atlantic Yards project is the “Manhattanization of Brooklyn.”

Of course that's what it is. The issue here is whether that is a good thing or a bad thing. My sense is that it will be a big plus for the City as a whole, and for the site on which it is a built, but definitely a big minus for many of the charming low-scale neighborhoods that surround the site. How one weighs these pluses and minuses is a matter of perspective.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Maybe the Bostonization of Brooklyn.

Manhattanization is hyperbole.

[Jasonik]

Apt statement Zippy (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=98277&postcount=1380)

[ablarc]

So let's see ... building skyscrapers is "Manhattanization." Shanghai, Mumbai, Istanbul, Seoul, London and Riga are being Manhattanized.

All except Riga have also built subways. Was that also Manhattanization?

When Brooklyn converts its waterfront to parkland, is that also Manhattanization?

If Brooklyn becomes a successful business center, will that be JerseyCity-ization?

If something nice is done with the Gowanus Canal or Newtown Creek, will that be Amsterdamization?

They should banish the Brooklyn Academy of Music to Manhattan where it belongs. Appeals too much to hipsters like the ones in Manhattan.

[BPC]

Huge Arena Project Looms Over Brooklyn
By DAVID B. CARUSO
Associated Press Writer

January 28, 2007, 9:53 AM EST

NEW YORK -- When Jill Baroff steps through the gate of her little yellow townhouse, she sees the Brooklyn of storybooks.

Families tend brownstone buildings they've nurtured for decades. Children skip by speaking a half-dozen languages. Down the block, tough guys rub shoulders with authors and artists at an eclectic tavern that predates Prohibition.

In a few years, however, she may see a half-mile strip of skyscrapers designed by celebrity architect Frank Gehry, a flashy new arena for the NBA's Nets and hordes of basketball fans hunting for parking and a cheap sports bar.

It will be like a slice of midtown Manhattan, she says, right across the street from the century-old, wood-frame house on Dean Street that she bought in 1983.

"I really can't imagine what's in store for us," Baroff said. "We live in this little haven, and if this gets built, I think it will destroy that. ... Will anybody be able to remain here? Anyone who is of the neighborhood?"

Change has been coming fast in Brooklyn, but maybe nowhere more so than in the 22 acres that make up Atlantic Yards -- the $4 billion megadevelopment of 16 skyscrapers planned by New Jersey Nets principal owner Bruce Ratner.

Much of it will rise on land now occupied by an unloved open rail yard, shabby industrial buildings and blocks of automotive businesses. Mayor Michael Bloomberg has heralded their replacement as "the most exciting private development Brooklyn has ever seen."

State officials have approved the project, leaving only lawsuits by residents standing in the way of the wrecking crews in a borough that has found itself suddenly wealthy, fighting homogenization and struggling to remain affordable.

In addition to the 18,000-seat arena, Atlantic Yards will contain office suites, a hotel, 6,400 apartments and a 500-foot glass tower. It will contain nearly 8 million square feet of floor space -- the equivalent of more than three Empire State Buildings.

The project's size dismays residents who love the village-like feel of the adjoining neighborhoods, and worry about the deadening effect skyscrapers have on residential street life.

But Atlantic Yards has its champions, especially those left behind by the borough's already spreading gentrification.

Under a deal signed by Ratner's development company, at least 2,250 of the new rental apartments will be offered at reduced prices to families living on low or middle incomes. At least 600 condominium units will be available at reduced prices to families that meet income guidelines.

Opponents of the project note that many of the price-controlled units aren't scheduled to be built until the later stages of the construction, and might not be available for a decade or more.

Still, the long odds of landing one of them in a housing lottery haven't stopped prospective tenants like Gabriel McQueen from dreaming big.

A native of Brooklyn's Bedford-Stuyvesant section, the 29-year-old firefighter recently gave up trying to find an affordable apartment close to his old neighborhood and moved an hour away to Far Rockaway, on the Queens seashore.

"I had lived in Brooklyn all my life. I grew up in Bed-Stuy and I never wanted to leave it. This was like the hardest thing for me to do, to come out here," he said.

With a little luck, he said, Atlantic Yards could be his ticket home.

"I think Brooklyn needs this," McQueen said.

[Teno]

The Brooklyn Paper has taken it upon itself to release information about Barclays as a bank that profited from slave money. In an effort to raise public ire about the Barclays/Ratner deal.

What is so ironic about this is the editors of the Brooklyn Papers cannot see how they themselves are exploiting this unfortunate history for their own cause.

If Barclays had not given money to a project that the Brooklyn Paper opposes, would the paper have brought up the issue? Barclays past would have been the same regardless of giving money to Ratner.

Of all of the countries, industries, businesses, banks that profited from African slavery, its disingenuous and exploitive to point out one with the intent to expressly gain support for a cause that has nothing to do with slavery.

Blood money: Nets arena to be named after bank founded on slave money (http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/30/3/30_03blood_money.html)

[ablarc]

U.S. was founded by slave owners.

[antinimby]

Says more about the Brooklyn Paper's objectivity or the lack thereof as a newspaper than anything else.

[NYguy]

NY Sun

Bloomberg's Budget Doubles Subsidy For Atlantic Yard


By ELIOT BROWN
January 30, 2007


The city has doubled its direct subsidy for the Atlantic Yards project, adding an extra $105 million to the proposed development.

The added subsidy, which brings the city's direct contribution to $205 million, was disclosed in Mayor Bloomberg's preliminary budget last week.

"The additional funding is for infrastructure improvements, several of which would have been required with or without the construction of the Atlantic Yards Development," a spokesman for the mayor's office, John Gallagher, told The New York Sun via e-mail.

In 2005, the city and the Empire State Development Corporation agreed to a memorandum of understanding with the developer of the Brooklyn project, Forest City Ratner Companies, in which both governmental parties committed $100 million. A provision in the agreement allowed for further subsidy "for extraordinary infrastructure costs relating to the mixed use development."

A spokeswoman for the state agency said it has no plans to change its $100 million commitment.

A spokesman for Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, which opposes the project, Daniel Goldstein, said the city's move was unwelcome, though not unexpected. "As long as they can convince the public it's only $100 million, they'll do that," he said.

Forest City Ratner did not return several calls seeking comment.

Council Member Letitia James, whose district includes Atlantic Yards, was upset by the budgeting for additional funds, her chief of staff, Kate Suisman, said. Ms. James has been an outspoken opponent of the project, but Ms. Suisman said she did not think the added $105 million would derail the passage of the mayor's proposed budget.

A former president of the Boerum Hill Association, Jo Anne Simon, said she opposes many aspects of the project, though infrastructure could be a good thing. "This is part of the problem," she said. "Of course there are needs for infrastructure, but I don't know why this amount of money and what it's going to go for."

[Teno]

Has anyone found a breakdown of exactly what public money is paying for and why the city add another $100 million?

This may be a good investment in light of a report in the Times that stated the city is flush with a 3.9 billion surplus (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/26/nyregion/26york.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin) because of the surging real estate market.

[NYguy]

Park Slope Courier

Nets promise local fans cheap tickets - Say $15 seats will be open for BK games

http://images.zwire.com/local/z/zwire2384/zwire/images/737301113848302x6_Netspress03_A7.jpg

Rapper, Def Jam Records President and Nets part-owner Jay-Z said bringing the team to the borough will create a new spirit.

By Stephen Witt
01/26/2007


Brooklyn’s hardworking basketball fans will not be forgotten once the NBA’s Nets land in Brooklyn, according to team spokesperson Barry Baum.

Baum’s comments fly in the face of a recent published report touting that tickets for Nets games, once the team comes to Brooklyn, are estimated to go for between $51 and $970 each.

“We want to make Nets games in Brooklyn as accessible for everyone and so we’re providing 2,000 $15 tickets for all regular season games in the upper bowl seats,” said Baum.

Baum also noted that the Community Benefits Agreement (CBA), signed with eight local community based organizations, calls for the team to designate one luxury suite, four seats in the lower bowl and 50 seats in the upper bowl for community seats.

The seats will be free and priority will be given to seniors and youth for Nets games throughout the year as per the CBA, said Baum.

Baum also said the NBA currently requires that each team sell 500 tickets for $10 each.

Baum’s comments came after a published report cited a confidential December audit by KPMG projects that the Nets will charge a $4,500 “personal seat license” fee for the best 4,500 seats at Barclays Center once the 18,000-seat arena is built and the team starts playing there in 2009-2010 season.

The audit also states that the 170 luxury suits in the $637 million arena could command a record $463,710 each.

But Baum noted the KPMG report was separate from the Nets management and might not necessarily reflect the team’s ticket pricing.

“The KPMG report is an independent consultant’s projection prepared for the Empire State Development Corporation of how the economics of the arena might work and the actual numbers may very,” said Baum.

“We’re committed to making Nets games accessible for everyone in Brooklyn and the metropolitan area,” he added.

Meanwhile, Brooklyn-born rap artist Def Jam Records President and Nets part-owner Sean (Jay-Z) Carter, said that to have an NBA team in Brooklyn up the street and down the block brings the dream closer to youths in the borough.

“I was telling Bruce [Ratner] and the guys from the beginning [that] you guys think this is a good idea, but you don’t understand it’s really a great idea,” said Jay-Z.

“You don’t understand the passion and love that Brooklynites have for each other and something they can claim ownership in. They have no idea how incredible its going to be,” he added.

©Courier-Life Publications 2007

[Transic]

http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/powerplays/archives/2007/01/bloomberg_addin.php


Bloomberg Adding $226 Million for Nets, Mets, Yanks?
By Neil deMause | January 29, 2007

Buried in the nether reaches of the preliminary capital budget (http://www.nyc.gov/html/omb/html/finplan01_07.html) that the mayor released last Thursday are some curious details on the three new sports facilities—that's Yanks, Mets, and Nets, for those scoring at home—that the city has in the works. Namely, total city capital funding for the projects appears to now be as high as $586 million—a nearly two-thirds hike from the $360 million (not counting tax and lease breaks (http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0546,demause,70002,5.html)) that Bloomberg had promised taxpayers would be on the hook for when the projects were first announced.


Our story begins last Thursday, when Norman Oder of the Ratner-watch blog Atlantic Yards Report (http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/) noticed something odd in the mayor's capital plan overview: On a page marked "Economic Development Capital Highlights," Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards project to bring big-ass skyscrapers (http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/powerplays/archives/002684.php) and a Nets basketball arena to the northern edge of Prospect Heights was listed at a city price tag of $205 million (http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2007/01/205-million-for-ay-seems-to-double.html). That's more than double the $100 million in direct city cash that Bloomberg agreed to spend back in 2005 (http://www.empire.state.ny.us/press/press_display.asp?id=556):
Under the MOU, the State and the City will each contribute $100 million in capital contributions to fund site preparation and public infrastructure improvements on and around the arena site, including streets, sidewalks, utility relocations, environmental remediation, open space and public parking.The mayor's office didn't respond to Voice queries about the discrepancy, but Doug Turetsky of the Independent Budget Office did. The added $105 million, he explains, is for still more infrastructure costs, "some of which might have been on the books prior to Atlantic Yards, but some substantial amount of which is likely related to the scale of the project—such as the need for expanding sewer and water capacity."

News of the mayor's apparent hidden-ball trick provoked outrage at Develop Don't Destroy, whose spokesperson Dan Goldstein fumed in a Monday morning press release, "The ballooning number comes after the project received its only political approval (http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/powerplays/archives/2006/12/atlantic_yards_2.php) by the State's Public Authorities Control Board in December, amounting to a bait and switch at taxpayer expense." Councilmember Tish James's office is currently investigating exactly where the new funds are headed, and what, if anything, the council can do about it.

Elsewhere in the mayor's budget, meanwhile, projected capital costs for land and infrastructure associated with the Yankees and Mets stadiums—previously pegged at $160 million and $98 million, respectively—are now listed as totaling $209 million and $172 million over the next several years. The Observer's Matt Schuerman first noticed similar overages in last summer's city capital plan (http://therealestate.observer.com/2006/10/city-pads-yankees-budget.html); at the time, city Office of Management and Budget spokesperson Ray Orlando claimed that the added funds were a mistake that would be rectified in this month's budget.

Not so much, it turns out. (Orlando has yet to return Voice phone calls asking for an explanation.)

It's all enough to make one wonder if New Yorkers are really meant to know what our elected officials are spending our money on. "The city budgets, while they have become increasingly transparent, still are not organized in a way to allow the kind of public scrutiny necessary to evaluate these sorts of items," admits Citizens Union director Dick Dadey, though he says the problem may be less "intentional effort to obfuscate" than the fact that " our city budget is far more complex than most states'." Council speaker Christine Quinn, he points out, has pressed for more transparency in the budget process; it will be interesting to see if an unexpected $105 million invoice will be enough to get the speaker to start asking tough questions of her pal the mayor over the project that would eat Brooklyn.

[lofter1]

boondoggle ^^^

[Transic]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/02/nyregion/02yards.html

Barclays Arena Deal Raises a Reputed Link to Slavery

By ANTHONY RAMIREZ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/anthony_ramirez/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
Published: February 2, 2007

Hakeem Jeffries, a state assemblyman who supports the $4 billion Atlantic Yards project near Downtown Brooklyn, has denounced an important facet of it — the name for the new arena for the Nets basketball team, which he called an affront to the black community.

Another supporter, Roger L. Green, a former assemblyman, has said the Nets naming deal contributed too little money to help Brooklyn.

With all the public criticism and praise laid at the doorstep of the Atlantic Yards project, the naming of the arena did not figure to be controversial. Last week, Bruce Ratner (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/bruce_ratner/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the owner of the Nets and the president of Forest City Ratner, the Atlantic Yards developer, announced that the British bank Barclays would pay $400 million over 20 years for naming rights to the 18,000-seat stadium, to be called the Barclays Center.

Barclays’ accusers say the bank’s early founders had ties to the African slave trade in the 18th century. More recently, they say, the bank cooperated with the apartheid regime of South Africa. A spokesman for Barclays denied both claims.

In remarks reported last Friday in The Brooklyn Paper, a local weekly that is critical of the Atlantic Yards project, Mr. Jeffries said, “Of all of the companies in the world to pursue a naming rights agreement, Barclays is inappropriate to be in a borough which has one of the largest populations of African descent in this country,” Mr. Jeffries, who is black, said in an interview.

He said he would discuss the agreement with Forest City Ratner officials. “All options should be on the table, and those options should include termination of the agreement or Barclays compensating the community for the wrongs” of the slave trade, Assemblyman Jeffries said.

Mr. Green, who is also black, said that Barclays, one of the wealthiest corporations in the world, had agreed to pay $2.5 million for park renovation and other projects. “At least as a point of negotiation,” he said, “we should seek far more.”

He added, “If we were to exclude all the corporations that participated in the slave trade, there would only be a handful of companies” for Forest City Ratner to negotiate with.

Forest City Ratner, which is the development partner in building a new Midtown headquarters for The New York Times Company, declined to comment.

Letitia James, a city councilwoman who opposes the project, said, “The reason that Barclays is the largest bank in the world by total assets is because their assets represent fruit from a poisoned tree.”

Peter Truell, a spokesman for Barclays, said, “Claims that Barclays was founded on the profits of slavery are untrue.” He also said that Barclays withdrew from South Africa in 1986, six years before the end of apartheid, and was one of the first to return to the country in 1995, after the fall of apartheid.

“Indeed, David Barclay, who was a partner in one of the primary Quaker banks in the 1770s that eventually merged to form Barclays, was opposed to slavery,” Mr. Truell added.

In an 1801 book entitled “An Account of the Emancipation of the Slaves of Unity Valley Pen, in Jamaica,” David Barclay wrote, “Having been a slave owner, and much dissatisfied in being so, I determined to try the experiment of liberating my slaves; firmly convinced, that the retaining my fellow creatures in bondage was not only irreconcileable with the precepts of Christianity, but subversive of the rights of human nature.”

Christopher Leslie Brown, a Rutgers history professor and an expert on the early British Empire, said in an interview that the Barclay family were slave owners, but minor ones.

Mr. Brown, who is black and the author of the 2006 book “Moral Capital: Foundations of British Abolitionism,” said, “The point I would make about these banks, like Barclays, is that much of the wealth generated in the 18th century came either directly or indirectly out of either the slave trade or plantations” in Virginia, Jamaica and Barbados.

He added, “This game of ‘gotcha!’ — pointing out this particular bank had relationships with slave traders or slaveholders — gets a little bit silly because all banks did. Barclays is not unusual in being connected to the history of slavery, nor is it unusually innocent.”

[NoyokA]

And Bayer used Nazi slave labor, who cares...

[Eugenious]

And Bayer used Nazi slave labor, who cares...

Every major American company benefited in some way from slave labor, in fact there would be no United States if there wasn't slave labor. These people are illiterate nincompoops.

[NoyokA]

Every major American company benefited in some way from slave labor, in fact there would be no United States if there wasn't slave labor. These people are illiterate nincompoops.

Exactly, business is evil, there’s a reason its condemned in the bible.

[NoyokA]

Here's some illustrations I haven’t previously seen. They given an idea of the impact, although they are not from Gehry or Ratner, instead are done by Jason Lee of New York Magazine.

http://nymag.com/news/features/ratzilla060807_1_560.jpg

http://nymag.com/news/features/ratzilla060807_4_560.jpg

[ablarc]

^ Could be taller.

[infoshare]

“A powerful look (http://www.brooklynmatters.com/) and indictment of how red-carpet treatment for big real estate substitutes for any real planning skill or capacity by public agencies in New York City.”
-Jon Orcutt, Director, Tri-State Transportation Campaign

[NYguy]

Here's some illustrations I haven’t previously seen. They given an idea of the impact, although they are not from Gehry or Ratner, instead are done by Jason Lee of New York Magazine.

http://nymag.com/news/features/ratzilla060807_1_560.jpg

http://nymag.com/news/features/ratzilla060807_4_560.jpg



I think we discussed these earlier, particularly the way only Gehry's towers cast shadows in the rendering.

[stache]

http://nymag.com/news/features/ratzilla060807_1_560.jpg



A building that looks like it's falling down. Thanks, Frank -

[antinimby]

C'mon stache, you know better than that.

It's a distorted, crude drawing that came out a few years ago that everyone pretty much dismissed as highly exaggerated back then.

No need to dig that stuff back up again.

[lofter1]

Everything is falling over in this pic: trees, lampposts, 19th C. brick houses ...

http://nymag.com/news/features/ratzilla060807_1_560.jpg

[NYguy]

NY Sun

Barclays Denies Alleged Ties To Slave Trade

By ELIOT BROWN
February 5, 2007


Amid criticism by black leaders in Brooklyn over the naming rights deal for the Nets stadium, Barclays Bank late last week issued a letter denying allegations that it had links to slave trading in the 18th century.

After staying relatively mum on the issue for two weeks, Barclays failed to pacify many outspoken critics with its letter, though it prompted a correction from the Brooklyn Paper.

In its letter dated February 1 signed by the head of corporate communications, Peter Truell, Barclays rejected allegations that early bank partner David Barclay was a Quaker slave trader, a claim they say was first printed in a 1944 book "Capitalism and Slavery."

"This book makes serious, unsupported and mistaken allegations about Barclays," Mr. Truell wrote. "The ‘ David Barclay' referred to in this book also had no connection with the bank."

The Brooklyn Paper issued a correction, but not a retraction, of its first article on the naming rights deal. Under the headline "Blood money: Nets arena to be named after bank founded on slave money," the article highlighted opponents' allegations against Barclays concerning links to slavery, apartheid funding, and cooperation with the Nazis.

On Friday, the paper corrected a quotation it lifted from a British paper, initially cited to a Barclays official, that acknowledged the company was linked to slave traders. The quotation actually was from a reader apparently unaffiliated with Barclays, Brooklyn Paper's editor, Gersh Kuntzman, said.

The paper has seemingly been feeding some of the firestorm surrounding the naming rights issue, and coverage similar to the paper's has appeared in the Independent of London, among other press outlets.

However Mr. Kuntzman cautioned that he didn't think his paper provoked the initial outcry, saying opponents were approaching him about the slavery links before any articles were written.

City Council Member Charles Barron, who has repeatedly spoken out against the naming rights deal, said the letter did nothing to change his view of Barclays.

"Whether the Brooklyn Paper had highlighted the link to slavery or not, many of us involved in the reparations movement were aware of Barclays for a long time," he said.

[antinimby]

Fighting Atlantic Yards

By Michael Clancy
amNewYork City Editor

February 5, 2007 (http://www.amny.com/news/local/am-yards0205,0,2621282.story)

http://www.amny.com/images/icons/talkbackbutton.gif (http://www.topix.net/forum/source/am-new-york/T9UV0RJ6IC1281P7V)

Developer Bruce Ratner is only a few courtroom victories away from realizing his vision of the Atlantic Yards project, a $4 billion mega-development that would build an arena for the Nets and 16 skyscrapers along a 22-acre tract in downtown Brooklyn.

On Wednesday, his lawyers will be in federal court arguing to dismiss a lawsuit -- one of several legal challenges pending -- brought by 12 plaintiffs who seek to prevent the government from taking their property and homes through the use of eminent domain.

About two dozen people -- including homeowners, a commercial property owner, Freddy's Bar on Dean Street and families and individuals who rent -- are arguing that use of eminent domain is unconstitutional.

"You have a Puerto Rican extended family, a Romanian immigrant, you have a Pakistani family with nine kids -- this is New York. This is Brooklyn," said plaintiff Daniel Goldstein, who helped organize the anti-arena group, Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn.

The 8-million-square-foot project will create 6,400 housing units, including 2,250 units for low- and middle-income families. About 600 of those affordable apartments will be for sale. A spokesman for Forest CityRatner declined comment for this story.

Some of the plaintiffs agreed to explain why they signed onto the lawsuit.

Joe Pastore has lived in his one-room apartment on Dean Street for 40 years. A 62-year-old retiree, Pastore likes to fix radios and collect knickknacks. Though he is a plaintiff in the eminent domain case, he is actually a supporter of bringing the Nets to Brooklyn.

http://www.amny.com/media/photo/2007-02/27740431.jpg
62-year-old retiree Joe Pastore.

"I am not against the project," said Pastore, who retired from a city job working with juvenile defenders. "I am not against the arena. I am against what's going to happen to me and my neighbors. ... I don't think I should be put out and pay high rent because a developer that's a billionaire says I have to get out. It shouldn't be like a bully-style."


Maria Gonzalez, a 54-year-old homemaker, has rented her apartment on Pacific Street near Vanderbilt for 35 years. She's lived in the neighborhood her entire life and met her husband on Vanderbilt Avenue.

http://www.amny.com/media/photo/2007-02/27740354.jpg
Maria Gonzalez, a 54-year-old homemaker.

While she shares her apartment in the four-story brickwalkup with her husband and son, her two daughters also live in apartments in the building with her two granddaughters and grandson. She said she doesn't like her chances in the lawsuit, but feels it's her only recourse.

The residents of the building are like family, she said.

"We used to do barbecues with the kids, they ride bikes and the kids consider themselves not friends cousins, aunts and all that.... I really don't want to get no more white hairs than I have but if it's God's will to be that way then let it be that way."


Out of all those who oppose the project, [B]Daniel Goldstein, a 37-year-old graphic designer, has been one of the most vocal and tireless critics.

http://www.amny.com/media/photo/2007-02/27740261.jpg http://www.amny.com/media/thumbnails/photo/2007-02/27740261.jpg
Daniel Goldstein, a 37-year-old graphic designer.

He is also a person who the project's backers hold up as an example of nouveau Brooklynites who oppose a plan that will brings jobs, tax revenue and affordable housing. Goldstein, who is the last tenant in a condo building where the other owners sold to Ratner, is undaunted by criticism or the seemingly tough odds of prevailing.

"People just feel that viscerally it's wrong," said Goldstein, who has lived in his condo for nearly four years and in Brooklyn for 12. "People want to stay in their neighborhoods of choice. And stay in their homes of choice .... I think that everyone who has stayed here and is on this case is courageous to challenge what is a lot of political and financial power."


Freddy's Bar and Backroom has served as informal headquarters for those who oppose the project and the use of eminent domain. The no-nonsense watering hole has sat on the corner of Dean and Sixth Avenue since Prohibition. The backroom serves as an art gallery and music venue hosting free events most nights of the week, said manager Donald O'Finn.

http://www.amny.com/media/photo/2007-02/27740301.jpg
Freddy's Bar and Backroom manager Donald O'Finn.

"I really want people to understand who and what they were attempting to destroy here," said O'Finn, who gets visibly angry just talking about the loss of the bar. "It's a beautiful thing. It's not just a place where people come and drink. It's not just a bar. People don't come here to get laid. They come for other reasons."

Having worked at the bar for nine years, O'Finn said he has seen the neighborhood rebound in recent years as new buildings have gone up and the rents have too. "It was a blooming neighborhood when this whole arena project was initiated," O'Finn said.

"So blight is absolutely ridiculous, if they wanna say, 'We have money and you don't. We are throwing you out and you suck. We don't.' That's fine. But let's be honest about it. It's not blight."

Copyright 2007 AM New York

[lofter1]

Anything that will block the view of this \/ should be built (the POS building, not Goldstein) ;) :

http://www.amny.com/media/photo/2007-02/27740261.jpg

[Teno]

"Whether the Brooklyn Paper had highlighted the link to slavery or not, many of us involved in the reparations movement were aware of Barclays for a long time," he said.

I agree with the reparations movement. But Atlantic Yards and reparations are two totally different issues, that should not mix.


"I really want people to understand who and what they were attempting to destroy here," said O'Finn, who gets visibly angry just talking about the loss of the bar. "It's a beautiful thing. It's not just a place where people come and drink. It's not just a bar. People don't come here to get laid. They come for other reasons."

I can understand people who enjoy the bar and hold nostalgia of its past. But the need of the few should be tempered with the needs of Brooklyn as a whole. Is the bar more valuable than 6,400 apartments, of which approximately 2,250 will be affordable, in light of a growing population, and over priced market starved for housing?

[NoyokA]

Anything that will block the view of this \/ should be built (the POS building, not Goldstein) ;) :

http://www.amny.com/media/photo/2007-02/27740261.jpg

On my browser its pointing to the Williamsburg Savings Bank, do you mean Atlantic Terminal?

[infoshare]

Fighting Atlantic Yards

"So blight is absolutely ridiculous, if they wanna say, 'We have money and you don't. We are throwing you out and you suck. We don't.' That's fine. But let's be honest about it. It's not blight."

Copyright 2007 AM New York

I would define most of that area as "blighted", but that is nothing more than my opinion - that is part of the problem here, what exactly is blight.

I would like to have seen this entire area of Brooklyn develope in an more piece-meal (organic) fashion: this superbloc mega-project thing seems all wrong (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=145910&postcount=2195) to me.

And besides, Ghery is way over rated.:D

P.S. I just found some information on "Brooklyn Matters", a documentary about the proposed Atlantic Yards project.
I lost the link you will have to find out yourself where the current screenings are held, from what I recall they are free and at variious locations in town.
The website explains: brooklynmatters.com (the website seems to be down now?)
No single event will have a more drastic and long-lasting impact on Brooklyn than the proposed Atlantic Yards development. This uncommon proposal, however, is mostly misunderstood. Brooklyn Matters is an insightful documentary that reveals the fuller truth about the Atlantic Yards proposal and highlights how a few powerful men are circumventing community participation and planning principles to try to push their own interests forward.

[lofter1]

...do you mean Atlantic Terminal?

But of course!

[Teno]

I would like to have seen this entire area of Brooklyn develope in an more piece-meal (organic) fashion: this superbloc mega-project thing seems all wrong to me.

It pretty much will be piece-meal because it will take 10 years to compete the entire project. So it won't go from nothing to superblock over night.

I cannot think of any scenario where a developer would pay a billion dollars to deck over a giant hole in the ground without a fully realized plan for how to make money from it.

So far no one has touched the Hudson Railyards until it has a deck.

[MikeW]

The reason it's being developed as a superblock is because it started as a superblock. The core of the development, and IIRC the majority of the land involved is the LIRR railyard. That was not going to be developed piecemeal. So whatever went there was going to be a superblock. Atlantic Yards is just swallowing up some of the surrounding territory.

[infoshare]

The reason it's being developed as a superblock is because it started as a superblock. The core of the development, and IIRC the majority of the land involved is the LIRR railyard. That was not going to be developed piecemeal. So whatever went there was going to be a superblock. Atlantic Yards is just swallowing up some of the surrounding territory.

O.k. Mike and Tino, so live and learn ..... i am on-board. :p

[Teno]

The murky description of the $205 million begs further explanation, so after the symposium on Robert Moses last Thursday, I asked Deputy Mayor for Economic Development Dan Doctoroff a couple of Atlantic Yards questions. I already covered the discussion of public dialogue and Community Benefits Agreements, but I also raised the funding issue: "You probably know there's a $205 billion capital plan for Atlantic Yards--

"Much of that," he intervened, "was stuff that was going to be done in the area regardless."

"Then why is it under the rubric of Atlantic Yards?" I asked.

"Because it happens to be in the area surrounding Atlantic Yards," he responded.

"Is that an artifact of the fact that it wasn't classified--"

"It's an artifact of the way in which we classify things in the capital budget," he said.

"Y'know, people look at the MOU and see $100 million; it looks like it's a doubling," I said.

"We don't believe it is. We believe that there's an infrastructure cost that affects the $100 million that in any event would have been spent in the Atlantic Yards area," he said.

"Is there a cap, ultimately, because there is 'extraordinary infrastructure' [spending possibility] in the MOU potential continued; do you have a sense of that?" I asked.

"There isn't a cap, but other than escalations of construction costs, I'm not anticipating anything else," he said, adding, "It's a big project; things change."

Mayor Mike Bloomberg, according to the Brooklyn Paper, attributed the higher allocation to the “rising cost of cement and steel.”

“We have a commitment to pay for infrastructure costs and we will meet that commitment,” the mayor said.

http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2007/02/times-daily-news-pass-on-205m-story.html

[kliq6]

This project is a joke, now you have more public money going to the project for "related costs" and what makes me laugh is the job numbers that are promised. The only jobs being made will be food vendors and security guards at the stadium and doormen at the building. The jobs created number for residential buildings always are full of themselves!!

The day this project starts is a sad sad day in Brooklyn and NY history!

[TonyO]

^ Aren't you the same one who claimed downtown Manhattan would never recover? Don't cry wolf on this just yet.

[Teno]

Well one of the major complaints of AY opponents was that it would overwhelm Brooklyn's infrastructure. The city is spending money to deal with that problem. Doctoroff said many of these infrastructure improvements were needed anyway but are more imperative with AY.

All of these projects are going to be done by people who need to be paid: job creation.

[BrooklynRider]

I'll read my crystal ball and predict that the stadium and the three or four adjoining towers get built. After that, Ratner pleads poverty and sells off development rights. The public is left holding the bill and all those suckers screaming that it is all about housing still sit in their dumpy little rooms n public housing.

We'll see a stadium and Ms. Brooklyn, (i.e. Missed Opportunity Brooklyn). Look at the final renderings. Guaranteed we never see it built. Someone note this post somewhere. I'm channeling Sylvia Browne.

[NoyokA]

Unless we enter another great depression, I have no doubt that Ratner will make out like a bandit.

[BrooklynRider]

That's not saying it will get built or that the project is good. Therefore, I have to agree with you.

[NoyokA]

lol.

[antinimby]

I'll read my crystal ball and predict that the stadium and the three or four adjoining towers get built. After that, Ratner pleads poverty and sells off development rights.That would be fantastic.

This way, it'll look less like one big, common-themed complex because each of the different developers will then use different architects designing the remaining buildings.

[ablarc]

Sounds like an OK scenario to me.

[bkmonkey]

I hate to point this out....

Doesn't Ratner still own Metro-Tech? A project he started in 1987, about 20 years ago?

Metro-tech was a similar project requiring some subsidies from the city. He bought out hundreds from their homes, and used eminent domain on the rest.

Yet, here we are in 2007 and he still owns the thing, even if you hate metro-tech, you have to admit.. it has been pretty successful.. the entire complex has a less that 2 percent vacancy rating. So it's not because he couldn't sell the thing. The last building in the Metro-tech complex was completed in 2002.

If Ratner hasn't sold Metro-Tech yet, I don't think he will be so quick to sell Atlantic Yards, especially since this project will be the cornerstone for his company. I would think he would hold on to the higher profile properties, and his record shows that.

And he has the money to build it too.

[BrooklynRider]

He does control most of it. Jonathon Muss was responsible for the Marriott and its extension. Ratner is certainly the owner of Metrotech south of Jay Street and he developed the new courthouse north of Jay Street (330 Jay?).

[lofter1]

Metrotech has no residential, and thereby offers fewer on-going headaches than projects that include housing.

A bit of an apples <> oranges comparison to AY, IMHO.

[Teno]

AY originally had much more office space that Ratner winnowed down. So it seems he feels residential is the way to go with this project. It would seem quite odd he would make that choice only to abandon the project later.


This way, it'll look less like one big, common-themed complex because each of the different developers will then use different architects designing the remaining buildings.

That's not necessarily a good thing. You guys would be really upset if a new developer hired Kondylis to come finish up.

[NYguy]

Gehry must be slapping himself over this quote:
http://www.newyorkbusiness.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070214/FREE/70214006/1058/breaking


Ms. Burden said she would consider proposals for new skyscrapers that top the 512-foot Williamsburgh Savings Bank, the borough's tallest building.

Late last year, downtown Brooklyn developer Forest City Ratner Cos. bowed to community objections and agreed to shrink the tallest tower in its $4 billion arena/office tower plan -- nicknamed Miss Brooklyn -- so that it would not top the bank building. Designed by project architect Frank Gehry, Miss Brooklyn would have risen to 620 feet.

[ablarc]

^ Does this mean Gehry and Ratner can now re-proportion Miss Brooklyn so she's less fat? Or has that battle been irretrievably lost?

[ZippyTheChimp]

It is being redesigned, so it's possible.

But I wouldn't bet on it.

[Citytect]

Wasn't part of the perceived problem with Miss Brooklyn's height the proximity to the Williamsburg Bank building?

Regardless, I think Ms. Burden had downtown Brooklyn in mind when she stated her willingness to consider towers taller than Williamsburg Bank, not Atlantic Yards.

[ablarc]

Doesn't Atlantic Yards effectively extend "Downtown Brooklyn"?

[BrooklynRider]

Ablarc,

We went through this. Atlantic Yards DOES NOT fall into the Downtown Rezoning plan. It is not now nor will it ever be considered a part of Downtown Brooklyn.

[bkmonkey]

Im not so sure about that.

When this project is completed, it will effectively extend Downtown Brooklyn as most people will consider it part of Downtown Brooklyn.

Neighborhoods in New York Change all the time, Park Slope is constantly expanding while Sunset Park has gotten smaller. Many people refer to the area as part of Downtown Brooklyn now... how do you think they will look at the area in 15 years?

[Citytect]

Doesn't Atlantic Yards effectively extend "Downtown Brooklyn"?

I don't think so - not yet. The two areas could eventually merge into one, but Atlantic Yards alone won't do the trick.

[ablarc]

Ablarc,

We went through this. Atlantic Yards DOES NOT fall into the Downtown Rezoning plan.
So?

Government agencies prescribe what's real? There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? The powers of authority ...

BR, Brooklyn's much too big to settle forever for such a shriveled downtown. Tiny Boston's perceived downtown stretches a mile or two through Back Bay regardless what agencies might claim in definitions.


It is not now nor will it ever be considered a part of Downtown Brooklyn.
That's quite presumptive. Best to leave such omniscience to God. Wouldn't want the earth to start shaking beneath your feet. :p



Isn't it time Brooklyn recognized its bigness and started acting its size? :)

.

[ZippyTheChimp]

The Brooklyn Fox Theater defined the limits of what was considered "going Downtown" in Brooklyn - so, say Flatbush and Livingston. It's about a quarter mile from AY.

The Downtown Brooklyn Rezoning Plan (http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/dwnbklyn2/dwnbklynintro1.shtml) boundary is the WBB, 400 ft from AY.

[lofter1]

FYI: MAP (http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/dwnbklyn2/dwnbklynplan2.shtml)

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/gif/dwnbklyn2/dcp-2a.jpg

[MidtownGuy]

400 feet, or a quarter mile, how small a distance!
Before moving to Manhattan, I lived on Ashland Place and on St. Felix for for many years. There is "downtown" in the literal and zoning sense, as trumpeted by BrooklynRider and others, and there is the actual downtown as pretty much everyone else perceives it. Brooklyn is huge, and it's "downtown" area, if you use that word to mean an area of concentrated businesses, hotels, and/or cultural attractions, will expand and envelop Atlantic Yards. The projects around BAM, the towers going up on Fulton, Dekalb, Flatbush, all of these will redefine what Brooklynites think is "downtown", more so than some zoning map that no one, except people like us, on this rather specialized forum, will ever be aware of. Soon enough, people will say, "I'm going downtown to see a basketball game", or a performance at BAM. The 400 ft. or 1/4 mile is, in a way, meaningless when you just rode in from the edges of the borough.

[Citytect]

I'm trying hard not to say something crude about "going downtown" or about the size of Brooklyn's "downtown."

[BrooklynRider]

I think that despite the city's definition or our speculation, it is pretty clear what could be construed now or going forward as downtown. It is the area, both residential and commercial, that borders the historic districts on Park Slope, Fort Green, Brooklyn Heights, Bourum Hill, and Cobble Hill.

It is a huge area. I think those familiar with is understand how tremendous the area is. The only place we have commercial towers are along Court Street (all vintage 1920's & 190's, some converted to residential). We have the banal MetrotechCenter somewhat pushing eastward. A smattering of atrocious buildings that are two or three steps below useful and interesting. We have the Williamsburg Bank Tower.

There's not much meat to the large swath that can be inarguably called downtown Brooklyn. The potential (without even considering Atlantic Yards) for a hi-rise business district is greater than anyone not familiar with the area might realize. South of te Fulton Mall is a barren area of parking lots and crap buildings. The challenge is whether the city contonues to give a pass to developers, so they can in turn build more residential housing. We need housing all over the city, but 8 or 10-story residential buildings in the heart of the "Downtown District", such as the new building on Livingston defy logic.

Yes, it is great to see the investment in the area, but it is investment that has a minor payback versus commercial development that brings jobs. Every project seizes on "job creation" and about the only job creation we get are jobs in the construction trades. Transient jobs. Then we get the dry cleaners, delicatessens, florists, chinese restaurants and phone stores augmented by [insert name of pharmacy here] and Starbucks.

The Downtown Brooklyn Plan is not working. It is not attracting ANYONE. Thor's Albee West was the often hailed catalyst for the revitalization. It was flipped and Joe Sitt, Brooklyn's son and a person who swore he had only Brooklyn's future and jobs, jobs, jobs, in mind bailed. He bought that parcel fo $25M and could've built commercial or commercial hotel and still made a fortune.

The Brooklyn Plan is faltering, if not entirely falling apart. The BAM cultural district is the most promising, cohesive plan announced - if it happens. The most high-profile and attractive development in Brooklyn in decades, Richard Meier's One Prospect Park, isn't anyhere near the Downtown Area.

Brooklyn will have a two great cultural districts: BAM and the Prospect Park-Eastern Parkway cultural mile.

Atlantic Yards is nothing. It adds nothing. It is being built on nothing. Take that project away an NO PROJECT of the job-creating kind is being built in Brooklyn. The folks in Red Hook have it right fighting to preserve the watefront jobs. lest we lose the last vestiges of a "working Brooklyn." Walk across the Brooklyn Bridge from Manhattan to Brooklyn and you will see the pier buildings on the right proclaiming "BROOKLYN WORKS." No it doesn't. Those signs are obvioulsly holdovers from decades ago and THOSE VERY PIERS will be razed to make way for a park. Brooklyn does NOT work.

[Teno]

Its pretty extreme to say downtown Brooklyn is not working. As you walk around the area during the day it is bustling with people living, working, shopping.

I suppose in relation to Manhattan downtown Brooklyn isn't much but hey its Manhattan. I've seen downtowns that are not used and they look nothing like Brooklyn.

As far as jobs. Again yes most of the lucrative jobs are in Manhattan but that does not take away from the fact that Brooklyn has 2.5 million people. Brooklyn as a city by itself would be the fourth largest city in the country. If there were no jobs people would not live here.

Brooklyn river front shipping has been a business slowly dying for 40 years. It is incumbent on city leaders to determine what is the best use of resources. It is possible that river front housing may be more lucrative use of the land for Brooklyn than shipping. I'm not necessarily saying the shipping should be shut down. But there has to be room for adjustment because time and industry move on.

Its also pretty extreme to say AY adds nothing. It may not add what you prefer but it certainly adds something. It adds housing, a basketball franchise, retail, possibly a school.

You may not value either of those things but they cannot be dismissed as nothing.

[bkmonkey]

Atlantic Yards adds nothing?

It adds an entire dense neigborhood.

Retail.. thousands of square feet. ( shopping district next to a transit hub)

Housing, thousands of new residents........ (next two a transit hub)

Even though it may not seem like much.... hundreds of thousands of square feet of office space..

The Arena... will be a cultural attraction... not only was it designed by superstar architect...., it has been so contriversial and so public that it will instantly draw tourism...There will be many public events that will take place there.

Atlantic Yards adds a new urban core to Downtown Brooklyn, it will spur tons of growth along Flatbush, and Atlantic Avenues....


And thousands of people will work there.

Seems to be alot of nothing

PS. Are you sure 1 prospect park is the most exciting and high profile project in Brooklyn either today or in the past decades? I know you don't like atlantic yards.... but it has gained worldwide attention, and has excited many millions of people.

Downtown Brooklyn has as much office space as Atlanta.... the new developers of the Thor Mall, are still planning to build an office tower. There are other office towers being considered for the area.... (Muss development), and developers have been quietly buying areas of downown brooklyn for years. The Downtown Brooklyn plan was approved in late 2003/2004, its only been three years, and things like this take time

[BrooklynRider]

Atlantic Yards is nothing in relation to the Downtown Rezoning Plan and Downtown Brooklyn. Please quote me in context.

We can all speculate of the plethora of new commercial buildings that are going to create a giant Brooklyn skyline and day now, but they aren't there. There's no hole in the ground. There's no construction fencing going up.

The only construction we are seeing is residential towers. I am pleased to see them, but the are THE ONLY portion of the Downtown Rezoning that is moving forward as you said, "after 3 or 4 years." That's a pretty lousy rezoning plan if all we can get are 7 or 8 new residential highrises in a business distict hurrahed as the next big thing.

With regard to the Downtown Rezoning and Downtown Revitalization - Atlantic Yards ADDS NOTHING. The city is now writing a blank check to the developer to building a platform over the yards before construction can even begin. We aren' going to see PERMANENT jobs. We are going to see construction jobs. Those are transient.

Nothing has begun at Atlantic Yards and the design relies on the completion of the arena AND adjoining towers before we can check that phase off and count how many fewer jobs we get than promised. Then we'll have to check to see the average wages of those new quality jobs as security guards, maintenance men, pretzel vendors, and cashiers.

Yeah, Atlantic Yards means NOTHING to Down Town. If it did, it would be a commercial development as opposed to an arena built in a Gehry fugly Battery Park City.

[lofter1]

The Arena... it has been so contriversial and so public that it will instantly draw tourism ...

Walk around MSG during the day ...

Almost never anything going on there during daylight ours.

So if tourists show up to look at the Gehry / Nets Arena they'll take a look and move on.

What is the daytime activity at AY that will draw tourists to that site?

[NoyokA]

Its nice to see that some that are being displaced, in this case the choice was temporarily, have a positive outlook and are making the best of what is an inevitable situation, this particular story is a win-win for everyone.

Drink ’til you drop at Yards-area bar
By Dana Rubinstein
The Brooklyn Paper

A neighborhood establishment wants you to come in and get completely wasted — and you can thank Bruce Ratner for it.

The JRG Restaurant and Fashion Cafe — which is on Flatbush Avenue between Atlantic and Fifth avenues — is having a hedonistic last hurrah before it is torn down to make way for Ratner’s Atlantic Yards mega-development.

The bar, which is in the way of the Frank Gehry–designed arena, is liquidating its stock in a $30, all-you-can drink bacchanal.

And rest assured — that cash won’t buy you mere swill.

“It’s all premium liquor — we’re not talking house wine,” said the bar’s general manager Ray Rodriguez. Even better, the $30 gets you 15 percent off all food, which is a substance sometimes ingested during alcoholic binges.

Like any decadent exercise, this one is tinged with a sense of fatalism.

The liquoricious deal will last only as long as the bar-cum-restaurant-cum-fashion house does — through the end of the month.

That’s because the premises are owned by Forest City Ratner, which has said it intends to start demolition for its 16-tower development as early as next month.

On a recent Tuesday evening, the ploy to pour liquor into the throats of eager Brooklynites wasn’t going so well. The bar was empty, save a few diners and a couple of reporters.

Rodriguez attributed the slow night to the just-beginning snow, and of course, to the fact that it was a Tuesday. But he was optimistic that business would pick up again once the streets became passable and the long President’s Day weekend encouraged lots and lots of toasts to our former leaders.

Rodriguez insists the bar will relocate rather than just close down.

“We’ll come back even stronger,” he said.

He also claimed that JRG Restaurant would move into the Nets arena when it is completed in 2009 — though Forest City Ratner would not comment.

After all the binge-drinking is done, Rodriguez will throw one last two-day bash on March 3 and 4.

[krulltime]

Brooklyn: Atlantic Yards Construction to Begin


February 20, 2007
By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA

Construction crews were expected to take the first steps today toward building the huge Atlantic Yards project near downtown Brooklyn, according to an aide to Bruce C. Ratner, the developer. The first stages of the work will involve subcontractors removing contamination from a bus depot, then demolishing that structure. Forest City Ratner Companies will build a temporary Long Island Rail Road yard in its place, so that a giant platform can be built above the permanent rail yard to support much of the $4 billion development. The city and state approved the project despite heated opposition from residents who said it would overwhelmingly congest the local streets and transit system. The development will include thousands of apartments, commercial buildings, a hotel and an arena for the Nets, the basketball team Mr. Ratner owns.


Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

[NYguy]

It's inevitable...

NY Post

B'KLYN ARENA TIP-OFF BREAKS GROUND TODAY

By RICH CALDER
February 20, 2007

Brooklyn developer Bruce Ratner is expected to finally break ground today on his controversial $4 billion Atlantic Yards project, The Post has learned.

Preliminary work on the 22-acre Frank Gehry-designed development - which is to include an NBA arena for Ratner's Nets and 16 skyscrapers filled with residential and commercial space - will quietly kick off without fanfare along the Vanderbilt Rail Yard off Atlantic Avenue, sources said.

The start of construction on property Ratner already controls comes as a federal judge weighs the merits of a lawsuit by opponents seeking to block the developer from getting other property he needs for the project through eminent domain.

The MTA - to which Ratner is to pay $100 million for development rights to the 8.4-acre rail yard - gave the developer the green light last week to begin work on the site, sources said.

The first job calls for building a temporary parking area for trains on the east side of the yard so that existing LIRR trains could be moved from the west end, which must be cleared so that construction on the $637 million Barclays Center basketball arena could begin in September.

The Nets hope to be playing in their new home for the 2009-10 season.

Later this week, a former auto-repair shop at 179 Flatbush Ave. is to be demolished so that the land could eventually be used as the base of the planned 511-foot "Miss Brooklyn" at Atlantic and Flatbush avenues.

Patti Hagan, of the anti-Atlantic Yards group Prospect Heights Action Coalition, called the start of construction "free cleanup work for the MTA by Ratner," adding that she believed the developer would eventually lose the eminent-domain lawsuit and have to abandon the project.

The first work on Brooklyn's biggest development in decades includes more than $600,000 in contracts awarded to minority- and women-owned companies as part of a Community Benefits Agreement reached by Ratner and government bosses.

[NYguy]

Daily News

Restaurant 'Nets' new site at arena

By JOTHAM SEDERSTROM

The only restaurant operating in the footprint of the controversial Atlantic Yards project will shut its doors next month - but it won't be gone for long.
JRG Fashion Cafe will be resurrected to serve food and drinks inside the Frank Gehry-designed Nets arena when it opens in 2009, a manager for the Flatbush Ave. restaurant told the Daily News.

"Yes, we will be serving drinks and food in the arena," said JRG general manager Ray Rodriguez, who said the Caribbean-inspired hotspot will close March 2.

"We were fully compensated and part of the deal is [that we are] coming back in 2009 as part of the [arena]," he said.

Owners of the restaurant and bar, which opened in 2002, began negotiations with Forest City Ratner officials 18 months ago, Rodriguez said.

Though the cafe was originally to stay open until later this summer, Ratner officials moved up the closing date because of construction plans, Rodriguez said.

Groundbreaking may begin as early as this week, sources said.

"We were doing really well, so to tell you the truth, it's sad," Rodriguez said. "We felt like we were kind of like the show 'Cheers' - everyone knew everyone."

A spokesman for the developer declined to comment, citing ongoing negotiations with cafe owners.

The $4.2 billion development - greenlighted by the state in December - calls for a basketball arena for the Nets and 16 towers with residential and commercial space in Prospect Heights.

The cafe's current spot on Flatbush Ave. at Pacific St. will become an open area at the base of the Miss Brooklyn building, a source said.

In a concession to opponents, Ratner agreed to scale back the 620-foot skyscraper so it won't rise above the Williamsburgh Savings Bank, the borough's tallest building.

Councilwoman Letitia James (WFP-Fort Greene) said including the cafe in the arena is a good move, but she warned that the project still threatened to hurt other small businesses.

"It's a step in the right direction, but obviously I'm very much concerned for the small businesses that will be impacted by the entire project," James said.

Freddy's Bar and Back Room, a bar in the project footprint, is one of the holdouts fighting Ratner in court to prevent the use of eminent domain to make way for the 22-acre development.

__________________________________________________ _____


Councilwoman Letitia James (WFP-Fort Greene) said including the cafe in the arena is a good move, but she warned that the project still threatened to hurt other small businesses.

"It's a step in the right direction, but obviously I'm very much concerned for the small businesses that will be impacted by the entire project," James said.

Hell just froze over. Letitia James actually had something positive to say about the development.

[Teno]

Atlantic Yards is nothing in relation to the Downtown Rezoning Plan and Downtown Brooklyn.We can all speculate of the plethora of new commercial buildings that are going to create a giant Brooklyn skyline and day now, but they aren't there.

Oh ok you are saying AY does not do much to bring commercial business to downtown Brooklyn. Yes you are right about that.

City officials and developers have floated a couple of plans to bring business to Brooklyn. The biggest I can think of was offering a tower to the UN while the Secretariat is being renovated, an offer the UN turned down.

So far there has been no serious interest in downtown Brooklyn. They won't come just because we've built the building, there is a good chance it would just sit empty. Over the next 4 years a lot of new office space will come to market in midtown and downtown Manhattan, which most business will choose before they would even consider Brooklyn.

There has been great interest in people living in Brooklyn. So developers are building housing. The housing is filling as quickly as they build it because of the demand. Downtown Brooklyn will likely be more residential, shopping, and arts district than it will be a commercial district. I don't see a problem with that.

[NoyokA]

New York Magazine:

2/20/07

Atlantic Yards Begins Not With a Bang But With a Bulldozer in a Snowy Lot

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/20070220yardsdemo.jpg

There it is, folks: The start of demolition for Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards. Reports say they're knocking down a disused bus depot to create a temporary rail yard so that construction can begin. From the AP's pictures, it just looks like they're using a really big bulldozer to move some barrels and take down a chain-link fence. Either way, historic!

[BrooklynRider]

Oh ok you are saying AY does not do much to bring commercial business to downtown Brooklyn. Yes you are right about that.

City officials and developers have floated a couple of plans to bring business to Brooklyn. The biggest I can think of was offering a tower to the UN while the Secretariat is being renovated, an offer the UN turned down.

So far there has been no serious interest in downtown Brooklyn. They won't come just because we've built the building, there is a good chance it would just sit empty. Over the next 4 years a lot of new office space will come to market in midtown and downtown Manhattan, which most business will choose before they would even consider Brooklyn.

There has been great interest in people living in Brooklyn. So developers are building housing. The housing is filling as quickly as they build it because of the demand. Downtown Brooklyn will likely be more residential, shopping, and arts district than it will be a commercial district. I don't see a problem with that.


I think we are in agreement.

[ZippyTheChimp]

This Guy Wants You to Love Atlantic Yards

Laurie Olin, the landscape architect behind Battery Park City and Bryant Park, faces a tough challenge in central Brooklyn. Not that he’s worried.

http://www.observer.com/data/articleimages/photoimages/022607_article_schuerman2.jpg


By: Matthew Schuerman
Date: 2/26/2007

"Americans are frightened of density. Europe is not.”

Laurie Olin, one of the most noted landscape architects in the country, was holding forth in his firm’s library in central Philadelphia. He wants to help us get over our obsession with personal space.

So Mr. Olin took on the task of designing the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn. If built out to the developer’s present specifications, the five-block site at Atlantic and Flatbush avenues will become twice as dense as any census tract in the country.

“It’s the future: how to live wisely and well in close quarters with good spaces and environmental conditions and with the highest qualities. What a project!” Mr. Olin exclaimed. “Holy smokes! That many thousands of people in such a tight space, and to try to give them something wonderful that they’ll love. That’s fun. It’s hard, too.”

A tall, lanky 69-year-old with the beard and glasses of a high-school math teacher, Mr. Olin has been showing New Yorkers how to live for almost 30 years now. He helped create the master plan for Battery Park City, restored Bryant Park and turned Columbus Circle into a destination. Mr. Olin reintroduced Manhattan to Frederick Law Olmsted’s hexagonal paving stones and to the park bench from the 1939 World’s Fair, both of which have been included in the required vocabulary of New York City park design ever since.

“I could be overreaching or fooling myself, but I think I know how public space works and, especially in New York, what will or will not work,” he said.
And so, even if he is less well known than Frank Gehry, the principal Atlantic Yards architect, his work is ubiquitous. Mr. Olin is also the more verbal of the two. When they appear in public to hawk the project, it is Mr. Olin who talks about the site planning, and it is the Olin Partnership’s name that can be seen at the foot of the master-plan slides. An audience member might even think that Mr. Olin was brought in to compensate for Mr. Gehry’s reputed lack of urban-planning skills. (Both Mr. Olin and the development company, Forest City Ratner, deny that Mr. Gehry lacks anything.)

In any case, Mr. Olin’s role in the project is far more than figuring out what trees to plant, and it cuts to the very heart of the controversy: the placement of the buildings that enclose eight acres of open space, the closure of city streets, and accommodating 16,000 residents on 22 acres of land. Battery Park City is expected to have between 12,000 and 14,000 residents once it is completed, and it encompasses 92 acres—less than one-quarter as dense as Atlantic Yards.

“When I was asked to work on Battery Park City, everybody said: ‘It’s a terrible job, and it won’t work.’ And I thought, ‘No, I don’t think so. I think I could do something pretty good there.’ They said, ‘It’s going to be hopeless—this landfill next to Wall Street. Nobody will go there.’ I go and see the people there now and say, ‘Well, it certainly works for some.’”
But would it work if it had the same number of people and only one-quarter of the land? Would it work if there were no river in sight—in fact, if it was in the heart of brownstone Brooklyn? Would it work if it were Atlantic Yards?



MR. OLIN'S 60-MEMBER FIRM, WHICH WON the firm-of-the-year award last year from the American Society of Landscape Architects, overlooks Independence Park, which is being redeveloped according to a plan that Mr. Olin began about 10 years ago, and which is far from finished.

His walls are littered with watercolors of his various projects, a few of which have stalled because of lawsuits or the developer’s financial troubles. Rather than worry about whether Atlantic Yards will work once it is finished, Mr. Olin is worried about it getting finished.

“It’s a great project, if it all happens,” he said. “The time calendar we are talking about is probably 20 years. People say 10 to 15, but take a look. How long does it take the market to absorb that much stuff?”

He also doubted that all 16 buildings, which include a basketball arena and a 511-foot tower called Miss Brooklyn (sometimes called “Ms. Brooklyn”), would be designed by Frank Gehry—which was one of the selling points to get the project through the state approval process last year. Forest City began preliminary site work this week, but three lawsuits have been filed against the project.

“Various architects who have specialized in doing residential towers will probably be brought in to be the architect of record anyway, even if design architects like Frank Gehry or other personalities give image and shape to them,” Mr. Olin told The Observer.

Both statements diverge from the official line taken by Mr. Ratner’s firm.

“Laurie has his views,” countered Jim Stuckey, executive vice president of Forest City Ratner. “We don’t believe it is going to take 20 years. We expect that it will take 10.”
He added, “Frank Gehry will be the architect on every one of them.”

Mr. Olin, who is also a professor of landscape architecture and regional planning at the University of Pennsylvania, was brought onto the Atlantic Yards project by Mr. Gehry about four or five months into the design process. (The two had worked together in Los Angeles and London.) By that point, Mr. Olin said, the design already called for demapping a one-block length of Pacific Street and melting the two adjoining blocks together into a “superblock”—the type of mid-20th-century urban planning widely used in housing projects, but since discredited by Jane Jacobs and a whole school of so-called urbanists. They have argued that superblocks discourage the type of street life that makes places like the West Village so successful.
Mr. Ratner, however, needs that street bed in order to increase the open space on the project. Along with streets that will be demapped to make way for the arena, he will gain about 2.7 acres, according to The Observer’s calculations based on the environmental-impact statement.

And that is important: Right now, the site’s immediate neighborhood has 0.36 acres of parkland for every 1,000 people. Once Atlantic Yards gets built, that ratio will increase to 0.39 acres—but only after those street beds are included, according to calculations based on the final environmental-impact statement. Battery Park City has 2.5 acres per 1,000 residents, while the overall city ratio is 1.5 acres per 1,000 residents.

“I am not in a position to say how much quantum is needed to pay for the project or give a reasonable return to investors,” Mr. Olin said. But he did toy at one point with reinstating the street. He also considered turning the street into a circular drive, like the roads in Stuyvesant Town. Neither worked. As for the taboos against superblocks and the tower-in-park design: “I think those are both clichés, and I think that we are using 1960’s language,” Mr. Olin told The Observer.

“If I put a street through here, I have less space for people and I have more cars,” he continued. “When people say ‘superblock’— what’s wrong with what this is? Because I don’t see how adding one car in here is going to make it a better space. I think space on streets is actually useless space.”

Mr. Olin said that Forest City will put restaurants, cafes, a daycare center and a community center on the ground floors of buildings that will face the central mall that runs through the development. And all those residents that opponents are worried about moving in? Well, they’ll just make the whole place livelier.



IN EARLY 2005, A YEAR AFTER ATLANTIC YARDS was announced, a group of neighborhood residents came up with a master plan called “the Unity Plan” that did away with the more controversial aspects of the project. Instead of joining two blocks together to form a superblock, it actually added streets, cutting one of the long east-west blocks along Atlantic Avenue into thirds.

“Atlantic Yards, as it exists now, has an open rail yard that is currently creating a barrier or a moat between Prospect Heights and Fort Greene,” said Marshall Brown, an architecture professor and the lead designer for the Unity Plan. “What we have to be careful of is replacing the moat with a wall or a series of walls.”

“If it was a real pedestrian street, why must it be a superblock?” said Ron Shiffman, the former director of the Pratt Institute Center for Community Development. “Why must it be owned by the developer? A superblock is not something that allows the dynamic of multiple ownership. It isn’t soothing. It will be a street where you will find a series of different chain stores. You will see another Starbucks; you will see another Baskin-Robbins.”

Kent Barwick, the president of the Municipal Art Society, remarked: “There will be some nice spaces, but will this be something that, if you are a resident from Fort Greene, you would feel comfortable walking into?”

Mr. Olin has introduced design features to draw outsiders through the complex: the spaces between the buildings along Atlantic Avenue and Dean Street are wider than normal city streets and lead to paths that can bring pedestrians over to the other side. He also labored to maximize the amount of sun that would shine down on that privately owned public space by shaping the buildings into what he calls “catcher mitts.”

“People say, ‘Well, it’s too private in there.’ And I say, ‘No, there’s lots of space for people to come in.’ And then they say, ‘Well, there’s no street wall.’” He leaned back, having made his point. “What do you want? Do you want people to get in, or do you want it to be closed up? And then they don’t know what to say.”

Mr. Olin speaks with the caffeinated jangle of a man who has been right so much of his life that he can afford to be wrong, and even candid, once in a while. “One of the things that is hard for us to get across is that everything is an experiment,” he said. “We know a lot about how people live and sit and eat, but have never actually dealt with this here before in the year that it gets built.”

The design is far from finished, and the east end, where the superblock lies, is particularly rough. Mr. Olin admits that the site plan was put together to establish the parameters of the project—the ratio of open to built space—to go through the approval process. Now he and Mr. Gehry are focusing on just one building: the basketball arena on the far western edge of the site, which will be surrounded by skyscrapers. (It needs to be open to host the first game of the 2009-10 Nets basketball season.) The arena’s roof will be an oval of about five acres.

At one time, the roof was also supposed to be publicly accessible open space, but that would have required greater egress to meet the building code. Now it will be reserved for people who live or work in the buildings around it: balconies, a jogging track, a restaurant terrace, all ringing a raised central green that will be covered with vegetation.
“Since it is in the northeast flyway, it is going to be full of birds; it will be bird habitat,” Mr. Olin said. “We have to do something with the roof anyway, because it’s a big roof and there is a big watershed, because all of the rain that falls on it is clean water. So we can catch that, filter it with the plants a bit, and then we can reuse it for toilets in the buildings. We can reuse it for irrigation.”
As for the rest of the project, that can wait. Even the three towers that directly ring the arena are not on Mr. Olin’s immediate radar. The developers, he said, would “love to see one of these going, but I haven’t heard them saying that there is this market crying out for condos at Atlantic and Flatbush.”

The opponents, then, have that much to hope for, at least: that Atlantic Yards gets stuck in the bureaucratic, regulatory or economic jungle that has slowed too many of Mr. Olin’s projects before.

copyright © 2006 the new york observer, llc | all rights reserved

[NYguy]

Observer

Amanda Burden Isn’t Afraid of Heights

Amanda Burden, the City Planning Director, never joined in the chorus calling for a shorter Miss Brooklyn tower at Atlantic Yards. And, last week, Ms. Burden wouldn’t predict if the tower’s last-minute downsizing (to 511 feet) would have a chilling effect on developers citywide.

But she did say that skyscrapers are good for the soul.

“The city needs big projects,” Ms. Burden said at a Feb. 14 breakfast sponsored by Crain’s. “And, in fact, tall buildings are aspirational and give the city, really give the world, a feeling that we welcome innovation and expressions of aspirational architecture.”

—Matthew Schuerman

____________________________________

Like music to my ears.

[ld876]

Good for her -- it's rare someone in a public, government/city position says something along these lines. And good, we need big projects. Freedom Tower, bleck.

[Teno]

At one time, the roof was also supposed to be publicly accessible open space, but that would have required greater egress to meet the building code. Now it will be reserved for people who live or work in the buildings around it

Lofter you are always complaining about the roof the stadium being open to the public. Here is the reason why they reneged. I suppose it can be believed or not but it is an answer.

[lofter1]

That ^^^ is a p-poor excuse ...

These people (Ratner / Gehry) are professionals in their fields. Surely they understand the need for adequate egress in a space intended for Public Assembly. If not then they are simply hacks pretending to be professionals.

This is a clear example of cutting corners rather than providing the amenity as originally proposed.

The promise of the park atop the arena was bait + switch, pure and simple.

[NYguy]

it's rare someone in a public, government/city position says something along these lines.

That would mean being crucified at the stake by the NIMBY faithful. I get the feeling she'll be speaking out more on the subject, but she has hinted at the subject before when speaking of the Hudson Yards.

[bkmonkey]

Walk around MSG during the day ...

Almost never anything going on there during daylight ours.

So if tourists show up to look at the Gehry / Nets Arena they'll take a look and move on.

What is the daytime activity at AY that will draw tourists to that site?

I wouldn't exactly refer to Madison Square Garden as a wonder of architecture...

In any sense... the MSG area is usually pretty crowded... because its above Penn station...

Daytime activity... shopping, (the area is already crowded), there will be many people who live and work in the area, like the MSG area. Places to dine...

By the time this project is done, the Brooklyn Center will be nearly complete... This entire area will evolve as as the cultural core of Brooklyn...

A must-see for many tourist...

If the arena ends up being a wonder of art... If the buildings end up being a wonder of architecture... people will visit just to visit.

People are not only going to go simply because there is basketball...

[BrooklynRider]

I do think the arena is a bonus for Brooklyn and the whole metro region. Right now we have some pretty piss-poor arenas in the metro region. The question is whether there will become a glut: "Barclay's Arena", MSG, PNAC, Brendan Byrne (Continental) Arena, Nassau Coliseum, Newark's new arena.

I'm not sure if I got them all, missed some, or included others that don't belong. However, it seems like A LOT of arena for the region. Tell me ticket prices will drop and it will all be worth it.

[NoyokA]

I do think the arena is a bonus for Brooklyn and the whole metro region. Right now we have some pretty piss-poor arenas in the metro region. The question is whether there will become a glut: "Barclay's Arena", MSG, PNAC, Brendan Byrne (Continental) Arena, Nassau Coliseum, Newark's new arena.

I'm not sure if I got them all, missed some, or included others that don't belong. However, it seems like A LOT of arena for the region. Tell me ticket prices will drop and it will all be worth it.

Well NYC is a Baseball City, followed by basketball, and then far behind is football, and hockey. There’s already talk about a third baseball team in the Metro area, although I don’t think that will come to pass. I think the Nets in Brooklyn will be a huge success, Brooklyn is a very big basketball borough, and it’s probably the biggest basketball borough in NYC, although Queens follows closely, it will also help with the Nets fan base, just as many Mets fans are from Brooklyn. I also think that the since Brooklyn has become hip and cool the Nets of Brooklyn will be immensely popular outside Queens and Brooklyn.

[NYguy]

amny

Magistrate deals legal blow to critics of Atlantic Yards project

The Associated Press
February 23, 2007

A federal magistrate on Friday recommended tossing out a lawsuit meant to block developer Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards project -- dealing a blow to a group of Brooklyn property owners and tenants facing eviction.

While a U.S. district judge still has final say on whether the suit survives, the odds are long: magistrates' recommendations are rarely rejected.

The suit, filed in federal court last year, charges that seizure of the plaintiff's property under eminent domain would be unconstitutional.

U.S. Magistrate Robert M. Levy concluded in court papers filed Friday that "there is a real dispute between the parties." But also found that the federal court should abstain from entering the fray because it's a local matter.

"This action represents important public policy concerns and is essentially local in nature," he wrote. "Because the state's interest in adjudicating this case in its own forum outweighs the federal interest in retaining jurisdiction, I respectfully recommend that this court abstain ... and dismiss plaintiff's complaint."

Calls to attorneys on both sides and to a spokeswoman for Ratner were not immediately returned.

The suit identifies the defendants as Ratner, Gov. George Pataki, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff and Empire State Development Corp. Chairman Charles Gargano, among others. It seeks to permanently block the defendants from seizing the property, and asks for unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

Atlantic Yards is a $4 billion megadevelopment of 16 skyscrapers and an arena planned by Ratner, the principal owner of the New Jersey Nets.

[Bob]

Wouldn't it be way cool if Ratner/Gehry and the whole gang decide one day, "enough," and just throw in the towel? I can see it now: "You know, you folks are right. We'll just leave the rotten buildings right where they are and take our billions elsewhere. We're pulling our proposal in its entirety. Sorry to have bothered you. Have a nice day!"

[Jaffster]

Wouldn't it be way cool if Ratner/Gehry and the whole gang decide one day, "enough," and just throw in the towel? I can see it now: "You know, you folks are right. We'll just leave the rotten buildings right where they are and take our billions elsewhere. We're pulling our proposal in its entirety. Sorry to have bothered you. Have a nice day!"




The NIMBYs probably enjoy the burnt out buildings (Underberg Building), trash everywhere (Pacific Street), and the giant hole in the ground (Rail Yards). All the characteristics of such a wonderful neighborhood. If this happened, it would make their day!