it's a shame that all the controversy surrounding this project has drawn so much negative attention. i think that the positive aspects of these plans far outweigh the negatives.
this arena is going to be an amazing step for downtown brooklyn and the boro's second coming of the brownstone boom. once the arena is up and running, the surrounding development of the yards will fill out quickly.
in fact, i'm hoping to move back to that area (its where i grew up) right as the development is hitting its stride.
Oh, I get it ^
Just like the building of MSG in the 1960s spurred the instant development and upgrading of that part of midtown.
i don't think the state of RE development in nyc during the 1960s is a fair comparison to that of nyc in the 2000s. people were fleeing the city in the 60s-70s, now they're flocking to the city. this arena area will attract many new residents and businesses in the way that the developments along flatbush-x, metrotech and albee are going to bring in new residents, retail and commerce.
BKLove this project has to go back for approval again by the State and it is less clear if it will pass that hurdle again. This project still isn't a done deal. They are doing prep work yes with the platforms, but no shovel has gone in yet for the arena. I mean the Rock and the Barclay''s were concieved at the same time and the Rock is a success and is quickly cementing itself as one of the great arenas in the US. Barclays still is on the drawing board and a final product rendering has not yet been produced. I'll believe it and accept once I see steal rising.
Also do you really feel that the taxpayers and state and city paying for this Billion dollar arena is sensible??
jc - i think that this project is worth the use of public funds given its long-term benefits to brooklyn.
so many residents of this city are quick to complain about use of public funds for anything - the use of funds in a particular manner or the lack of funding for a desired purpose - yet people freak at the notion of this city adjusting real estate taxes across the board to a level that even gets close to making sense. if property owners across the 5 boros were taxed in an equitable manner, there would be sufficient city funds to make everyone happy.
This arena will attract new residents where? It is not like we have large swaths of uninhabited housing crying for tenants.
Originally Posted by BrooklynLove
The arena will attract new businesses where? It might displce existing businesses with chains willing to pay higher rent, but an arena plopped down over a major transit hub - like MSG - sees people go directly from Mass Transit to the arena and then disappear underground again. It isn't possible for an aena to attract new businesses because there is no new retail or commercial space being built.
If you recall the unveiling of Ratner's vision and the much ballyhooed model of the arena, it was to be a uniquely urban arena. The design built it into a three tower centerpiece of the entire development. So, now we aren't getting that development and we are not even getting the commercial component, meaning that the services for that arena and the infrastructure "improvements" will be made for one reason only - the private profit of Bruce Ratner and the Nets.
When people opposed the huge project, the consistent and frantic argument from FCRC, Marty Markowitz, the Bloomberg Administration and foolish, ignorant organizations like ACORN and BUILD was: "it will bring in jobs" "it will address the dire need for affordable housing" "it creates much needed park and public spaces" "he has agreed to a Community Services Agreement that serves OUR community".
Now, we seem to be getting only an arena, which will have to be vastly redesigned to sstand alone. All of their arguments about why the project was viable and should go forward are D-E-A-D. Not a person who supported the project because of these supposed benefits has spoken out.
Ratner has received funds from NYS for the project. He is receiving funding from the City for portions. What exactly is the public benefit at this point?
Rather than dumping on Dan Goldstein and DDDB, look back at one of their original arguments about the development: If chosen and giving the zoning variance, Ratner could build the arena only and claim he has no funding to complete the housing and public amenities portion of the project.
In the end, this situation proved that Ratner's numbers and projections were a sham. Affordable housing isn't affected by "the market" because it serves an existing segment in need that couldn't pay market rates to from the outset.
Personally, I think Ratner should be shown the door.
Although subtle at first, this project began going downhill waaay in the beginning, when Ratner lowered the ratio of commercial to residential space, a short-term reaction to the then soft office market vs the hot residential market.
The justification for committing public funds was job creation at an ideal place - over a major transit hub.
Not much housing is affordable if you don't have a decent job.
I have been saying for a while that this project was a boondoggle and it is coming to fruition. Ratner stop this foolishness, sell my boys to James Vanderbeek, owner of the New Jersey Devils who said he would buy the Nets if they went up for sale, and bring the Nets to the Rock in Newark where they we're orginally suppose to go and belong.
There's still hope even though I don't like the fact that only the arena will be built. But I would not be surprise if the whole project is scrapped altogether.This one reeks even if there is only a arena built by itself.:mad:
The implosion of the credit markets killed it (if it is indeed dead). Can't build without money. If the crash held out a few years, and the financing was secured, it would have been built.
Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp
the new lux housing would attract the ever increasing populus of young professionals with decent money but priced out of manhattan and who want to move to bk b/c their friends have moved to bk, as well as that young newlywed set that can't afford a tony b-stone but can afford a large lux condo while still having convenient access to the primo brooklyn private schools, tony bk nabe amenities and other family friendly advantages of bk to manhattan. there is virtually no supply of new full service lux housing in this immediate area - which is the primary choice for the 20s-30s set these days. i can think of 2 buildings - both condo, both of which will be full by the time the arena gets built.
Originally Posted by BrooklynRider
there will be new retail geared toward the arena crowds (mostly restaurant/bar) as well as everyday retail geared toward the new residential influx - grocery, etc - the everyday type stuff. the commercial component will grow over time - gradually in the way that metrotech has. this location is extremely convenient to long island based businesses that need some city presence as well as city biz that need back office type space in bk. and eventually once things gain momentum you'll have biz putting a major office there. i know that you'll likely poo poo this, and you won't be in the minority b/c people also poo pooed the initial jc and metrotrech initiatives ... i think that you also need to be realisitic about how new commercial hubs progress - they don't catch fire right away - this is planned for in the financing. how long did it take the old wtc to get filled out with real tenants (ie not city agencies)? year, many years.
the msg comparisons don't work in my opinion - msg is in a part of manhattan where people do not really live - they are there for work, for the game, whatever, and then they're out. AY is at the nexus of a multitude of teaming nabes - people will be around there b/c they live there.
it really is a shame that people seem to lump their disdain for ratner together with the merits of this project. forget about ratner's involvement and how this project would be financed and just think about the development itslef for a bit. i think that i would be great for brooklyn.
BL: You still seem to believe that both the housing and the retail are in the pipeline to be built, despite Ratner's own words that they are off the table.
All he gives us is an arena above a nexus of train tracks.
Sounds like an MSG-type situation to me.
i think that he said arena, then first resi building several months later, then they'll evaluate.
not really a premise to the points i'm trying to make though - ratner or not, i still think that this will all get built eventually. and frankly, by the time the arena gets built, the credit markets will probably be back to normalcy and financing will again be there for the buildings.
There's no justification for spending $950 Million on an arena for one tenant, not only that but it will struggle to lure acts from competiting venues at the Nassau Coliseum, MSG, Izod Center, Prudential Center etc..
It's too much, better for the NETs to move to Newark where they were originally heading until Ratner threw Newark's redevelopment plans a wrench. MSG or the new MSG if it gets developed at Moynihan serves NYC (Manhattan, Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens), the Prudential center serves New Jersey and Staten Island, and the Nassau Coliseum (which Wang is trying to redevelop) serves Long Island.
Two arenas in Northern New Jersey make no sense, which is why the State should shut the Izod center. And two arenas for NYC make no sense, especially given there's only one tenant for the huge public subsidy.
The Yankees and Mets can justify their own stadiums and not sharing because of the length of the Major League Baseball season, they play so many games it's difficult from a logistics perspective (rain outs, double headers, play offs etc) to share a venue.
The Giants and Jets are better off sharing a venue as they don't have their own facilities competiting against the other, there are not a lot of acts out there can warrant a venue the size of a football stadium. The NFL season is also very short, with only a handful of home games. Two NFL franchises sharing a venue is the only prudent.
The Devils and Nets as the Knicks and Rangers should share a venue, neither the Nets nor Devils alone warrant their own arenas. The Prudential Center is up and operating and the Brooklyn arena is years away, and requires a huge public commitment of money in a time of economic distress especially amongst the City's financial community which means less revenues into the City.
I do not see any way the City can justify a $950 Million dollar handout to an NBA franchise, that money would be much better spent on transportation. Such as adding the planned second station to the 7 line extension, or helping with the Fulton Street complex. Better yet if they want to do something to help Brooklyn put the Billion towards the Lower Manhattan rail link, which would put stations under Downtown Brooklyn and connect directly to JFK's Terminals, Long Island's Suburbs and Lower Manhattan's Financial District.
AMEN STT, my sentiments exactly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!