Reply With QuoteThe next line is fire burn and cauldron bubble.Originally Posted by lofter1
HEY ... we're talkin' about a BUBBLE here !!
HEY ... we're talkin' about a BUBBLE here !!
The next line is fire burn and cauldron bubble.HEY ... we're talkin' about a BUBBLE here !!
The Times writes another empty story, pretending to expose but winking in approval ...
To Build Arena, Developer First Builds Bridges
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE
October 14, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/14/nyregion/14yards.html
In the two years since he announced his ambitious Atlantic Yards development in downtown Brooklyn, Bruce Ratner has lined up an impressive roster of supporters, including Gov. George E. Pataki, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, the Rev. Al Sharpton, and even the rap artist Jay-Z.
But it is Mr. Ratner's support from community figures - including a prominent Brooklyn minister, the head of an advocacy group that has battled him in the past, and an organization run by members of the local community board - that in many ways has fueled the project's slow but steady march forward.
Mr. Ratner has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on publicity for Atlantic Yards, the sprawling Frank Gehry-designed office, retail and residential development with an arena for the Nets as its centerpiece. Top executives of Forest City Ratner, Mr. Ratner's company, held dozens of meetings with residents.
The project's supporters - as well as Mr. Ratner's associates - see these tactics as smart business. But opponents see the outreach as something more sinister: a campaign to divide opponents, co-opt those local figures who were interested but skeptical, and create the appearance of broad support where they say little exists.
The developer's effort follows the death of the city's dream of a West Side football stadium amid overwhelming neighborhood hostility.
"He's manufacturing community support, and in terms of political support, he's just relying on old relations," said Councilwoman Letitia James, one of several local politicians who oppose the project, and whose district includes its footprint. "They are Goliath, and we are David."
Bruce Bender, Mr. Ratner's executive vice president, put it another way: "What Bruce's philosophy is is reaching out and getting in and reaching out to the community before the community gets into you, so to speak." Forest City Ratner is also the development partner for the new Midtown headquarters of The New York Times Company.
But from whatever viewpoint, the project's seemingly inexorable movement suggests that Mr. Ratner is creating a new and finely detailed modern blueprint for how to nourish - and then harvest - public and community backing for a hugely ambitious development that is expected to provide more than nine million square feet of apartments, offices, stores and hotel rooms, as well as the arena, in the middle of a populous, cantankerous and often sharply divided city. Mr. Ratner scored a coup of sorts when he received the support of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or Acorn, the advocacy group that has fought previous Forest City projects, which this time struck a deal to include a significant amount of moderate- and low-cost housing in the project. He has also found an ally in the Rev. Herbert Daughtry, pastor of the House of the Lord Churches on Atlantic Avenue, who initially fought the plan.
Both were among eight groups that signed a community-benefits agreement with Forest City Ratner in June under which the builder will provide job training, housing and business opportunities to local residents.
But it is Mr. Ratner's links to a different group, Brooklyn United for Innovative Local Development, or Build, that has drawn the most attention from critics, who say it didn't incorporate until after the plans were announced. The company has denied that it provided financial support to launch the group, but a spokesman said that as part of the community-benefits agreement, the company recently gave Build a $100,000 grant and covers its overhead costs.
"There's no doubt that the development community all over the country is very closely watching what happens in Brooklyn. The movement to build coalitions around development is going national," said John Goldstein, national program director for the Oakland, Calif.-based Partnership for Working Families, which helped negotiate a landmark community-benefits agreement around the Staples Center sports complex in Los Angeles.
Mr. Ratner's street-level and high-level public relations campaign began in the fall of 2003, when his company retained Dan Klores Communications, one of the city's top public relations firms. Their team, headed by Joe DePlasco, a veteran of the city's Democratic establishment, began lining up politicians and other supporters before the December news conference unveiling the initial design.
Since then, the firm has run what amounted to an ambitious traveling road show, organizing presentations for community boards, business groups, block associations, and others, according to a schedule Mr. DePlasco offered. It also worked with the developer's allies to turn out local supporters at press conferences and at several contentious public hearings, and connected Build and other groups with media outlets that were in search of pro-arena voices.
"To the extent that there was a strategy, it wasn't 'Oh, let's go out there and pick off community groups.' It was, 'Let's go out there and talk to people and find out what the major issues are,' " Mr. DePlasco said.
Forest City Ratner also contracted with Knickerbocker SKD, a media consultant, to produce two promotional mailings, each going to more than 300,000 households in Brooklyn. They oversaw publication of a newspaper-style brochure, dubbed The Brooklyn Standard. More recently, Forest City retained the Terrie Williams Agency, a prominent black-owned public relations firm, to represent those groups that signed the community-benefits agreement.
Then there is Build.
The group had its roots in an effort by Roger Green, a longtime Brooklyn assemblyman, and local labor organizers to tackle unemployment among residents in the area's public housing developments. It has since become the project's most enthusiastic local supporter; its president, James Caldwell, has said that Mr. Ratner was "truly sent by God."
Some of the project's opponents, however, charge that Build is an enthusiastic supporter of Mr. Ratner because he pays it to be.
There is little doubt that the group, and Mr. Green, figured early in Mr. Ratner's efforts. The two met in Mr. Green's district office in October 2003 to discuss the project, and later dined at Junior's, on Flatbush Avenue, to discuss job-training programs and minority business participation. Later, Mr. Green would help shape the community-benefits agreement that Forest City Ratner would sign with pro-development groups.
Mr. Green's support gave the project local roots; the three other elected officials whose districts include parts of the project - Representative Major Owens, State Senator Velmanette Montgomery, and Councilwoman James - adamantly opposed it.
Mr. Green also helped connect Mr. Ratner with others who became allies. Soon after Mr. Ratner purchased the Nets in January 2004, the developer hired Randall Touré, one of Mr. Green's top staff members, to run the firm's community outreach efforts.
Around the same time, Build held a meeting in the firm's offices in MetroTech Center to discuss business opportunities for minority contractors and job-seekers, facilitated by two of Build's co-founders, Darnell Canada and Eric Blackwell, and attended by Mr. Touré among others.
Critics have pointed out that Build and Mr. Daughtry, in particular, decided to support the project even as they were in the middle of negotiating the community-benefits agreement. "A lot of us feel that Roger's relationship with the developer was too close, and that he excluded a lot of people," said the Rev. Mark Taylor, a member of the Downtown Brooklyn Leadership Coalition. "That raises questions about whose interests those negotiations were in."
Mr. Daughtry founded the Downtown Brooklyn Leadership Coalition in 2004 but left soon after, in a dispute with other members over whether it would support the project. He later started a new clergy group, the Downtown Brooklyn Neighborhood Alliance, which supports Mr. Ratner. "I thought we needed to move on this thing," Mr. Daughtry said. "It became rather heated, and I decided at that point that I would resign."
According to Internal Revenue Service documents first reported by The Daily News, Build was not formally incorporated until Feb. 4, 2004, just a few days before the group held a press conference to announce that it was supporting the project. The same I.R.S. form also estimated that the group would receive $5 million over two years from Forest City Ratner as part of the community-benefits agreement then being negotiated. Build officials later said that that amount was never promised by or discussed with the developer.
Soon after the group decided to support Mr. Ratner, Mr. Canada, its original president, resigned, citing in a news release "the need to distance myself from those in the organization who see this organization as financial self gain" rather than "for the needs of the Brooklyn community."" That has led some of Mr. Ratner's critics to question whether the group was too close to the developer to fairly represent the community.
"Build and the other signatories of the so-called community-benefits agreement are Bruce Ratner's partners. They are contractually obliged to speak on behalf of his project," said Daniel Goldstein, a spokesman for the anti-arena group Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn. Mr. Caldwell, the group's current president, and Marie Louis, its treasurer, said late last month that Build was not yet receiving money from Forest City and that neither of them was yet drawing a salary.
But on Tuesday, Mr. DePlasco and a new spokeswoman for Build, Cheryl Duncan, revised that account.
In August, Mr. DePlasco said, two months after the agreement was signed, Forest City disbursed $100,000 to the group. The company also provided space for and is paying the overhead of a new Build office near the Atlantic Yards site, and along with other supporters donated furniture and computer equipment to the group. On Sept. 5, Ms. Duncan said, Build began paying several staff members, including Mr. Caldwell and Ms. Louis, who she said are currently being paid at a rate equal to half the salaries listed on the group's original I.R.S. form. Before the signing of the community-benefits agreement, the staff had been working as volunteers, she said.
Mr. DePlasco emphasized that the money given to Build was intended to fulfill the company's obligations under the community-benefits agreement.
"No money was given to Build prior to the community-benefits agreement. What they're supposed to do is begin outreach and job training so that people are ready to apply for these jobs when they become available. If you are going to commit to programs that otherwise don't exist, you have to find the funding for those programs - or at least a big chunk of that funding," he said. "Forest City Ratner Company believes firmly that supporting nonprofits and community groups, and working with them to identify and address needs, is at the foundation of what they do. It's that simple."
Last edited by lofter1; October 14th, 2005 at 12:30 AM.
Yeah, I couldn't even read through it.
Blah, blah, blah.... Oh, did WE say that before this plan got approval? What we really MEANT was....
Watch for more "revisions"
Revisions to date:
(1) No Public Access to Rooftoop Garden after all presentations declared it would be a wonderful public amenity
(2) Forest City admits it created and funds (i.e pays the salaries of the leaders of) BUILD - after claiming it was one of many community group supporting his project.
So, in effect, they are being paid for signing a community benefits agreement. They were not a real existing "community group" beforehand, but became one after signing one for people they didn't represent.
The best way to gauge whether a project has majority support or opposition is to measure the indifference among the wider community.
The less the indifference, the greater the opposition, because people who generally support a project are not as passionate about it. There does not seem to be much peripheral interest in it . Not much from Nets fans either (well, except JCMAN320).
Contrast this to the Jets debate, where everyone had an opinion. Of course, that saga benefited from media-worthy antagonists:
Mayor Mike and the Deputy vs. the Dolan Boys.
It even sounds like WWF. Ratner vs. Leticia? Boring.
It's time for the community to do what CB1 did in confronting Ratner's downtown project - get what you can.
That rooftop plaza is the perfect target. It has all the wrong elements for Ratner - class, privilege, money. He would cave in a minute.
Or maybe Ratner is at least as smart as me, and has already figured this out. A bargaining chip to throw in the pot?
David?
From the article, a quote from James:
"He's manufacturing community support, and in terms of political support, he's just relying on old relations," said Councilwoman Letitia James, one of several local politicians who oppose the project, and whose district includes its footprint. "They are Goliath, and we are David."
I'm sorry, but in NYC, NIMBY and community groups are the goliath's and developers are the davids -- arrayed against and army of every joe, dick, and harry out to stop the project or stall it either for personla gain or ignorance or fear...
Ratner is making some serious miscalculations, and I hope though that community outcry has the positive effect of reminding him to be careful.
That being said, he may very well be creating points of contention, as the last post said, as "throw away" negotiations: the community gets the rooftop park it was always promised, and in the end feels like it really did a job on Ratner, without really damaging what he wants...
Developers do it all the time: last building I worked on as a renderer, the project was designed, on the order to the developer, was taller than it should've been, bigger, and it blocked the neighboring buildings windows. There was a huge to-do, the neighbor got the developer to put in a small courtyard (always the developers intention, because he himself needed to give his lower appartments windows of their own), and then the neighbors threw their support behind the project -- a project they never would have supported at all if they could help it.
^ That's a funny story, elfgam.
Human folly: probably endless.
“Some Guy’s Idea”: MTA Chairman Peter Kalikow Creates Existential Crisis—Resolves with Cronyism
by Brian J. Carreira
The humiliation begins at eight o’clock. It is catered. Bagels, coffee and juice, passed out along with “Jobs, Housing, and Hoops” pins. The union workers have already lined up, sporting the buttons and drinking coffee outside the MTA’s Madison Avenue headquarters, for the September 14 meeting to decide the fate of the Vanderbilt Rail Yards.
“I don’t even know what I’m supposed to do,” remarked Jared Armendariz of Queens, a member of the Carpenter’s Local 20-90, as he sipped his hot beverage. He didn’t know much about Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards proposal—the one he was out to support. “Just what I’ve heard on the news,” he said, then added, with regard to the hearing he stood waiting to attend, “I take it today there’s a meeting or something.”
The union workers came out an hour and a half before the 9:30 a.m. hearing where the MTA would decide to accept the Forest City Ratner Company (FCRC) offer to purchase the Vanderbilt Yards. They were there to fill space and presumably to squeeze out actual Brooklynites. “Once a year, as part of the Union, you have to do some sort of picket duty,” Armendariz explained. “You’ve seen those big inflatable rats on the street? Usually that’s what I’m out doing.” No inflatable rat was in attendance that day.
It was a light turnout compared to previous meetings and events related to the controversial proposal that would plop seventeen skyscrapers (and counting) along with a basketball arena atop an existing neighborhood. Perhaps this is because the outcome of the meeting had already been reported by the New York Times the previous week, and was otherwise widely considered preordained.
First it marked out a race-course, in a sort of circle, (‘the exact shape doesn’t matter,’ it said,) and then all the party were placed along the course, here and there. There was no ‘One, two, three, and away,’ but they began running when they liked, and left off when they liked, so that it was not easy to know when the race was over. However, when they had been running half an hour or so, and were quite dry again, the Dodo suddenly called out ‘The race is over!’ and they all crowded round it, panting, and asking, ‘But who has won?’
This question the Dodo could not answer without a great deal of thought, and it sat for a long time with one finger pressed upon its forehead (the position in which you usually see Shakespeare, in the pictures of him), while the rest waited in silence. At last the Dodo said, ‘everybody has won, and all must have prizes.’
The meeting came to order. Many strode forth to bear witness to the powers of their own speech. Knowing that a decision had already been reached attendees were freed of the usual restraints of topicality, accuracy, or advocacy.
Reverend Herbert Daughtry urged for the MTA’s approval of the Forest City bid for his “domestic tranquility,” as his wife would stand to gain an intergenerational center at the development as part of the Community Benefits Agreement. “Hopefully you’ll participate in this historic effort,” he implored with grandiosity, “and leave your footprint on the sands of time.”
City Councilman David Yassky, relatively quiet as the nearly two-year long debate over Atlantic Yards has raged in the district adjacent to his, contrasted Daughtry’s flourish with tepidness. Summoning excruciatingly mild language, Yassky requested that the MTA “wait until a project of an appropriate scale is approved by the state,” and then seek the best value for the yards at that time.
State Senator Carl Kruger, representing unaffected Brighton Beach, Midwood, Mill Island, and Bergen Beach residents, strongly lauded the Ratner proposal as part of the process by which “neighborhoods are being re-gentrified,” and that the Senator heralded as a “new era.” Excited that the project was “for all of us in Brooklyn that are proud of our heritage and our lineage,” he looks forward to the day that he can say, “the Vanderbilt Yards will no longer be the cesspool that they currently are.”
Shabnam Merchant, in a comment on the MTA’s lack of “courtesy to pretend that this is part of the democratic process,” ceded her remaining time at the podium to silence. Daniel Goldstein addressed Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, not in attendance, regarding her willful ignorance over the threat and potential use of eminent domain that have been essential to Forest City’s success. Norman Oder talked about his 173-page report on the New York Times’ coverage of the project.
And it would continue like this. Chairman Kalikow created the room with no walls. The marrow of relevancy sucked dry, the stage was set for an apocalypse of noise tempered only by individual time limits and a sign-in sheet.
“The voting public is particularly cynical about government and about politicians. Now I know why,” City Councilwoman Letitia James lashed out against the board. The councilwoman then proceeded to unfurl a litany of reasons she feels the project is bad for her district and bad for Brooklyn: “This is really for Manhattanites. This is for the rich.” Then to counter the mantra from Forest City and their supporters that Atlantic Yards will provide a great boost to the community—and the African-American community in particular—she added, “This is a project that will only benefit the investors. Ninety-eight percent of the investors on this project are not people of color.”
The offer from Forest City Ratner for the yards was $100 million cash. This is $50 million more than their initial cash offer, yielding the much desired headline that the developer had “doubled” their bid. Of course, as Ratner’s people are quick to assert when asked about a number which undercuts both the scuttled Extell offer of $150 million and the MTA appraised value of $214.5 million: their meat is in rail yard improvements, cash is just a portion of the deal. Forest City throws in a revamped rail facility and platform that the developer has posited are worth $345 million. Thus, by their estimate, FCRC actually far exceed the politically neutralized rival bid and the MTA value.
Forest City didn’t blanche as most of the press, including the New York Times, mischaracterized the new bid as “double,” when it was in fact only increased by 12.6%. A factor of two also has a nicer ring than the reality that FCRC’s package is mostly made up of fuzzily estimated improvements with a mere 22% in hard currency. But these are just numbers. Atlantic Yards has always been about perception.
As to the non-cash portion of their bid, Forest City VP Jim Stuckey implored, “That’s not funny money. That’s real cash.”
But why not just offer the whole thing in cash? The answer might lie in the February MOU. In section 8, paragraph (i), it is noted that the already promised state subsidy of $100 million “shall be used to fund costs of site preparation and public infrastructure improvements on and around the Arena Site.” The city’s $100 million can be used for the same.
Paragraph (ii) also notes that FCRC is responsible for all other costs, “Provided however, that the Public Parties will consider making additional contributions for extraordinary infrastructure costs relating to the mixed use development on the Project Site.” This is strikingly similar language to the “Platform and Other Extraordinary Infrastructure” that accounts for $163 million of the developer’s bid, according to a Ratner Fact Sheet released on September 14.
The money might be “real cash,” but a substantial portion will likely come from the taxpayer’s pocket to feed a taxpayer-funded agency, with Forest City simply giving it a good wash along the way.
Managing to arouse the slumbering journalists for a moment from the methodical plod, MTA Board member Michael Pally had a brief exchange with Chairman Kalikow. As cross as futility can manifest, Pally, the lone dissenting vote, suggested that the board shouldn’t consider the non-cash segment of the bid. He contended that per the MTA’s own 20-year needs assessment, “The Long Island Railroad and the MTA would not have made improvements to the Atlantic Yards. These funds are not being used to substitute for a project the Long Island Railroad wants to do, they are being used for a project the Long Island Railroad does not want to do.”
He also questioned the aspect of the deal that requires Forest City to put only 10% down of their cash offer pending approvals from the state. “Why is the approval of this project subject to entities over which the MTA has no control?” Pally asked, noting that the West Side Stadium process left the MTA without anything to show for the Hudson Yards due to a similar deal structure.
It was during these comments that Kalikow leapt into the abyss by asserting that the $214 million estimated value of the property, appraised by Daniel P. Lane and Associates and paid for by the MTA, “is some guy’s idea of what it is worth.”
It wouldn’t matter. The rich help themselves in Mike Bloomberg’s New York. The idea that logic and proportion might apply to the MTA’s decision, or any other along Ratner’s triumphal march towards his cement and glass crown, is evidently more absurd than the contortions the politicians and sycophants have made to justify their actions.
“Sometime in the summer of next year,” is when Jim Stuckey hopes to erase Prospect Heights in favor of Ratner’s Wonderland—“maybe earlier.” In their actions though, the politicians and the developer continually demonstrate that by their understanding the neighborhood is an empty slate, and always has been.
‘I never heard of ‘Uglification,’’ Alice ventured to say. ‘What is it?’
The Gryphon lifted up both its paws in surprise. ‘What! Never heard of uglifying!’ it exclaimed. ‘You know what to beautify is, I suppose?’
‘Yes,’ said Alice doubtfully: ‘it means—to—make—anything—prettier.’
‘Well, then,’ the Gryphon went on, ‘if you don’t know what to uglify is, you are a simpleton.’*
This about sums it up.
*Lewis Carroll, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. London 1865. Chapter III, A Caucus-Race and A Long Tale. Chapter IX, The Mock Turtle’s Story
Everybody's obsessed with process on this project. Is the process in New York ever really above-board on the big ones?
What I'd like to see is an update on the product.
Both the process and the product are being obscured.
Ratner has finally begun creating the jobs he promised. In Park Slope this weekend, there were newsies (all minorities - there he goes creating quality jobs) hawking a "new newspaper". It was the Weekly Standard, which was, in fact, an advertisement for the development in newspaper format. It did state on the cover in tiny lettering a "Forest City Ratner Publication." The most galling aspect of it was the "public notice" placed in their by Ratner. How does posting a public notice in a newspaper with no history, credibility or circulation count as "public notice."
Anyone outside Park Slope see these things?
I'm sure our non-resident neighbors will start the NIMBY chants, but this was a Ratner offensive. Fighting lies and propaganda it isn't NIMBY. It's American.
Another Ratner sham.
He ought to withdraw the grander project. Concentrat on the arena and three towers and let the city bid out the the rest of the land as parcels to competing developers.
This will be a disaster. Each time I walk by the STILL INCOMPLETE Atlantic Terminal with the "signature" glass atrium entryway MISSING, I am reminded of the hollowness of Ratner promises.
Another great post Brooklyn
I agree all those buildings is just too much gehry for one man to take
Hoping to see a post with a report from someone who was at the public meeting on Tuesday 10/17 ...
Here's what the Times has to say:
The People Speak (Shout, Actually) on Brooklyn Arena Project
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE
October 19, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/19/nyregion/19yards.html
Simmering tensions over a sweeping development project in Brooklyn erupted last night at a public hearing, as opponents and supporters took turns applauding, booing and interrupting one another. The meeting exposed deep divisions between residents who want jobs and housing and those who fear the traffic that the project might bring, as well as a host of other problems.
The crowd shouted down several speakers, including Marty Markowitz, the borough's president and the project's leading booster, who endured a withering chorus of catcalls while he described the project as "a wonderful addition to Brooklyn."
Eric McClure, a member of Park Slope Neighbors, a local group that opposes the project, insisted: "If and when ground is broken for this project, there will be no turning back, no second chances. The surrounding community will feel its effects for decades." He added, "Nothing less than the future of Brooklyn depends on a thorough, comprehensive and effective" environmental review.
The debate over the Atlantic Yards project - a 9-million-square-foot office, residential and commercial project designed by Frank Gehry with a basketball arena at its center - ran well beyond the three hours scheduled for it. The hearing, intended strictly to consider environmental concerns related to the project, instead became a referendum on the proposal's myriad flaws and virtues.
Both sides were well represented at the hearing, nearly filling an 880-seat auditorium at the New York City College of Technology in Downtown Brooklyn.
Most people spoke on behalf of local block associations, community boards and business groups. But opponents appeared to outnumber supporters in number, intensity and volume.
And those who spoke quickly revealed the fault lines that have divided the neighborhoods around the project, which has been proposed by the developer Forest City Ratner Companies.
Opponents, many of whom said they lived at or near the project site - near Downtown Brooklyn at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush Avenues - cited overburdened sewer lines, overcrowded schools and the project's sheer physical size as drawbacks. Supporters focused narrowly on the promise of employment and inexpensive housing.
"I'm here for one reason, and one reason only: jobs," said Reinaldo Torres of the Sheet Metal Workers International Association, one of several unions that sent members to express support for the project.
"This Forest City Ratner is the right way to go," Mr. Torres added, speaking over and through a deafening crescendo of catcalls and applause. "He's got a very good record. He builds union 100 percent of the time."
Mr. Torres, who is from Staten Island, said that his union had 900 members in Brooklyn and supported the project. Forest City Ratner is also a development partner for the new Midtown office tower being built for The New York Times.
The hearing was contentious from its start, despite an early admonition by Ted Kramer, a lawyer hired to moderate, that "anyone who interrupts will be asked to leave." He was applauded by some audience members, then interrupted and eventually ignored. Few of the speakers succeeded in observing the three-minute time limit, and even fewer managed to finish their statements without disturbance. At times, the hecklers heckled one another, trading barbs and the occasional threatening gesture across rows of auditorium seats.
The crowd was impatient with those who seemed to have not yet made up their minds. Councilman David Yassky of Brooklyn, who has expressed cautious support for the project, said, "If done right, the benefits will outweigh the costs." But he added that it was "out of scale" and would "change irretrievably and irreversibly the character of the surrounding neighborhoods."
That prompted one audience member to yell out, "Are you for the project or against it?"
Mr. Yassky repeated that he was for the project if it was "done right."
But street congestion, asthma and gentrification were only a few of the concerns raised. One speaker, Alan M. Rosner, said that the planned arena's soaring glass walls would endanger pedestrians on the street in the event of a terrorist attack. Another, Lumi M. Rolley, who has a blog devoted to the project, raised the issue of "reflected light," which she described as an environmental hazard rooted in Mr. Gehry's use of titanium panels in his buildings.
She said that temperatures on the sidewalk near the Gehry-designed concert hall in Los Angeles had exceeded 136 degrees. "Passing motorists were blinded by the glare, while pedestrians had to cross the street to avoid the intense heat," she said.
By 8 p.m., with nearly 150 people signed up to speak, the hearing was extended for three hours.
The environmental hearing, the first of two, was among the first steps in a state process that is likely to last through the end of the year. It was sponsored by the Empire State Development Corporation, the agency charged with guiding the Atlantic Yards project along the long path toward final approval by the state.
The project has been bitterly opposed by some local politicians and residents since Bruce Ratner, the president of Forest City Ratner, proposed it in December 2003. But they have had few formal opportunities to register disapproval because most of the project is not subject to the city's stringent land review process, which requires multiple public hearings, input from community boards and a vote by the City Council.
The agency's staff is to consider all remarks from last night's hearing, and written statements submitted through the Oct. 28 deadline for public comment on the project, before releasing a draft environmental impact statement this year or early next year. The second public hearing will follow that release.
"I think it's a wonderful discussion that we're having," said James P. Stuckey, Forest City Ratner's executive vice president for development, who spoke to reporters outside the hearing. "Given that there's been so much discussion about the public process, and so much discussion about whether or not people are going to be heard - here we are tonight, and hundreds of people have come out to be heard."
Mr. Stuckey was asked to specify which of eight groups that signed a community benefits agreement with Forest City Ratner last June were currently receiving funds from the developer. (Under the agreements, the builder will provide job training, housing and job opportunities to local residents.) Last week, the company announced that one such group, Brooklyn United for Innovative Local Development, had received more than $100,000 during the summer to promote the Atlantic Yards project and to create job training programs.
He said that Forest City Ratner had also provided $50,000 in seed money to the Downtown Brooklyn Neighborhood Alliance, a group founded by the Rev. Herbert Daughtry, a prominent supporter of the Atlantic Yards project. The money was intended to help pay for programs for children and the elderly.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks