August 24, 2006
Hundreds Pack in for Atlantic Yards Public Meeting
The Atlantic Yards Project's public meeting last night was packed with Brooklyn residents wanting to have their say. WNBC reported that hundreds of people were waiting outside the New York City College of Technology, since the auditorium was full, and inside, "the crowd became unruly, cheering wildly for their cause until security was called in to remove a few of the audience members." That sounds about right - and they had lots of signs for and against the project! About 300 people had signed up to speak, and since 3 minutes is allowed for each person, that would mean a public meeting that would go on for more than half a day.
City Councilwoman Leticia James, who is against the huge project, said, "If this project were built, there would be far-reaching negative impacts on public health, air quality, infrastructure, waste management, noise abatement, the environment and much else," while a unemployed carpenter expressed how the project would give him work for five to six years. Atlantic Yards developer Bruce Ratner promised to employ only union labor, and while Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz is pro-Atlantic Yards, he did suggest it could (and should) be cut down.
New Jersey (and soon to be Brooklyn Nets, should all go according to Ratner's plan) Nets star Vince Carter said that he thought the plan would bring "unity to the community." The NY Times had some more of the residents' attitudes in their article, both the supporters and protesters. For instance:
Umar Jordan, 51, a black resident of Bedford-Stuyvesant, said he had come to “speak for the underprivileged, the brothers who just got out of prison,” and he drew loud cheers when he mocked opponents who had moved to Brooklyn only recently. Mr. Jordan suggested that they “just go back up to Pleasantville.”Were you there? Did you get in? What was the scene like?“People complaining about the size of a building, the height of this or that?” Mr. Jordan said. “Welcome to the hood; this is Brooklyn!”
Update: Our contributor, Jill Priluck, was on the scene, took pictures and sent in this report
At yesterday's rowdy Atlantic Yards forum, hundreds of Brooklynites - for and against - waited in a line that snaked around the block for a chance to speak while, inside the 800-seat auditorium (with empty seats at times!), celebs and elected officials were on display. Changing his tune, Marty Markowitz proposed that the project's 16 high-rises be scaled down to under 512 feet, the height of the Williamsburgh Savings Bank.And read Atlantic Yards Report's post about the event.Behind metal barriers and amid heavy police and media presence, the crowd just stood there (or bolted), with traffic in and out of the building at a virtual standstill. Around the corner, ACORN-ers chanted loudly for the project and a Municipal Art Society representative quietly handed out press releases denouncing the plan.
Richard Goldstein and others from the Carlton Avenue Association of Prospect Heights stood alongside the Flatbush Youth Association's basketball team [Picture 782]. "You don't want the Nets to come to Brooklyn?" asked Allen Davis, a James Madison High School ninth grader. "We want the Nets. In Coney Island. In the Flatlands," said one CAA representative, who later sparred with a pro-Yards carpenter's union member when he cut the line.
The Empire State Development Corporation estimated some 250 speakers, a number that didn't include the throngs outside and those who left. The meeting was scheduled to end at 8:30 pm, but, according to the ESDC, would last until the building closed at around 11:30 pm.
A community forum is being held September 12th.
This entry has a slideshow. To view the slideshow your browser must have the Flash Player. (If you are using a newsreader that doesn't support Flash click here to launch the slideshow.)
Photograph at top from visual.resistance on Flickr
|
I have to say that hand will give people nightmares.
marty markowitz is such a joke. he's for the project, and has been since its inception, and is now trying to play both sides of the issue.
awwww. but he's so loveable and fat that it doesn't matter, right?
That hand will give people nightmares? Puh-leeze. Maybe for a 12 year old girl.
The New York Times article today was well-balanced. You nimbys should read it, instead of getting all your information from DDDB.
Thanks for deleting my pro-development comments. Welcome to nimbyland.
Umar is my hero. In regards to people who are afraid of tall buildings...."go back to Pleasantville". Priceless.
Umar doesn't understand Brooklyn. Period!
If he wants LOADS of rich white folk from the suburbs of Jersey, Connecticut, etc...then bring on the project!
Umar will see his enire life taken away from hime, year by year. And Broklyn will be gone forever.
Jason - that is already happening. Umar will get a chance to stay with over 2000 affordable units going in here. There will be middle and high income units as well - that's how neighborhoods work best.
For you to try to keep Brooklyn to yourself while it slowly gentrifies and kicks people like Umar out, it shameful.
Exactly how does an ad hominem attack on either Markowitz or Umar advance your position?
Umar will get kicked out when you make more and more housing for the Upper Class. How long do you think it will take before people start buying up real estate in the surrounding neighborhoods becuase now they can live they bourgiose lifestyles in Brooklyn.
You can argue that is already ahppening, then why make it easier and guaranteed to happen 10 times faster. Hey why don't you just move out now so a nice lawyer with three kids can get an early jump on rennovating your brownstone?
If YOU care about Umar, and the other working people of Brooklyn, then you find locally ownwed business to support - Not corporate development who's onwer's have no allegience to Brooklyn, only to money.
Do you think a bunch of new Starbucks and a Wal-mart is going to make Brooklyn great for everyone? So kids all over brooklyn can work for minimum wage whil some corporate jerk in Seatlle gets rich off their labor? You ARE ANTI WORKING MAN - you want a buch of wage slaves and call that development?
Umar attacked the people who are opposed to this project. He attacks people that are essentially on his side, but he is the aggressive one.
If people want to be overrun by giant buildings, traffic jams, and if they're dumb enough to believe that when all is said and done, that there will actually be 2,000 units of affordable housing, I say let 'em have it. Another great place is being sucked dry, on all sides, by "market forces," and anyone with a low to middle income is getting pushed out. Is it really worth it? We can't fight it - we have already lost because the process of this project is completely and utterly corrupt. Bye, bye Brooklyn.
The hyperbole here by you nimbys is sickening. 2,250 affordable units of housing. What does your vision provide? Keeping the underused railyard underused. You seek to keep your views undisturbed with unconvincing nimby arugments and rhetoric.
Meanwhile New York is 49th out of 50th in creation of housing thanks to numbnuts like you.
Jason: I would pay money to see Umar kick your ass back to pleasantville.
I was born in Brooklyn - And since when do threats make a point? You have nothing to argue, so therfor you will make your case by being a bully. Is this how development is started? Well, I hope you enjoy the results.
Also, remember that earlier on in this process, a second developer offered millions more for the site than Ratner, and proposed a plan that was ALL housing with open green areas, and I think some small retail spaces. His proposal was rejected in favor of Ratners. I'm sure that the opposition to that would have been minimal to non-existent. No one wants to really just leave the Yards as is. Who wouldn't want more affordable and low income housing? But realise that this whole thing stinks.
12 = funny stuff, but not necessary. Jason you're just wrong buddy.
This development will be good for the community and someday we will have more affordable housing, an arena on a transit hub and a good design. The chance to do this is now.
So: the only way Brooklyn can get 2000 units of of below-market rented apartments (btw: who gets the rent?), and generate 1500 construction jobs, is by destroying the current quality of life 2-3 historic districts (and the attendant property values of the owners), overrunning the schools and aging utility systems, and jamming 68 intersections? Doing this with billions of taxpayer money, skirting any public involvement of what should go there?
That is, of course, BS, and a massive failure of planning on the city's part.
The so-called "NIMBYs" are not against developing the parcel - that's why one group's called "Develop Don't Destroy" - but doing so in a way that generates value for all without picking the taxpayers pocket in the bargain. The Extell bid - ugly as it was in the rush to beat the deadline - did that, was more cost effective, and could have been improved more easily than the godawful sprawling architectural mess that Gehry is proposing.
So: your idiot "NIMBY" attack ignores facts and the EDC's own study.
born/raised in the 'hood, and no thanks.
As if the name of a group can't hide their intentions. When I was a kid, the anti-property tax contingent in my home town called themselves "the Friends of Ridgefield". Their plan was to balance the budget by slashing the school budget. Friends indeed.
Develop Don't Destroy is hyberbole from the start. "Destroy"? Please. And what development is ok? Whatever they decide? That doesn't sound like much of a free society to me.
Face facts. New York's population is growing. This isn't 1975. People aren't fleeing. They are moving back to the city. Sure there are too many "luxury" projects but to believe that you can keep a neighborhood from changing is naive. And the irony here is that the same activists are probably left of spectrum individuals that are in favor of immigration.
I think sewster makes a really good point (which I think Jason was trying to allude to as well) - I don't think an old railyard is of use to anyone, but the Ratner plan is out of all proportion with the neighborhood's needs and ability to sustain the inevitable increaese in population, traffic, human services needs, infastructure needs, etc.
It is insane to think that adding this development will cause the sky to fall. Traffic? Its on a transit hub - take a train. Tall buildings? You live in New York City - not South Orange.
17 is right. Look at the big picture beyond the microcosm of your brownstone. This is not the cul-de-sac where you have a right to everything you see around you.
It seems a totally reasonable development for an urban center/transportation hub. build it!
Do you think rich lawyers from Jersey are going to ride the subway? Or any of the other 4,500 new residents who will be able to afford the apartments? When they arrive, they bring not only their money - but the way of life too!
Get ready for a ridiculous influx of cars/SUVs/family vans...That's the inevitable reality - not a criticism af any person.
Your kids will breath the fumes of rich people's vehicles. Thats your future if you ask corporations to develop your neighborhoods.
Be a MAN! And come up with your own, community driven plans and implement them if you want improvement in Brooklyn.
The supporters of Ratner pick on good intentioned residents of small brownstone neighborhoods. Is it these 'Pleasantville' types who have kept the working man down in this country?
Don't sell your soul to corporations - you will nver be able to get it back.
By the way, anybody concerned about energy shortages? Are 625 foot tall building a good idea in a world of energy shortages?
By traffic I mean mass transit as well, I should have stated that above. The trains at that transit hub are all massivly overused already, and the fact is that the MTA has not kept pace with development in brooklyn, where the population has increased drastically and will continue in all likelihood to do so in the future. Where is the plan for the concordant MTA developmetn along with the development of the area? If they expect to keep vehicular traffic to a minimum this needs to be addressed. Also the vehicular traffic at that intersection is a nightmare already
Yesterday was just a sad and stupid Jerry Stringer episode, and Ho-mey continues it right here.
Those Ratner "supporters" were bussed in, given food to be there, and in the case of the carpenter's union, PAID to be there, including overtime! Those "supporters" all said the same thing, they need help, which is true. But they didn't want to hear that they're being lied to, that those 2500 affordable apartments only have 250 apartments set aside for low income, and available only by lottery: the rest go to folks making up to $115,000 per year!
And Darnell Canada standing up there at 300 pounds saying black men were hungry, and were "forced to rob" to feed themselves and their families, and that this project "better go through" or those black men will be robbing and worse. Yeah, now THAT'S a persuasive argument, especially from a man who went to prison for this kind of construction extortion! Over Metrotech, no less! So now he's a paid Ratner thug.
And the comments from the supporters that basically came down to "Our lives are crap and yours should be, too." "Welcome to the Hood." Like this is revenge for what life did to them (and of course they're all victims who were forced to rob and worse.)
Pure Jerry Springer, orchestrated by Ratner. This is the kind of contempt this developer has for Brooklyn.
the meeting was LONG and unspeakably DEPRESSING. ratner bused in tons of supporters, including tons of union folks (given the day off w/pay?), packing the meeting, making sure everybody was YELLING about JOBS. JOBS!!!! regular folks, who had to work, showed up at the specified time to find the building was FULL, so they had to wait outside. consequently, most of the first 3 hours speakers were PRO PRO PRO yards. i was there an hour early at 3:30, waiting in line till 5:30 to get in, then waited till 9:30 to NOT hear my name called to speak. at 10:00 i packed it in. it seems clear that the esdc wasn't really interested in hearing my opinion.
ratner's $ to community (via the community benefits agreement) means a lot and has totally coopted many locals. there were lots of ridiculous fiery speeches about who is qualified to speak for brooklyn (been to the marcy projects? no, you're not from brooklyn!). most comments about traffic, congestion, asthma rates, environmental impact, were shouted down by members of the church (on the ratner payroll) or union guys in orange t-shirts (soon to be on the payroll). oh yea, the union truck outside the hall distributing sandwichs was a nice touch...
don't get me wrong: i am not saying that the union members don't have a right to speak. they do. certainly. and they have a right to demand jobs, just like everybody else. what's grim, is that nobody was paying the opposition to be there. nobody was buying the oppostion free lunches. nobody was giving the oppostion free t-shirts.
over all, it was perhaps the most depressing thing i've ever seen in nyc. a picture of the process so badly broken as to be beyond repair. the thing is going to get built. bet on it. (unless the courts stop it w/eminent domain litigation). pataki will use ratner's $ to run for president (ratner will be his patron as root was patron of LBJ in texas).
no matter which side you come down on, it was a SAD day for brooklyn...
I'm for anything Vince Carter likes. Vinsanity's gotta know about urban planning, traffic congestion, energy usage, the whole shebang. Can't y'all just trust an NBA player on this one?
Dear playa haters.
affordable housing for Umar? give me a break. Section 8 vouchers go to families making maximum 56k/year. 84% of Atlantic Yards would be for families making above 56k/year. If you make less than 21,270, guess what, there is not one single unit in Atlantic Yards for you.
Brooklyn AMI is 35k. 900 out of 6,680 units of Atlantic Yards would be below that 35k.
Oh, and NONE OF THE SUBSIDIZED (SO CALLED AFFORDABLE UNITS) are guaranteed. none.
Yeah, this project is for Umar and all his ACORN friends. thats who it will benefit.
4,610 luxury units. 900 affordable unit. that wouldn't even house everyone who showed up at the hearing.
Folks, facts are a tough thing.
no way buck williams would've supported this mess.
but really, not to add my 2 cents, because really who cares what someone says on a comments posting...but....since you asked...
The only thing that troubles me is the eminent domain thing. I mean that's a pretty scary government action of forcing people to move/sell for a private development that doesn't really benefit the public at large at all. I could see this being the thing that throws it for a loop if those people never sell. Which I hope they don't.
Its 2250-2500 affordable units. Don't misrepresent the project description for your benefit.
You nimbys are so disingenuous. You will say anything to derail this.
What's next? "Ratner is in the KKK!" "Gehry is a communist!"
Lawyers from Jersey aren't going to work in Brooklyn. Make some sense. And there are plenty of cars already. Seems like the locals aren't eating their own cooking.
And what does the height of the building have to do with energy? Would you rather have sprawl like Long Island and Jersey? Life is about making some compromises.
homey-he's not misrepresenting...
1100 of those 'affordable' units will go to people making 56,000 dollars a year and above...
only 900 will be for people earning less than 56K
Ratner considers 56K a year 'affordable', but how many folks living in Bed Sty make 56K a year? Ratner doesn't share the same definition of affordable - you better figure that out fast.
You can't think of a better way to make 900 new and affordable apartments?...besides these Ratner buildings won't be done for years (because of the sheer size of the project) - when do you want your 'cheap' 900 aparments , the year 2012?
Ratner is playing you all for SUCKERS
hey friends of Brooklyn-
Large building use lots of energy -
NY state uses Oil, Coal, Nuclear and Hydro to make energy....Remember the blackout? Why do you think that happened? The city is using too much energy, and it doesn't have the capcity for it. Will Downtown be able to ahndle the new demand? Will Ratner pay for new infrastructure?
And the Jersey comment makes perfect sense...where do you think the influx of new growth in this city is coming from? With rising rents and costs? Its coming from affluent peopl from the nearby States and their affluent Suburbs.
A very simple solution would have been to limit the entrants to the meeting by their address. All people wishing to enter would have had to show proof of their address, and if you are outside a given radius (say ten blocks), no entrance. And yes, I realize the shadow of the buildings will cover MUCH more than ten blocks. My point here is that Ratner packed the meeting with people who are not from the neighborhood, and those who live here (I live two blocks away) were not allowed in because we couldn't show up at noon (yeah, people in my neighborhood were too busy WORKING). I'm really sick of people from outside the neighborhood (and no, BedStuy is not Prospect Heights) coming in and telling me that they need jobs. Why should their lack of jobs be a justification to destroy my neighborhood, gridlock the already too crowded streets, pollute my air, tax the already overburdened infrastructure, etc...? And lets be honest here, the jobs are not going to go to people from Bed-Stuy. The jobs are going to be filled by guys who are already in the various trade/construction unions (i.e. a lot of guys from Queens and Long Island).
look, bottom line is some people feel they have the right to stop others from doing what they want with land they acquired. it's rediculous. you want to stop the development, i hope you can pony up the $$$ to buy out the property otherwise stop the whining. hopefully it will change the neighborhood for the better, if not move. happens everywhere, but only in NYC can boards stall projects for years...
19 - if you think that just because it is on a transit hub, that makes this whole thing alright, then you clearly have never taken the train, at any hour of the day, out of Atlantic-Pacific.
that station is constantly packed. Do the math - wtih all the new apartment, lets estimate that approximate 1,500 extra people will have to take the train during rush hour each day. That's more than teh station can fit. Fixing the traffic flow will break up the brilliant way the neighborhoods keep their integrity and feel by automatically forcing traffic into it.
And almost no one for this project has really thought about how many more schools will have to be built by adding in this extremely dense amount of residential space.
First of all, it's obvious that "homey" is a Ratner shill, so his/her comments should be read with that in mind. The whole "NIMBY" accusation is such a cute little refrain though.
Other than those who directly benefit financially from a project so obviously flawed (these union fucks who would sell their mothers' souls for a few hours of paid seat-warming time, politicians in line for kickbacks, etc.) it seems that there isn't much support for this project.
Those not in favor have proven that this isn't a case of 'we abhor development of any kind.' Rather, that there are better uses of that land, and that Ratner isn't to be trusted.
the infuriating part of this project is the abuse of eminent domain. ratner comes up with a big plan, and when he cannot acquire the all of land that is part of it, he gets the government to step in to get it for him...from private owners who no longer have a choice?
it's "urban renewal" all over again, like the building of the WTC, countless NYCHA projects, etc, etc. unacceptable.
as much as i dislike Bush, i agree with parts of his Executive Order of June 23 limiting federal use of eminent domain as "...for the purpose of benefiting the general public and not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060623-10.html
all things being equal: with a project this massive anyway, why does he even need to enforce eminent domain? Isn't he building tall enough on the land he already has to fulfill whatever minimum he desires?!
How many affordable housing units exist there today?
NONE! It's a freaking wasteland.
Go UMAR!! Go Homey!!
If they allocate (1), that's right (1) unit of affordable housing they're doing more than they should be made to. This is America, a free market capitalist society - if you want government subsidized everything - move to France.
All you holier than thou wannabee-yuppie, hipster trash make me sick. How many sides of your mouth can you talk out of?
The only thing worse than NIMBY, is selective NIMBY.
Yeah, I'm sure you'd be saying the same thing if some Johnny-come-lately erected a 50-story building 2 feet across whatever window you presently look out of.
Asshole - get a clue.
Jason, Single family homes use far more energy than apartments.
But on the Jersey thing, I don't see what your point is. People from the suburbs can't simultaneously be wrecking Brooklyn - unless you're talking about people that own multiple homes. I suppose that happens but the point is that many people are opting for urban dwelling these days.
um...this project is heavily government subsidized, in the tune of half a billion in tax-exempt bonds and estimated 2 billion in tax breaks, exemptions, and subsidies. Actually, your tax dollars are Ratner's current #1 source of tenant income.
Also, a free-market does not apply - Ratner's bid for the property was below a competing bids, but the MTA - who holds the public land - sold to Ratner.
so again, all you have is NIMBY name calling, and no factual basis for discussion
Friends of Brooklyn,
who do you think lives in Battery Park City, for example? Life long New Yorkers? People from the Outer Borough just looking for a nice place to live?
No. They are the ultra affluent (the only people who can afford these newly developed complexes).
These complexes offer the decadence and luxury of an upscale suburban lifestyle (parking garages, beautiful landscaping and all white rich people). If you offer this type of living to the affluent who do not live in the city, they will come back. Its not second homes, its white flight in reverse now that the city is "back in order".
This is a huge problem with the Ratner plan, because its adding a whole new group of people that have nothing to do with Brooklyn, its culture or lifestyle - Its creating a new market with a new culture that is designed only for an entirely new group of people.
and to add insult to injury they are acting like this project is for the people of Brooklyn...its ridiuclous.
Kudos on the single family energy comment- that is very true.
But buildings the size are Ratners are too big and will requires obscene amounts of energy to build, and to maintain. Its like driving a car: it is fuel efficient to drive from 45-55 miles per hour - but when you start driving even faster than 55 the efficiency goes down very very quickly.
Would you want to live on the 50th floor the next time there is a blackout?
Jason,
Who do you think lives in Park Slope when a townhouse costs over $2 million and one bedroom rents average at least $2000? Jonathan Lethem neighborhood types who have done good? There are still some characters from the area's grittier past, but they are selling out or dying off fast. Do you think people are going to start rushing over from Tribeca's $4000+ one-bedrooms to fill up Ratner's "oh-so-horrible-market-rate-apartments"? No, they are most likely going to be coming out of their Park Slope apartments with their sloping floors and substandard plumming or will be the type looking to move into the area anyway. If you want "authentic Brooklyn character" move out to Bay Ridge with me, beyond a comfortable commuting distance for Wall Street bankers and lawyers born in fly-over land, where we can get our asses beat by some authentic Brooklyn characters.
Obscene amounts of energy? Buddy, there is a reason why the per-capita energy use of New Yorkers is so much lower than everywhere else, and it is not because we are living in quaint brownstones built in the horse-and-carriage days.
Jason #31. Recent blackouts, whether it was in Queens this summer or the northeast in 2003 had nothing to do with using too much energy. They had everything to do with a poorly maintained electrical distribution grid. Plus, the 2003 blackout started in Ohio, New York (and everyone else down the line) were victims of that blackout but had nothing to do with its cause. I'm not a fan of AY but if you're going to make an argument against the project at don't use made-up "facts".
dont be gullible,
a downed tree branch did not cause the 2004 blackout
both 2004 and 2006 blackouts were at peak demand with record electricity use - this exacerbates any infrastructure problems that may exist
why is everyone so confident that our nyc energy supply is ok?
be worried people.
"Would you want to live on the 50th floor the next time there is a blackout?"
Any half way decent complex as a generator!
Jason, what is this "Brooklyn culture" of which you speak? I was at Moe's in Fort Greene the other night and someone was singing country music during karaoake. I'm still trying to figure out how that meshes with the Fort Greene that I used to know.
Yes, the Ratner approach is flawed from a "democratic" perspective but whomever suggested that capitalism must equal democracy? I can't be mad at the man for understanding how the game works and using the rules to his advantage. I'd love to learn from him.
I am not looking forward to the congestion or loss of light in my neck of the woods. At the same time, it won't be so bad to have a large-scale change in the neighborhood either. I'm thinking that this will spark a greater amount of mid- to hi-rise development...that would actually make Brooklyn a destination for more people.
I'm not foolish enough to buy into the worries about affordable housing, given the current rental and purchase dynamics in these coveted parts of Brooklyn. No, many of the people who have moved here during the past 5-7 years have ensured that everyday working families won't be able to live anywhere close.
Cripes, I know a single mother who happens to make good money and is looking into moving to Bay Ridge from Park Slope because she can't justify the rent and would like to own a home for her and her teen-aged son. Unlike many others in her tax bracket, she doesn't have the benefit of family money or a husband equally compensated. So, excuse me if I find the DDDB arguments about affordable housing just a little bit specious.
Is anyone aware that the "affordable housing" they are referring to does not have to be in Brooklyn?? In fact Ratner has not even said where he is planning on putting it.