NEW YORK | Atlantic Yards Development News [Archive]

TalB

April 27th, 2007, 12:34 AM

These people are a small number. They would like to think they aren't and would probably have lots of fun being snooty pr*cks with the moust incorrect data they can find to debate nonsense with you. It's the same repetitive dribble.
The majority of these folks are living in Brooklyn 1946. They ARE and ALWAYS be protesting for themselves. Forget what this could mean to Brooklyn. Oh well it'll go up ontop of all those picket signs and I can't wait to be the first one to step infront of someone and tell them to hit the road. Lots of people around the area and park slope I know involved with someone or something connected to this. Although none of them care that much and would welcome it. Don't get too worked up over the protesters they won't leave a dent on this in the short run.
Actually, Develope Don't Destroy Brooklyn represents a number of groups living in Brooklyn as well as the rest of NYC, and click here (http://dddb.net/php/opposition.php) if you don't believe me. They are not fighting the project b/c they will be living with it, they are fighting the project b/c it will be on their property hence they are NOMBYs (Not On My Backyard) rather than NIMBYs. Also, their alternative to the Atlantic Yds is not to leave them undeveloped, they do support an alternative, and that is both the Extell and UNITY plans, which features real affordable housing, union jobs for the community, a better scale, builds only on the railyards, and has been prommised by a developer who will NOT use subsidized bonds unlike Forest City Ratner. If you are saying that they are rich, greedy snobs, then why are they paying rents that are below the market rates? Another reason they don't support it, is b/c this project will use emminent domain on those who refuse to sell their homes if they haven't already, and this can promise them even less than what Ratner is giving to them. As for the supporters, all they do is repeat the same jiborish Ratner and his drones have already given as well as use personal attacks on the oppositions such as calling them transplanted Manhattanites or from somewhere just for not being born and raised in Brooklyn like they were. Even though I don't live in Brooklyn or even the rest of NYC for that matter, I still oppose it for the fact that it will use my tax dollars to which Ratner will not even give a penny for this project. BTW, if they didn't really make a dent, Ratner would have been starting on this project two years ago rather than still facing court problems from them.

nygirl

April 27th, 2007, 12:49 AM

you'll have to forgive me on this but while you will have the slightly extreme on one side you will have the slighty extreme on the otherside.

Scruffy88

April 27th, 2007, 10:17 PM

something about a wall collapse while demolising a building has halted further demolition until further notice giving the naysayers a minor win. on NY1 news this morning. Don't have accompanying links to support

Don Omar

April 28th, 2007, 08:03 PM

^^

Project Halted in Brooklyn for Inquiry Into Accident

By ANDY NEWMAN
Published: April 28, 2007

One day after the partial collapse of a building being prepared for demolition to make way for the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, the state and the developer announced that work would be stopped pending the outcome of the city’s investigation into the accident.

Workers for the developer, Forest City Ratner, were removing asbestos from a former industrial bakery on Thursday morning when a 200-foot parapet on top of the building fell five stories onto Pacific Street. No one was hurt, but several cars were damaged, and a homeless shelter next door was evacuated for much of the day.

Opponents of the project had tried in vain to have the 97-year-old building at 800 Pacific Street, known as the Ward Bread Bakery complex, designated a city landmark. The bakery’s planned destruction had been cast as a symbol of the changes that the project — 8 million square feet of high-rise housing, office space and a basketball arena — would visit upon the neighborhood, which is near Downtown Brooklyn.

Yesterday, opponents of the project applauded the decision to halt work, which was announced in separate news releases by Forest City Ratner and the Empire State Development Corporation, the state agency that approved the project last year.

“We were very encouraged that the E.S.D.C. understands the gravity of what happened,” said Jim Vogel, spokesman for the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods, a coalition that is among the plaintiffs in a suit that seeks to overturn the agency’s approval of the project.

“We also are very encouraged that they took the appropriate actions in stopping the demolition until the problem causing this can be identified,” Mr. Vogel said.

The accident occurred six days after a State Supreme Court justice declined to issue a restraining order temporarily halting demolition of nine vacant buildings at the site. Opponents seeking the court order had argued that demolition should not be allowed before a hearing on the suit challenging state approval of the project, scheduled for Thursday .

It remained unclear if the asbestos work, being done on the roof with what Forest City Ratner called “hand-held chippers,” contributed to the parapet’s collapse. Fire officials said on Thursday that the building might have been weakened by the recent northeaster.

Mr. Vogel said that the development corporation had declared the building sound a year ago. “How can it go from being a sound building to being in imminent danger of collapsing on people within a year?” he asked.

In March, the Buildings Department declared the building fit for demolition, and Forest City officials said they planned to finish removing asbestos and obtain a final demolition permit within two months.

In a statement yesterday, the department said, “In the coming days, the Buildings Department will be meeting with the developer’s engineers to review demolition plans for the Atlantic Yards sites to ensure safe means and methods are employed.”

TalB

April 29th, 2007, 04:33 AM

If they happen to win the lawsuit on 5/3 at the NYS Supreme Court, then the project is officially dead!

arbeiter

April 29th, 2007, 10:13 AM

My perspective regarding the Atlantic Yards is this:

NYC is booming economically like it hasn't in a long time - Atlantic Yards obviously need to be redeveloped; environmentally and in terms of urban planning, a brownfield site in the middle of a major city is the ripest fruit to pick. However, some people on here seem to think we need to whore ourselves out to Ratner as if we're begging for any kind of commercial development. We're not; the scale and incentives used to develop this were more than what are necessary. That's issue number 1 - we're developing this as if we're Syracuse and will take anything we can get. Just because the yards need to be redeveloped don't mean we need to overdo it!

Issue #2 is that Ratner has a history of building large projects in Brooklyn, and all were made with promises that were never kept. MetroTech frankly sucks; it's a soulless office park in the middle of downtown Brooklyn with underutilized train stations (shocking but true), with inward facing buildings that go completely against the character of the neighborhood. The Target portion of Atlantic Station was originally supposed to be much better-looking and more in scale with the neighborhood; instead we got a bunch of big boxes plopped over a decayed commuter rail station. So Brooklynites have a reason to not believe in Ratner's 'truth'.

Issue #3 is that this project would be profitable at a scale slightly smaller, which is all most people were asking for. WHY does it have to be so big as to force people out of their homes, businesses to relocate, and puts 3-story brownstones up against 40-story condo towers? Brooklyn has a history of having development forced upon it completely out of the scale of the urban fabric.

Issue #4 is that this arena plus the new residences will put strain on an overcrowded transit node (Atlantic/Pacific). It's already a nightmare to drive around there, much less take the train, so where are the considerations for that?

Issue #5 is completely subjective: Frank Gehry is tired. By the time this thing is completed, he'll be known as overwrought and passe. We picked the most obvious, mainstream architect to build this. Don't people notice that Gehry has a kooky Picasso-like building going up in a dozen other cities?

That is all.

Hanshin-Tigress

April 29th, 2007, 07:57 PM

how tall will those buildings be?

seeya14

April 30th, 2007, 01:19 AM

http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger/3667/1536/1600/189324/AYSitePlanGPP.jpg

seeya14

April 30th, 2007, 01:20 AM

Miss Brooklyn, though shorter, would still block the clock
It was a concession, right? Among several relatively minor changes announced Wednesday, Forest City Ratner agreed to lower the announced 620-foot Miss Brooklyn tower a sliver below that of the iconic 512-foot Williamsburgh Savings Bank nearby.

Bluewarning

April 30th, 2007, 01:29 AM

I can see where some people are coming from. That arena looks pretty funky. I would have to see a daytime rendering of it.

By the way, when exactly are the Nets moving?

Taylorhoge

April 30th, 2007, 01:39 AM

Personally Metrotech helped Downtown Brooklyn have a skyline.It also helped with the nearby tech schools as well.

arbeiter

April 30th, 2007, 06:17 AM

Personally Metrotech helped Downtown Brooklyn have a skyline.It also helped with the nearby tech schools as well.

Personally? How did it personally help it? And isn't a sustainable office project with good connectivity with the neighborhood and streetfronts more important than a 'skyline'? Brooklyn already has hundreds of high-rises.

What nearby tech schools? Brooklyn Tech High School? How did it help? I am kind of baffled by your uninformed response.

patextreme

May 1st, 2007, 09:27 AM

i've seen this in Discovery chanel

Taylorhoge

May 1st, 2007, 02:12 PM

Well BK Tech high school isnt the only one around you still have Poly Tech and BK Design tech as well as a few others.I miss interpretated for what I said I was really tired and a little out of it when I stated Metrotech helped downtown BK

TalB

May 2nd, 2007, 02:19 AM

I find the statement on how Metrotech Center helped downtown Brooklyn to be rather misleading. First off, it's a private project, and they do not do anything to help local revenue except their own. Another thing, is that if MTC was really a plus for the neighborhood, then why did unemployment there happen to increase after it was built? The answer is that it was not built for the community. As a matter of fact, when JP Morgan Chase located there, rather than hiring people from the area, they just relocated jobs from Manhattan. People are not allowed to cut through this complex by car or on foot in the blocks it cuts off. Also, it has numerous garages that were off limits to people that were either just for the tennants or for loading docks. BTW, Ratner used the same method he is using for the Atlantic Yds by having blacks fight for this project and later on be cheated in the end by having nothing once he wins. Again, MTC was also built by subsidized bonds, and Ratner paid nothing for it.

Don Omar

May 2nd, 2007, 06:57 AM

http://bp0.blogger.com/_mJPzxRaCL64/RjVBMfWQfwI/AAAAAAAAADE/DdTNkahR53Q/s1600/CompletionDates4_lg(2).jpg

Don Omar

May 2nd, 2007, 07:13 AM

Dan Doctoroff Discovers Communities

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/20070426doctoroff.jpg
Doctoroff pursuing his Olympic dream in 2005.

by Alec Appelbaum
4/26/07
nymag.com (http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2007/04/dan_doctoroff_discovers_commun.html)

Dan Doctoroff has a big title — Deputy Mayor for Economic Development and Rebuilding — and even bigger ambitions. But as he hits the hustings to sell the mayor's environmentally friendly PlaNYC 2030 package he's finally started embracing small-ball politics. PlaNYC's proposal to build potentially huge housing complexes on decks over rail yards and highways, he said at a New School forum this morning, will proceed at a pace set by the affected community boards — not by Olympic committees or neighborhood-swallowing developers. "The lesson of Hudson Yards and Atlantic Yards is to get communities involved upfront," he told us after the event, though he wouldn't specify which areas he sees as ripe for this affordable-housing development. "We've learned, before we even go public with an idea, to reach out to the local community." Imagine that! (Oh, also, he confirmed the key non-word is pronounced "plan-why-see." Now you know.)

Taylorhoge

May 2nd, 2007, 04:49 PM

TalB

May 2nd, 2007, 10:28 PM

The same goes with his other two Brooklyn projects such as his malls. Again he used subsidized bonds to build them. The Altantic Ctr Mall couldn't even keep an anchor tennant. Originally it was Caldor's, then Macy's, and now Pathmark, plus there is no telling how long it will stay there. Residents in Ft Greene, Prospect Hts, and Crown Hts refer to that mall as the Ghetto Mall as it doesn't fit in with the area. I even remember walking through it, and the hallways are pretty narrow. Since business was not going very well and other businesses were moving out, Ratner just allowed for Pathmark to expand its space. As for the Atlantic Terminal, he ruined a beautiful terminal building by winning the air rights over it by placing offices over it that had the Bank of NY working there. Just like JP Morgan Chase, they to just relocated jobs from elsewhere rather than hiring people from the area. Even though the Atlantic Terminal Mall has more space, many of them are corperations like McDonalds, Starbucks, Target, Chuckie Cheeses, etc that are not only have their headquarters out of town, but also out of state. I will not be surprised if these will also be located at the base of Ratner's buildings at the Atlantic Yds Complex. The fact that malls are bridged to each other and has the Atlantic Ave subway hub, along with the LIRR, below it makes people even bypass the rest of the area just like how they will when the arena is built, plus the same is with MTC being by the Lawrence St station (M, R). In the end, Ratner's buildings in Brooklyn just take after how it works in the rest of Manhattan by isolating themselves from everything else.

TalB

May 14th, 2007, 05:43 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/boroughs/brooklyn/2007/05/11/2007-05-11_bizman_rips_ratner_over_nets_worth_in_la.html
Bizman rips Ratner over Nets worth in lawsuit

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BY JOSE MARTINEZ
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Friday, May 11th 2007, 4:00 AM

A former investor in the New Jersey Nets is suing Bruce Ratner for allegedly stiffing him out of a spot in the ownership of the Brooklyn-bound NBA team.

Eugene Greene alleges that at Ratner's request, he sank $6 million into the Nets in 2003 and also raised more than $30 million from other investors. In exchange, Greene charges, he was promised a "key role in the team's organization."

The Manhattan businessman has filed a $20 million lawsuit against Ratner, charging that senior executives with Ratner's organization told him he had been "f----d" out of the deal.

"We strongly disagree with the plaintiff's assertion," said Joe DePlasco, a spokesman for Forest City Ratner. "We will defend ourselves vigorously in court."

The lawsuit, which was filed in Manhattan Supreme Court, is the latest legal battle for Ratner. The developer, who bought the Nets in 2004, has been sued repeatedly over his bid to build the Atlantic Yards megaproject, which would include an arena for the team in Prospect Heights.

According to court papers, in November 2003, Greene was brought into the group Ratner was assembling to buy the team from former owner Lewis Katz, and charged with lining up more investors.

"We need money, money, money," Ratner said, according to court papers. "And you need to get it for us."

"You will be the glue that helps run this team," Ratner allegedly told Greene.

But Greene wasn't picked for the team's Board of Governors once Ratner's bid to buy the Nets was approved in 2004. According to the suit, he then realized he "was not going to be compensated" for raising more than $30 million from investors.

"Through May of 2006, Greene communicated with a variety of senior executors in Ratner's organization to review his position on what had occurred," the lawsuit says. "Substantially all of those executives admitted and acknowledged to Greene, in words or substance, that he had been 'f----d.'"

A source said Greene had his $6 million investment returned.

Jonathan Sack, an attorney for Greene, did not return calls.

jmartinez@edit.nydailynews.com

Max the Swede

June 4th, 2007, 08:03 PM

That's quite a development, finger's crossed

TalB

June 7th, 2007, 03:04 AM

I think Marty Markowitz should be removed after what he did in firing all the Brooklyn CB6 members who oppossed to the project. Perhaps there should be a law on removing borough presidents either through impeachments or recalls. What he did should not go unpunished. On a sidenote, Adolfo Carrión, Jr., who is the borough president of The Bronx, did a similar thing to CB members who oppossed the new Yankee Stadium.

nygirl

June 7th, 2007, 06:33 PM

http://www.nysun.com/article/56026

Federal Court Ruling Clears Obstacle From the Path of Atlantic Yards

By ELIOT BROWN
June 7, 2007

The $4 billion Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn took a major step forward yesterday when a federal judge dismissed a key lawsuit, removing a major hurdle that opponents had hoped would thwart the giant mixed-use development.

The project, which was approved by the state late last year, seeks to use eminent domain to clear property on a 22-acre site near downtown Brooklyn for a complex of 6,000-plus apartments and a Frank Gehry-designed basketball stadium for the New Jersey Nets.

The suit, filed by apartment owners, renters, and businesses, challenged the state's right to acquire the land and hand it over to a private development company, Forest City Ratner, arguing that it did not fulfill a public purpose, as is required for eminent domain.

U.S. District Court Judge Nicholas Garaufis's ruling rejected those arguments, bringing the state closer to moving forward with the property takings that would allow Forest City Ratner to begin construction of the complex.

A lawyer representing the project opponents, Matthew Brinckerhoff, vowed to appeal the decision, a move that he said would prevent the state from taking land for months.

"As long as this case is pending, they cannot proceed to the next step of the eminent domain process," Mr. Brinckerhoff said.

The Spitzer and Bloomberg administrations, and Forest City Ratner, yesterday issued statements praising the case's dismissal and hailing the benefits of the development.

"Today's decision is an important victory not only for Atlantic Yards but for Brooklyn as well," the chief executive of Forest City Ratner, Bruce Ratner, said in a statement.

A spokesman for the Empire State Development Corporation, Errol Cockfield, said the state wants to avoid using eminent domain and hopes landowners will settle with Forest City Ratner.

Should the development continue to be held up in court, the project could fall behind schedule; critics have questioned whether the Nets could move in for the 2009–10 season, as Forest City Ratner has suggested they will.

Oh boy talB! Wanna come to the first nets game with me in brooklyn?

TalB

June 8th, 2007, 11:39 PM

Are you forgetting that the judge is allowing for an appeal? I doubt that DDDB is going to give up just b/c of this. Also, there is another case going on a separate courthouse. Unless Ratner is able to win all of the lawsuits, it isn't over yet. Also, a judge cannot deny appeals or they can be removed just for that. On a sidenote, if the court does rule Goldstien vs Pataki et all on saying that eminent domain for a private project is justified, it will be just like Plessy vs Ferguson on justifying segregation with the Jim Cro Laws as well as Barron vs Baltimore on saying that states can go against one's US constitutional rights with their own state's rights.

Dale

June 9th, 2007, 12:01 AM

Good God! I thought this had been underway for months. Seems almost impossible to get something built in NYC.

nygirl

June 12th, 2007, 12:18 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categor..._id=4&id=13338

Federal Case Against Atlantic Yards Project Dismissed
by Elizabeth Stull (court@brooklyneagle.net), published online 06-08-2007

Project’s Public Purpose Justifies Eminent Domain, Judge Says
By Elizabeth Stull
Brooklyn Daily Eagle

CADMAN PLAZA EAST — In a much-anticipated decision, Brooklyn federal Judge Nicholas Garaufis has dismissed two eminent domain challenges to Forest City Ratner Companies’ (FCRC) Atlantic Yards Project because they failed to show that the project would not serve a public purpose.

The relative merits of the project and whether it will achieve any of its objectives are political issues the court may not consider after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. New London, Conn., Garaufis observed in a footnote.

The plaintiffs in both cases are property owners and rent-subsidized tenants located in the footprint of the planned 22-acre development project. They challenged the state’s right to forcibly take their property by eminent domain, saying it violates the Constitution. Both cases, Daniel Goldstein et. al v. George E. Pataki and Aaron Piller et. al v. George Pataki, et. al, named several state and city defendants along with the project developer.

After reviewing the cases last winter at Garaufis’ request, Magistrate Judge Robert Levy recommended he abstain from reviewing them based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Burford v. Sun Oil. Under the Burford ruling, a case belongs in state court when the state’s strong interest in the matter outweighs the federal interest and the plaintiffs can have timely and adequate recourse in state court.

But Garaufis rejected this recommendation, and spent more than half of his 66-page decision distinguishing Burford and its progeny from the consolidated cases before him.

“In this case, in contrast to Burford and Alabama, the questions of state law are straightforward and largely duplicative of the questions of federal law that this court must address,” Garaufis wrote.

“[i]t is questions of federal law that predominate, as three of the Plaintiffs’ four claims are based on allegations that their federal constitutional rights have been violated. The three claims do not rely in any way on state law. Therefore, however much discretionary interpretation of state law this case may require — and I find that it requires none — the need to interpret state law is dwarfed by the need to interpret the U.S. Constitution.”

The federal district judge adopted Magistrate Levy’s recommendation to reject ripeness and a Younger abstention as grounds for dismissal. However, he dismissed the case on its merits, finding that the plaintiffs failed to state a valid claim.

Under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, “private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Therefore, when eminent domain is used to take private property, it must be for a public use and just compensation must be paid to the owner.

In this case, plaintiffs argued that the public use requirement is not met because the primary purpose of FCRC’s development project is to benefit FCRC — not to provide any public benefit.

The defendants moved to dismiss the case. They argued that FCRC’s planned sports arena for the Nets basketball team, as well as affordable housing and new office space, will generate economic benefits and jobs in a blighted central Brooklyn area.

The plaintiffs argued that the area is not blighted, that the project will generate minimal economic benefits and that it will not create jobs or increase available affordable housing.

The judge addressed each of the plaintiffs’ arguments and concluded they were quibbling over the project’s relative value, and did not show that it lacked any public value at all.

“Whether these [housing] units are sufficiently affordable may be an important political question, and if the citizens of Brooklyn are unsatisfied with the answers, then elected officials and their political parties may pay the price at the polls,” Garaufis wrote.

“The Constitution does not enshrine Plaintiffs’ value judgment that a taking lacks a public purpose if it results in ‘luxury’ as opposed to ‘affordable’ housing, and the constitutionality of this taking does not depend on the relative numbers of planned housing units priced at, above, or below market rate.”

The judge cited the Supreme Court's decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, an anti-trust conspiracy case which held that plaintiffs must "nudge their claims across the line from conceivable to plausible

Bruce Ratner, president and CEO of Forest City Ratner Companies, hailed the decision as “an important victory not only for Atlantic Yards but for Brooklyn as well.

“This decision means we are one step closer to creating over 2,200 units of affordable housing, thousands of construction and office jobs and bringing the Nets to Brooklyn,” Ratner said.

The plaintiffs plan to appeal.

The lead attorney for the plaintiffs, Matthew Brinckerhoff, said, “We are confident that the appellate court will allow this case to proceed to trial, at which the citizens of New York will finally learn the real reason plaintiffs’ properties were selected to be forcibly taken, and why Ratner was chosen to reap an unprecedented financial windfall.”

The plaintiffs claim that more than half of FCRC’s $4 billion Atlantic Yards Project would be subsidized by New York State. The developer has reportedly requested at least $1.4 billion in tax-exempt housing bonds, $637 million in tax-exempt arena bonds, $205 million direct cash subsidy from New York City and $100 million direct cash subsidy from New York State, which adds up to $2.34 billion.

TalB

June 12th, 2007, 02:15 AM

http://brooklynpaper.com/stories/30/23/30_23nipplehair.html

Ratner’s myth

To the editor,

You recently printed a letter from Alvin Pankin, who was commenting about a photograph previously published in The Paper (“Thank Ratner,” May 26).

Mr. Pankin spent the first paragraph saying good riddance to the three buildings in that photograph that Forest City Ratner has demolished in the Atlantic Yards project site.

In the second paragraph, Mr. Pankin, in a non-sequitur, trotted out the most-insidious mythological talking point that Mr. Ratner’s supporters use against critics of the project — that they are “new arrivals.”

This is an insidious myth, first because it couldn’t be more false. Having spent the past three plus years working with project opponents and critics who favor sensible development, I can say with assurance that most have deep generational roots in the borough, or have lived here a significant amount of time.

Also, some of the most fervent project opponents trace their Brooklyn roots back for centuries.

The myth is also insidious because there is no eligibility barometer to civic discourse.

But, to paraphrase Samuel Johnson, this sort of mythmaking is always the last refuge of those without a substantive argument.

On another point, Mr. Pankin may not have liked what the now-demolished buildings looked like, but they once housed residential tenants and successful businesses. Now they are rubble-strewn empty lots.

Daniel Goldstein, Prospect Heights

The writer is spokesman for Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn

Marty’s ‘purge’

To the editor,

I was outraged to read in your paper that Borough President Markowitz purged members of local community boards who voted against Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards project.

What does he think this is, a Soviet Republic?

It’s bad enough that he’s been Ratner’s waterboy, ramming Atlantic Yards down our throats without holding Ratner accountable for solving the very real questions of transit and traffic.

Now, Markowitz is erasing any semblance of community voice.

Ratner may get his project built — Marty and his Tammany Hall buddies in Albany have seen to that — but Marty has cost himself the critical support of Brownstone Brooklyn with this outrage.

I will personally mobilize my block association and grassroots networks to run him out of town on a rail.

Scott Powell, Park Slope

nygirl

June 12th, 2007, 03:05 AM

^^ Sure you will scott. 'pat' 'pat'

TalB

June 24th, 2007, 12:47 AM

Brucey's right hand is no longer part of this landgrab.
http://www.nydailynews.com/boroughs/brooklyn/2007/06/15/2007-06-15_i_jumped_ship_sez_yards_big.html
I jumped ship, sez Yards big

Departed Forest City honcho denies he got axed from building project

BY JOTHAM SEDERSTROM
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Friday, June 15th 2007, 4:00 AM

Bruce Ratner's top lieutenant on the controversial Atlantic Yards project, James Stuckey, resigned this week from Forest City Ratner.

His sudden departure, and the fact that the company referred questions about his resignation to public relations guru Howard Rubenstein, fueled speculation by insiders that Stuckey's exit was a rocky one.

But Stuckey said yesterday his decision to leave his post as executive vice president of commercial development after 13 years with the company was not the result of a falling out between him and boss Bruce Ratner.

"There are other interests I want to pursue and, quite honestly, when you're working 18-hour days on a project as complicated as this, with a company as great as Forest City, it's very difficult to pursue those other interests," Stuckey told the Daily News in his first public comments since his departure.

He declined to divulge his future job prospects. And when asked if he had signed a confidentiality agreement prohibiting him from discussing the Atlantic Yards project or his own resignation critically, Stuckey declined to comment.

Stuckey was promoted to head the $4 billion project last year and quickly drew attention for his confident but bullish handling of its many legal and political obstacles.

His resignation comes one week after a judge dismissed a key lawsuit filed by 13 residential and business owners in Prospect Heights who were threatened by the state's controversial use of eminent domain in the project.

"I made a decision, especially given that we've now gotten this project approved and got past this federal lawsuit, that after doing this for 30 years, it was the time to make a change," said Stuckey, referring to three decades working for government and real estate entities, most significantly as president of the Public Development Corp.

But several people familiar with the company hinted that Forest City's image had been sullied after tussling with anti-Yards opponents.

"Let's be honest," said one source who knows Stuckey and is familiar with the project. "This project has been a pain in the a-- from the beginning, for everyone, and that couldn't have looked good for Stuckey."

Stuckey denied he had been pushed out of the company, and insisted he maintained good relationships with Ratner and Bruce Bender, executive vice president of governmental and public affairs.

"Absolutely not," Stuckey said of speculation of a falling out.

Ratner "is an incredible leader and an incredible visionary," he said. "With a project like this, obviously, people say the things they want to."

jsederstrom@nydailynews.com

TalB

July 1st, 2007, 01:28 AM

http://www.davidyassky.com/2007/06/atlantic_yards_2.php
Atlantic Yards letter to Gov. Spitzer and Mayor Bloomberg

June 27, 2007

Dear Governor Spitzer and Mayor Bloomberg:

We write to you today to express our profound disappointment regarding one provision of the 421a legislation adopted by the State legislature. Specifically, we refer to A9293, Section 6 that makes separate affordability standards for “a multi-phase project that includes at least {2,500} TWENTY-FIVE HUNDRED dwelling units,” ie the Atlantic Yards Project.

The Atlantic Yards carve-out in the State’s 421a legislation makes exceptions for the development that apply to no other part of the exclusion zone: it provides the full 421a tax break—even for market-rate condos—while allowing offsite affordable housing for sections of the project, and raising the mandated affordable 1/5 of the development from a 60% AMI requirement to an average of 70%.

The most egregious aspect of the carve-out is the amount it will cost taxpayers. New York City has already approved $205 million for the project, and the State has pledged $100 million. The rewrite of the 421a legislation will cost taxpayers at least an additional $100 million and could reach $170 million in forfeited tax revenue.

Because of the size of the 421a tax break for Atlantic Yards, we ask that the money previously set aside for land acquisition aid--$100 million from the City and $100 million from the State—be withheld. This $200 million should not have been allocated in the first place—there is no justification for the government to subsidize a developer’s bottom line—and now, with this latest development, any distribution of this money is inexcusable.

Sincerely, David Yassky Letitia James
New York City Council New York City Council

Dale

July 1st, 2007, 05:28 AM

Is this actually under construction at present ?

TalB

July 2nd, 2007, 04:11 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/01/nyregion/01yardsxx.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin
Official Sees Possible Risk in Big Project in Brooklyn

By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and ANDY NEWMAN
Published: July 1, 2007

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/07/01/nyregion/01yards.600.jpg
Forest City Ratner

An illustration of a portion of the Atlantic Yards project near Downtown Brooklyn shows the tower known as Miss Brooklyn at center.

Ever since it was proposed, the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn has simultaneously been the borough’s biggest, most controversial and least understood real estate development.

Critics have long suggested that the project is a taxpayer-subsidized bonanza for the developer, the project’s promised jobs and subsidized housing a kind of Trojan horse for the thousands of high-end apartments that come with them. But the developer, Forest City Ratner, and state officials overseeing the project have resisted divulging much information about the project’s financial structure, confining those criticisms to the realm of speculation.

That debate may be revived because of a lawsuit that has wrung free hundreds of pages of internal documents from the Empire State Development Corporation, the state agency overseeing the project. An analysis of the documents suggests that the Atlantic Yards behemoth — 8 million square feet of apartments, offices, stores and an arena planned for 22 acres near Downtown Brooklyn — may in fact be a delicate beast.

“The documents confirm that the overall project is risky,” said James F. Brennan, a Brooklyn assemblyman who, with State Senator Velmanette Montgomery, also of Brooklyn, sued the development corporation to obtain the documents. “This information should have been disclosed to the public before the project was approved.”

Interviews with real estate developers and brokers not connected to the project indicate that estimates of the construction costs for the project’s 6,430 apartments are low compared with some other developments in Brooklyn, where a residential building boom is pushing up construction prices. And Forest City’s projections for the future sale of the project’s roughly 2,000 condominium apartments seem optimistic, forecasting high volume at prices that have barely been tested in Brooklyn.

Mr. Brennan said he worried that Forest City could be forced to scale back or even abandon later phases of the project if the real estate market sours, putting at risk some of the 2,250 units of subsidized rental housing planned. Most of those units are scheduled to be built during the project’s later years of construction, as are most of the market-rate units.

“The affordable housing is the weakest link in a project that is otherwise financially very tight,” Mr. Brennan said. “This is disturbing, because the affordable housing was marketed as the main public benefit of the project.”

But Forest City officials said that they remained confident in their prospects and in those of the neighborhoods around the project site, where sleek condo developments and stylish coffee shops lie near public housing projects, abandoned auto repair shops and weedy vacant lots.

“Atlantic Yards does have a risk to it. It is a complicated project. And frankly, we understand that, and we’ve worked through that,” said Joanne M. Minieri, the company’s chief operating officer.

Bruce R. Bender, the company’s executive vice president, said Forest City was committed to building all of the subsidized housing and had promised state officials that at least 30 percent of all the apartments built during the project’s first phase would be lower-priced units.

“We said we will do 50 percent of rentals as affordable for low- and moderate-income families, and we will. And we made it legally binding,” he added. “Find someone else who does this and let us know.”

Company officials also referred to an independent audit of the financial projections that was commissioned by state development officials and performed by the consulting firm KPMG. That audit, which was released in December, judged Forest City’s business assumptions to be broadly sound, though it forecast a lower return for the project’s investors than Forest City did.

Forest City is also a development partner in the new Midtown headquarters for The New York Times Company.

The documents, which Mr. Brennan provided to The New York Times, span from June 2003, when Forest City Ratner was in early discussions with the development corporation, to last November, the month before the project received final approval from the Public Authorities Control Board, which must sign off on large state-backed projects. The city and the state are contributing hundreds of millions of dollars, including direct subsidies, sales and mortgage recording tax exemptions, and tax-exempt bond financing.

In settling Mr. Brennan’s lawsuit, the development corporation agreed to release the documents without conceding that they were legally subject to the state’s freedom of information law.

The business plans from last October do not include information about one of the project’s buildings that was approved separately. And they represent only one snapshot of an ever-evolving, much-delayed project that still faces several lawsuits and has yet to begin rising in Brooklyn.

But the business plans — among the documents available to state officials before they approved the project — still offer an unprecedented look inside Atlantic Yards.

They indicate that Forest City and the project’s investors have paid a steep premium for design, most notably the services of Frank Gehry, among other architects. The documents cite architectural costs of just over $12 a square foot for the project, roughly three times the industry average.

They show that the basketball arena, widely assumed to be a money-loser whose chief purpose was to make the project more appealing to city leaders, is expected to be profitable by the 2012-13 basketball season, when it would bring in $20 million a year in net revenue. Bruce C. Ratner, the chief executive of Forest City Ratner, is the principal owner of the Nets of the National Basketball Association and intends to move the team from New Jersey.

The documents also provide a window into the considerable resources Forest City poured into early plans for the project, promoting it to the public, and getting it approved in a city that has proven inhospitable to some recent attempts at large-scale development. Those costs amounted to $19.5 million, according to one document, including money for litigation, public relations and Mr. Gehry’s initial designs.

The entire complex would bring an estimated profit of $609 million by 2015 if all the project’s elements, including the Nets, were sold by that year, according to the documents. (According to company officials, the sales figures were included to help value the project for investors, and the company has no plans to sell the complex.) The documents indicate that investors would make a modest return of 7.7 percent on the arena and 9.6 percent on the rest of the complex over 12 years despite significant construction and housing subsidies from the city and state.

Forest City itself would earn a development fee of 5 percent of the project’s total cost: roughly $200 million if the entire project is built as planned. Most of that, company executives said, would go toward recovering the company’s internal costs. They also said that Forest City owns a significant share of the project, in addition to being the developer.

But the company’s assessment of Brooklyn’s residential market and the project’s construction costs may provoke the most scrutiny.

The project’s 16 towers are scheduled to open in several increments, beginning in July 2009 with the completion of the signature tower, known as Miss Brooklyn, at Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues, and concluding in April 2015 with a condo tower at Dean Street and Carlton Avenue.

But their financial viability depends on Brooklyn’s high-end real estate boom penetrating from waterfront neighborhoods to the area farther inland, just east of Downtown Brooklyn, where Atlantic Yards will be built.

In Miss Brooklyn, Forest City expects to sell condos for an average of $889 a square foot. (Even so, the residential portion of the building will lose money, according to the documents; revenue from office space will make it profitable.) Projected prices for the rest of the project’s condos rise steadily until the opening of the last tower in 2015, where condos are expected to sell for $1,069 a square foot.

Real estate prices have grown rapidly in the gentrifying neighborhoods around the project, Fort Greene and Prospect Heights. But Andrew Gerringer, managing director of the development marketing group at Prudential Douglas Elliman, said that buyers did not yet view those neighborhoods as being as desirable as Williamsburg, Dumbo or Brooklyn Heights, waterfront districts where the borough’s luxury real estate is now concentrated.

A luxury building that Mr. Gerringer’s firm is marketing in Downtown Brooklyn is averaging about $750 a square foot in sales. On the waterfront, he said, “The high end of the market is probably blended at about $850 a foot, give or take.”

It is not clear yet whether those prices will spread quickly to other parts of Brooklyn. Mr. Gerringer said that, according to his firm’s research, the former Williamsburgh Savings Bank building — just blocks from Miss Brooklyn — had sold less than half of its units by the middle of May, with an average price per square foot of less than $800. The building’s developer, the Dermot Company, not long ago cut its prices by 10 percent across the board after sales stalled, he said, though they have picked up again.

Andrew C. MacArthur, a principal of the Dermot Company, said that he expected all of its apartments to sell by early 2008, including condos priced at up to $1,500 a square foot. But the company had not yet begun selling those units, he said.

Before the Atlantic Yards condos can be sold, however, they must be built. According to the documents, the “hard costs” for the towers — chiefly construction material and labor — range from $259 to $369 per gross square foot, the price tag for Miss Brooklyn.

A few developers said that they were currently building comparable buildings at similar costs. But most cited hard costs of $350 to $400 a square foot and higher, particularly when it came to the construction of high-end condos with union labor.

“We’re seeing in the neighborhood of $425 per foot” for new construction, Mr. MacArthur said.

Moreover, Forest City’s calculations appear to reflect only a modest increase in costs over roughly a decade of construction. A condominium tower scheduled to open in 2013 has hard costs of $314 a square foot; another one, opening in 2015, has an estimated hard cost of $324 a square foot.

One developer, who asked not to be named for fear of angering the city and state officials who support Atlantic Yards, whistled when told of the estimates.

“They aren’t really saying that, are they?” he said.

But Forest City executives said they believed the projections were accurate.

“I’m not surprised at everything that you’ve heard,” said Ms. Minieri, who noted that the developer’s last major project in Brooklyn, the MetroTech office complex, had had its share of naysayers.

She also said that hard costs for Atlantic Yards would be partly reduced by several factors. For example, all of the residential buildings include underground parking, and several feature ground-level retail space. Both are cheaper to build than apartment units, she said, and bring down the overall square-foot costs of those buildings.

Richard Moore, a real estate analyst at RBC Capital Markets, said that Forest City had a reputation for careful planning and very conservative investments. But he also noted that even the most competent developers could not easily predict how a long-term project like Atlantic Yards would turn out.

“I could see this project taking many forms over the years,” Mr. Moore said. “It could go either direction, I imagine.”

Charles V. Bagli and Ken Belson contributed reporting.

Gaeus

July 19th, 2007, 07:41 AM

Brooklyn is a very nice place but I admit that it needs new changes like maybe modern buildings. I went to Brooklyn last month and I was fairly disappointed that there are some buildings that is a bit old and needs renovation. I hope this development will spark another growth for New York and a modern look for Brooklyn Skyline.

TalB

July 26th, 2007, 01:39 AM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07232007/news/regionalnews/ratners_plan_hits_big_nag_regionalnews_rich_calder.htm
RATNER'S PLAN HITS BIG $NAG

TAX DEAL IRKS CITY

By RICH CALDER

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07232007/photos/news008b.jpg
YARD WORK: Bruce Ratner is getting special breaks for developing Brooklyn's Atlantic Yards.

July 23, 2007 -- The Bloomberg administration is threatening to pull more than $100 million in city subsidies from the controversial Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn unless a deal providing massive tax breaks for developer Bruce Ratner is drastically revised.

"Pure and simple, it's a giveaway," a high-ranking city official told The Post.

At issue is an affordable-housing reform bill hastily passed by the state Legislature that included a special "carve-out" for Atlantic Yards.

The provision, quietly inserted by Assemblyman Vito Lopez (D-Brooklyn), would provide Ratner with an extra $300 million in property-tax benefits. It also exempts Atlantic Yards from a new definition of government-assisted affordable housing that limits it only to low-income households. Atlantic Yards could still include middle-income tenants.

Many developers, city officials fear, would hesitate to build "affordable" housing that excludes the middle class. A city memo says the bill could kill the construction of 10,000 subsidized units citywide for which middle-income families could qualify, including 5,000 units at Queens West.

Another provision eliminates - for Ratner only - the requirement that at least 20 percent of the housing units in each building in a complex be affordable.

Critics say it opens the door to Ratner "segregating" all of the project's 2,500 affordable-housing units into several buildings.

"More sinister, [Ratner] can build the market-rate housing first and wait a decade to do the affordable housing or, even worse, come back after the market-rate housing is done and then say, 'We can't afford to do the affordable housing,' " an official said.

The project plan currently calls for 30 percent of all housing built during the project's first phase to be affordable, and Ratner's staff says there's no plan to change that.

One high-ranking official at Ratner's company said, "Rather than working with Albany to create more affordable housing for New York, the Bloomberg administration is threatening to kill middle-income housing at Atlantic Yards unless they get what they want."

The city committed $205 million to Atlantic Yards to help Ratner acquire property and make infrastructure repairs. It might not hold back all the funds because the area needs the infrastructure repairs anyway.

Additional reporting by Tom Topousis

rich.calder@nypost.com

SheistbugzzNY

July 26th, 2007, 09:47 AM

what is up with that, im confused why is there such a huge controvesy over this??

TalB

July 26th, 2007, 09:40 PM

The reason is b/c there are people who actually live there, and they do not intend to sell their homes. If they refuse, then they will be forced to by emminent domain in which they will have to give up their homes for no matter what they decide on. Residents and workers in the surrounding areas opposed this project b/c it will cause the property tax to go up and they will eventually be priced out. Others who hate this project don't like the fact that this is their tax dollars that are going to be paying for this project rather than Bruce Ratner paying for it himself.

Sentient Seas

July 26th, 2007, 10:42 PM

It seems to be a solid project to me.

SheistbugzzNY

August 1st, 2007, 10:01 PM

I really hope this gets passed. But the taxpayers shouldn't have to shell out so much in taxes for it

TalB

August 3rd, 2007, 10:43 PM

I think that us taxpayers shouldn't be giving anything for this project or any other project that is privately owned.

storms991

August 6th, 2007, 08:53 PM

Re-design the entire thing, Why do they build this abstract crap these days?? The buildings look a bit dodgy because of the weird angles

TalB

August 10th, 2007, 12:08 AM

DDDB did come up with an alternative known as the Extell-Unity Plan.

http://www.cbrooklynneighborhoods.homestead.com/Extell_3.jpg

BrooklynNYC

August 12th, 2007, 02:12 AM

I just want to be able to park and drive my car. Atlantic ave is gonna be such a parking lot after this is completed, and the congestion will certainly impact Ft. Greene, Park Slope, etc.

storms991

August 12th, 2007, 02:51 AM

I thought people in New York prefer to take the subway over driving their cars?

SmellyHongKongAir

August 12th, 2007, 11:34 AM

but ny subway is old? so its not comfortable

nygirl

August 12th, 2007, 12:52 PM

^^ Eh, the trains aren't old. It does get uncomfortable though. Only when there are like 50 people in each car. That happens just about everyday at least once for me. The thing about New York is it has plans to revitalize it's trains, stations, and the way everything that works. It's just a plan and it won't happen for some time but when/if it does it will blow every other system out of the water not just on how large it will be everything about it will be revolutionary.

hkskyline

August 12th, 2007, 04:39 PM

POLS SEEKING SAY ON ARENA
9 August 2007
New York Post

Saying the Atlantic Yards project lacks accountability, many Brooklyn politicians and civic groups want Gov. Spitzer to give the community significantly more input on the $4 billion project.

Councilwoman Letitia James and Assemblyman Jim Brennan were among local elected officials yesterday calling on the Empire State Development Corp. to create a new subsidiary corporation to directly oversee the state-approved NBA arena/residential complex.

The contingent said the new subsidiary's board should include community officials and leaders and that the ESDC should also devise "a stakeholder council" that would get project input from residents and report back to the new subsidiary.

hkskyline

August 12th, 2007, 04:40 PM

Architecture: Battle for the Big Apple
With this stunning, yacht-like bulding, Frank Gehry finally has a foothold in Manhattan.
And now every other big name architect is hot on his heels
9 August 2007
The Guardian

New York makes exceptionally little virtue out of the fact that it is surrounded by water. Most of the time, you have to remind yourself that Manhattan is an island. Say New York and you tend to think of its core: the Empire State building, the Chrysler, Central Park. Architecturally, all the city's gems are huddled in the centre of the island, while mile upon mile of embankment is devoted to six-lane highways and Soviet- looking housing developments - the legacy of its 1940s planning guru Robert Moses.

It would take a Herculean effort to remove the highways and restore life to the city's waterfronts. But, gradually, a sense of purpose is being injected back into the fringes of Manhattan - through new buildings. Nowhere is that more visible than on the lower west side of the city, along the Hudson river, where a whole succession of designs by some of the world's top architects are now in planning or construction.

Top of the pile is Frank Gehry, who has just put the finishing touches to the headquarters of the internet conglomerate, InterActiveCorp. The building is Gehry's first to be completed in New York, a surprising fact in itself, as you would have expected one of the world's most famous architects to have made his mark by now in Manhattan - the ultimate showcase of modernist, or in his case postmodernist, architecture.

It has certainly been a long time coming. The Los Angeles-based designer has spent 20 years trying to gain a foothold on the island.

Two decades ago, Gehry drew up plans for a 61-storey skyscraper in Madison Square Garden. It came to nothing. Designs of an Ian Schrager hotel and a project in Times Square followed, with similar results. Most ambitious of all was to have been a new Guggenheim museum mooted in 2000, for the downtown waterfront near Wall Street. The design, described at the time as "cloudlike", was to have cost $800m and been twice the size of the building that made his name: the Bilbao Guggenheim, with its famous twisting titanium shell. That bit the dust, too.

After all those disappointments, Gehry has finally arrived in NYC - with a building that, fittingly, pays homage to the water. The IAC rises up from the old brick and rusting iron that is the meat-packing district of Chelsea like a shimmering white yacht, its sails puffed out in a gentle breeze. Viewed from the north, it really does appear to move, sailing southwards alongside the Hudson.

It is a building whose sheen changes with the seasons, and hour by hour. Earlier this year, when the city was deep in snow, the almost completed building looked like a glorified giant snowball. On the day I toured it, it glistened in blinding daylight, the clouds reflected across its upper windows.

The design is the product of a collaboration between Gehry and IAC's chairman, Barry Diller. The motif of a sailing boat was selected by Diller - a keen yachtsman, who moors his super-yacht opposite the building at Chelsea Piers - from a range of possibilities proposed by the architect. Diller also stipulated that he wanted the building to be made entirely of glass.

These desires presented huge technical problems. First, how to construct a curved building from glass? Gehry and his advisers came up with the solution: enormous 35ft by 22ft panels, each one bent to an alarming extent through a process carried out on site known as cold-warping. In some corners of the building, the glass twists 150 degrees from ground to roof,

Colour was more difficult still. Diller wanted the building to be uniformly white to enhance the sails allusion. But how could a building be white on the outside and still allow workers inside to see out? The solution they reached was to use frits, small white enamel dots that are silk-screened onto the glass below waist-height and above head-height, leaving an eye-level band of clear glass for untrammelled views.

From inside the building, this generates a pleasant hazy glow, a bit like watching a dream sequence in a movie. From the outside, when the blinds aren't drawn, it creates stripes of white (the frits) and black (clear glass), giving the building a resemblance to a Liquorice Allsort. At night, the stripes vanish and the building transforms itself into a fish-bowl: lit from within, it becomes transparent and glows orange. To heighten that translucent effect, the executive offices have been placed in the middle of the building, while underlings, with their open-plan work stations, get to enjoy breathtaking views over the Hudson. This is revolutionary thinking.

Gehry's first imprint on Manhattan has left some commentators faintly underwhelmed, though. At a mere nine storeys, it is a peanut of a building compared with Bilbao or the Walt Disney Concert Hall, his similarly exotic mass of twisted metal in Los Angeles. Alongside the swoops and curls of those buildings, the elegant curves of the IAC headquarters appear almost conservative. As you drive by it on the West Side Highway, it certainly holds your attention, but it doesn't scream at you as Gehry's trademark structures do.

That has inevitably prompted some expressions of disappointment. "The problem for as showy and spectacular an architect as Gehry is that people come to expect that from him," says Suzanne Stephens, of Architectural Record magazine. "They associate him with triple axles and the whole shebang."

The pared-down nature of the design is because Diller was looking for a relatively modest building to house up to 500 employees of his many internet firms. Being an office, it also required internal spaces that could house his businesses, which in turn forced compromises upon Gehry. But the unfamiliar simplicity is also, perhaps, a recognition on Gehry's part that if he keeps repeating his famous titanium look, astonishing though it is, he is at risk of being labelled a one-hit wonder.

At the moment the IAC building looks a little lost amid the surrounding wasteland. But all that is about to change. As interest in the shores of Manhattan grows, architects are descending on the area in droves, attracted by a disused elevated subway track, the High Line, which is being turned into an urban park. Shigeru Ban is already on site, on a plot adjacent to the IAC; and Jean Nouvel, Renzo Piano and Robert Stern all have schemes nearby. So intense is the scramble for sites that this stretch of Chelsea has been dubbed "architects' row".

How Gehry's building will emerge from this new architectural jungle is anybody's guess. "It's a bit of a gamble," says Stephens. "He clearly couldn't have had any idea of how the area would look when he began drawing his designs. The building could be enhanced by its new context, or it might not."

There is another, bigger gamble for Gehry on the New York horizon. Having just arrived here after so many years of struggle, the commissions are now pouring in. The next job is something of a folly: a state-of-the-art children's playground in Battery Park, the designs for which Gehry is donating as a way of thanking the city. But then comes Atlantic Yards. This gargantuan $4bn development in downtown Brooklyn has already invited a storm of protest from local residents, who dislike its high-rise nature. The project spans 22 acres and will include housing, offices, shops and a home for the New Jersey Nets basketball team.

As the project's lead architect, Gehry is at the centre of the dispute. On the one hand, he is being tugged by a highly organised protest movement that has managed to whittle down some of the more ambitious elements of his design, if not kill it off altogether. On the other, he is having to please a famously hard-nosed developer, Bruce Ratner, who will only stomach so much risk-taking from an architect. It doesn't bode particularly well for the outcome that Gehry has christened the tallest building in the scheme, a 511ft tower of glass and metal, "Miss Brooklyn". He says it is his "ego trip".

It is a gamble indeed. Gehry has finally arrived in New York. But when Atlantic Yards is completed in 2017, will he wish he had never done so? *

SmellyHongKongAir

August 12th, 2007, 04:43 PM

hkskyline

August 12th, 2007, 04:46 PM

is there plans to have a new subway?
what is PATH? there is a station at the WTC? is it linked?

They're building a new subway line now (Second Avenue).

PATH is a train system that connects Manhattan to New Jersey, running trains underneath the Hudson between Midtown and WTC with Jersey City, Hoboken, and Newark.

TalB

August 13th, 2007, 04:58 AM

The Extell Plan was thought up by Garry Barnett, who is the head of Extell Developement, and it was backed by DDDB b/c it met what they wanted.

TalB

August 15th, 2007, 12:41 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/boroughs/brooklyn/2007/08/10/2007-08-10_buildings_collapse_no_surprise.html
Building's collapse no surprise

Ratner knew of damage to Ward building, but didn't halt demolition - report

BY JOTHAM SEDERSTROM

DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Friday, August 10th 2007, 4:00 AM

Three months after the partial collapse of the Ward Baking Company building in Prospect Heights, engineers have determined the crash was due to nearly a century of water damage.

In a seven-page report issued July 25, the Buildings Department also laid blame on developer Forest City Ratner for not alerting a demolition crew to the extent of the damage.

"Forest City Ratner had been apprised of the deterioration of the facade and the parapet, but the extent of the deterioration and the risk of the collapse had apparently not been communicated to the crew that had been assigned the task of removing tar and asbestos," the report states.

Forest City and its subsidiary, Pacific Vanderbilt Development Co., were slapped with violations for failing to maintain an exterior building wall, and Gateway Demolition was hit for failing to protect its workers, a Buildings Department spokeswoman said.

Forest City also was cited for removing a sidewalk shed while locating a sewer line near the building and failing to replace it, the report states.

The report also determined that the Pacific St. building was so badly damaged that "even relatively passive construction activities" could have caused the collapse.

"The Building Code requires contractors to safeguard the public and property during construction," said agency spokeswoman Kate Lindquist. "At the same time, it requires the owners to maintain property in a safe and lawful condition."

The April 26 collapse - which occurred just days after demolition began on the controversial Atlantic Yards project - drew dozens of firefighters and forced the evacuation of about 300 people from a homeless shelter next door.

Forest City Ratner "should be heavily fined for this," said Daniel Goldstein, a member of the opposition group Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn. "Ratner's negligence is stark evidence that the community desperately needs the ombudsman promised by [state officials] over 93 days ago."

The Ward building, which the baking company once called "the snow-white temple of bread-making cleanliness," was cited by the Municipal Art Society for its terra-cotta tiles and considered for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.

Forest City executive Bruce Bender did not say yesterday why the demolition crew had begun work despite its knowledge that the building was in poor condition, but he said company officials would review the report.

"Our contractors were engaged in necessary predemolition asbestos-abatement work," Bender said. "We believed at the time that all safety measures were being taken."

jsederstrom@nydailynews.com

SheistbugzzNY

September 22nd, 2007, 08:35 PM

soo i teke it, nothins rele happenin wit this no more, or no1s posting.??

TalB

September 23rd, 2007, 02:53 AM

You will probably here more news around 10/9 when the lawsuit is being made.

SheistbugzzNY

September 23rd, 2007, 04:47 AM

00, ok thanks.

TalB

September 26th, 2007, 09:33 PM

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/30/37/30_37unityyards.html
Group has alternative to Ratner’s Atlantic Yards mega-development

By Gersh Kuntzman

The Brooklyn Paper

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/assets/photos/30/37/30_37_unityrender_z.jpg
The so-called “Unity” proposal, an alternative plan to Forest City Ratner’s Atlantic Yards project.

A coalition of community-based urban planners will unveil a new alternative to Bruce Ratner’s state-approved, already-under-construction Atlantic Yards mega-project on Monday, calling it the last best hope for sensible development on the controversial Prospect Heights site.

Planners behind the so-called “Unity” proposal say they were motivated to devise an alternative to Atlantic Yards by two concerns: that pending lawsuits — and the downturn in the real-estate market — make Ratner’s $4-billion project “not a done deal,” and that “there are better ways to build” on the site, said planner Marshall Brown, a former Fort Greene resident and architecture professor at the University of Cincinnati.

“Other supposedly ‘done deals’ — like the Jets stadium on the West Side and all the Columbus Circle projects before the Time-Warner Center — didn’t get built, so we need to be ready with an alternative,” Brown said. “Otherwise, we’ll be left with acres of empty land for decades.”

Brown said he and his fellow planners — former Planning Commissioner Ron Shiffman and Hunter College professor Tom Angotti — are mostly concerned that Ratner will only build the first phase of his project (the arena and several skyscrapers at the corner of Atlantic and Flatbush avenues) and then lose interest, run out of money, or give in to the declining market.

“But even if he builds the entire project, it’s going to take 20 years,” Brown said. “During that time, there will be many opportunities to influence what actually gets built. And we have a community-backed proposal ready to go.”

The “Unity” plan — which despite its common-ground-implying name, actually stands for “Understanding, Imagining and Transforming the Yards” — is the result of a series of public workshops and design sessions in April.

The resulting project would have 1,500 units — far fewer than Ratner’s 6,430 — with 60 percent reserved as “affordable,” far more than Ratner’s 35 percent.

And since the Unity plan would only be built on the Vanderbilt Yards, it would occupy just eight acres and require no condemnation. Ratner’s project covers 22 acres and would have the state seize private property via eminent domain.

The tallest building in the Unity plan would be “just under 400” feet, said Brown — and it would be at the eastern end of the site. Ratner would put his tallest building, the 511-foot Miss Brooklyn tower, at the already-busy corner of Atlantic and Flatbush.

“Ours is a simple and effective strategy,” Brown said. “The Atlantic-Flatbush intersection is already very congested. But Vanderbilt and Atlantic is underdeveloped. Our idea would create more density there and relieve congestion at the Flatbush Avenue end of the site.”

Brown called that “the definition of transit-oriented development”: “You don’t need to put the tallest buildings right on top of the transit hub at this site because the entire site is near the transit hub.”

Forest City Ratner did not answer a request to comment on the Unity Plan. The Empire State Development Corporation, which is overseeing the project, also declined to comment.

‘Unity’ vs. Ratner

The latest incarnation of a community-based “Unity” Plan for the Atlantic Yards site will be publicly unveiled next week — but The Brooklyn Paper got a sneak peak at a draft. Here’s how it compares to Bruce Ratner’s proposal.

Unity plan
Footprint: Eight acres
Total housing units (percent “affordable”): 1,500 (60 percent)
Tallest building: Less than 400 feet
Amount of open space: 4.5 acres
Basketball arena? No arena.
Requires condemnation of private property? No.

Ratner plan
Footprint: 22 acres
Total housing units (percent “affordable”): 6,430 (35 percent)
Tallest building: 511 feet (“Miss Brooklyn”)
Amount of open space: Eight acres
Basketball arena? 18,000-seat arena.
Requires condemnation of private property? Yes.

The “Unity” Plan will be presented publicly on Monday, Sept. 24 at the Soapbox Gallery (636 Dean St., between Carlton and Vanderbilt avenues), 6 pm.

©2007 The Brooklyn Paper

philvia

September 27th, 2007, 06:28 AM

unity plan is borrrinngg as hell

iLiR

September 27th, 2007, 06:34 AM

^^ I agree. The Ratner plan has more buildings, more open space, a basketball arena and I'm digging the "Miss Brooklyn" name of the tallest building. ;)

TalB

September 27th, 2007, 09:49 PM

Here is the big difference between the two. The UNITY Plan is just building on the railyards itself, while the FCR Plan includes places where people actually live and work. BTW, the open space in the FCR Plan might be more, but it is a small part of the site, and most the so-called park space will be the backyards that only residents can use. The UNITY does have more housing units that are affordable as oppsed to FCR. A final thing, the developer of the UNITY Plan will be paying for the project himself and NOT with taxpayer money unlike the developer of the FCR Plan. As for Gehry, he I find a lot of his places to be overrated.

TalB

October 3rd, 2007, 10:37 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/boroughs/brooklyn/2007/10/02/2007-10-02_atlantic_yards_evicting_tiny_town_day_ca.html
Atlantic Yards evicting Tiny Town day care
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BY JOTHAM SEDERSTROM

Tuesday, October 2nd 2007, 4:00 AM

School's out - forever.

A city teacher who was weeks away from opening a day-care center near the Atlantic Yards project is being booted by developer Forest City Ratner.

The 15-year-old Crown Heights program, Tiny Town, was expected to reopen by October following $150,000 in renovations to a building on Dean St., said owner Shirley Milligan.

"That arena is going up, and I don't care what anybody does, but to take away my existence? That's despicable," said Milligan, 50, who began renovations after leasing the building at 487 Dean St. in 2004.

She decided to relocate the center - with about 45 children - in part because of a playground across the street from the Dean St. building.

Milligan claims real estate brokers told her then that the building would not be touched by Ratner's Prospect Heights development, which is expected to include an arena for pro basketball and 16 towers.

"I was looking at the center the other day with tears in my eyes and I was saying to myself, 'How could you put so much money into something that was going to be demolished?'"

Until earlier this year, the building was owned by Lisa Steiner, who gave Milligan a three-year, renewable commercial lease at $3,000 a month, according to Milligan.

The eviction petition filed by Forest City Ratner earlier this month charged Milligan neglected to pay $18,000 in back rent, even as Forest City offered to buy out the remainder of her lease.

"She was in a true Catch-22 situation," said Milligan's attorney, Michael Rikon, who said his client's lease expires in 2009. "She was just pouring money into opening a new business that looked like it was going to end before it began. I think she probably ran out of money."

Candace Carponter, a spokeswoman for the anti-Yards group Develop Don't Destroy, said the Dean St. building is being demolished prematurely to make way for additional parking for construction workers at the project.

"They're going to level a day care [center] to put up a parking lot for construction workers so they can park for the next 20 years," said Carponter.

Forest City Ratner spokesman Loren Riegelhaupt said a new day-care center will be included as part of the project. He also insisted the developer was booting Milligan because she had routinely failed to pay rent since earlier this year.

"Forest City offered to buy her out of her lease and to reimburse her for money she spent to fix up the space, along with forgiving back rent owed," said Riegelhaupt. "For reasons unknown to us, she decided instead to continue to withhold rent. Given her refusal to pay her rent, Forest City served papers notifying her that she will be evicted if she continues to not pay her rent."

jsederstrom@nydailynews.com

philvia

October 3rd, 2007, 11:03 PM

The UNITY does have more housing units that are affordable as oppsed to FCR.

Unity plan
Total housing units (percent “affordable”): 1,500 (60 percent)

Ratner plan
Total housing units (percent “affordable”): 6,430 (35 percent)

do the math talb

Don Omar

October 4th, 2007, 03:03 AM

oooohhhh burn ^^

this project is dead to me

Taylorhoge

October 4th, 2007, 05:55 AM

So I went over to the ite and poked around a little while and saw what was being knocked down it seems numerous wharehouses small tenements and a FDNY fire station the fireman who I talked to said he liked it alot he said the house they were in was falling apart and they were being promised new equipment as well

TalB

October 7th, 2007, 09:10 PM

Unity plan
Total housing units (percent “affordable”): 1,500 (60 percent)

Ratner plan
Total housing units (percent “affordable”): 6,430 (35 percent)

do the math talb

Exactly how is 35% greater than 60% philvia?

Reyas

October 7th, 2007, 09:52 PM

Exactly how is 35% greater than 60% philvia?

nevermind, Palindrome explained it nicely.

palindrome

October 7th, 2007, 09:59 PM

Exactly how is 35% greater than 60% philvia?

60% of 1,500 = 900
35% of 6,430 = 2251

:bash: :bash:

NewYork-wala

October 7th, 2007, 10:32 PM

Don Omar

October 8th, 2007, 12:17 AM

yea 8th grade math

Ralphkke

October 8th, 2007, 12:12 PM

Looks like a nice project to me:)

TalB

October 9th, 2007, 02:24 AM

Tommorrow, will by the continuation of the case Goldstien vs Pataki et all. The courthouse will be at the US 2nd Court of Appeal, which is at 500 Pearl St in Manhattan. The case will start at 10 AM, though there is no time limit to how long it will be, but don't be dissapointed if you miss one hour of it, b/c I doubt it will be over by then. If the opposition wins this case, it will mean the end for that monstrousity.

TalB

October 26th, 2007, 11:59 PM

http://www.villagevoice.com/specials/0743,various,78157,7.html
STILL DEVELOPING

Thank you for honoring Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn with your kudos in the "Best of New York" [October 17-23] category "Best Noble Failure." Our organization, and all the other organizations and individuals who have struggled against the biggest real-estate boondoggle in Brooklyn's history, certainly have a good sense of humor, and we enjoyed your "award."

At the same time, we always like to keep the public informed rather than misled. So here goes: There are two pending court cases we have organized and are funding. We are optimistic about [their outcomes]. Both of these cases will not be over for a long time.

If either the 26 community-group plaintiffs on the state case win, or if the plaintiffs fighting to keep their properties from being seized by the government for Bruce Ratner win, the Atlantic Yards project cannot go forward. Failure? "Dewey Defeats Truman!"

Daniel Goldstein
Spokesman, Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn

TalB

November 5th, 2007, 04:21 AM

Since the opening of the Altantic Yds arena will not be ready by 2009, the Nets will be staying in the Meadowlands for another five years.
http://www.nba.com/nba_news/izod_071031.html
N.J. Gov. Jon Corzine: Izod Center Good for 5 More

By TOM CANAVAN
Posted Oct 31 2007 9:27PM

http://www.nba.com/media/izod_300_071031.jpg
Nathaniel S. Butler/NBAE/Getty Images

The future of the 26-year-old Izod Center, formerly Continental Airlines Arena, has been in question for the past few years following decisions by the two major tenants to move out.

EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J., Oct. 31 (AP) -- The foundation has been laid for the refurbished IZOD Center to survive at least another five years, Gov. Jon Corzine said Wednesday at a ceremony to rename the 26-year-old arena in the Meadowlands sports complex.

"It doesn't seem like a dying arena to me,'' Corzine said when asked about the future of the building that had been known as the Continental Airlines Arena since 1996.

The future of the arena, which opened with a Bruce Springsteen concert in 1981, has been in question for the past few years following decisions by the two major tenants to move out.

The New Jersey Devils of the NHL moved to Newark this season, and the New Jersey Nets plan to leave for Brooklyn for the 2009-10 season. Nets owner Bruce Ratner said Wednesday that the planned arena in Brooklyn probably would not be ready for the start of that season, however.

The IZOD Center is also the site of about 200 concerts and family entertainment events annually.

"I was in business for a long time, and a five-year time frame is really a planning cycle,'' Corzine said after the ceremony and before the Nets tipped off their season with a game against the Chicago Bulls. "We've laid the foundation for a successful five years, and we will be looking at this as a business decision as time goes on.''

Corzine was cautiously optimistic about the arena's future once the Nets move.

"I am not prejudging any of that,'' he said. "We will look at it as a business person would in any kind of analysis. For the next five years we are in pretty good shape. We can maintain most of that time (with) the Nets and the family entertainment schedules that we have today and, if we grow that, there is plenty of reason to be optimistic.''

George Zoffinger, chief executive of the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority, said the arena would turn a profit this year for the first time since 1996.

Clothing maker IZOD, best known for its sports shirts, was awarded the naming rights in early October. The division of clothing and apparel maker Phillips-Van Heusen Corp. agreed to pay $1.4 million each year over the course of the five-year deal.

IZOD was a sponsor of the Nets before being awarded the naming rights.

Copyright 2007 by STATS LLC and Associated Press. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of STATS LLC and Associated Press is strictly prohibited

NovaWolverine

November 5th, 2007, 04:34 AM

shitty sponsor

TalB

November 6th, 2007, 11:29 PM

Izod has sponsoring the Nets even before the arena was renamed, and the association with Continental Airlines is still there.

TalB

November 9th, 2007, 02:43 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/08/nyregion/08yards.html?ref=nyregion
Security Study Urged for Atlantic Yards

By ANDY NEWMAN
Published: November 8, 2007

Of the many criticisms leveled against the planned Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, two of the major ones are that it would worsen traffic in an already congested area and that its 18,000-seat basketball arena might provide a tempting target for terrorists.

So when the city of Newark decided last month, just before the opening of its new downtown arena, to close some surrounding streets during events for security reasons, a chorus of questions arose in Brooklyn: Would the Atlantic Yards arena, sited at the clogged crossroads of two main arteries, Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues, require street closings, too?

Yesterday, a group of state and city lawmakers revealed that they had added their voices to the chorus and had sent a letter to Gov. Eliot Spitzer and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg urging an independent study of security at Atlantic Yards.

“We want to know how the situation in Brooklyn differs from that which has just occurred in Newark,” Assemblyman James F. Brennan said. He also noted that Newark’s police director, Garry F. McCarthy, had said, “You can’t construct an arena and put it right against a street in a post-9/11 world.”

A New York City police official, however, said yesterday that the Brooklyn arena would require no street closings.

“Our counterterrorism experts have examined the Atlantic Yards plans and they have met with those involved with its design and planned construction,” said Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s chief spokesman. “They have been cooperative and receptive to N.Y.P.D. recommendations, which did not require street closings.”

Mr. Browne declined to offer further details, saying it was policy not to publicly discuss “any vulnerabilities we’ve identified.” The developer of Atlantic Yards, Forest City Ratner — a development partner in the new Midtown headquarters of The New York Times Company — said yesterday that it had been working closely with the police and other antiterrorism experts on the design of Atlantic Yards.

Plans for the Brooklyn arena, though preliminary, seem to show it set back farther from the street than the Newark arena, the Prudential Center. The Prudential Center is about 25 feet from both Edison Place and Mulberry Street in downtown Newark, while renderings of Atlantic Yards show the arena about 75 feet back from Atlantic Avenue and about 150 feet from Flatbush Avenue.

In Newark, the police have been closing one block of Mulberry Street and half a block of Edison Place during events, Mr. McCarthy said.

The Atlantic Yards plan — eight million square feet of high-rise housing, office space and an arena on a 22-acre swath near Downtown Brooklyn — is one of the largest development projects in the city’s history. It was approved last year by the state, and demolition and clearing have begun at the site. Plans for the arena, which would be home to the Nets basketball team, call for it to be used about 240 days a year. It is scheduled to open in 2009.

Even the project’s sponsor, the Empire State Development Corporation, has said that its traffic impacts would be considerable. A study the corporation conducted last year found that 68 out of 93 intersections near the site would have significantly more congestion at one or more peak hours, most markedly during the morning rush and after Saturday games. That evaluation did not take street closings into account.

The letter to the mayor and governor, sent on Oct. 29, was signed by seven elected officials in addition to Mr. Brennan, including some that have been relatively supportive of Atlantic Yards, like council members Bill de Blasio and David Yassky.

Mr. de Blasio recently announced his candidacy for the Brooklyn borough presidency, a post whose current occupant, Marty Markowitz, is one of the loudest supporters of Atlantic Yards. Term limits dictate that Mr. Markowitz will lose his seat in 2009.

nygirl

November 10th, 2007, 04:21 PM

^^ :)

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11102007...ntic_80430.htm

COURT EVICTS RESIDENTS' SUIT VS. ATLANTIC YARDS

By RICH CALDER
November 10, 2007

A state appellate court yesterday tossed a lawsuit challenging the legality of the Empire State Development Corp.'s relocation plan for Brooklyn residents living in the 22-acre footprint of the controversial Atlantic Yards project.

"A review . . . reveals [that the ESDC] appropriately considered the impact that the displacement of all households within the project site would have on the socioeconomic profile and character of the community," the panel's written decision said.

George Locker, a lawyer for rent-stabilized tenants being forced to relocate because of the state-approved $4 billion NBA arena-residential-retail megaproject, said he planned to appeal the decision.

Developer Forest City Ratner and the ESDC hailed the decision. Ratner Executive Vice President Bruce Bender said, "We remain committed to ensuring the proper relocation of tenants," which includes the opportunity to live in the new development at the same rent.

The suit is one of four opposing the project. Project opponents are appealing a ruling against them in a federal suit challenging the state's use of eminent-domain powers to acquire property.

Atlantic Yards Opposition: Take a seat and shut your mouths ;)

TalB

November 11th, 2007, 02:02 AM

Bear in mind that this case was about the tennants, who don't as much as a say as those who own their property. Norman Oder interperted that article over here (http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/) in that their lawyer will file appeal. Nevertheless, there are still other cases, so the fight isn't over just yet. Afterall, you don't want to be what the 2004 NY Yankees or the 2007 Cleveland Indians were against the Red Sox when they were just win one away from from beating them.

Cojapo

November 12th, 2007, 09:03 PM

Afterall, you don't want to be what the 2004 NY Yankees or the 2007 Cleveland Indians were against the Red Sox when they were just win one away from from beating them.

Nice!!

nygirl

November 13th, 2007, 07:30 AM

But completely irrelevant to the topic? Tal your analogies are so distasteful. What does baseball have to do with this construction site?
The fight isn't over just yet. Good that you added that because it will end. The hope is in opposition keeping this thing going,. They don't have a chance on this one so to continue stalling it is all they got.

nygirl

November 13th, 2007, 07:32 AM

You also forgot to mention the usless Ny mets of 2007. Beat the mets, beat the mets.. come on everybody and beat tghe mets... yea those guys, the ones that took the entire season by storm and gave it all up at the very end. Same ones that didn't even swing in the playoffs. Keep bringing up useless analogies I'll be spiking them at you everytime kid. I know you think your slick but you are nowhere near that.. yer just greasy.

TalB

November 15th, 2007, 05:37 AM

That analogy was to mention how one can grab a victory from the jaws of defeat in which it will most likely be Red Sox-esque for the opposition.

nygirl

November 15th, 2007, 06:29 AM

yeah sure it was tal. I believe you were instigating a fight. Like I said, slick you are not.

nygirl

November 15th, 2007, 06:57 AM

So in turn the opposite of that analogy to grab victory from jaws of defeat being redsox esque...

Would the analogy for total domination to then defeat just at the end of the battle be ny mets-esque?

Like... if the develop don't destroy brooklyn organization wins like every law suit all year long and then starts losing the last insignificant few at the end only to be completely shut down and out of the arguement all together, humiliated once again and oblivious to that embarrassing let down, leaving the courtroom like deer in head lights...

would they be like the mets?

Me likes these analogies because if forestCity Ratner is like the yankees then we can expect a new dynasty any time and consecutive wins over opposition this means multiple trophy projects every decade.. cool.

Wait if DDB is the red sox then does that mean they like get a few hard hits in the beggining and then spend a lifetime of misery and defeat later? Cool.

Then I guess if DDB was Redsox-esque then Forestcity Ratner would have to stop fighting the battle all together and make it extremely easy for DDB to look like actual winners when they're really historic losers...
So then ForestCity Ratner laying down and taking it would kinda be Rocky-esque, or cardnial-esque...

See how dumb that sounds?

TalB

November 16th, 2007, 12:49 AM

First off, its DDDB, and they are not alone on this. There are other groups that are helping them such as No Land Grab, Fans For Fair Play, South Oxford Block Association, Field of Schemes, and other grassroots and non-profit organizations. BTW, I insist on you reading the Atlantic Yards Report by Norman Oder in which he states what is really being said behind the printed words. As for NIMBYs, they are not going to be living with this project b/c it would be built on their homes. Also, are you willing to pay for this project, b/c FCR isn't going to be giving a penny for this project in which it will be the entire state of NY? Since you brought up the Yankees, a Yankees-esque scenairo for FCR could be being overcofident and then loosing it all like the Yankees did in the last four ALDS.

nygirl

November 16th, 2007, 05:19 AM

Oh dddb.. I mean that Red Sox-esque thingy majig...

Whateve Merry Gridlock and Eminent domain to all!!! Ho, Ho, Ho.. I'm sure it will effect you Tal, up in your place in pleasantville. Reading Norman Oders report in the Atlantic Yards wouldn't sway me.. I'm all for the project and care very little about who it effects in the long run. Shallow as that sounds..

I believe those Nimbys you speak of that won't be living in the project were offered just that.. but I could be wrong. I mean, your conspirasy theories just might be right. One thing about me on Nimbys in particular.. Don't give a horses ass about them.. and <^> them for always making things difficult for large and promising projects.. West Side and Jets Stadium, Con Ed site, Foster UES, and this among others...
Glad to see them losing a few for a change and I hope that more opposition is thwarted.
Key part of that analogy Tal.. last four ALDS.. and on another note before those last 4 ALDS they appeared in 8 others.. where were the mets? That was weak. Yea... yer cool.. bringing up baseball scenarios just to piss people off and you know it. Yer a weasily little worm and you always have been here. That is just truth. Pop off.

TalB

November 16th, 2007, 10:39 PM

http://www.nysun.com/article/66577?page_no=1
Against Ratner's Domain

By STEVE ETTLINGER
November 16, 2007

A lawyer for Bruce Ratner and the Empire State Development Corporation stated that the Atlantic Yards mega-development, 16 skyscrapers and a sports arena, would "connect" neighborhoods.

This was at last month's hearing of the federal abuse of eminent domain case brought against the state of New York by a group of Brooklyn residents and business owners.

I nearly laughed out loud in the hushed courtroom — Mr. Ratner plans on eliminating, among other things, the street that I currently use to get to Fort Greene from Park Slope. He also wants to put up massive "superblocks" in what would be the densest residential area in America. Claiming that building big walls connects neighborhoods is doublespeak at its worst.

The defense lawyer, Preeta Bansal, spoke about the construction of a new subway entrance at Atlantic and Flatbush Avenues as one of the other public benefits. That got a mere chortle from me, as the current one needs no replacement — it is still under construction.

The final insult was when she said that local schools could use the arena. That's no public benefit at all in my book because Mr. Ratner plans on charging over $100,000 for such rentals. At that price, they can use the privately-owned Marriott in downtown Brooklyn. Mr. Ratner's purported public benefits are easily disputed, and they are the key to the court case.

The underlying argument was that the arena would be publicly owned and merely leased to Mr. Ratner. Truth is, he expects a 99-year lease for the princely sum of $1. If the public really will own it, why did Barclay's Bank agree to pay Mr. Ratner $400 million so it could be called the Barclay's Arena? It seems that if the arena were truly public, taxpayers would be getting that cash, not a private developer. The state's basis in this unusual case for taking private property from one owner and transferring it to another is the declaration of blight, but these properties were never considered blighted until Mr. Ratner asked the ESDC to condemn them, and only them. Isn't that putting the cart before the horse? They are not part of an urban renewal zone — they contain many recently renovated condos that were selling for close to $1 million a piece.

Tellingly, the ESDC admitted that it looked only at properties within the footprint of his project. Mr. Ratner, the ESDC, and even former key booster Marty Markowitz have confessed that he was the only developer ever involved, and that he initiated discussions. The city did not plan anything; indeed, there is no comprehensive civic plan for the entire site.

It is important to realize what's at stake here: If Mr. Ratner prevails, our traditionally sacred property rights will get trampled. And if the government follows the lead of a private developer's project, it will be a blow to the free market economy.

To add insult to injury, the ESDC, the lead government agency involved in the proposed takings, is not an elected body and operates outside of normal government constraint for developers, overriding zoning laws and the like. It's a perfect example of big government running roughshod over homeowners.

My hope is that the Second Circuit Court of Appeals will see this case in light of Kelo v. New London (2005). This landmark U.S. Supreme Court case ruled that private property can be turned over to a private developer under eminent domain, the catch being that the government is responsible for creating the redevelopment plan — not a private developer like Mr. Ratner.

The bottom line is that Mr. Ratner had eyed this site years ago and has engineered an abuse of eminent domain to acquire the land he needs.

If proof of that doesn't come from the discovery process sought in this case, just take a look at the shopping malls that he built on neighboring blocks: The Atlantic Center Mall opened in 1996 and the Atlantic Terminal that opened in 2004. Both were designed with a stadium look, complete with pennants and arches along the roof edge.

This is really a case for the Supreme Court — a struggle of the government versus private homeowners and the preservation of property rights. I think the right team is going to win.

Mr. Ettlinger, a popular science and popular reference writer, lives in Brooklyn.

nygirl

November 17th, 2007, 02:21 AM

^ Are you going to just post some journalists biased opinions or anything factual any time soon? Seeing as how we obviously know what side Stever Ettlinger choose are we supposed to except he probably won't post all the facts, just the ones that back his opinion up? See an unbiased journalist would have been a better catch for article posting in here, someone who presents just facts without a hint of which side they take on the issue. Why should we even care what STEVE ETTLINGER thinks.. just give me the facts you boob. Oh lol the Nysun.. nevermind..

TalB

November 17th, 2007, 10:59 PM

The NY Sun does have a comment section, so if you don't like what he said, then write it there, but don't use personal attacks or they won't allow for it.

nygirl

November 18th, 2007, 07:25 PM

Actually Mr. Ettlinger has every right to voice his opinion in a newpaper. He isn't coming into the SSC forum and doing it. You just happen to have a knack for posting one sided articles and you post them quite often giving everyone the impression that this is how everyone thinks. I don't have the patience or time to search articles though I have read several in Newsday, the Daily news, and the times by journalists who are less one sided on this particular site. How convenient that you only post articles by journalists that share your biasy. What is the point of trying to inform everyone when it just expresses your views ? When do you post articles about good things going on down there,like the opponents losing trials and actual demo work being done? Oh wait... you hate this project and you want it to fail desperately..

Well then I'll have to call upon Nyguy to do his handywork, or get on Lexusnexus and contribute more articles myself. I warn you though, that there willbe more pro development arguements and articles than negative flooding this thread.

TalB

November 18th, 2007, 11:47 PM

In reality, there is no such thing as a neutral article, and any editor or editorialists tends to be biased somewhere. Is Eroll Louis, a columnist for the Daily News, less biased on his statements on the Atlantic Yds in which he actually supports it? I have posted numerous articles regaurding this project, and some of them were positive, while others were negative. Regaurdless of their stance, I am just the messenger here. If the media wants to talk to Daniel Goldstien, other members of DDDB, or anyone else who opposes this project and place it in the article, they can. The bottom line is that you have your view and Stever Ettlinger has his, and I doubt that DDDB had convinced the Sun into allowing for his editorial. Currently, the project is not u/c, especially if Bruce Ratner looses the other two lawsuits, so it is not inevitable.

TalB

November 22nd, 2007, 04:01 AM

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/21/putting-the-atlantic-yards-arena-in-a-secure-place/
November 21, 2007, 4:43 pm

Putting the Atlantic Yards Arena in a Secure Place

By Andy Newman

Once the basketball arena at Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn gets built — assuming it does get built — it should be fairly obvious where it is. But until now, the precise location of where the arena is going to be has proved strangely elusive.

The location matters, somewhat, because elected officials and opponents of the $4 billion Atlantic Yards project have raised questions about security at the site based on the arena setback. In Newark, where a new arena recently opened, that city decided at the last minute that at 20 feet from the curb, the arena was too close to the street for comfort, so now Newark closes streets around its arena during events.
If the streets bordering the Brooklyn arena had to be closed, critics say, it would be a disaster.

The arena site is at an intersection — of two of Brooklyn’s main arteries, Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues — that is already a congestion choke-point, even before a single brick has been laid for Atlantic Yards, which is slated to include more than 6,000 apartments and a few million square feet of commercial space, in addition to the 18,000-seat arena.
The New York Police Department has said that its antiterrorism experts examined the plans for Atlantic Yards, where the arena is scheduled to open sometime after 2009, and determined that no streets will need to be closed.

Fine, the critics said, but still they asked, almost in the spirit of pure scientific inquiry, just how far from the street will the Atlantic Yards arena be? Twenty feet, like the
Newark arena? Fifty feet? Two hundred?

Well.

On Nov. 6, in an interview with The Times, a spokesman for Forest City Ratner directed this reporter to a rough site diagram. This reporter multiplied the distances from arena to street by the scale of the plan, and determined that the diagram showed the arena set back about 75 feet from Atlantic Avenue and 150 feet from Flatbush Avenue. That calculation was included in a Nov. 8 article that noted that some city and state officials had called for a security review of the project.

If only life were so simple.

After the article was published, the prolific Atlantic Yards watchdog Norman Oder dredged up a 2006 article in his favorite newspaper, The Times, that included an architect’s rendering that appeared to show the arena much closer to the street. More calls were made.

The Forest City Ratner spokesman, Loren Riegelhaupt, did some digging and reported that Page 8-27 of the environmental impact statement that the Empire State Development Corporation issued for Atlantic Yards states, in part, “Pedestrian movement along the arena block would be facilitated by widening existing sidewalks to 20 feet wide along Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues.”

Mr. Riegelhaupt confirmed that this meant that at all points, the arena would be set back at least 20 feet from the street.

Is that to say, he was asked, that at its closest point the arena would indeed be set back 20 feet from the street, or could “at least” mean 25 feet, or 50 feet, or more?
Mr. Riegelhaupt was initially unable to answer. The problem was that the location of the arena falls under the rubric of a “security issue,” a phrase that brings a magic cone of silence crashing down onto even the most innocent-seeming inquiry. Somehow the planned location of an 18,000 seat basketball arena had become as classified a piece of antiterror information as, say, the structural vulnerabilities of a bridge.

Finally, after more than 24 hours of tense negotiations, Mr. Riegelhaupt called at 1:43 p.m. today with the definitive number: at its closest point to the street, the arena will indeed be 20 feet from the street, on both the Atlantic Avenue side and the Flatbush Avenue side.

That is the same distance as the Newark arena is from its neighboring streets. So what’s different about the Atlantic Yards arena? That, Mr. Riegelhaupt said, is a security question, to be directed to the Police Department. The Police Department has said that its policy is not to comment on such matters.

TalB

November 24th, 2007, 11:52 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/24/nyregion/24yards.html?ref=nyregion
A Brooklyn Arena and the Street: What’s the Right Distance?

By ANDY NEWMAN
Published: November 24, 2007

Throughout the contentious prehistory of the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, just about every fact and figure about the planned development has been passionately debated, from the height of its tallest building, to the number of apartments that will be affordable to those of modest means, to the amount of taxpayer financing it will require.

Lately, months after the project near Downtown Brooklyn was approved and preliminary site work began, another question has arisen: How far will the project’s basketball arena be from the street?

The arena’s precise location matters because elected officials and opponents of the $4 billion project have raised questions about security at the site based on how far the arena is set back from the roadway. In Newark, where a new arena recently opened, the city decided at the last minute that at 20 feet from the curb, the arena was too close to the street for comfort, so now Newark closes streets around its arena during events as a precaution against truck-driving terrorists.

The critics characterized any street closings in Brooklyn as potentially disastrous. This is because the arena is set to be built at the intersection of two of Brooklyn’s main arteries, Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues, an area that is already a congestion choke-point even before a single brick has been laid for the project. Atlantic Yards is slated to include more than 6,000 apartments and a few million square feet of commercial space, in addition to the 18,000-seat arena.

For weeks, the project’s developer, Forest City Ratner, and its state sponsor, the Empire State Development Corporation, had deflected questions from bloggers about the arena’s location, saying that they could not divulge information related to security.

They referred questions to the New York Police Department. Officials there said that antiterrorism experts had examined the plans for the arena and determined that neither streets nor lanes would need to be closed.

The question of the arena’s planned location lingered, however: a strangely unknowable fact, given that when the arena is built — it is scheduled to open after 2009 — its precise location will be obvious to terrorist and nonterrorist alike.

This month, a spokesman for Forest City Ratner, in response to inquiries from The New York Times, directed a reporter to a rough site diagram. The reporter multiplied the distances from arena to street by the scale of the plan and determined that the diagram showed the arena set back about 75 feet from Atlantic Avenue and 150 feet from Flatbush Avenue.

After this calculation was published in The Times on Nov. 8, Atlantic Yards watchdogs said that it was not realistic and that the arena was going to be much closer to the street, citing architect’s renderings and language in plan documents.

(Forest City is also a development partner in the new Midtown headquarters of The New York Times Company.)

On Wednesday, a spokesman for Forest City, Loren Riegelhaupt, offered an updated response to a reporter’s inquiries: At its closest point to the street, the arena will be set back 20 feet from both Atlantic and Flatbush Avenues.

That is the same distance as the arena in Newark. This new information prompted another question: What makes the Atlantic Yards arena sufficiently different from the Newark arena that it will not require street closings?

That, Mr. Riegelhaupt said, was a security question to be directed to the Police Department. The Police Department has said that it does not comment on such matters. The department’s security analysis, which found that the arena was safe and streets need not be closed on game days, would stand.

TalB

November 27th, 2007, 10:56 PM

http://www.villagevoice.com/specials/0747,various,78434,7.html
FIGHTING AMONG THEMSELVES

Regarding Dan Ross's November 7–13 letter referring to Daniel Goldstein and Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn as an absolutist organization: Mr. Ross surely gives us more power than we were ever afforded.

Downplaying the work of a self-made grassroots organization in the way Mr. Ross does is taking on a sort of "blame the victim" mentality. There comes a point in organizing and social action when "sitting at the table" and negotiating are no longer strategic options. If Mr. Goldstein and the entire organization believed that negotiation with Forest City Ratner was an option, it would have been done years ago. Sure, we would have liked to remain idealistic and think that conversations could have occurred, but good faith went the way of the falling bricks a long time ago. However, Mr. Ross, perhaps you could try?

Deborah Goldstein
Brooklyn

Don Omar

November 28th, 2007, 12:20 AM

please put the hateorade back in the fridge Talb

TalB

November 30th, 2007, 12:55 AM

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/28/a-political-casualty-in-the-atlantic-yards-battle/
November 28, 2007, 1:12 pm

A Casualty in the Atlantic Yards Battle

By Andy Newman

The Brooklyn borough president, Marty Markowitz, has named a local community board chairwoman to the City Planning Commission, following the political downfall of his previous appointee, Dolly Williams, a self-inflicted casualty of the Atlantic Yards battle.

Ms. Williams agreed last month to a $4,000 fine from the city Conflicts of Interest Board, the board announced Tuesday, settling a complaint over a crucial zoning vote that paved the way for the Brooklyn mega-project in 2004. The planning commission is a 13-member body whose part-time commissioners are paid $48,000 per year to oversee zoning and urban renewal, subject to approval of the City Council.

To replace her, Mr. Markowitz, an ebullient cheerleader for Atlantic Yards, has put forward the name of Shirley A. McRae, the chairwoman of Community Board 2, which covers parts of the area where the project will be built. Her appointment is subject to the City Council’s approval.

Ms. Williams’s problems started in 2004, when she voted to approve a rezoning that allowed residential development on parts of the Atlantic Yards site. Just weeks earlier, she had invested $250,000 in the Nets basketball team. The Nets had been bought that year by Bruce C. Ratner, the Atlantic Yards developer.

Mr. Ratner plans to move the Nets to an 18,000-seat arena at Atlantic Yards, a $4 billion, eight-million-square-foot residential and commercial development to be built near Downtown Brooklyn. (Mr. Ratner’s company, Forest City Ratner, is the development partner in new corporate headquarters of The New York Times in Midtown.)
After complaints about her vote, Ms. Williams, who heads a construction company, A. Williams Construction, in Brooklyn, had recused herself from further voting on Atlantic Yards issues.

Ms. Williams did not immediately return a call seeking comment this morning.

TalB

November 30th, 2007, 12:57 AM

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/27/atlantic-yards-ombudsman-is-named/
November 27, 2007, 5:37 pm

Atlantic Yards Ombudsman Is Named

By Sewell Chan

The Empire State Development Corporation named an ombudsman today to serve as a public liaison for the contentious Atlantic Yards development near Downtown Brooklyn.
The corporation promised to create and fill the position in May as part of a package of measures intended to improve accountability to the public. With increasing fervor, bloggers and community activists had questioned why no ombudsman had been named more than six months later.

The new ombudsman, Forrest R. Taylor, was chief of staff to Gifford Miller when he was speaker of the City Council from 2002 to 2004.

Previously, Mr. Taylor was a protégé of Marc V. Shaw, a former first deputy mayor who now works for the Extell Development Company, and worked as deputy executive director for operations at the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, where Mr. Shaw was executive director before he joined the Bloomberg administration. Most recently, Mr. Taylor has been manager of Prowess Initiatives and Analysis, which advises companies on government relations and corporate communications.

Mr. Taylor, 46, a Detroit native who graduated from the University of Michigan in 1981, has his work cut out for him. Atlantic Yards, a large retail, residential and office development that includes a new basketball arena, has been the most debated project ever to rise in the city’s most populous borough.

As the “dedicated project coordinator,” Mr. Taylor will be the liaison from the development corporation to elected officials, community groups and the public.

“Understanding and addressing the community’s concerns are a high priority for this administration,” said Avi Schick, president of the development corporation. “We believe this important development project will help transform Brooklyn by bringing much-needed housing, transit improvements, open space and jobs to the downtown area. Forrest’s background in government, transportation and community affairs makes him ideally suited to provide the public with direct information and direct access to the state and the developer.”

Mr. Taylor started his new job on Monday. His office will be “in the Atlantic Yards project area,” according to a news release. (Readers are encouraged to post their comments for the new ombudsman below.)

TalB

November 30th, 2007, 11:16 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2007/11/30/2007-11-30_opponents_slam_plan_to_build_atlantic_ya.html
Opponents slam plan to build Atlantic Yards arena near busy intersection

BY JOTHAM SEDERSTROM
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Friday, November 30th 2007, 4:00 AM

Critics of the Atlantic Yards project renewed their call Thursday for an independent security review in light of news that a portion of a planned basketball arena would be built just 20 feet from Brooklyn's busiest intersection.

The potential security risk at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush Aves. is within reach of terrorists hellbent on crashing into the glass-walled arena, opponents charged.

"The [Empire State Development Corp.] and Forest City Ratner are asking us to trust that they have shared a security plan with the NYPD, and that the NYPD is fine with it," said Eric McClure, member of the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods, an Atlantic Yards watchdog group.

Security has always been an issue for Yards critics, but it was only recently that a spokesman for Forest City Ratner revealed just how close arena walls would be to the street.

The cry for more information from Forest City Ratner and an independent review grew even louder in October after Newark police officials ordered the closing of streets near the new Prudential Center during events.

Those streets are about 25 feet from that arena's walls.

"You can't construct an arena and put it right against a street in a post-9/11 world," Newark's police director, Garry McCarthy, told the Newark Star-Ledger in October.

Forest City Ratner spokesman Joe DePlasco declined to comment on security, citing the sensitive nature of the issue - even as opponents called on officials to fully explain how the arena would be protected from terrorism.

DePlasco, however, directed the Daily News to an affidavit by security expert Jeffrey Venter, the president of Ducibella Venter & Santore, the firm tapped by Forest City Ratner to consult on security matters at the project site.

The plan "considers in detail the ability of the structures to resist progressive collapse or to otherwise fail in a manner that could compromise life or interrupt facility operations," Venter said in the affidavit.

But opponents said more information should be made available.

"From our point of view, the question is how is the Brooklyn arena different from Newark's arena when it comes to closing streets?" asked Daniel Goldstein, a member of the anti-Yards group Develop Don't Destroy, adding that Brooklyn wouldn't be able to withstand street closures.

The $4.2 billion project in Prospect Heights calls for a pro basketball arena for the NBA's Nets and 16 towers with residential and commercial space, according to plans.

jsederstrom@nydailynews.com

Don Omar

December 1st, 2007, 07:01 AM

AAAAHHHHHHHH

TalB

December 6th, 2007, 10:37 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/12/06/2007-12-06_foes_latest_plan_seems_fishy.html
Foes' latest plan seems fishy

Thursday, December 6th 2007, 4:00 AM

Opponents of two mega-projects - Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn and the Columbia University expansion in West Harlem - have lately taken to arguing that the deals should be halted because potentially dire security concerns haven't been thoroughly examined.

The public should take these complaints with a grain of salt. Every sane person wants to make sure new development is done safely - but project opponents, desperate to kill these projects by any means, are hardly the kind of trustworthy and neutral authorities to decide what's safe and what's not.

In Brooklyn, the same politicians and anti-development activists that have tried to kill or delay Atlantic Yards from its inception with lawsuits and protests are now screaming that the proposed arena will be "only" 20 feet from Flatbush and Atlantic Aves. - allegedly too close to traffic and potential terrorists.

A recent decision by the Newark Police Department to close off streets near its newly opened Prudential Center arena - located 25 feet from a busy street - is being cited as a cause for alarm in Brooklyn.

"The risks are clear and the lack of information that has been shared with us is unacceptable," said City Councilwoman Tish James, whose public opposition to Atlantic Yards began before her first glimpse of the project plan.

In reality, the risks aren't clear at all. New York is full of sensitive facilities located right near busy streets, including Madison Square Garden, the U.S. mission to the United Nations, Mayor Bloomberg's home and the recently reopened footpath between City Hall and the Tweed building.

Uptown, opponents of Columbia are hollering that part of the proposed new campus, a $200 million research facility, might contain hazardous biological materials that could leach into the Hudson River, poison the neighborhood and otherwise endanger the Harlem community.

Here are some lurid scenarios about biohazards posted on an opposition Web site, www.stopcolumbia.org.

"The missed shower, the filter not changed on time, the minuscule tear in a bodysuit, the scientist with a paper cut who forgets to put on his gloves - each of these events could lead to disaster," the site claims. In both cases, opponents are searching for a seemingly tiny opening that might persuade a sympathetic judge to halt or kill the projects for them.

They're hoping for a replay of the 1985 Westway decision, when a federal judge famously issued an injunction that killed a controversial multibillion-dollar plan to build a mostly underground six-lane highway on landfill running along the West Side of Manhattan.

Westway, which was backed by the mayor, governor and President of the United States, would have created 89 acres of parkland and 100 acres of residential and commercial development - and the feds would have picked up 90% of the cost.

But after 10 years of battling to block the project, community opponents scored a death blow by convincing Judge Thomas Griesa that the Army Corps of Engineers had produced inconsistent and misleading findings on how the project might harm the Hudson's striped bass population.

Fast-forward 22 years. Atlantic Yards and Columbia have both succeeded in the early rounds of state and city approvals for their respective projects, both of which are ambitious, well-thought-out and enjoy substantial community support.

Forest City Ratner officials - who had seen the department cite security concerns to halt or change expensive projects like the proposed Goldman Sachs headquarters - say they made presentations to senior police brass years ago and incorporated all sorts of security provisions into the proposed Atlantic Yards arena complex.

Columbia, which runs multiple hospital and research complexes, has extensive experience in handling biological materials.

It's not surprising that die-hard opponents are searching for a modern version of the striped bass. But I strongly suspect they are fishing in empty waters.

elouis@nydailynews.com

TalB

December 7th, 2007, 11:31 PM

I am glad that fans are standing by the Nets staying in NJ like I am on stopping the move to Brooklyn.

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/sports.aol.com/fanhouse/media/2007/12/keep-the-nets.jpg

nygirl

December 8th, 2007, 01:17 AM

Too bad, they'll move. Just a gut feeling and you can go ahead and say all you want to about that. Its totally cool if you do but.........

I have no doubt theres going to be a long, drawn out, emotional battle ( at least on the side west of the Island of Manhattan) but in the end both sides will be crushed with a fresh look on just a piece of Atlantic AND a new proffesional NBA team to boot. Can't wait to purchase a ticket for a Nets home game in Brooklyn and I'll be smiling at the thought of Talb throwing tantrums over it. Ahh victory will be ours, watch big bucks go to work. ;)

As someone from Brooklyn and has lived there for 20 years of my life, I can't wait to see a shiny venue at the bleak looking Atlantic yards.

TalB

December 10th, 2007, 03:27 AM

Taylorhoge

December 10th, 2007, 04:49 AM

100 people are being displaced talb thats nothing compared to what Moses did building the triborough bridge.Or when the WTC was built and tore down radio row,Or what about the east village and Flatiron after Peter Cooper and Stuyvesant town were built.

nygirl

December 10th, 2007, 07:44 PM

I wouldn't be so overrconfident like you were on the Yankees durring last years playoffs nygirl. As long as it hadn't ended, it's not official. To add on, to the lawsuits, the oppossition can also convince a number of the NBA Board of Governors to vote against the move, which will would be a major loss to Ratner regaurdless to whether he wins or looses the lawsuits in the fact that an owner cannot arbitrairly move an NBA team w/o their approoval. That shot I just posted shows how much fans really care about their team. As for attendance at Nets games, it has actually increased in the last number of seasons since making the NBA Finals according to ESPN on average attendance at home, so it really shows how much support they have. If the move to Brooklyn fails, he can always have the Nets stay in the Meadowlands or go to Newark with the Devils as a consolation prize, which will probably be even better than taking away homes and businesses from hard working people.

What the hell do the yankees have to do with anything? You always bring them up with me to get a fight started. Dude here is what I think... you are going to get I told you so's on a few things on these boards by a bunch of forumers who cannot wait to do so. Keep giving us room to say I told you so. The "proof picture" shot you posted prooves nothing, although I do believe there are tons of fans who will protest over in jersey. Things are only going to get more heated but there will be an outcome. The photo you show has a few nobodys with posters that looks like it took them alot of time and effort to make. When it all boils down to Ratner doing what he wants to do, I believe he will get it done. Let's just wait and see. About the Yankees. At least they are somebody in their hometown.. if you want to keep bringing that up. But you know what? You win. I give up the arguement. See you when this thing is standing over Atlantic and Flatbush.

TalB

December 13th, 2007, 01:23 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/12/sports/basketball/12arena.html?ref=nyregion
Wait Until 2010, Nets Say of New Brooklyn Arena

By THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: December 12, 2007

The Nets, who had hoped to move into a new arena near downtown Brooklyn in time for the 2009-10 season, have acknowledged that construction will not be finished until sometime in 2010.

Legal challenges to the 22-acre Atlantic Yards project have altered its timetable. Construction of the 19,000-seat, glass-walled arena has not begun.

The project’s developer, Forest City Ratner, said it had razed 20 buildings and started to build temporary yards for the Long Island Rail Road.

“Our goal is to be in the arena during the calendar year 2010,” said Barry Baum, a spokesman for Forest City Ratner.

Baum said the arena could be ready before the 2010-11 season begins.

The Nets will continue to play at Izod Center in East Rutherford, N.J., under a lease extension signed last year. The extension, which goes through the 2012-13 season, gives the team an annual option to leave for Brooklyn.

In 2004, Nets officials said the new arena would be ready in 2006. Last year, the team said it would move into the new facility in 2009.

Don Omar

December 13th, 2007, 06:10 AM

Ok I go to Seton Hall in Jersey and we used to play at the Continental, but we moved with the Devils to Newark's Prudential Center (amazing by the way). First, the new Prudential Center is way to small to have the Nets. Second, the Continental is going down. I heard they are making it into some kind of theater. There is also the big Xanadu that is a HUGE development that is taking over the parking lot.
http://www.meadowlandsxanadu.com/stellent01/groups/public/documents/mx_webassets/056910.jpg
Its like a huge shopping and entertainment complex with like a ski hill inside (Dubai better watch out for Jersey).

Plus...
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/459/loserzj0.jpg

TalB

December 14th, 2007, 12:41 AM

I am very sure that very few people are against this project with myself included. :|

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2182/1701813294_22da017148_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2133/1700890047_2162016135_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2322/1700667928_e031083ea7_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2341/1603973618_15d987d542_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2343/1603940760_39a68f7ffd_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2003/1603950316_eab233a9df_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2070/1603966266_cf6e7c1181_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2099/1603102003_8677acff45_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2283/1603956790_bf08b07aa4_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2120/1572444145_63dec19d4d_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2179/1573345154_216d166ca3_b.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1046/1433586067_eef0fe42c5_b.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1065/1429434263_67261f6952_b.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1117/1391396935_bbce4afdf7_b.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1109/829610692_1b5be77e03_o.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1196/526576988_d35f45120e_b.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/209/479181302_824cb93b3f_b.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/108/308857919_34ad25acc9_b.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/118/282779220_2c9c31ee78_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/82/276862049_21ac799cf1_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/104/276861807_a73937cfbf_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/111/276861626_efd71b7262_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/108/276862375_2449103f70_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2266/1573381394_b3d16b06b4_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2087/1572427467_d2b66ab439_b.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/116/276171412_56085f9d99_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/115/276170880_4c0950f56c_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/88/276169301_e5d51298da_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/94/276168865_c01a335023_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/112/276168355_76a3e789e4_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/89/228805345_a7882b9246_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/69/191362798_b3b31d0cce_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/48/191360722_163ee76e24_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/44/191360651_f460244d4c_o.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/53/191358850_a27096d9df_o.jpg

nygirl

December 14th, 2007, 01:00 AM

Doesn't the Franchise want to move?

TalB

December 14th, 2007, 08:27 PM

Lewis Katz, who owned the Nets before Ratner bought him out, didn't want the Nets to leave NJ and even insisted on having the team go to Newark to help with transportation issues.

nygirl

December 16th, 2007, 09:02 PM

^ But Lewis Katz is no longer the owner while Ratner and I think Jay Z are. So basically the guy that didn't want to move was bought out by the guy who does want to move them and will ultimately develop it all in Brooklyn. Dealing with these legal battles that won't drain him nearly as much as the people opposing him. Tal did you grow a beard btw?

TalB

December 17th, 2007, 05:27 AM

I am actually in none of those shots, but being with the opposition gives a good understanding and the ability to debunk the myths aimed at them on the Atlantic Yds.

"Oppenents of the Atlantic Yds are against developement on the railyards and want to see them remain undeveloped.": It must be true that the opposition really wants to see the railyards remain undeveloped just by opposing the Atlantic Yds Complex by FCR. This is false, b/c they actually did claim that the railyards should be developed, but with a project that is more in scale with the area. With the help of local coucilwoman Lettitia James, a plan known as UNITY was created, and Gary Barnett, who heads Extell Developement, agreed to use that idea. For those who don't know the UNITY plan, it was to create an alternative that will feature a project that goes in scale with the area, builds only the Atlantic Yds themsevles, features real affordable housing, provides jobs for lower and middle income individuals and familes, and does NOT use taxpayer money. If they really wanted to leave the railyards undeveloped, then why did they come up with an alternative plan? If the railyards do remain undeveloped in the end, it will be b/c of the MTA, not the opposition.

"The Atlantic Yds Complex will offer many benefits for the community": In reality, this is nothing but a selling point that Bruce Ratner claims in his broken promises. The affordable housing was found to be only around 10% in a study that was taken by his own numbers. In fact, a study even found that the two lowest brackets based on income won't even part of this new complex yet the highest will be at about 2/3 in the demographics. An NBA arean is not a public project, and new arenas mean that ticket prices will be higher. The CBA (Community Benefits Agreement) is more of a joke, and those who currently live in the proposed footprint weren't allowed to join but those who supported it were. The majority of the greenspace in the project is mainly going to be the backyards of residents, which is never open to the public. The renderings even show it as being a walled fortress, which is sheilded from everything else. Another major study was that the project would increase traffic on the already traffic prone intersection at Atlantic/Flatbush Aves, which is already a traffic nightmare along with several other points on a daily basis. There was a similar project like MTC over in downtown Brooklyn in which he demolished much of the area and built his sterile complex, plus he used eminent domain abuse on that one as well, not forget that he lied about there ever being a retail base in those buildings. Another lie about that complex is that when JP Morgan Chase located there, they didn't hire anyone from the area and just relocated existing jobs from somewhere else instead. The Atlantic Ctr and Terminal Malls only has corporations in them that give minium wage jobs and collect their profits out of state as well as having government agencies working in them and in MTC. The truth about his Brooklyn projects is that he builds him as if he doesn't care about the neighborhoods. Overall, many of us have been done this road before, and developers really think more about themsevles than the people.

"Those who are long time Brooklyn residents support this project.": Whether a person has lived in Brooklyn for 4 or 40 years, it doesn't mean anything on their view. I am not saying that long time Brooklyn residents are dumb on this, but those that support don't represent every Brooklyn resident. There are long time Brooklyn residents that oppose this project as well, so it's really on the individual, not the group. The reason why a non-Brooklyn resident like myself is very much concerned about this project is b/c it will involve the tax dollars of the entire state of NY, so this means that a resident who is living by the Canadien border will be paying for this project as well even though they live nowhere near Brooklyn. There are a lot of people who have shaped up Brooklyn but weren't born or raised there. As a matter of fact the US was settled by many who weren't from around here. Ratner's project is hardly about Brooklyn, and he continues to call what he sees today as the past and his projects as the future, which shows how little he cares about the borough. Also, Frank Gehry mentioned, "Building an entire neighborhood from scratch" in which he ignores what is already there.

"Bruce Ratner does care about the people and give donations to groups.": What Ratner really does for the community is photo-ops. The only groups he donates to are the ones that either agree with him like ACORN or the ones he created like BUILD. What he does his really on behalf of his company. By no surprise, BUILD is a group that is on his payroll and will be dumped after the results occur for Ratner regaurdless of the results. Let's not forget that he did use residents from the Ingresoll Houses to get MTC built, and then dumped them after he got it built. A major bait and switch movement was those who signed a three year contract in the claim that they will be promised to live in the affodable section when in reality the contract will start when the second they sign it, and Ratner will use his lawyers to protect his contracts in mentioning how he will not owe them anything whether or not the project gets built, b/c it won't take three years to build it and that is if it's being built right now. Why are poor blacks supporting a white corporate developer who really doesn't care about them? The answer is follow the money. Again, Ratner is not a saviour, he is a developer and unless you happen to be one of his CEOs or stockholders, he wouldn't care about you.

"The Nets arena is the focus of Ratner's project.": I could have included this in how his project don't offer any public benefits, but the arena has its own stories. If you look at the project as a whole, the arena is really just 10% of the entire project. The arena is a trojan horse for his master plan. He knows that if he can get the borough with its policticians to support having an NBA team, he can get them to agree with him on the rest of his project. The truth is that Ratner cares very little about the Nets, but he bought them so that he can convince the city, state, and other local governments to stand by him. The second he bought the NJ Nets, he wanted to move them to Brooklyn w/o trying to test out where they are now. One can call it a business, but others call it a sellout to the fans.

"The Nets don't have that many fans right now.": This is not all true by that statement. It is true that when the Nets made the NBA Finals in both 2002 and 2003, teams that didn't make the playoffs those years averaged a higher home attendance than they did, but it did increase over the last number of seasons. In 2005, the Nets actually rose up seven spots on the NBA attendance list on ESPN. It is found that 60% of its fan base lives in NJ, and they will loose a whole chunk if they move to Brooklyn. Supporters claim that those living in Brooklyn will replace them when Brooklyn already has a number of long time Knicks fans who won't just convert just b/c the Nets are there.

"Sports facilities do a lot to help develope an area": That statement has been found to be false. Stadiums and arenas don't actually help an area, they reap from it. An example is Yankee Stadium has been in the Concourse Village section of The Bronx for at least 80 years yet it hasn't given anything to the community b/c it is private property, and owes the public nothing. As a matter of fact, when someone is spending money on sporting events, they will actually spend money less on a lot of other things unless they are a multi-millionare. Also, newer sports facitlies tend to mean higher ticket prices for the fans, so if anyone thought that ticket prices are high now, just wait until the new place opens up causing for the average fan to just stay home and watch the game on TV rather than sit in nosebleed seats to save money. In several states, their state supreme courts have voted against using eminent domain or even tax dollars on sports facilites, though NY is not one of them.

"There wasn't that much opposition when the WSB was built.": Actually, there was when the WSB was first being built. Many didn't like the fact that a number of rows at Hanson Pl near Flatbush Ave were going to be demolished for a skyscraper that would hold a bank. There is more to this that many do not know about when this happened. There was no Landmark Preservation Act back in the 1920's nor was there any zoning laws back then. There were a number of other things that was done back in the 1920's such as prohibition, Jim Cro Laws, and illegal gambling dens. Just b/c it was done then doesn't mean that it was right either. However, Brooklyn's population was a lot of smaller then as oppossed to now, and the lower half was still undeveloped back in 1929. Another thing is that the owner of the WSB didn't use eminent domain to build it unlike for the Atlantic Yds complex that Ratner intents for nor did was it built with taxpayer money.

"The opposition offered no alternative sites for Ratner to place his project, so it has to be on the Atlantic Yds.": Actually, he was offered several other places to build his complex so that he wouldn't need to destroy an already existing neighborhood. Coney Island was offered to Ratner b/c there were places that had vacant lots that were in need of developement along with an even bigger railyard than that of the Atlantic Yds and were up for graps as well as being easy to get to by both subway and cars. Another site was the Brooklyn Navy Yd b/c that area was up for sale, and Ratner wouldn't have to use eminent domain to build them like in Coney Island. Others have offered that Ratner should build the arena over his own mall, which was failing anyway. Charles Barron, who represents East NY by assembly district, had offered building his complex there over empty lots in that he claims that East NY has easy tranist by subway and LIRR. Others had wanted the Nets to move to Newark with the Devils to solve the transit issues b/c it has NJ Tranist, PATH, and the Newark City Subway, while others wanted the Nets to stay in the Meadowlands b/c the PA of NY/NJ is building a line from Penn Station on NJ Transit. However, Ratner had refused to accept any of these alternative sites and only wanted to build it where he wants it.

"People will take mass transit to the game especially b/c of the transit hub there.": Nobody is arguing that the Atlantic Ave Station, along with Pacific St, is a major subway hub. However, the increased population has resulted in strains on these lines. Norman Oder, who formed the Atlantic Yds Report, mentioned that he tries to avoid using subway station durring peak hours b/c of how full it can get. Even though sports facilities in NYC are built with subway and rail lines near them, who really uses them? Yankee Stadium, the home of the NY Yankees, has the B, D, and 4 trains of the subway yet the Major Deegan Expwy (I-87) is gridlocked before and after games despite this. Shea Stadium, the home of the NY Mets, has 7 train and the Pt Washington Branch of the LIRR yet people are still packing the LIE (I-495), Van Wyck and Whitestone Expwys (I-678), and the GCP. There are even a good percentage of people who are taking cabs rather than using the A, C, E, 1, 2, and 3 trains along with NJ Transit, and just about every line of the LIRR to MSG, which is home to the NY Knicks, NY Liberty, and NY Rangers. Let's not forget that rail lines like Metro-North and LIRRs run on a sporadic schedule, which makes it easier if people drive b/c they would have to wait up to nearly an hour for them to come, plus the Atlantic Ave Branch of the LIRR can only be reached from the Jamaica Station and not anywhere else. For those who would be taking Metro-North RR to GCT, they would have to get there before 2 AM b/c it won't run for another two hours, so they would be better off driving. This is not a surprise for other cites with transit and sports facilities are almost designed as if they were meant for auto traffic.

TalB

January 5th, 2008, 01:07 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/sports/basketball/04nba.html?_r=1&ref=basketball&oref=login
Nets Say Brooklyn Move May Be Delayed Further

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: January 4, 2008

The Nets will play most or all of the 2009-10 N.B.A. season in New Jersey instead of in their new arena in Brooklyn, a team spokesman said Thursday.

The spokesman, Barry Baum, said the Nets could begin the 2009-10 season at the Izod Center in East Rutherford, N.J., and then move to Brooklyn in the first half of 2010.

The Nets had planned to play in their new arena starting in 2009. But in October, the Nets’ principal owner, Bruce Ratner, said the arena, to be called the Barclays Center, probably would not be ready by the start of that season.

Baum said Thursday that under the terms of their contract with the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority, which operates the Izod Center, the Nets must give 18 months’ notice before leaving to avoid paying a penalty. The Nets’ agreement with the authority, which runs through the 2012-13 season, gives the team an annual option to leave for Brooklyn.

In 2004, Nets officials said the new arena would be ready in 2006. Last year, the team said it would move into the new facility in 2009. In December, Baum told reporters, “Our goal is to be in the arena during the calendar year 2010.”

The Nets have not broken ground on the Brooklyn arena, which is part of the larger Atlantic Yards development that will also include office space and as many as 6,400 new apartments. The $4 billion project has faced legal challenges from residents and environmental groups.

TalB

January 13th, 2008, 04:49 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/nyregion/12atlantic.html?ref=nyregion
Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Seeking to Block Atlantic Yards

By ANAHAD O’CONNOR
Published: January 12, 2008

A state judge on Friday dismissed a lawsuit filed by a coalition of community groups against the Atlantic Yards project near Downtown Brooklyn, dealing a major setback to opponents of the $4 billion development plan.

The lawsuit had been widely considered the last major one standing in the way of the project, second perhaps only to an eminent domain suit that was dismissed by a federal judge in June.

The project’s developer and supporters applauded Friday’s decision, while opponents said they would appeal and continue to try to have the eminent domain decision overturned.

In her ruling on Friday, Justice Joan A. Madden of State Supreme Court in Manhattan rejected a claim by the coalition of 26 community groups that the environmental impact statement the state used in evaluating the project should be annulled.

The groups contended that the review did not fully address the project’s potential impact on traffic, security and open space in the neighborhood, and that it had failed to take a “hard look” at alternative sites for the project.

But in a detailed 71-page decision, Justice Madden disputed most of the groups’ arguments.

In rejecting a claim, for example, that the review failed to properly address the prospect that the project would provide a tempting target for terrorists, the judge said the project did not have as many inherent hazards as “facilities with some degree of dangerousness, such as an oil supertanker port, a gas storage facility or a hazardous waste facility.” She also noted that state law did not require the developer to consider in its environmental impact statement “the potential security issues and impacts of a terrorist attack.”

Justice Madden also rejected claims that a timetable for the project was inaccurate, and that the environmental impact statement did not consider the major effect the project would have on traffic in the neighborhood, on the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway and on the Brooklyn and Manhattan Bridges.

“Petitioners submit no competent proof from a traffic expert to support their objections,” the judge wrote in her decision.

The project’s developer, Forest City Ratner, a development partner in the new Midtown headquarters of The New York Times Company, has begun work on the property, and says that about half of the structures on the site either have been demolished or are being demolished. The plans for the site include a basketball arena for the New Jersey Nets, more than 6,000 apartments and considerable office space. Supporters of the project say it will generate thousands of jobs, hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue and badly needed units of subsidized housing. The project is being overseen by the Empire State Development Corporation, which would exercise eminent domain.

In a statement, Bruce Ratner, the chief executive of Forest City, said the decision was “a significant step forward.”

“We are very pleased with Judge Madden’s decision, as it further clears the way for Atlantic Yards and the thousands of jobs, affordable housing units and world-class arena — the Barclays Center — that will accompany the project,” he said. “After an exhaustive three-year review process, we are continuing to move full speed ahead on the project.”

The plaintiffs said that the concerns raised by the lawsuit still remained.

“Our elected leaders, who understand those concerns, must gird themselves to bring more pressure to bear on Gov. Eliot Spitzer, now that we’ve had this legal decision,” said Candace Carponter, a lawyer and a member of Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, a coalition of groups and individuals opposed to the project. “With the project in financial jeopardy and the real estate market treading in such troubled waters, and with a pending eminent domain lawsuit, it is time to rethink the Atlantic Yards project.”

Don Omar

January 13th, 2008, 07:39 PM

Another Atlantic Yards Lawsuit Dismissed

http://curbed.com/uploads/Atlantic%20Yards%20Crop.jpg

Friday, January 11, 2008, by Robert
curbed.com (http://curbed.com/archives/2008/01/11/curbedwire_another_atlantic_yards_lawsuit_dismissed.php)

PROSPECT HEIGHTS—A late day decision has been handed down dismissing the lawsuit challenging the environmental review process for Atlantic Yards. The case was filed last April. The decision in the suit filed by 26 community groups was issued by New York State Supreme Court Judge Joan Madden. No details were immediately available, but Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn (DDDB) said it planned an appeal. The group tried to put a positive spin on the latest legal setback, headlining the release conveying the news: "NY State Supreme Court Rules for ESDC in Atlantic Yards Lawsuit. Project Cannot Move Forward While Federal Eminent Domain Case Is Pending." The Federal case was also dismissed, but has been appealed. DDDB's Daniel Goldstein said in the release: "We expect to prevail in that lawsuit, as well as on the appeal of today’s decision."

TalB

January 13th, 2008, 11:34 PM

There is still the federal lawsuit as well as convincing the NBA Board of Governors to block the move, so the fight isn't over just yet.

Mr. Met

January 14th, 2008, 05:36 AM

how many more need to be dismissed?

TalB

January 15th, 2008, 12:45 AM

There is still the federal case that is still being reviewed, but the plaintiffs are filling an appeal to the state supreme court, which they are allowed to by law. Of course they can also convince about half the members on the NBA Board of Governors to vote against the move, b/c the owner of a team cannot single-handidly move an NBA team if it's across state lines. The battle is not over yet, so there is still a fighting chance. BTW, there are some upcoming events based on the Atlantic Yds for this week.

1/15: Book reading of Brooklyn Was Mine at BookCourt, located at 163 Court St near Pacific St in Brooklyn, at 7 PM.

1/17: Quiz Don't Destroy at Rocky Sullivans Pub, located at 34 Van Dyke St by Dwight St, at 8 PM.

1/23: Showing of Brooklyn Matters at 451 West St in Manhattan at 7:30 PM.

1/28: Showing of Brooklyn Matters at the Kimmel Ctr, located at 60 Washington Sq South, in Manhattan, at 6 PM.

Dallasbrink

January 17th, 2008, 07:19 AM

Dallasbrink

January 17th, 2008, 07:21 AM

Hey Ratner, if they dont want your development, bring them and your team to Dallas or Fort Worth. Fort Worth Nets. The Texas Square. Spurs, Rockets, Mavs, Nets. If you dont want them , we'll take them.

philvia

January 17th, 2008, 08:13 AM

seriously, why do those people live in nyc? :rolls eyes:

Dallasbrink

January 17th, 2008, 05:32 PM

seriously, why do those people live in nyc? :rolls eyes:

I know. I thought this would be an awesome development for that part of the city. They get ALOT of green space onto of the arena that connects the 3 beautiful towers for a mast project that will re-vitalize this entire district. But no....there ok with slums and run down trashed out buildings

TalB

January 19th, 2008, 12:55 AM

so they dont want there neighborhood to get a giant booster shot by getting a massive Green Project, the Nets and get rid of old run down buildings....u guys are crazy.
Those people aren't protesting the project b/c they will be living with it, they are protesting b/c it will be over their homes and workplaces, and please don't include all the pics in the quote next time.

Hey Ratner, if they dont want your development, bring them and your team to Dallas or Fort Worth. Fort Worth Nets. The Texas Square. Spurs, Rockets, Mavs, Nets. If you dont want them , we'll take them.
The Dallas Mavericks aren't enough? If the Nets don't end up going to Brooklyn, they will either stay in the Meadowlands or possibly go to Newark, which is a lot better than what Bruce Ratner wants b/c nobody will loose anything, and it won't recquire the votes from the NBA Board of Governors since it's within the same state. As for Texas in terms of proffessional baskettball, they already have three NBA teams (Dallas Mavericks, SA Spurs, and Houston Comets) and two WNBA teams(Houston Comets and SA Silver Stars), and that's more than most states except for California with four NBA teams (LA Lakers, LA Clippers, Sacramento Kings, and Golden State Warriors) and two WNBA teams (LA Sparks and Sacramento Monarchs).

Don Omar

January 19th, 2008, 03:03 AM

first Dallasbrink did you really just quote all of those pictures.

and I bet that if the Nets don't go to Brooklyn, then Ratner will sell them off to someone who will probably take them somewhere else. The are not going to be able to stay in the Meadowlands for very long and the new Prudential Center is too small for them.

Mr. Met

January 19th, 2008, 03:24 AM

The Nets will remain in this area. Either Brooklyn, remain in the Meadowlands, or Long Island near the Mets and Islanders (I just thought that would be a good place they could go, nothing has been mentioned) Brooklyn will build this stadium or they will build a new arena in the Meadowlands (or 1% possibility of moving in with the Islanders. The Meadowlands can support this team, especially with Xanadu.

Ebola

January 19th, 2008, 03:57 AM

Very nice NIMBY porn there. What retards. You could kill two birds with one stone by moving all of these NIMBY idiots to Dubai with a promise that their new city would be free of new development.

I really hope that people protest these BS NIMBY protests. I would.
I don't understand why there are a lot of people here against large projects and why no one at all complained about the WTC, the largest office complex ever with four supertalls; I guess it was a business area. Then again, I'm sure a lot of people did whine about it, but the media and no one at all cared because it was obviously imbecilic.

It needs to be like China. Let the city buy out fruitless neighborhoods, raze them, and build skyscrapers; let there be more Radio Rows and let out creativity and ambition grow. It really is sick because people will whine and moan about any slightest change and ruin projects that potentially can turn the area into something many times better than it was before with the positive results far outweighing and wholly cancelling out the negative results. Some people are blind to everything but the negative. It's funny how any piffle excuse will be used, no matter how trivial, and people actually buy the POS NIMBY mentality. It's one thing to be against a nuclear waste dump; it's another to be against a project like this, but, of course, the idiot who's against it just to be an ass will say its worse than a nuclear waste dump. I got a good idea! Let's use racism as an excuse too! We little people are always treated like livestock! Not doing what the government wishes makes us soooo cool. Let's continue to bitch about the Con Ed site and then we'll start in with ruining the Hudson Center, which contains a lot of tall buildings so it will be even more fun to screw over.

Proof that people are retarded and find an excuse to be against anything is that some people hate the Hearst Tower and call it one of the worst buildings in the city. Ha. Ha. It doesn't matter what it looks like or how big it is or what it will stand for; if some people hear "proposed/new tower/project," they will instantly and blindly try to oppose it and refuse to accept reality.

ardecila

January 19th, 2008, 06:14 AM

People don't like change. Those of us that want change only want it because we are disgruntled with the status quo.

It's pretty much a basic rule of human nature.

Now, that doesn't mean that 95% of NIMBYs aren't navel-gazers who fail to see the big picture. I especially hate NIMBYs who oppose projects based on "character of neighborhood". Displacement of residents and the use of public funds is one HUGE thing, which I oppose most of the time. Preserving views and character is another.

FWIW, I'm still undecided on Atlantic Yards (not that my opinion matters 970 miles away).

koolkid

January 19th, 2008, 07:05 AM

Ebola

January 19th, 2008, 07:44 AM

Quite frankly, a lot of them would protest because they are douches. The gap will no longer be there one day, but it will take many years. Protesting in front of Trump SoHo when the tower's over 40 floors high and growing: utterly retarded. I'm glad that Trump shot that harbinger through their heart. Show them who is boss, that development is vital to success and more towers will rise there. They'll make up piffle that the city is just tying not to 'fall behind' other cities - utter BS, because it could never fall behind in the first place. All of this new development is paving the way for a bright future, and bitchy NIMBYs only hurt their children.

Dallasbrink

January 19th, 2008, 07:45 AM

Those people aren't protesting the project b/c they will be living with it, they are protesting b/c it will be over their homes and workplaces, and please don't include all the pics in the quote next time.

The Dallas Mavericks aren't enough? If the Nets don't end up going to Brooklyn, they will either stay in the Meadowlands or possibly go to Newark, which is a lot better than what Bruce Ratner wants b/c nobody will loose anything, and it won't recquire the votes from the NBA Board of Governors since it's within the same state. As for Texas in terms of proffessional baskettball, they already have three NBA teams (Dallas Mavericks, SA Spurs, and Houston Comets) and two WNBA teams(Houston Comets and SA Silver Stars), and that's more than most states except for California with four NBA teams (LA Lakers, LA Clippers, Sacramento Kings, and Golden State Warriors) and two WNBA teams (LA Sparks and Sacramento Monarchs).

I know, i was just joking around. O boo hoo, u live in a major city and you dont want a sky scraper looming over you. are they fucking serious?

Ebola

January 19th, 2008, 07:54 AM

I know, i was just joking around. O boo hoo, u live in a major city and you dont want a sky scraper looming over you. are they fucking serious?

Yeah and you could argue that it's Brooklyn, but Brooklyn would be one of the top 3 cities in the US if NYC were broken up. If you live in a place like most places in Brooklyn, buildings are bound to grow ever taller. It's already the same as Manhattan Island, just without buildings all over 400+ feet tall on nearly every block.

It's like living in a massive, modern city with millions of people in the middle of the ocean totally isolated from the rest of the world and whining when someone tries to build an airport on your island or create new ports. Whhaaaa, but we don't need an airport or new ship docks! People can just swim! I don't want to deal with the minor problems it may cause me even though it will also being many benefits! Uhh, it will cause pollution and noise and it will clog up the waterways! Uhh, it will cause babies to cry! And it will also cause old people to slip and fall and that's bad!

I really wonder what NIMBY's will be like in 2,000 years from now:

NOOOO! How stupid! We don't need more new skyscrapers! It's okay, we'll simply compact our living space to a 6'x8'x9' room (aka box) per person and problem solved. It's way more efficient because you can excrete your liquid and solid waste at the same time while eating, watching a dozen channels on the TV, listen to your iBox, and playing a holo-novel about our leader, Lord Dou-Che 'NIMBY' Dumbass, the greatest NIMBY to ever live, who in 3022 single-handedly opposed and destroyed a plan to erect fourty-five 150-380-story towers in NYC, along with many other skyscraper masterplans too.

ElCrioyo

January 19th, 2008, 09:30 AM

Many people on here are only giving this project the thumbs up because it'll enhance Brooklyn's skyline. We might aswell fill in the gap between downtown and midtown, anyone who protests against that will automatically be a fucking douche..

I think they are more reasons that the downtown and midtown aren't together as one. One of those reasons is that from around 14th st to around 33rd st the bedrock is much deeper in this locations which makes it harder for skyscrapers to be built around the area because the foundation would be unstable!

would u really think that if developer had the chance to built in this gap, they wouldnt do it?i

anyways, i really think they should put this development closer to Brooklyn Heights, Borough Hall(Downtown Brooklyn). It really destroys the area were the project is presently being proposed

Dallasbrink

January 20th, 2008, 12:41 AM

so this will get built right? I mean, Ratner seems patient so im willing to think he will put up with these pointless law suites. So im putting a year before this all really starts.

TalB

January 20th, 2008, 03:05 AM

Is fighting to keep your property a crime these days? The reason I ask this is b/c many of you feel that it is. Let's say that it was your property that a developer wanted and he said that he can use eminent domain to acquire it if you said that you weren't selling your property without giving you say on it. Would any of you be fighting tooth and nail to keep your homes, or would you just buy out to them to save time? Most of those who are fighting against this project live there, especially in the proposed footprint. They never wanted to sell to Bruce Ratner, and they shouldn't be forced to either. Calling them douches is very insulting, and I am sure that nobody would like if I called you guys sellouts or scabs for supporting it, so no you would know how they would feel. I insist on going back to the post where I placed the debunked myths, and I have gotten the facts especially from being with the opposition in person. If they really said that they wanted to keep the Atlantic Yds undeveloped, then please give me proof of that, and it has to come directly from the opposition and not from someone else, b/c there is a big difference between them actually saying it compared to someone else claiming that they said it. As for the green space, most of it is going to be the backyards for the residents there, not parks if anyone noticed the fact that a lot of it is between the buildings.

Mr. Met

January 20th, 2008, 04:00 AM

If this was the government instead of a private investor they could be forced out. I am not going to call these people idiots, but if someone offers you a ton of money (in this case maybe 3 times what your property is worth) you take it, unless yyour family has been living there forever, then you should consider the pros and cons.

TalB

January 21st, 2008, 05:25 AM

Emminent domain is defined as taking away one's property for a public use as it's described in the 5th amendment of the US Constitution. However, the Atlantic Yds Complex by Bruce Ratner isn't public, it's privately owned by him, which is why they call it emminent domain abuse. Either way, they shouldn't be forced to give up their property to a developer, especially if they don't want to sell. The federal lawsuit, which is about this abuse, is still in the courts and that one has yet to be decided, so if Ratner looses this one, his project will be dead.

Don Omar

January 21st, 2008, 06:17 AM

Its getting a little dicey in here. talB do you know how much land it being taken over through eminent domain?

Because of the Xanadu development and several other developments in the Meadowlands, there is not going to be any room for the Nets within 5 years. Not saying that Jersey couldn't come up with a new location.

Brooklyn is being transformed with a whole list of new developments.
20vvOnDBXis&feature
I think that the opposition against Atlantic Yards is a larger response to all of the development. Rather just has the bullseye on his back.

So if Brooklyn is going to develop at least it gets the likes of Frank Gehry.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/07/01/nyregion/01yards.600.jpg

Don Omar

January 21st, 2008, 07:22 AM

ok so I am not doing any work tonight. But here are some updates as of Jan 11, 2008. From Atlantic Yards News (http://www.atlanticyards.com/html/footer/e_news19.html)

Construction on the Site

- Construction work on Atlantic Yards began in February of 2007. We expect to open the Barclays Center in the 2010 calendar year.

- To date, roughly 50% of the structures on the site have been demolished or are in the process of being demolished. Twenty-five structures have been demolished and an additional 8 buildings, including the former Ward Bread Building, are being demolished or are slated to be demolished in the short term. There are 11 vacant lots and 28 other remaining buildings.

- Over $40 million worth of contracts have already been awarded to contractors for work on the site thus far.

- Minority- and women-owned businesses have received a large percentage of the work. Construction contracts awarded at Atlantic Yards total approximately $40 million. The total MBE awards are $15 million or approximately 38% of total purchases. The total WBE awards are $3.6 million or approximately 9% which brings the total M/WBE participation thus far to $19 million or approximately 47%.

- Construction of the Temporary Rail Yard is under construction. The Carlton Ave bridge over the rail tracks will be closed and rebuilt starting in mid January. Critical upgrades to the sewer and water infrastructure have begun.

Legal Update

- The federal eminent domain lawsuit was dismissed in June, 2007. The opponents have filed an appeal, and the appeal is being handled by the court on an expedited basis.

- The Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court unanimously dismissed a challenge to the project approvals under Section 207 of the Eminent Domain Procedure Law in November 2007.

- A second suit brought in the NY Supreme Court challenging the State’s use of eminent domain was dismissed in May 2007, and the dismissal was affirmed by the Appellate Division in October 2007.

TalB

January 23rd, 2008, 11:55 PM

A known actor who helped in the fight against the Atlantic Yds complex has just recently died, so take the time to give condolences for him. :(
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/actor-heath-ledger-is-found-dead/
January 22, 2008, 4:42 pm

The Death of Heath Ledger

By Sewell Chan

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/01/22/nyregion/22ledger.190.jpg
Heath Ledger (Photo: Bryan Bedder/Getty Images)

Updated, 10:17 p.m. | The actor Heath Ledger was found dead Tuesday afternoon in an apartment in Manhattan, according to the New York City police. Some signs pointed to an accidental overdose or a suicide, although no note was found, police sources said. Mr. Ledger was 28. [Now online: Comprehensive coverage prepared for Wednesday editions of The Times.]

At 3:31 p.m., according to the police, a masseuse arrived at the fourth-floor apartment of the building, at 421 Broome Street, between Crosby and Lafayette Streets in SoHo, for an appointment with Mr. Ledger. The masseuse was let in to the home by a housekeeper, who then knocked on the door of the bedroom Mr. Ledger was in. When no one answered, the housekeeper and the masseuse opened the bedroom and found Mr. Ledger naked and unconscious on a bed, with sleeping pills — both prescription medication and nonprescription — on a night table. They attempted to revive him, but he did not respond. They immediately called the authorities. As the news reports spread quickly, throngs of people gathered in the neighborhood.

The police said they did not suspect a crime. Ellen Borakove, a spokeswoman for the office of the city’s chief medical examiner, Dr. Charles S. Hirsch, said that employees of the office were at the apartment and that an autopsy would be conducted on Wednesday. Around 6:30 p.m., city workers rolled Mr. Ledger’s body, in a black body bag on a stretcher, out of the building.

(At first, Paul J. Browne, the Police Department’s deputy commissioner for public information, said that the apartment was owned by the actress Mary-Kate Olsen, but later reversed himself and said that was not the case. In a phone interview, Annette Wolf, a representative of Ms. Olsen, said, “It is not her apartment,” adding, “She does not own the apartment. She has never owned the apartment. She and her sister have an apartment in New York City but they are not in this building.” An earlier version of this article reported the erroneous detail from the police.)

Heathcliff Andrew Ledger was born on April 4, 1979, to Sally Ledger, a French teacher, and Kim Ledger, an engineer. Named for a character in Emily Brontë’s “Wuthering Heights,” he and his older sister, Katherine, grew up in Perth, Australia; his parents were divorced when he was about 10. As a student, he joined a local theater company and appeared in a production of “Peter Pan,” which led to his being cast in children’s television programs.

Mr. Ledger’s first Hollywood film was the teenage romantic comedy “10 Things I Hate About You” (1999). He later appeared in romantic-hero roles in films like “A Knight’s Tale” (2001) and “Casanova” (2005).

But the role for which Mr. Ledger was probably best known by American audiences was in “Brokeback Mountain” (2005). The film, based on a short story by Annie Proulx about two cowboys who fall in love, won critical acclaim. Reviewing the film in The New York Times, the critic Stephen Holden wrote, “Mr. Ledger magically and mysteriously disappears beneath the skin of his lean, sinewy character. It is a great screen performance, as good as the best of Marlon Brando and Sean Penn.” Mr. Ledger was nominated for an Oscar for Best Actor in January 2006. (His death came on the same day that the 2007 Oscar nominations were announced.)

Mr. Ledger met the actress Michelle Williams while filming ‘’Brokeback Mountain.” They became romantically involved and moved to Boerum Hill, Brooklyn, where their comings and goings were widely noted by the celebrity press. They had a daughter, Matilda
Rose, who was born on Oct. 28, 2005. The couple separated last year.

In an interview in London for an article published in November, Mr. Ledger told The Times, ‘’I feel like I’m wasting time if I repeat myself.” He said in the interview that he was not proud of his latest role, in Todd Haynes’s “I’m Not There,” in which Mr. Ledger was one of a half-dozen actors depicting the musician Bob Dylan. ‘’I feel the same way about everything I do. The day I say, ‘It’s good’ is the day I should start doing something else,” he said in the interview.

Mr. Ledger had been cast as the Joker in the latest Batman installment, “The Dark Knight,” set to be released this summer.

As news of Mr. Ledger’s death made its way across the Internet, the Police Department issued a fairly terse summary of the death: “On Tuesday, 01/22/08, at approximately 1530 hours, in the confines of the 5 precinct, police responded to 421 Broome Street and found a M/W/28 unconscious. The victim was pronounced DOA at the scene. M.E.’s office to determine the cause of death. Investigation continues.”

Calls by The Times to Mara Buxbaum, a publicist for Mr. Ledger, and Steve Alexander, the actor’s agent, were not immediately returned.

The building at 421 Broome Street was sold for $4.8 million in 1999 by Ho Hwa Properties Inc. to Red Tulip, L.L.C. Calls to a phone number listed for Junia Hissa Neiva, a Brazilian painter who is listed as an owner of Red Tulip and of the building, went to an answering machine that was full and could not accept new messages.

Julie McIntosh, a hair stylist in a SoHo salon a few doors down from the apartment building, said this afternoon that she used to see Mr. Ledger once or twice a week and had twice seen him going on walks with his young daughter. “I think it’s really sad,” Ms. McIntosh said. “He’s a really nice guy. He seemed happy.” A month ago, she said, she chatted with Mr. Ledger in front of the salon and jokingly asked him, “When are you going to come in and let me wash your hair?” Ms. McIntosh said she believed Mr. Ledger had been living in the area for several months. “He always said hello,” she said.

Outside Ms. Williams’s house in Boerum Hill, Brooklyn, this evening, residents expressed shock at Mr. Ledger’s death. Elliott Puckett, an artist who lives in neighborhood, said, “That’s terrible. I used to see them with their dry cleaning and their baby. It’s really sad.”

Emily Ekman, a student who lives in Boerum Hill, said, “I knew Michelle. I’m blown away. I hope she’s O.K. She must be really upset.”

Elise Harris, who lived across the street from Ms. Williams and Mr. Ledger, said, “I’d met them. They were very nice, with their daughter. I think shock is the reaction. I didn’t even know he was on drugs, but that’s the kind of thing you don’t know unless you are in that circle. He was a nice guy, attractive, very friendly.”

A block away, at the Brooklyn Inn, the manager, Jason Furlani, said, “Obviously we’re shocked that it happened. We knew that he was in the neighborhood. I saw him around with his wife and daughter in the neighborhood, just normal folks. It’s a tragedy.”

Al Baker, Julie Bloom, John Eligon, David S. Hirschman, Thomas J. Lueck and John Sullivan contributed reporting. This is the initial blog post on Mr

TalB

January 26th, 2008, 04:28 AM

I wouldn't celebrate just yet.
http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/31/4/31_04editorial.html
Not a waste of time

The Brooklyn Paper

Bruce Ratner and his state enablers are trotting out a new argument for steamrolling through the legitimate legal challenges to the $4-billion boondoggle that is Atlantic Yards.

Last Friday, during a court hearing to discuss scheduling the Yards opponents’ appeal of their recent loss in state Supreme Court, a lawyer for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority apparently asked that the appeal be expedited because the long legal battle over the project is having “a chilling affect” on Ratner’s ability to get financing.

The lawyer, Steve Kass, later denied to a Brooklyn Paper reporter that he had made the comment, but two lawyers who were in the hearing confirmed that Kass had specifically cited Ratner’s financing woes as the reason for the request for an expedited appeals process.

Kass told The Brooklyn Paper that if he made any such comment, it was merely a generic complaint that sometimes opposition groups bring lawsuits simply to delay projects and harass developers.

We certainly share Kass’s sentiment that the legal battle over Atlantic Yards should be waged with all deliberate speed — but any delay at this stage is the fault of state officials, who circumvented normal planning review processes during their rush to approve Ratner’s mini-city before his old law shcool chum, Gov. Pataki, left office last year.

Lest we forget, the two remaining legal challenges center on vitally important matters of state:

• one suit challenges the state’s substandard environmental review of the project;

• the other attacks the state’s legally questionable use of eminent domain to condemn privately owned properties and hand them to Ratner.

In both cases, had the Empire State Development Corporation — a pro-business agency that Pataki treated as a cash machine for his favorite developers — gone through the normal, rigorous (and public) land-use review process, the very flaws that are addressed in the current litigation could have been exposed, debated and fixed, thereby forestalling the need for litigation.

As Daniel Goldstein, the spokesman for Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, put it, “Our lawsuit was not ‘designed’ for anything. It was filed in order to make sure that a state agency follows state laws.”

Doing so may end up costing Bruce Ratner a few bucks, but our sympathies lie with those who seek the truth about this shady back-room deal, not those who tried to do an end-run around the public.

©2008 The Brooklyn Paper

Phobos

January 26th, 2008, 10:42 PM

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/2871/50307524oe5.jpg

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/1349/59088047lj5.jpg

Don Omar

January 27th, 2008, 11:55 PM

The Death of Heath Ledger

really TalB
your using his death to advance your cause. you are no better than best buy

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/3412/heathledgememorialdw5.jpg

spicytimothy

January 28th, 2008, 04:22 AM

at any rate why would u advertise that here if he's AGAINST it? weird.

ny_lawyer

January 28th, 2008, 01:33 PM

I completly agree.

TalB

January 29th, 2008, 12:01 AM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01282008/news/regionalnews/court_trouble_793583.htm
COURT TROUBLE

RATNER ADMITS ARENA-FUNDING WOES

By RICH CALDER

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01282008/photos/new021a.jpg
MONEY SHOT:Bruce Ratner, at the Atlantic Yards site, says he's having difficulty getting...

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01282008/photos/new021b.jpg
money for the $4 billion Brooklyn development project.

January 28, 2008 -- Don't fork over money to reserve seats for the Brooklyn Nets just yet.

Developer Bruce Ratner is running into trouble securing funding for his controversial $4 billion Atlantic Yards project, which would bring an NBA arena for Ratner's Nets and 16 skyscrapers with residential and commercial space to Prospect Heights, according to court documents obtained by The Post.

The papers, filed Friday by Ratner's firm in an attempt to speed up the appeal process in a lawsuit by project opponents, reveal for a first time that the biggest development in Brooklyn's history is in jeopardy because of dragging litigation and a slumping fiscal market.

"The credit markets are in turmoil at this time . . . There is a serious question as to whether, given the current state of the debt market, the underwriters will be able to proceed with the financing for the arena while the appeal is pending," one affidavit says.

Read The Affidavit (PDF) (http://www.nypost.com/seven/01282008/news/regionalnews/Silberfein_Affidavit.pdf)

The document says that although financing isn't locked up, Goldman Sachs "has been selected" as lead underwriter on the bond financing of the arena, estimated at "several hundred million dollars."

As The Post reported last year, the proposed 18,000-seat arena is slated to be called the Barclays Center through a record $400 million naming-rights deal. It would be formally owned by a local development corporation set up by the Empire State Development Corp. and leased to an affiliate of Ratner's firm.

The court papers contend Ratner and the new corporation "are likely to encounter significant difficulties and cost increases in concluding the bond financing that is essential to the arena's completion" should the appeal not be decided quickly.

Bruce Bender, a vice president for Ratner's firm, said in a statement the company is committed to building Atlantic Yards, and "regardless of the opponents' delay tactics, we will continue to move forward as quickly as possible."

But Jeffrey Baker, the opponents' attorney, said the financial market knows "how much of a risk" the project is when the litigation is factored in.

The papers were filed by Ratner's company regarding a suit by opposition group Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn that alleges the project was approved by the state in December 2006 without a proper environmental review.

The case is now before an appellate panel in Manhattan after Ratner won a lower-court ruling. Develop Don't Destroy is also appealing a decision in a federal suit it filed opposing the use of eminent domain to take private land for the 22-acre project.

While preliminary work on Atlantic Yards began in March 2007, construction on the arena hasn't started. The Nets recently announced that their anticipated move from the Meadowlands to Brooklyn has been pushed back from late 2009 to sometime in 2010.

Project opponents say they believe the litigation will make reaching the new goal difficult.

Dallasbrink

January 29th, 2008, 08:18 AM

xXFallenXx

January 29th, 2008, 09:20 PM

^^ he helped fight the atlantic yards so TalB posted it here.....i think.

Dallasbrink

January 29th, 2008, 09:28 PM

But i didn't read any of that in the article. Hmmm, I bet Ratner had him poisoned. He got the Mob involved. Sent a message.

TalB

January 30th, 2008, 02:32 AM

^^ he helped fight the atlantic yards so TalB posted it here.....i think.

DDDB mentions his relationship with helping them from their website.

"We offer our condolences to all of Heath Ledger's loved ones. Our heart goes out to his young daughter. His passing is very sad news.

Heath was a member of our Advisory Board. He was not afraid to speak out against the entrenched power and corporate back room deals that the Atlantic Yards represents. He felt passionately that this project was wrong for Brooklyn. DDDB thanks him and celebrates his life.

We are grateful that Heath chose to contribute to our efforts, and hope to honor his memory through our ongoing work."

TalB

February 1st, 2008, 03:20 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2008/01/29/2008-01-29_theater_critics_to_review_atlantic_yards-1.html
Theater critics to review Atlantic Yards

BY JOTHAM SEDERSTROM
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Tuesday, January 29th 2008, 4:00 AM

It's Atlantic Yards: the play.

A Manhattan theater company that has garnered rave reviews for previous performances on hot-button topics now has its sights set on the controversial Atlantic Yards project.

The Civilians, a performance group that combines investigative reporting with stories, song and dance, will tackle the $4.2 billion arena project for a play or musical that could be ready by the 2009-2010 theater season.

"For the Atlantic Yards project, I think we have the advantage of doing a show about a story that's much closer to home," said Steve Cosson, artistic director for the company, which recently staged a performance based on the evangelical Christian political movement in Colorado.

"I anticipate having more time and more in-depth research before we create the show," said Cosson, who lives in Bedford-Stuyvesant. Most of the group's 50 members live in Brooklyn.

As soon as this summer, The Civilians expect to descend on Prospect Heights, where they'll attend civic meetings, interview Atlantic Yards movers and shakers and pour through news reports and other project information.

From there, the group will have a better idea of what form the show will take and how it will be presented, said Cosson, who added that while he is critical of the project, the theater company's portrayal will be objective.

Plans for the 22-acre project in Prospect Heights call for a pro basketball arena for the NBA's Nets and 16 towers with residential and commercial space.

The show, which is being supported by a $150,000 Rockefeller Foundation grant, could include characters based on the activists, politicians and residents now front and center in the real-life development drama, Cosson said. Think actors playing fictional versions of Borough President Marty Markowitz, anti-Yards activist Daniel Goldstein, Forest City Ratner CEO Bruce Ratner and former Deputy Mayor Daniel Doctoroff. At least some of those real-life characters told the Daily News last week they were honored by the attention.

"How do I feel about being portrayed?" asked Goldstein. "It's a compliment to all the hard work that [the group] Develop Don't Destroy [Brooklyn] has done over the past four years." Markowitz said he hoped "that the actor who plays me is taller, thinner and better-looking - I'm thinking Robert Redford!"

A spokesman for Ratner declined to comment.

Dallasbrink

February 1st, 2008, 07:06 AM

^^ More cry babies coming out. Man i hate plays ^^

TalB

February 2nd, 2008, 12:24 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2008/02/01/2008-02-01_federal_appeals_court_says_atlantic_yard.html
Federal appeals court says Atlantic Yards project can go forward

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Friday, February 1st 2008, 12:22 PM

A federal appeals court gave a green light Friday to the $4 billion Atlantic Yards project that would bring the New Jersey Nets to Brooklyn, rejecting a lawsuit by a group of property owners and tenants facing eviction.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a lower court judge in Brooklyn who had ruled that the seizure of the plaintiffs’ property under eminent domain would not be unconstitutional.

The appeals court wrote: "For affected property owners, monetary compensation may understandably seem an imperfect substitute for the hardships of dislocation and the loss of a home or business.

"But federal judges may not intervene in such matters simply on the basis of our sympathies. Just as eminent domain has its costs, it has its benefits."

The court noted that the plaintiffs acknowledge that the project would result in a new stadium for the NBA franchise, a public open space, the creation of affordable housing units and the redevelopment of an area in downtown Brooklyn afflicted for decades with substantial blight.

The project was first announced to the public in December 2003. The lawsuit was brought in October 2006. It sought to block the defendants from seizing the property and asked for unspecified damages.

Atlantic Yards was approved by state officials and praised by Mayor Michael Bloomberg as "the most exciting private development Brooklyn has ever seen."

The project includes 16 skyscrapers and an 18,000-seat arena. Opponents say the massive project would overwhelm existing neighborhoods and unfairly enrich Bruce Ratner, the developer of the project and the principal owner of the Nets.

Another legal appeal seeking to block the development is pending.

Dallasbrink

February 2nd, 2008, 12:30 AM

0k, now he needs to demo as much land as possible to get these people out of the area so there will be no more lawsuits.

TalB

February 4th, 2008, 01:31 AM

With the credit issues as mentioned recently in the NY Post, the court victory might just be a meainingless win for Ratner.

Ebola

February 4th, 2008, 02:34 AM

You're right, TalB. In fact, I bet Larry will run out of money soon and nothing will happen at the WTC. Even if Team A wins the World Series, there's still a chance that green pigs in spaceships will travel back in time from the year 8979 and influence the game so that Team B wins. Nothing is concrete.

philvia

February 4th, 2008, 05:05 AM

lol he's such a pessimist

TalB

February 5th, 2008, 01:22 AM

It was Ratner himself who said that he had financial issues, and if you don't believe me, then go to the previous page and scroll down for that article I mentioned rather than just skim over to the most recent post.

TalB

February 8th, 2008, 04:16 AM

Another stereotype by Errol Louis on the opposition
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/02/07/2008-02-07_foes_stickin_it_to_the_lil_guys-1.html
Foes stickin' it to the lil' guys

Thursday, February 7th 2008, 4:00 AM

There's a real possibility that up to 100 construction and demolition workers could be laid off in the near future, thanks to the delaying tactics being employed by opponents of the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn.

It's enough to make the blood boil.

The fact that real people could lose real jobs moves the proposed $4 billion development beyond an abstract debate over the process by which city and state agencies and businessman Bruce Ratner shaped the project.

State and federal courts have already heard four cases and a blizzard of motions on those questions, and ruled each time in favor of Ratner and the Empire State Development Corp., the lead government agency managing the project.

Now the main question is whether the project's benefits - starting with those 100 Brooklyn jobs - will be put in danger as opponents of Atlantic Yards resort to their only remaining tactic: endless delay.

A related question is whether Brooklyn politicians intend to sit on their hands with their mouths closed while local workers and companies run the risk of losing millions of dollars in salary and contracts.

Four years after the unveiling of the Atlantic Yards plan, about half the structures on the 22-acre project site have been demolished and Ratner has begun relocating train tracks to create room for construction in what's now an open-air depot for the Long Island Rail Road.

Opponents of the project, led by a group called Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, have sued at every step of the way, and lost.

DDDB sued in state court, alleging 11 defects in the process by which city and state agencies approved Ratner's plan. At the same time, DDDB's spokesman, Daniel Goldstein, was lead plaintiff in a federal case arguing it would be unconstitutional for the government to use the power of eminent domain to force Goldstein and other property owners on the project site to sell their land and buildings.

Last month, a state court struck down all of DDDB's allegations and dismissed the case. The eminent domain case also was dismissed by a federal judge - and a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld the dismissal last week, pointedly noting that the lawsuit was based on an ulterior motive having nothing to do with the Constitution.

"At the end of the day, we are left with the distinct impression that the lawsuit is animated by concerns about the wisdom of the Atlantic Yards Project and its effect on the community," the appeals court decision said. "While we can well understand why the affected property owners would take this opportunity to air their complaints, such matters of policy are the province of the elected branches, not this court."

Case closed.

Goldstein is now vowing to take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is unlikely to even consider the matter. An appeal of the state lawsuit is being planned, which is equally unlikely to succeed - but will eat up more months.

And all along the way, DDDB's lawyers have run to state court more than once asking for restraining orders to halt specific work at the site, like the demolition of crumbling buildings and a bridge.

The point of the sue-early-and-often strategy is obvious. If key court cases remain unresolved, Wall Street investors may hesitate to commit the billions the developer needs to line up.

But as Ratner's lawyers recently stated in court papers, if this blizzard of legal nonsense proceeds much longer, 100 employees at the site, mostly laborers, could be in trouble: "Most of these workers would be demobilized and sent home - in some cases, without pay," the motion says.

There's no danger of a full halt right now, but the fact Ratner has raised the issue is a warning that political, civic, labor and business leaders need to stand up for Brooklyn jobs by urging state courts to resolve the junk lawsuits of the anti-development brigade with all deliberate speed.

elouis@nydailynews.com

TalB

February 15th, 2008, 10:17 PM

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/31/7/31_07_citys_paytopark_proposal.html
Stop feeding Ratner

To the editor,

The $700 million in subsidies for Atlantic Yards cited by Councilmembers Yassky and James is an understatement of the subsidies Ratner is being given by the city and state (“James, Yassky: Ax Yards funds,” Feb. 9).

Among other things, Ratner is basically being given the $637.2 million arena for free through an “R-TIFC-PILOT” agreement (pronounced “Artifice PILOT,” or “Return Total Intercepted For Costs PILOT”).

Then there are 139 years of real-estate tax exemptions.

Then there are several-hundred-million more from the state and city in flat-out direct subsidies.

Then there is the Metropolitan Transportation Authority discount on the land that Ratner is being sold at below market.

Then there is the additional subsidy from the tax-exempt bonds on the arena, which includes exemption from state and city taxes in addition to federal.

And Ratner wants more tax-exempt bonds and housing subsidies for the residential portion of his project.

So even before you get to the subsidy he gains because of the state’s use of eminent domain to make properties available to him, the figure is way over $700 million. It clearly exceeds $1 billion and is quite possibly close to $2 billion.

Michael White, Brooklyn Heights

TalB

February 16th, 2008, 11:33 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/02/16/2008-02-16_voice_of_the_people.html
An appeal for justice

Brooklyn: Your editorial about our court fight against Atlantic Yards was rife with misstatements, exaggerations and fabrications ("Abuse of process," Feb. 5).

From calling an area where two-bedroom condos sell for $1 million "blighted," to implying that creating "a home for the Nets" justifies the taking of private property, it's clear you are willing to ignore the facts to further Forest City Ratner's goals.

For those who oppose this boondoggle, the only opportunity to fight is in the courts. Yet Bruce Ratner (photo) and the Daily News cry foul because the community is exercising its legal rights and appealing lower-court decisions it believes are wrong. Interestingly, you found no fault when Forest City Ratner and the state filed appeals.

The judicial process is there to protect all citizens, not just those with money and power.

Candace Carponter

Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn

Don Omar

February 17th, 2008, 07:26 AM

I feel like we are being spamed

TalB

February 18th, 2008, 04:18 AM

Don, while the project is still in the proposed stage, articles with both sides can be mentioned. Either way, the moderation staff will worry about it, not you. Unless you are a mod/admin, then stop b/c you are not. I care very much about those who are going to loose their home through eminent domain, and it will not be for a pulbic use. You had your say while Candance Carpenter and Michael White had their's, plus I doubt that either the Brooklyn Paper or NY Daily News aksed them to write their letters. BTW, the full letter from Carpenter can be read here (http://www.dddb.net/php/latestnews_Linked.php?id=1240), which is not the watered down version as on the Daily News. If you really have a bone to pick with DDDB, then come over to their community meeting on 3/13 at 7 PM over at the Hanson Pl United Methodist Church located at 144 St Felix St by Hanson Pl, which is right by the WSB b/c I know that you have questions and issues only they can answer, plus I am inviting you to this, so don't act like you were left out on this, and the rest of you who live in the NY area can come to if you choose to.

hoosier

February 18th, 2008, 05:24 AM

^^ More cry babies coming out. Man i hate plays ^^

That's because you are teenage ignoramus with no appreciation for anything that involves a modicum of abstract thought or brain functioning above basic mammalian instincts.

You are too stupid to understand playwriting or literature.

Dallasbrink

February 19th, 2008, 12:26 AM

That's because you are teenage ignoramus with no appreciation for anything that involves a modicum of abstract thought or brain functioning above basic mammalian instincts.

You are too stupid to understand playwriting or literature.

I like Real Art, not any of that "Musicals are art" bull shit on the stage that is NOT ART. Its called art so people with no True Art Talent can feel good about being lousy actors.

Wanna see abstract, study the Bauhaus Art Movement that pretty much established all modern ways of thought.

Mr. Met

February 19th, 2008, 10:48 PM

did construction start yet?

nygirl

February 20th, 2008, 12:44 AM

^^ he helped fight the atlantic yards so TalB posted it here.....i think.

Funny. I thought this was a thread about the construction of the Atlantic Yards project. Why include anything about the opposition and glorify nimbyism in this site at all ?

MasonsInquiries

February 20th, 2008, 02:56 AM

hmmmm, the "brooklyn nets". has a nice ring to it!!:okay:

fcarvall

February 20th, 2008, 02:08 PM

Many people on here are only giving this project the thumbs up because it'll enhance Brooklyn's skyline. We might aswell fill in the gap between downtown and midtown, anyone who protests against that will automatically be a fucking douche?..

That's an awesome idea, that would increase supply of apts, drive down rents, and let some people with less economic means actually live in Manhattan.

fcarvall

February 20th, 2008, 02:13 PM

Hipsters... they get kicked out of Manhattan, and now they are taking over Brooklyn.

TalB

February 21st, 2008, 06:38 AM

hmmmm, the "brooklyn nets". has a nice ring to it!!:okay:

Here is a list for a better name if they move to Brooklyn.

Brooklyn Traitors
Brooklyn Sellouts
Brooklyn Runaways
Brooklyn Rats
Brooklyn Drones
Brooklyn Yesmen
Brooklyn Refugees
Brooklyn Landgrabbers

Don Omar

February 21st, 2008, 07:55 AM

Talb it's not the fact that you have an opinion on the Atlantic Yards, but that you post articles saying the same thing over and over. All that does is make everyone scroll more.

Personally I do not agree at all with the actions of Dan Rather. The entire process is way to shady and should have had a lot more community engagement (and I'm even a Knicks fan). But the DDDB crowd is screaming like this is some sort of urban holocaust.

Brooklyn and the rest of New York has to grow. That is the entire history of the city. Hell's Kitchen was called that for a reason, but today they got the Daily Show filming there. The need for development is no excuse for developers to ignore communities or residents, but that growth is what has made New York what it is today

TalB

February 21st, 2008, 10:38 PM

Talb it's not the fact that you have an opinion on the Atlantic Yards, but that you post articles saying the same thing over and over. All that does is make everyone scroll more.
I am not against anyone who disagrees with me on the Atlantic Yds, but those who have called me an idiot for oppossing it is another thing. Nevertheless, the articles gives updates on what is happening. Since I don't see anyone else placing articles, then I place them. Not every article that went against it was a plus for DDDB, especially when they weren't interviewed on Ratners financial woes. Either way, I am just the messenger, and if you not satified with their interviews, then write to the media on why you think the project must be built.

Personally I do not agree at all with the actions of Dan Rather. The entire process is way to shady and should have had a lot more community engagement (and I'm even a Knicks fan). But the DDDB crowd is screaming like this is some sort of urban holocaust.
I suggest looking at the cause to why they are fighting it, not the effects. How about the fact, they will be forced to move out even if they didn't want to sell their homes and workplaces to Ratner via emminent domain? You would probably feel the same way if a developer wanted to build over your home and claimed that you had to sell whether or not you agreed with him.

Brooklyn and the rest of New York has to grow. That is the entire history of the city. Hell's Kitchen was called that for a reason, but today they got the Daily Show filming there. The need for development is no excuse for developers to ignore communities or residents, but that growth is what has made New York what it is today
Just b/c they oppose the complex doesn't mean that they are against developement on the railyards. Not everything is really blighted just b/c a developer, planner, or a politician says so, especially when they are hardly ever there themselves. Let's not forget Eroll Louis, who writes columns for the Daily News, continues to claim that DDDB is against developement even after they presented an alternative plan by Garry Barnnet, head of Extell Developement, that would only build on the railyards and make promises that Ratner couldn't keep. Jane Jacobs once mentioned that neighborhood should be developed by the community, not the developer.

TalB

February 22nd, 2008, 11:01 PM

For the record this is from FCR to the PACB, not the opposition.

http://www.nolandgrab.org/images/Exhibit-F03.gif

TalB

March 1st, 2008, 11:21 PM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03012008/news/regionalnews/atlantic_yds__foes_miss_shot_99899.htm
ATLANTIC YDS. FOES MISS SHOT

By RICH CALDER

March 1, 2008 -- An appellate court yesterday agreed to speed things along for the perennially bogged-down Atlantic Yards project - Brooklyn's largest-ever development.

Developer Bruce Ratner had complained legal delays are creating funding woes for his ambitious $4 billion plan - and an appeals panel ordered opponents in the "Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn" group to be ready with their arguments for the September term.

The appeal had been set to be in February 2009; Ratner wanted it heard this May.

Don Omar

March 2nd, 2008, 08:40 AM

see now that was a good post. Short to the point and not repeating the same thing.

Please talb don't act like you don't attack people, you have to me. And you first say that you are a messenger of the media and the complain about how the media is bias.

I have an genuine question too, how many people are being forced out with eminent domain?

TalB

March 3rd, 2008, 06:10 AM

To answer that question, I would say around 200 people. However, I find it wrong for them to be forced to sell to him either right now or via eminent domain despite not wanting. For the record, nobody on DDDB or any other group or individual that opposed the Atlantic Yds complex had seeked Norman Oder to write his blog on that issue, he wrote that blog, the Atlantic Yds Report, by himself. I have actually met with opposition constantly, so I know what they want there. The moderation staff views that articles as being on topic, and it's them who decide whether I have spammed this thread or not, and they never told me that it was spam, so I stayed on topic. I say that I am the messenger b/c I didn't write those articles. Just go to one showing of Brooklyn Matters (http://www.brooklynmatters.com/), which is having some screenings this week, and if you feel scared, then I can come with you to do those, plus it gives you a chance to ask how you feel on it. If you think that it should be built then write back to tell them why. Evidently, I didn't attack you for liking this project nor did I try to stop you or anyone else as well as saying that you were wrong for liking it. If you think that those statements that proove Ratner wrong are false or overstatements, then proove them wrong with your own facts to defend your claim rather than being defensive. Now it's time for me to ask the questions.

Why are you so anxious to have this built?
Where did the oppisition say they were against any type of developement on the railyards?
Would you feel the same way as they are right now if your home could be taken by a developer via emminent domain?
Does the news on this project have to be in favor of it only b/c I saw no rule on what position the media can have?

Don Omar

March 3rd, 2008, 07:33 PM

I think you are projecting your own thoughts on to others in this community. I could almost care less if this gets built or not, but I think overall it would be good for Brooklyn.
I am anxious about a the prospects of a New Penn Station in the Farley post-office building because sometimes I feel like I live in that crappy underground strip mall more than my actual dorm. So then yes I would love someone to kill of that home. jk

TalB

March 5th, 2008, 12:25 AM

Apparently, you didn't answer all of my questions as I did for yours. Again, I am not forcing others to hate this project. Besides emminent domain abuse, it is also the fact that taxpayers from all over the state will be paying for it, not Bruce Ratner. I feel that my tax dollars should be going for places that are really for the public rather than making the rich even richer. Also, you tend to throw me statements, along with other supporters, that do not hold any grounds and are just angry posts made in response to mine. Instead of going on the all out defensive, proove your claim with facts like I am doing right now. BTW, in the last election for local councilmen, Ratner endorsed whoever, I forgot that persons name, was running against Letitia James and had her oppenent be in favor of the project, but lost and the same was for the oppenent of state senator Velmanette Mongomery, which was also a loss. Let's not forget that borough president Marty Markowitz purged those who opposed the project in Brooklyn CBDs 2, 6, and 8. I didn't make this up, it actually happened, which is why I place the news articles on this project be it negative or positive.

TalB

March 15th, 2008, 03:06 AM

http://www.nysun.com/article/72905
Paterson Could Derail Development

Opposes Use of Eminent Domain

By PETER KIEFER
Staff Reporter of the Sun
March 14, 2008

If David Paterson as governor displays the opposition to eminent domain that he showed as a state senator, several high-profile development projects in New York City could be derailed or delayed, including a Columbia University expansion, the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, and the transformation of Willets Point in Queens.

As a state Senate leader, Mr. Paterson in 2005 held a rally with Council Member Letitia James and state Senator William Perkins on the steps of City Hall during which he called for a statewide moratorium on the use of eminent domain.

Mr. Paterson said a decision handed down by the Supreme Court in the Kelo v. City of New London case could lead to a "gold rush" of eminent domain use across the state, The New York Sun reported at the time. He said he would gather legislators and introduce legislation to impose a moratorium on its use.

"He stood with me and proposed some legislation and I am very hopeful that the lieutenant governor and soon-to-be governor will honor his commitment and will either issue a moratorium or review the abuse of eminent domain across New York City," Ms. James said yesterday in an interview.

Ms. James's district is in Brooklyn, and she opposes developer Bruce Ratner's $4 billion Atlantic Yards project near downtown Brooklyn, which would require use of eminent domain.

Mr. Paterson's opposition to eminent domain could also pit him against Mayor Bloomberg, who has defended its use. "You would never build any big thing any place in any big city in this country if you didn't have the power of eminent domain," Mr. Bloomberg once said.

A moratorium on eminent domain "would be shocking," a developer, who declined to speak for attribution before any official action was taken by Mr. Paterson, said. "It would be really out of left field and send a very scary message."

At the time of the rally, Mr. Paterson was a state senator whose Harlem constituents were concerned about the expansion of Columbia University.

The Supreme Court had just ruled that the use of eminent domain for economic development did not violate state and federal constitutions.

Mr. Perkins, who assumed Mr. Paterson's seat when the latter became lieutenant governor and considers Mr. Paterson a friend, said he hadn't had a chance to discuss the issue with Mr. Paterson but was "very confident that we are going to work well together."

A spokesman for Mr. Paterson was unavailable for comment yesterday.

The president of the Real Estate Board of New York, Steven Spinola, said he was not very concerned about the issue, and that other pressing needs such as resolving the state budget would dominate the agenda for now.

"It would clearly be a mistake for the state to give up one of its powers to get public improvement projects off the ground," said Mr. Spinola.

Instability in Albany is a concern to developers, as Governor Spitzer, the scion of a large New York real estate family, had been viewed as a friend to the industry. The assumption of power by Mr. Paterson comes at a precarious time for the development and construction industries, and developers say it is difficult to gauge how development-friendly Mr. Paterson will be.

"I don't believe he has a built in prejudice against economic development or development. It is still premature to try to figure out what he is going to do but he is somebody we have been able to work with for 20 years when he was in the state Senate," Mr. Spinola said.

At a press conference yesterday Mr. Paterson was asked how his policies differed from Mr. Spitzer's. His response suggested that positions he previously held had not changed very much.

"There are some points of view I guess that I've changed over the years, but I'm pretty much the same person," he said.

Mr. Ratner is planning 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 complex designed by architect Frank Gehry.

A spokesman for Forest City Ratner declined comment.

Other projects that would be affected include the $7 billion proposed expansion of Columbia University over the next 25 years, which would extend the campus with glass-walled buildings, tree-lined streets, and student dormitories in Upper Manhattan. There is also the Bloomberg administration's $3 billion plan to turn 75-acre site near Shea Stadium in Queens — known as Willets Point — into a destination retail and entertainment facility.

Both plans would likely call for the use of eminent domain.

A spokeswoman for Columbia University said the University is hoping to reach agreements with all of the commercial property owners that could be affected.

Don Omar

March 15th, 2008, 06:13 PM

1. i'm not
2. i don't know what that means
3. (answered that)
4. only if your Fox News

my turn
what is your favorite color?

TalB

March 15th, 2008, 09:55 PM

The second questions implies for where did the opposition actually say that they didn't want any developement on the Atlantic Yds and it has to be from their own mouths, not someone else's like Erol Louis, who constantly makes that claim w/o proof.

TalB

March 21st, 2008, 01:56 AM

http://www.brooklyndowntownstar.com/StoryDisplay.asp?PID=4&NewsStoryID=7575
Dateline : Thursday, March 20, 2008

FCR Foes See Tide Turning in Yards Fight

By Robin Gordon-Leavitt

A changing of the guard in Albany combined with a sputtering economy might mean trouble for Forest City Ratner's Atlantic Yards project. Opponents of the project discussed the status of the ongoing battle at the United Methodist Church Thursday night.

"The project that was proposed in '03 is never going to happen; nothing like it is going to happen," said Daniel Goldstein, spokesman for Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn (DDDB), who led the meeting.

Problems in the credit and real estate markets, and soaring construction costs have delayed the project already. Construction has not yet begun on the Barclays Center, the sports arena at the center of the project, and one of the plan's most controversial elements. The 2006 projected cost of the arena, $640 million, is now seen as unrealistic, and the project might have difficulty getting more government funding with no end to the economic slowdown in sight.

Goldstein expressed optimism about new Governor David Paterson as a potential ally in the fight. In 2005 Paterson publicly called for a moratorium on the use of eminent domain in the state of New York.

"That's something we are going to be talking to him about once he gets himself settled," Goldstein said. Forest City Ratner's project would require the use of eminent domain to clear certain areas of all residents and businesses.

Vigorous hissing broke out among audience members at news that Bruce Ratner, CEO of Forest City Ratner, would be honored at the Brooklyn Museum's April 3rd fundraising ball for his patronage of the arts.

"If there is a desire to publicly protest that event, I..." said Goldstein before his voice was drowned out by cheers and applause. The museum's board has several members who have ties to the Atlantic Yards project or Forest City Ratner. "FCR and Bruce Ratner are very involved in some of the great civic institutions in Brooklyn and in the city and there is a reason for that other than their kindness,"

Goldstein added, "The effect is to silence a lot of people who wouldn't otherwise be silent."

Councilwoman Letitia James also spoke at the meeting.

"This is a textbook study on how not to do development in New York," said James, an outspoken critic of the project. She pointed to the woes of former Governor Eliot Spitzer as a lesson to Forest City Ratner. "This is what happens when one walks around with the notion that the rules do not apply. What happens is you fall down in disgrace."
One area woman felt heartened to learn that major parts of the project still faced serious challenges.

"I've been so demoralized seeing all these buildings torn down in the neighborhood," said Melanie Chopko of Crown Heights. "I'd assumed the cat was in the bag, but it's not."

TalB

March 21st, 2008, 09:06 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/nyregion/21yards.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin
Slow Economy Likely to Stall Atlantic Yards

By CHARLES V. BAGLI
Published: March 21, 2008

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/03/21/nyregion/yards600.jpg
Chang W. Lee/The New York Times

Some residents oppose the Atlantic Yards project over concerns that it will flood the area with new residents and heavy traffic.

The slowing economy, weighed down by a widening credit crisis, is likely to delay the signature office tower and three residential buildings at the heart of the $4 billion Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, the developer said.

“It may hold up the office building,” the developer, Bruce C. Ratner, said in a recent interview. “And the bond market may slow the pace of the residential buildings.”

Mr. Ratner, chief executive of Forest City Ratner, did not specify the kinds of delays possible, but suggested that construction could be put off for years. His comments are his first public indication that the darkening economy has slowed the ambitious project, spanning 22 acres at the intersection of Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues.

The developer did say he was confident about starting construction on a $950 million basketball arena for the Nets by the end of the year. The arena was to be surrounded by the office tower, known as Miss Brooklyn, and three residential buildings in the first phase of the project.

But Mr. Ratner has yet to secure an anchor tenant for the Miss Brooklyn building, and now plans to phase in the residential buildings slowly.

Economic downturns have a history of delaying, and sometimes killing, large construction projects in New York.

The Riverwalk project, a plan to build five residential towers on a 30-acre platform over the East River, surfaced in 1980 but collapsed a decade later after the economy slowed. A developer for the redevelopment of Times Square was selected in 1984, but work did not begin for 12 years — with a different developer — largely because of a recession, as well as 47 lawsuits.

New York is not alone in seeing projects falter or even collapse in recent months. Ian Bruce Eichner’s $3.9 billion Cosmopolitan Resort Casino, a condo-hotel complex in Las Vegas, is facing foreclosure after he failed to finalize a deal for financing.

The once high-flying developer Cameron Kuhn has defaulted on loans related to projects in Orlando and Jacksonville, Fla. And in Los Angeles, a number of residential projects have been delayed or abandoned.

Mr. Ratner’s remarks were a far cry from the optimistic days of December 2006, when the state approved Atlantic Yards and Forest City indicated that it would build the first phase of the project within four years and complete the entire venture in a decade.

In another indication of the problems facing the project, Forest City recently sent a letter signed by the project’s celebrity architect, Frank Gehry, to chief executives of many of the city’s biggest corporations, inviting them to become a tenant in the “centerpiece of the project,” Miss Brooklyn. It was originally scheduled to be completed in July 2009.

Brokers said that developers usually home in on companies actively looking for new headquarters, rather than cast such a wide net. Forest City’s approach was more akin to cold-calling to solicit interest, a possible sign, they said, that the developer was struggling to find tenants.

Mr. Ratner insisted that the Brooklyn office market remained healthy, but he conceded that “until we get a tenant, we won’t start Miss Brooklyn.”

“It’s not going to happen in a nanosecond,” Mr. Ratner said during an interview across Atlantic Avenue from the railyard where he plans to build the arena. “I hope it’s not going to be drawn out. I’d hope that the first residential building will be done within six months of the opening of the arena, and a second one a year after that.”

Atlantic Yards has been the target of protests and lawsuits since Mr. Ratner proposed it more than four years ago. Some local residents say the project is oversized and will overwhelm the neighborhood, flooding it with new residents and heavy traffic. They also oppose the government’s use of eminent domain to condemn property on behalf of a private developer.

The courts have ruled in Mr. Ratner’s favor 18 times, but two cases are on appeal, or are expected to be shortly. Mr. Ratner said his project had been held up for nearly two years by lawsuits brought by one group, Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, and its supporters.

Given the current environment, some critics worry that Mr. Ratner will negotiate for deeper subsidies, reduce the amount of low- and moderate-income housing included or eventually sell off portions of the site to other developers who could use their own, less expensive designs.

“We need leadership in the city and the state to face the music,” said Daniel Goldstein, the sole resident remaining in a building on the Atlantic Yards site and a leader of Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn. “The project needs to be reconfigured, rethought and renegotiated. The promise was affordable housing. It’s clearly been put on the back burner, while the arena has been moved to the front burner.”

Atlantic Yards began with Mr. Ratner’s purchase of the Nets in 2004 and the idea of moving the team, which currently plays in New Jersey and loses about $30 million a year, to the railroad yard. It was near the spot that the Brooklyn Dodgers once considered for a new stadium before the team fled to Los Angeles after the 1957 season.

The project swelled into 8 million square feet of apartments, office space, stores in 16 towers, an arena and eight acres of open space, stretching from Flatbush to Vanderbilt Avenues.

At least 30 percent of the roughly 6,000 apartments are to be for low- and moderate-income families and individuals.

The arena sits at the west end of the site, embraced by Miss Brooklyn and three residential buildings with about 1,000 apartments, as well as a separate building at what is known as Site 5, which is also being delayed. In the second phase, a residential complex with 5,000 units in 11 towers would be built on 13.6 acres between Sixth and Vanderbilt Avenues in Prospect Heights.

The undertaking will require Forest City to spend more than $550 million in the early stages to buy land and build new sewers, water mains and a railyard for the Long Island Rail Road. The city and the state agreed to provide $300 million in subsidies, and tens of millions in tax breaks.

Mr. Ratner faces the same stiff challenges that are suddenly hobbling other developers after a 10-year boom: an economy teetering at the edge of recession, a credit market that has all but closed for large-scale real estate projects and a lack of tax-exempt financing for housing.

“Financing is very difficult to come by, and it’s becoming even more difficult,” said the developer Douglas Durst, who is completing the Bank of America tower on 42nd Street in Manhattan. “Nobody knows how bad this is going to be. As for commercial projects, now doesn’t seem to be the time to start one.”

Adding to the uncertainty surrounding Atlantic Yards is the ascension of a new governor. Gov. David A. Paterson, who took office on Monday, called for a statewide moratorium in 2005 on the use of eminent domain, which is needed to clear the site of about 20 property owners. Mr. Paterson was a state senator when he made the proposal; his office said it is reviewing the matter.

The Internal Revenue Service has also issued a proposal to tighten the regulations on the use of tax-exempt bonds for stadiums and arenas, which could swell the cost of the arena beyond the current $950 million estimate. And there is increasing competition by developers for the limited number of tax-exempt bonds for residential development that include affordable housing.

Mr. Ratner, whose company was a development partner in the new Midtown headquarters of The New York Times Company, said he remained optimistic and committed to building the affordable housing. He has been working with Avi Schick, chief executive of the Empire State Development Corporation, to complete all the documents for the project this summer, so that the state can start and finish condemnation by the end of the year.

Some work has started: Buildings on the site have been demolished, and construction is under way on a temporary railyard for the Long Island Rail Road. The city and the state have already provided $58 million of the $300 million in public funds for the project.

Mr. Ratner has had plenty of experience with long-term projects. The 4-million-square-foot MetroTech office complex nearby, for instance, took nearly two decades to complete.

“This is a good project,” he said of Atlantic Yards. “Good things sometimes take a long time.”

TalB

March 21st, 2008, 09:09 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/arts/design/21atla.html?ref=arts
What Will Be Left of Gehry’s Vision for Brooklyn?

By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF
Published: March 21, 2008

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/03/21/arts/21atla-600.jpg
Gehry Partners

Frank Gehry’s design for Forest City Ratner’s proposed Atlantic Yards development in Brooklyn. Much of the project may now be delayed.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/03/21/arts/21atla-650.jpg
Gehry Partners

Part of the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, as originally envisioned by Frank Gehry.

The growing possibility that much of the multibillion-dollar Atlantic Yards development in Brooklyn will be scrapped because of a lack of financing may be a bitter pill for its developer, Forest City Ratner. But it’s also a painful setback for urban planning in New York.

Designed by Frank Gehry, the project was a rare instance in which the architectural talent lined up for a New York project matched the financial muscle behind it. When it was unveiled in late 2003, it seemed to signal a genuine effort to raise the quality of large-scale development in a city still stinging from the planning failures at ground zero.

So if the decision to proceed with an 18,000-seat basketball arena but to defer or eliminate the four surrounding towers is defensible from a business perspective, it also feels like a betrayal of the public trust.

Mr. Gehry conceived of this bold ensemble of buildings as a self-contained composition — an urban Gesamtkunstwerk — not as a collection of independent structures. Postpone the towers and expose the stadium, and it becomes a piece of urban blight — a black hole at a crucial crossroads of the city’s physical history. If this is what we’re ultimately left with, it will only confirm our darkest suspicions about the cynical calculations underlying New York real estate deals.

The project that the city approved in late 2006 would have included eight million square feet of residential and commercial development on an eight-acre site extending east from Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues, one of the borough’s most congested intersections. For many who opposed it early on, it was yet another instance of powerful economic interests trampling on the rights of a deeply rooted middle-class community — one that had already been reshaped by waves of transplanted Manhattanites. Mr. Gehry’s involvement was simply a bit of window dressing intended to give the project an aura of enlightenment.

I sympathized with these arguments to some degree. New York has had a terrible track record with large-scale planning in recent years. Look at Battery Park City. The MetroTech Center. Donald Trump’s Riverside South. All are blots on the urban environment, as blandly homogenous in their own way as the Modernist superblocks they were intended to improve on.

But it’s important to remember that this is also the city that spawned Rockefeller Center, a 22-acre development at the core of Manhattan that became a glorious emblem of the 20th-century metropolis. For some of us Atlantic Yards presented a creative opportunity for the 21st century.

If large-scale development is unavoidable, why not enlist serious talents like Mr. Gehry to come up with an alternative to the bottom-line proposals that have been the accepted norm for decades? Finally a big developer had turned to a legitimate architectural hero for help, rather than the usual corporate hacks.

As it turned out, Mr. Gehry’s design revealed both the promise and the limits of that collaboration. The main residential blocks to the east of the arena lacked the architect’s signature ebullience. A series of mismatched towers along two sides of a central courtyard encompassing several blocks, they followed most of the usual planning rules: adhere to the street grid, pack in a good deal of retail along the street, add a dose of public space.

But if that part of the development bordered on soporific, his design for the arena block was a tour de force. Most urban sports arenas are big, windowless boxes that suck the life out of their surroundings; Mr. Gehry’s great invention was to conceal this one behind a dense array of residential and commercial towers. The most glamorous of these, Miss Brooklyn, clad in cascading sheets of glass, anchored the arena to Flatbush Avenue. Three smaller residential towers, their playful forms like unevenly stacked children’s blocks, framed the arena on the east and south.

This imaginative fusion of inside and out, with the intensity of the sports arena paralleling the bustle of the street, spelled promise. Visitors arriving by subway would spill out into a multitiered glass atrium; directly above, the voluptuous curves of Miss Brooklyn would be a counterpoint to the nearby Williamsburgh Savings Bank tower — a classic stone phallus.

Between the bases of the towers, views would open up from the street onto the concourses that envelop the arena. During a Nets game, pedestrians strolling along Flatbush Avenue would be able to catch glimpses of anguished fans inside; when the arena was empty, its dark, gaping void could have the haunting effect of the ruins of a Roman coliseum. A cold, characterless intersection might thereby be transformed into Brooklyn’s vibrant answer to Times Square, minus the saccharine Disney décor.

The first sign that something was amiss arose when Forest City began to reduce the percentage of affordable housing units in the design and add condominiums, decisions that altered the project’s character. Then the developer quietly asked Mr. Gehry to redesign Miss Brooklyn to cut costs. The delirious exterior was replaced by a less graceful design, with floors piled loosely on top of one another, their forms twisting as they rose. The atrium was reduced to an empty glass hall with a set of bleachers overlooking the street.

Meanwhile, Mr. Gehry invested more energy into designing a 20-story tower for a site across Flatbush that he hoped would balance his composition by creating a visual bond between the sides of the avenue.

Still, the core of his concept, the charged relationship between the enclosed arena and the street, remained intact.

Without the towers the arena is likely to become an enormous eyesore. Even if Mr. Gehry adorns it with a seductive new wrapper, its looming presence will have a deadening impact on a lively area. The magical peekaboo effect of peering between the bases of the towers into the arena will be lost. The atrium, once a vital public space, will be reduced to a barren strip of pavement.

No development at all would be preferable to building the design that is now on the table. What’s maddening is how few options opponents seem to have.

We could wage a public campaign to stop it. We could pray that Forest City Ratner comes up with more money. But given that the city approved the plan, we cannot prevent the developer from building the arena. Nor is there any way of preventing Forest City from selling off pieces of the property to other investors, who could then come up with any design they liked, as long as they abided by zoning and density guidelines.

Mr. Gehry, on the other hand, could walk away.

In the old days, when he was still a budding talent with an uncertain future, he walked off jobs when a client began pushing things in the wrong direction. This was not simply an act of vanity; it showed that the quality of his work mattered more to him than a paycheck.

Years later, he has been backed into a familiar corner. There’s much more money at stake here, and I expect that he is torn between a sense of loyalty to his client and a desire to make good architecture.

But by pulling out he would be expressing a simple truth: At this point the Atlantic Yards development has nothing to do with the project that New Yorkers were promised. Nor does it rise to the standards Mr. Gehry has set for himself during a remarkable career.

aquablue

March 21st, 2008, 10:01 PM

Fools, complete waste of time. Just horrible how the nimbies are winning all the fights these days.

nygirl

March 21st, 2008, 11:34 PM

You can say that again, aqua. New York is quickly becoming the "city that can't". Its a shame that we let these people stop the world from putting its mark on the city, well severely limit it at best. We even have them posting on this forum. Sorry they destroyed Ghery's vision and Ratners offers. Truely closed minded , little people. Hopefully this will die off someday but its surely a dark cloud over New York for the time being. We are sorta loosing what could have been an absolutely terrific chapter in the life of New York.

Middle-Island

March 22nd, 2008, 05:06 AM

Did anybody read the article? What's stopping these projects is the now widening financial crisis, not victorious NIMBYs. Some were never thrilled with these Gehry wrecks anyway.

TalB

March 22nd, 2008, 10:50 PM

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/the-week-in-comments-come-in-off-the-ledge/
March 21, 2008, 1:31 pm

The Week in Comments: ‘Come In Off the Ledge’

By Patrick LaForge

Friday, March 21

What Would a Delay at Atlantic Yards Mean? (http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/what-would-a-delay-at-atlantic-yards-mean/)

“I do hope that his project doesn’t go through. It is not right to evict residents and workers living there just so that others can enjoy going to an NBA game. Even worse, taxpayers from all over the state of New York would be paying for this, so this is my business even though I live nowhere near the proposed footprint.”
– Posted by Tal Barzilai

More Comments (http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/what-would-a-delay-at-atlantic-yards-mean/#comments) | Read Friday Posts (http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/21)

The print edition now features weekly highlights from City Room each Friday, including selected reader comments. If you would like to have your comments considered for publication in the newspaper, please use your real name or initials and include a valid e-mail address for verification purposes. Thanks.

NewYork-wala

March 23rd, 2008, 04:44 AM

How tragic for Borooklyn if this project doesnt go through... Large projects like this have to be weighed between the many who benefit against the few that dont (atleast in the short run)...

TalB

March 23rd, 2008, 10:54 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/03/23/2008-03-23_blight_at_the_end_of_the_tunnel.html
Blight at the end of the tunnel

Sunday, March 23rd 2008, 4:00 AM

News that key parts of the Atlantic Yards project will be delayed is a disaster for my Brooklyn neighborhood - and a timely reminder of why New York's middle class needs to get serious about fighting for jobs, housing and opportunity against the not-in-my-backyard activists bent on blocking development.

Too many civic, religious, labor and political leaders sat idly by over the past four years while those who objected to the landmark project resorted to a delay-at-all-costs strategy that included protests and lawsuits.

And now, turmoil in the financial markets - compounded by the chaos in Albany - has put the project's future in jeopardy.

The project's foes are taking a victory lap, but they should be ashamed of themselves. The casualties will be felt, especially in the lives of struggling Brooklynites.

For now, the first phase of Atlantic Yards - construction of an 18,000-seat sports arena - will proceed. But other parts - a commercial tower, thousands of units of subsidized housing and new street-level retail - will be on hold indefinitely, according to developer Bruce Ratner.

That means more than 6,000 apartments - about a third of them subsidized to bring down the rental cost - will be delayed, and perhaps axed. Ditto for 200 or so condos slated to be subsidized for middle-class homeowners.

Delay also means that money going to minority- and female-owned businesses will slow to a trickle. So far, those businesses have landed $19 million in construction contracts at Atlantic Yards - nearly half of the approximately $40 million in contracts to date.

Seventeen of the small contractors are Brooklyn companies doing demolition, rubbish hauling, fencing, cleaning, asbestos removal and the like. These small businesses, and the local workers they hire, are going to take a financial hit in a neighborhood where every job is precious.

In Community Board 8, where the project site is located, nearly 27% of the residents were receiving some form of public assistance - including welfare, Medicaid and disability - according to figures from the 2000 census.

Their chances of escaping economic dependency are now diminished.

That's just fine with the anti-development brigade. Here are the words of one of their number, a man named Joe Boms, who sent a note to me last month that he said reflected the thoughts of his Park Slope neighbors.

"I'm afraid 100 jobs - or 10,000 jobs - are not reason enough. A monster of such scope and complexity simply does not belong in the downtown area," wrote Boms. "We do indeed wish that financiers, insurers, investors and its plethora of assorted cheerleaders will pull out, and let this white elephant die in a spectacular way so as to serve as a lesson to future megalomaniacs."

That kind of smug willingness to condemn others to joblessness is infuriating.

When development stalls, civil servants find it harder to land affordable housing. Entrepreneurs can't get a reliable stream of contracts. Kids looking for a career in the building trades can't land that all-important first apprenticeship. And many people, weary of the uphill battle, pack up and move out.

The next act in the Atlantic Yards drama will be crucial.

Honest critics of the project now have an opportunity to separate themselves from the naysayers and negotiate improvements to the plan with Ratner.

Gov. Paterson, an avowed supporter of minority- and female-owned businesses, should fight to get the project back on track.

And pols who fought to block Atlantic Yards, like City Councilwoman Letitia James, should be held accountable by their constituents for contributing to the grim, rising tide of unemployment in my neighborhood.

Above all, those who want prosperity and progress in Brooklyn must get off the sidelines and make their voices heard in the months to come, while there's still a chance to rescue an important project from a slow death.

elouis@nydailynews.com

TalB

March 23rd, 2008, 11:00 PM

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/31/12/31_12_readers_go_batty_over.html
Ratner’s lies

To the editor,

Forest City Ratner will not correct misrepresentations on its Atlantic Yards website unless hounded to be truthful (“Another Ratner lie! Gehry was NOT ‘born in Brooklyn,’” March 15).

The Gehry misrepresentation is a case in point.

The Web site also still misrepresents that the mega-development will be “primarily situated over the MTA/LIRR’s Vanderbilt Rail Yards.” In fact, only 40 percent of the mega-development is over the rail yards.

Lost in this misrepresentation is any acknowledgment that additional acreage is being taken through gratuitous eminent domain abuse that allows Ratner to seize control of what will be.

FCR leaves misrepresentations on its Web site because it benefits them when press-release-reading “journalists” promulgate the inaccurate stories.

Witness the way the New York Times has misreported and then failed to make its own corrections.

Michael D.D. White, Brooklyn Heights

Honor Ratner?

To the editor,

I am outraged that the honored guest at the Brooklyn Museum’s annual ball is Bruce Ratner (“B’klyn Museum honors Ratner,” March 15).

The Museum, in the past, has denied its facilities to events that were deemed “too political” or “too conroversial.” Yet, although Ratner’s Atlantic Yards project has totally split the Brooklyn community, he gets the Augustus Graham Medal, “the Museum’s highest honor.”

Could it possibly be that the Museum is setting aside its rule about controversy because Ratner pours money into the Museum’s coffers? Or am I being too cynical?

Clem Labine, Park Slope

TalB

March 28th, 2008, 11:16 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/28/opinion/lweb28brooklyn.html?ref=opinion
A Bright Future for Brooklyn

Published: March 28, 2008

To the Editor:

Re “What Will be Left of Gehry’s Vision for Brooklyn?,” by Nicolai Ouroussoff (Architecture, Weekend Arts, March 21):

The cancellation of Atlantic Yards would not be a “painful setback for urban planning” but a victory for Brooklyn and for responsible future development. Mr. Ouroussoff’s grand architectural visions for the Manhattanization of Brooklyn leaves out the effects on individuals.

Dozens of residents have been evicted because of Atlantic Yards, and the project would do further harm:

• The “Brooklyn Bride” would cast a permanent shadow over the surrounding area.

• The Nets Stadium would cause impossible traffic congestion.

• Public streets would be closed for what would be a luxury development.

• There would only be minimal affordable housing (Bruce Ratner has continually backed off from his initial promise).

A coalition of Brooklyn organizations has come up with a Unity Plan, to provide for the improvement of Brooklyn homes and services. The possibility finally looks brighter for that.

Reva Cooper
Brooklyn, March 21, 2008

nygirl

April 1st, 2008, 06:38 PM

I actually would like to change my mind about this project... I would personally like to see a giant surface parking lot put in place and if not lets leave it looking like shit for atleast a decade for these people. Too bad they can't turn it into a dumping ground for New York's garbage because that would really stick it to them. Hope they knock down as much crap as they can and leave it as is. Too bad that freak tornado didn't rip through that area north and south of the Atlantic Yards.

hoosier

April 1st, 2008, 08:34 PM

There does need to be development of th Atlantic yards rail depot, but this project was a piece-of-shit monstrosity from the get go.

Frank Gehry has no business being an architect and Ratner was going to rake in billions in public funds so he could provide a playground for the super-rich, all the while pushing the middle class out of the area.

There was no plan to improve the infrastructure to support such a massive project.

Back to the drawing board is the best outcome. PLEASE DO NOT LET GEHRY DESIGN THE PROJECT IN THE FUTURE!!

Beware

April 1st, 2008, 09:19 PM

TalB

April 2nd, 2008, 12:14 AM

nygirl

April 2nd, 2008, 02:43 AM

^^ How about no. Instead Ratner should have a chuckle, go cheap, hire McSam and build something terrible, and ugly that takes up the entire block. I'm thinking 8-9 squat boxes with cheap red, yellow, violet, and turquois stucco. Then put up an MSG duplicate only make it black and grey. Where ever trees could possibly go just slap concrete and limit garbage cans as much as possible. ;)

TalB

April 3rd, 2008, 04:20 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2008/04/02/2008-04-02_residents_being_displaced_by_atlantic_ya.html
Residents being displaced by Atlantic Yards ask Supreme Court to hear case

By JOTHAM SEDERSTROM
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Wednesday, April 2nd 2008, 4:00 AM

Brooklyn property owners and tenants being forced from their homes and businesses by the Atlantic Yards project are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear their plea.

Eleven owners and tenants within the footprint of the $4.2 billion project - designed by famed architect Frank Gehry to include an arena for the Nets and several glass towers - filed a petition Tuesday with the Supreme Court.

They are claiming the seizure of land by developer Forest City Ratner violates their constitutional rights.

"It doesn't matter how much evidence there is, my clients' homes and businesses are being taken from them forcibly to enrich Ratner," said lawyer Matthew Brinckerhoff. "That violates the Fifth Amendment," which protects against unjust seizure of private property.

The complaints were dismissed on Feb. 1 in the U.S. Court of Appeals. The panel accepted the claim by Ratner and state officials that the area was blighted, a legal justification for eminent domain, the taking of private property. The Supreme Court will decide by June whether to accept or deny the request.

philvia

April 3rd, 2008, 04:59 AM

They can just build the Extell-UNITY Plan there instead, which is what they were fighting for.

or not. i really prefer a giant parking lot with all entrances/exists barred so no one is able to enter. they just walk by and stare at hot black asphalt for a couple years.
if i was a rich developer, that is exactly what i would do

NewYork-wala

April 3rd, 2008, 05:26 AM

Downtown Broolyn is booming.. Those residents who cant afford to live there can move, there are tons of affordable apartments all across brooklyn, I know, I live in one!
Go a mile or so up Flatbush and you have the entire flatbush area at you disposal...

Downtown however, has far to much potential, and is far to profitable, to be allowed to nose dive at the hands of some disgruntled residents...

Thats how development works! Should we also have not built the World Trade centers for the sake of all the low rent electronics shops that once covered the area?!?

nygirl

April 4th, 2008, 06:51 PM

Actually lets send those residents on a barge out into the Atlantic. They would be much happier there as nothing much can be built infront or around them. These people are temporary, NY is forever. What is there now, aint much. What should be there in the future is a whole lot better. I hope these people DO get evicted and end up with nothing for being such whiney babys about it.

TalB

April 5th, 2008, 11:39 PM

Here is a shot of me that was taken at the protest at the Brooklyn Museum where Bruce Ratner was being honored on Thursday, and more can be found here (http://www.adriankinloch.net/photography/BMGala/), which was taken by Adrian Kinloch.

http://www.adriankinloch.net/photography/BMGala/content/bin/images/large/2008_DSC_0552.jpg

philvia

April 5th, 2008, 11:48 PM

:baaa::baaa::baaa::baaa:

storms991

April 6th, 2008, 03:47 AM

Seizing land for private use is wrong; if it were used to build, for example, a bridge, roads, or other *public* projects, it would be fine.

George Bush even stated in 2007 that the Federal Government must limit its use of taking private property for "public use" with "just compensation", which is also stated in the constitution, for the "purpose of benefiting the general public." He limits this use by stating that it may not be used "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

Sorry for all you urban enthusiasts, but this project most probably won't go through.

TalB

April 6th, 2008, 11:27 PM

Unfortunately, here we have those who don't seem to care whether or not it will be emminent domain abuse, just having another set of massive skyscrapers and an NBA team.

Beware

April 6th, 2008, 11:55 PM

^^Unfortunately, here we have those who don't seem to care whether or not it will be emminent domain abuse, just having another set of massive skyscrapers and an NBA team.

:mad2: That's Right! Including one SO shameless as to wish THIS (image below) upon the affected residents.....

http://green.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Environment/Images/Natural_Disaster/family-ngd070505027774-ga.jpg

[(image from green.nationalgeographic.com)

nygirl

April 8th, 2008, 04:39 AM

:lol::lol: Now if you tossed in some icebergs in the back and icicles forming on their chins we would have a picture to admire. I'd still rather Gehry's vision over what is there now and what these people want there instead. Everyone is going to have their preference now that there are options with what could be done with it.

Beware, take it easy.

TalB

April 9th, 2008, 03:58 AM

That shot was uncalled for. Stereotyping the opposition to state a point doesn't help your cause, it hurts, especially when intellectuals look at it. I actually heard on Brownstoner, that the week before that protest, there was one that was supporting that complex, but the turnout was very small compared to the one I went to. If anyone actually did click the link, you would be surprised all of the different people who were there that day besides myself, Norman Oder, and members of DDDB. If the Nets don't end up moving to Brooklyn, they can always go over to Prudential Ctr in Newark with the Devils, which will be easy to get to be by both highways and by transit, so the problem is solved there with Newark Penn Station having both NJ Transit and PATH. On a sidenote, a Brooklynite who signed the PHAC petition against the Atlantic Yds Complex mentioned how that borough has a number of long time Knicks fans who won't convert just b/c the Nets end up moving there.

TalB

April 11th, 2008, 02:48 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2008/04/09/2008-04-09_community_advocate_still_missing_in_atla.html
Community advocate still missing in Atlantic Yards project

BY JOTHAM SEDERSTROM
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Wednesday, April 9th 2008, 4:00 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2008/04/09/alg_apartmentcomplex.jpg
Willens/AP

It's been almost a year and still the community has little say in the Atlantic Yards project.

Nearly a year after state officials announced they would hire a community advocate for residents living near the Atlantic Yards project, the doors have yet to swing open to the public, officials acknowledged Tuesday.

Former MTA executive Forrest Taylor was hired in a fit of damage control nine months after a building collapse on Pacific St. within the $4.2 billion development site.

But since November, when Taylor started the job, office renovations and ongoing meetings with city and state officials have delayed his advocacy duties.

"He's been the ombudsman since we hired him and he's been working with the community, but this will be the first time he'll be keeping office hours," said Empire State Development Corp. spokesman Warner Johnston.

The politically savvy Taylor, a one-time chief of staff to the City Council speaker, was hired in November by ESDC officials for a job that led many Prospect Heights residents to believe he would act as a voice for the community. But only 60% of Taylor's job would be spent addressing community concerns, Johnston said.

Candace Carponter, a member of the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods, a group critical of the arena plan, said that for the select few residents who have actually tried calling Taylor, getting through has been smooth sailing.

"I do think he's accessible, he's just useless," said Carponter, who said that when residents complained about early morning construction on Dean St., Taylor defended the Transportation Department ruckus and refused to mediate the situation.

"His responses have been completely party-line. He's not even good about conveying information," she said.

Officials vowed to create and fill the post last April following the partial collapse of the Ward Baking Co. building, which rained debris on cars and stranded homeless people, but did not injure anyone, authorities said.

But not everybody was down on the delay of Taylor starting the advocacy part of his job.

"Better late than never," said Councilwoman Letitia James (WFP-Prospect Heights), who had pushed for the creation of a community representative.

After the Daily News inquired, officials said Taylor would open his Hanson Place office to the public - an opening that has been delayed before.

Taylor, whose salary is $105,000, could not be reached for comment Tuesday because he is on vacation, an ESDC spokesman said.

A spokesman for developer Forest City Ratner declined to comment.

jsederstrom@nydailynews.com

koolkid

April 11th, 2008, 03:40 AM

Cool shot, you can see midtown in the distance...

TalB

April 14th, 2008, 10:27 PM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04142008/news/regionalnews/your_net_loss_106461.htm
YOUR 'NET' LOSS

$2B IN TAXES TO RATNER

By RICH CALDER

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04142008/photos/ratner.jpg
Developer Bruce Ratner stands at the site of the Atlantic Yards project.

Developer Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn is boosted by so many sweetheart deals that the public stands to pay for more than half the cost of his controversial $4 billion plan, a Post analysis found.

The project - which would bring an NBA arena and 16 residential and office towers to Prospect Heights - is in line to receive at least $2,157,260,000 worth of government subsidies, according to project records and interviews with past and present state and city officials.

And the developer is gearing up to ask for even more corporate welfare.

The president of Ratner's parent company said in a conference call with investors last week that the project will "still need more" subsidies.

The state and city say Ratner has yet to ask for extra assistance, but the developer last month admitted that a sagging economy is holding up construction of the project's residential and office space.

Among the biggest revelation of the Post analysis is what project skeptics have feared for years - that Ratner can build the planned 18,000-seat arena for his New Jersey Nets to move to with little financial risk.

"The setup is basically like paying taxes on your home and then having the government use that money to help you pay off your mortgage," said Michael D.D. White, a former vice president and top lawyer for the state finance authorities.

White - who provided the newspaper with subsidy projections based on his own review of project documents --estimates that Ratner would save slightly over $1 billion in tax payments through a Payment in Lieu of Taxes deal with the state.

Under the deal, he said these payments would be "intercepted" and go directly towards settling debt service on state bonds to build an $950 million arena that Ratner will "all but own," with remaining cash going towards arena operating costs.

While the state will technically own the arena, Ratner under a cozy $1-a-year lease deal, will control it and all its potential profits.

Anticipated arena financial windfalls include a record $400 million naming-rights deal signed with Barclays Bank and up to $35 million annually through the sale of luxury suites.

Ratner has an option to buy the arena at market value after 30 years, records say. But it doesn't pay because the average life span of an NBA arena is about three decades, and he is eligible to continue the buck-a-year lease arrangement for up to 99 years.

Other benefits for Ratner include:

* Saving $261.25 million in taxes through tax-free bonds that will finance affordable housing, White said.

* $150 million in tax credits through special state legislation set up to benefit Atlantic Yards, officials said.

* Saving $114.5 million buying the Atlantic Rail Yards site for the project at less than the MTA's own appraised price.

Ratner spokesman Loren Riegelhaupt refuted most of the subsidy estimates made by White and the Post, adding "it is too early to know" the exact tally and that the only subsidies currently guaranteed are $305 million coming from the state and city for infrastructure and land-acquisition costs.

"Yes, there's investment from the city and state, but what they get back is even greater," he said.

He added that the entire project will eventually be built and bring in nearly $1 billion in net tax revenues over the first 30 years, create over 21,000 permanent jobs and construction jobs and 2,250 units of affordable housing for low- and middle-income families.

Assemblyman Richard Brodsky (D-Westchester) warned that Ratner must deliver what was promised when the state approved the project in December 2006.

"All the big projects -- the 7-line, downtown Manhattan, Hudson Yards, Atlantic Yards -- they're all hanging by a tread, and the notion the taxpayers are going to invest money while the developers don't meet their commitments, if that's what people expect, there is going to be a fight about it," said Brodsky, who chairs the Assembly committee that oversees state entities that approved these projects.

Spokespersons for the city and state said it's unclear whether Ratner would receive more subsidies if he asked, adding it would need to be reviewed. But some Brooklyn-based council members have said their dead set against giving Ratner more cash.

While Riegelhaupt said Ratner plans to break ground on the arena and one of the residential towers later this year, construction on other parts of Atlantic Yards is being pushed back because of the downtown in the economy.

Project opponents, however, are still attempting to block the entire project through pending lawsuits.

rich.calder@nypost.com

TalB

April 14th, 2008, 10:28 PM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04142008/news/regionalnews/ratners_nets_gain_106507.htm
RATNER'S NETS GAIN

PROJECTED ATLANTIC YARDS SUBSIDIES (SAVINGS TO BRUCE RATNER)

By RICH CALDER

April 14, 2008 --

*1. Arena real estate tax savings through 30-year Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) agreement with state = $1,032,740,000

*2. Taxes saved on $1.406 billion federal-state-local tax-free bonds to create affordable housing = $261.25 million

3. Cash from New York City for infrastructure and/or land acquisition costs = $205 million

* 4. Taxes saved on estimated $1.032 billion fed-state-local tax-free bonds to finance $950 million arena = $191.9 million

5. Tax credits through special 421-a "carve out" state legislation = $150 million

6. Savings from purchase of Atlantic Rail Yards at price less than MTA appraisal= $114.5 million

7. Cash from New York State for infrastructure costs= $100 million

* 8. Mortgage recording tax exemption (on residential buildings) = $39.37 million

* 9. Value of city land under arena given to developer= $27.1 million

* 10 Potential tax credits for low-income housing units= $18 million

*11. Sales tax exemptions (only arena) = $17.4 million

12. Sale tax exemptions (other than arena) = Undetermined

13. Extra funds for "extraordinary infrastructure costs"= Undetermined

14. Credits for public utilities relocation= Undetermined

GRAND TOTAL=AT LEAST $2,157,260,000

*Estimations by Michael D.D. White, an urban planner and former top lawyer for New York State's finance authorities, after reviewing public documents. Other figures based on New York Post examination of state records and interviews with government officials.

Note: Atlantic Yards is estimated to cost $4 billion.

TalB

April 16th, 2008, 10:37 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2008/04/16/2008-04-16_councilman_wants_atlantic_yards_demoliti.html
Councilman wants Atlantic Yards demolition halted - for now

BY JOTHAM SEDERSTROM
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Wednesday, April 16th 2008, 4:00 AM

A Brooklyn councilman who has been supportive of the controversial Atlantic Yards project has called for a moratorium on the struggling basketball arena plan.

Councilman Bill de Blasio bashed developer Forest City Ratner for keeping government subsidies hidden and not telling residents about construction delays.

"I've been frustrated in general by the lack of communication by Forest City Ratner for years, and it seems to me it's only gotten worse, not better," said de Blasio, who is running for borough president.

De Blasio called for "a moratorium on demolition until there is a written plan" that "confirms what will be built when and confirms affordability" of the 2,500 low-income apartments promised as part of the $4.2 billion project.

"We need something in writing from Forest City Ratner to tell us if there has been a change, and if there's been a change, we need to revisit it," said de Blasio of his call for a moratorium on demolition.

"Ratner has cast doubt himself on what his project looks like, and depending on what we see in writing, that will determine whether everything will move as it's scheduled."

Forest City Ratner Executive Vice President Bruce Bender argued in a statement that the project has been transparent but did not address the developer's refusal to publicly reveal aspects of public funding and security concerns involving the plan.

"Atlantic Yards has been reviewed and debated extensively for over five years, including two public hearings before the City Council, multiple other state public hearings and hundreds of public meetings," Bender said in the statement.

"As the Council member knows, all of Atlantic Yards, including all of the affordable housing, will be built, and any delays in the construction phase will result in delays in delivering the thousands of units of affordable housing and thousands of jobs that Atlantic Yards will create."

The $4.2 billion project in Prospect Heights calls for a professional basketball arena for the NBA's Nets, and 16 towers with residential and commercial space.

jsederstrom@nydailynews.com

TalB

April 20th, 2008, 12:42 AM

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/31/16/31_16_ratner_and_the_brooklyn.html
Ratner and the Brooklyn Museum: Perfect together

The Brooklyn Paper

To the editor,

Of course Bruce Ratner should not have been feted at the Brooklyn Museum (“Protesters call Bruce’s honor a ‘Dung Deal,’” April 12). His Atlantic Yards plan across from our splendid Williamsburgh Savings Bank building is an architectural nightmare (never mind that the city does not need another sports arena).

But the honor for Ratner makes sense, given that Arnold Lehman of the Brooklyn Museum has offered up his own horror —his ill-proportioned, multi-million-dollar glass snout on a Beaux Art building. That new entrance looks as if it’s still a construction site.

More important, entire galleries in the Museum have been cleared of works of art — treasures that rival those of the Metropolitan Museum — to make way for the occasional gaudy show of modern nonsense. Real curators have been fired, and the publicity department seems to be running the galleries.

Oh, dear.

Every time I renew my membership to the Brooklyn Museum (to which my father used to take me from the time I could toddle, over 50 years ago!), I hold my nose in disgust and hope Arnold Lehman will retire soon.

So is it any wonder that Ratner and Lehman have discovered each other?

Barbara Minakakis, Ditmas Park

Miss Brooklyn monologues

To the editor,

I have shown sketches of Frank Gehry’s “Miss Brooklyn” tower to dozens of people and almost everyone who sees it sees what I see: a vagina-shaped entrance that makes it appear that Miss Brooklyn is squatting on her knees at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush avenues (“Gehry to Brooklyn Paper: Miss Brooklyn ain’t dead — in fact, she’s hotter than ever,” Web exclusive, April 4).

I think Gehry’s frontal design is, to put it discreetly, simply naughty. Could he be pulling this satirical trick on us similar to his “Ginger Rogers–Fred Astaire” building in Prague?

Could all of the people who have seen the rendering — architects, designers, students and faculty of design — be crazy?

Brent Porter, Clinton Hill

The writer is an architect and professor at Pratt Institute.

TalB

April 23rd, 2008, 11:27 PM

Click here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7Ff0bE3aEo) for the video on the protest of outside of the Brooklyn Museum, and many will be very surprised who they were talking to at the end of this video. :naughty:

TalB

April 26th, 2008, 11:06 PM

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/31/17/31_17_megarally_to_stop.html
Mega-rally to stop mega-project

By Gersh Kuntzman
The Brooklyn Paper

Three local groups that haven’t exactly agreed on how to fight the Atlantic Yards development will put aside their differences to demand a halt in demolition work on the project at a mega-rally next Saturday.

The announcement of the May 3 rally by the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods, Brooklyn Speaks and Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn comes one week after three City Councilmembers from Brooklyn asked the Empire State Development Corporation to bar developer Bruce Ratner from continuing to tear down buildings in the Atlantic Yards footprint given that the developer has said he cannot build the 16-skyscraper, office space, retail and basketball arena project that was approved by the state in December, 2006.

“Recent statements by the developer have called the entire project into question,” said Terry Urban, co-chair of the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods. “The public benefits are in question and the only thing remaining seems to be an arena! This is not the project that was approved. Meanwhile our neighborhoods are being blighted by unnecessary demolitions for a project that seems to be disappearing or drastically postponed.”

All three groups oppose Atlantic Yards in one form or another. Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn came out against the project from its inception, arguing (among other things) that its 6,800 units and 16 towers would overwhelm low-rise Prospect Heights, and that city and state taxpayers were footing too much of the bill.

The Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods was established to ensure public input into the project’s Environmental Impact Statement. The CBN spent more than $100,000 to find the flaws of the EIS, which was nonetheless accepted by state officials.

Brooklyn Speaks formed mere weeks before the project got its finally approval in late 2006. Unlike DDDB, the group has neither explicitly opposed the basketball arena nor the project’s use of eminent domain.

That said, the group has argued that Atlantic Yards “must be changed substantially or rejected.”

Ratner appears to have taken care of the “changed substantially” part himself. Last month, he told the New York Times that the $4.2-billion project now consists only of the arena and two or three buildings surrounding it. The bulk of the project — which includes the vast majority of the promised below-market-rate units and most of the open space — is no longer scheduled for completion.

And even the iconic Miss Brooklyn tower at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush avenues has been postponed until Ratner can get a tenant, he told the Times.

Despite the group’s different approaches to opposing Atlantic Yards, there will be a unified voice on display next Saturday.

“We can all agree that we can’t allow things to continue as they are going — with Ratner demolishing the neighborhood,” said DDDB spokesman Daniel Goldstein.

Expected on hand will be Councilmembers Bill DeBlasio (D–Park Slope), Letitia James (D–Fort Greene) and David Yassky (D–Brooklyn Heights), the trio that penned a letter to state officials calling for a halt in demolitions so that the neighborhood is not left “in an empty, blighted state for an unknown number of years to come.”

Rally against Atlantic Yards sponsored by the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhood, Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn and Brooklyn Speaks will be held at 752 Pacific St. (between Carlton and Vanderbilt avenues in Prospect Heights) at 2 pm on Saturday, May 3. Visit www.councilofbrooklynneighborhoods.org, www.dddb.net or www.brooklynspeaks.org for info.

©2008 The Brooklyn Paper

TalB

April 28th, 2008, 10:09 PM

http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/newark-wants-ratner-to-ditch-brooklyn-and-stay-in-nj
Updated On 04/25/08 at 07:13PM

Investors urge Ratner to ditch Brooklyn for Newark arena

By David Jones

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trd_three/images/32796/Prudential_Center_midsize.jpg
The Prudential Center

Developer Bruce Ratner has been approached by several New Jersey investors and public officials on a plan to relocate the Nets to the Prudential Center in downtown Newark, according to sources familiar with the talks.

The investors would like Ratner to have the Nets partner with the New Jersey Devils and move into the Prudential Center in Newark, where the hockey team has just finished its first full season.

"They're being wooed politically as well as by the private sector," said Ken Baris, a West Orange, New Jersey-based realtor, who is familiar with some of the investors who have approached Ratner. "There's a lot of people that kind of want to keep it quiet, but [at the same time] are looking forward to a lot more leaks."

A move to Newark would effectively end Ratner's efforts to move the Nets to a proposed $950 million Barclays Center in downtown Brooklyn, which was to serve as the centerpiece of his controversial $4 billion Atlantic Yards complex and would be the most expensive basketball arena in the country. Nets officials denied there have been any plans to move to Newark and have insisted they are moving forward with the Brooklyn arena.

"The Nets are moving to Brooklyn, period," said Barry Baum, a spokesman for Forest City Ratner who handles the Nets.

Still, sources say the discussions have life.

Since the October opening of the Prudential Center, Newark officials have urged New Jersey Governor, Jon Corzine, to shut down the Izod Center in East Rutherford, where the Nets have played since 1981.

After failing to make the playoffs and trading its star player, Jason Kidd, the Nets are expected to lose more than $40 million for the 2007-2008 season. They currently plan to stay at the Izod Center for at least another two seasons.

"If they don't get that arena built in Brooklyn in the next couple of years, I'm doubtful that Ratner would want to keep paying for losses for the Nets," said Michael Cramer, professor of sports management at New York University. "It would have been good to get the Nets and Devils in the same arena."

Baum said, however, that the Nets are set to announce new corporate partners in May for luxury suites at the proposed Barclays arena, and are working to sell season tickets and corporate sponsors at the Izod Center for the remaining two years at that site.

New Jersey Devils owner Jeff Van der Beek declined to comment on the Nets. But, he said, the arena is doing much better than "our wildest expectations." He said the Devils were averaging about 16,000 fans a game and that the arena would average about 175 event nights in its first year. He said he hoped that the number of events would climb to 225 per year in the future.

Essex County Executive Joseph DiVincenzo wants the Nets to join the Devils in Newark, and has publicly questioned claims by the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority that the arena can turn a profit with no hockey team and limited public transportation.

"We would welcome the Nets with open arms," DiVincenzo told The Real Deal. "If anything could be negotiated I think it would be great." A provision in the Nets lease with the NJSEA calls for a $12 million penalty if the Nets move to another arena outside of Brooklyn or Queens, however the Star Ledger reported earlier this week that officials might be willing to waive the penalty.

Ratner told the New York Times in March that he would not be able to finance the full 16 building Atlantic Yards project for several years due to a weak financing environment and the inability to find an anchor tenant for the Miss Brooklyn office tower. However, he said, that he would move ahead with the arena by the end of 2008.

Atlantic Yards opponents have petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear their case and officials from Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn said they expect the court make a decision on whether to hear it by June.

Mr. Fusion

April 29th, 2008, 03:13 AM

waccamatt

April 29th, 2008, 07:10 AM

Was Prudential Center built with basketball in mind? Example... US Airways Arena in Phoenix. It was built for basketball only and was poorly retrofitted to house the Coyotes before Jobing.com Arena went up. I guess going from hockey to basketball wouldn't be as big of adjustment...

:cheers:

It was built for the Devils to play hockey and for Seton Hall to play basketball so it will be able to host either sport. The floor for hockey is only slightly larger than for basketball so the combination works pretty well.

metsfan

April 30th, 2008, 02:36 AM

Nets are owned by the same people who own the yankees, you expect them to care where they play or how the public feels?

- Andy

ramvid01

April 30th, 2008, 03:43 AM

The Nets are not currently owned by the ''people" who own the Yankees. They never were, they just happen to share ownership of the YES aTV station.

TalB

May 2nd, 2008, 03:24 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/nyregion/01yards.html?ref=nyregion
Delays in $4 Billion Brooklyn Development Are Challenged in Tenants’ Lawsuit

By ANDY NEWMAN
Published: May 1, 2008

The ever-lengthening timeline for completing the $4 billion Atlantic Yards project near Downtown Brooklyn is not just bad news for those who hoped to see the project’s basketball arena, office towers and apartment blocks completed quickly.

It is also, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday, illegal.

The suit challenges an agreement between the project’s state sponsor, the Empire State Development Corporation, and the developer, Forest City Ratner, that gives Forest City at least 12 years to complete just the first phase of the project and an unspecified amount of time after that to build the second, final phase.

The agreement, the suit says, violates a provision in the state’s eminent-domain law, under which the state agency intends to seize private buildings on Forest City’s behalf. The law says a seized property must be offered back to its prior holder if it is not “materially improved” in 10 years.

The agreement between the agency and Forest City was signed in 2007 but not publicly released until March of this year, on the same day that Forest City’s chief executive, Bruce C. Ratner, was quoted in The New York Times as saying that the hobbled economy could hold the project up for years.

The suit, filed in State Supreme Court in Manhattan on behalf of 13 tenants whose apartments face condemnation, asks the court to void the parts of the agreement that give Forest City more than 10 years to build Atlantic Yards.

The lawyer for the tenants, George Locker, said fixing the problem would not be as simple as changing the deadlines in the agreement from more than 12 years to 10 years.

“They could change the language,” Mr. Locker said. “But changing the language doesn’t mean changing words on a piece of paper. It means Phase 2 of the project would be declared abandoned. Because we know he’s not even starting it for more than 12 years.”

The state agency declined to comment on the suit; a spokeswoman said officials had not had the opportunity to review it.

The suit is at least the sixth filed against the project, but the first in more than a year. All the previous suits have lost at least one round in court. The 8-million-square-foot project — more than 6,000 apartments, office space and an arena for the Nets on 22 acres near the intersection of Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues — has been widely opposed for its huge size, effect on traffic and the use of eminent domain to condemn property on behalf of a private builder.

Forest City was also a development partner in the new Midtown headquarters of The New York Times Company.

More than half the structures on the site have been demolished and more than $42 million in contracted work is nearing completion, Forest City said Wednesday.

But Mr. Ratner’s recently conceded difficulties — he has indefinitely delayed the project’s signature skyscraper, known as Miss Brooklyn — have energized his opponents, in a particularly bitter, told-you-so way.

The second phase of the project is to contain most of the 2,250 units of moderate-income housing that helped Atlantic Yards win political support and more than $300 million in state and city subsidies, and critics have questioned all along whether most of the affordable housing will ever be built.

“When you spend hundreds of millions of dollars in public money on something you know the developer is never in a position to deliver,” Mr. Locker said, “and government bodies take votes and appropriate hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money, which is in short supply, based on the promise of affordable housing and jobs, and it’s not going to be built in the statutory 10 years, it’s really a fraud on the public.”

The standing of the tenants to be plaintiffs in the suit is owed to an earlier ruling that went against Mr. Locker, which held that tenants, and not just owners, were considered “condemnees” under eminent-domain law.

Norman Oder, author of the Atlantic Yards Report blog and a critic of the project, noted that Forest City’s agreement with the state, and one with the city that he wrote about Wednesday after obtaining a copy through a Freedom of Information request, both appear to impose relatively minor penalties if Forest City starts missing its deadlines.

“It seems to me,” Mr. Oder said, “that Forest City has reason to be more concerned about losses from the Nets and from construction cost increases than from the penalties posed in these agreements.”

TalB

May 2nd, 2008, 11:28 PM

http://www.nysun.com/news/new-york/rally-will-call-governor-halt-atlantic-yards
Rally Will Call on Governor To Halt Atlantic Yards

By PETER KIEFER, Staff Reporter of the Sun | May 2, 2008

Seizing on a string of reports questioning the economic viability of the Atlantic Yards project, hundreds of residents and a handful of elected officials are expected at a rally Saturday calling on Governor Paterson to step in and halt all demolition related to the $4 billion plan.

“There is tremendous uncertainty about the future of the project,” Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries said in an interview yesterday. “Myself and several of my colleagues in the state believe under Governor Paterson we have an opportunity for a complete re-evaluation of the size, scope, and definition for the Atlantic Yards project.”

Since becoming governor, Mr. Paterson has been quiet on Atlantic Yards, an 8-million-square-foot development that would create more than 6,000 apartments, office space, and an arena for the Nets basketball team on 22 acres, near the intersection of Flatbush and Atlantic avenues in Brooklyn. The plan required the state to exercise eminent domain, a process that Mr. Paterson opposed when he was a state senator.

The original Atlantic Yards proposal pledged 2,250 “moderate income” residential units, but a number of critics are now questioning whether the affordable housing will be built.

A spokesman for Forest City Ratner, Loren Riegelhaupt, said all facets of the plan, including the affordable housing, were moving forward and that the company expects to break ground on the arena later this year. “Nothing has changed. We are going to build all of the Atlantic Yards and all of the affordable housing. Any rumors that things have changed are flat-out wrong,” he said.

Mr. Riegelhaupt also warned that any delays would hurt the community. “Any slowdown in our construction phase will only result in the delay of the affordable housing and the jobs we are trying to create with this project,” he said.

Following an acknowledgement a month ago that the plan was delayed, developer Bruce Ratner and his company have been forced to address a series of questions about the project’s viability.

Yesterday Mr. Ratner denied a report in the Newark Star-Ledger that the owner of the New Jersey Devils, Jeffrey Vanderbeek, and Mayor Cory Booker of Newark were trying to assemble investors to buy the Nets and move the basketball team to Newark from the Izod Center in the Meadowlands.

“The team is very simply not for sale and any stories that suggest or insinuate that we would be interested in listening to those conversations are flat out false,” Mr. Ratner said in a statement. “We are focused on breaking ground on the Barclays Center in Brooklyn later this year and building all of Atlantic Yards, nothing else.”

The Star-Ledger report came a day after a group of 13 residents whose apartments face condemnation filed a lawsuit in state Supreme Court in Manhattan. The suit alleges that the agreement between the Empire State Development Corporation and Forest City Ratner violates the state’s eminent domain law, which says seized property must be offered back to its prior holder if it is not “materially improved” in 10 years.

The agreement reached with the ESDC gives Forest City at least 12 years to complete the first phase of the project and an unspecified amount of time for the second phase.

“Something is up. If the project was a done deal, why are they now talking about selling the Nets and why is the city funding an agreement allowing Ratner to build a project that is much smaller with far fewer affordable units with no penalty?” a spokesman for Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, Daniel Goldstein, said. “That is why we need a time-out.”

Senator Velmanette Montgomery, Assemblywoman Joan Millman, and City Council members Letitia James, David Yassky, and Tony Avella also are expected to participate in Saturday’s rally.

TalB

May 4th, 2008, 11:23 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2008/05/04/2008-05-04_ratner_vows_to_break_ground_on_atlantic_.html
Ratner vows to break ground on Atlantic Yards

BY RACHEL MONAHAN and ELIZABETH HAYS
DAILY NEWS WRITERS

Sunday, May 4th 2008, 4:00 AM

Developer Bruce Ratner unveiled Sunday a new timetable for the sprawling Atlantic Yards development after admitting recently the slowing economy might delay the project.

In an Op-Ed in Sunday's Daily News, Ratner acknowledged the massive 22-acre project is behind schedule due to numerous court challenges and the shaky economic climate. He insisted the obstacles have not derailed the project - and vowed to break ground on the Frank Gehry-designed Nets arena later this year and complete all 16 residential and office towers by 2018.

"In recent weeks, some have rushed to write the obituary of Atlantic Yards," Ratner wrote in his opinion piece. "Rumors of Atlantic Yards' demise, stirred by opponents, have been greatly exaggerated. The project is moving forward in its entirety."

In particular, Ratner vowed to complete the first residential tower - with "significant" affordable housing - at the same time as the arena in 2010. Ratner also promised to break ground on two more residential towers in the project's first phase by 2011.

"In these three residential buildings, no less than 30% of the approximately 1,500 units will be dedicated to low- and middle-income New Yorkers," Ratner vowed.

As for the complex's signature Miss Brooklyn tower, Ratner said officials are still searching for a key tenant and will not begin construction until a deal is signed.

Even with the softening real estate market, Ratner pledged that the project's original 6,400 apartments, including 2,250 affordable ones, will still be built.

"The cynics can doubt. The critics can naysay. Conspiracy theorists can spin wild tales. But Atlantic Yards is too important to the ongoing vitality of Brooklyn and New York for us to come up short," he concluded. "We will build Atlantic Yards - and deliver on all of our commitments to Brooklyn."

ehays@nydailynews.com

TalB

May 4th, 2008, 11:24 PM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05042008/news/regionalnews/atlan_ticked_off_109278.htm
ATLAN-TICKED OFF

By JOHN MAZOR

May 4, 2008 -- Hundreds of protesters squared off yesterday in Downtown Brooklyn over the Atlantic Yards development project.

Opponents called for Gov. Paterson to put the brakes on the renovation, which includes an arena for the Nets, claiming that affordable housing and jobs have taken a back seat in the wake of skyrocketing construction costs.

TalB

May 7th, 2008, 03:09 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2008/05/06/2008-05-06_give_heaveho_to_lego_building_say_atlant.html
Give heave-ho to 'Lego' building, say Atlantic Yards critics

BY JOTHAM SEDERSTROM
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Tuesday, May 6th 2008, 4:00 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/img/2008/05/05/amd_atlantic-yards.jpg
Building One (foreground) replaces Miss Brooklyn in Atlantic Yards development. Click image to see photo gallery of the evolving plans for Atlantic Yards.

Photo Gallery (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/galleries/atlantic_yards_/atlantic_yards_.html)

Call it a scrap heap, a life-size land of Legos or, as one critic described it, a post-apocalyptic nightmare - just don't call it fit for Kings County.

One day after the release of scaled-back new designs for the controversial Atlantic Yards project, New Yorkers took a bite out of the spiraling, Lego-like remake of the signature 620-foot Miss Brooklyn building.

"You're kidding, right?" said Anthony Lomastro, 62, when shown renderings of the wild-eyed, glass-and-steel skyscraper, now called Building One. "That looks like it's falling down instead of going up. It's awful."

The building, which is conceived as a centerpiece to the $4.2 billion project, was designed by architect Frank Gehry to calm critics who feared an earlier version would overshadow the nearby Williamsburgh Savings Bank building.

Although a 110-foot height reduction was announced by developer Forest City Ratner in 2006, the new designs were completed recently and obtained exclusively by the Daily News.

They were front and center in conversations yesterday among many Brooklynites, who called the tower a disaster.

"It looks ugly," said Joseph Charles, 19, of East Flatbush, who said he supports the project. "It looks like scrap metal. The whole NBA thing is good, but not like this."

Crown Heights resident Brian King professed his support for the ambitious project, insisting the 22-acre complex promised to bring needed jobs and basketball. But the architecture? Fat chance, said King.

"It looks like milk crates," said King, 36, before name-dropping another building with similar features. "There's a building on the West Side that looks like that - but better. This one looks like ... a post-apocalyptic Earth or something."

Not everybody was sour on the building, which Forest City Ratner officials say will now house only office space as opposed to a mix of residential and commercial space.

"Why not? It looks fun," said Prospect Heights resident Colin McCabe, 31. "I could see this being like the Empire State Building, with all the lighting schemes. You could light it up at night, and it could be part of the skyline."

Spokesmen for Gehry did not respond to calls.

jsederstrom@nydailynews.com

Phobos

May 7th, 2008, 03:32 AM

I preferred the previous design,wich was much more innovative when you compare it with other works by Gehry.
Has the change in design something to do with that opinion that Miss Brooklyn looked like a pussy? :lol:

koolkid

May 7th, 2008, 03:48 AM

I was wondering how long it'd take for you to bring that news over. They also brought down the height. Yep, she'll no longer be Brooklyn's tallest...

BTW, I had no idea Ratner announced a 110-foot height reduction two years ago.

Metsfan1520

May 8th, 2008, 02:17 AM

ugh the new plans are absolutely terrible. The buildings are all different colors and look like garbage. I supported the original plan which looked very nice, but i can't support the new plans. WHY couldn't they keep the old plans? im sure there will be less support for the atlantic yards when people see theses awful designs.:ohno:

Dallasbrink

May 8th, 2008, 05:26 AM

Ebola

May 8th, 2008, 05:54 AM

I like B1 better, believe it or not. It will fit in better, but I think it would look cooler as a really, really tall skyscraper, but with a little less randomness in how the sections are placed.

I'm no expert in this area, but it's a shame that NIMBYs and anti-development freaks kill the great projects all over the city. It should be like the 70s or like China. If the WTC were being built today with today's attitude in the same fashion it were being build back then, there would be NO WTC. People are lazy and only out for themselves. I recently saw an epidode of Star Trek about a big anti-development, anti-skyscraper VS pro skyscrape/development on Earth in the year 2000. Sad to say, but you should have your right to protest/stop the project taken away under under certain circumstances (say if a developer proves the project will benefit the area in a certain way and any bad outweighs future benefits, and perhaps that anyone in the way gets more than they deserve or something else, but not judged by those who are biased against development). It seems like Ratner is just like Bush, not a bad person, but hated because people ignorant sheep and don't want to use their brains. Go ahead, why not ruin HY and the ConEd site and 53rd West too?

TalB

May 9th, 2008, 01:35 AM

http://www.nysun.com/sports/newark-good-backup-plan-nets
Newark a Good Backup Plan for Nets

By EVAN WEINER | May 6, 2008

The Nets’ ownership still insists it plans to play games at the Atlantic Yards site in Brooklyn sometime in the foreseeable future. But there is now some doubt that Bruce Ratner will actually move the franchise to Brooklyn: Last week, the Newark Star Ledger reported that the owner of the New Jersey Devils, Jeffrey Vanderbeek, and the mayor of Newark, Cory Booker, have held preliminary talks with Ratner and his Nets associates about moving the franchise from the Meadowlands to Newark.

On Friday, Ratner issued a statement: “The team is, very simply, not for sale, and any stories that suggest or insinuate that we would be interested in listening to those conversations are flat-out false. We are focused on breaking ground on the Barclays Center in Brooklyn later this year, and building all of Atlantic Yards, nothing else.”

That should have ended the story. But in the stadium and arena game, the talks between Vanderbeek and Ratner may be more of a starting point than an endpoint. There are some compelling factors that make it a sensible move for Ratner and Vanderbeek to marry their business interests.

Vanderbeek, who controls the revenue streams at the new Prudential Center in Newark, could use the extra tenant to go along with the Devils, his Ironmen indoor soccer team, Seton Hall basketball, and concerts and shows. Ratner is losing an estimated $40 million annually by playing in the Meadowlands, and he is at least two years away from playing in Brooklyn. When Ratner first announced that he wanted to move his basketball team to Brooklyn in 2005, the arena was the centerpiece of the Atlantic Yards deal, worth more than $4 billion, and its projected cost was in the neighborhood of $500 million. Three years later, the building’s price tag is $950 million and could very well exceed $1 billion by the time it is completed.

Originally, Ratner had hoped to get much of the arena funding from a naming rights deal with the British financial company, Barclay’s Bank: The bank has a deal in place to pay somewhere between $300 and $400 million over 20 years for the building’s naming rights. But Ratner needs a lot more than that right now to make the building a go. Will corporate sponsors buy into what is currently just a hole in the ground in this economy?

In March, Ratner told the New York Times he was scaling back on his Atlantic Yards plan, and that some elements of the project, including the Miss Brooklyn building, were being eliminated for the time being because of the country’s economic slowdown. But he also said plans for the arena were continuing.

Ratner can leave the Meadowlands without penalty in 2010 for Brooklyn, or he can stay in the building until 2013 if the Brooklyn building’s opening is delayed for any reason.

Moving to Newark, on the other hand, is not necessarily going to be easy, and it may be a very tough sell. The way the NBA and NHL work financially may mean that Ratner will have to sell his team or become a part-owner of the Devils.

Getting the Nets into Vanderbeek’s building is simple on paper, but it is also extremely complicated, because of how revenues generated inside his building are distributed. Ratner would need access to monies from luxury boxes, club seats, and in-arena concession areas. Vanderbeek would theoretically have to give up lucrative revenue streams from NBA games that he would normally keep from non-Devils events in the building. But Ratner could not financially survive without getting the lion’s share of those revenues.

Vanderbeek and Ratner would have to create a partnership along the lines of those in Chicago, Dallas, or Washington to succeed. In 1988, Bulls owner Jerry Reinsdorf and the late William Wirtz, owner of the Blackhawks, decided to build jointly a new Chicago arena, sharing in its cost and sharing the revenues generated in the building. The partnership has grown over the years to include a share in a Chicago sports channel that is owned by Comcast, Reinsdorf (who also owns the White Sox), the Tribune Company (which owns the Cubs), and the Wirtz family. Reinsdorf and the Wirtz family are also cross-promoting the White Sox and Blackhawks, with events at both the arena and at U.S. Cellular Field, the White Sox ballyard.

Mark Cuban bought a stake in the new Dallas arena when he purchased the Mavericks from Ross Perot Jr. in 2000. Perot Jr. and Dallas Stars owner Tom Hicks also worked out a partnership in the new building, which opened in 2001.

In Washington, Abe Pollin had owned both the NBA’s Wizards and the NHL’s Capitals and controlled the revenues at the city’s new arena. In 1999, Pollin sold his interest in the Caps to Ted Leonsis and Lincoln Holdings, which Leonsis founded and has remained the chairman and majority owner of. As part of the deal, Lincoln Holdings also has a piece of the Wizards, a piece of the WNBA’s Mystics, and 44% of Pollin’s Washington Sports and Entertainment management company. Leonsis has the first option to buy out Pollin if he decides to sell his teams or Washington Sports and Entertainment.

Owners in New York (the Dolan Family), Toronto (Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment), Philadelphia (Comcast), Denver (Stan Kroenke), Los Angeles (Phil Anschutz), and Atlanta (Atlanta Spirit LLC) fully own or have financial stakes in both the NHL and NBA teams that play in local arenas. Revenues generated in the building for all events can then be applied to specific team needs.

There are only two NBA teams that share arenas who are “secondary tenants” when it comes to the home court. The Boston Celtics’ ownership has no ownership stake in their building but has worked out a new contract agreement with the Boston Bruins management to remain in the building until 2021. This allows the franchise to get more money from premium seating and inbuilding advertising.

Donald Sterling’s Los Angeles Clippers play games at Anschutz’s building with limited access to revenues generated from highend seating. Over the years, Sterling has rejected moving to other arenas and has decided that being the third tenant behind the Lakers and Kings is fine with him — even though it probably costs him big money.

Ratner would be getting all of the revenues generated in a Brooklyn arena and might eventually want to pursue an NHL presence in the building as well. But the Brooklyn building is still years away from opening, and Ratner will still be losing money at the Meadowlands, which means the possibility of moving to Newark is definitely real. The longer the Brooklyn building is delayed, the possibility of the Nets staying west of the Hudson increases. But to get to Newark from East Rutherford is going to require a lot of creative accounting to make the business of the New Jersey Nets work.

evanjweiner@yahoo.com

TalB

May 9th, 2008, 09:40 PM

I love when people no where near the area o this project march around and protest this. There as useful to the world as Peta, which isn't saying much since Peta is the scum of the earth and kills more animals then they save, but i digress. This is a great development for what seems to be a run down part of the city, so why so much negativity?
Most of those who were at that rally did live either within or near the proposed footprint. I would like to know where you got that information. Once again, that area is NOT blighted, yet there are many who continue to believe those lies from Bruce Ratner and Eroll Louis, a columinist for the NY Daily News, on this. Is it rundown just b/c some politician or developer said so? Maybe some developer should abuse emminent domain to take away your property, and then you will understand how they are feeling about this.

I like B1 better, believe it or not. It will fit in better, but I think it would look cooler as a really, really tall skyscraper, but with a little less randomness in how the sections are placed.

I'm no expert in this area, but it's a shame that NIMBYs and anti-development freaks kill the great projects all over the city. It should be like the 70s or like China. If the WTC were being built today with today's attitude in the same fashion it were being build back then, there would be NO WTC. People are lazy and only out for themselves. I recently saw an epidode of Star Trek about a big anti-development, anti-skyscraper VS pro skyscrape/development on Earth in the year 2000. Sad to say, but you should have your right to protest/stop the project taken away under under certain circumstances (say if a developer proves the project will benefit the area in a certain way and any bad outweighs future benefits, and perhaps that anyone in the way gets more than they deserve or something else, but not judged by those who are biased against development). It seems like Ratner is just like Bush, not a bad person, but hated because people ignorant sheep and don't want to use their brains. Go ahead, why not ruin HY and the ConEd site and 53rd West too?
They never said that they were anti-developement, so unless you can proove it, then your statement is false. Did they really say that they didn't want developement on the Atlantic Yds or did someone else make that claim? I am saying this b/c there is a difference between them actually saying it compared to someone else putting words into their mouthes and making that unwarranted assumption. Eroll Louis continues making claims that they are anti-developement even after they agreed with another developer to build on the railyards, not to mention he scapegoated when Ratner had a credit crunch and practically denied it. The other projects are irrelevant to this one, b/c many of them mentioned are privately owned, not to forget that the WTC is not an example of eminent domain abuse b/c the owners were the PANYNJ, a bistate agency, not some private developer.