Standing up to Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn
by Katya Soldak, Carly Baldwin and Matt Moll
Atlantic Yards – the proposed 22-acre residential and entertainment complex in downtown Brooklyn – is viewed by the state and city’s political leaders, from Governor Eliot Spitzer to Mayor Michael Bloomberg to Senator Charles Schumer, as a major asset that would improve the neighborhood and promote economic growth.
Designed by world-renowned architect Frank Gehry, Atlantic Yards is comprised of a new basketball arena for the soon-to-be Brooklyn Nets, 16 residential high-rises containing 6,430 units (2,250 of which would be set aside for moderate- and low-income housing), retail space, and eight acres of open space. The $4 billion proposal would be the largest development project in Brooklyn’s history.
But to make space for Atlantic Yards, some local residents and small business owners have found themselves in the path of the wrecking ball. They’ve been mobilizing strong opposition against the project since 2003. They are concerned that the sheer size of the project alone would dwarf their neighborhood of mostly quiet streets lined with brownstones and trees as well as bring in crime and create congestion. Some critics also say the development proposal violates the U.S. Constitution because the city and state local government use eminent domain to seize homes and businesses for what residents say is Atlantic Yards developer Bruce Ratner’s private gain.
While the debate makes its way through the courts, where two pending lawsuits are being considered, many locals meet at Freddy’s, a neighborhood bar, to strategize about their opposition efforts. Freddy’s, one of the businesses slated for demolition for the project, has become a meeting point for rallies, concerts and spirited opposition to the powers of big development.
Located at the corner of Dean Street and 6th Avenue, the owner of Freddy’s is a plaintiff in one of the lawsuits challenging the city and state’s decision to use eminent domain – the government’s oft-criticized practice of taking over privately owned property for public use – in the courts.
"Who's this deal for?” asked Sean Elder, 52, who is on the advisory board of Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, the largest anti-Atlantic Yards group, which often convenes at Freddy’s. “Solely, the benefit of Ratner. The whole idea that it's for the community is an afterthought."
Elder, a writing professor at Eugene Lang College who lives a few blocks north of Atlantic Yards, was at Freddy's recently for a walk-a-thon fundraiser for Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn.
Demolition has already begun on a few properties previously purchased by Ratner’s company, Forest City Ratner. But these properties comprise a small portion of the site. The bulk of the Atlantic Yards construction awaits the results of two lawsuits currently pending in federal appeals court. Despite Ratner’s offerings of monetary compensation, thirteen residents and businesses, including Freddy’s, have refused to turn over their buildings or leases to Forest City Ratner. Until the lawsuits have been resolved, Ratner cannot break ground on the basketball arena – dubbed the Barclays Center – or the apartment complex.
Two cases were heard this year in the U. S. District Court of the Eastern District in New York. In Goldstein v. Pataki, filed in October of 2006, the project’s opponents claim Atlantic Yards would not afford enough public use to meet the standards for eminent domain. The opponents are primarily businesses and property owners who are directly affected by Ratner’s development, who contend that the city of New York and Ratner abused the right to seize private property for public use.
In the case of Atlantic Yards, critics said, the initiative of the project came from a private developer seeking to build a private commercial project. Ratner says that the arena will be for public use while the plaintiffs’ attorney – Matthew Brinckerhoff – likens the arena to a hotel, from which Ratner will profit immensely.
The other lawsuit, Piller v. Pataki, questions the process that various government agencies used to obtain approval for an environmental impact statement for the site. The lawsuit seeks to set aside the review and approval of the Atlantic Yards proposal by Empire State Development Corporation, Public Authorities Control Board, and the Metropolitan Transit Authority. Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn accuses the developer and public authorities in failing to follow proper procedures and requirements in approving the project.
While both cases were dismissed in federal court this past summer, they are currently pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
But for all the Atlantic Yards opponents, many in downtown Brooklyn support the project and look forward to the economic growth Atlantic Yards could bring to the neighborhood. Agencies that advocate for Atlantic Yards say the development will bring in $1.4 billion worth in sales and income tax for New York City and the state. According to Ratner Forest City representatives, Atlantic Yards will also create over 15,000 union construction jobs and between 1,500 and 6,400 office jobs.
Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz is one of Atlantic Yards’ most vocal fans. Markowitz supports Atlantic Yards because of the jobs the arena and shops will provide and the sense of pride in again having a Brooklyn professional sports team, not felt in the borough since the Brooklyn Dodgers left in 1957.
“The progress of the Atlantic Yards project means that our borough will soon be benefiting from thousands of union jobs, affordable housing, and our much-anticipated return to sports' major leagues,” said Markowitz in an e-mail. “The project’s world-class architecture, space for a new public school, street-level shopping, and accessible public open space will enhance downtown Brooklyn.”
And not all business owners and residents are opposed to the plan in the area immediately surrounding Atlantic Yards. In interviews with business owners in the neighborhood, some people said they welcomed the change and additional business traffic it would bring to the area.
On Atlantic Avenue, Donald Gianchetta, 62, owns Horseman Furniture, a store that sells antique furniture. "Things can't stay the same way. This development will bring more business," said Gianchetta, who lives in New Jersey. “So far, every change I've seen here in 42 years in Brooklyn was a positive change," he said.
Hooked on Shoes shoe store stares directly at Atlantic Yards from Flatbush Avenue.
"This is good; it'll bring jobs to the neighborhood and money into Brooklyn," said Mila Wilks, who works at Hooked on Shoes. "On the other hand, people are losing their homes. But in the end, more good than bad is going to come out of this - more jobs, people moving in Brooklyn, and more affordable housing," said Wilks.
But other residents cite a strain on the neighborhood’s resources, a potential traffic nightmare, the possibility of big buildings blocking the sun, and a changing the character of the low-rise residential neighborhood. In the Goldstein lawsuit, residents also allege there has been a "Patina of Public Participation” in Atlantic Yards planning, saying that people who spoke out against the development at meetings were turned away or ignored.
“Atlantic Yards has a lot of flaws,” said Nancy Cogen, 68, who has owned the Melting Pot, a batik clothing store on Atlantic Avenue for 35 years. “There is no planning for infrastructure: subway, police, and fire department. They have not addressed electrical problem, sewage problem, school problem.”
"I've looked at this project carefully and all I can say - 'Develop, don't destroy'. Traffic is already bad here, people can't find parking to go to the stores,” said Richard Rollson, 54, a designer and manufacturer from nearby Boerum Hill. “The project's buildings are too high. They did not include schools, and it is already hard to find a place for a child in school. The character of this neighborhood? Low-rise brownstones. Build something smaller."
The Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods – an organization created in opposition in Atlantic Yards – endorses an alternative to Ratner's development called the Unity Plan. Developed at the College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning at the University of Cincinnati, the Unity Plan would develop the Atlantic Yards site without the arena and skyscrapers. Unlike Atlantic Yards, the Unity Plan doesn’t require seizing private property to be built. It is also a much lower scale project, which proponents said would connect the surrounding neighborhoods of Prospect Heights and Fort Green.
"We believe that something should be built there," said Candace Carponter, co-chair of the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods. "There is a big place over the rail yard that we believe should be developed. But the community had no say in Ratner's proposal. That was inappropriate and they have to listen to us."
"Atlantic Yards is not a done deal and we believe the community will have a voice in this,” Carponter said.
Indeed, what irks residents most is their feeling of being steamrolled by Ratner and city officials as Atlantic Yards moves forward - with or without their consent.
"Really, the idea that you can come in overnight and change several neighborhoods simply because you have the developer's money to do it is wrong,” said Elder. "We've had absolutely no input in this. Who gets to decide? Who gets to change a neighborhood?"
|
