Anti-Atlantic Yards Rally: Thousands Brave Blazing Sun

1.

Thousands of people with homes protesting the creation of thousands of affordable units in a commercial district on top of a transit hub.

Only in NY.

2.

hundreds of families displaced from their apartments to build luxury condos? unfortunately everywhere.

3.

^ families that are now filthy rich because they were bought out. this is a fight against aesthetics and keeping people out, don't try to categorize it as anything else.

4.

These people make me sick. Whatever happened to concern for one's neighbors? People need housing and jobs. The current site provides neither.

Their selfish, suburban, anti-everything mentality is delaying affordable housing for thousands.

5.

Rosie Perez to Time Out New York:

“I don’t have a problem with white people moving into my neighborhood. That’s asinine to say. What I have a problem with is when new people, regardless of what color they are, come into a neighborhood and decide to change it.”

I guess change is always a bad thing. And we all know that NYC has never changed in the past.

6.

it seems like everyone who comments at Gothamist these days lives in Toledo. Is that starting here? Or are these just really clever Ratner moles?

7.

Daniel Goldstein is clearly delusional if he thinks that 4000 people attended this rally. The police, who are far better trained and more experienced at estimating crowds, put the number between 600-700.

To the person who commented that "hundreds" of people will be displaced for luxury condos: this plan will provide more than that number of units for families earning less than 31K per year. As of September, Goldstein will be the lone condo owner in the footprint.

I look forward to seeing construction begin in a few months. While this rally may make people feel good for the moment, let us not forget that Ratner opponents have not scored a single victory in court thus far, and none of the politicians they endorse(d) have won or stand a chance of winning the upcoming elections. Except Tish James, of course, who wields absolutely no power to stop this project.

8.

#2. Please don't try to classify this development as being bad for poor families. There are two sound arguments against this project (although I personally believe the positives outweigh these negatives) - scale and traffic. Poor families could care less about scale, they just want a place to live and they don't (shouldn't in this city) have cars. I can't imagine how anyone could see this project (and all of its income restricted housing) as, on the whole, a bad development for the poor.
The rich homeowners in the neighborhood, on the other hand, want to limit overcrowding/supply (so their homes become more valuable) and it's understandable they are fighting - I would fight it too if I owned a home nearby - but please don't try to say poor people would be better off without this development.

9.

As pointed out at the rally, those "affordable" housing units will not be available until 2010 at the earliest, and applications are not even going to be available until 2009, according to Jim Stuckey himself. And they may not even be at this location -- more likely on the site of the former St Mary's Hospital in Crown heights, which Ratner also purchased recently saying at the time that he'd never specified exactly WHERE those affordable units would be placed.

How about giving it up with all thise nonsense, going with the pland submitted by Extell, which offered the MTA more money for the Atlantic Yards, didn't involve the treat of eminent domain, would provide the same number of affordable units in a project more in keeping with the surrounding neighborhoods' architectural character, and could be completed much sooner?

Again, people need homes today, not in 2010!

10.

miss representation: to the contrary, the people against this project appear to be as country-bumkin as can be. "They're toooo tawwwwllll" cry me a river on *your* way back to Ohio.

11.

Phrases like "delaying affordable housing for thousands" seems a bit too much like FCR's cynical PR to be anything other than shilling. Besides, anyone with even passing familarity with the issue knows that the protestors aren't against housing or change, but against the project's size, scale, and lack of community sensitivity. Maybe if Brooklyn hadn't already seen first-hand, by way of Tech Plaza, Ratner's proclivity for massive, cold, prosaic structures, there mightn't be such opposition. Is there anything more honorable in today's bottom-line world than a fight for aesthetics?

12.

#4 yes, because a stadium and overpriced/expensive condo's will help the neighbors. If you actually believe there will be "affordable housing", call me I have a bridge to sell you. Look at any number of projects that were supposed ot have affordable housing, and see how many in the last 5-010 years actually have them. Dvelopers use this to skirt the zoning, and think that once they have consturction partially done the city won't hold them to their empty promises..... sadly they are usually right.

Come on people get a grip, these people may have recieved money from being bought out, but they are not rich, they were forced out their home, all to put up housing for rich people, and aa stadium for the suburbanites who want to fell like they are part of a metropolitan area.

This plan is not well thought out, tramples on the the people currently living there, and to top it off is comprised of some of the ugliest budlings to date.

I am not part of thiis group, and agree they can be over the top. But I do respect them for not only decrying bad decisions, but coming up with actual aternatives. Most in the group do not want to leave things the way it is, but rrather do something for the actual community, instead of rewarding Ratner and his cronies for devious behavior.

13.

And in terms of this devleopment being bad for poor people, what this equals, again as pointed out at the rally is "instant banlieu." As anyone who's lived in/near Paris in the past twenty years (or who observed violence that took place in the suburbs there last fall) can tell you, the "villes nouvelles" built in the Paris suburbs in the late 1960's -early 1970's, while well-intentioned (and designed by leading architects of the time), have created some of the most miserable, isolated, hopeless ghettoes out there. This project, similar in scale and intent to those (indeed, it is the biggest single-developer project ever in the US), will create the same kind of atmosphere, assuming poor people are even put there (and not elsewhere, as mentioned above).

14.

These are high rise luxury condos, you troll nitwits, not all affordable housing which is not even on the site!! Poor families were displaced for that, numb nuts. The traffic as ALREADY out of control in Prospect Heights, and this project is a nightmarish tragedy for Brooklyn. I I fervently hope it gets stopped before any more damage is inflicted on a once thriving, now emptied out part of the neighborhood. Robert Moses is chortling in his grave.

15.

babs, that has to be the most lamest of the many bad arguments against atlantic yards.

The housing won't be completed until 2010 and we need housing now so you're against it. Completely insane.

You try to build thousands of housing units, an arena, over a rail yard before 2010.

16.

Then please explain to me how all these luxury condos are popping up in only a year? Yes, there is additional work required to build a platform over the rail yards, but 2010 is a joke -- this could easily be done in less time, but FRC knows it's going to be held up in court for a long, long time -- if it even ever gets out.

17.

kudos to the use of the term "troll nitwits." kudos.

anyway, dddbrooklyn has come forward with ALTERNATIVE plans to this GIGANTIC development of an area surrounded by fairly bucolic, low-rise streets. i mean, i know jane jacobs isn't so in favor these days, but jeez. look at bruce ratner's awful track record with large projects in this borough and tell me why he should be heading up this project.

the area will be developed. it's a question of how.

18.

#14 How do you know the affordable units won't be built? Its easy to make that claim but back it up please. There have been two notable developments where air rights/tax incentives are bought in exchange for affordable units built: Bloomberg Tower and Avalon Christie. Both developments followed through with their affordable housing requirements.

I have no sympathy for the "displaced" because they all made out very well.

The plan is not well thought out? This plan has been poured over by FCR. You might not like the design but I don't think its ugly. I bet you'd love it if it were in Queens.

If DDDB is as righteous as you believe then they should come up with a financed alternative plan themselves. Otherwise they are just a group of nimbys who offer nothing to brooklyn except keeping their vision of what it should be.

New York is a city of change. Eventually you will lose out to this undeniable and unstoppable fact.

19.

The sewage systemsin the area also, and quite simply, can't support a development of this size. It's already quite a problem in Park Slope/Gowanus -- in the torrential rains we experienced over the last few weeks, many people's basements were ankle-deep in sewage, backing up as more water washed into the system than it could handle. This effect would become standard considering the amounts of water that would be pouring into the system at all times from this development (and waterless urinals aren't going to do much to fix the problem -- think sinks, showers, dishwashers, washing machines, conventional toilets, etc.).

20.

babs - seriously, drop that argument.

tell me one development that is in the thousands of units built that was planned, developed and ready for occupancy in 1 year. that is a laughable statement.

21.

To #11, Rascal -- Who writes "anyone with even passing familarity with the issue knows that the protestors aren't against housing or change, but against the project's size, scale, and lack of community sensitivity"

I am so tired of the transparent dishonesty of the DDDBers when it comes to explaining their motives. Of course they are against housing and change, if it's in their neighborhood. The majority of these people have never campaigned before for affordable housing or urban development, or have been involved in the larger New York community (because Brooklyn is a part of New York) in any way. As another poster said, they wouldn't even notice if this project had been proposed for Queens. The Extell alternative they love to shill for is obviously a smoke screen--if they were at all honest they would admit that they would have been just as opposed to that plan if it had been the only one porposed, and for that matter, they have to know that Extell (far more odious than Ratner, as anyone who knows anything about NY development knows) would have reneged on all the vague promises it made about afforeable housing in its last minute proposal.

There are lots of us who are concerned about the scale of Atlantic Yards, but feel that New York needs development, housing and jobs if it is to thrive. The DDDB people have shown no interest for anything other than their own upscale backyards, and to pretend otherwise is the height of hypocrisy. They might get a lot farther with their arguments if they would stop assuming that the rest of us are stupid.

22.

So why not a smaller development, erected faster? That's the whole idea here, I think. And everyone believes that something should be done about the rail yards; they're unsightly and a big physical and psychological divider between Prospect Heights and Fort Greene. However, Ratnerville would be an even bigger divider.

23.

So, do you retardaires working for the Rat or Suckey get extra money for trolling? You must be making a bundle today! I bet NONE of you live in Prospect Heights, as do NONE of Rat's people.

24.

Luella,

Right, anyone for affordable housing or transit-oriented development must work for a developer, sure.

Let me guess, you just graduated from Brown, think protesting development is chic, and moved to Brooklyn five minutes ago...

25.

DDDB are all for affordable housing and transit oriented development, don't you know that? Who isn't? Do you really think those luxury skyscrapers putting wads of cash into Ratners coffers at taxpayers expense are for the poor? Are you on crack, Crawford? And you are wrong on all accounts in your assumptions, painfully so.

26.

Luella - by all means please tell us the overwhelming evidence you have that the thousands of affordable units will be turned luxury. Surely you know something that we don't.

Your insults are sophomoric. Are you not a 'troll' as well as the other nimbys on here?

27.

Gosh, I didn't realize this was class warfare! The arrogance of wealth vs. the needs of hardworking people. After reading all these posts I now see that Ratner really is trying to help the poor and to serve this community's longterm needs. Those rich, elitist, liberal current residents are just being very selfish.

28.

realist (#18), try researching before typing:

>"If DDDB is as righteous as you believe then they should come up with a financed alternative plan themselves. Otherwise they are just a group of nimbys who offer nothing to brooklyn except keeping their vision of what it should be."
They have one.... wait no two proposals and people willing to back it up with money. Thats what makes this movement a little more interesting. They are not just compalining, they are proposing solutions, hence their slogan "develop don't destroy Brooklyn".

>"New York is a city of change. Eventually you will lose out to this undeniable and unstoppable fact."
No doubt, which is why they came up with new proposals for the site, not just asaying "don't build here".

>"The plan is not well thought out? This plan has been poured over by FCR. You might not like the design but I don't think its ugly. I bet you'd love it if it were in Queens."
No it'd be ugly anywhere. But hey I understand there are difference so fopinion on that. But don't you think that the neighborhood should have some say in it. Sure my opinion, or yours, or nayone outside should not count in the aestetics decision, but the neighbors sure as hell should.

and 'gimmeabreak' why don't you give uds a break. Of course they;re fighting for this its close to their hearts and their homes. Based on your reasoning I should be globe-trotting protesting everything I disagree with. I have neither the time nor the money to do this, so we focus coloser to home. You're also probably the same person decrying outsiders when they come to protest an issue..... nice.

29.

#21 - OK, so, according to your view of the world, people in a community who are in line to be significantly impacted by an enormous development project don't have the credibility to challenge it unless they also do so on behalf of projects in the "larger New York community"? Why stop there? Why not require that they challenge projects in New Jersey? Houston? Frankfurt? Congratulations for seeing self interest and spinmeistering on both sides of this issue, what a revelation.

30.

babs, because atlantic yards is the plan on the table from a real developer who has real money and the ability to follow through. So you don't like what it looks like, that shouldn't mean that the thousands of people and families who would benefit from affordable housing shouldn't get their chance.

And your argument about sewage is just silly. When a development like this is devised one of the first things they do is work in infrastructure requirements.

The arguments against atlantic yards just get more and more crazy. You folks need to get out of the house.

31.

Thousands of affordable units? Show me anywhere this is stated. Last I read in the past few days it had dwindled down to a few hundred, probably offsite. That leaves everything onsite, LUXURY. Get it now? ANd if Ratner deosn't deliver them he only gets fined. SO what, for someone with such deep pockets. In the long run, he'll get the last laugh and get even richer if this monstrosity proceeds as planned, and you'll feel like an ass for siding with it, while dealing with myriad infrastructure nightmares. Shitty water filling your basement, anyone? MMMM This happens even NOW because the infrastructure is so weak and old.

I have been called "operatic" in my verbal epressions, I do agree to tone it down, thanks for the reminder.

32.

#23 Luella:

Yes, I live in Prospect Heights. Do you? Does that make my viewpoint any more valid, given that I still disagree with you?

Kindly provide evidence that any poster here works for Ratner. By the way, here's some evidence that Daniel Goldstein's girlfriend has been placeed on the payroll of DDDB. How about commenting on that?

http://www.observer.com/20060717/20060717_Matthew_Schuerman_finance_financialpress-2.asp

33.

Hey, anon #30, obviously you're new to this:

1. The "real money" that Ratner is using is yours -- courtesy of NYS, which has comitted over $2 billion of taxpayer funds to this project. And thet's not even mentioning the fact that the MTA rejected a higher offer (from Extell) for the sale of Atlantic Yards -- as a governmnet-financed (i.e., taxpayer supported) organization, shouldn't they be required to sell to the highest bidder?

2. There are NO infrastructure improvements in this proposal -- that's one of the reasons people are protesting it.

34.

Luella, here is the quote from the NYTimes article:

"About 2,300 people attended the first of two presentations at a Marriott in Brooklyn last night, roughly one person for each of the 2,250 units of below-market-price, rent-stabilized units the company says it will build if the project is approved."

That's thousands sweetheart.

35.

Marco,
No one on this board claims that Ratner is a saint - but note that he's agreed to build thousands of much needed affordable housing (where in the neighborhood doesn't really matter) for which he deserves credit. He will definitely make a ton of money from this deal. Development is a risky, complicated, capital intensive business and developers deserve to be rewarded. If you really want to see Prospect Heights decline take away developer's incentive to build.

Ratner has negotiated with the city - the city is getting great concessions. If DDDBrooklyn wins no large developer will ever attempt such a development again - the predevelopment risk will be too great. Some may say "Great," but a lack of new development hurts the poor the most (even if the majority of what is built is luxury condos).

Regardless of the final outcome, DDDBrooklyn has made developing in Brooklyn more risky/expensive, they discourage new construction, and fewer affordable units will be built because of their campaign. I realize this is not their goal - they merely want to protect their neighborhood, but the building of affordable housing is a casualty of their cause.

36.

babs - as with any bid system, the seller has to vet all bidders and Extell was not approved. Ratner is an experienced NYC developer with a buildable plan which gives back a lot to the city (maybe not you personally, but that's not what this is about).

Give us the source of your claim that "there are no infrastructure improvements in this proposal -- that's one of the reasons people are protesting it." And no, DDDB is not a credible source.

37.

How does the fact that Shabnam gave up a highly-paid full-time job (making well over $100K/yr) to volunteer full time for 10 months and then accept a position at $35K/yr relevant at all in this argument, beyond pointing out that 1. people are really committed to this cause and 2. DDDB is getting a bargain here!

38.

#36 not that I disagree with DDDB not being a credible source, but many here are regurgitating Ratner as a credible source. So it swings both ways here.

39.

So let me get this right, residences of Prospect Heights rally to complain about new housing and getting an NBA franchise and jobs in their neighborhood when they have sh*t in their own basements? If it were me, I would consider spending my time protesting old sewage pipes. But what do I know about how people in Brooklyn like to live. Doesn't sound like a neighborhood worth fighting for if you ask me.

40.

Here's an excerpt from Councilmember Tish James's response to the proposal (10/18/2005; full text at http://www.gothamgazette.com/community/35/officialword/177):

"...this project will be constructed in two phases, with the affordable housing built in the second phase, which could take up to ten years to begin."

"This project fails to take into account State SEQR requirements that establish a threshold analysis of schools, libraries, healthcare, and day care facilities based upon an increased residential population."

"Based upon the IBO report issued September 2005, the rate of return to the city of New York is estimated to be less than $1 million in revenue per year."

From CB8's 10-point plan for its involvement in the process, highlighting the areas not addresed by FCR (10/18/2005; full text here: http://www.brooklyncb8.org/BAYEIS.htm):

"Project proposes a significant increase in paved surface area so resulting plans for treatment of groundwater, surface drainage, stormwater run-off, sewer capacity demands, combined sewer overflow discharges and municipal facility demands must be considered. Tree surveys and water quality analyses should be performed.

Other questions to be addressed include:

What is the impact of commercial/residential development on the Gowanus watershed area? Will it affect existing plans for Gowanus Pump Station/Flushing Tunnel?"

41.

Babs is right about no infrastructure.

The sewage will also have a great impact on Carroll Gardens since during heavy rain all those CSO's go right into the canal. I guess Carroll Gardens isn't a neighborhood worth fighting for either.

42.

If people really, honestly care about sewerage issues (they don't, they are desperate to stop development), then why aren't the protestors demanding the City improve the supposedly deficient infrastructure rather than protesting Ratner?

There are significantly fewer residents in the nearby Community Boards than in the past, so sewerage problems have nothing to do with recent or forthcoming development.

The notion that the sewerage system will be overburdened even though the local population is lower than it was in the 1930's is ridiculous. Even if it were true it would make no sense to protest the development, it would make sense to ask the City to make the needed improvements.

This has nothing to do with sewerage. Next I assume we'll hear the electrical grid will fail if development occurs in Prospect Heights...

43.

Thirty years ago, your average home did not include a dishwasher, jacuzzi tub, two (or more) bathrooms, a washer-dryer hookup, etc., all of which is becoming increasingly common in new construction. There may be fewer people in this area, but they already use probably twice as much water. With the addition of these new buildings the effect would be catastrophic.

44.

Sewage is only one part of the equation and illustrates the vast impact this project will have on many different neighborhoods - not just PH. Maybe when DEP, DEC, and the Army Corps of Engineers can all manage to get on the same page something will be done.

45.

Bklyn needs some serious urban renewal. In no time we could have a city as cool as Las Vegas or South Beach, and these NIMBYS just want to spoil good ol' American progress. SHAME ON THEM! Time to Destroy and rebuild Brooklyn, Dubai-stylee!

46.

Fine, babs, let's assume you're right (I seriously doubt it) and that any new Brooklyn development = end of times catastrophe (you know, all those jacuzzis in the affordable housing). Somehow the environmental analysis missed this but you have better information than all the consultants, planners, etc.

If this truly is the case, Brooklyn needs to upgrade its sewerage regardless of Ratner or the pace of new development.

These are two different issues. It's the same as protesting economic growth because it will lead to more water usage. There is a complete logical disconnect.

47.

I didn't say any new development, I said this one, because it's ill-conceived, inappropriate, and another FCR scam to rip off the taxpayers (note that approx 78% of Metrotech is leased out at above-market rates to city and state agencies in order to support the below-market rents offered to the few corporate tenants there). Any responsible development would take into account the surrounding neighborhood characteristics, including the need for new esssential services such as police and fire protection, as well as upgraded sewage systems, to account for the new residents and plan accordingly.

The draft environmental impact statement on AY hasn't been released yet, so I fail to see how you can say it "missed" anything, since no-one has seen it (except possibly FCR employees?).

48.

ugh. blackshirt (facetious fascist reference, i hope?) why would NYC with all of its rich history want to look like another city with less architectual heritage?

i live in fort greene as a renter from one of the families who owns a gorgeous brownstone. i do feel some sympathy for their concerns about the impact to property values and general neighborhood congestion. i even supported the dddb people on numerous occasions, including yesterday.

however, my stance against ratner's development plan has recently become more tepid since it's difficult to feel true sympathy for the vision of these gentrifiers. i cannot afford to purchase in today's fort greene/prospect heights even though i could have afforded to do so some 10 years ago if i'd had my current salary. that's perhaps inconsequential but i find it difficult to side with folks who hold up the mantle of jane jacobs' earlier views while largely being otherwise absent from the visible political process. that is, they are exactly what's wrong with american civic action today - things only matter when they affect MY assets. i feel a little dirty supporting this group, even more after watching the predominantly white, middle class rally and entertainment by "rev. billy" and the "stop shopping gospel choir." it just all seems a little...um, contrived.

that said, i think that much more supporting infrastructure is needed to develop on the scale proposed by ratner. i also think that coney island seems like a potentially better site for many reasons that benefit all parties. yet, i cannot help but think that such a drastic change in brooklyn's landscape may actually help propel it forward into a destination neighborhood, rather than simply being one of the "outer" boroughs. Just a thought.

49.

ugh. blackshirt (facetious fascist reference, i hope?) why would NYC with all of its rich history want to look like another city with less architectual heritage?

i live in fort greene as a renter from one of the families who owns a gorgeous brownstone. i do feel some sympathy for their concerns about the impact to property values and general neighborhood congestion. i even supported the dddb people on numerous occasions, including yesterday.

however, my stance against ratner's development plan has recently become more tepid since it's difficult to feel true sympathy for the vision of these gentrifiers. i cannot afford to purchase in today's fort greene/prospect heights even though i could have afforded to do so some 10 years ago if i'd had my current salary. that's perhaps inconsequential but i find it difficult to side with folks who hold up the mantle of jane jacobs' earlier views while largely being otherwise absent from the visible political process. that is, they are exactly what's wrong with american civic action today - things only matter when they affect MY assets. i feel a little dirty supporting this group, even more after watching the predominantly white, middle class rally and entertainment by "rev. billy" and the "stop shopping gospel choir." it just all seems a little...um, contrived.

that said, i think that much more supporting infrastructure is needed to develop on the scale proposed by ratner. i also think that coney island seems like a potentially better site for many reasons that benefit all parties. yet, i cannot help but think that such a drastic change in brooklyn's landscape may actually help propel it forward into a destination neighborhood, rather than simply being one of the "outer" boroughs. Just a thought.

50.

Blackshirt is obviously using satire to criticize the development. Sorry, pro-development does not mean facist or generic. Believe it or not, the romanticized brownstones dear to the NIMBYs were built by evil developers.

Babs, you are a NIMBY. I am a regular New Yorker and I don't care about Ratner or any other developer. My concern is with the people of Brooklyn, and not only the Ivy League snobs who think it's so cool to "Fight the Power."

Now that the sewerage issue has been refuted you now complain Ratner doesn't include a police station! There is nothing any developer could do to make the NIMBYs happy beacuse the whole point is to stop anything from being built.

If you want a wasteland, Detroit is waiting. Desolation and misery is totally cool!

51.

The sewage issue has totally not been refuted and I'm not, technically, a NIMBY, because I don't live there -- I live in Prospect Lefferts Gardens, on the other side of Prospect Park, but I care about all of Brooklyn (and NYC in general). And the police and fire, schools, day care, etc., are not idle complaining, but state and federal requirements that are being flouted here. And I never attended any Ivy League school (although I've been accepted by several). And I don't want to stop anything from being built, I want to stop this (and other ill-conceived horrors) from being built.

52.

babs,
then you are worse than a nimby. you use bad arguments with no proof to back them up, and you don't even live there.

53.

Please see the above citations from Congressperson Tish James and CB8 -- the proof is irrefutable and it seems one just can't win with these FCR minions -- if you live there and you don't like it, your arguments don't count because it's just NIMBYism, but if you don't live there and don't like it you have no right to speak up. Whatever -- sounds like desperation to me. Remember Westway?

54.

Sorry -- Tish isn't in Congress (yet), she's on the City Council.

55.

Goldstein's girlfriend being on the payroll is relevant because an organization that prides itself on taking the moral high road most likely hired her without regard to basic employment ethics.

Did they advertise the position? Did they do a thorough search? DDDB is always claiming it serves a diverse crowd - is this girlfriend a person of color? I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the answer to all of these questions is "no". Also, if she's so financially comfortable, then why is she accepting a salary at all?

To try to dismiss this as an act of generosity because she took a salary cut is missing the central point of DDDB's hypocrisy.

56.

I don't want to live in the shadow of unwanted skyscrapers. My neighborhood would be seriously impacted:
http://www.nolandgrab.org/archives/2006/06/ratneras_shadow.html

57.

Listen, y'all need to get beyond questions of who has more ethics or compassion and who is less self-interested and hypocritical: Neither side is all sinner or all saint. The question is one of COMMUNITY IMPACT and which side you think has the better, higher, greater interests of the community at heart.

58.

I'm a property rights guy and so I'll chip in here. It use to be that if you bought something you owned it. Whatever happened to, he bought, it's his, so let him do what he wants. If he builds something so ugly that no one wants to live there then he loses. If he builds something people like then he makes money. It's not his job to make everyone happy, just enough people to fill his vacancies. The market will decide if it's good - not DDDB.
And no he won't build a strip club next to a school because the neighbors would protest outside his club and it would go out of business. Developers are dirty because our regulations have made them that way. You treat someone poorly and they will reciprocate. I'm tired of paying $3,000 for a crappy one bed, but I'm not willing to live in a crappy neighborhood. Let's get out of their way and let them build.
I guess I'll move to Houston where property owners actually have the property rights they've paid for.
Out!!

59.

There are, however, those pesky properties he DOESN'T own, and has threated to use eminent domain to get.

60.

If eminent domain where used it would be a great example of its proper use. Taking 150 homes (sensitive issue I understand) and using the land as part of the development of thousands of units (including 2,000 plus affordable housing units). If we could replicate this math throughout the city we could actually solve our housing problem. Plus, those displaced are getting above market price for their units - hardly abusive as many claim.

I live in a building that's being converted to condos (ie I'm getting kicked out of my home). I'm not being offered a chance to buy my unit nor am I being offered a buyout. Everyone in our building must leave (300+ units - there are about 100 of us left). We'll get nothing, we won't hire lawyers - we don't own the building so we'll go when our lease is up. We'll get over it, we don't want to move, but it's not the end of the world. I imagine 10 years from now we'll see the change as being good for us.

61.

Did the NIMBYs ever consider that building this is the impetus needed to get their sewer system fixed? A way to get the sh*t out of their basements? If it doesn't work now (and the population will continue to grow regardless of this development) then building this development could/should trigger the upgrading of the sewers.

62.

I am so tired of all these protesters. Now celebrities have joined them. There's so little job creation ni our city due to the high taxes, rents and expenses. I think we should all be very happy when someone wants to build modern residential and commercial towers in the middle of a dumpy Brooklyn neighborhood.

63.

Shabnam is Indian, and probably one of the most qualified organizers in NYC.

64.

Dan,

Sorry, just as you would not accept such a pat statement from Ratner, I can't accept your brief answer about the hiring of your girlfriend. You neglected to answer the question about whether or not the position that she now holds was advertised, or whether other candidates were considered before she was chosen. Given your evasiveness, I think the answers to these questions are obvious.

And, Babs, I noticed that you still have no answered my question regarding your statements about the police dept. No surprise there.

65.

Well #62. If you think it's a dumpy neighborhood, it's just proof that you've never stepped foot in it. The ignorance...