Atlantic Yards: Not So Affordable
Affordable Housing is the mantra that we keep hearing from the pro-Ratner camp, where people are willing to overlook the insane scale of the project, the sewage overflow problems, traffic problems, corruption and cronyism surrounding the process, and the lack of community input for the promise of affordable housing. I am very much for affordable housing, but it has almost become a code word in Brooklyn for pro-Ratner. But I have always felt that Ratner's promise of affordable housing always seemed hollow. Where are the guarantees that he will keep his promise? How long will that housing be affordable to the average Brooklynite? And what does Ratner really mean by "affordable?"
Well, we are getting a hint that my feelings that Ratner's promises aren't trustworthy are founded.
One way to judge Ratner's proposals (as well as the three other proposals Pataki and Bloomberg have been ignoring!) is comparing it to other projects in NYC. Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn (DDDB) is doing just that and finds that according to Manhattan standards, only 17% of Ratner's proposed housing would be "affordable." Remember, we were told as much as 50% would be "affordable."
From DDDB:
Forest City Ratner has promoted the "Atlantic Yards" proposal as an "affordable" housing project. While there are a total of 6,430 units proposed in "Atlantic Yards" only 2,250 (or are claimed to be "affordable." But half of those 2,250 are not considered "affordable" by the City of New York if one looks at what is going on in Manhattan.
The New York City Department of City Planning has proposed a rezoning for the East Village and Lower East Side where the "affordable" units would go to families earning a household income of 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) or less. The AMI for New York City, for a family of four, is $70,600. However, the proposed "Atlantic Yards" "affordable" housing component caps off at 160% of AMI.
Thus, using the City's definition of "affordable" housing for the Lower East Side and East Village rezoning, only 17% of "Atlantic Yards" would be affordable.
We just can't trust Ratner, Pataki and Bloomberg who have been trying to shove this down our throats with hollow promises and threats of eminent domain. And now that Pataki will soon be out, he will try to fast track this bad project so Eliot Spitzer will have no chance to consider it for himself.
Please send New York's Public Authorities Control Board a letter asking them to postpone a vote on the "Atlantic Yards" until the courts rule on the Federal eminent domain lawsuit. Remember, it's important to act now - the PACB may be asked to vote on the "Atlantic Yards" project before Thanksgiving.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
Community | Economics | Housing | Real Estate | Brooklyn
I can't speak for DDDB
Submitted by mole333 on 21 November 2006 - 11:15am.
It is my impression that DDDB favors the Unity Plan, but I am not sure. Don't assume I am a DDDB insider, even though I generally support them and certainly know most of their leadership. I would be willing to bet that they don't even have a fully unified opinion of what would be acceptable. What they have is a unified opinion that the corrupt process and excessive scale of Ratner's plan is unacceptable.
Speaking for myself personally, it would be hard for me to support any Ratner plan given the rotten process. But, if there really was a considerable scale down, gobs of affordable housing, adequate upgrades to the infrastructure not just under the site but throughout the affected area, good local, union jobs, etc. I might support a Ratner plan in the end. The other three plans seem far better than Ratner's and far more open to community input. But I also don't think any of them have stood up fully to scrutiny because they have been pushed aside in favor of Pataki's buddy, Ratner.
I personally, and I think most DDDB members if my impressions are correct, want the following:
1. an open and fair review process of all options, not claims of a "done deal" that circumvents the community boards and creates front organizations to give the appearance of community support;
2. a design that uses the clocktower as a guide rather than overshadows it and the entire neighborhood into oblivion;
3. real guarantees of enough affordable housing to really make a difference and that would remain affordable rather than rapidly price out low and middle income residents
4. a better consideration for both small businesses and union jobs...a stadium and giant chain stores don't really help either much.
5. far more consideration for Brooklyn's infrastructure, traffic, schools, firehouses and green space. All of these need help anyway, but adding Ratner's plan as it is would make all of these worse. Development really is only good for the community if it improves the quality of life within the community. I don't see that happening with Ratner's plan...in fact I can only see it making the quality of life far worse.
Again...I don't speak for DDDB here other than to say I have, when speaking to them personally, found the vast majority of DDDB supporters to be reasonable and in substantial agreement with my views on the issue.
All you have to do to kill Ratner's Atlantic Yards is...
Submitted by rwallnerny on 21 November 2006 - 2:45pm.
All you have to do to kill Ratner's Atlantic Yards is bribe Shelly Silver. All these projects have to get unanimous approval of Silver, Joe Bruno and the Governor. The Jets stadium was killed by Silver voting no. Now it turns out according to recent news reports that Cablevision, the owners of Madison Square Garden who were the bitter opponents of that stadium, had given a highly paid consulting job to Silver's daughter. Before he voted. Cablevision tried the court of public opinion, and when that didn't work they greased some palms. Silver must have been really appreciative, because he also just killed the Moynihan Station project with his vote as well, a deal that Cablevision ALSO bitterly opposed (because it didn't call for them to get a new Garden)
Anyway, Cablevision is rumored to be gearing up strong opposition to Atlantic Yards because they don't want another large arena in the city competing for dates with the Garden. So what does Shelly Silver want to kill the deal this time? Or Joe Bruno? I was against the stadium, and am against Atlantic Yards, but the whole process whereby these things are considered is highly corrupt. We think we can kill Atlantic Yards with good, high minded debate, when the truth is the only thing that may stop it is payola.
Query
If all of the housing in Atlantic Yards met your definiation of affordable, would anyone in DDDB support it?
Me, I think it would still be too big, and if my favorite bar were in the site of the bulldozers, I'd lay down in front of them, but I am still curious to learn if Danny Goldstein and his friends would be willing to move under any circumstances. Frankly, I am dubious.