What Ebbets Field Wasn't

Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn highlights a New York Magazine piece contrasting the differences between Brooklyn's fabled Ebbets Field with the Nets Arena proposed for the Atlantic Yards:

But as a metaphor, it’s the exact opposite of Ebbets. Ebbets was a tiny, neighborhood-uniting orthodox baseball temple that was built, in less than a year, on an old dump crisscrossed by goat paths. Atlantic Yards is a huge, neighborhood-raping megadevelopment, pinned between two of its developer’s own malls, that violates every design principle of the borough’s small-scale, organic history. Construction is scheduled to take ten years. It is pure real estate, with sports as a footnote. The Nets haven’t grown, like the Dodgers did, directly out of the Brooklyn soil—they’ll be transplants, a squad of mercenaries paid to sell the neighborhood’s new regime. It’s hard to envision the natives finally bonding with the gentrifying hordes over $50 seats at a Nets game. (Bruce Ratner has skillfully scrambled the racial politics of the project, enlisting—some say buying—widespread black support and casting opponents as selfish gentrifiers.) Atlantic Yards is Dodgers nostalgia run amok: New Brooklyn getting rich on the dying myth of Old Brooklyn—a supposed tribute to the borough that may well end up defacing the Brooklyn it’s pretending to honor. The Nets are less a karmic reversal of the Dodgers tragedy than its logical conclusion. O’Malley ruined the borough by leaving; Ratner will ruin it by moving in.

I'm occasionally asked how a pro-growth, pro-development, free-market conservative such as myself opposes a project like the Atlantic Yards. This piece gets to the nut it: If preserving a neighborhood's character is a priority (and for me, it is), growth cannot be imposed from the outside; it needs to come from within, to be organic, and its sponsor can't cheat, using the heavy-hand of government to steal private property to make way.

Atlantic Yards Update

"In an emphatic yet potentially questionable decision, U.S. District Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis yesterday dismissed Goldstein v. Pataki, the federal lawsuit challenging eminent domain that Atlantic Yards opponents have considered their best hope for stopping the project," writes the Atlantic Yards Report:

In his decision, Garaufis ruled that even if public benefits—including new tax revenues, housing, jobs, and the elimination of blight—are less than promised, they’re sufficient to overcome allegations that the project is a sweetheart deal benefiting developer Forest City Ratner.

“Because Plaintiffs concede that the Project will create large quantities of housing and office space, as well as a sports arena, in an area that is mostly blighted, Plaintiffs’ allegations, if proven, would not permit a reasonable juror to conclude that the 'sole purpose' of the Project is to confer a private benefit,” Garaufis wrote. “Neither would those allegations permit a reasonable juror to conclude that the purposes offered in support of the Project are 'mere pretexts' for an actual purpose to confer a private benefit on FCRC.”

Develop Don't Destroy responds:

Because Judge Garaufis failed to consider that there was no comprehensive development plan, that the project was developed and driven by Forest City Ratner from the beginning, that FCR planned the footprint of the properties to be seized, that Forest City was known to be the beneficiary before the takings occurred and that there was no legislative oversight -- all characteristics of an unconstitutional taking according to the U.S. Supreme Court in Kelo v. the City of New London -- we are taking an immediate appeal to the United States 2nd Circuit (federal) Appeals Court. But we will not stop there. If necessary, we will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to hear our claims.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Matthew Brinckerhoff adds:

“We have a nice issue for an appellate court to decide. Undisputed facts lead to an inference that this was driven for Ratner’s benefit. It’s undisputed that no other developer was considered to do this project, that the genesis was Forest City Ratner, that they identified my clients’ properties [for eminent domain], and that the government, broadly speaking, agreed to do exactly what [the developer] asked for. If those facts don’t give rise to a claim under the public use clause, it’s definitely a dead letter, for anybody.”

With an appeal forthcoming and another suit challenging the environmental review currently in state courts, it will be a long time yet before this matter is resolved.

'I'm not giving up my family's house'

Facing the threat of eminent-domain-driven evictions, Brooklyn residents aren't going quietly, Julia Vitullo-Martin reports for The New York Sun:

If New York City had such a thing as the Most-Endearing-House-in-the-Five-Boroughs Award, the tiny four-story frame house at 493 Dean St. in Brooklyn, built sometime in the 1830s, would be a contender. Fronted by a fenced herb garden, casement windows above and a small Alice-through-the-looking-glass door below, the house seems to beckon visitors in from the street. At Sunday's Garden Walk 2007, held by the Brownstone Brooklyn Garden District Association, the owner, Jerry Campbell, said his grandfather bought the house 50 years ago, moving to Brooklyn from Sugar Hill in Harlem. He wanted a house he could afford on his own, not share, Mr. Campbell said. Sugar Hill had gotten expensive.

Mr. Campbell's house and his neighbor's at 491 Dean were chosen for the walk in part because their backyard gardens grow at the edge of the neighborhood's first known garden, Parmentier's Horticultural and Botanic Gardens, established in 1825 on 25 acres by a Belgian nurseryman, André Parmentier. The remaining "petits Parmentiers" are imperiled, the tour organizer, Patti Hagan, said, because they occupy the western edge of Bruce Ratner's proposed Atlantic Yards development, which the association's brochure calls a "24-acre House & Garden Grab." Arguing that the area's heritage is important, Ms. Hagan said it was known as Rose Hill a century ago, when it was Irish. Indeed, roses still bloom in nearly every garden on the tour. Of the 16 listed gardens, only two are in the Atlantic Yards footprint, though nearly everyone — owners and visitors alike — expressed dismay at the looming threat of eminent domain.

Bloomberg's Land Grabs

What should be one of the most controversial aspects of Mayor Bloomberg's tenure is his cavalier use of eminent domain. But for whatever reason, there just isn't much resistance -- outside the Atlantic Yards project, that is -- for top-down development projects, whereas City Hall plays the role of private developer.

The threat of eminent domain now hangs over property-owners' heads in Prospect Heights, Downtown Brooklyn, Willets Point, and upper Manhattan. On that latter score, the Neighborhood Retail Alliance's Richard Lipsky reports on the latest:

It now appears that the City Planning Commission, unless there is some last minute intervention, will certify Columbia University's land use application at its June 4th meeting. This precipitous move, coming as it does before there has been any meaningful negotiations between Columbia and the community, has already begun to spark controversy.

In strongly worded letters, both CB#9 and the West Harlem LDC (formed to negotiate with the university), asked Planning Chair Burden to put off certification because, in the words of Board Chair J. Reyes-Montblanc, "It will be a great disservice to the Community, the Administration and Columbia University to issue such certification and referral during the month of June. The consequences of such an inadvisable action by DCP are dangerously enormous and may even involve public disturbance, this is how serious the situation could be." (emphasis added)

The LDC gets it just right when it tells CPC's Burden that certification this Monday, "will offend the essence of the ULURP process which is designed to seek community comment and involvement." The action also exposes the sham nature of these negotiations, proceeding along the lines of first getting the approval and then tossing the community as meager bone when it's under no pressure to really accomodate the local needs.

To qualify for a legitimate eminent-domain taking under New York law, the targeted area must be blighted if the project is intended for something other than a "public" project. That the city appears willing to pretend northern Manhattan is blighted so as to usher Columbia's expansion along doesn't reveal much respect for the limited nature of eminent domain law. Lucky for Bloomberg that not too many New Yorkers value the principle of private property.

UPDATE: Lipsky's latest.

Atlantic Yards: 'House of Cards'?

"In examining the $4 billion mixed-use Atlantic Yards project for approval, New York State's leading development agency never saw a business plan from developer Forest City Ratner," The New York Sun reports. Why does this matter? Recall my last Atlantic Yards posting:

State lawmakers seeking documents from the Empire State Development Corp., the public agency overseeing the project, detailing Forest City Ratner's full financial plan, were forced to litigate. And only then received a few indecipherable pages. Because the project involves more than a billion dollars in taxpayer subsidies, lawmakers understandably felt their constituents deserved knowing more about it. Earlier, the ESDC refused a Freedom of Information Act request.

So, what's the ESDC hiding? If this eminent-domain-dependent development is furthering the "public good," why must the public be kept in the dark?

Apparently, the only thing they were hiding was their own incompetence. Quoth the Sun:

A former city planning commissioner who opposes the project, Ronald Shiffman, said that in not seeing FCR's financial plan, the state did not provide appropriate oversight.

"One would believe they should look at it with a lot of due diligence, particularly with the amount of money they're putting into this," he said. "It's been a done deal from the beginning without anybody really looking at it."

A spokesman for Forest City Ratner declined to comment.

Develop Don't Destroy asks:

Does anyone who approved this project, for which the government intends to use the awesome power of eminent domain, even know if it's financially viable? Does anyone in Albany or in City Hall have any idea how Ratner's potential profit compares to the public's meager return? Does anyone know if Ratner might pull the plug on Phase Two if he makes all his money on Phase One? Apparently not.

In the face of the sub-prime loan default crisis, we think it's high time that someone in Albany get to the bottom of Bruce Ratner's $4 billion, eight-million square foot house of cards.

Quite.

Brooklyn's Hollywood Saga

Anyone not following the Atlantic Yards project is missing out on a classic Hollywood tale unfolding in a real-life setting. We have a classic big-bucks developer (Bruce Ratner) who, in cahoots with public officials with questionable motives (Mike Bloomberg and, earlier, George Pataki and Charles Gargano), are commandeering private property for a project local residents say will destroy their neighborhood. Some recent developments:

-- State lawmakers seeking documents from the Empire State Development Corp., the public agency overseeing the project, detailing Forest City Ratner's full financial plan, were forced to litigate. And only then received a few indecipherable pages. Because the project involves more than a half-billion dollars in taxpayer subsidies, lawmakers understandably felt their constituents deserved knowing more about it. Earlier, the ESDC refused a Freedom of Information Act request.

So, what's the ESDC hiding? If this eminent-domain-dependent development is furthering the "public good," why must the public be kept in the dark?

-- New York State Supreme Court Justice Ira B. Harkavy ruled yesterday that Forest City Ratner illegally obtained property from a landowner within the proposed Atlantic Yards "footprint." The property has been given back to its owner.

-- A new study finds that Park Slope drivers looking for parking spots account for half of the neighborhood's traffic. What's needed? How about another 20,000 cars?

-- In what's likely to be the Atlantic Yards' death knell, NoLandGrab unearths yet another example of the MTA offering explicit favoritism to FCR during the project's earlier stages:

Ratner, [MTA spokesman Tom] Kelley said, "would be given preference" for development [of the railyards] since he has already built the Atlantic Center and Atlantic Terminal in the immediate vicinity.

As Develop Don't Destroy notes,

In his concurring opinion to the Supreme Court's decision in Kelo vs. New London, Justice Anthony Kennedy warned that projects in which there was an "impermissible favoritism" might not pass constitutional muster. Examples of impermissible favoritism, Kennedy wrote, would include instances in which a governmental entity picked out "a particular transferee beforehand."

My prediction: The Atlantic Yards will be defeated in federal court, with Mayor Bloomberg haughtily blaming community organizations like Develop Don't Destroy. The real culprit -- political arrogance -- will go unmentioned.

-- Finally, Reverend Dr. Daniel Meeter, pastor of Brooklyn's Old First Reformed Church, looks to the Good Book for the morality of eminent domain:

The concentration of power is a moral issue, because it affects human freedom and human choices, especially the freedom and choices of the weak and powerless. The Bible regards the secure possession of private property and its protection from eminent domain as a sign of human freedom and dignity. The defining story is 1 Kings 21, the story of Naboth's Vineyard.

Naboth had a vineyard. A little vineyard, because he was a nobody. But it was close to the palace of King Ahab, and Ahab desired it. Had Ahab been king of any other people than Israel, he could have just taken it. It's what kings do. But the Torah forebade it. The Torah protected as sacred the private property of the family. But Queen Jezebel, herself a gentile, and familiar with the ways of gentile kings, found this preposterous. So she used the tools of royal power to get Naboth's vineyard.

They got away with it. God did not intervene. But the anger and judgment of God was made clear, and in the end, the House of Ahab paid. "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house." In the Israel of God, not even kings have eminent domain.

Eminent Domain Watch: Brooklyn

Today, The New York Post reports, construction begins at the Atlantic Yards. Meanwhile, Develop Don't Destroy, an anti-Atlantic Yards organization funded through private contributions and fund-raisers (as opposed to subsidy-dependent Forest City Ratner), says the chances of a federal lawsuit blocking the project making it to trial appear strong:

An overflowing crowd of Brooklyn residents and reporters (some late arrivals had to watch the proceedings on closed-circuit TV in the courthouse's cafeteria) filled the courtroom of Federal Magistrate Robert Levy on February 7th, as the judge listened to initial oral arguments in the eminent domain lawsuit filed by property owners and tenants whose homes and businesses lie in the footprint of the proposed "Atlantic Yards" development.

The hearing, in the Brooklyn Federal Courthouse, was held in response to a motion to dismiss the case, brought by the defendants, who include the Empire State Development Corporation, Forest City Ratner, former Governor George Pataki and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The defendants are fearful of the case going to trial in Federal court, where the fate of Bruce Ratner's "Atlantic Yards" project would rest solely on the law – and with a politically independent, impartial judge.

If the case proceeds to trial – and many courtroom observers believe that Judge Levy's demeanor and his line of questioning indicate there's a good chance it will – it would derail Ratner's plans to erect an arena and a superblock of high-rise buildings in Prospect Heights. If the plaintiffs win, the project will have to go back to the drawing board, or be scrapped altogether, because the arena cannot be built, nor can streets de-mapped, without the plaintiffs' homes and businesses.

During the nearly four hours of sometimes-fascinating, sometimes-technical courtroom back-and-forth, Judge Levy seemed largely unmoved by the defendants' arguments; at one point, he interrupted ESDC lawyer Douglas Kraus to tell him "you and I have very different ideas about the law."

The Sun has more.

Atlantic Yards' Latest Blemish

The Brooklyn Papers reports:

The future home for the Brooklyn Nets will be emblazoned with the corporate logo of a British bank that was founded on the slave trade, collaborated with the Nazis and did business with South Africa’s apartheid government.

Councilwoman Letitia James (D-Prospect Heights) has some choice commentary:

“[Black] supporters of Atlantic Yards were just tools used by Ratner to get this project passed ... Now that the project has been approved, they don’t serve his purpose anymore. Now, he can insult them by signing an agreement with a bank that financed the slave trade and supported the apartheid system. He’ll take money from anyone.”

But as The Brooklyn Papers editorial notes:

That an old, established, global bank has some skeletons in its closet should not surprise anyone. But the particular nature of Barclays skeletons should have given Ratner pause.

Those who downplay the significance of having the Barclays name atop a publicly subsidized arena that African-Americans will walk past every day — and where African-Americans will earn their living, both on the court and in the concessions stands — should put themselves in the shoes of the descendents of the slaves that Barclays family members once traded as property.

Noting that the arena will largely be funded through public subsidies, Develop Don't Destroy wonders why Forest City Ratner gets to pocket the full $400 million. Incidentally, if, as the Empire State Development Corp. says, the Atlantic Yards is a "public arena" -- and it's certainly true it's to be publicly financed with triple-tax-free bonds -- then why, pray tell, don't we the people get naming rights?

Let There Be Blight

In today's Wall Street Journal, William Maurer, author of "A False Sense of Security: The Potential For Eminent-Domain Abuse in Washington" shares this troubling story from Burien, Wash., a place where pols pronounced post-Kelo that "it could never happen here":

The city of Burien, Wash., recently decided that a piece of property owned by the seven Strobel sisters that had long housed a popular diner-style restaurant was not upscale enough for the city's ambitious "Town Square" development, which will feature condos, shops, restaurants and offices. Rather than condemn the property for a private developer and risk a lawsuit, Burien came up with a plan--it would put a road through the property, and the city manager told his staff to "make damn sure" it did. When a subsequent survey revealed that the road would not affect the building itself, but only sideswipe a small corner of the property, the staff developed yet another site plan that put the road directly through the building. A trial court concluded that the city's actions might be "oppressive" and "an abuse of power"--but allowed the condemnation anyway. The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed, and the Washington Supreme Court refused to hear the case.

Welcome to the post-Kelo world.

The piece goes on to note how state and local governments have perverted the definition of "blight" to include just about anything. Sounds familiar.

Why Brooklyn's Better

In its 2007 "Blue List" of must-see yet seldom traveled to destinations, the backpackers bible, "Lonely Planet," lists Brooklyn among its top spots, the Daily News reports:

Citing its multiethnic character and multiplying number of trendy neighborhoods, the book lauded the borough as "the hippest part of New York City."

"It's a diverse place," Lonely Planet spokesman Frank Ruiz said. "There are hipster bars, there's great shopping, all along with an intimate neighborhood feel."

So adventurers seeking wild fauna in their natural habitat should go to Honduras for howler monkeys, Gabon for elephants and Brooklyn for tattooed bloggers in $50 T-shirts?

"I'm not a big fan of hipsters, but I guess it's sort of exciting that they're attracting people from the outside who want to see what's going on, what all the fuss is about," said Scott Beard, 31, co-owner of Barcade in Williamsburg, which was singled out by Lonely Planet for vintage arcade games and local brews. ...

Other Brooklyn recommendations range from the well-known - the hot dog-eating contest in Coney Island - to insider favorites like a Slope bed-and-breakfast or dinner at the Carroll Gardens Mexican restaurant Alma.

"We have a lot of people coming in from Norway, Sweden and Germany," Alma owner Ronald Starns said. "A lot of people say they don't feel like they're in the city. They're almost on vacation while they're on vacation."

See, the beauty of Brooklyn is precisely that is not Manhattan. That a Manhattan-based developer and a Manhattan-based mayor and a Manhattan-based Empire State Development chief and a Manhattan-based governor all seek to "improve" Brooklyn through the government-orchestrated development of the Atlantic Yards helps explain why Brooklynites are so uniformly opposed to the project. Turn Brooklyn into Manhattan, and that which makes Brooklyn better will be gone forever.

A Funk Doc Funk Blast

Your mother always told you some funk everyday keeps the doctor away.

-- What's better than an enormous arena/skyscraper airdropped into an otherwise tasteful, classic Brooklyn brownstone neighborhood? How about an enormous arena covered 150-feet high, 75-feet long animated signs?

-- In anticipation of Wednesday's possible "final approval" of the Atlantic Yards, The New York Sun offers its opinion that such an outcome would serve as an unbecoming harbinger of the future in urban planning. Read it (unless you're a sissy).

-- In an interview with Senegal-born rapper Akon this month in The Source, a few passages demand closer attention. The writer, Chloe A. Hilliard, observes early on: "To West Africa, whose coasts were used to ship slaves to the New World, he is the first positive international representation of their people in decades." Now maybe I'm wrong and it's just that Hilliard knows little of West African culture (ever heard of Fela Kuti, Ali Farka Toure, or Tony Allen?) or, perhaps, simply suffers some sort of weird obsession with slavery, but it sounds to me like she's trying to start a new coastal beef -- with Africa's west side. Possible future New York Times headline: "Longstanding East Coast/West Coast Rap Feud Ends; former foes vow allegiance against a new enemy: Africa."

On a gloomier note, Hilliard reports:

Kicking off the transcontinental promotional tour for his sophomore album, Konvicted, Akon's engine is currently in overdrive. What would normally have been a publicity push has turned into a media circus. The week prior, Akon appeared on NYC's Hot 97 radio station. During an interview with host Angie Martinez, the singer admitted to practicing polygamy. Mayhem ensued.

"This week I realized just how big I was," says Akon of the media's attack on his lifestyle. "I started getting calls from people in high positions in Africa and the states saying, 'Akon, what are you doing? You can't be that open. You represent millions of people.'" However, not everyone was bothered by his admission. "Understand that after the show, I got a call saying that Hot 97 got over 350 calls from women saying they wanted to learn more about [polygamy]." Having witnessed the power of his words, he now refuses to address any questions about his dating life.

Now, far be it from me to question the fruits of stardom in Africa. As an aspiring rap star, I got dreams, too. But what I really want to know is this: If more than 350 Hot 97 female listeners need to be educated on what polygamy is, maybe it really is time to start asking whether hip-hop has failed the fairer gender? Yes, it's time to wake up.

-- Finally, Greg Gutfield passes on the Huffington Post press release we've all been waiting for:

IN THE NAME OF FREEDOM AND TOLERANCE, AND IN HARMONY WITH OUR GAY MUSLIM BROTHERS AND SISTERS, WE PROUDLY ANNOUNCE THE FIRST MARCH TO MECCA, FEBRUARY 14, 2007

Human Rights Watch, Moveon.org, ACT-UP, the Huffington Post and David Geffen are proud to present the March to Mecca, a celebration of peace that calls all gay brothers, sisters and people undergoing sex-reassignment to march to the holiest of holy cities, Mecca, the capital city of Saudi Arabia's Makkah province on Valentine's Day, February 14, 2007.

The march, a brainchild of activists and celebrities who acknowledge that more gays are dying from Islamic fundamentalism than from the policies of George W. Bush, will begin 12 noon sharp in Jeddah, the stunning night-life friendly Saudi Arabian city located on the coast of the Red Sea.

"Not marching in these countries, in this era of terror, seems cowardly," says event co-organizer Sharon Stone. "I'm embarrassed to say at social gatherings I even blamed the United States for everything. But I realized it's the radical Muslims - not the US - who want gays dead, and for that I am truly sorry."

Keep reading.

-- P.S. Read Mark Steyn. Civilization demands it.

The Enigma of Prospect Heights

When someone writes the tome on how expansive government is genetically inefficient, there ought to be a chapter on the failed record of intra-bureaucracy communication.

A case in point comes courtesy of New York, where, one might recall, many Brooklyn residents were recently served with condemnation notices courtesy of the Empire State Development Corp. In part, the notice of their properties' impending implosions read:

The Atlantic Yards site is located in the intersection of three major arterials: Atlantic Avenue, Flatbush Avenue, and 4th Avenue. Despite its location on these major arterials and the presence of ten subway lines and the LIRR Atlantic Terminal across the street and two other subway lines and 11 bus routes in the vicinity, the Atlantic Yards project site has been a center of blight and decay.

For the state to qualify for a legitimate eminent-domain taking under New York's constitution, the affected property owner has to be in the way of a public-works project (new highway) or a blighted area the state proposes to revitalize, and be justly compensated. Hence, ESDC's farcical claim that Prospect Heights is a "center of blight and decay."

Meanwhile, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn is proposing a reworking of somewhat controversial 421(a), a tax-abatement program created in the 1970s to spur residential development. Developers receive significant chunks off their property-tax liabilities in exchange for introducing new residential units to the housing market. For areas that are already affluent, a "geographic exclusion area" was created to ensure these tax benefits don't unduly benefit wealthy landowners. The GEA, as 421(a) currently exists, includes Manhattan from 14th Street to 96th Street and the Greenpoint-Williamsburg waterfront in Brooklyn.

The program being three decades old, posh neighborhoods now exist in many areas outside the GEA. Consequently, many news stories have described how 421(a) allows people like Natalie Portman, Calvin Klein, and Derek Jeter to save gobs on their property-tax liabilities. While 421(a) is scheduled to sunset at the end of 2007, Mayor Bloomberg has proposed reworking it as a vehicle to generate "affordable housing." Several members of the City Council have pitched their own reform, essentially seeing Bloomberg's "affordable housing" requirement and doubling it. Quinn is currently working to reconcile the differences.

A map of Quinn's proposed Geographic Exclusion Area (green line):
So the area where Forest City Ratner intends to build the Atlantic Yards project is now too developed for tax benefits? (h/t: The Observer's real estate blog.)

Perhaps the city's Economic Development Corp. will reconcile everything with a new motto: "Prospect Heights: a neighborhood of contrasts -- at once both too affluent and too blighted for frivolities like tax benefits and private-property rights." Though how that would attract anyone I'm not sure.

The Hammer Is Falling ...

... on Brooklyn.

Residents in the Atlantic Yards footprint receive eminent domain condemnation notices. Note the claim that Prospect Heights is a "center of blight and decay." Makes you wonder whether the Empire State Development Corp. even bothered visiting.

Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn asks:

For all those elected officials (for example our Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum whose spokesman said "If eminent domain is part of the project she's not supporting it.") and un-elected ones like ESDC Chairman Charles Gargano, who said eminent domain would not be used for "Atlantic Yards," your notice is below. Now watcha gonna do?