Skip to main content

High-rise vs. low-rise; the Times resists corrections, maintains false dichotomy

When Atlantic Yards architect Frank Gehry said last Thursday that Brooklynites wary of the Atlantic Yards plan would have picketed Henry Ford, and when landscape architect Laurie Olin said they were "frightened" of change, the two designers set up a simplistic dichotomy between progress and Luddism.

The misrepresentation was compounded by some shorthand in the Times's 5/12/06 report:
"They [opponents] have backed alternative plans for the site, including proposals by rival developers that would include mostly low-rise buildings and would not require eminent domain."

That continued the false dichotomy. Opponents have helped formulate the UNITY (Understanding, Imagining, & Transforming the Yards) plan, which serves as a set of principles for development, not a funded alternative. UNITY plan principles were adapted by the Extell Development Corp., the sole developer that responded to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's RFP for the Vanderbilt Yard. The coalition behind the UNITY plan is not a developer. So there were not "rival developers," just one developer.

As for "mostly low-rise buildings," the UNITY plan would be mid-rise, not low-rise (like the Dean Street buildings at right recently demolished by Forest City Ratner for a planned 322-foot tower). The Extell plan would be high-rise, but not so tall and dense as Forest City Ratner's plan, as explained below.

However, my request for a correction was resisted with some of the obfuscation and unwillingness to check facts that the Times too frequently employs.

A letter to the Times

I wrote to the Times on 5/12/06:
Developer Defends Atlantic Yards, Saying Towers Won't Corrupt the Feel of Brooklyn states:
"They [opponents] have backed alternative plans for the site, including proposals by rival developers that would include mostly low-rise buildings and would not require eminent domain."
Actually, there's only been *one* proposal from a developer on the table, from Extell Development Corp. The Times, in a 7/7/05 article headlined Brooklyn Plan Draws a Rival, And It's Smaller, described the plan as "11 buildings ranging from 4 to 28 stories."

However, Real Estate Weekly, in a 7/13/05 article headlined Ratner's Brooklyn dream being hijacked by Extell stated:
Extell's plan calls for 10 high-rise apartment buildings and one four-story building marked for community use...


So the phrase "mostly low-rise buildings" deserves correction, as does the term "proposals."

The article also states:
"But in an hourlong presentation, Frank Gehry, the project's architect, and Laurie Olin, its landscape designer, emphasized details that they said would harmonize the project's scale with the neighborhoods it would border. They described shorter and thinner buildings on Dean Street, where the project abuts a mostly low-rise neighborhood..."

This was imprecise: the thinner buildings would be the four on the eastern end of Dean Street. Of the three on the western end of Dean Street, none would be thinner, and one would be shorter and the other taller (than the previous iteration). The Forest City Ratner project fact sheet focused on the height and density of the buildings on Dean between Carlton and Vanderbilt.

It would have been more precise to say: They described shorter and thinner buildings on part of the Dean Street segment of the site.
Even if one building on the western end of Dean Street has been reduced to 322 feet doesn't mean it would harmonize with the bordering neighborhood.


The Times responds

I got a response Tuesday from the Times's Karin Roberts:
I am the corrections editor for the Metro department of The Times. Your e-mail was forwarded to me for review. After consulting Nicholas Confessore, the reporter for this article, I have determined that no correction is warranted. There were in fact two rival proposals for the Atlantic Yards project: Extell's and the UNITY plan, which called for mostly low-rise buildings. (Although the backers of the UNITY plan are not developers in the strict sense of the word, it is broadly accurate to refer to them that way, in the interest of shorthand.) The phrase "including proposals by rival developers that would include mostly low-rise buildings" is therefore accurate.

The reference to the buildings on Dean Street was likewise accurate; it is needlessly wordy to say they were on "part of the Dean Street segment of the site."

In an article on any topic as complicated as this, we aim to be concise and try not to overwhelm readers with extraneous information. To do that, we use shorthand language when it will not impede clarity or accuracy. In this case, the language chosen met both requirements.

Laying it out

I wrote back yesterday, focusing on the "low-rise" issue:
Thanks for your response. While I recognize that newspapers must use shorthand, I think some of the shorthand here is inaccurate. Even accepting the strained characterization of the UNITY plan backers as "developers"--shouldn't developers have a source of capital?--the UNITY plan does not consitute a low-rise plan (though it certainly is a lower-rise plan). The Art & Architecture Thesaurus defines low-rise as up to five stories.

The community-derived UNITY plan proposed buildings five to 10 stories, or five to 12 stories, as noted in the articles on p. 13 here. Architect Marshall Brown, in one of those articles, uses the term "mid-rise," which the Thesaurus defines as five to nine or 10 stories.
[An example: the Atlantic Terrace development planned by the Fifth Avenue Committee for Atlantic Avenue just east of the Atlantic Center mall, right.]

As for the Extell plan, it would encompass 2.7 million square feet on 8.3 acres. See the third PDF page here. Forest City Ratner's plan would be 8.6 million square feet on 22 acres. You can see that the plans are roughly equivalent in terms of density, though Extell's would be less dense. Even Forest City Ratner's Jim Stuckey acknowledged in a radio interview Monday that the Extell plan represents another high-rise proposal. Scroll down to the heading marked "The Extell bid."

Even if one believed that the UNITY plan was "mostly low-rise," rather than the more accurate mid-rise, the Times employed plurals in the phrasing at issue: "including proposals by rival developers that would include mostly low-rise buildings." The syntax misleadingly suggests that more than one developer (including Extell) proposed mostly low-rise buildings.

Here's the sentence at issue:
They have backed alternative plans for the site, including proposals by rival developers that would include mostly low-rise buildings and would not require eminent domain.

Here's a crack at more precise phrasing:
They have backed a community plan for mid-rise construction, as well as a rival developer's proposal for high-rise buildings, and neither plan would require eminent domain.

Or, alternatively:
They have backed a community plan for mid-rise construction, as well as a rival developer's proposal for high-rise--but not as tall--buildings, and neither plan would require eminent domain.


The Times stonewalls

Roberts responded later in the day:
Thanks for writing. As I said, we've determined that no correction is warranted, and I understand that you disagree with that decision. But I have to handle many duties here, so I am not able to engage in an extended debate about this particular matter. We do appreciate the feedback.

But this is no disagreement over opinions, but rather one over easily verifiable facts.
1) There's one developer, not two.
2) There's a mid-rise community plan and one developer's proposal for high-rise buildings.
3) To avoid the false dichotomy between low-rise and high-rise plans, the need for concision could have been accommodated with a rephrased sentence one word longer.

Whatever happened to the "journalism of verification"?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Barclays Center/Levy Restaurants hit with suit charging discrimination on disability, race; supervisors said to use vicious slurs, pursue retaliation

The Daily News has an article today, Barclays Center hit with $5M suit claiming discrimination against disabled, while the New York Post headlined its article Barclays Center sued over taunting disabled employees.

While that's part of the lawsuit, more prominent are claims of racial discrimination and retaliation, with black employees claiming repeated abuse by white supervisors, preferential treatment toward Hispanic colleagues, and retaliation in response to complaints.

Two individual supervisors, for example, are charged with  referring to black employees as “black motherfucker,” “dumb black bitch,” “black monkey,” “piece of shit” and “nigger.”

Two have referred to an employee blind in one eye as “cyclops,” and “the one-eyed guy,” and an employee with a nose disorder as “the nose guy.”

There's been no official response yet though arena spokesman Barry Baum told the Daily News they, but take “allegations of this kind very seriously” and have "a zero tolerance policy for…

Behind the "empty railyards": 40 years of ATURA, Baruch's plan, and the city's diffidence

To supporters of Forest City Ratner's Atlantic Yards project, it's a long-awaited plan for long-overlooked land. "The Atlantic Yards area has been available for any developer in America for over 100 years,” declared Borough President Marty Markowitz at a 5/26/05 City Council hearing.

Charles Gargano, chairman of the Empire State Development Corporation, mused on 11/15/05 to WNYC's Brian Lehrer, “Isn’t it interesting that these railyards have sat for decades and decades and decades, and no one has done a thing about them.” Forest City Ratner spokesman Joe DePlasco, in a 12/19/04 New York Times article ("In a War of Words, One Has the Power to Wound") described the railyards as "an empty scar dividing the community."

But why exactly has the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Vanderbilt Yard never been developed? Do public officials have some responsibility?

At a hearing yesterday of the Brooklyn Borough Board Atlantic Yards Committee, Kate Suisma…

Barclays Center event June 11 to protest plans to expand Israeli draft; questions about logistics

At right is a photo of a poster spotted in Hasidic Williamsburg right. Clearly there's an event scheduled at the Barclays Center aimed at the Haredi Jewish community (strict Orthodox Jews who reject secular culture), but the lack of English text makes it cryptic.

The website Matzav.com explains, Protest Against Israeli Draft of Bnei Yeshiva Rescheduled for Barclays Center:
A large asifa to protest the drafting of bnei yeshiva in Eretz Yisroel into the Israeli army that had been set to take place this month will instead be held on Sunday, 17 Sivan/June 11, at the Barclays Center in Downtown Brooklyn, NY. So attendees at a big gathering will protest an apparent change of policy that will make it much more difficult for traditional Orthodox Jewish students--both Hasidic (who follow a rebbe) and non-Hasidic (who don't)--to get deferments from the draft. Comments on the Yeshiva World website explain some of the debate.

The logistical questions

What's unclear is how large the ev…

Atlanta's Atlantic Yards moves ahead

First mentioned in April, the Atlantic Yards project in Atlanta is moving ahead--and has the potential to nudge Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn further down in Google searches.

According to a 5/30/17 press release, Hines and Invesco Real Estate Announce T3 West Midtown and Atlantic Yards:
Hines, the international real estate firm, and Invesco Real Estate, a global real estate investment manager, today announced a joint venture on behalf of one of Invesco Real Estate’s institutional clients to develop two progressive office projects in Atlanta totalling 700,000 square feet. T3 West Midtown will be a 200,000-square-foot heavy timber office development and Atlantic Yards will consist of 500,000 square feet of progressive office space in two buildings. Both projects are located on sites within Atlantic Station in the flourishing Midtown submarket.
Hines will work with Hartshorne Plunkard Architecture (HPA) as the design architect for both T3 West Midtown and Atlantic Yards. DLR Group will be t…

Forest City acknowledges unspecified delays in Pacific Park, cites $300 million "impairment" in project value; what about affordable housing pledge?

Updated Monday Nov. 7 am: Note follow-up coverage of stock price drop and investor conference call and pending questions.

Pacific Park Brooklyn is seriously delayed, Forest City Realty Trust said yesterday in a news release, which further acknowledged that the project has caused a $300 million impairment, or write-down of the asset, as the expected revenues no longer exceed the carrying cost.

The Cleveland-based developer, parent of Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner, which is a 30% investor in Pacific Park along with 70% partner/overseer Greenland USA, blamed the "significant impairment" on an oversupply of market-rate apartments, the uncertain fate of the 421-a tax break, and a continued increase in construction costs.

While the delay essentially confirms the obvious, given that two major buildings have not launched despite plans to do so, it raises significant questions about the future of the project, including:
if market-rate construction is delayed, will the affordable h…

Not quite the pattern: Greenland selling development sites, not completed condos

Real Estate Weekly, reporting on trends in Chinese investment in New York City, on 11/18/15 quoted Jim Costello, a senior vice president at research firm Real Capital Analytics:
“They’re typically building high-end condos, build it and sell it. Capital return is in a few years. That’s something that is ingrained in the companies that have been coming here because that’s how they’ve grown in the last 35 years. It’s always been a development game for them. So they’re just repeating their business model here,” he said. When I read that last November, I didn't think it necessarily applied to Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park, now 70% owned (outside of the Barclays Center and B2 modular apartment tower), by the Greenland Group, owned significantly by the Shanghai government.
A majority of the buildings will be rentals, some 100% market, some 100% affordable, and several--the last several built--are supposed to be 50% market/50% subsidized. (See tentative timetable below.)

Selling development …

"There is no alternative": DM Glen on de Blasio's affordable housing strategy

As I've written, Mayor Bill de Blasio sure knows how to steer and spin coverage of his affordable housing initiatives.

Indeed, his latest announcement, claiming significant progress, came with a pre-press release op-ed in the New York Daily News and then a friendly photo-op press conference with an understandably grateful--and very lucky--winner of an affordable housing lottery.

To me, though, the most significant quote came from Deputy Mayor Alicia Glen, who, as the Wall Street Journal reported:
said public housing had been “starved” of federal support for years now, leaving the city with fewer ways of creating affordable housing. “Are we relying too heavily on the private sector?” she said. “There is no alternative.” Though Glen was using what she surely sees as a common-sense phrase, it recalls the slogan of a politician with whom I doubt de Blasio identifies: former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, a Conservative who believed in free markets.

It suggests the limits to …