Skip to main content

Featured Post

Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park graphic: what's built/what's coming + FAQ (pinned post)

Reading between the lines of the Times editorial

It's not exactly what Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn was advocating, but a round-up editorial in the New York Times today, headlined Construction and Hard Times, asserts
Work is slowing, stalling or stopped altogether on too many of the projects we hoped would transform some of the bleakest sections of the city.
(Emphasis added)

I'm not sure that the Atlantic Yards site (or even Penn Station) would qualify as "the bleakest," but the Times editorialist apparently hasn't been checking the un-bleak real estate market in Prospect Heights.

The AY mention

The editorial states:
Atlantic Yards The Nets arena appears to be moving ahead, but the centerpiece Miss Brooklyn building designed by Frank Gehry is likely to be delayed. A strong state hand could ensure that the project — with adequate lower-income housing — survives hard times.

Does "strong state hand" mean that the state should supply the mystery anchor tenant for Miss Brooklyn? Does it mean that the state should prioritize subsidies for the affordable housing (most of which would be "lower-income" than market but certainly not low-income) promised at Atlantic Yards? Do the flexible deadlines already established--6+ years to build the arena, 12+ years for Phase 1--suggest a strong hand?


See how the editorial already made FCR's AY e-newsletter.

And NoLand Grab and DDDB remind us that, oh yeah, the parent New York Times Company is the developer's business partner. I'm so used to the editorial page's cognitive dissonance that I sometimes forget.