Slope group rips Ratner plan After taking on Commerce Bank, Atlantic Yards is next

After taking on Commerce Bank, Atlantic Yards is next

The Brooklyn Paper
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook

Get our stories in your inbox, free.

Like The Brooklyn Paper on Facebook.

A civic group in Park Slope that began by successfully pressuring Commerce Bank into modifying the look of a new branch to fit in with the neighborhood, is now taking aim at developer Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards basketball arena and skyscraper project.

Park Slope Neighbors, which formed last October to bring together block associations and residents who felt estranged by other area organizations, made a splash when they convinced the bank to reduce the area allocated to a suburban drive-through design for a more Brownstone Brooklyn facade.

Last Sunday, at the annual Seventh Heaven street fair on Park Slope’s Seventh Avenue, three members of the group gathered 450 new signatures of people opposing Atlantic Yards, a $3.5 billion proposal by Ratner, which would stretch from Fourth Avenue and Pacific Street in Park Slope along Atlantic Avenue, bounded by Dean Street, and ending at Vanderbilt Avenue in Prospect Heights.

The concerned Slopers want elected officials to push for a greater public say in the development of the site.

“It’s kind of interesting,” said Jon Crow, a member of Park Slope Neighbors, who sat at the table between Berkeley and Union streets on Sunday afternoon. “All you really need to do is put out there what you’re doing — which is petitioning against the arena project — and people just come at you like a magnet.

“Either that or people just pass you by and don’t know what you’re talking about,” said Crow. “It’s really amazing that the council members say their constituents support this, when you’re like, ‘What are you talking about?’”

City Council members David Yassky and Bill DeBlasio, who both represent portions of Park Slope, are two of those whom the petitions are addressed. Yassky has stated support for the Ratner project, with the caveat of more community input, and DeBlasio has voiced his support for the value the residential component, which may provide as many as 7,300 new units of housing.

Just as the petition against the bank’s plan for a mammoth, glowing sign-adorned drive-through took elected officials by surprise after the deal was long sealed, the Atlantic Yards petition will be presented to elected officials, who members of the organization say have been resting on their laurels instead of reaching out to the community to explain their stance on the arena.

Simply worded, the statement signatories agree that the proposed development, “the largest real-estate development in Brooklyn in 25 years … would have tremendous consequences for our neighborhoods.”

“We’re being asked to pay for it through hundreds of millions of dollars in public subsidies, yet we are being given no voice in how this project might take shape,” the petition reads.

“We, your constituents, demand that you call for greater community input in the Atlantic rail yards development process,” reads the petition. “As our elected representative, we expect you to work to 1) protect neighborhood quality of life; 2) ensure competitive bidding for the MTA’s rail yards; 3) explore alternative proposals, including the UNITY plan and the siting of an arena in Coney Island.”

Crow said the petition received “450 or 500 signatures this weekend,” but during a street fair on Fifth Avenue a few weeks ago they collected as many as 650.

“Primarily, we’re tabling, but we also e-mailed to our list of folks who have signed the Commerce Bank petition or are on our list serve,” explained Eric McClure, a spokesman for the group.

“The majority are coming from tabling efforts,” he said.

Along with the two council members, the petition is addressed to Assembly members Joan Millman and James Brennan, state Sen. Carl Andrews and Borough President Marty Markowitz, the most vocal political advocate of the plan.

“It’s been pretty clear to us that if the elected officials are working on these things, they have been completely behind closed doors, because it doesn’t appear that anybody has been addressing this issues,” said McClure.

“We don’t really have a mechanism to make sure they are doing these things right now, but it seems pretty clear that nobody is.”

Today’s news:
Share on TwitterTweet
Share on Facebook

Get our stories in your inbox, free.

Like The Brooklyn Paper on Facebook.

Reader Feedback

Enter your comment below

By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:

You agree that you, and not or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

First name
Last name
Your neighborhood
Email address
Daytime phone

Your letter must be signed and include all of the information requested above. (Only your name and neighborhood are published with the letter.) Letters should be as brief as possible; while they may discuss any topic of interest to our readers, priority will be given to letters that relate to stories covered by The Brooklyn Paper.

Letters will be edited at the sole discretion of the editor, may be published in whole or part in any media, and upon publication become the property of The Brooklyn Paper. The earlier in the week you send your letter, the better.

This week’s featured advertisers