Atlantic Yards is a huge undertaking, redeveloping 22 acres in Downtown Brooklyn. Some argue that the project is a benefit to the community, providing jobs and affordable housing while others make the claim that the redevelopment will be overwhelming and take up a lot of space. I agree with Nicole Gelina’s argument, who talks about the failures of central planning and for those reasons I mainly oppose the redevelopment of Atlantic Yards.
I had not heard of this redevelopment project until reading about it recently and I was surprised to learn that it is being planned by architect Frank Gehry. Known for his beautiful and surreal buildings, Gehry already has two well known buildings in Manhattan; the luxury apartment skyscraper on 8 Spruce Street and IAC/InterActiveCorp’s headquarters on the West side. While I admire Gehry’s talent, I am opposed to the notion of central planning. Though knowing his excellent work, I am sure the Atlantic Yards redevelopment project will at least be aesthetically pleasing.
The Atlantic Yards project required taking private property away from residents in order to get land to build. The buildings and “half-million-dollar apartments” were labeled as being blighted, though “the city had already designated part of the neighborhood as “blighted” 40 years earlier, long before its resurgence” (Gelinas). Residents of the neighborhood, looking to keep their homes, have lost those lawsuits, with the court “abdicat[ing] its duty to protect property owners from the governor” (Gelinas). I greatly disagree that the government has the right to take away private property for the sake of the public for redevelopment projects. Gelinas makes a good point when she states, “Whenever government fails to confine itself to a limited role in the economy, it creates similar uncertainty.” These uncertainties often create incentives for people to take unnecessary risks, knowing the government will be providing support if something goes wrong, or create a lack of incentives to invest or upkeep infrastructure stemmed from artificial “low income” rent pricing.
While Kent Barwick also opposes the redevelopment of Atlantic Yards, I don’t quite agree with his arguments. He seems to think that the Atlantic Yards will “overwhelm the surrounding neighborhoods” and says the buildings will be large and take up a lot of space. I don’t find this a negative aspect of the project. In fact, this may be the only positive element of the Atlantic Yards. Gehry is a talented architect who probably has an interesting design for a large building. Barwick also seems to think that large buildings will turn out as “tall, deadening towers,” yet tall buildings can be built with storefronts facing the streets as well. Large buildings in Manhattan have a multitude of shops and stores on their lower levels, making the streets inviting to walk upon.
Thus the size of the buildings and height are irrelevant. If a private company was building large buildings for market-rate housing or offices, there would be no reason to complain. The residents would have the right to remain in their houses or chose to sell to the private developer, who would have the highest incentives to create an attractive and safe project to attract residents. This is not the case with this redevelopment of the Atlantic Yards. Using eminent domain or claims of blighted neighborhoods to take private land, the government is forcing this project onto the neighborhood.
