July 07, 2005
Another Brooklyn contender
It's like deja vu all over again: On the deadline day for bids to buy the Brooklyn rail yards that Nets owner Bruce Ratner wants for his basketball arena development, a competing bidder has emerged. Extell, a development company that had previously butted heads with Ratner over development rights to the new New York Times building near Times Square, has proposed a row of apartment buildings that would meet several of the demands of Ratner's neighborhood opponents: It would not require demolition of existing buildings, it would be smaller in scale (28 stories max vs. Ratner's 60), and it would be vetted by the city land-use process, including an environmental impact statement and public hearings. (The Ratner plan, by contrast, would likely evade city oversight, and features towering structures inspired by Frank Gehry's discarded Chinese-food cartons.)
Dan Goldstein of the community group Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn today told a City Hall press conference - at which, incidentally, a Ratner flunky in dark glasses and stiletto heels stalked about collecting the names of reporters in attendance - that the Extell plan "doesn't rip off taxpayers," but in truth we don't really know what public subsidies would be involved. The Times reported that the Extell plan "would not require public subsidies beyond $200 million from the city and state to build a platform over the rail beds." Newsday quoted Goldstein as saying that the plan "would use just the $100 million in city funds, but would take advantage of available tax incentives," but Goldstein later told me he himself doesn't know the specifics of the Extell plan.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority board could vote on the land sale as early as its next meeting on July 27 - maybe by then they'll deign to let the public know the details of what they're voting on.
Ah, what you don't know about Extell...
do tell, and then I'll trade you with what you don't know about Ratner. I'll take what I don't know about Extell over what I do know about Ratner.
whaddya got?
If you go to my blog, http://redredbecca.blogspot.com you'll see some info about Extell. It's not stadium related, but you'll see that Inez Dickens, who's running for City Council in Harlem opposes their development plans there, and that Extell, partnered with the Carlyle Group just was involved in the biggest residential real-estate deal in NY history, buying up Donald Trump's land.
Oh, there's more. But Mr. DeMaus won't allow it on his list. He's such a ninny!
For those playing along without a scorecard: "Candy" is John Fisher of hellskitchen.net, who's still peeved that I won't let him call people names on my e-mail discussion list. Go ahead, John, spill any beans you want here - and this isn't the e-mail list, so call me a poopyhead, too, if you like.
More amused than peeved. And what name was it that joins the seven dirty words? Who specifically was called this horrific name?
In your last news digest, you made a significant factual error, but it's unlikely your readers will find out about it.
I call, John. Show your cards.
Waiting for you to answer the questions.
if it is john, if you point is that we are taking sides with a guy you don't like. look at the situation here and tell us what we should do?
it its not john, never mind.
And if that's Danny the Brooklyn sex symbol, explain why you supported the Olympics and support groups that call for Eminent Domain. But that's not what Neil is talking about -- if he ever answers the questions, never has.
This is like the stadium activist who called up a Minneapolis radio station I was being interviewed on to say "Hi, Neil, sorry I never returned your phone call." But if you insist, John (aka Eloise/Bruce/Danny/Candy): There are no prohibited "dirty words" on the e-mail list, you're just not allowed to engage in personal attacks on other list members. John Fisher called someone named "brklynnyusa" a "doorknob" and told them to "stop trolling"; he'd already been warned once, so his posting privileges were revoked until such time that he agreed to abide by the rules. To date, he has not agreed to do this.
Now, John, speaking of trolling: Do you actually have a "significant factual error" to point out, or are you just trying to see if you can get banned from posting comments here as well? I have a two-year-old, so I know all about testing limits.
So you finally aknowledge at least part of what happened and your over-reaction, just like you are doing so now. No one ever suggested you can't run your list as you see fit, but you need to be reasonable as well. Running my own boards (a lot longer than you) I know the difference between moderation and censorship.
And actually, I never said, "you are a doorknob." It was a more generic "doorknobs are at it again."
Now, if I called someone a f***ing a***ole, you might have a point. But doorknob? Oh Neil, you can be such a ninny.
Oh yes, your post did have a factual error.
John, why don't you stop slandering me?
supported the Olympics? wrong.
Support groups that call for eminent domain? wrong.
quit the slander. and quit the anonymous posting.
and you have some nerve suggesting that I support eminent domain abuse.
Why Danny, it's a matter of public record. You can always ask Candace -- you remember, she represents the state of Iowa, right? You can ask Shanamabama. Look at your old newsletters. Time to get your story straight. You can always rely on the kindness of strangers.
Hey Bertha, why don't you try to effect something instead of slinging mud at those who are? You are really a sensitive woman Bertha, showing your true colors when it comes to what you perceive to be an unusual name. Its amazing, Bertha, what lies you can tell. After you wipe the Bloomberg spiddle off your lips, you can kiss me where the daylight don't shine.
I second that!
