Calipari Gets His Wish: Wildcats at Barclays Center

by Net Income on Jul 17, 2011 7:52 AM EDT in Brooklyn

In a Crain's New York Business report on progress at Barclays Center, reporter Matthew Flamm writes that one of the first events at the arena (beyond the Nets opener and a Jay-Z concert) will likely be a college basketball game between the Wildcats of Kentucky vs. the Terrapins of Maryland.

John Calipari, UK's coach, had said it was his hope that UK would play the first college game at the 18,000-seat arena. Brett Yormark said Barclays has now booked 163 dates out of a planned 220 for 2012-13 and said initial sales of All-Access seats have exceeded his expectations. Meanwhile, the Daily News in an editorial slammed arena critics, saying they continue to "sue their way toward preserving an urban wasteland", Critics immediately called the editorial "flagrantly ignorant".

Barclays Center takes shape at Atlantic Yards - Matthew Flamm - Crain's New York Business
The new Nets' arena rising in Brooklyn is shaping up as a huge plus - Editorial - New York Daily News
Flagrantly ignorant, Daily News calls arena rising "huge plus for an underused neighborhood" - Norman Oder - Atlantic Yards Report
Another reason to distrust the New York Daily News's editorial today: a dishonest photo - Norman Oder - Atlantic Yards Report
Debate continues over new Nets arena - Arena Digest
Crain's article on arena calls documentary "latest insult," relies on ever-spinning Yormark - Norman Oder - Atlantic Yards Report
Kentucky Will Open New York Arena - Alan Cutler - Lex18.com
Maryland to play Kentucky at the Nets' new arena in 2012-13? - Jakob Engelke - Baltimore Sun

Tweet Comment 41 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

ballers paradise!

by DJ HeavyDuty on Jul 17, 2011 8:57 AM EDT reply actions

"sue their way toward preserving an urban wasteland"

exactly.. imagine what that area would be like if they successfully stopped construction.. its not like ratner is going to pay to have a half built basketball arena taken down..

by NJNETS29 on Jul 17, 2011 9:31 AM EDT reply actions

They aren't really suing to stop Barclays

But the massive Atlantic Yards project which truly will be a disaster.

by BrooklynNets on Jul 17, 2011 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions

yes, they are

and no, it won’t be.

by Net Income on Jul 17, 2011 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions

What makes you say that?

Is there any justification for building so much new commercial office and residential space in this economy?

Would love to hear what benefits you think the AY project will provide?

by BrooklynNets on Jul 18, 2011 3:20 AM EDT up reply actions

Site can be retrofitted

Let’s say out of a possible outcome that they did succeed in stopping all construction, and the Nets move to Brooklyn was stopped. Does that mean that whatever is there must be torn down? The answer is no. They can always reuse what is there for something else, so nothing current has to be demolished at all. The rest of the site can go with the UNITY Plan, which actually give even more of the promises than what Ratner has given, which he will never keep in the end especially because he is really using you. One of the things that can be built is affordable housing to bring back those who were kicked out from this. It’s sort of like what would happen if the official plan at the WTC site gets stopped, and some think that everything will have to get demolished and start over when in reality it can just be included in the Twin Towers II Plan with those unfinshed buildings topped off rather than being taken down. In other words, there is no call to take everything down if they win in the end, at least that’s not what I heard, but this is just me, and I don’t speak for any of the groups on the opposition, just myself.

by Tal Barzilai on Jul 17, 2011 10:23 PM EDT up reply actions

...

Let’s say out of a possible outcome that they did succeed in stopping all construction

Except that is not happening.

"Dont blame me, I was given this world, I didn’t make it."
-Tupac Shakur

by NetsMets4Life on Jul 17, 2011 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions

According to whom?

Am I supposed to believe this from a person who just hides behind their computer screen and never shows his face at anything involving this very project?

by Tal Barzilai on Jul 17, 2011 10:54 PM EDT up reply actions

they arent halting arena construction

by nets14 on Jul 17, 2011 10:56 PM EDT up reply actions

Am I supposed to believe this from a person who thinks that a documentary

that has an average turnout of, what, 75 people out of borough with a population of 2.6 million people is an efficient turnout? Am I supposed to believe this from a person who thinks his opinion has better foundation just because Michael Moore has the documentary play at a somewhat obscure film festival? Am I supposed to believe this from a person who reads Norman Oder’s blog and accepts every word as truth?

Man oh man, I can’t wait for September 28, 2012.

"Dont blame me, I was given this world, I didn’t make it."
-Tupac Shakur

by NetsMets4Life on Jul 17, 2011 11:22 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Rec'd

by nynjlawyer on Jul 17, 2011 11:30 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

Answer me this

Why is Oder wrong about what he says? Do you have any proof that he wrong or are you just mad that he sees through demagogue known as Ratner? BTW, not everything that Oder has mentioned is for the opposition. He has stated sometimes things that were against them. Either way, he does have a lot more credibility on this than you have. As for Michael Moore, he has won awards for his films, and such awards do not go those who make something up. Since you brought him up, Jane Boursaw, who is writing about the Traverse City Film Festival that he is hosting, actually consideres The Battle for Brooklyn a must see, and sides with the opposition. The support for the film is very popular. Also, much of the borough and even the city actually opposes the arena, and there are stats especially from Oder as well from other websites that took thorough interpretations that have proven that to be true rather than your baseless claim with a bunch of bandwagoners.

by Tal Barzilai on Jul 17, 2011 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Jane Boursaw?

Give me a break.

"Dont blame me, I was given this world, I didn’t make it."
-Tupac Shakur

by NetsMets4Life on Jul 17, 2011 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions

What she said

Here is the exact statement Jane Boursaw said when reviewing The Battle for Brooklyn.

http://www.reellifewithjane.com/blog/2011/07/traverse-city-film-festival-2011-jane-boursaws-best-bets/

‘Battle for Brooklyn‘ (Michael Galinsky, Suki Hawley, USA, 2010). I always love documentaries where a group of people take on "the man." In this one, a historic Brooklyn neighborhood is being torn down to make way for a development that includes a new basketball arena, future home of the New Jersey Nets. The developer, Forest City Ratner Companies, with prominent politicians by its side, promises the project will bring in jobs and low-cost housing, but longtime residents are being forced out of their homes. An eight-year grassroots resistance effort ensues. Geez, I really hope the residents won.

by Tal Barzilai on Jul 17, 2011 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions

umm tal

60% of brooklynnites support…..
bq.Most Brooklynites are not begrudging, however. The Nets put premium season tickets on sale in March, and 39% of the buyers were from Brooklyn. They cite current polls with more than 60% of Brooklynites supporting the arena, while about 30% are against.

by nets14 on Jul 17, 2011 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions

I am surprised its as much as 30%.

30% who mostly dont care about sports to begin with, I would not be surprised. Not unlike many of the critics.

"Dont blame me, I was given this world, I didn’t make it."
-Tupac Shakur

by NetsMets4Life on Jul 18, 2011 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions

I've said it a thousand times and I will say it again

The Atlantic Yards critics did themselves a disservice by opposing the arena and not the larger project. It was simply a giant tactical blunder. It’s clear that this “editorial” is nothing more than a press release with some inflammatory opinions sprinkled in. But the critics still don’t get that by separating a positive (the Barclays Center) from a massive negative (any residential or commercial office development by Forest City) they could accomplish their goals.

The arena is going to beautiful and iconic. It will transform Brooklyn into an autonomous city in the minds of Americans separate from Manhattan. The Atlantic Yards towers will permanently destroy Brooklyn and they are the real money maker for Forest City Ratner.

The critics definitely need some PR of their own right now. Endorse the arena and then try to kill AY.

by BrooklynNets on Jul 17, 2011 9:32 AM EDT reply actions

I wonder how many people

thought the same thing about Rockefeller Center in the 1930’s.

Brooklyn is not immune from the urban forces that are shaping New York. Forty years ago, all those brownstone neighborhoods were non-descript at best and a few decades earlier were referred to as “South Brookliyn”, not by the pretty names they bear today. There hadn’t been a new office building built in the borough since the 1950’s. Bay Ridge was filled with Scandaiavians. Now, it’s filled with Arabs. Anyone predict that? Things change. Same is happening now…just in different ways.

It’s not limited to Brooklyn either. Urban forces are reshaping Hell’s Kitchen…without the mass transit. It’s now called Clinton Hill or some other jazzed up brand. In Jersey City, in other corners of the inner core of the metropolitan area, high rises are replacing small manufacturing operations, much of it abandoned as jobs like that go overseas.

Brooklyn is not sacrosanct. Atlantic Yards is not the end of the process. Nor is it the beginning. It’s just the process.

by Net Income on Jul 17, 2011 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions

EXACTLY

what exactly is wrong with change and development? I have said this exact thing thousands of times. It’s like people dont know whats good for them. Im cool with keeping the old iconic stuff around, but who is touching that? Brooklyn has 2.5 million people and is the 4th largest city in America, we should be building up.

by nets14 on Jul 17, 2011 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions

clinton hill is in brooklyn

hells kitchen is still called hells kitchen and has nothing to do with atlantic yards.. threres not giant eminant domain case hovering over the development of atlantic yards.. better references are ikea in red hook and metrotech if im not mistaken.. make what you will out of those developments

by NJNETS29 on Jul 17, 2011 7:03 PM EDT up reply actions

whoops

hells kitchen is still called hells kitchen and has nothing to do with atlantic yards.. threres not giant eminant domain case hovering over the development of hells kitchen.. better references are ikea in red hook and metrotech if im not mistaken.. make what you will out of those developments

by NJNETS29 on Jul 17, 2011 7:04 PM EDT up reply actions

Apples and oranges

Unlike Ratner, John D Rockefeller did not threatened those who were there before with eminent domain as a way to get them out. Instead, he paid them at fair market value or even higher. You are aware that you are comparing this a time before there was even the idea of urban renewal. At that time, there was no such thing as preservation, which didn’t come until the 1960’s. Still, just because they did something then didn’t make it right either. However, at that time, the city’s population was a lot smaller and there was still a lot of places that were left undeveloped until the end of WWII in the rest of the boroughs. Still, an area doesn’t have to change its face entirely to be considered developed, it can be done without that. Some believe that you can reuse what is already there rather than just tearing down and starting over, which is the idea of Jane Jacobs when she wrote the Life and Death of American Cities. As for Hell’s Kitchen, it’s a combination of three neighborhoods, the part of the 20s to the 30’s is known as Chelsea, while the part from the 30’s to the 40s is known as Midtown South, while the part of the 40’s to the 50’s is known as Clinton (not to be confused with Clinton Hill). There is nothing wrong with developement, but there is a way it can be done right and a way it can be done wrong, and Ratner is the perfect example of it being done wrong. If he cares so much about Brooklyn so much, then why does he keep on demolishing it only to replace it with his own buildings that act as if they alienate the area. Keep in mind that downtown Brooklyn lost a lot of its historic architecture just so that he can build that failed complex known as MTC.

by Tal Barzilai on Jul 17, 2011 10:36 PM EDT up reply actions

First and foremost Atlantic Yards is not Rockefeller center

Sorry, poor comparison.

And NI, I know that development is sorely needed in Brooklyn and the rest of NYC. Bloomberg has made it clear that the city needs to add housing for a million more residents over the next decade.

The problem is, and always has been, about the scale of the Atlantic Yards project and questionable relationship between Ratner and NYC politicians. Make no mistake, I firmly support the development of the Atlantic yards, just not FCR’s plan. If we are going to debate this, we should do so honestly: FCR is not building a bunch of affordable housing, they are building luxury housing with enough “affordable housing” to make the project fly politically. They are also trying to maximize profit, which has historically been death for the neighborhoods were said development takes place as the projects tend to meet the Developer’s vision and not that of the local community.

The “UNITY plan” is not so much a plan as a community coalition that is suggesting alternatives to FCR’s Atlantic Yards. While I feel it to be insufficient, I think it is a more representative process then awarding FCR the AY without competitive bidding.

by BrooklynNets on Jul 18, 2011 3:39 AM EDT up reply actions

so this is better than an arena and housing?

by nets14 on Jul 17, 2011 12:50 PM EDT reply actions

ahhh, the old neighborhood, how could they rip that down??

by nets1 on Jul 17, 2011 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions

That picture is wrong

In that image, you only see the right hand side, but not the rest. This is the typical false statement in the claim that it’s just the rail yards when in fact it has been proven false. More than 2/3 is not on the rail yards, but on the blocks that are south from it. The part that you see is not where the arena will be built, and Oder mentioned how wrong it was. By no surprise, the Daily News, which has shown a blind support especially from Errol Louis, tries to give the illusion that Ratner is a good guy by one again drinking that Kool-Aid he gives them. Crains NY is no better and called the very documentary that states what really happened an insult. Then again, Crains NY has a history of supporting such projects right or wrong. Perhaps what that editorial really doesn’t understand why there are those fighting against this is maybe because it’s a private project that is using both taxpayer dollars and allowed to use a public process such as eminent domain that is supposed to be for public projects only. One a side note, the MTA would have probably have more to complete that Second Avenue Subway that is long overdue if so much money wasn’t given to this.

by Tal Barzilai on Jul 17, 2011 10:45 PM EDT up reply actions

i remember what was there before

it was maybe a little better than this. Barely.

by nets14 on Jul 17, 2011 10:55 PM EDT up reply actions

No

The choice is NOT between rail yards and Atlantic Yards, the choice is between a massive development that denies the #1 rule of urban planning (scale) and a project that could (I admit potentially) include schools and truly affordable housing.

The choice is between a no-bid gift to a politically well-connected billionaire and a competitive bid process that could award different sections to different developers (an urban planning good practice).

The choice is between developing AY through an outside developer or local community groups.

Again, think FCR has done an outstanding job with the Barclays center, but doubt that will carry over to the larger project. FCR, in my opinion, uses flash over substance and never has the community’s interests in mind.

Look at the Gehry building by city hall: love Gehry but that building is hideously out of place. But all of this proves my point: without the arena would any of you be supporting the larger project? Would you have even been aware of it? Doubtful.

by BrooklynNets on Jul 18, 2011 3:48 AM EDT up reply actions

yes i would be supportive

Brooklyn needs to build up. It has more people than 6 cities combined, 2.5 million people, with more coming in. Brooklyn needs housing, and this project is giving it. And this is Brooklyn in NYC, since when is developing a bad thing in this city? And if not for ratner, those rail yards would have been sitting there for another 50 years untouched. Its the most accessible place in the city, with no purpose, it would have gone unused.

by nets14 on Jul 18, 2011 3:53 AM EDT up reply actions

developing on that scale is a bad thing.

Above, you posted a picture that has no context. The yards are unused, possibly ugly. That I agree with. But what goes on in the rest of that picture? What goes on if you turn 180 degrees?

I’ve seen the area (180 degrees behind) go from dodgy to a haven for fairly wealthy people who want to leave (or are priced out of) the nicer areas of Manhattan but want proximity to bucolic streets, green grass, a neighborhood feel and scale. In that picture, there are other wealthy and less wealthy people who were priced out of Manhattan and want the same thing.

It doesn’t NEED development, it’s developed pretty nicely already. It’s been touched.

The scale of the apartment buildings that Ratner wants to build are outsized and ridiculous. For an already-crowded transfer hub (where I lived for a number of years) to take on that kind of daily traffic is a bit much. That Target in Ratner’s Atlantic Mall is already overcrowded, for example.

I am a Nets fan as well – personally, I don’t love the arena location without some serious traffic changes, but placing an arena in a huge Brooklyn/ Long Island traffic hub is smart.

But the project as a whole is greedy, selfish, it’s a backroom handshake, and it’s unfortunate.

Rumble in the Garden - St. John's blog with thunderous undertones, on SB Nation | Follow on Facebook | Follow on Twitter

by picodulce on Jul 18, 2011 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Very well put

Better then I have put it for sure. People on this site (generally) seem to have a problem at looking at this issue with any sort of complexity. You’re either with Ratner or against him. But I’m not sure people on this site have really thought about how damaging this could be for Brooklyn.

by BrooklynNets on Jul 18, 2011 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions

That's just plain ignorant

When have mega-developments been a bad thing in NYC? Try all the freakin time. Development for development sake is just horrible, usually because it’s done as generically and cheaply as possible to maximize profit. They often exacerbate density and traffic problems, are environmentally hazardous, and because they are developed by publicly traded companies like Forest City Enterprises they suck the money (which is often subsidized by tax payers) right out of the communities in which they are placed. These are all valid criticisms of the Atlantic Yards project.

NYC also has a woeful history of not just bungling mega-developments but housing projects as well. And considering that NYC is the OLDEST modern metropolis on the planet, the drain on water resources and ensuing pollution is only exacerbated by an aging infrastructure.

Also, the land could have been put up for competitive bidding, parceled out to multiple developers, involved more community input, and would have developed much faster than FCR can develop the area (it will take them 25 YEARS to complete this project because they need to secure financing, which they don’t have a prayer of doing in this economy). The real issue is that Ratner used his substantial political connections to win control of this immensely valuable piece of property. Had the process been put up for competitive bidding, ESDC (or whomever actually receives the funds) would have most likely gotten a lot more money for that property. But Ratner used his influence to get his way.

Again, I have been a supporter of the Barclays Center from the moment Ratner announced he was moving the team to Brooklyn. I am a HUGE NETS FAN THAT IS ON THIS BLOG EVERY DAY. I think Ratner has done everything to make Barclays an iconic building and made sure no money is spared to make this at least a LEED Silver certified building (with a remote chance it will be graded gold). Why is he doing this? Because it is the way he dupes the public into not blocking his much more profitable Atlantic Yards project. Plain and simple.

by BrooklynNets on Jul 18, 2011 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions

Oder is such a Tool

by nets14 on Jul 17, 2011 1:03 PM EDT reply actions

He's saving this up for his own book.

That makes him a capitalist pig, just like everyone else.

by jerry25 on Jul 17, 2011 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions

False

First off, nobody ever did ask Oder to blog about this, he did that on his own. I cannot answer what got him interested in it in the first place, but you can always email him if you are curious. Regaurdless, he is credited for his research that he is down, and he has covered it a lot more than those of who slam him have done, especially a certain someone here who thinks that he knows more when he is really someone who just hides behind his computer and never even bothers to attend any events reguarding this very project. If Oder is so wrong, I would love to see the evidence that he is wrong. I like how he debunks claims on anything that tries to paint this as a good thing when it really isn’t. His most recent coverage really shows he caught the media once again using misinformation and even showing a dishonest photo like the one shown here. We should applaud Oder for his great coverage, not condemn him on it. Make all the assumptions you want, but many will remember him, and forget you. Just like me, he only represents himself, and he is not writing for DDDB.

by Tal Barzilai on Jul 17, 2011 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions

all typical opposers

have absolutely nothing good to say about the arena. Nothing. Its just a horrible sin that will never be a success, False. They are all tools. DG, and everyone scream bloody murder, its not that serious, and is improving the area.

by nets14 on Jul 17, 2011 11:00 PM EDT up reply actions

Wake up already!

When you are going to finally realize that Ratner was just using you to push this project forward and nothing else? He felt that the only way he could get good press was to make friends with minority groups that would normally despise him for the fact that he represents a rich developer. Let’s not forget that BUILD is a group that he clearly created and acted like his puppets. What you said on the other thread was very similar to what members of that groups said, and I know that because I have been the very hearings you never even bother to attend. My guess is that you are only going to wait until after it’s all done, or just some of it, to realize that he will never hire no matter what. He said very similar things when he built MTC and lied there as well. I would rather stop this now rather than looking back decades later to seeing how much of a bad idea it really was. It’s already been proven from the IBO (Independent Budget Office) Report that it’s going to be a net money loser. When he does lie to you in the end, don’t come crying to people like me who warned you about it. In reality, you are the tool, not me or anyone else who opposes it. I am actually looking at what it really represents, and that is just another greedy developer looking for more land to help bolster his ego. Saying that it will improve the area is just another illusion said by any developer, and I have heard that one before.

by Tal Barzilai on Jul 17, 2011 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions

using me?

ive never even met the guy, or publicly said i support the project, so how exactly is he using me? And from BUILDS website,

Myth: BUILD is financially supported by Forest City Ratner.
Fact: Since its inception BUILD has been supported by its members and community based supporters. BUILD’s faith in God and strong ties to the community has sustained and perpetuates our operations and advancement of our mission. Space, computers, supplies and time has been donated to the organization by its members since its inception this year (1/2004).

Wrong again Tal, And how can an arena that is in the most publicly accessible place in NYC be a net money loser? Opposers are tools, they bow down to whatever DG says. And when he lies to me? What are you talking about?

by nets14 on Jul 18, 2011 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs