 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
tel/fax:
718.362.4784
Please note our new postal address when sending
contributions to the legal fund:
121 5th Avenue, PMB #150
Brooklyn, New York 11217
About DDDB
Our coalition consists of 21 community organizations and
there are 51 community organizations formally
aligned in opposition to the Ratner plan.
DDDB is a volunteer-run organization. We have over 5,000
subscribers to our email newsletter, and 7,000 petition
signers. Over 800 volunteers have registered with DDDB
to form our various teams, task-forces and committees
and we have over 150 block captains. We have a 20 person
volunteer legal team of local lawyers supplementing our
retained attorneys.
We are funded entirely by individual donations from the community at large
and through various fundraising events we and supporters have organized.
We have the financial support of well over 3,500 individual
donors.
More about
DDDB...
|
|
|
|
 |
ARCHIVES:
By Date|
By Category|
Text Search
|
Security in a Box
The proposed "Atlantic Yards" project deserves a serious design and
financial review in the context of security and terrorism. We've
been saying this for a long time. Why? Because the proposal calls for a glass-walled
arena (with 250 regularly scheduled events drawing crowds of up to 20,000), surrounded
by glass-walled high-rise towers, over the 3rd largest transportation hub in the
city, right at one of the busiest and most gridlocked intersections in Brooklyn,
at a location targeted for a terrorist attack in 1997.
The Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods (CBN) made similar statements last week
in its public letter
to city and state officials:
We are particularly concerned about the profound range of
consequences resulting from concentrating, in what would be the nation’s most
densely populated urban tract, adjacent to one of Brooklyn’s busiest intersections,
three Department of Homeland Security-designated terror targets: a
glass-walled sports arena and a glass-clad office tower built above the borough’s
largest transportation hub, which was, in 1997, the target of a thwarted terror
plot.
Today Norman Oder reports on a panel discussion he attended last night where he
went up against a conflict and buck-passing from the Department of City Planning:Security
study for Atlantic Yards? Sure, but it's Ratner's
A panel discussion last night sponsored by the Municipal Art Society, Security
at What Cost? Balancing Security and Public Space, seemed like a good place
to ask the Atlantic Yards security question.
A panel of design and engineering experts from the public and private sector
had just discussed a variety of issues relating to security perimeters, security
barriers, and the importance of maintaining a public streetscape. Post-9/11
New York was a giant "laboratory for security, said Bob Ducibella, principal
at security consultants Ducibella
Venter & Santore, but the city's been doing well.
...
Then again, as Ducibella put it, "glass and explosives go well together." His
firm has worked on numerous major projects, including the World Trade Center
transportation
hub and the Bank of America tower
at Bryant Park.
A glass skyscraper and an arena
So, in the Q&A, I mentioned that the Atlantic Yards Final Environmental Impact
Statement had just come out, with nothing about security and terrorism. People
are were concerned about a glass skyscraper and an arena in Forest City Ratner's
project, but the Empire State Development Corporation says
such a review isn't required under the law, though the city police department
has examined the project.
What should people expect from the government in doing a security review and sharing some of that with the public?
There was a pause. Moderator Andrew Manshel looked over at Ducibella and asked if he'd been involved in any EIS reviews.
"I have an unfortunate conflict of interest," Ducibella responded. "Our firm is involved and has been for about a year and a half trying to work with the developer to create an environment" that, among other things, is responsive to police department concerns, he said. "I understand your position and would love to comment, but I'm sorry."
Manshel asked him about such reviews in general. "Most of the projects that are of substances--and that project is of substance--when the original security considerations are developed, they are no longer part of just looking at what kind of electronic security components might be built in, or how many security officers there might be," Ducibella replied.
"There are issues of perimeter boundaries--you're witnessed street closures--issues about lighting levels at night that create local pollution, in some cases screening trucks on streets, which has a real significant effect on local traffic, so it's difficult for a project of significance now to not have security studies done and recommendations developed in advance that don't somehow inform the EIS process."
City Planning demurs
Manshel turned to the city's Gastil. Does City Planning have a position on the
issue? "Atlantic Yards is a state project," Gastil pointed
out, saying that he wasn't prepared to provide a policy statement on the issue
of security reviews. (Atlantic Yards would be the Brooklyn office's bailiwick,
anyway.) Still, he said it was a "a good question" and he was willing
to take it back to his colleagues... (Empasis added)
Read
the full article.
So, we only have a Ratner consultant looking at security, in a box, from the developer's
point of view; we have the city passing the buck to the state; and we have the
state mum on
the issue.
Maybe we need the Feds on this. We know that Senator Schumer is very
concerned with Homeland Security. Might the Senator be willing to intervene
in his own backyard?
Posted: 11.30.06
|
|
 |
 |