Atlantic & Flatbush

[wamby]

I have been re-reading The Dodgers Move West and it got me wondering what currently stands at O'Malley's proposed stadium site. Do you Brooklyn fans think this would have been a good place for a possible Dodger Stadium?

I've only been to Brooklyn once and wasn't able to check out the site.

Also, if the Giants had left after '57 and the Dodgers stayed: Do you think the Mets would have been added to the NL in '62?

Thanks

[donzblock]

The LIRR would have received a shot in the arm. The city's transit system would have benefited since parking down there would have been impossible. It might have been the precursor of Camden Yards, which draws millions of fans who use public transportation, not the automobile. And it would have kept the Dodgers in Brooklyn. That adds up to success. But right about now, the park would probably be on its last legs, and the Dodgers would be making noises for a new one with luxury boxes. Right about now, astute Brooklyn politicians would be trying to interest the Dodger owners in moving to Coney Island and putting up a magificent major league park where Keyspan now stands. Such a project would revitalize that area of Brooklyn, force the city to make Stillwell Avenue the Grand Central on the Atlantic, and enable Ratner to purchase the Atlantic Avenue ballpark for the purpose of converting it into a complex that would feature the Brooklyn Nets of the NBA and the Brooklyn Coney Islanders of the NHL. The ultimate goal, of course, would be to lure the Jets into Brooklyn, thereby making the borough the home of four major sports franchises. That is what should have happened.

[DODGER DEB]

EVERTHING the Professor stated is true!

The "Big O" knew exactly what he was doing when he asked for that piece of land at Atlantic Avenue/LIRR to build OUR new ballpark, a ballpark HE would have built and payed for with no public money, unlike today's owners.

OUR new ballpark would have done wonders for BROOKLYN, for many years to come. Instead, today that area is in the middle of a huge legal mess with Bruce Ratner, the Nets owner, and NYC trying to build a new arena on the same site to insure the Nets move to BROOKLYN. The difference today is that the entire area has hundreds of homes with a few thousand people living in them. To build this arena these people will have to be evicted and the homes all torn down. These people are fighting this all the way which could take years to clear in the courts, if ever. Whereas, if OUR new ballpark was in place, all they would have to do is replace it with the new basketball arena.

As WE discussed in a previous thread, the Coney Island area (in Brooklyn) where the new KeySpan Park is located and its wide surrounding area (Stillwell Avenue/Surf Avenue/E. 16th to E. 20th Streets) which has been in desperate need of HELP for many,many years now, would be perfect for a new ML ballpark, with the Atlantic Ocean as a backdrop, like SF. IT would be perfect!

If WE had some CLEAR THINKING in BROOKLYN and NYC in 1956/1957 it could have been a WIN/WIN situation for BROOKLYN and NYC for years to come. Instead, WE were forced to live with Robert Moses, his arrogant ego and his insufferable attitude of..."my way or the highway"! While I am in no way taking the heat off the "Big O", given the situation as WE knew it, taking Moses out of the picture would have given everyone what they wanted....AND OUR DODGERS WOULD STILL BE THE BROOKLYN DODGERS!

c.

[wamby]

I find it amazing that the Parks Commission wouldn't give the Dodgers the land. If O'Malley had offered to build a stadium with his own money in 1975 or 2005 you would still have your Dodgers. Every city wanting a team would have beaten down his door.

[wamby]

Robert Moses, his arrogant ego and his insufferable attitude of..."my way or the highway"! While I am in no way taking the heat off the "Big O", given the situation as WE knew it, taking Moses out of the picture would have given everyone what they wanted....AND OUR DODGERS WOULD STILL BE THE BROOKLYN DODGERS!

c.

It seems to me that Robert Moses's mottow was 'my way IS the highway"

[DODGER DEB]

I find it amazing that the Parks Commission wouldn't give the Dodgers the land. If O'Malley had offered to build a stadium with his own money in 1975 or 2005 you would still have your Dodgers. Every city wanting a team would have beaten down his door.


The ONE and ONLY PERSON who had the CONTROL and the POWER over whether "O" got THAT land or not, was ROBERT MOSES...no one else! Every politician in NYS at that time, from the Governor to the Mayor of NYC, including the Brooklyn Boro President, had NO POWER over MOSES (HE was accountable to NO ONE), and they were scared to death to oppose him. NO one ever raised their voice, in public, in opposition to what HE was doing...NOT ONE of THEM!

THIS is what WE were up against! In the end, HIS ego clashed with the "Big O's" and WE LOST EVERYTHING!

c.

[tonypug]

The area of the proposed new stadium also housed the meat market which was in a very rundown state. The plans called for moving the meat market, redoing the LIRR terminal and renovating the entire area, which badly needed it. The clash of two giant egos not only cost us a baseball team but hurt Brooklyn economically.

[donzblock]

It certainly did hurt us. Wamby is dead on about Moses' motto: "My way IS the highway." Moses was blind to the fact that a city like New York lives and dies with its transit system, not with its highways. Moses was horrible, the worst kind of person to have such power in the New York of the 50s.

[Paulmcall]

Caro's book The Power Broker about Robert Moses presents his story very well.
It's like reading a horror story about one man's power and ego trip. Incredible.

[tonypug]

Moses was a very powerfull man, who was not an elected official. All of the city politicians worried about being re-elected, Moses didn't have that worry. Because of his position Moses could hurt or help other elected officials and used that power constantly. O'Malley had no chance against Moses and later used that in the move to LA.O knew he wouldn't get the Atlantic and Flatbush site and used that as justification for moving to LA. This incident marked the beginning of Moses gradual loss of power.

[boysof7]

The LIRR would have received a shot in the arm. The city's transit system wouldwhich draws millions of fans who use public transportation, not the automobile. And it would have kept the Dodgers in Brooklyn. That adds up to success. But right about now, the park would probably be on its last legs, and the Dodgers would be making noises for a new one with luxury boxes. Right about now, astute Brooklyn politicians would be trying to interest the Dodger owners in moving to Coney Island and putting up a magificent major league park where Keyspan now stands. Such a project would revitalize that area of Brooklyn, force the city to make Stillwell Avenue the Grand Central on the Atlantic, and enable Ratner to purchase the Atlantic Avenue ballpark for the purpose of converting it into a complex that would feature the Brooklyn Nets of the NBA and the Brooklyn Coney Islanders of the NHL. The ultimate goal, of course, would be to lure the Jets into Brooklyn, thereby making the borough the home of four major sports franchises. That is what should have happened.


can you tell me how many proposed parking spaces the site at Flatbush and Atlantic would have provided?

[boysof7]

can you tell me how many proposed parking spaces the site at Flatbush and Atlantic would have provided?


all things considered I am of the opinion that O'M insisted on Flatbush-Atlantic site because he knew he wouldn't get it. he used Moses ego and power against him. The OAM wanted LA since 1947!!!!

[donzblock]

can you tell me how many proposed parking spaces the site at Flatbush and Atlantic would have provided?
Yes, I certainly can. I have done the math, and it comes to seven parking spaces--half that if the city doesn't suspend alternate-side-of-the-street parking.

P.S. You have managed to butcher my quote, sir.

[DODGER DEB]

Yes, I certainly can. I have done the math, and it comes to seven parking spaces--half that if the city doesn't suspend alternate-side-of-the-street parking.

P.S. You have managed to butcher my quote, sir.


Now, now, Professor, let's be TOTALLY TRUTHFUL......wasn't it more like 6 plus a space for a cart, right on the corner? ;)

c.

[boysof7]

Yes, I certainly can. I have done the math, and it comes to seven parking spaces--half that if the city doesn't suspend alternate-side-of-the-street parking.

P.S. You have managed to butcher my quote, sir.

please clarify. What quote and who butchered it?

[donzblock]

please clarify. What quote and who butchered it?
Reread #11, the first line where you quote my post.

[boysof7]

Reread #11, the first line where you quote my post.

still don't know what you mean by misquote. I had read that there would have been 2000 parking spaces. Are you saying that all depended on LIRR and no parking at all?

[MATHA531]

In the book the op cited above, the author makes it very clear that it was probably illegal for the city of New York to appropriate the land the sub human O'Malley claimed he needed to build his ballpart. It was a cover, he was going to LALA land no matter what.

You know this Robert Moses thing is simply an attempt to try to justify what this piece of garbage did. Did the Crosley family owning a team making nowhere near the money the Dodgers were making go to the city of Cincinnati and demand they be given land along the Riverfront so they could build a stadium? Did the Carpenter family in Philadelphia go to the city of Philadelphia and demand they be given land in south Philadelphia to build a ball park? Both of them played in ball parks every bit as decrepit as Ebbets Field and they lasted another decade in those parks...the piece of slut O'Malley could have waited and worked with the City of New York, Ebbets Field could have lasted another decade (Fenway Park, Wrigley Field are just as old as Ebbets Field was as were Connie Mack Stadium, Crosley Field, Sportsman Park, Briggs Stadium, Griffith Stadium)....to try to take the blame off of the piece of garbage is absurd. He was not happy making the 2nd most money in baseball, he wanted more.

Yes a decent capitalist position but in 1957 baseball was supposedly a sport reflecting the values of the community. He singlehandedly changed all that and were all the worse off for it today.

[tonypug]

In the book the op cited above, the author makes it very clear that it was probably illegal for the city of New York to appropriate the land the sub human O'Malley claimed he needed to build his ballpart. It was a cover, he was going to LALA land no matter what.

You know this Robert Moses thing is simply an attempt to try to justify what this piece of garbage did. Did the Crosley family owning a team making nowhere near the money the Dodgers were making go to the city of Cincinnati and demand they be given land along the Riverfront so they could build a stadium? Did the Carpenter family in Philadelphia go to the city of Philadelphia and demand they be given land in south Philadelphia to build a ball park? Both of them played in ball parks every bit as decrepit as Ebbets Field and they lasted another decade in those parks...the piece of slut O'Malley could have waited and worked with the City of New York, Ebbets Field could have lasted another decade (Fenway Park, Wrigley Field are just as old as Ebbets Field was as were Connie Mack Stadium, Crosley Field, Sportsman Park, Briggs Stadium, Griffith Stadium)....to try to take the blame off of the piece of garbage is absurd. He was not happy making the 2nd most money in baseball, he wanted more.

Yes a decent capitalist position but in 1957 baseball was supposedly a sport reflecting the values of the community. He singlehandedly changed all that and were all the worse off for it today.
You have to stop holding things in, and let them out more often. Just kidding, you express the same sentiments that most of us who were there feel. Welcome to our universe, and hope to see you around.

[Bluesteve32]

Also, if the Giants had left after '57 and the Dodgers stayed: Do you think the Mets would have been added to the NL in '62?

Thanks

My feeling is that if the Dodgers remained in Brooklyn, the Giants were moving to Minneapolis, the home of their AAA Millers. That was already set, from what I inderstand. O'Money convinced Stoneham to move to San Francisco, together

In that scenario, The Griffith-Senators would not have had Minneapolis as an alternative when the AL expanded and move to that city and gave the new expansion team to Washington. My guess is that SF or LA would have gotten a 1962 NL expansion franchise along with Houston, depending on where the other 1961 AL franchise or the Senator/Twins would have ended up.

For the most part, I think the cities that had teams in 1963, would be the same cities in any scenario. It just made sense that the West Coast have at least three teams, Washington would also have either kept the Griffith-Senators or they would have relocated to a West Coast city rather than Minnesota and have gotten the Senators II or the AL would have put that second 1961 expansion team on the West Coast, which would have balanced their other 1961 expansion team the LA Angels.

[tonypug]

My feeling is that if the Dodgers remained in Brooklyn, the Giants were moving to Minneapolis, the home of their AAA Millers. That was already set, from what I inderstand. O'Money convinced Stoneham to move to San Francisco, together

In that scenario, The Griffith-Senators would not have had Minneapolis as an alternative when the AL expanded and move to that city and gave the new expansion team to Washington. My guess is that SF or LA would have gotten a 1962 NL expansion franchise along with Houston, depending on where the other 1961 AL franchise or the Senator/Twins would have ended up.

For the most part, I think the cities that had teams in 1963, would be the same cities in any scenario. It just made sense that the West Coast have at least three teams, Washington would also have either kept the Griffith-Senators or they would have relocated to a West Coast city rather than Minnesota and have gotten the Senators II or the AL would have put that second 1961 expansion team on the West Coast, which would have balanced their other 1961 expansion team the LA Angels.
The Giants had asked the National League for permission to move to Minneapolis, in those days all the other National League teams had to vote yes. When put to a vote O'Malley voted no, the Giants request was turned down. O'Malley wasn't going to let the Giants leave by themselves, he had other plans for himself and the Giants.

[Bluesteve32]

OK, but what would have been the scenario if the Brooklyn has the stadium built. Would the Giants been able to go, then. I don't think even O'Money could have kept the Giants in town since they were losing money. Stoneham would have gotten permission, eventually.

As you can tell, I am no fan of Walter O'Money, I mean O'Malley. He pulled the wool over all the Angelinos eyes except the old time Angel fans, we hate his guts, too.

[DODGER DEB]

OK, but what would have been the scenario if the Brooklyn has the stadium built. Would the Giants been able to go, then. I don't think even O'Money could have kept the Giants in town since they were losing money. Stoneham would have gotten permission, eventually.

As you can tell, I am no fan of Walter O'Money, I mean O'Malley. He pulled the wool over all the Angelinos eyes except the old time Angel fans, we hate his guts, too.


IF WE had gotten a new ballpark, the Giants would have been able to go to Minneapolis...which wouldn't have been the worst thing. The "Big O" was the only owner holding up the Giants move to Minneapolis, so sooner or later he would have given his "OK", providing he got what he wanted from Brooklyn...a new ballpark in Downtown Brooklyn!

c.

[Bluesteve32]

I tell you, build then a stadium now, break the hearts of all those LA fans (tunabout is fair play), so McCourt can biuld his luxury condos in Chavez Ravine. :D

Regarding the Giants, that is what I thought. That would have produced another whole new scenario for the Twins may still be in Washington and that would have left the whole West Coast to the American League.

Funny, neither San Francisco nor Los Angeles has major league stadiums ready. Seattle did not have a major league facility until the Kingdome was built, for the Pilots had to play in Sicks Stadium.

[wamby]

I tell you, build then a stadium now, break the hearts of all those LA fans (tunabout is fair play), so McCourt can biuld his luxury condos in Chavez Ravine. :D

Regarding the Giants, that is what I thought. That would have produced another whole new scenario for the Twins may still be in Washington and that would have left the whole West Coast to the American League.

Funny, neither San Francisco nor Los Angeles has major league stadiums ready. Seattle did not have a major league facility until the Kingdome was built, for the Pilots had to play in Sicks Stadium.

My feeling is that if the Giants had moved to Minneapolis and the Dodgers were still in Brooklyn, Griffith would have moved the Senators to LA and the expansion team that was awarded to LA would have gone to Houston.

[tonypug]

My feeling is that if the Giants had moved to Minneapolis and the Dodgers were still in Brooklyn, Griffith would have moved the Senators to LA and the expansion team that was awarded to LA would have gone to Houston.
LA would have gotten and deserved a team. The National League talked about expansion in 1955. LA and SanFran were the top choices. There was an informal vote taken, six teams voted yes the Giants and Phillies voted no. Minneapolis and Dallas-Fort Worth were also considered.

[Bluesteve32]

From what I understand, after the Dodgers and Giants moved to the West Coast, MLB was trying to thwart a "Continental Baseball League" to rival the other leagues. Expansion was being considered and natrually the AL wanted a West Coast presence and coveted Los Angeles (the Browns were given permission to move there in late 1941, but something happened to that plan called Pearl Harbor).

So if the Dodgers had stayed in Brooklyn, my bet is the Giants still would have been in Minnesota and that would have left the expansion of 1961 open. Griffith seem to want out of DC, and the scenario I see is that Griffith would have move his Senators to San Francisco (I think that city would have been more to his liking and image) and the Autry Angels and Senators II may not have been changed. If Griffith stayed in DC, then the AL would have expanded to SF as well.

Now that brings the question of the NL 1962 expansion. With a team still in NY (Brooklyn) being the Dodgers, Houston would have been a definate candidate and I see another NL team in say LA. Just think, the Mets would really be the the NL representitive in LA, and my bet be called the Hollywood Stars to renew the old PCL Angels-Stars rivalry, albeit in different leagues.

Of course this is all speculation, but it is fun to talk about.

Of course us West Coasters wanted the AAAA PCL to be a third major league, which most likely ended up being a merger. I would see the Portland Beavers, Sacramento Solons, and possibly the Oakland Oaks moving to Denver, Dallas-Ft Worth, and/or Phoenix. That would almost be the same scenario MLB had by the 1970s.

The "what ifs" in history do not make that subject boring.

[DODGER DEB]

Since WE are, once again, visitng the issues of both the Atlantic and Flatbush Avenues land grab, from how the Big "O" wanted to build OUR new ballpark there, and the feasibility of, once again, adding a third team in NYC, I thought re-reading this thread would be interesting.

Of course, additional comments are welcome, since WE now know a little more about Bruce Ratner's current land grab of that area, which is much worse than the Big "O's" intentions back in 1957.

c.

[Matty]

One thing I don't understand regarding the Robert Moses influence is how come there are no or very little references to his blocking the Dodgers from staying in Brooklyn until very recently, including in O'Malley's own personal correspondence to his friend Bob?

[yanks0714]

Moses was a very powerfull man, who was not an elected official. All of the city politicians worried about being re-elected, Moses didn't have that worry. Because of his position Moses could hurt or help other elected officials and used that power constantly. O'Malley had no chance against Moses and later used that in the move to LA.O knew he wouldn't get the Atlantic and Flatbush site and used that as justification for moving to LA. This incident marked the beginning of Moses gradual loss of power.

What became of Robert Moses after the Dodgers left? Did he get much of the blame in the press? I notice the comment that the Dodgers leaving was the beginning of his gradual loss of power, but did he hang on in his position, retire from it, get fired, what?

The other thing is, how did he ever get to that position in the first place? Who appointed him? How did he go about consolidating all that power?

[VIBaseball]

What became of Robert Moses after the Dodgers left? Did he get much of the blame in the press? I notice the comment that the Dodgers leaving was the beginning of his gradual loss of power, but did he hang on in his position, retire from it, get fired, what?

The other thing is, how did he ever get to that position in the first place? Who appointed him? How did he go about consolidating all that power?

yanks0714 -- a little further down, still on the first page of this forum, there's a Robert Moses thread. Included is his full lengthy obituary from the New York Times. Short of reading Caro's mammoth biography The Power Broker, that should tell you everything you want to know.

[aqib]

EVERTHING the Professor stated is true!

The "Big O" knew exactly what he was doing when he asked for that piece of land at Atlantic Avenue/LIRR to build OUR new ballpark, a ballpark HE would have built and payed for with no public money, unlike today's owners.

OUR new ballpark would have done wonders for BROOKLYN, for many years to come. Instead, today that area is in the middle of a huge legal mess with Bruce Ratner, the Nets owner, and NYC trying to build a new arena on the same site to insure the Nets move to BROOKLYN. The difference today is that the entire area has hundreds of homes with a few thousand people living in them. To build this arena these people will have to be evicted and the homes all torn down. These people are fighting this all the way which could take years to clear in the courts, if ever. Whereas, if OUR new ballpark was in place, all they would have to do is replace it with the new basketball arena.


c.

How is the new arena progressing? Have they even broken ground? I saw they are already trying to sell luxary boxes and tickets.

Forest City (the Ratner's real estate company thats doing most of the development) is based here in Cleveland. The company and the family have done tremendous work keeping the city alive and getting it to the point that we can even think about a turnaround. Without them we would be a dead city. So don't assume the worst in these guys.

[Mattingly]

Moses was a very powerfull man, who was not an elected official. All of the city politicians worried about being re-elected, Moses didn't have that worry. Because of his position Moses could hurt or help other elected officials and used that power constantly. O'Malley had no chance against Moses and later used that in the move to LA.O knew he wouldn't get the Atlantic and Flatbush site and used that as justification for moving to LA. This incident marked the beginning of Moses gradual loss of power.
I realize after having read briefly about Robert Moses that he was a power broker who was never elected. I also know that he helped such large projects as the Verrazano Bridge, and I think the BQE, etc. I'm not sure if he'd developed Robert Moses Park, or if that was named after him.

Anyway, as a developer and figurative sculptor of NYC, favoring auto traffic over human traffic, what exactly was Moses' role in the Atlantic Yard in the first place? What plans did he have for this which were never eventually realized?

I've seen it quite a few times, since it's both the Atlantic Ave & the Pacific St subway station, near BAM (the Brooklyn Academy of Music), a few blocks from Brooklyn Tech HS and right under that 400 ft clock building on Hanson Place, Brooklyn's tallest building.

Thanks in advance to anyone who can help me out a bit. :)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I did a little searching and found Robert Moses' response (http://www.bridgeandtunnelclub.com/detritus/moses/index.htm) to the book Power Broker by Robert Caro. The entire response is seen. Interesting first few pages.

I just happened across Moses' NY Times Obit, dated July 30, 1981:

http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/1218.html]Robert Moses, Master Builder, is Dead at 92[/url]
Robert Moses, who played a larger role in shaping the physical environment of New York State than any other figure in the 20th century, died early yesterday at West Islip, L.I. Mr. Moses, whose long list of public offices only begins to hint at his impact on both the city and state of New York, was 92 years old.

A spokesman for Good Samaritan Hospital said he had been taken there Tuesday afternoon from his summer home in Gilgo Beach. The cause of death was given as heart failure.

''Those who can, build,'' Mr. Moses once said. ''Those who can't, criticize.'' Robert Moses was, in every sense of the word, New York's master builder. Neither an architect, a planner, a lawyer nor even, in the strictest sense, a politician, he changed the face of the state more than anyone who was. Before him, there was no Triborough Bridge, Jones Beach State Park, Verrazano-Narrows Bridge, West Side Highway or Long Island parkway system or Niagara and St. Lawrence power projects. He built all of these and more.

Before Mr. Moses, New York State had a modest amount of parkland; when he left his position as chief of the state park system, the state had 2,567,256 acres. He built 658 playgrounds in New York City, 416 miles of parkways and 13 bridges.

But he was more than just a builder. Although he disdained theories, he was a major theoretical influence on the shape of the American city, because the works he created in New York proved a model for the nation at large. His vision of a city of highways and towers -which in his later years came to be discredited by younger planners - influenced the planning of cities around the nation.

His guiding hand made New York, known as a city of mass transit, also the nation's first city for the automobile age. Under Mr. Moses, the metropolitan area came to have more highway miles than Los Angeles does; Moses projects anticipated such later automobile-oriented efforts as the Los Angeles freeway system.

But where Los Angeles grew up around its highways, Mr. Moses thrust many of New York's great ribbons of concrete across an older and largely settled urban landscape, altering it drastically. He further changed the landscape with rows of red-brick apartment towers for low- and middle-income residents, asphalt playgrounds and huge sports stadiums.

The Moses vision of New York was less one of neighborhoods and brownstones than one of soaring towers, open parks, highways and beaches - not the sidewalks of New York but the American dream of the open road.

* * *

[MattM]

What became of Robert Moses after the Dodgers left? Did he get much of the blame in the press? I notice the comment that the Dodgers leaving was the beginning of his gradual loss of power, but did he hang on in his position, retire from it, get fired, what?

The other thing is, how did he ever get to that position in the first place? Who appointed him? How did he go about consolidating all that power?

The short version is that when he tried building the Seaford Oyster-Bay parkway, all the wealthy people bound together and basically told him no. After that people realized that he wasn't the all-powerful and fearful man he once was.

[tonypug]

When asked, near the end of his life, what he felt was his greatest achievement, Moses replied,Jones Beach. After the team was taken to LA, very little was said or blamed on Moses. In reality Moses had almost nothing to do with the Dodgers leaving Brooklyn. He was however a larger then life public figure. He made for a perfect whipping boy for O'malley's propaganda. Moses was a strong willed stubborn man who had a vision for New York and made that vision happy, while making many others unhappy. He recently is being looked at differently, and many in the building profession say Moses did the right thing or NYC would be in a world of trouble now.Say what you want about him personally, but he had nothing to do with the Dodgers leaving Brooklyn.If Moses had been on O'Malley's side Walter would have found another reason to leave.

[DODGER DEB]

When asked, near the end of his life, what he felt was his greatest achievement, Moses replied,Jones Beach. After the team was taken to LA, very little was said or blamed on Moses. In reality Moses had almost nothing to do with the Dodgers leaving Brooklyn. He was however a larger then life public figure. He made for a perfect whipping boy for O'malley's propaganda. Moses was a strong willed stubborn man who had a vision for New York and made that vision happy, while making many others unhappy. He recently is being looked at differently, and many in the building profession say Moses did the right thing or NYC would be in a world of trouble now.Say what you want about him personally, but he had nothing to do with the Dodgers leaving Brooklyn.If Moses had been on O'Malley's side Walter would have found another reason to leave.

Truer words were never spoken!

Thanks, tony.

c.

[DODGER DEB]

How is the new arena progressing? Have they even broken ground? I saw they are already trying to sell luxary boxes and tickets.

Forest City (the Ratner's real estate company thats doing most of the development) is based here in Cleveland. The company and the family have done tremendous work keeping the city alive and getting it to the point that we can even think about a turnaround. Without them we would be a dead city. So don't assume the worst in these guys.

The long time residents of this area that Ratner wants (needs) to complete his "plan" still have him tied up in court with all kinds of legal suits.

I guess it's just a matter who holds out longer, and that includes the Nets, who just might be given a new arena in NJ.

c.

[tonypug]

The long time residents of this area that Ratner wants (needs) to complete his "plan" still have him tied up in court with all kinds of legal suits.

I guess it's just a matter who holds out longer, and that includes the Nets, who just might be given a new arena in NJ.

c.

In 1957, there was a meat market, a LIRR terminal and some housing. What is in that area today?

[callingit]

there's a modest new indoor mall featuring higher-end retails such as Banana Republic, et. There are rows and rows of condemned, abandoned or run-down warehouses. I don't know how they possibly plan to squeeze the new arena and office/hotel/retail space into that area--it just doesn't seem big enough.


For the record, the Nets announced yesterday that they will play most, if not all, of the 2009-1010 NBA season in the Meadowlands. Which means the Ratner Brooklyn project is now at least a full year behind schedule.

[DODGER DEB]

In 1957, there was a meat market, a LIRR terminal and some housing. What is in that area today?

There are many condos, two family homes (with rental apartments), and also many, many small businesses. Whereas back in 1957, it was mostly vacant lots, except for the items you mentioned.

c.

[tonypug]

There are many condos, two family homes (with rental apartments), and also many, many small businesses. Whereas back in 1957, it was mostly vacant lots, except for the items you mentioned.

c.
Thanks Dodger Deb and callingit. The point I am making is there has to be a reason why nothing has happened there. Moses didn't stop O'Malley from building there, O'Malley himself knew that was not the right place for a ballpark. Who knows if its the right place for a basketball arena, and the way things are going we may never find out. Just off topic for a second, has the re-development of Coney Island been started yet?

[donzblock]

Despite the loss of Mrs. Stahl's Knishes and Zei-Mar's and a movie theater and Brighton Beach Baths, the redevelopment of Brighton Beach, Coney Island's neighbor, continues. What is going on in Coney Island?

[DODGER DEB]

I haven't seen much lately.

Several months ago, I read where there was some real community opposition to a developer wanting to build condos along the beach, blocking views, etc.

c.

[tonypug]

During the summer I read about this great re-vitalization project that was going to take place in Coney Island. I guess once again that was just a lot of hot air.

[DODGER DEB]

During the summer I read about this great re-vitalization project that was going to take place in Coney Island. I guess once again that was just a lot of hot air.

I think NYC still plans on going through with it. However, like with the Ratner project, which has been going on for several years now, there will be many legal challenges to some of the proposed changes, which will slow it up considerably.

c.

[callingit]

from the NY Times 12/29/07




>>>>>A state senator from Brooklyn said on Friday the city’s plan to revitalize Coney Island could not go forward without an extensive environmental review, an undertaking that could delay or even derail the project.

The city had hoped to begin the approval process in January. But Senator Carl Kruger, a Democrat who opposes the plan, cited a recent advisory opinion from the State Department of Environmental Conservation that could disrupt the city’s timeline and make it difficult to win the necessary approvals in the two years left in Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s final term.

The city wants to rezone Coney Island’s aging amusement park district to attract the development of stores and apartments, while preserving historic attractions like the Parachute Jump. Its proposal calls for swapping 9.6 acres of city-owned parkland next to KeySpan Park for 10 acres in the amusement park area owned by a shopping center developer, Joseph J. Sitt. The transaction would require state legislative approval.

The advisory opinion, issued Nov. 30, does not address the Coney Island plan directly, but contends that an environmental impact review, a process that could take a year or more, is required for any change in public parkland to nonpark use, and must be completed before state approval is sought.

The opinion adds another stumbling block to a project that already appears to be at a standstill, since Mr. Sitt has balked at the land swap. It is likely to present Robert C. Lieber, the mayor’s new deputy mayor of economic development, with one of his first big challenges as he takes office on Jan. 8. He has already been deeply involved in the Coney Island proposal in his current position as head of the city’s Economic Development Corporation.

Mr. Sitt’s reluctance to trade his land could be particularly problematic for Mr. Lieber because the city has said it will not exercise its power to acquire the Coney Island land by eminent domain.

City development officials said on Friday that they would abide by all the necessary environmental requirements, though some privately expressed skepticism about whether the environmental review was needed before the approval process had even begun.

Christian DiPalermo, executive director of the nonprofit group New Yorkers for Parks, asked for the advisory opinion to ensure that the public had more chance to comment before parkland is lost. Mr. DiPalermo said his group was not opposed to the Coney Island plan as long as the proper environmental procedures were followed. <<<<<<


Yet Astroland and many of the small businesses surrounding the area closed permanently at the end of last summer. In most cases their leases were not renewed because the developer planned to begin reconstruction this spring.

If you take away both the redevelopment AND the existing economic strength, the area could be headed for a tailspin similar to that which ruined Asbury Park. I have to wonder how Keyspan, the Cyclone & the NY Aquarium will fare as the sole seasonal attractions at Coney Island. (As a historic landmark, the cyclone will continue to operate at its present location regardless of what redevelopment plan is finally instituted.)

[Gary Dunaier]

I was under the impression Astroland will be in operation for the 2008 summer season.

Here's a view of Keyspan Park as taken from the top of the Wonder Wheel.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2162/2127614783_0163258274_b.jpg
(Photo taken August 12, 2007)

[callingit]

I stand corrected. Astroland will indeed return for the 2008 season. I had not seen that announcement until today. Thanks, Gary D.

[tonypug]

Thanks guys, if all you did was look at that picture, all looks well. Much of the rest of the area looks like a war zone.

[TarHeelMan]

Thanks Dodger Deb and callingit. The point I am making is there has to be a reason why nothing has happened there. Moses didn't stop O'Malley from building there, O'Malley himself knew that was not the right place for a ballpark. Who knows if its the right place for a basketball arena, and the way things are going we may never find out. Just off topic for a second, has the re-development of Coney Island been started yet?

I went to high school and college in the area (Brooklyn Tech and Long Island University), and I was very curious to hear about how they planned to drop a 20,000 seat basketball arena in the middle of downtown Brooklyn. It never seemed to make sense logistically... The last I remember, traffic there was nuts as it was, without an arena. I didn't know about O'Malley's supposed plan to put a baseball arena there, but from knowing what I do about the area, it would have been a nightmare.

I always wondered why the Nets just didn't move into the new arena with the Devils in Newark. Weren't they originally supposed to move to Newark anyway?

[Mattingly]

I don't know if it's been asked before, but I was wondering, had this deal ever gone through, what would the new stadium for the Brooklyn Dodgers been called? Ebbets Field II?

[MATHA531]

I don't know if it's been asked before, but I was wondering, had this deal ever gone through, what would the new stadium for the Brooklyn Dodgers been called? Ebbets Field II?

O'Malley's Rip Off

[Perseus71]

Commissioner David Stern said the Nets plans are going well and they just passed through a major hurdle. It's amazing to see Brooklyn getting back a major professional team, I just hope they make every effort to keep them there. It's as much an effort from the citizens that live near by to the owners that run the team and the venue. I also hope the crappy Brooklyn politicians understand the political balance in revitalizing and supporting the area where they will play and not demanding kickbacks to keep it going.

[donzblock]

I don't know if it's been asked before, but I was wondering, had this deal ever gone through, what would the new stadium for the Brooklyn Dodgers been called? Ebbets Field II?

The new stadium would have been called OM's Cash Cow: [Insert name of Sponsor Willing to Spend the Most] Field/Stadium/Park/Yards/Grounds/Gardens/Acres/Elysium Fields/Compost Pile: Choose One.

[aqib]

I went to high school and college in the area (Brooklyn Tech and Long Island University), and I was very curious to hear about how they planned to drop a 20,000 seat basketball arena in the middle of downtown Brooklyn. It never seemed to make sense logistically... The last I remember, traffic there was nuts as it was, without an arena. I didn't know about O'Malley's supposed plan to put a baseball arena there, but from knowing what I do about the area, it would have been a nightmare.

I always wondered why the Nets just didn't move into the new arena with the Devils in Newark. Weren't they originally supposed to move to Newark anyway?

When the Nets were up for sale there were three groups bidding, each one with its own plan as to where they would go. One group (lead by now Governor Corzine) had plans to keep them in Jersey, Ratner (who won the bidding war) had the plan to move them to Brooklyn, and I think the third group wanted Long Island but I am not 100% sure.

As for how O'Malley's plan would have worked if he had gotten his deal, it would have required the whole area to be redone, which is one reason why Moses didn't like it.

Ratner's plan all along was to build this megadevelopment and the Nets were solely a tenant for an arena that was to be a big part of the development. He had no interest in basketball. In fact when he was at a meeting in Cleveland (thats where the Ratner family is based) with other finance big wigs in town someone asked him if he was planning to spend a lot to win, he pretty much laughed that off. Hence why Kenyon Martin wasn't resigned.

[Mattingly]

O'Malley's Rip Off
I tend to believe this. :D
The new stadium would have been called OM's Cash Cow: [Insert name of Sponsor Willing to Spend the Most] Field/Stadium/Park/Yards/Grounds/Gardens/Acres/Elysium Fields/Compost Pile: Choose One.
Same here with agreement on the stadium name.

Perhaps I need to read up more, but had this plan gone through, would you or other Brooklyn Dodger fans have been willing to go to the new stadium? Or would you have preferred that Ebbets Field remain as the Brooklyn Dodger home?

[DODGER DEB]

At the time, WE really understood the need for a new ballpark, and WE would have been overjoyed to see it built anywhere in BROOKLYN.

I have always felt, and still do, that the Atlantic/Flatbush Avenues site, as the "Big "O" wanted, was the perfect site for OUR new Ebbets Field. It had access to almost all the trains, buses, and the LIRR. At that time, this piece of land was nothing but empty lots, and OUR ballpark would have refurbished the neighborhood and brought it to a life it only could have flouished in.

c.

[donzblock]

At the time, WE really understood the need for a new ballpark, and WE would have been overjoyed to see it built anywhere in BROOKLYN.

I have always felt, and still do, that the Atlantic/Flatbush Avenues site, as the "Big "O" wanted, was the perfect site for OUR new Ebbets Field. It had access to almost all the trains, buses, and the LIRR. At that time, this piece of land was nothing but empty lots, and OUR ballpark would have refurbished the neighborhood and brought it to a life it only could have flouished in.

c.
And there is a theory that with a new ballpark, the LIRR trains would have actually begun to experience some movement.

[DODGER DEB]

And there is a theory that with a new ballpark, the LIRR trains would have actually begun to experience some movement.

Ya know, Professor, I heard that, too!

To that, let me add, never let it be said that OUR BROOKLYN DODGERS weren't community minded. With OUR new balllpark WE could have continued to do things for BROOKLYN that have been absent for the past 50 years.

c.

[Mattingly]

At the time, WE really understood the need for a new ballpark, and WE would have been overjoyed to see it built anywhere in BROOKLYN.

I have always felt, and still do, that the Atlantic/Flatbush Avenues site, as the "Big "O" wanted, was the perfect site for OUR new Ebbets Field. It had access to almost all the trains, buses, and the LIRR. At that time, this piece of land was nothing but empty lots, and OUR ballpark would have refurbished the neighborhood and brought it to a life it only could have flouished in.

c.
Did the "OM" ever mention how many seats would've been in that new ballpark? I hadn't realized you'd have been happy had this actually gone through.

So you think it would've been called Ebbets Field or something similar?

So you think that with residents coming from Long Island, that there would've been a suburbian group of Brooklyn Dodger fans?

[aqib]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/11/opinion/11kahn.html?scp=20&sq=walter+o%27malley&st=nyt

I don't know if Kahn is being sarcastic but he mentions it under the name O'Malley Downs.

[DODGER DEB]

Did the "OM" ever mention how many seats would've been in that new ballpark? I hadn't realized you'd have been happy had this actually gone through.

So you think it would've been called Ebbets Field or something similar?

So you think that with residents coming from Long Island, that there would've been a suburbian group of Brooklyn Dodger fans?

I am not sure how many seats our new ballpark would have had but, in any case, it would have been larger than OUR Ebbets Fied. I would say it would have had about 48/50 thousand seats, if I had to guess.

I do remember some of US calling it Ebbets Field II, but truthfully, WE never really had much time to think about it, before the decision was made for US, by the Big "O".

As far as the residents of LI were concerned, it would have been perfect. The LIRR would have dropped them off at Atlantic Avenue, right in front of our new ballpark. Because of that fact, there would not have been the need for huge parking areas. All the trains, the BMT, IND, and IRT, either stopped at the Atlantic Avenue station, or you could transfer in Manhattan, from the Bronx, Queens, or other parts of Brooklyn, to get a train that stopped there. There were also many Buses that ran through BROOKLYN, with transfers, to get you there. Had the ballpark been built, there were have been many, many private buses lines that would have gone into business taking people from many areas to the ballpark. So, it really would have been an ideal solution. If only.....

c.

[dodger dynamo]

I alway's liked "Dodger field". one question I have asked that I don't think was ever answered then and now was could the big o' have actually bought the the land instead of just asking for it. he probably could have picked it up for a song as it wasn't for the most part in use. battlin bake the dodger dynamo. p.s I never liked the Idea of a domed stadium though. cause back then I don't believe a retractable one was easily possible. baseball is supposed to be played in the sunshine. at least I alway's thought it was.

[Mattingly]

I am not sure how many seats our new ballpark would have had but, in any case, it would have been larger than OUR Ebbets Fied. I would say it would have had about 48/50 thousand seats, if I had to guess.

I do remember some of US calling it Ebbets Field II, but truthfully, WE never really had much time to think about it, before the decision was made for US, by the Big "O".

As far as the residents of LI were concerned, it would have been perfect. The LIRR would have dropped them off at Atlantic Avenue, right in front of our new ballpark. Because of that fact, there would not have been the need for huge parking areas. All the trains, the BMT, IND, and IRT, either stopped at the Atlantic Avenue station, or you could transfer in Manhattan, from the Bronx, Queens, or other parts of Brooklyn, to get a train that stopped there. There were also many Buses that ran through BROOKLYN, with transfers, to get you there. Had the ballpark been built, there were have been many, many private buses lines that would have gone into business taking people from many areas to the ballpark. So, it really would have been an ideal solution. If only.....

c.
Thanks for filling me in on your views of this. That "what would it have been if ...?" thing has always intrigued me, very much in this case.

I'm again pleasantly surprised that you feel the larger stadium would've been realized. I'm guessing that you'd prefer the larger stadium? Some have said they liked the coziness of Ebbets Field, which sat around 34-35,000. I remember some comparing it to Fenway Park, which is about the same size before the Monster Seats were added.

If you had to pick a name, would it be "Ebbets Field II" or "Brooklyn Dodger Stadium"? I'm still intrigued by the "what if" portion of things. :D

Yes, I do remember going to the Atlantic Ave station quite a few times. When I'd lived in Flatbush (near Sears and also near the former Macy's in Flatbush by Tilden & Flatbush Avenues), if the Beverley Road station wasn't working for whatever reason, we all had to take a cab to that station. It was crazy, but fun.

I remember the B-41 bus went up that far, and you could catch the D, Q, B, M, N, R, 2, 3, 4, 5 trains. To my knowledge, that's the 4th largest superstation on the planet, after Times Square, Grand Central and NY Penn Station. With Times Square, it's got the Port Authority Bus Terminal, making it a multi-source of transportation. Grand Central has Metro-North, Penn Station has Amtrak and NJ Transit. The Atlantic Ave & Pacific St Station had LIRR, so those are the major transportation types. Just mentioning.

Anyway, I could see the Brooklyn Dodgers being the epicenter of so many types of people, extending Brooklyn Dodger fanship far around the NYC metro area! :)

[DODGER DEB]

Thanks for filling me in on your views of this. That "what would it have been if ...?" thing has always intrigued me, very much in this case.

I'm again pleasantly surprised that you feel the larger stadium would've been realized. I'm guessing that you'd prefer the larger stadium? Some have said they liked the coziness of Ebbets Field, which sat around 34-35,000. I remember some comparing it to Fenway Park, which is about the same size before the Monster Seats were added.

If you had to pick a name, would it be "Ebbets Field II" or "Brooklyn Dodger Stadium"? I'm still intrigued by the "what if" portion of things. :D

Yes, I do remember going to the Atlantic Ave station quite a few times. When I'd lived in Flatbush (near Sears and also near the former Macy's in Flatbush by Tilden & Flatbush Avenues), if the Beverley Road station wasn't working for whatever reason, we all had to take a cab to that station. It was crazy, but fun.

I remember the B-41 bus went up that far, and you could catch the D, Q, B, M, N, R, 2, 3, 4, 5 trains. To my knowledge, that's the 4th largest superstation on the planet, after Times Square, Grand Central and NY Penn Station. With Times Square, it's got the Port Authority Bus Terminal, making it a multi-source of transportation. Grand Central has Metro-North, Penn Station has Amtrak and NJ Transit. The Atlantic Ave & Pacific St Station had LIRR, so those are the major transportation types. Just mentioning.

Anyway, I could see the Brooklyn Dodgers being the epicenter of so many types of people, extending Brooklyn Dodger fanship far around the NYC metro area! :)

Actually, Matt, I personally would not have liked a larger ballpark. I LOVED OUR Ebbets Field.....just the way it was! The proximity to the field, the closeness and inter-action that it provided with OUR players was wonderful, and I would have hoped, even if they added some seats, that it would have remained the same. On the other hand, if it meant keeping OUR Dodgers in BROOKLYN, I would not have cared how many seats they added.

I have also spent a lot of time in Fenway Park, and I also love that place. From the first time I walked into Fenway, everything about it reminded me about OUR Ebbets Field. They were built within one year of each other, so the "sameness" is understandable. I hope they never allow the dumb thing WE allowed to happen, here in NYC, by throwing it down. It's much too precious and must be preserved for baseball history.

As for the name, if WE would have ever been lucky enough to get that far, I really would have liked it to be called OUR EBBETS FIELD II. I also think most BROOKLYN DODGER FANS would have like that, too. After all, most of OUR precious Ebbets Field would have been transferred over to it, so it would have been very appropriate.

c.

[Shotgun Shuba]

As far as the residents of LI were concerned, it would have been perfect. The LIRR would have dropped them off at Atlantic Avenue, right in front of our new ballpark. Because of that fact, there would not have been the need for huge parking areas. All the trains, the BMT, IND, and IRT, either stopped at the Atlantic Avenue station, or you could transfer in Manhattan, from the Bronx, Queens, or other parts of Brooklyn, to get a train that stopped there. There were also many Buses that ran through BROOKLYN, with transfers, to get you there. Had the ballpark been built, there were have been many, many private buses lines that would have gone into business taking people from many areas to the ballpark. So, it really would have been an ideal solution. If only.....

c.


I think it certainly could have worked the way you describe DD, but I think that is coming from a "modern" point of view. In the mid 50's I think people wanted something different. The stadiums that followed, from Candlestick up until Veterans Stadium, had huge parking lots. There must have been a collective idea among owners and fans that this was "better". I preferred going to Shea over the Stadium because it was more convenient. I think many Long Islanders wanted that convenience, especially then because it was so fresh and new. I love Fenway, and go often, but the parking is a nightmare. I accept the tradeoff but I don't now if people would have then.

[jayzeeg]

has anyone thought about the fact that had the dodgers gotten the land at atlantic ave. to build in the mid-50's, that ballpark would have been older than ebbets field ever was and out-moded years ago. the whole cycle might have started again. i guess we would have seen peter o'malley's true colors.

[driver62]

As someone who's never been to New York let alone Brooklyn, I have a question.

Would it have been possible to build a new Ebbets Field at the same location as the old one or would it be too limited by the space available? Could the city or the Dodgers have bought some of the land around the park to enlarge it?

If it was possible, the Dodgers could have split time with the Giants at the Polo Grounds for a few years. Did that scenario ever come up?

I guess I'm a little nostalgic. I hate seeing parks torn down and turned into a parking lot or in this case, a high rise.

[jayzeeg]

that was never going to be acceptable to o'malley. he thought that the area was rundown and chaging for the worst. he wanted only the downtown site because of access to commuter RR where "the fans" were moving to. by the way, all of these "unacceptable" areas are the new hot, high rent areas of the borough.

[DODGER DEB]

As someone who's never been to New York let alone Brooklyn, I have a question.

Would it have been possible to build a new Ebbets Field at the same location as the old one or would it be too limited by the space available? Could the city or the Dodgers have bought some of the land around the park to enlarge it?

If it was possible, the Dodgers could have split time with the Giants at the Polo Grounds for a few years. Did that scenario ever come up?

I guess I'm a little nostalgic. I hate seeing parks torn down and turned into a parking lot or in this case, a high rise.

You know, driver62, that would have been complicated, but I do believe it could have been done...if the will was there.

While it would (probably) have been impossible to cut across Bedford Avenue, there certainly was room to cut across Sullivan Place, up to Empire Blvd. and to Franklin Avenue, and then cut across McKeever Place to up to Franklin Avenue. On the back end of OUR Ebbets Field (left field), cutting across Montgomery Street would also have been possible. Sure, some small buildings and lots, plus a gas station, would have had to be bought out and leveled, but keeping in mind how much OUR Dodgers meant to BROOKLYN, and if the desire and will to keep them in BROOKLYN was there by everyone, there is no doubt in my mind that this possibility could have become a reality.

None of this ever came up for discussion...and I am not sure why. Probably because the Big "O" wanted that piece of land on Atlantic and Flatbush, and would settle for nothing less.

And, you are right, no one should ever have to see a ballpark demolished. I, and my sister DEBS, were there when OUR beloved Ebbets Field was town down, and believe me when I tell you, the pain of those few days has never left me!

c.

[driver62]

Deb,

Even though Cincinnati still has a team, it was a sad day when Crosley came down. I wasn't there in person but I saw it on TV and I wanted to cry.

Every time an old park is gone, someone loses a bit of their youth. I thought Crosley would be there forever. I feel bad for the people who never got to see a game in one of those old parks and only see games in a park with very loud rock music and very high concession prices.

Bring back the organ music.

[DODGER DEB]

Deb,

Even though Cincinnati still has a team, it was a sad day when Crosley came down. I wasn't there in person but I saw it on TV and I wanted to cry.

Every time an old park is gone, someone loses a bit of their youth. I thought Crosley would be there forever. I feel bad for the people who never got to see a game in one of those old parks and only see games in a park with very loud rock music and very high concession prices.

Bring back the organ music.

As someone who did infact see games at your Crosley Field, in addition to many other old ballparks, I could not agree more with your thoughts, driver62.

It was something truly special...and has gotten more special as the years have gone by.

I not only cried while watching OUR Ebbets Field being demolished.......I cried a river for many days after.

c.

[metfan13]

Don't know that I'll cry, but a lot of memories will be shaken when they knock down Shea.

[kramer_47]

Don't know that I'll cry, but a lot of memories will be shaken when they knock down Shea.

Isn't it ironic that Wilpon is building a new ballpark in 2008 that resembled Ebbets field while O'M wanted one of those bigger stadiums back in 1956-57. Look at all those cookie cutter parks that were build in the 1950-60's that are now giving way to the retro smaller parks. I love the retro look but I honestly believe that all cold weather cities should have the retractable roof with real grass instead of that new turf even though the new artificial turf is much better.

[yanks0714]

Years ago my parents took me to see a game at Connie Mack Stadium (Shibe Park). I was much too young to really grasp the significance of this old stadium. When it was built it was pretty much a shrine.

I remember the game, a night game, extra innings against the Braves. My Dad got lost in North Philly trying to find the Ben Franklin Parkway. Not fun for some country folks.

Anyway, when the Phillies moved to their new stadium in 1970, Connie Mack Stadium stayed standing. It fell into disrepair. I remember an article written around 1976 or so, where old Phillie Tony Taylor returned to talk about his time with the Phillies. Pictures of the Connie Mack Stadium as it was were included in the article. Total disrepair, falling apart. Grass in the field itself was thigh high. Vandalized. Just as sad as could be.

I wish I had never read the article nor seen the pictures. it destroyed a childhood memory I had. I was profoundly sad even though I was about 24 at the time. I wish they had torn it down long before it ever had the opportunity to fall into such disrepair.

[tonypug]

You know, driver62, that would have been complicated, but I do believe it could have been done...if the will was there.

While it would (probably) have been impossible to cut across Bedford Avenue, there certainly was room to cut across Sullivan Place, up to Empire Blvd. and to Franklin Avenue, and then cut across McKeever Place to up to Franklin Avenue. On the back end of OUR Ebbets Field (left field), cutting across Montgomery Street would also have been possible. Sure, some small buildings and lots, plus a gas station, would have had to be bought out and leveled, but keeping in mind how much OUR Dodgers meant to BROOKLYN, and if the desire and will to keep them in BROOKLYN was there by everyone, there is no doubt in my mind that this possibility could have become a reality.

None of this ever came up for discussion...and I am not sure why. Probably because the Big "O" wanted that piece of land on Atlantic and Flatbush, and would settle for nothing less.

And, you are right, no one should ever have to see a ballpark demolished. I, and my sister DEBS, were there when OUR beloved Ebbets Field was town down, and believe me when I tell you, the pain of those few days has never left me!

c.

Ddger Deb, in the late 40's before O'Malley had control, he had a survey and plans made to see if Ebbets Field could be enlarged. The answer was, yes but it would cost as much as building a new ballpark. O'Malley said it was too expensive. In 1956 Robert Moses told O'Malley that if he would stay at Ebbets Field and renovate he and the City would help in re-directing traffic and allowing him room to expand. O'Malley of course said no, at that point he was already headed to LA although no one else knew at the time. Every time one of the classic ballparks was torn down, it evoked memories of Ebbets Field being torn down and the sadness started anew.

[DODGER DEB]

Ddger Deb, in the late 40's before O'Malley had control, he had a survey and plans made to see if Ebbets Field could be enlarged. The answer was, yes but it would cost as much as building a new ballpark. O'Malley said it was too expensive. In 1956 Robert Moses told O'Malley that if he would stay at Ebbets Field and renovate he and the City would help in re-directing traffic and allowing him room to expand. O'Malley of course said no, at that point he was already headed to LA although no one else knew at the time. Every time one of the classic ballparks was torn down, it evoked memories of Ebbets Field being torn down and the sadness started anew.

True, but there is no doubt, that it could have been done. There was a lot of land surrounding OUR Ebbets Field, and with the exception of Bedford Avenue, as I said, any and all of it, could have been transformed into expanding our ballpark, and adding much space for parking.

When you think about it, that could have done wonders for that neighborhood, unlike that that sorry site of apartment buildings, which from the start were never maintained...just left to deteriorate.

But, the bottom line was, that the Big "O" had made up his mind long before any of US knew about it.

[sydpink]

I know I will probably get flamed for this, but after all the reading I have done on the subject over the years, I am convinced of this: we can argue until doomsday about who was to blame for the Dodgers moving out of Brooklyn---O'Malley, Moses, Wagner, the Board of Estimate---they all share a part of the blame.

The one thing I truly believe however is that if O'Malley had been allowed to build his proposed domed stadium at Atlantic and Flatbush, he would have stayed in Brooklyn.

BTW---if eminent domain didn't allow this to be done in 1957, how come there was no problem with allowing Bruce Ratner to be given permission to build an arena for the Nets on the same spot fifty years later?

[VIBaseball]

Syd, if you don't mind, I'll merge your new thread with a long-established one. You can see the opinions put forth previously about the Big O's bona fides.

As to your other point, this source, for one, states that Ratner's payments to former Senator "Pothole Al" D'Amato's lobbying firm paved the way:

http://www.nolandgrab.org/archives/2008/02/blame_it_on_emi.html

Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn (www.dddb.net) still has a lawsuit outstanding challenging the (ab)use of eminent domain.

[MATHA531]

I know I will probably get flamed for this, but after all the reading I have done on the subject over the years, I am convinced of this: we can argue until doomsday about who was to blame for the Dodgers moving out of Brooklyn---O'Malley, Moses, Wagner, the Board of Estimate---they all share a part of the blame.

The one thing I truly believe however is that if O'Malley had been allowed to build his proposed domed stadium at Atlantic and Flatbush, he would have stayed in Brooklyn.

BTW---if eminent domain didn't allow this to be done in 1957, how come there was no problem with allowing Bruce Ratner to be given permission to build an arena for the Nets on the same spot fifty years later?

Here's the difference....in 1956 the land was not public land...it belonged to a private entity, the Long Island Railroad which was a subsidy of the privately owned Pennsylvania Railroad. At some point between then and now, the resources of the Long Island Railroad were acquired by the MTA which means today the land is public property to be disposed of as the MTA sees fit! Big big difference.