Would a library in a private developer's high rise be the same? (Brownstoner)

The City of New York, like many other large landowners, has been selling its land for centuries. However, these last few months have brought what many consider to be a disconcerting flurry of real estate transactions as the city, citing a cash crunch, moves to sell off a number of schools, libraries and municipal buildings.

The city and others have lauded the sell-off as a way to bring much-needed monies to institutions that are in dire need of help. Trading in valuable real estate, we are told, will keep the city's civic institutions afloat. If only it didn't have the vaguely desperate vibe of a pawn shop swap.

Is the city is making bad—or at least short-sighted—deals in exchange for a little cash right now? As The New York Times, which examined the sudden spate of sales argues: the decision to sell certain properties and keep others is being driven by the logic of developers, not the virtues and the problems of the library branches and schools themselves.

And when private, rather than public interest dictates the city's real estate decisions, that's a real cause for concern, even if those sales will ultimately benefit the public, as the city claims.

For example, the 52-year-old Brooklyn Heights branch requires a $3 million overhaul of its air conditioning system, as well as other repairs, but it's certainly not the oldest or most dilapidated library in Brooklyn, according to The Times. The parcel just happens to be in a posh neighborhood where developers are eager to build luxury housing for the kinds of residents who can afford to do without libraries.

(The Brooklyn Public Library, via a spokesman, has contacted The Observer to say that while it does not dispute that the value of the real estate is a huge factor in the decision to sell the branches, it does feel that the Brooklyn Heights branch is among the system's most dilapidated and was closed for 30 days last summer because of air conditioning problems.)

The same could be said of the Beaux Arts library branch on Pacific Street, located just steps from Barclays Arena. Library officials say that selling the land would allow the branch to build out a more modern space.

While the Pacific Street branch will increase slightly with the move, from about 15,750 square feet to 16,500 square feet, according to the Brooklyn Public Library, the 60,000 Brooklyn Heights branch will shrink considerably. (The library argues that the part of the library that houses the local branch will remain nearly the same, given that much of the of the space is used for storage and the business library is being relocated off-site.)

There's a tendency, in these situations, for both the city and the developers to focus on what is being given, rather than what is being gained by private interests—and what is being gained, rather than what is being given, by the public.

In the case of the Brooklyn public libraries, it's not all that much—while the two libraries are said to need repairs totaling $9 million to $11 million each, most of the proceeds of the sale would go to building the new spaces out. Moreover, whatever money is gained would be just a one-time infusion, rather than a strategy for supporting an under-funded institution in the long run. There's a real question as to why, if New York's economic development during the last decade is benefiting the city as much as Mayor Bloomberg has claimed, such sell-offs are necessary.

The public has been generous to private developers—particularly in the case of Barclays, with city and state subsidies granted on the basis that their developments would be enriching the entire community, rather than just the developer. If that's the case, why is it that the local public library by Barclay's can't afford to stay in its long-time home? What can we expect of even more public-private partnerships that transfer public property to the private sector, relocating to inferior spaces on property that was once theirs in exchange for a one-time windfall?

kvelsey@observer.com

Correction: The Observer previously misreported that the square footage of the Pacific Street branch. It is 15,750 square feet, not 60,000.

What weathering steel looks like up close.

Now that the finishes touches are being put on Barclay's Arena, it has become apparent to neighbors and passers-by that the building will not be getting a coat of paint to cover its rusty exterior. Because it's supposed to be that way. While this is old news to most neighborhood opponents—who zealously perused construction designs—it has surprised some others.

“I thought they were going to paint it,” commented one man to The New York Times, which has a story about the structure's rusty surface.

After all, wasn't the whole eminent domain claim based on the idea that the arena would eliminate blight?

"Weathering steel" or Cor-Ten, as it is sometimes called, is intended to create a rusted coating that protects the panels. According to SHoP Architects principal Gregg Pasquarelli, the 12,000 steel pieces that make up the building's exterior shell were pre-weathered, going through more than a dozen wet-and-dry cycles a day for four months.

The pre-weathering process should limit the arena's rust drippings, which have been known to stain sidewalks and sometimes t-shirts, according to Forest City Ratner executive V.P. and director Robert Sanna.

“This should keep it to a minimum, and you won’t have to worry that it will stain your sweater as you walk by,” Mr. Sanna told The Times.

The warm brown coloring is lovely, but the possibility of being caught by rusted rain will probably not thrill the neighbors who never wanted it the arena there in the first place.

kvelsey@observer.com

There will be a few more people in real life.

The residents in the neighborhoods bordering Barclays Arena will almost certainly be stuck with congestion and beer-swilling visitors, but at least they may be spared a multi-level nightclub.

The landlord is evicting Kemistry Lounge’s owners for non-payment of rent, putting a halt (if only a temporary one) to their clubbing brainchild, Brownstoner reports. That’s good news for those nearby the lounge’s would-be home at 260 Flatbush Avenue.

The prospect of the nightspot drawing a loud, young intoxicated crowd to an area that is likely to already be highly-trafficked by loud, young and intoxicated people left many in Community Board 6 unenthusiastic about its arrival.

But after the owners allegedly failed to pay more than $60,000 in back rent, neighbors may be in luck. Which is fortunate, because could they really stomach another battle?

Brownstoner also noted the owners had been unable to gain support from the Community Board 6 and did not file for a license from the State Liquor Authority.

While this is bad news for the Kemistry Lounge owners (who are apparently still planning to open, despite its eviction notice/$60,000 setback), we expect make residents near the would-be club spot happy.

But even without the nightclubbing crowd, residents will still have to contend with the added congestion. The deadline to file public comments on the traffic plan ended today, but we're fairly certain that the majority of locals were not enthusiastic about increased congestion promised by the arena—especially since Forest City Ratner’s traffic plan, focused mostly on encouraging public transit via the train by adding additional trains, relies on visitors—especially out-of-towners—overlooking public transit downsides like sweltering heat and sticky benches).

We’re not sure whether an in-the-works plan to control an impending traffic problem will mitigate the ongoing headache that is likely in the future, but at least there are small mercies.

sgrothjan@observer.com

And by the looks of these renderings there will be no shortage of alcohol in the new arena, which will house at least four bars and a court-side club. Swanky. We think point guard Deron Williams will approve.

The new arena is set to open by the beginning of the next basketball season.

pengel@observer.com