What does the new proposal for 110 Amity Street (the former Amity Street Horror) look like? Few people know as the developer hasn’t released any renderings of the recooked plan. Of course, no developer has an obligation to publicly release renderings. Some gladly do. Others refuse to do so, either preferring to have vague descriptions of their projects in circulation or images shot with cameras at public presentations that are the equivalent of cheap bootleg movies. That having been said, Time Equities, which withdrew its last proposal for 110 Amity Street (dubbed the Amity Street Horror by critics) is back with a new design and new public presentations. So far, though, it hasn’t released images of the new design. (The image here is the original Amity Street Horror proposal.) There is a detailed description of the project at the new Cobble Hill Association blog, which notes some “zinc siding” in the design that wasn’t a crowd pleaser earlier this week. The developer is making a presentation tonight to the Community Board 6 Land Use/Landmarks committee, which will be voting on the plan. It takes place at the PAL Miccio Center, 110 West 9th Street (between Clinton and Henry Streets) at 6PM.

GL Analysis
In cases like this, where a design has to be approved by the Landmarks Preservation Commission and has been the subject of public debate it would seem the developer has an obligation to release images well in advance so the community can the plans before any public votes are taken. To do otherwise is the equivalent of stating a preference for an important public process to be held as privately as possible and to keep the project from the public at large. (Or, in some cases, to give preference to the developer’s media outlet of choice in the hope of getting positive coverage.) The desire to avoid transparency is a holdover of pre-internet days when it was possible to plan major developments and secure their approval with almost no public scrutiny. It is symbolic of the very worst of a development approval process in which the public is the last to know what was going on. (It sometimes still is, but such cases are becoming less common.)

In this case, we think that Time Equities and its CEO Francis Greenburger, who back in January wrote GL and other blogs that they were withdrawing their proposal to make it more responsive to the community, owes everyone in the community every opportunity to see their redone plan before it goes to the Community Board and the Landmarks Preservation Commission. Unless, of course, they’re trying to pull a fast one on the neighborhood so that residents can only comment after the fact. In which case, they’re doing exactly the right thing.