« Monday On The Record Tuesday Links »
April 23, 2007
BREAKING: 434 Units Announced for Former Brig Site
After months of speculation, HPD finally announced plans for the former Navy Brig site on Flushing between Clermont and Vanderbilt. (Our spidey sense must have been tingling when we shot the photo above a couple of weeks ago.) A group called the Navy Green Joint Venture — a partnership between Dunn Development Corporation and L&M Equity Participants, Ltd. that brings the architectural chops of FXFowle Architects, Curtis + Ginsberg Architects LLP and Architecture in Formation together — was awarded the mixed use project. Almost 80 percent of the development's 434 units (roughly half co-op and half rental apartments) will be affordable housing for families making between $21,250-$92,170; in addition, there will be open space, commercial tenants and a visual arts and day care center.
Brig Site Redevelopment Announced [Myrtle Minutes] GMAP
City Announces New Mixed-Income Development ast Brig Site [NYC.gov]
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/1020
Comments
The scheme does all the things it is supposed to, respects the street line, creates a corner "node", staggers the massing to allow for better views and air, has at least some green roofs.
It is the new generation Manhattan-style apartment block complex I guess.
Hey, it could be worse.
Posted by: anonymous at April 23, 2007 2:38 PM
this looks great for brooklyn!!
Posted by: anon at April 23, 2007 2:45 PM
This is where the Nets Stadium and rest of the Atlantic Yards behemoth should be....and all this affordable housing should be on what is now the AY site.
Posted by: bricktop at April 23, 2007 2:50 PM
"This is where the Nets Stadium and rest of the Atlantic Yards behemoth should be....and all this affordable housing should be on what is now the AY site."
that's easy enough to say, but a. this site is not large enough and b. is is not near like 12 subway lines.
it would make no sense to put an arena over here as the impact on having nearly everyone have to drive to get there would do horrible things for brooklyn.
Posted by: anonymous at April 23, 2007 3:01 PM
3:01 alludes to a good point...how are people going to come and go? The nearest subway line seems to be good long walk away (and it's the useless G line at that).
Posted by: Anonymous at April 23, 2007 3:10 PM
The G's really not that bad--during commuting hours at least
Posted by: Brownstoner at April 23, 2007 3:11 PM
i agree that the g is fine but certainly not for folks coming to a nets game.
that would knock out all but the most die-hard manhattan fans.
the new area must be within close proximity to major subway lines in brooklyn and manhattan to be viable.
Posted by: anon at April 23, 2007 3:15 PM
i live on the next block and yes, there is no good subway access. MTA should run more B69's- that will be the best way for residents to get to the A/C (at high st) and the 2 (at grand army plaza). The 61 and 57 also run along Park and Flushing, respectively- they aren't so bad.
Does anyone know the future of the large brick building at the south end of this block? Up until recently it had tons of trash around it, and now there is a big "for rent" sign and it's much more cleaned up. It looks like it needs a lot of renovation, though. Is it to be ripped down?
Posted by: mk at April 23, 2007 3:16 PM
this area is for sh*t. you sit under the BQE, lots of water running off the road, noise level crazy, no ammenities, lots of crime and dirt. it sounds like just a place for the city to find to put low income. believe me when i tell y ou anyone making 92K is NOT buying or renting one of these places in this location
Posted by: me at April 23, 2007 3:21 PM
3:21...wow...you certainly have no vision. people have said the same thing you just did about NUMEROUS areas of nyc....williamsburg, long island city, bed stuy, red hook, east harlem....and now they have become mostly prosperous neighborhoods that DO in fact attract residents of higher income levels.
try to think before you speak next time.
Posted by: anon at April 23, 2007 3:29 PM
Yup. Flushing could be wonderful if a couple of the larger warehouses are converted. Of course, the city is blowing a momentous opportunity by flushing history down the toiled by turning its back on Officers Row. Tragic.
Posted by: Brownstoner at April 23, 2007 3:33 PM
dude at 3:29: i've thought about exactly what I said. I see it, live it and breath it and this area is NO comparison to Fort Green proper or williamsburg or bed stuy. It sits directly under the damn highway, there are NO local grocery stores that don't require traveling at least 1/2 hour to get to, there are no dry cleaners (except up on Myrtle and I never said anything about this are gentrifying and attracting higher incomes and look at it now), there are no good restaurants, there's only the 69 bus, no hair dressers and no banks. the area blows and it doesn't require anymore thinking than what I gave it. If I was in real estate and I had a customer who earned 92K, this is NOT an area I would bring them to. williamsburg and bed stuy yes, bumbf*ck brooklyn, no
Posted by: me again at April 23, 2007 3:41 PM
I believe it is 92k for a family of four which doesn't go very far many places in Brooklyn in terms of real estate.
My question is who are the suckers who will pay for the small percentage of market rate units available?
Posted by: Anonymous at April 23, 2007 3:49 PM
who pays 1.6 million dollars for a two-bedroom apartment in places like 70 Washington street in dumbo that are crammed in between the BQE, the Manhattan Bridge and the Brooklyn Bridge?
Traffic central.
And people are buying them like they were on Central Park.
What's the nearest train there?
The F, under that creepy overpass?
I'm telling you, this looks OK by comparison.
Posted by: anonymous at April 23, 2007 3:56 PM
There goes the neighborhood.
Posted by: Anonymous at April 23, 2007 4:01 PM
well of course there are no amenities yet. You need to have customers first. Aren't they building a grocery store on the officer's row site?
Posted by: Anonymous at April 23, 2007 4:04 PM
and long island city is about to get it's first grocery store YEARS after it's been gentrified.
"me" has clearly not lived in nyc very long. i'd love for him to have seen williamsburg 15 years ago. he has NOOOOO idea.
Posted by: anon at April 23, 2007 4:07 PM
Some days I just don't know where to begin with all the ignorance. Okay, I'll call it naivete and get myself in a more positive frame of mind. Here goes:
1. Thank you 3:01 and 3:15 for stating what should be, but apparently isn't, obvious.
2. 3:16, the city tried to acquire the building at the southern end of the block, to include in the planned development, but the owner wouldn't sell. I'm guessing that the owner will try to piggy-back on the success of the rest of the block.
3. me again, there is a bank at the corner of Washington and Flushing and there will be some retail included in this project. As for your "customer" who earns $92K, see the comment by 3:49.
4. What everyone seems to be overlooking is that this is a large city-owned parcel. Is it a little slice of heaven? No. But it's an above-average project that will serve hundreds of people and several positive policy goals.
Oh, and Mr. B, you can flog that sorry horse call Officers Row, but ain't nothing gonna change there.
Posted by: Anonymous at April 23, 2007 4:15 PM
u are all nuts. this neighborhood has been around for a long time. obviously only attracting city run operations and garages for a reason. there are families that have lived on the other side of Park Ave and have been there for YEARS. why would any of you foolishly think that NOW they will put in a supermarket when they never accomodated those who have live around there for years? and for the life of me, I don't know why anyone is paying what they are paying for property at 70 washington, except that it is a much hipper place to live and they are much closer to transportation and shopping then this new location is ever going to be.
Posted by: luv at April 23, 2007 4:20 PM
I guess $94K for a couple with two kids passes for "low income" these days...
To me, "low income" would be about $30-$40K for a family of four.
Posted by: supergirl at April 23, 2007 4:22 PM
Anon 3:56,
Re: DUMBO, people buy the pricey 2 bedrooms because of pretty spectacular views, proximity to Manhattan, the park, promenade, amenities, etc.
Bag on the crappy subway station all you want, but at least it's only a 5 min walk to get there.
To compare the two locations is truly dumb.
Posted by: Anonymous at April 23, 2007 4:31 PM
Oh, forgot to mention that I think this is a great project.
Posted by: anon 4:31 at April 23, 2007 4:32 PM
i think it looks like another city housing project, low income housing (and I don't think anyone is saying 92K is low income)look and feel. sort of a piggyback to the prison look that was there.
Posted by: yaya at April 23, 2007 4:42 PM
crap
Posted by: Anonymous at April 23, 2007 4:51 PM
"this neighborhood has been around for a long time. obviously only attracting city run operations and garages for a reason"
are you a moron???
look at 4th avenue in "park slope" which has been there with garages and vacant lots for YEARS and is just now starting to get developed.
you don't have one clue about what you are talking about.
you need to make an effort to get to know your city a little better before you choose to comment on it so ignorantly.
Posted by: anon at April 23, 2007 5:06 PM
well mr I know everything there is to know about brooklyn, and then some...4th ave sucks too but the reality is why didn't the city put housing along 4th ave with the garages? well, because the neighborhood is so much better and can accomodate a higher level...unlike this piece of garbage location. you my friend are the one who needs some education before shooting from your lameass hip.
Posted by: Anonymous at April 23, 2007 5:20 PM
I'm the developer behind this project. And I'm about to commit suicide. I had no idea that this was going to be a bad investment. Granted, I just kinda blindly threw a dart at a map of brooklyn and then unloaded millions of dollars at it. But had I known -- had I had the privelege to have been given -- this insider information, I would NEVER EVER have invested in this project.
Where were you people when I was signing on the bottom line?
Posted by: Depressed Developer at April 23, 2007 5:22 PM
this development is being put together by the city, dumbass.
Posted by: anonymous at April 23, 2007 5:29 PM
That's Dunn Ass to you, oh wise one.
Posted by: Anonymous at April 23, 2007 5:37 PM
I'm optimistic about this area and the proposed plan looks pretty decent. Presumably some of the streetlevel spaces will be reserved for retail which will be a boon for all -- not just the new residents but other local residents and workers (especially folks at the Navy Yard).
Quick, non-scientific thought: compare the density of this development with Atlantic Yards. In this case, 434 units on (almost) an entire city block. AY will have approx 6,500 units on basically 3 city blocks (yes, the site is larger but the residential will be largely contained to 3 blocks only). That's 5 times the density! Perhaps some readers can now better appreciate why so many of us are concerned about AY's density.
Posted by: NeoGrec at April 23, 2007 6:01 PM
re: density -
it's not that hard to imagine when half this block on both sides is taken up with townhomes. ay is going to have highrises. you know...like the ones all over manhattan? sorry, i know i know. this is precious brownstone brooklyn. nothing above 4 stories allowed...
i think we need to also focus on how great it is that this development is looking to be LEED certified. this is BIG news and for me, along with the affordable housing component, the most promising aspects of the project.
Posted by: anon at April 23, 2007 6:06 PM
this project looks fantastic
Posted by: TonyTone at April 23, 2007 6:19 PM
You bozos will buy any hyped shit wrapped in glass. I'm convinced the city is overrun by suckers, pure and simple. This is the real estate you want to debate?
Posted by: tomk at April 23, 2007 6:38 PM
hey tomk,
this is affordable housing. i don't think many people on this site are looking to buy into the project, but for those of us that care about and love brooklyn, it is a very fine addition to the boro. not necessarily in terms of its beauty, but for the much needed affordable housing (and green housing at that!) that will be brought to an otherwise decaying area.
i can't for the life of me figure out why you would not find this topic of interest to debate or discuss.
most people on here probably make well above the salary requirements, so your whole we'll buy anything wrapped in glass comment is pretty absurd and definitely not of any use to this conversation, in my opinion.
Posted by: anonymous at April 23, 2007 7:11 PM
"ay is going to have highrises. you know...like the ones all over manhattan?"
And yet AY will still be the densest community in the country - well surpassing those neighborhoods with those highrises "all over manhattan."
Posted by: EJ at April 23, 2007 7:17 PM
EJ, I agree, it is pretty breathtaking that AY is obscene even by Manhattan standards.
7:11, some people just like being viscious, regardless of the subject. They don't actually have an opinion, just rage. Notice how they never offer any inkling of the kind of real estate they WOULD like to debate.
Posted by: Anonymous at April 23, 2007 7:55 PM
If there is a glut of housing, and
the units are slow to sell, prices will come down. Low income units will be
gone in a day, but that's besides the point.
Prices in the surrounding area will come down. Remember when Yorkville was over built, couldn't give the apts away. Remember when owners were offering
two months free rent to entice renters.
Remember when there were more coops then people to buy, prices went down, shakey buidings went into receivership.
Remember? No, well where's your reference point. The last ten years,
interest rates have been at an all time
low, fueling the market. Ten thousand units are being built between Williamsburg and DT Bklyn. Have we reached saturation? Will your house be worth less. I think it's a given.
Manhattan is cheaper, has way better schools, and is less congested than
downtown Brooklyn. There's no where to
park in Brooklyn. The schools, we could
talk about the schools for days.
I read recently that a brownstone coop
sold for one thousand dollars a sq. ft.
Move to Manhattan, have a doorman, views. good schools for less. Oh, and you can actually have a decent meal in a
restaurant. They call Smith St. restaurant row! What a hoot. Where's your reference point, stuck in a can.
Posted by: Anonymous at April 24, 2007 7:49 AM
I quite like it down there. The old naval hospital building is great, the grounds are full of wildlife. Its a nice old section of New York that hasn't been modernized, sanitized and genericized. And theres no traffic on Flushing.
Posted by: Anonymous at April 24, 2007 8:54 AM
I was under the impression that the development was going to try to emulate Westbeth- any knowledge about this?
Posted by: cler at April 24, 2007 12:17 PM
I'm 100% interested in the project, for residency, and I've weighed the pros and cons of subway and commerical proximity. I'm willing to invest in the neighborhood. At the risk of sounding like a dork, "If you build it, they will come."
I and my husband average 80K/yr. I do not consider this "low income" by any means. We are very well taken care of. However, buying property in any form is extremely limited at that income.
Also, it's near both our jobs. So more housing in the area is better for us.
Posted by: okki at April 25, 2007 3:44 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.