« Monday Events A Peek at the Floating Pool »
June 25, 2007
On Flatbush, a $3 Billion Pipeline of Projects
There is more than $3.1 billion of construction projects in the pipeline for the one mile stretch of Flatbush Avenue between the Manhattan Bridge and the Williamsburgh Bank building, calculates The New York Post this morning. Here's how it breaks down: 
In addition, there's another $1 billion in projects off the northern end of Flatbush and, of course, a $4 billion project some of you may have heard of called Atlantic Yards. "Flatbush Avenue is the borough's quintessential boulevard and the gateway into Brooklyn," said Joseph Chan, president of the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership. "It is to Brooklyn what Broadway is to Manhattan, and it is poised for some dramatic change."
Boom on Flatbush [NY Post] GMAP
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/1462
Comments
Ok and..? What exactly is your point?
Posted by: anon at June 25, 2007 9:06 AM
this link is to a coop for sale...
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 9:12 AM
Bring it on. As a buyer in One Hanson Place I think this is fantastic!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 9:18 AM
what is his point anon 9:06? there are so many economic, social and political issues to be drawn from this post that the your question seems inane.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 9:34 AM
this is great
i wish we can tear down all the projects as part of the process
Posted by: rm at June 25, 2007 9:37 AM
flatbush needs all the help that it can get. they should get started. maybe DOT should get involved to help deal with the traffic/pedestrian conflicts.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 9:43 AM
Although this in interesting, how many of us regular people will be able to afford any of these?
Posted by: anon at June 25, 2007 9:54 AM
I guess people can't keep calling the Atlantic Yards complex "out of context" anymore.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 10:01 AM
Brooklyn will never be the same. It just can't.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 10:13 AM
This is going to look like midtown and the village had a baby
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 10:20 AM
Well we certainly need the housing. I'm all for it.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 10:22 AM
Hooray for impending downward price spirals!
Posted by: your future at June 25, 2007 10:23 AM
Where does the Atlantic Yards project stand these days, I've lost track. I haven't seen a "done deal" posting in quite a while. Is that because the deal is actually done, and they don't need to push their agenda? Or is there still a tug of war between Ratner and those who don't want to see his project come to life? I've already moved away from that area and into Bed-Stuy (thank God!) so I don't care one way or the other, just asking.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 12:10 PM
i wonder if people were having these conversartions during the early 1900s almost 30 years into the brownstone boom?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 1:07 PM
"thank God I've moved to Bed Stuy"...lol
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 1:08 PM
To Anon, 9:18
Hear hear. :)
Which line did you get? My husband and I bought on the 9-17 D line.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 1:34 PM
Go Brooklyn!! Go Brooklyn!!
Great news!
For those of us who have been living hear for our entire lives, we've been waiting for critical development in downtown Brooklyn for decades! I can't tell you how happy I am to see that this is finally happening now and I'm living to see it! Thank God!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 1:58 PM
*** "here".... Oppps!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 2:02 PM
I now have hope. There is no way in the world that all of Flatbush and downtown Brooklyn takes off and Fulton from Fort Greene to Bed-Stuy continues to be a cesspool. No way!
Right? ;-\
This is great for the borough and all of its residents! Yahoo!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 2:09 PM
To Anon, 1:34 PM
My wife and I are buying one of the 9-17M line. Can't wait to move in. Its already a nice neighborhood and seems that it will only get better...
Posted by: Anon, 9:18 at June 25, 2007 2:26 PM
cesspool? oh wait, that's tongue in cheek--i get it. ha ha ha hee ha.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 2:33 PM
Truly, I'm not big on conspiracy theories. But what this part of the Downtown Brooklyn Plan looks like is a government sanctioned effort by private developers to push the working class, largely minority, population out of this area. The renovations at the Myrtle Ave projects have already displaced hundreds of PHA tenants and the consensus locally is that they are unlikely to be given an opportunity to move back in. Of course, for buyers at One Hanson Place and other new condo developments, this is good news since gentrification will be necessary for these otherwise marginal locations to hold their value. But it begs the question of where the working class are meant to live in this city. To me, it's too overwhelming a level of change -- and too fast -- to maintain the vibrant mix of people that makes Brooklyn so vibrant. Perfectly stable, if somewhat down-at-heel, communities will be disrupted. I'd be interested to hear PICCED or the Fifth Ave Committee's take on all of this.
Posted by: Anon at June 25, 2007 2:37 PM
To Anon, 9:18 & Anon, 1:34 PM:
My partner and I also purchased at One Hanson on the 9-17 D Line. We can't wait to move in. The two of us are originally from Brooklyn and think the revitalization is great!
Posted by: EP at June 25, 2007 2:50 PM
OP "I moved to Bed-Stuy thank God" here --Seems to me a lot of people have a fixed idea of what it means to live in Bed-Stuy. I live on a landmarked Historic block that is lovely with truly wonderful neighbors. We look out for and help each other, and I hope that culture never changes -- even in the face of all of this "progress." And believe me, there is no tongue in cheek in my post. I am sincerely happy to have moved. What's going on on Flatbush Ave. may be a wonderful change once all of the construction and noise are over, but I don't want to live in that for the next 5-15 years. Just my preference. I like green trees, grass, flowers and old brownstones to come home to at the end of my day. Oh yea, I also work in Bed-Stuy as well --and have for 7+ years. Guess I'm just a fan, but there seem to be more and more like me that are finding homes in the neighborhood.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 3:10 PM
Boy, I hope the poor river-side schmucks (like me) that bought into the Heights and Dumbo are going to be able to get onto a train during morning rush hour with the addition of all these folks coming to our fair borough. As if the Jay, York, High and Clark Street stations aren't crowded enough in the morning!! Welcome to Brooklyn, and please dont't block the doors!
Posted by: neighborgood at June 25, 2007 3:29 PM
Neighborgood, I'm sure the city has put absolutely no, as in zero, planning into infrastructure, traffic, public transportation, or schools for this corridor. Cynical? With the ever rising population in Wmsburg - where are the extra trains? Traffic and transportation planning for AY? Not. I don't know why people who are paid to think of these things seem to think we'll all just squeeze in and deal.
Posted by: Preservationista at June 25, 2007 3:40 PM
Given the abysmal amount of middle income and affordable housing in all of this development, they should leave the projects right where they are and change them from rentals to lost cost condos or co-ops, with current residents having the right of first refusal. People should be allowed to return, with the exceptions of known troublemakers. Most people there just want decent places to live that they can afford to live in in peace and safety. Just like the rest of us. They've been there for the worst, they should share in any improvement for the best.
Posted by: Sterling Silver at June 25, 2007 3:47 PM
Preservationista, didn't you know that infrastructure issues are always the problem of the next mayor? The object is to change the face of Brooklyn, not what's behind or underneath it. As Mayor Mike and the developers seem hell bent on giving the suburbs a run for their money in competing for the high-income earners and the tax revenues they generate, I really worry more for the people that seem to be buying a pig in a poke. Luxury housing with ghetto facilities just doesn't make sense to me.
Posted by: Neighborgood at June 25, 2007 4:42 PM
Give me a break with the "lack of affordable housing for the middle class" crap already! 75% of Brooklyn is easily affordable for the middle class! WTF?!? First, if you can't afford to live in brownstone Brooklyn then move someplace! No one has an inalienable right to live where they can't afford to! There's a lack of affordable housing for the middle class on Fifth Avenue but I'm not burning down City Hall in protest either!
Second, none of these developments are displacing middle class residents. For the most part, you're talking about empty lots and former low rise commercial properties that have outlived their useful purpose. Please stop the BS because no one is kicking out the middle class from downtown Brooklyn (for the most part they were never there, thus why the place is a shit hole). Now if the issue is why aren't developers building housing for the middle class in downtown then that's another question. Answer, don't blame them. Blame the escalating cost of properties and construction in the city. It's not economically feasible to build low to middle income residential developments on these highly expensive to acquire sites. Third, if you truly want to rehash a thread on the imaginary "lack of the affordable housing in NYC for the middle class" issue, please see last week's thread (and witness another butt kicking of the LEFT from the RIGHT) on Albee Square Mall. Can't afford NYC? Get the @%#!K out!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 4:48 PM
Sterling Silver, where is the working class/middle class going to live?
Ever heard of Bed-Stuy, Crown Heights, PLG, Kensington, Windsor Terrace, Midwood, Marine Park, Bay Ridge, Sunset Park, Bath Beach, Dyker Heights, Bensonhurts, Fort Hamilton, Williamsburg, Bushwick, Gravesend, Sheepshead Bay, Flatlands, Bergen Beach, Brownsville, East New York, Canarsie and Greenpoint? Are you kidding me?!?
You are so pathetic! Asking "where will the middle/working class live in Brooklyn" is perhaps the dumbest question ever posted on this board! The middle/working class are living very well all over Brooklyn and have been doing so for decades! Did you just discover our fine borough? If not, where do you get off asking such stupid and ridiculous questions?
I come from a solid blue collar - middle class background in Flatbush and no one I know ever felt deprived because we didn't live right downtown! In fact, we preferred to live in the quieter residential neighborhoods further from the city.
This insane and insatiable need to be in "the mix" downtown is a recent phenomenon. I find this blind sense of entitlement unconscionable? Why the heck do you people think that they should be able to purchase a two bedroom apartment in a new $300M+ residential condo tower for just $200k where the same apartment elsewhere in the building cost $1M? Are you fucking kidding me?!?! Some of you people obviously do not work for a living or understand the value of a dollar earned.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 5:21 PM
Ah, Anon 4:48, once again you've shown your true colors...and I doubt your personal spectrum includes anything other than white. I'm surprised you could tell left from right without a compass, my man.
Posted by: Neighborgood at June 25, 2007 5:31 PM
4:48, if you'd lower your blood pressure enough so that you could actually read and comprehend what I wrote, I never said anyone was displaced. I've probably lived here longer than you have, and know full well what has been in this corridor for generations.
Secondly, downtown is not brownstone Bklyn, this is not a discussion of brownstone Brooklyn, and no one said anything about the rest of Brooklyn, least of all me. Let's get the exaggeration and hyperbole, like affordable housing on 5th Ave, out of the discussion, shall we? Your crowd of money buys everything, end of discussion debaters always create some kind of absurd situation like that and use it to poorly defend your position.
18 new projects - 18! 3784 luxury and market rate units, only 638 affordable units. That is abyssmal, no other word for it. It's crap that they can't afford to develop more affordable units in these projects. Oh, poor, poor developers! They don't want to, that's all. If you are building a tall residential tower, how much more money is it to build a few more affordable units in the same building? If anything, it should cost less. Basic construction should be the same, the only difference would be finishings.
Thirdly, half of Brooklyn may be what you want to call affordable, but whether people want to live there is certainly the other topic de jour on this site. If it's so ok to live in the hinterlands, why don't all of you "get the f out people" go there and homestead? No? The lack of middle class housing is not imaginary. It may be impossible for you to comprehend not buying a million dollar plus home or apartment, but it's an impossible dream for 90% of the population. You are vastly outnumbered.
Since we are talking about new construction here, why not have some sound city planning that plans for mixed incomes in a percentage that's not a token nod to the law or allows for just enough to allow the developer to qualify for some tax break that he really didn't earn. Let them help build a city for all of Brooklyn, not just the rich. That was my point last week, where we certainly did NOT get our butts kicked, and remains my point now.
Can't stand the thought of a diverse and vibrant Brooklyn? Get the @%#!K out!
Posted by: Sterling Silver at June 25, 2007 5:40 PM
Agreed anon 4:48 and 5:21.
Absolutely 100% agreed.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 5:46 PM
5:21 - I don't want to live downtown, I could care less about living downtown, and for your information, I've lived in Brooklyn for a very long time, and probably know more about this borough than you ever will. My comments concern the Brooklyn that is now being built, something I have just as much of a right to be concerned about as anyone else who lives here and pays taxes.
I am well aware of middle class neighborhoods, funny how half of the ones you mentioned went from ghetto/slums in everyone else's opinions on the board to middle class neighborhoods in one fell swoop when someone wants to excuse what's happening to Bkln. All of a sudden neighborhoods that are never spoken of in the same breath are now hand holding brothers and sisters of equality. Brownsville and East New York, where most of you would be nervous driving through with an armed motorcade, is now in the same middle class boat as Kensington and Bay Ridge. Interesting.
If you can write anything so "stupid and ridiculous", I reserve the right to my own opinions, as well. And who are "you people"? The only people I see here who have a blind sense of entitlement are those who think that the size of your wallets entitle you to run roughshod over the rest of us. Not without a fight, you won't.
Posted by: Sterling Silver at June 25, 2007 6:03 PM
The level of hostility in the comments thread on this blog toward people who can't afford million dollar apartments is really startling.
I don't know why the market does not produce adequate housing for people with modest incomes, but it does not. Therefore, it's necessary for the government to intervene in some fashion. There's plenty to argue about in terms of how the government intervenes, but without intervention, people of modest means are often hard pressed to find a place to live.
When thousand and thousands of units of new housing are being created and almost all of it is far beyond the means of the average Brooklyn earner, we have a serious social problem.
Remember -- we live in a society in which the top 1% of the people rake in 50% of the income. And that doesn't take into account wealth -- accumulated assets.
That's for the United States as a whole. I'd love to know what it is in New York City. What do you think? What proportion of the total wealth of all New Yorkers do you think the top 10% hold? What proportion of the total income earned in NYC does the top 10% take home?
The reason we have such problems with affordable housing is because we have such extreme income and wealth inequality.
It's unhealthy.
Posted by: SPer at June 25, 2007 6:03 PM
"That is abyssmal, no other word for it. It's crap that they can't afford to develop more affordable units in these projects. Oh, poor, poor developers! They don't want to, that's all. If you are building a tall residential tower, how much more money is it to build a few more affordable units in the same building?"
Sterling what do you do for a living? Mind if I come by and tell you how to do it and how much profit you are allowed to make? Email me thanks.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 6:05 PM
"I don't know why the market does not produce adequate housing for people with modest incomes, but it does not."
Yes, as evidenced by all the people we see living in tents and caves.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 6:09 PM
Obviously the people on this thread hyperventilating about "the displacement of the middle class" and "where are the working class people going to live?" are (i) picking the wrong fight on the wrong neighborhood, and/or (ii) don't know the neighborhood. This isn't Ft. Greene or Prospect Park. This is Downtown Brooklyn. I've lived in the neighborhood for ten years and believe me for those of us that ACTUALLY LIVE HERE, the development is VERY welcome. The prospect of having proper grocery stores, dry cleaners, restaurants and other services like those found in neighborhoods communities will be a God Send! Take the Myrtle Avenue development as an example...the new development with its retail component will replace "Kennedy Fried Chicken", a terrible Associated "supermarket", multiple check cashing spots and liquor stores...GOOD RIDDANCE!! Take note people there were very few (if any) "middle class" people in the neighborhood to begin with...so it's really not a matter of them being displaced. There area was primarily populated by the folks in public housing (Ingersoll, Kennedy, etc.) and those of us in University Towers (where I live) and Kingsview Towers. The population in the projects is down to about 20% (check it, it's true) and those of us in University and Kingsview CAN'T WAIT for the much needed additional services!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 6:12 PM
Yes, if you cannot live in downtown Brooklyn or in a brownstone neighborhood, then your quality of life is doomed. The only way to have a happy life is to live in downtown Brooklyn or in a brownstone neighborhood. If you live east or south of Prospect Park, then you are doomed to be miserable.
It's a simple fact. Just ask Sterling Silver. His word is law.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 6:15 PM
Wow -- Bed Stuy, Crown Heights, and PLG are for middle and working class people now -- I guess if middle and working class people can afford to pay $850K and up for a house.
And new Bed-Stuy resident ("Thank God"), congratulations on your new neighborhood, but just because you've moved away from the proposed Ratnerville, you shouldn't stop caring about it -- a travesty of justice is the same anywhere and your tax dollars are going to subsidize Bruce Ratner along with everyone elses' -- and the subway and traffic nightmare the would ensue from this horror will affect you as well. So please keep fighting.
Posted by: babs at June 25, 2007 6:22 PM
Sterling writes:
"Half of Brooklyn may be what you want to call affordable, but whether people want to live there is certainly the other topic de jour on this site."
AGAIN, ever heard of Bed-Stuy, Crown Heights, PLG, Kensington, Windsor Terrace, Midwood, Marine Park, Bay Ridge, Sunset Park, Bath Beach, Dyker Heights, Bensonhurts, Fort Hamilton, Williamsburg, Bushwick, Gravesend, Sheepshead Bay, Flatlands, Bergen Beach, Brownsville, East New York, Canarsie, Flatbush, East Flatbush and Greenpoint? You just insulbted 85% of this borough!!!!
The vast majority of these nabes are fine, middle class and upstanding communities, you condescending ass wipe! That's the problem with you handout addicts (e.g., panhandlers), you're on your hands and knees begging all day, then you get hostile and look down on others who refuse to give you a dime simply because they're too preoccupied with their own issues: busting their butts to make ends meet, holding down decent jobs, running stable households and contributing to the well being of their community.
Who the heck do you think you are begging/demanding to live for peanuts among the rich simply because you don't want to live among your own economic class, ethnic or racial group. Don't like you income strata? Get another effing job! But don't come begging to the rest of us (especially those "greedy developers") for opportunities you simply refuse to create for yourself. There's affordable housing for the middle/working class throughout Brooklyn but if you're too lazy, racist or snobbish to live among "common folks" then YCGFY!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 6:30 PM
So tell me, anon 6:12, what white anglo-saxon master race spawn of Heinrich Himmler are you? Seems to me everytime one of you fascist morons chimes in, its to talk about shoving minority groups out of your elitist way. I lived for over 20 years in the downtown Brooklyn area and there were plenty of middle class people living there with me.Of course I don't have your refined and delicate sensibilities so I actually went out into the neighborhood and see what it was really like. For the record plenty of businesses could have moved into the area- there were loads of people who would have supported them, But business doesn't like poor- lower income neighborhoods, no matter how much money is spent- no. they think minorities don't drink lattes, or like to eat in nice restaurants. So businesses come in to fill the need. Then they get kicked out as the money nazis move in.
Unfortunately ignorant folk like you have no clue as to the financial or political power of Black communities. But they are discovering it for them selves, and there will be a day when they'll buy you out and put you in the dinky little trailer park you belong in.
Posted by: Beeotch and proud of it at June 25, 2007 6:31 PM
6:05, don't tell me you have all of this great moral outrage because I suggest that multi-millionaire, or even billionaire developers take less profit, like they and their corporations wouldn't write off any supposed "loss" anyway. Poor, poor gazillionaires! No thanks, don't need to email you.
I think development in downtown is both necessary and desired. Nothing wrong with decent supermarkets, etc, etc. Wouldn't it be nice if those in the projects had a chance to have those things, too, and weren't just populations to be kicked to the curb when the site of their homes becomes desireable. While I am certainly not naieve enough to say that these were always places of safety and comfort, but they were homes for thousands of people who work hard to make ends meet, and try to raise their families in the same quiet enjoyment that all of us want. The only difference between all of us are the chances of birth, background, education and the opportunities that follow. What happened to the people who lived there, where did they go? Does anyone care? Apparently not.
Posted by: Sterling Silver at June 25, 2007 6:34 PM
Ya know, 6:30, the discussion that took place on this blog last week was interesting and intellectually stimulating because everyone managed to be civil. We agreed and disagreed, but there was no vulgar name calling and no one was as unpleasant a jerk as you have become. You want to have a discussion on the issues at hand - let's have at it. If you only want to call me names, assume facts not in evidence and generally be a disagreeable asshole, you can do it by yourself. I don't come to this site to be insulted and called names. You obviously have no point to argue except to prove what a lout you are. Enjoy.
Posted by: Sterling Silver at June 25, 2007 6:41 PM
Sterling, you are so offensive I don't know where to begin. I would much rather have someone from Brownsville or East New York living in my coop then you. You are a pompous arrogant snob! Instead of calling for better housing in depressed neighborhoods for people of low to middle income means, you would prefer that these "undeserving" communities remain mostly black and poor so long as you can buy a nice two bedroom coop in Oro for $200k.
I guess a "diverse and vibrant Brooklyn" is only desirable when it's downtown and benefits people such as yourself. That's a shame.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 6:41 PM
Beeotch and Proud of it....you're and idiot...plain and simple. I'm Anon 6:12 and I'm black, I'm originally from Jamaica and I grew up in the Bronx and I certainly don't need to be lectured by you or anybody else about what's needed to improve the neighborhood. I'm "middle class"...I won't be buying a "million dollar condo" in Oro or anywhere else (I like it in University Towers)...and if wanting to be able to walk to the grocery store or dry cleaner makes me "heinrich himler" (what ever the hell that is) or a "sellout" (which I'm sure is going to be your next ridiculous argument") then God Bless brother!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 6:42 PM
I think you totally misconstrue what Sterling Silver said, anon 6:30. SS is referring to the fact that as neighborhoods get taken over by greedy developers and the rich, it displaces the lower to middle income people who have lived there and forces them out. It is no dispersion on other neighborhoods- and in fact the problem is occurring in Bed-Stuy and Crown Heights, as well as other areas. At some point there will be no place for anyone to go- so should the middle class and poor people simply wlak out into the Atlantic so rich people can live wherever they want?
And that isn't even the issue- the issue is not a natural evolution of neighborhoods, which it has nearly always been in NYC. It's a literal deconstruction of old neighborhoods, displacment of populations and the uprooting of communities for the convenience of one particular group. And every force and agency works toward easing the way for one particular income bracket. It's short-sighted, it is hugley non-beneficial and it reinforces the feeling of entitlement for the upper classes who are folled into thinking that money makes them deserve everything.
As for those who constantly trumpet on about handouts, welfare, section 8, blah blah blah- I guarantee you that the upper income brackets, by way of tax breaks, amenities and government subsidies for businesses cost this country billions of dollars more than what we pay out in welfare and housing subsidies. The rich get their handouts, oh yes they certainly do. They're just too hypocritical to admit it.
Posted by: resident of at June 25, 2007 6:45 PM
"The level of hostility in the comments thread on this blog toward people who can't afford million dollar apartments is really startling."
No Sper. You're wrong. There's a lot of hostility towards people who feel entitled to drive a Mercedes when all they can afford to own is a Hyundai. Please get real and stop the bullshit.
I don't think anyone on this board hates or feels pity for anyone who can't afford to purchase a $1M condo. There's a slew of single family homes in Brooklyn that can be purchased for under $400k. When did living in a $1M condo become a birthright in this city?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 6:50 PM
Ah, Anon at 5:21 and 6:30 - this must be what Shakespeare meant by "sound and fury signifying nothing."
You totally made up stuff that Sterling never even said, and then spun off of it like your imagination was fact.
I'm waiting for a large noise over Brooklyn, as your gasbag explodes. Sheesh. Get a grip.
Posted by: Preservationista at June 25, 2007 6:50 PM
Yeah, a developer spend $750M on a project and all of a sudden he's expected to make half the units affordable. Are you guys serious?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 6:53 PM
Where would that slew of single family homes in Brooklyn that can be purchased for under $400K be, Anon 6:50? Even houses in East New York go for more than that.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 6:55 PM
So I guess that makes East New York middle class - MOVE THERE!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 7:04 PM
And your reading comprehension is zero, anon. I envision ou at the computer foaming at the mouth right about now. If you don't want to be lectured I strongly suggest you not come off like a white supremacist (gee- did I get your demographic wrong or what!). I have no objection to improving services in poorer neighborhoods- would that the powers that be actually bother to do that. But they don't. Like I siad, I lived there for over 20 years and there are plenty of services- maybe not up to your refined tastes- out there. But you,like lal the rest seem to think your income bracket ( took bad about the million dollar condo) entitles you to remake a neighborhood to suit yourself and to get rid of everyone else. An idiot? I don't think so- and for the record i was born here and raised in the Bronx. Maybe you don't need a lecture, but you do need reminding.
Posted by: Beeotch and proud of it at June 25, 2007 7:09 PM
People don't want to be forced to move anywhere. they want to stay in their homes and communities- that happens to be a human issue, not an economic one. for those of you who can't empathize with that, I can only hope karma will teach you- what goes around, comes around.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 7:12 PM
anon 6:53- why shouldn't he? He's getting enough tax breaks and subsidies from the city and state to build. How about givng something back? Oh- I'm sorry- I guess you don't believe in social responsibility.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 7:15 PM
Beeotch....I'm not foaming at the mouth and I didn't take your lecture personally...I thought it was funny actually! I do, however, question YOUR reading comprehension. What was it in my original post that made me come across as a "white supremist"? Re-read my post (now that you know I'm black) and tell me that? I know you claim to have lived here, but when was that? Again, I've been here since '97 and believe me there have never been "plenty of services". As for my "refined standards". The damn Associated "supermarket" had rats running around the produce section for God Sake!! Poor, middle class or rich, that's ridiculous!! My primary point was that (a) the services were/are substandard in the Downtown Brooklyn (again not speaking to any other neighborhood), (b) most of the new developments are not replacing / tearing down existing housing...they are replacing parking lots, abandoned buildings and such. Thus not displacing middle class / working class people and (c) the development projects will surely bring in much needed services. What's wrong with that? Again, I can't speak for everyone in my building, University Towers (which again, I love...have no plans or interest in moving anywhere else...it's a nice community and diverse mix of folks), but the people I have spoken with and the sentiments in our (coop board / community) meetings is that people are ecstatic about the changes...black, brown and white alike.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 7:42 PM
As a resident of Brooklyn for over 30 years the development in downtown Brooklyn is way over the top
And a terrible idea for the middle class it will only increase property value that means the rent will go up and for you house owners It will increase property tax, water tax, con Ed bills, etc…
If you think for a minute that your con Ed bills has nothing to do with the neighborhood that your leaving think again
They have different rates for high class areas same goes for property tax,
And lets not forget the force behind all this our Mayer Bloomberg who in my opinion has been he worst Mayer
New York ever had and that’s saying a lot considering we had David dinkies
He is making sure that in a couple of years no middle class or poor families will be able to afford to live in NY
He increased outrageously property tax without any consideration for middle class
Increased parking tickets from $55 to $115-$125 for most of us it takes one or two days of work to pay this off
The problem here is that he is out of touch he is worth according to forbs between 20-25 billion dollars
So for him what is $125 he is completely clueless and dangers for poor and the middle class families
Now he is increasing water tax and wants you to pay $8 when you go in to Manhattan and as Bloomberg said “what is $8 when somebody really needs to go to Manhattan” for him $8 is nothing but for most of us its a lot of money he reminds me
Of he French revelation when they ask the king why he didn’t provide food for the French people who where starving to dead because there was no bread his reply was “if you don’t have bread then eat cake” there was another dictator who was out of touch
And do you really think crime is down look all over the drug dealers are back,
the other day my friends car was stolen at gun point when he called the police to make a report they gave him a hard time with questions like do you really want to make a report, are you sure that it was at gun point, do you really think it was stolen, etc…
They sounded more like aol when you call to cancel an account where they just don’t understand this two letters :please cancel” NYPD is acting the same way and a few months after that when my friend called one police plaza to get a copy of the report CAN YOU BELIVE THIS THE REPORT WAS NOT EVEN THERE no wonder reporting crime is down
He is running this city more like Mogadishu, Somalia rather then NYC
Posted by: brooklyn lover at June 25, 2007 8:22 PM
wow....just....wow. Where do I begin.
As someone who's seen Crown Heights both good and bad, I don't like the idea of pushing the working class out. However, most of Brooklyn is solidly middle-class anyway. I resent people infering that working-class Brooklyn is a shithole. It's not. There are simply a few shitty residents.
We need the luxury developments. It means tax money for schools, boys&girls clubs, cops, trains, pay rasies for the cops, etc......As for "Race", I couldn't care less what race moves in. If Brooklyn turned 99% Black tomorrow, I wouldn't care. If it turned 99% white tomorrow, then I wouldn't care.
Being for high-income earners doesn't make someone a "little hitler spawn". As someone who has family that died in the holocaust, I resent people using that term. We don't need more NYCHA in this city. There's already too much poverty and crime. What we need is a plan to retain the middle class (read: 40-200k).
Eastern Parkway and New York Ave checking in...
Posted by: CommonSense at June 25, 2007 8:24 PM
I think development is a good thing. I object to the short-sighted approach current developers take, over visionary designs that consider the shape of a city fifty or one hundred years in the future. True visionaries are rare, and are not currently represented in our municipal government. The developers do what they can get away with, and not currently restricted to perform to any strandard of foresight.
Given the market-based capitalism that is our system, and the support it gets from those in power and their friends with money, the system is unlikely to be equitable in a growing economy, especially where concentrations of wealth are competing to be close to sources of wealth. We will see a more equitable society when the economy crashes, or with radical changes in the governement, or some kind of revolution.
I urge everyone to participate more effectively by communicating with legislators, and of course, by voting.
Whenever I post to Brownstoner, I use the name 'Hal'. That way, people recognize my comments within a topic, and even from topic to topic. It would be so helpful if at least a couple of you who post using the name 'anonymous' would pick some regular handle so it's easier to follow the comments.
Who'll be the first to use the name 'Dick'?
Posted by: Hal at June 25, 2007 8:36 PM
"Wow -- Bed Stuy, Crown Heights, and PLG are for middle and working class people now -- I guess if middle and working class people can afford to pay $850K and up for a house."
Babs, sorry to burst your bubble but Bed-Stuy, Crown Heights and PLG are indeed soundly middle class no matter how many homes sell for $1M. Theses are mixed income communities and not home to the uber-rich. Yes, they have their investment bankers, lawyers and doctors but they have far more teachers, bus drivers, sanitation workers, firemen, policemen and local businesspeople. Most homeowners in these areas might be "house rich" but they are definitely middle class.
I guess some people will just say about anything to win an agrument.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 8:52 PM
Beeotch, "the powers that be"?
Man, can some of you people please stop blaming everyone under the sun for your problems!?!?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 9:01 PM
Good job Brooklyn lover
I agree with you 100% thank you for changing my mind about Mayer Bloomberg,
But I can not understand why all the newspapers love him I guess they love rich people are they getting money under the table ?
you never know with him
Posted by: anon at June 25, 2007 9:02 PM
right on Brooklyn lover you make some good points
Posted by: john t at June 25, 2007 9:06 PM
Brooklyn Lover, if you don't want parking tickets then don't break the law. If you break the law and get a parking ticket, then you have pay the piper. That's how the system works. Same rules for everyone.
How old are you? Did you take your grand kids to see Jackie Robinson steal home at Ebbet? You sound like my grand dad! I'd love to hear of your great vision for Brooklyn. Ha! Thank God that you're not in urban planning.
"As a resident of Brooklyn for over 30 years the development in downtown Brooklyn is way over the top."
Yeah! Way to go! Nothing like aiming low, underachieving and shooting for mediocrity!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2007 9:17 PM
I'm all for mixed neighborhoods. I grew up believing in the great melting Pot and I think it is still the most viable philosophy for the city. And that means all income levels as well. The problem we're have is not the building of luxury housing and improving services- its the imbalance. I don't think anyone should be surprised that people who have lived in communities for years and are being forced out would be angry and resentful. Especially with the attitudes they get. Everyone assumes only the upper income levels do their fair share and so deserve the greatest return. I'd be interested in seeing which income level the most tax dollars come from. And which levels get the most breaks. I know my taxes aren't huge compared to someone making 6 figures, but i pay a greater share proportionately as a single person head of household. So its unrealistic to think that rich neighborhoods deserve better quality schools, transportation, or services. And its even unhealthier to let "benign neglect" destroy older,poorer or run down neighborhoods to deteriorate further until a developer takes an interest.then everyone goes ooh ooh! they're improving the neighborhood.
Better stores follow the money, but better services to a neighborhood happen through the community itself, and hard work. People don't really know Crown Heights,Bed-stuy or other such neighborhoods because they only look at statistics without real context. the landmarking of Crown heights didn't come about because of gentrification- it came from long-time residents who have lived here for generations- some of them- and care about pretty much the same things everyone else does. Housing, schools, their kids, etc. "Poor" neighborhoods are not cardboard commmunities, all projects, gangs and drug dealers. But to hear some poster on this board talk, you would think that only people with money care about their neighborhoods.
Posted by: bx2bklyn at June 26, 2007 12:00 AM
Here is a strong law biding citizen
You never broke the law
You never park where its illegal, after all there are so many parking spaces available in the city, the city after all makes it as easy as possible to find legal parking the city never puts up meters or no standing or no parking signs
Where it does not make sense
You never get a ticket when parked 20 feet away from the pump and the traffic agent gives you a ticket and writes on ticket that you where parked 10 ft Away from the pump
After all this traffic agents are very honest people and they would never lie just to fulfill there quota for the week
You would never get a ticket with the wrong address written on the ticket just to justify the ticket
If you believe all of the above I have a bridge to sell you
I love when your saying “if you don't want parking tickets then don't break the law. If you break the law and get a parking ticket, then you have pay the piper. That's how the system works”
Guess what smart guy Stalin in Russia also had a system when you break the low you pay the piper and that was
Who ever said he was no good paid the piper 30 years in prison
Also tell me smart guy about your vision for Brooklyn I’m assuming it goes like this
con ed bills $2000 a month
property tax $30.000 a year
water bills $10.000 years
to buy an apartment $2000 a square feet
unbelievable vision did somebody tell you that Einstein was almost as smart as you are
Posted by: brooklyn lover at June 26, 2007 12:25 AM
brooklyn lover,
You write like you have the mental capacity of a 12 year old.
Just pay the damn fine and shut the fuck up. Enough of your inane, moronic babbling.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 26, 2007 1:31 AM
Brooklyn Lover, go sleep with Queens. Puh-Leeaze!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 26, 2007 4:32 AM
what's wrong with promoting diversity in brownsville and east new york? we should be asking for more housing development there (no more NYCHA projects). many empty lots and available land.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 26, 2007 4:42 AM
This blog has succeeded in being more exciting than Jerry Springer, Oprah, Jenny Jones and W/T/F Rosie O'Donnel in one. Congratulations. You are a group of Archie Bunkers and George Jeffersons trapped in the bodies of 30 year olds. Congratulations. I am glad MY neighborhood is changing. I bought here long enough ago to enjoy a happy, successful retirement. Remember it is easier to blog than to flip bergers!
Posted by: stonersquad at June 26, 2007 8:18 AM
I agree with Hal that people should use handles to identify their comment patterns. That way we'd know who people are. For example, everytime I see a post by Brower Park or bx2bklyn, I simply skip over it because I know that it's sure to be drivel.
Posted by: Dick at June 26, 2007 8:58 AM
Ignoring the fact that 95% of the developments listed above are displacing no one, and ignoring the fact that by adding massive supply of luxury housing here will by definition reduce the market for such developments elsewhere (in more middle class brooklyn) and ignoring the fact that displacing check cashing places (usurious fees), kennedy fried chicken (so unhealthy it should be regulated) and horribly sub-par grocery stores and bodegas (well documented that they overcharge the poor and offer least healty food selections and little fresh produce) is probably the best thing you can do for the urban poor - Could someone please tell me how people are being displaced by development in Downtown Brooklyn? - Virtually all housing in the area is either rent stabilized, NYCHA or owner occupied. In either case the costs for the occupants rise or fall entirely independent of other development.
And I am forced to ask the same question I asked last week - since none of the anti-development, anti-Bloomberg, anti-everything people has yet answered it. Okay lets assume you are correct, what tax/zoning/law would you change to improve the situation without causing worse unintentional consequences.
Its funny to me how people post here with such clarity as though things are so black and white - yet when asked for solutions - all we hear is silence.
Posted by: David at June 26, 2007 9:10 AM
I agree with Hal too, especially when he wondered who would be the first to use the name "dick." Now we know- some fool who was too dense to get Hal's sarcasm.
David- I think the point really is that people are not "anti-development, anti-Bloomberg, anti-everything "- they want a handle on how it is happening, and they want it to happen in more constructive ways.And your question is being directed for the most part at those on the receiving end developer greed. At the same time, as everyone acknowledges, this group also happens to most likely be those without access tothe same money and/or power as the group that wants to build everywhere. It's almost an exercise in futility since the parameters for each group are totally different- one based on money and entitlement, and the other based on home and community. And the solutions or compromises offered will always be derided by the development/money people because that's all they are interested in. When was the last developer you met concerned about the impact of his building on the neighborhood- or even if it would impact the community?
Posted by: bx2bklyn at June 26, 2007 9:52 AM
AMEN David!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 26, 2007 9:59 AM
Bx2Brkly - no my question is directed to the people who claim they want a "handle on how it is happening".
You cant complain that it is an "exercise in futility" until you actually have a SOLUTION and then if it is ignored or unimplemented despite wide support you have a complaint. It requires ZERO money or power to post a policy here on Brownstoner. Yet all we hear is, this wrong, this is evil, stop this, NY is being ruined on and on and on. (which is why it sems as though the agenda is simply anti-everything)
So I pose the question again, imagine you were king, what law/zoning/taxes/incentives would you change, implement or repeal to alleviate the problems you are articulating, and in doing so you have to consider possible unintended consequences.
Posted by: David at June 26, 2007 10:04 AM
David- I will be the first to admit I am not expert enough in law to begin to be able to answer that question. But I think part of my answer would include not so much rewriting laws as coming down on those who ignore or circumvent the ones that are there to keep some protections in place. Maybe one thing i would love to see would be a requirement that developers must contribute to the infrastructure of the nieighborhood- and by that I mean the streets, the trees, con ed, etc. Big developments would have to pay for upgrading subway stations, police precincts and firehouses. I would also cut out any subsidies for luxury housing in poor or lower income neighborhoods and only instate them if the housing is being built for lower-mid income levels,giving neighborhood residents a shot at newer housing without displacing the community. I'd offer better and bigger incentives to business to build in these neighborhoods- make no mistake. Business can do well in poorer neighborhoods- Fulton St. in downtown Brooklyn does, and business districts should be upgraded for the people who already live here, instead of with an eye toward getting luxury housing.
There is a lot of money- if it has to be put in those terms, in minority neighborhoods. there is a huge working class and they support neighborhood business. their buying power has been very underestimated.
Well, I'm sure to be raked over the coals here but the NY times has a very interesting article on the subway system if anyone cares to read it. the study says that the system is already carrying, in some cases, more than it can handle, and cannot add more trains to the system. I know you have always said the trains were one major reason for putting a huge project like AY there- but this kind of argues against that.
Still and all, the reason people want to have a handle on what is happening have a valid point,especially as all the secret deals come to light and all the special favors. You can't fight what you don't know.
Posted by: bx2bklyn at June 26, 2007 10:56 AM
I guess you love Bloomberg - because he is doing virtually everything you are requesting. Property sale taxes, mortgage recording and unit property taxes are one of the biggest generators of revenues in the city, which it is then up to the city to use for Mass transit, infrastructure, police etc.... Not to mention that developers must pay all sorts of fees, taxes and other costs to the city coffers - and Bloomberg has proposed cutting the 421-a exemption to make those new property owners start paying taxes right away or put up affordable housing on-site.
Additionally Bloomberg has dedicated 7.5B to build or preserve 165,000 units of affordable housing within the city - of course that money comes from the aforementioned taxes (and the approx 2-3% income tax NYC has on its residents - including the wealthy ones).
As for the subway/transit issue, Bloomberg has proposed a massive increase in funding - payable by those people who choose to drive into Manhattan from 6am-6pm M-F. Lets see how many of the "Develop Dont Destroy" folks support him on that.
Finally, I dont want to get into another AY debate, but overcrowded or not, it is still better to put development over a railhub then not. It is far easier to alleviate 'congestion' by upgrading and improving the current mass transit system then in is spreading people all over the place and trying to either add completley new service or have to upgrade a wider area of the system (economies of scale)
Posted by: David at June 26, 2007 11:15 AM
People, can we review the numbers again? 18 separate developments with 4,422 new residential units within a 1/2 mile stretch. I'm all for developing the downtown area, which has long been overlooked as the orphaned child of the surrounding brownstone areas, but trying to force 10 pounds of shit into a 5 pound bag at this rate of speed alarms to me. Again, I ask the question, can this area, which most everyone acknowledges was pretty desolate, handle this sudden influx of people without putting a substantial drain on the infrastructure?
Posted by: neighborgood at June 26, 2007 11:45 AM
The racism coming from the Black posters here is astounding. No one is being displaced and no minority neighborhoods are affected.
Posted by: CommonSense at June 26, 2007 11:57 AM
Neighborgood - seems like you are looking for a specific answer when you ask it in the form of "10lbs of shit into a 5lb bag" so I'll tell you what you want to hear....
No, their will be undoubtedly be very significant strain on the existing infrastructure, so much it might even create terrible problems.
Now for the other side....what else do you suggest - if you build less or nothing - the lack of supply will continue to push housing costs higher and higher, resulting in NY and Brooklyn being less affordable.
If you try to spread the development out, you will put the strain over a wider area including in places further from the 'center', where it will cost more to solve (economies of scale). It will also impact more of the 'neighborhoods' you claim to be trying to protect.
Now before you go and tell us that the city should improve the infrastructure 1st, then build, let me say - that would be nice - but as realistic as Osama Bin Laden becoming a gay jew. Until the tax base and political will is actually realized (i.e. close to crisis) the city is not going to invest billions in upgrading and adding new subways/transit/schools/muni-services for 'proposed' developments. And if the city tried to do alot of this 'developing for the fuure' - the political firestorm from those who live in already developed areas would be huge.
Posted by: David at June 26, 2007 12:29 PM
Thanks for your specific answer David. Unfortunately, the sophistry that followed your acknowledgment of the potential infrastructure problems does nothing to advance the argument any closer to a common-sense solution. If todays headlines about the 2,3, 4 and 5 lines are any indication of what to expect, the "close to crisis" situation you mention is already at hand. BTW, I'm not saying I have any answers either, but I believe my concerns are valid ones, no matter how glibly you'd like to dismiss them
Posted by: neighborgood at June 26, 2007 1:44 PM
Yes, the middle-class people lucky enough to have moved into PLG, Crown Heights, Bed Stuy, etc., way back when and who are still there are part of what gives these neighborhoods their character and why we like them. However, middle class people looking to buy there today cannot afford them. I believe the question was, "Where can middle class people afford to buy TODAY?" And the answer is not those areas.
Posted by: babs at June 26, 2007 1:53 PM
As David says, neighborgood, you have no answers and do nothing but complain.
Babs, if you're so concerned about middle-class access to home ownership in PLG, why not sell your home for 200K and live full-time in your LES pied a terre?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 26, 2007 2:25 PM
David- if in fact the City does not preplan for increased stress on the infrastructure, then the term Urban Planning is patently false. By not improving the structure beforehand, all the additional stress will indeed put it into crisis- and be much more expensive to fix. So then the City has to wait again for the coffers to fill because they now have an even bigger, more expensive problem to fix. So it goes into a ever-worsening cycle and never gets done, and as the infrastructure falters and fails, the once "desirable" developments become less so and the money does what it always does- it moves on. Of course the City follows the money too, so they will do what they've always done in the past, let the damaged neighborhoods rot. And in ten-20 years it will be the community that stayed that will rebuild, only to go through the same cycle again. So your answer makes absolutely no sense on any level.
By the way my answer was never to build less or not at all- my answer was to strengthen the communities that are there, build where there is empty land and a need. But make it more attractive to developers to build to the market that is there- not rip out and reconfigure entire neighborhoods to accomodate massive and monstrous developments. The subway is not an afterthought- its an integral part of the development and it also points up the implausibility of your statement: "As for the subway/transit issue, Bloomberg has proposed a massive increase in funding - payable by those people who choose to drive into Manhattan from 6am-6pm M-F" If the public transportation systems are already strained now, how does forcing more people onto it resolve anything? It doesn't- and people who drive into the city are , in any case, hardly going to use a system that is overcrowded, always late and takes far more time.
As for Bloomberg- it's an unfortunate fact that all of those incentives, etc. don't seem to get translated into anything other than benefits for luxury developers.Bloomberg loves gentrification and pushes it at every opportunity. It's nice to see neighborhoods improve- how about improving those that need it the most for the people who need it the most? And I reiterate- working class neighborhoods pay their fair share into the system. why shouldn't they get something back? Why aren't they entitled to stay in their homes and communities? I understand the economics of gentrification, I just don't like the ethics of how its done. And AY is a perfect example of economics without ethics.
Posted by: bx2bklyn at June 26, 2007 2:34 PM
Anon 2:25 do you have ADD or just a reading comprehension problem? David was not the one that said I didn't have any answers, I DID! And if you'd actually read the posts before reacting to them, you'd see I'm not complaining, just pointing out what even David admits is a potential problem in the ass-backwards approach to recent development viz a viz infrastructure. Just because you don't agree with my position doesnt't make me a complainer. And P.S., this is a forum, not the WWF so cool it with the smackdown mentality.
Posted by: neighborgood at June 26, 2007 4:10 PM
Hey, anon 2:25, I don't own a home in PLG (or anywhere else). I rent, and if my landlord were to increase my rent to what are now market rates in the area, I'd have to move.
Posted by: babs at June 26, 2007 4:10 PM
Bx2Bklyn - while it would be nice if infrastructure was repaired, upgraded and added before development, in today's world (with Nimbism, Land Use Reviews, Lawsuits, term limits, Politics by 30 sec ads, etc...) its not going to happen. That being said you have it exactly backwards - the reason the neighborhoods 'rotted' was not because too many people came into them, but b/c too many people left them. The best protection for NYC, Brooklyn, and whatever neighborhood you are talking about is for there to be more investment and more people - new, old and the babies of the old and the new.
Posted by: David at June 26, 2007 4:51 PM
David, I wish I could buy you a beer.
Thanks for being one of the more level-headed and rational posters on this forum.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 26, 2007 4:59 PM
david,those are excuses and not very good ones. Show me one person in this City who would object to improving infrastructure- especially mass transit. Since we depend on it, we would very very much like it improved, do for things like that nimbyism is not the reason. The build it and they will fix it idea is nice but didn't work in Williamsburg.Where's the improved infrastructure?
If things progressed in a linear fashion you could interpret the problem as too many people in or out- but it's circular, and spiralling. There are reasons people left their neighborhoods- you only look at one part of the progression. That said, as noted in the Times, we are years away from any solutions and so far as I can tell, the only subway they are looking to improve are the lines in Manhattan going crosstown, or on the East side. And since it looks like it won't happen there, I can hardly credit it happening here. they call it urban planning- when did they forget the planning part? Trust me, if they can do enough "urban planning" to allow Ratner to build, or the waterfront to be developed, they can plan to build the infrastructure to support it. And when they don't, who do you think will be complaining loudest? the people who pay big bucks and feel "entitled." The infrastructure keeps a city helathy- when was the last time you heard of a guy being healthy with a bad valve? thats how infrastructure works- the whole has to be healthy or the system will break down.
Posted by: bx2bklyn at June 26, 2007 5:17 PM
Gotta side with Dave here. NYC went downhill because the middle class/rich left and the crime rocketed out of control. Yes, we should preserve the middle class. How about we kick the losers out of NYCHA and give them to the middle class?
More development=more services to the community. And the reason nothing infastructure wise gets built is becuase people like the ones on this board complain all day long about it...
Posted by: CommonSense at June 26, 2007 6:13 PM
"middle class/rich left and the crime rocketed out of control" is that what happened? Perhaps you should change your name to NonSense you simpleton.
Posted by: anon at June 26, 2007 6:27 PM
And just WHY do you think the middle class/rich left? Well, what can we say? can't teach old morons new thinking.
more development= more strain on the infrastructure
nothing get built because we have shortsighted, ignorant, uncomprehending and uneducated politicians and moneymen who are too piggish and stupid to put money where it's needed. Of course it doesn't help that simpleminded "social philosophers" who can't analyze worth a damn have to post inane commentary under laughably inappropriate names. CommonSense- an oxymoron in every sense of the word.
Posted by: Beeotch and proud of it at June 26, 2007 7:08 PM
Beeotch - sorry but the middle class and rich leaving had ZERO to do with city services (which were actually quite good - NYC school system = best in the world for example).
They left b/c of the migration of southern blacks escaping Jim Crow, they left b/c the baby boom generation left so many people looking for family sized homes, they left b/c the autombile age and road building opened up the suburbs -which with the lawn, garage and open air seemed like manifest destiny all over again, they left b/c in a country obsessed with new and the future, the city seemed old and boring and the suburbs (and in the Bronx - Coop City) seemed to be where "it" was happening.
There are hundreds of social, economic and political reasons why people left the city in droves but very, very low on the list was 'lack of services' or 'too tall buildings'
Posted by: David at June 26, 2007 8:48 PM
I could understand blacks leaving the south to escape whitey but why would whites leave the city to escape blacks? Elaborate please. As far as I can tell in history black people should be afraid of white people what with the centuries of the slave trade and then Jim Crow/colonialism and currently the risk of being shot 40 or 50 times by the gustapo looming over our heads. But why a white people afraid of black people? Please sight historical accounts. I can show you pictures of the atrocities practiced against black people so you might want to include that yourself.
Posted by: anon at June 26, 2007 9:09 PM
Anon 9:09, not historical accounts, but...
Try being white and walking past the Farragut Houses. You'll be afraid of black people.
Try being Asian and walking through the Fulton Mall. You'll be afraid of black people.
Hell, try being black, young, and male. You'll be afraid of other black people.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 26, 2007 9:29 PM
David- you illustrated my point-"but the middle class and rich leaving had ZERO to do with city services (which were actually quite good - NYC school system = best in the world for example)." in your reply to Beeotch. Yet you and every other pro development w/o boundaries person keeps claiming that gentrification will bring improved services. funny- it was done before because it was for the good of all, and now you claim it can't be done except for the forces of gentrification.
Sure there are lots of reasons for the rise and fall and rise again of neighborhoods- but it is cyclical, not linear.
Posted by: bx2bklyn at June 26, 2007 11:52 PM
Try walking around with 9:29. You'll be afraid of ignorance and stupidity on a monumental level.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 27, 2007 12:24 AM
truer words were never spoken...er...written, anon 12:24!
Posted by: resident of at June 27, 2007 1:55 AM
/\ to Anon 6:27
Ummm, in 1960 NYC had 435 murders.
in 1970 it had 1,200.
Facts are facts.
And it's not like Whites were the only ones who fled. Lots of middle-class Blacks left too.
And for the record, Black people don't scare me
Posted by: CommonSense at June 27, 2007 7:02 AM
Never heard of any black people chaining an Asian or white person to their pick-up truck and driving them around until they disintegrated; so I repeat who shoul be afraid of who.
Posted by: Anon at June 27, 2007 4:41 PM
You're right. There's no reason to ever fear anyone of African descent. You have opened my eyes. It being a hot summer evening, I think I'll take a long stroll down Pitkin Avenue through Brownsville and East New York dripping in expensive jewelry, because I have nothing to fear. Thanks for changing my life. Nothing to fear. Yay.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 27, 2007 5:28 PM
4:41--
Where in NYC does that pick-up truck shit happen? NOWHERE.
On the other hand, ask my girlfriend why she refuses to go to the Fulton Mall anymore. Racism exists everywhere, but Fulton Street might be the only place in NYC where she's mocked with "ching chong" or "jap wap" TO HER FACE.
Or why ANY sane white person tries not to go anywhere near the mostly black housing projects. Because black folk will KILL for sneakers or if they think you looked at their girlfriend the wrong way.
It's not "ignorance" or "racism". It's knowing that more black men are in prison than in college. It's knowing that black men commit more crimes as a percentage of the population any anyone else.
Hell yeah black people scare me.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 27, 2007 9:20 PM
You folks are not aware of the recent history of New York, I am 47 years old and I moved to Brooklyn in June of 1967 and when my mother first went looking for a house to purchase it was made clear to her where she would not be welcomed because of her skin color. As for myself as a youth in Brooklyn we knew that Bay Ridge or Bensonhurst or Breezy Pt. or Howard Beach or Carnarsie meant certain death. The actual pick up truck event happened in another galaxy called Texas but we have had our share of lynchings in Brooklyn and Queens in my 40 years here. The fact that the jewels that you are sporting were stolen from Africa and millions were killed in the process should still historically and factually have black people more afraid of you than you are of them. Why be afraid of a people that were kidnapped and subsequently enslaved and then criminalized and incarcerated? GUILT! And this shit is all about land/real estate or what the land has under it. I am scared of white mobs, but by yourselves or hiding behind a keyboard you are cowards. Here is how you know you are racist and or an ass wipe: you have no empathy or sympathy for others suffering and you would never make the comments in public that are made on these blogs.
Posted by: Anon at June 28, 2007 3:28 PM
Cowards hiding behind keyboards?
And where on this thread have you provided your name, address, and telephone number?
You're just as anonymous and cowardly as anyone else who posts here.
Hypocrite.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 28, 2007 3:53 PM
Come to Tompkins and Hancock my office is on the corner of Hancock in Bed Stuy, bring it on. Notice where you took it and who you challenge and that says everything about you.
Posted by: Anon at June 28, 2007 4:43 PM
Resorting to violence. How chic.
Still waiting for your information, coward...
Posted by: Anonymous at July 5, 2007 10:39 AM
Latest Restaurant Additions
-
Tillie's of Brooklyn
added December 1, 2008 12:00 PM in Fort Greene -
Provence en Boite
added November 26, 2008 11:58 AM in Boerum Hill -
Melt
added November 25, 2008 12:02 PM in Park Slope -
The Farm on Adderley
added November 24, 2008 12:00 PM in Ditmas Park -
Chez Lola
added November 21, 2008 12:02 PM in Clinton Hill -
Nana
added November 20, 2008 12:02 PM in Park Slope -
Pomme de Terre
added November 19, 2008 12:01 PM in Ditmas Park -
Scopello
added November 18, 2008 12:01 PM in Fort Greene -
DiFara
added November 17, 2008 11:59 AM in Midwood -
Chiles y Chocolate
added November 14, 2008 12:02 PM in Park Slope
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.