« Thursday Blogwrap Calls for Reining in Development at Carroll Gardens Meeting »
August 24, 2007
Friday Links
Brooklyn Heights. Photo by october is a month.
In Britain and U.S., Urgent Steps to Change Mortgage Systems [NY Times]
Fort Greene Firm Rips City's Seizure of Longtime Office [NY Daily News]
City Blocks 6-Story Addition on Clinton Street [Brooklyn Paper]
Wrangling Over Rent for Astroland '08 Season [NY Post]
Residential Rentals Thrive Amid Subprime Collapse [Sun]
State Approves $42M for Affordable Housing [Crain's]
The New Battle Against Gentrification [Gotham Gazette]
Barack Takes Brooklyn [Gothamist]
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/1923
Comments
downtown brooklyn sucks. what about it is worthy of saving? the look of it, the stores, the food--all crap.
Posted by: guest at August 24, 2007 9:49 AM
I agree that Downtown Brooklyn is seedy, ugly, and depressing. Urbanistically, it would make a perfect blank canvas. A new downtown, well-designed and attractive is what we need. Downtown is stuck in 1974.
Posted by: guest at August 24, 2007 1:21 PM
The Brooklyn Paper is horrible. The news article is reporting on a routine DOB action.
The City didn't "block" anything. Building permits for new buildings or alterations are routinely rejected for various bureaucratic reasons (usually insufficient paperwork). It has nothing to do with the overall merits or legality of a given project.
Posted by: guest at August 24, 2007 2:39 PM
Any article that takes FIERCE and FUREE seriously as "innovative advocacy groups" isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
Not to mention that the comparison of the Fulton Mall to Chinatown is ridiculous and asinine. In Chinatown, the Chinese own the buildings, own the stores, and LIVE in the area.
The Fulton Mall? Whites own the buildings, Asian and Middle Eastern immigrants operate the stores, and NO ONE lives there.
I can't wait until the Fulton Mall and Downtown Brooklyn changes and gentrifies to serve the entire community that lives in the area (Brooklyn Heights, Boerum Hill, Fort Greene, etc) and NOT just the small segment of the population that lives in the nearby public housing projects.
Posted by: guest at August 24, 2007 2:53 PM
The Brooklyn Paper is great. It's far and away better than the Park Slope Courier which reads like a Ratner lovefest. And don't even get me started on their lunatic op-ed writers.
Posted by: guest at August 24, 2007 5:33 PM
interesting contrasting opinion on BID's. I have always thought they brought business communities together- being a business owner. anyone else care to comment?
Posted by: guest at August 24, 2007 9:24 PM
I agree with 2:39. The Department of Buildings turned down the design for one specific building. A 185-foot tall structure is permissible at this location and may get built, after a re-design.
While 5:33 can rightly criticize the editorial stance of the Courier-Life papers (and is 1000% correct about the opinion writers), I feel like the chain trys to get the story straight. The Brooklyn Papers sexs up stories to make the weekly a tantalizing read, and the truth gets lost somewhere.
Posted by: guest at August 25, 2007 11:52 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.