« Eminent Domain Spreads to Williamsburg Waterfront Sunset Park Senior Facility Nears Completion »

October 17, 2007

So That's What Avalon Myrtle Will Look Like!

We're a couple of days late to market with this rendering of the Avalon Bay project slated for the northeast corner of Flatbush Extension and Myrtle—it appeared in an off-line-only section of The Post last weekend (where Curbed grabbed it and posted earlier this week). The specs on the project—42 stories, 650 rental units—have been common knowledge for some time but they'd kept the pretty pictures under wraps. Besides being huge, this looks like it could be decent, though it's hard to get a feel for the choice of materials. Look for a 2009 completion...The other take-away from the article was this quote from Joe Chan, president of the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership: "Somewhere in the pipeline, there are about 14,000 residential units and a million and a half square feet of office space." How you like them apples?
Towering Avalon Brooklyn Revealed [Curbed] GMAP
Development Watch: BFC and Avalon Straddle Myrtle [Brownstoner]
Development Watch: BFC and Avalon Straddle Myrtle [Brownstoner]

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/2595

Comments

I don't think the GMAP is correct.

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 10:15 AM

Great spot to build. It connects Dumbo to downtown to Fort Greene -sort of. It's right by the housing projects, right? Is that cool? It's a totally different sensation coming off the bridge with tall buildings there. It works. It is a bit funny though because it makes me think that I'm at some beach. I guess I'll get used to it. Still wondering how changes in the housing market will impact new building. Fulton Mall in its current state is not long for this world. I give it 5 years, if the economy cooperates. Can't you just see it- Urban Outfitters, GAP, H&M, etc...

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 10:16 AM

thanks. fixed the link.

Posted by: brownstoner at October 17, 2007 10:22 AM

This would be the same Avalon involved with all those soulless towers in Long Island City, right?

http://www.queenswest.com/riverview/pictures

Posted by: deadnancy at October 17, 2007 10:31 AM

wow.
it's so hard to imagine... it's going to be interesting watching this area change so dramatically.

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 10:31 AM

Will there really be enough people to fill all the new condos and these 14,000 rental units? What is their intended demographic/clientele?

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 10:44 AM

oops--I meant the 14,000 new residential units Chan mentions total.

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 10:45 AM

What about the fact that there is a huge public housing project 1/2 block away?

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 10:49 AM

I had read somewhere (can't remember where) that Giuliani had tried to move those projects to East New York. Anyone know about this? And how would it affect this Avalon monstrosity? Is it supposed to be luxury rentals?

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 10:50 AM

Re: expensive apartments next to projects -- already the case in Manhattan, ie East Village, Hell's Kitchen, probably elsewhere as well.

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 10:55 AM

I can't actually believe you think that looks decent. I think it looks hideous.

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 10:59 AM

So would this be the tallest building in Brooklyn? It's taller than Williamsburg bank right?

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 11:02 AM

Brooklyn needs a lot more class A office space. This area would be great for it, why isn't it being built??

Posted by: LM at October 17, 2007 11:17 AM

It's a shame that such a bunch of Suburban Hell d-bags as Avalon had to be the ones to come along and build this, buuuut... I really think it is the right project at the right location. I love historic districts, historic buildings, and the vigorous protection thereof, etc, as much as the next B'stoner reader, but the fact is that much of that is wildly out of reach for most people. It is a simple economic fact that NYC and Brooklyn are in DESPERATE need of more housing and that more housing directly equals stabilization of prices which equals less people getting priced out of their neighborhoods. It is putting the cart before the horse to say that poor and middle class people are being run out of Brownstone Brooklyn neighborhoods by gentrifying preservationists - people across the city are moving to less expensive neighbohoods than the ones they were in before because there is not enough housing stock in the city. Brooklyn desperately needs 13,000+ more units of housing and right there is the second best place in the borough for it.

Posted by: MrMinerva at October 17, 2007 11:28 AM

"Brooklyn needs a lot more class A office space."

Really? I've seen no evidence of such demand.

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 11:44 AM

There is affordable housing in Brooklyn. It's in Bedford Stuyvesant, Bay Ridge, Bushwick and Flatlands. People aren't entitled to live in downtown Brooklyn if they can't afford it. They should have to move to a place they can afford. It's called the free market, and it's why places like Beverly Hills have an average home price of $1.8m dollars and only people who can afford to live there do.

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 11:46 AM

thank you, 11:46.

there are too many entitled people in this city that believe that they DESERVE to live wherever they please.

even on their 60K a year salary.

it's not so.

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 12:16 PM

11:44 is probably right; there is not much evidence of demand for more Class A office space. However, there is evidence of a strong commercial market in DUMBO for smaller, Class B (let's say) space for "the creative industries." Joe Chan, president of the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, has expressed interest in attracting more architecture firms and the like to downtown. So what's the difference between DUMBO and downtown? (1) The space already exists in DUMBO; no one is building on spec' downtown. (2) You can rent 1500-5000 square feet in DUMBO; the spaces downtown, even the sublets, tend to be much larger. (3) DUMBO has an established hipness; downtown is...well, you finish the sentence based on your own experience. That said, I think the east side of Flatbush is better as residential and I don't foresee the near-by NYCHA developments (which are not going anywhere, 10:50) having much impact on the new projects and their eventual tenants.

Posted by: g man at October 17, 2007 12:41 PM

So most new building is unacceptable unless done by some starchitect unless the price is too high and the 'burbs and
mc mansions are definitely out and tract housing is out and most people have hideous and unrefined taste.

What is okay- brownstones, prewars, victorians...?

I don't necessarily disagree if we're looking at everything from a design perspective. What should be built? How do you solve the problem of people who want mc mansions? When do you decide to end your arrogance and snobbery. The paradox- how to escape?

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 1:20 PM

Will any of the people in the 14,000 new units have kids? Where are they going to go to school?

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 2:56 PM

Residents with children will do what most of their ilk do - depart NYC once their kids reach school age. They will then be replaced by younger residents, who will follow the same pattern. Ad infinitum.

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 4:25 PM

Uh, not anymore. Studies show that middle class people are no longer eating their children when they reach age 4, but are allowing them to live to attend kindergarten in the city. Distressing, I am sure...

Posted by: Putnamdenizen at October 17, 2007 6:25 PM

Swift, but it was a modest proposal.

Posted by: guest at October 17, 2007 7:23 PM

Like lamb, you need to eat your children well before the age of four, or they're gamy. On a more serious note

400-foot height limit divided by 42 stories = 9.5 foot high ceiling heights?

Posted by: guest at October 18, 2007 6:12 AM

"Residents with children will do what most of their ilk do - depart NYC once their kids reach school age. They will then be replaced by younger residents, who will follow the same pattern. Ad infinitum" I am a baby boomer and when I was younger that was always true (with a few rare exceptions like my husband and I). Recently, less so I think. There are many people who want to stay in the city with kids and go to some efforts to do so.

Posted by: guest at November 26, 2007 3:55 PM

12:16

In regards to your comments regarding persons earning 60K a year. New York State minimum wage is $7.15 per hour. Based on that number a person who works a 40 hour week for 52 weeks a year would earn an annual income of $14, 872. In case you were wondering in Kings County (co-terminus with Brooklyn) the average median income (AMI) is $32,339. Based on the scenario of a 40 hour week for 52 weeks of the year, a person at AMI earns approximately $15.55 per hour.

What's the point? A person who earns 60k a year has an income that translates to $30 an hour. A wage earner at nearly twice the AMI should have the choice of a choice location.

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 3:35 PM

3:35
$60k is a decent salary everywhere but NY, SF and LA. That person does have choice locations, just not any location they want. There are lovely neighborhoods with good schools across brooklyn (Bay Ridge, Midwood, Ocean Ave, Sheepsead Bay, Marine Park etc..).

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:01 PM

« Eminent Domain Spreads to Williamsburg Waterfront Sunset Park Senior Facility Nears Completion »

October 17, 2007

So That's What Avalon Myrtle Will Look Like!

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions