DBP Does Its Five-Year Vision Thing

ugh. scary as hell. i live in Brooklyn b/c it's NOT Manhattan.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 9:56 AM

Flatbush is going to be a nightmare... Here comes Times Sq. Brooklyn...

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:02 AM

I do like the street scape project.... Most people in Brooklyn are going to spending most of there time on Flatbush sitting in traffic...

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:08 AM

Flatbush=hell

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:10 AM

9:56 - there is more to Brooklyn then the size of its buildings and the 2 sq miles that is being discussed here

as for traffic - try NOT DRIVING

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:20 AM

alot monsey is going to be comming to brooklyn... I think overall this can be good for the downtown area...

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:21 AM

Brooklyn the new UWS or (new name) Downtown East East Side....

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:23 AM

Brooklynlove - b/c these people don't love "Brooklyn" they love the (fake) image that they believe living in Brooklyn gives THEM. And since they are doing fine, to hell with everyone else, to hell with the future b/c its all about ME and what I want to (pretend) to be.

FSRG

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:29 AM

10:21, are you saying more Hasidim are moving to Brooklyn? Wait, I see, you meant "money," not "monsey."

More seriously, it is hard to say, as BrooklynLove does, that "the alternative is to continue losing these opps to jersey city, and eventually LIC-queens plaza." That might be true if office buildings were being built, as the Downtown Brooklyn Development Plan proposed. But I don't think that the eventual owners of expensive condominiums, which is what is actually being built, are looking at Jersey City as an alternative.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:33 AM

I wish my firm would move to Downtown Brooklyn... I could walk to work or have a 8 min train ride...

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:36 AM

I agree with BrooklynLove. I have been a Brooklyn resident my entire life (I grew up in PLG and I now live in Downtown Brooklyn) and it is exciting to see the borough develop. That said, many of the new buildings going up are horrible from an architectural standpoint which is unfortunate.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:42 AM

I'm with BrooklynLove. This is going to be great for Brooklyn. I'm a little worried a lot of these buildings will never materialize however. Seems like we're a bit late to the party.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:44 AM

Just in time for the next Great Depression...

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:55 AM

Just one other point of view: people all of this sounds great but remember that our streets (lanes) are not nor have ever been designed to accomadate this kind of traffic, Flatbush, Atlantic Ave, and most streets are two or three lanes, while the city is three to four lanes and much wider and longer, stadiums, hotels, high rises etc.. all should stay in the city, I think queens blvd. is going to have some competition in being the blvd of death,

think outside the box (money) for just a second,,

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 10:59 AM

Can anyone commment on the appearance in the video of a building on the SOuth side of Schermerhorn between nevins and 3rd Ave? (It appears around 2:45 or 2:50 in the movie.) The only empty area there is the admittedly underused Sixteen Sycamores Park -- which would seem due for reviatlization and not destruction if this much additional housing and hotels come on line in the next five years?

Also, did anyone notice the U-Shaped sleeve built around the Atlantic Avenue jail?

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 11:01 AM

35,000 new residents and not a single new school is mentioned. Outrageous.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 11:03 AM

Atlantic Ave, Flatbush Ext, 4th Ave, Boerum Pl, Tillary Pl are all at least 6 lanes wide - how does this significantly differ from most places in Manhattan? And unlike Manhattan virtually EVERY single subway line crosses through this area.

Housing is expensive, new people are coming and hopefully economic development is happening - so you have a choice - you can do nothing and prices will increase even more until NY is economically unfeasible for living and working(and then the city starts to reverse hurting millions) or you can build. (Despite what many here seem to believe economies/societies dont stay static - either you grow and develop or you shrink and suffer - as much as some would like you can't 'freeze' Brooklyn in 2003)

Seems to me the only real choice is to build (housing, offices and retail) to allow the city to continue to grow. So that only leaves 1 question =WHERE - and it is clear to anyone who cares about the environment, sustainable development and urban living that building at or near the city 'core' is the best place.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 11:37 AM

Didn't anyone else think it was hilarious that they need a British narrator to give this 'vision' a false sense of sophistication...?

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 11:49 AM

I was so inspired by this video that I now think we should raze all the landmark neighborhoods surrounding Downtown Brooklyn. Perhaps Kenneth Branagh will be available for the video for that plan. Maybe Borat.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 11:53 AM

11:53 -- ha.

are they razing historic buildings for the downtown plan?

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 12:09 PM

Brooklyn had needed this type of development for a long time. It's time to build a REAL downtown in Downtown Brooklyn. Let 'er rip!

-- Brooklyn native and lifelong resident.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 1:39 PM

12:09
Yes, they ARE razing historic buildings for "downtown" Brooklyn building. Duffield St. is in the news. FCR messed up a wonderfully convertible factory--it had a terrific glazed terracotta exterior (and it probably could have been built on top of or at least the facades saved). FCR has ripped down a number of buildings and would like to keep going, and going, and going.

Does anyone every discuss the vacancy issue Metrotech has been plagued with over the years?!

Now that we've approached the top of the hill and are looking over the summit into the chasm, what will happen if all this proposed space is built and fails to sell or rent as residences or office space?

Are the buildings being designed, spec'd and construction managed to be highly efficient, not just "LEEDS" compliant? Me thinks not.

Plus, as I have raised before on Brownstoner, have appropriate assessments been made that show there will be no problem with either the existing or even upgraded infrastructure to handle all the water and electricity needs as well as the waste water produced? What about the subways? I take the Q at Atlantic and it can be PACKED to the gills at 8:30AM.

FG/TGL

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 1:47 PM

Yes re-development of Downtown Brooklyn will be favroable to Brooklyn. But why does it have to be high rise? Those buidlings are just to out of scale with everything else in Brooklyn.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 2:15 PM

"Those buidlings are just to out of scale with everything else in Brooklyn."

So what? Where does it say that every building in the VAST borough of Brooklyn should be the same size?

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 2:23 PM

There's no arguing with people such as 2:15 and the oh-so-loquacious FG/TGL. Just ignore them. It's what Bloomberg and Marty do and so far it has been working.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 2:47 PM

Lovely 2:47! Yes, e-l-e-c-t-e-d officials should i-g-n-o-r-e their consituencies. WONDERFUL...
The era of the "Infallible Executive"...Executive Privilege...
Noblesse Oblige...

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 3:18 PM

"Does anyone every discuss the vacancy issue Metrotech has been plagued with over the years?!"

No, because Metrotech doesnt have a vacancy issue - it is a very successful development by virtually any measure.

"Are the buildings being designed, spec'd and construction managed to be highly efficient, not just "LEEDS" compliant? Me thinks not."

Me thinks you dont have any idea what LEEDS is....Leeds is the most commonly accepted benchmark for rating building's efficency and sustainability.

As for the Q train at 8:30- try going 30min earlier -its empty.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 3:39 PM

2:47 here. Yes elected officials should ignore some of their constituents sometimes. If they ignore too many they they will be held accountable come reelection time. If they are reelected (as both Bloomy and Marty were) then one can assume the majority of the people agree with their policies. This is how the system was designed to work. It is not a direct democracy. Sorry.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 3:56 PM

11:37 you mean 6 lanes total from both ways not 6 lanes on each side, the city has 4 to 5 lanes one way, big difference in the flow on traffic,

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 4:00 PM

To 2:23 PM Guest,

The low rise character of Brooklyn does a lot to promote the sense of neighborhood that is so prevalent in Brooklyn and lacking in Manhattan. The high rise areas of Manhattan are sterile and that's not what a lot of people want for Brooklyn.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 4:55 PM

Metrotech has had a lot of empty space. Heard that Keyspan wanted to give up but couldn't leave politcally. City offices (FDNY) have taken up space. Just like other Ratner buildings (mall), his political friends bail him out.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 5:09 PM

4:55,

I was born and raised in Brooklyn. I know all about the neighborhoods, and I think there are certainly areas (like downtown) that could use some tall buildings. Even when this project is complete, the majority of Brooklyn will remain low-rise.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 5:17 PM

2:47 (who came back to give a lesson at 3:56):
"...elected officials should ignore some of their constituents sometimes. If they ignore too many they they will be held accountable come reelection time."

You seem to fit the profile of someone who probably turns on the tube the minute he wakes up and the minute he walks in the door after work. Do I hear "privileged boomlet", Anyone?

I don't mean to sound "The What"-ish here, but some of us are going to have a VERY RUDE awakening when the dookie going on already out there really starts to hit home hard and impacts us all palpably. It's not just urban myth...people really DID jump out of windows after the 1929 Crash.

I'm sorry you seem to think the once-every-four-year-election is the only time we can/should have a say in the way those elected run the government...very sorry indeed.

Sincerely,
TheGrammarLady

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 5:40 PM

You misunderstand me GrammarLady. But thanks for the insults all the same...

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 5:50 PM

Thank you 5:09. YES, Metrotech has, indeed, a lot of vacant space over time!

3:39 doesn't seem to realize that Ratner had lots of sweetheart leasing deals from the City to cover his a** and make sure FCR had a healthier rent roll and occupancy rate...

And, 3:39...LEEDS is low level and insufficient...in application, it's almost as B.S.-y as carbon trading. It's a points system that gives you credit for big whoopdie stupid merdserie like installing big-deal Eco Star appliances. WOW! Eco Star! Such a load of clap. And sure, there are lots of design features, material choices and construction processes/management that can save energy and materials but even if they are down on paper at the outset, these buildings will MOST PROBABLY not be built to spec or be that well construction-managed. Having worked for one NYC's largest construction companies I've seen it from the inside.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 5:50 PM

2:47 (who came back to give a lesson at 3:56 and give thanks at 5:50):

Please don't feel so smug in some sense of your understanding of "realpolitik" or from an attitude of jaded reality-checkism. If you give up from the start and figure your voice counts at no other time than at the (questionable) ballot box than we might as well close up shop now.

What do elections even count for? Turnout is astonishingly low across the country. For example, does anyone realize Ahnahld (I'll be bahk) was "elected" (TotalRecalled into office) by a tiny portion of the California electorate? It wasn’t even representative. So to give up and think we have no way to determine how our civic lives play out except for a possible chance every four years is...I don't know...sad. No, not “sad”. It is “enlightening” to see how lave-cervelled some people are.

TGL

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 6:01 PM

I'm moving to Downtown Brooklyn pretty soon (Jan 2008). I like the townhouses and brownstones but renting a unit there just sucks. The buildings are great to look at from the outside and I'm sure it is even better to own the entire building but, there is no privacy and noise carries through like paper.

I'll take concrete floors and ceilings over thin wood planks any day like some other poster stated.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 6:12 PM

Every building has "had alot of vacant space over time"-

the issue is the vacancy rate (% of vacancies at any one time) - historically Metrotech has been low and the FDNY offices werent a "bail out" of vacant space - it was built specifically for the FDNY (and only a few blocks from its former DOWNTOWN Bklyn headquaters)

LEEDS is a rating system which has various levels of classifications. Your criticism is stupid - the equivalent of saying that car EPA MPG ratings are dumb because cars that get 10 MPG still get an EPA rating. Some buildings have better LEEDS ratings than others. - your willingness to speak without any knowledge is truly frightening

FSRG

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 6:15 PM

FSRG,
Please get over yourself. We doubt you're truly frightened...even though we just went through Halloween...okay, maybe you've got a Halloween hangover…

You kind of got off on a big LEEDS jag when what I was pointing out is that these towers will probably SCORE low on LEEDS in the end. They may look good on paper for LEEDS but go take an infrared picture of any of these towers (once they're built) on a cold winter's night and "fuhgeddiboudit"!

And anyway, you only serve to enhance what I was pointing out with LEEDS: that it's a rating system...so when developers bandy about "LEEDS Compliant", "LEEDS this and that" it becomes a pretty empty tagline. You need to get to a basic level to state that a building is LEEDS compliant but it can be at a very low level (in terms of making any real impact) so all the excitement around "LEEDS anything", I find, is diluted when I look at the fine print behind any project. And, again, a project may look great on paper but it also needs to be built great in reality.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 6:51 PM

Even if this plan is followed to the letter, 90% of Brooklyn will remain low-rise. People often forget that there's life beyond the brownstone belt.

Posted by: guest at November 2, 2007 9:15 AM

This is over building.LEEDs, no LEEDs these buldings will be junk.There are no schools,Friends and St. Anns doesn't have room for the Yups & their pups.I've been in Boymelgreens buildings on 4th Ave. You will be listening to your neighbors wall mounted flat screen in your 1/2 Mil. studio. Try getting across Flatbush at Tillary, you take your life in your hands, now. This doesn't just effect Downtown the traffic and congestion will be felt for miles.

Posted by: guest at November 3, 2007 9:37 PM

The whole idea of the plan is to have a central area within the city of Brooklyn.Still surrounded by low rise and brownstones.

Posted by: guest at January 7, 2008 10:21 PM