Development Watch: 339 Greene Avenue Revisited

Are there propertyline windows being closed in by the new construction? It appears so from the photo.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 12:57 PM

this has got to be one of the slowest projects around. why are there no renderings floating around? awe know it'll be 12 stories, but now the question is-will this be an imrovement to our neighborhood or not? either way, 12 stories is a lot of new people moving onto one block. (i heard that the owner of choice is opening a mexican spot on the corner of franklin/greene...i can tell you that the community supports this wholeheartedly!)

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 1:02 PM

Watch all the self entitled brownstone/townhouse a**hats claiming it's "too tawl" and wanting to restrict the number of units and cry fowl about the height in this building. You may be lucky to only pay around $3,000 to $4,000 property tax on your 4,000 sf to 6,000 sf building but us condo owners will being paying a lot more than that for our 700 sf to 1,200 sf unit and the more units in the building means lower comon charges.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 1:06 PM

fine. why so tightly wound, 1:06? i haven't heard people complain about the height as much as wanting to know what it will look like? a big, beautiful building is one thing, and an ugly, fedders nightmare is another.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 1:14 PM

Nobody wants a big ugly fedders building except the developer. Not the people that will be "forced" to buy due to not enough supply and limited choices or the neighbors of said building.

I'm "tightly wound" because I've snapped in regards to practically no choice in regards to housing in Brooklyn because all the nimbys restrict building housing for people that need it. Instead of creating a architectural review board and forcing developers to build aesthetically good looking buildings, they instead foster the creation of ugly, cheap, pancaked floored junk.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 1:25 PM

Owning a $1 million property/condo/co-op/townhouse makes you hardly rich. A million is nothing these days. To talk about the million dollars when we were kids (i.e. 10 years ago) you need 7-10 million in todays dollars. A million today is waht $200,000 thousand was back then.

Rich is if you're worth/have over $10 million. I can afford $900k condo but I'm stretched financially and working like a dog 60-70 hours a week.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 3:01 PM

I pay $7,800 a year on tax and without the J-51 tax abatement and when it expires it will cost me over $15,000 a year for my 1,100 sf condo. Yet a person that owns over 5,000 sf brownstone only pays around $3,000 a year and they don't have to pay a comon charge. And these are the nimbys that are restricting supply, implemting height restrictions, creating very low ceiling height developments for us to choose from.

I hate brownstone owners! Screw them. I hope a kid spray paints your house and you move to Westchester or NJ.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 3:10 PM

Do brownstone owners really pay that much less than conod and co-op owners? That is some messed up system!

And these brownstone owners are the ones the kids and they pay hardly anything for the schools and services from the city and yet they demand to restrict supply for the rest of us?

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 3:36 PM

Is there a rendering of this property Brownstoner?

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 4:10 PM

To 3:10: you made a poor economic decision and you expect the rest of us to bail you out? And you are angry? You have no one to blame but your self. Why would you enter into such a transaction?

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 4:26 PM

@4:26.
That is just the nature of the beast for condo buying and I don't feel it to be a poor economic decision. What is BS are townhouse owners being nimbys and restricting supply and crying about a building next to them that might be taller than their own and only paying a few thousand in real estate taxes. Townhouse owners are like rent control people, they feel entilted to lower rent or in this case lower taxes for vastly more space.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 4:37 PM

The question I think isn't why 3:10 is paying more in taxes but why a townhouse owner is paying so much less than than a condo owner with so much less space.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 4:39 PM

Bail me out? What the h*ll are you talking about? Just pay your share jacka$$!

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 4:40 PM

We do pay our share. You don't. You get the benefits of a livable neighborhood without paying full price.

Feel free to save your money and put a big downpayment on a brownstone and then you too can reap the "benefits" of lower property taxes.

As for being a nimby, buying a brownstone in this city is a major investment. You want me to roll over and die because you can't get what you want?! Grow up and stop being a cry baby. Some hideous piece of crap cuts into my investment and I would be a fool to let some trashy developer get their way and their money and run while I sit back and watch my investment and hard work amount to nothing.

There are zoning laws on the books that are regularly violated unless the nieghborhood complains. Idiotic owners of Fedders crap are dumb enough in the first place to buy one of these dorm rooms, so you have nerve telling be to back off. You have already displayed a lack of sense in buying turd piles like this.

Think of your property tax bill as an idiot tax. The higher it is, the dumber you are.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 5:44 PM

You can also ask why commercial real estate rates are so much higher than private homes. Why can I deduct my mortgage interest but renters can't? Why should I pay AMT? The tax code isn't fair to all.
And is you are a reader of this column you know that the city isn't doing much to prevent building sites where works are killed or injured, developers scamming the system with selfcertification and dozens of other questionable practices. I think the city is in the pocket of many developers. Look at Ratner and what he is getting away with.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 6:08 PM

Ignore the troll that raises the NIMBY strawman.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 6:15 PM

bknykev,

do you have info that this will be other than a middle-class building? do you have knowledge about cost?

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 7:58 PM

5:44 you are the biggest douchbag I have seen on this site. Do the neighborhood and city a favor by slipping on your slippery, icy stoop.

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 8:52 PM

The BS people are all pissed off because the neighborhood got more populated, they can't park their cars at night, can't cut their curbs for a dirveway, and spend a half hour doing circles around the block on a good day or park blocks away and then walk home. Those that don't use thier cars regularly then have to play the alternate side game. The rest pay, either for parking or summonses. Meanwhile, many of the larger condo developments come with underground or rear parking. Then they sit there eating their granola and sprouts as "Joe Wall Street" pulls into his designated spot and heads to the elevator. What an irony, screwed twice. Build More!!!!

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 9:03 PM

proposed uses for the first floor include a daycare and some sort of health care facility. also looks like they want an under ground garage for 50+ cars.

(http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/JobsScheduleAServlet?requestid=6&passjobnumber=301737388&passdocnumber=01&allbin=3055798)

Posted by: guest at December 10, 2007 11:43 PM

8:52, go back to the square state you came from. Kansas wants you back. Answer the call.

Posted by: guest at December 11, 2007 2:27 PM