Development Watch: 159 Myrtle Avenue

Very exciting. Don't know about the Toy Factory and the others (much be very noisy) that are going to be eclipsed by the tower, but it's sure is on a roll.

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 1:06 PM

Next to BFC 150 Myrtle, workers are taking down the wall boards where the parking lot is and the backhoe seems to be digging. Does anyone know if Catsimadis is going ahead with the planned construction? Anyone with info?

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 1:13 PM

I noticed lots of Con Ed trucks at the site the other day. Looked like a major operation--new service?

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 1:20 PM

400 ft height limit / 42 stories - 9" slab between floors = 8'8" ceilings. Lovely.

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 2:03 PM

I can't find any building permits (or even applications) for this site on the DOB site. What am I doing wrong?

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 2:48 PM

It they build as fast as they did on their buildings on Houston and the Bowery, people will be living there before you know it. These guys seem to throw up their buildings in record time.

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 3:16 PM

Never mind, I found the building permit under 343 Gold St.
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/JobsQueryByNumberServlet?requestid=4&passjobnumber=302356073&passdocnumber=01

393 ft, 41 stories, 627 apartments.

The building will have a 17,475-square-foot plaza and parking for 252 cars (!!! -- yikes).

It has 18 apartments per floor on floors 2-16, 15 per floor on floors 17-34, and 11 per floor on floors 35-42.

It will also have retail space, a fitness room, and a "community room" on the ground floor.

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 3:26 PM

Anything that keeps the cars off the street.

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 3:41 PM

Building parking encourages people to have cars at all. If this building didn't have parking, many fewer tenants would have cars; that would be better for everyone.

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 3:55 PM

Please call Philip Henn

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 4:17 PM

Well, 3:55, to be more specific, building parking encourages people WITH cars to move into the building (vis a vis another building without parking)...it does not encourage people to "HAVE" cars...

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 4:18 PM

4:18: Yes, it definitely encourages people to have cars.

First, consider people who already live in this building without cars. They may be considering whether to get a car. If their building has parking, they're much more likely to do so, rather than being repelled by the difficulty of parking.

Second, even if you're right that it only encourages people who have cars to move in, they've got to move from somewhere. Wherever they move from will suddenly have one fewer car trying to park there, and parking will get easier for everyone else. When parking gets easier for others, their former neighbors will be more likely to get cars.

The total number of cars in the city is quite closely constrained by the total amount of available parking. Increasing available parking directly increases the number of people with cars.

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 4:23 PM

Hi 4:30, I'm 4:18....I don't know whether or not there is a specific study. However, in my case, my wife and I do have a car and we have a parking space at University Towers. When we decided to move, we picked ORO over Forte, Rockwell Place and the Atlantic specifically because ORO will have parking and the others do not.

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 6:10 PM

It's too bad this building will be so ugly. Lots of squandered architectural opportunities around there.

Posted by: guest at March 11, 2008 10:29 PM