People in Cobble Hill deserve each other.

Posted by: GWH at November 16, 2009 11:41 AM in response to Cobble Hill Neighbors Irked by Norah Jones' Windows

Ratner is going to lose his shirt over this one.

Posted by: GWH at October 8, 2009 11:25 AM in response to Omissions and Lies in Atlantic Yards Study

I think this represents a significant investment on a stretch of 4th ave that could use it. I'm impressed with how much people are investing. Take the new C-town right above the 25th street stop. that is an amenity most neighborhoods would kill for, and the owners made a pretty significant investment to spruce it up.

Posted by: GWH at September 4, 2009 11:29 AM in response to Development Watch: 4th Avenue Best Western

We will never have housing affordability in this city until we add more housing units.

Posted by: GWH at August 21, 2009 11:00 AM in response to Immigrant Groups Fight Sunset Park Rezoning

491 units for a demographic that doesn't really exist anymore (or perhaps never existed): rich young singles that are willing to pay top dollar for a rental in downtown brooklyn. Instead, we should need buildings that can accommodate young professional families.

Posted by: GWH at July 13, 2009 10:45 AM in response to Details Leaked on 111 Lawrence Rents

With prices at The Edge in Wburg slashed to $700 a sq ft, the developer can dream on about those $715 asking prices. $500 a sq ft, more like.

Posted by: GWH at May 12, 2009 12:12 PM in response to Checking In On 500 4th Avenue

Finance Guy,

I'd suggest taking a look at Ed Glaeser's "Why is Manhattan So Expesnsive" from 2004. Glaeser suggests that land use restrictions prevent home prices from reaching what you call the equilibrium ceiling (I hadn't heard that term before).

Posted by: GWH at April 30, 2009 5:44 PM in response to The Ripple Effect of Northside Piers' Price Cuts

...and housing prices in new construction in brooklyn seem to have nothing to do with the actual cost of construction.

Posted by: GWH at April 30, 2009 12:06 PM in response to The Ripple Effect of Northside Piers' Price Cuts

lechacal,

I never said that developers shouldn't be able to make a profit. At $600 a square foot, I'm sure they're still making a handsome profit.

I'm just tired of the argument that high housing costs are a result of union labor:
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20080709/FREE/151713859
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/housing/20080916/10/2647

Thanks for the lesson in market economics.

Posted by: GWH at April 30, 2009 11:34 AM in response to The Ripple Effect of Northside Piers' Price Cuts

Don't let the development crowd tell you that high housing prices is the result of high labor costs or strict regulation. This shows that high housing costs are due to developer greed, looking for a price that is well above construction costs. I mean, if they can cut prices like that, what kind of price premium are they taking in? Unfortunately, the only thing that will bring housing prices to a reasonable level in this city is the construction of more housing. Developers think they can ask such high prices because people are desperate for housing in transit accessible neighborhoods. I've said it before, but I think we need to upzone more neighborhoods, especially those around transit. We need more housing!

Posted by: GWH at April 30, 2009 10:55 AM in response to The Ripple Effect of Northside Piers' Price Cuts

Wow, rock climbing. So much more useful than a grocery store.

Posted by: GWH at April 29, 2009 3:10 PM in response to StreetLevel: Gowanus Warehouse Rocks On

I was reading a scholarly paper by Ed Glaeser from 2004 that discusses Manhattan real estate prices. In 2004, Glaeser was reporting that condos in Manhattan were selling for $600 a square foot. Now, in Brooklyn, new condos are going for 800 a square foot and up. Some of this is attributable to developers being greedy and thinking that they were going to get a certain price that I don't think is realistic. But even at $600 a square foot, you're looking at what prices were in Manhattan only five years ago! Prices are only now coming back down. But prices would not be coming down if there wasn't the recent building boom in places like Williamsburg that produced so much housing stock.

My point is, there is a housing shortage in this city. We need more units. End of story. These downzonings will not help anyone. If there is a subway stop within a quarter mile, building heights should be at 6-8 stories as of right, unless the property has historical significance. Until we increase density, we will never have affordable housing.

Posted by: GWH at April 16, 2009 10:29 AM in response to CB1 Says 'Yea' to Rezoning of North Brooklyn

I'm glad that the mall-like retail portion is going away, but its a shame that we can't rehab the buildings for industrial use.

Industrial uses provides good jobs for those with less than a college education.

Here's an article from the Real Deal that shows industrial land is doing well despite the recession: http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/industrial-market-embracing-real-estates-stepchild-2

According to numbers provided by CBRE, Queens and Brooklyn have a combined total of 155 million square feet of industrial space. Both have a vacancy rate of around 4 percent.

Posted by: GWH at February 26, 2009 11:09 AM in response to Time Equities Bails on Bush Terminal Plans

Today's story in the NYT about Phoenix beverage distributors signing a deal at Pier 7 should give us pause. 600 jobs. I'm guessing of better quality than retail.

I'm bitterly opposed to this sort of project from an aesthetic standpoint, but the NYT story highlights the fact that Red Hook can be a true shipping hub once again, and benefit from the jobs that would be created.

376,00-square-foot mega-mall. Yuck.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/11/nyregion/11redhook.html

Posted by: GWH at February 11, 2009 2:47 PM in response to Thor Leak Reveals Plans for Mall at Red Hook Refinery Site

Right on top of a subway entrance (even better, an exit coming from Manhattan during the evening rush), this market will do great if it can provide quality products and a pleasant environment. The National Supermarket had terrible produce and a distinct trash odor.

Compare this use with the Dunkin' Donuts across the street, that has a parking lot(maybe one car parked there on average) and a drive-thru! To use transit adjacent space for such an auto dependent use is outrageous.

Posted by: GWH at February 3, 2009 2:49 PM in response to Streetlevel: C-Town Takes Over in Greenwood Heights

Ellis is next. I think the other bars and restaurants are in good shape, though.

Posted by: GWH at February 2, 2009 2:33 PM in response to Streetlevel: Vin Rouge Goes Dark

Parking for 700 cars! Unnecessary. This year the NYCDOT released a report that during the boom years of 2000-2007, when employment and population grew steadily, vehicular traffic remained flat while transit and biking grew rapidly. Therefore, just because you're planning for growth in an area, does not mean that you need to go about increasing the amount of parking.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/ssi_report_08_screen.pdf

Posted by: GWH at January 29, 2009 12:19 PM in response to City Secures Rest of Willoughby Square Park Properties

That building is pretty much right next to a subway stop, so the increased density is good. Now if we could only get rid of the parking lot and drive-thru at the Dunkin' Donuts. Land right next to a subway should not be used for such auto-centric uses.

Posted by: GWH at December 16, 2008 4:16 PM in response to Development Watch: 182A 26th Street

Dump truck in the bike lane. Put him on the naughty list, santa.

Posted by: GWH at December 15, 2008 10:48 AM in response to Monday Links

Wow.

Would work for tourists too since it is right on top of a subway stop, 30 minutes downtown, 45 to midtown.

Posted by: GWH at December 4, 2008 4:07 PM in response to Development Watch: Best Western Hits 4th Avenue

Can we please revise the zoning/building code so that garages, if they exist at all, aren't facing the FREAKING STREET!!!!

Posted by: GWH at October 30, 2008 1:57 PM in response to "Tuscan" Townhouses Coming to Red Hook

Maybe they'll give out Mardi Gras beads

Posted by: GWH at October 27, 2008 6:02 PM in response to Streetlevel: "Tiki Hut" Bar in Park Slope Open Today

Umm, limbo contests and ladies' night?

What is this, Daytona Beach?

Lame.

Posted by: GWH at October 27, 2008 2:34 PM in response to Streetlevel: "Tiki Hut" Bar in Park Slope Open Today

This is in Greenwood Heights, in my estimation. Greenwood rules!

Posted by: GWH at October 17, 2008 3:20 PM in response to Streetlevel: Coffee Shop for the South Slope

I agree with dreamking: just what is it that Brooklyn has done that the author feels should be replicated?

I also think that we shouldn't be celebrating the eradication of industrial use land in Brooklyn, as industrial jobs are much higher quality jobs than retail. Check out this organization: http://nyirn.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.viewPage&pageId=661&parentID=655&nodeID=3

Posted by: GWH at October 14, 2008 1:48 PM in response to Brooklyn Solves Retail Puzzle

Quarter Bar

Posted by: GWH at October 3, 2008 2:39 PM in response to Gems of Park Slope

Ha ha ha ha ha! Funny

Posted by: GWH at September 23, 2008 12:45 PM in response to A New Hotel for Red Hook?

$1.5 mill? Not this decade. Also, too close to 4th ave. I think half of the units face 21st and half face 4th. Maybe if it were between 5th and 6th, we could begin to entertain the idea of $1.5.

Posted by: GWH at September 16, 2008 2:56 PM in response to Sales Begin at Greenwood Plaza

Energy independence? How about ditching cars altogether?

Posted by: GWH at September 15, 2008 4:27 PM in response to Closing Bell: Energy Independent Park Slope?

Rossman's on 26th and 3rd rules.

Posted by: GWH at September 15, 2008 3:06 PM in response to Streetlevel: C-Town Coming to Greenwood Heights

Ok, if we get back to the point of the article, if we're talking about creatives and artists, it will definitely be Sunset Park because of all the warehouses that are being used by studios. IN that case, the next L is the R, N, or D.

Posted by: GWH at September 10, 2008 3:06 PM in response to Is the Q Train the New L?

Very good point, Flatbushwacker. BJ's would not exist if people chose not to shop there. However, it also wouldn't exist if it couldn't count on a dispersed base of customers from a large area to drive into the neighborhood, fill up their trunks, and leave.

Taking personal choice one step further, people can also choose to take place in the public review process and get the project stopped.

Most likely, the thing will be built. Hopefully, though, we can save urban new york.

Posted by: GWH at August 28, 2008 5:08 PM in response to More Big Box Shops for Red Hook

I just can't share your apathy, smeyer418, and say "so be it." With all due respect, we just seem to value different things. You still "drive down on Saturdays." I like to ride my bike around the streets and warehouses.

I just cannot stomach turning Red Hook into a little suburban shopping center. A lot of what makes it so unbearable to me is aesthetic. I'm here because I value the urban lifestyle, something that does not include driving to big-box retail outlets. It means getting to know my neighborhood stores and the people who work there. It's a romantic notion I have about the sense of urbanity and neighborhood that was idealized by Jane Jacobs. Every BJ's or Costco or Target that is grafted onto New York destroys some of that.

But I also don't think that these stores are good for the city economically. They take the money that is spent here and ship it to their headquarters located in who knows where. They destroy opportunity for local merchants, take up space that could be used much more effectively for housing or for light-industrial uses or even artist spaces.

Lastly, people don't just need jobs, they need vocations, and BJ's does not provide that.

Posted by: GWH at August 28, 2008 4:07 PM in response to More Big Box Shops for Red Hook

I don't speak for anyone except myself. I'm frustrated that the spread of big-box continues to happen here, from a possible Costco on the Upper West Side to Target in East Harlem.

I can only speak for the misguided focus on these type of low-wage jobs as support for projects that, in the long term, have negative effects on wages and opportunity in this city.

Flatbushwacker: I think you can tell the difference between a department store that is woven into the fabric of the city and one that destroys it. We're not talking about a department store with numerous entrances on several streets that harmonizes with its Midtown neighborhood. We're talking about losing valuable waterfront property in Northern Brooklyn to be a parking lot and retail outlet. We let Ikea fill in a much needed dry dock to build a parking lot it doesn't use. Jobs in ship repair are infinitely more valuable than those in retail (but enough about the jobs). I like the Fairway project because of its use of an old building, if it weren't for the parking fields that surround it.

Posted by: GWH at August 28, 2008 2:01 PM in response to More Big Box Shops for Red Hook

I'd like to pretend it won't happen.

But press like this, that supposes it is a done deal, does not help.

Public Review process - maybe something can be done.

Posted by: GWH at August 28, 2008 1:41 PM in response to More Big Box Shops for Red Hook

This will be fought and will never be built. It is time to reclaim the urban nature of New York City. No more suburbanization! I don't agree with the argument posited by smeyer418 that this use is better than the alternative.

Large-scale retail outlets are permanently scarring the urban fabric of this city, by paving over the waterfront to put in parking lots and ugly warehouse retail buildings, destroying neighborhood retail, encouraging automobile use, and driving down wages and opportunity for middle and low-income New Yorkers. You can't honestly pretend that jobs offered in large-scale retail outlets are good employment opportunities. Light-industrial uses are much better employment opportunities for those without college educations. By putting in a retail operation that has such vast advantages over local establishments, you drive out the entrepreneurs who start up new small business and give them the opportunity to actually own something, rather than work for a conglomerate.

Ruin someone else's city, please.

Posted by: GWH at August 28, 2008 1:23 PM in response to More Big Box Shops for Red Hook

We got enough Mexican food, or "southwest" over here.

French food, please. Or seafood. Or Thai.

Posted by: GWH at August 26, 2008 3:35 PM in response to Streetlevel: South Slope Gets a New Restaurant