I think the problem you're having with that quote is that you are assuming that I meant that, in general, preservationists don't concern themselves with financial feasibility. That's not what I meant. I know many preservationists personally who deal with those issues all the time. That quote was about this specific debate. If you look back and see all that has been written about this debate, whether in the postings or the comments, the preservationists are talking about the layout, and the knock-it-down folks are talking about financial feasiblity. The two sides are talking past each other. It wasn't a general assumption, it was an observation of the history of this one argument.

Have a nice weekend to all.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 4:53 PM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

But bxgirl - in none of your arguments have you ever taken financial feasiblity into account. You just dismiss with an "i'm sure it can be figured out" kind of attitude.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 3:13 PM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

I don't think you characterize my viewpoint correctly on severl fronts. I actually came to this project from the position of "How could we save these buildings and turn them into something cool?" I really did. But after spending some time trying to figure that out, I realized that it wasn't possible for all the reasons I've mentioned before. So then I moved on to "OK, the buildings aren't saveable, what's the best thing to do for the site?". The problem for us (you and me) is that you don't accept that the buildings aren't saveable, whease I have. And since i think that saving the buildings is a moot point I'm more focused on what happens next. I've tried with all my might to help you see why I am so thoroughly convinced that they are not saveable, but none of it is convincing to you. Either because I am not explaining myself clearly, you're not open to hearing what i have to say, or some combination.

Also I never deneigrated you for having ideas. When we first started getting into this I listened to your ideas and patiently tried to point out to you why those ideas were not realistic. Rather then describe how you could turn those ideas into reality you decided to tell me that i had no imagination. I also have worked in non-profit and have several times accomplished things that others told me were impossible. I think it's great to have ideas, but the next step is to figure out how to make those idea a reality, which is what I was challenging you to do, and what you've never actually done.

I'm not sure exactly what point you were trying to make above about the supermarket and what relevence to this discussion the demolition of the supermarket on Myrtle street has. But, like I've said the reason the i believe the buildings need to be demolished is not to build a supermarket, it's because they are too far gone. The supermarket is just what comes next. Kind of like the Brooklyn Flea under the brooklyn bridge. The flea was not why they demolshed the purchase building, it was just what comes next.

And finally (because I need to go home) i don't think it's right to say that the buildings were left to rot intentionally. If you've ever had any interaction with the National Guard or the Army Coprs, you will not find it hard to believe that there was not evil intent or forthought that went into this. It was just complete incompetence on their part.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 3:10 PM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

Streber - I agree with your last comment. The fact that the National Guard and Army corps have left them to rot for the past 30 years is idiotic and borderline criminal. I don't think anyone on this blog has ever argued anything to the contrary - so i'm not sure what your point is.

It is unfair to blame the Navy Yard though, because as has been pointed out many different times by several posters (really you got work on that reading comprehension) the Navy Yard doesn't own Admirals Row.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 2:27 PM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

Fair enough bxgirl. We've gone at it enough times and there's no need to rehash that again. But i take issue with you saying that I don't listen to to the other side. I listen very closely and often give point by point refutations. It's you who repeats the same arguments over and over without incoporating the points that i make.

For example, on the supermarket. As i've said before, this was never a discussion of "where could we put a supermarket", It was always a discussion of "what can we do with this site?" And once you realize that rehabbing the buildings doesn't work and that they need to be demolished then you start looking at what you can do on this site that best serves the community and the navy yard, and in this case a supermarket is a good answer to that question. Are there other places to put a supermarket? yes. But for some reason, that hasn't happened.

Finally, as you've often said the world is full of impossible things. I fully admit that. There are things out there that some have claimed are impossible that were somehow made to be. But that doesn't change the fact that many of the things that people said were impossible NEVER came to be because the naysayers were right. All I'm saying is that just because sometimes people who claim something is impossible are wrong doesn't change the fact that often times those people are exactly right. So in the end, "the world is full of impossible things" adds nothing to the discussion. Because the crux of the issue is "Is this one of the cases where the naysayers are right or where the dreamers are right?". Well let's take a look. The naysayers said these buildings were too far gone - about to fall down. The dreamers said "nonsense these buildings are in much bette shape than you are making them out to be". Now one of the buildings collapsed under it's own weight. To me that starts tipping the scales to make me thing "hmmmm maybe the naysayers are right about this particular instance".

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 2:14 PM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

Streber - like I said - I don't work for the navy yard. Once again, repeating the lie that i work for the navy yard doesn't make it true. Also as you might recall, thei fire happened at night around 7PM i believe. Not really during working hours, so that whole premise that one would only see the fire if they were working at the navy yard is false. How many times do i have to catch you in basic falsehoods before you realize that you are making yourself look like an idiot.

Also, I don't know what you're talking about regarding me not using my knowledge of the fire when i talk about the collapse. Go back an re-read this thread. I've continually said that although this building had a fire, and the water damage from that fire probably moved things along, it does not mean that the difference in building conditions is signficant, since all of the other buildings have also been subject to being soaked by the elements for the past several decades. You need to work on your reading comprehension kid.

Also the suggestion to leave the building alone is idiotic. What purpose would it serve? So that you can have a romantic moment as you walk by them everyday> What happens when the next one that collpases causes one of those very large trees in the front yards to tip over and fall into flushing and kills someone? Or when the next building catches fire and it's not so easily controlled and spreads to other navy yard buildings and causes millions of dollars of property damage? Only an idiot would value their own aesthetic enjoyment over other people's safety. Also - if these buildings are left to rot then this valuable land is not put into use creating jobs and serving the neighboring community. It's nice that you have a job and have services near where you live - why would you deny that to the people who live near this building?

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 1:06 PM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

Sam - you're probably right. There's a big hole in the roof with a tree growing through it. Also one of the walls that you can't see from the street is seriously buckling. Many of the bricks have delaminated (fallen off) and are sitting in a big pile between the building and Quarters K. But for some weird reason, this is one of the buildings that the Feds identified to be saved. I understand that this building was originally a timber shed, but was used in the 70's by the kids who lived with their families in these houses as their own personal ice skating rink. Very cool.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 12:21 PM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

I do not work for the navy yard corporation. I've explictly said that beofre and I'll repeat. Also, as I've said before, I do know some of those folks and have talked to them about the site extensively. I've also been lucky enough to go inside the buildings.

Your comment about Fairway is stupid, espcially since this notion of putting a supermarket on this site goes back to the mid 90's, well before fairway developed. The poor people in this neighborhood are actually in favor of this supermarket. Any money the navy yard makes does not go and make anyone rich - they are a non profit entity whose mission is to manage the navy yard. Anymoney they make would get poured into rebuilding the infrastructure in the yard and replacing roofs and windows in other buildings that still have some economic life in them. Please tell me why that is a bad thing.

I actually stood on flushing avenue that cold january day and watched the NYFD put out the fire in that building. DId you? I doubt it. So once again you are relying on your second or third hand knowledge instead of my firsthand knowledge.Calling it a major fire is disingenuous. It was only on the top floor of the building and was out in a couple of hours. No doubt the fire accelerated the detrioration somewhat, but not significantly. I'm telling you that walking around quarters c and any of the others around a year ago, you'd be hard pressed to tell which had the fire (except for the peeling plaster).

You can repeat that canard about how much worse this building was than the others as many times as you want, but again - it's truthiness. Repeating in every post doesn't make it true. This building collapse is an excellent indicator of the general state of almost all of these buildings.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 12:09 PM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

Also - I have walked by these buildings several times a week for the past 10 years. I have been to Flushing ave. WHatver so it's 45 feet away, I was makeing a point.

Yes this building has deteriorated but so have they all. There are plenty of phots of the exteriors of the other buildings showing how their windows have fallen out over the past several years too. For many years there was a pack of wild dogs that lived on the site - I am sure that that didn't help things and that they didn't exclusively cause damage to Quarters C. Photos of specific elements of the interiors may look nice, but that tells you nothing of the buildings actual condition. Are you seriously comparing your understanding of the building having looked at some photos of Flickr to my understanding - having actually been inside all of these buildings?

Even after today's collapse? Have you not learned the lesson? The people who say these buildings are falling down in front of our eyes are right. They've been inside and seen the actuall buildings. They are not making judgements based on flickr.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 11:35 AM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

Seriously Streber - that stupid conspiracy theory innuendo just makes you look like an ass. WHat do you mean to imply? Why don't you just say it outright. You are accusing me of having some sort of financial stake in this.

I don't.

My motivation is that I think that, as hearbreaking as it may be, everyone has to grow up and admit that they dropped the ball on this one and it's too late. The feds let this thing get too far gone and then they Navy Yard gets blamed for being the only ones with the balls to actually admit it and call it like they see it. My motivation is that it bothers me to see and hear people who don't know what they're talking about chastise those who do. My motivation is that I don't want to see public money go towards some disneyworld version of preservation when it could actually go towards much more worthy projects. Take that $50 million and spend it on the hospital or the surgeon's house - buildings that are actually savable and could wind up becoming a beautiful back lot for steiner studios and contribute to both the culture and economy of Brooklyn.

Isn't that enough motivation for you?

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 11:29 AM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

Streber - this is not the only building to have many of its windows gone. You are juding only by what you cans see of one facade from 100 feet away. If you were able to go inside or see the other facades you'd see that the other buildings are not much better off.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 11:12 AM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

All of you people who are saying that the facade was falling off after the fire are not being very accurate. The buildings are brick buildings whith a thin layer of plaster over the front. The fire (or the water, really) caused the plaster to come off. WHile this certainly looks striking, the plaster has no actual structural value. The reason this building fell (and the reason the others will soon) is becuase of the giant gaping holes in the roof that let in rain and snow. The cycle of freezing and defrosting has systematically rotted away the wood joists and other structural elements over the years. This building is not the only one with holes in the roof. The timber shed has a hole so big that a tree is actuallty growing through it.

I don't want to sound like a cheerleader for historic buildings falling down. I actually love historic buildings and understand the romantic impulses that these buildings have stirred up in alot of people.

But what has always bothered me about this issue is that people who have no idea about what's actually going inside these buildings have made comments about how sure they are that the buildings can be saved and that the Navy Yard was overstating their state of decay. It always had a ring of "truthines" to it. I want it to be true, therefore it's true.

So what I am cheerleading for today is the emergence of the actual truth. These buildings are in a very serious state of decay. Rebuilding them will be very expensive and, in the end, you will just be building replicas that look like these buildngs but are 95% new structures. No one has proposed a viable use for the rebuilt buildings anyway, and no one has identified a source to subsidize the tremendous cost. We live in a world of limited resources for important things like preservation and therefore we all have to perform a sort of triage. These are not the buildings to spend money on. There are more worthwhile historic buildings in Brooklyn. Hell, there are more worthwhile historic buildings in the Navy Yard.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 11:06 AM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

Still up on my high horse Jon. You've been up on yours on this issue for a couple of years now, So I don't think it's fair for you to ask me to come down after only a couple of minutes. I'll make you a deal, though. When you get down, I'll get down.

I think you're having some trouble with your cut and paste function because I didn't see an apology anywhere in your post.

Your comment about it being about cost is true for this house too. Andrew Kimball is 100% right. If they had wanted to, the Navy Yard could have spent millions of dollars rebuild Quarters C before it collapsed on itself. Hell, if they wanted to spend even more money, they could even still rebuild it now that it's collapsed. But even you would admit that that would be a waste of money now. The problem is that you think that the others are in such better condition. Yes this one had a fire a few years back. But i'll tell you, I've been in all the buildings since after the fire, and they were all in such bad shape that you couldn't tell which one had the fire.

The reason the fire contributed to the collapse of this building was not because of the fire itself, but from the water damage from soaking the building to put out the fire. The thing is, none of these buildings is watertight. They all have significant holes in their roofs and get soaked evertime it rains and snows. The additional soaking from putting out the fire may have made it the first to go, but the others are not too far behind.

What will it take for you to admit that these buildings are so far gone that it's just not worth it?

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 10:46 AM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

OK I think all of you posters who've been claiming that Navy Yard folks don't know what they're talking about when they say that these buildings are too far gone to be worth restoring should step up to the plate and admit you were wrong. Come on Bxgirl, Montrose Morris, SHahn Anderson, even you John Butler. Let's hear from you. For your convenience, I've posted some text that you can just copy and paste into your comment:

"I was wrong. I had never been inside these buildings and have no technical expertise about structural integrity. Still, I was conceited enough to think that I knew better than people who had first hand knowledge of the actual conditions and what it would take to restore them. I called them lazy, unimaginative and greedy, when in fact, they were just being cautious and looking out for the public good. We are all lucky that this collapse did not spill out to the street and harm innocent bystanders."

Your welcome.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at June 19, 2009 10:20 AM in response to Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage

Rob - You realize that in order to go the flea you'll have to leave the 5-block radius of your apartment. I thought you didn't do that?

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at April 17, 2009 1:32 PM in response to Weekend Events

I just want to say that I am absoultely shocked - SHOCKED I tell you - to hear both bxgirl and Montrose Morris come out in favor of preservation. Who would have thought it?

Benson did a pretty good job of representing the caveats to Moe's argument. In general I tend to agree with Moe that re-using old buildings is one of the tools in the "green" tool kit. It is not, however, the only one. Every problem is unique and we run into problems when we try to use the same tool to solve differnt problems.

Kudos to bxgirl, for being flexible in face of benson's excellent points.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at April 7, 2009 2:52 PM in response to Preservation Makes It To The NYT Editorial Page

Heath Ledger

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at April 1, 2009 4:30 PM in response to Closing Bell: First Inductees into the Brooklyn Hall of Fame

One of the fascinating things about this whole debate has always been the way in which the 2 sides are talking past eachother instead of talking to eachother.

BNYDC has been making the argument that they can't restore the houses because it is not financially feasible. They've basically said that there is no use out there that will generate the revenue that can justify the huge renovation costs (I think the number has been $30-$40 million). Therefore, in order to save these buildings it would require significanct public subsidy. They have not found any source for the public subsidy, and even if they did, there are other preservation projects in the Yard (like the hospital and the surgeon's house) that they deem more worthy of funds and are higher up on their list. Once they accept the fact the the houses are not savable, they looked into what would work there from a market perspective, and have determined that a supermarket is a feasible use that would also serve a community need.

The preservationist did not respond with any real ideas of uses that would make the renovation financially feasible. They didn't come back with any sources of subsidy for this rehab. And they never came back with an argument for why we should be spending money on these buildings instead of on the hospital and surgeon's house, which are much more important landmarks. Instead, they came back with drawings showing that you could shoehorn the supermarket in without demolishing the buildings. There was no financial analysis, and norecognition of the fact that no supermarket developer would want to operate in that configuration where they were surrounded by crumbling buildings. And no supermarket developer was going to subsidize the cost to renovate the building.

In short, the preservationists acted as if the issue were about layout of the site and not about financial feasibility end use - which is what it's always been about.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at April 1, 2009 1:19 PM in response to Ugly Politics May Trump Reason in Admiral's Row Saga

I've been reading this site since the beginning. Commented as a guest at first, and when the registration requirement started i basically became a lurker for a while. I'll admit I was intimidated by seeing the same names all over the place and feeling like I was crashing a private party. Eventually I realized there was nothing to be intimidated by and jumped in. Recently, I've pulled back - mostly because I've started to ask myself why I should bother getting myself worked up getting into arguments with people I don't even know. SO I created a second name, and only wade in every now and then with one-off comments, but make sure to never get dragged into ongoing arguments or discussions.

That being said, I've been thinking about b'stoner now vs bstoner then. Fisrt of all, I remember thinking in the beginning that alot of the commenting was very harsh and just outright mean. In the end, I think registration was a good idea and definitely raised the level of discourse. THis is definitely one of the more polite forums on the web. The OP has also definitely helped in the regard.

Reading through all 200-something comments here it strikes me that my favorite commenter back in the day was babs. SHe was great and always had something useful to say. Nowadays she rarely pops up and thats a shame. She's the kind of commenter you want to attract more of.

My favorite more recent commenter is 11217. I can't think of another commenter who I agree with more than him (or her). I was kind of sad to read that he/she has also taken a commenting holiday. If you wanted to start a blog and only allow babs and 11217 to comment, I would be your biggest fan.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 28, 2009 9:16 PM in response to Let's Talk About Commenting

I'm sure that the Brooklyn Paper completely made up the notion that this change in ownership could affect the condo plans. Wasn't it only about 5 weeks ago that City Parks Commissioner Benepe got up at a public meeting and wholeheartedly endorsed the park's funding scheme? DOn't you think that this neogtiation between the City and the State was going on while the that was happening? I see n oreason why that wold change.

Unfortunately the Brooklyn papers has no credibility when it comes to reporting on the this park. Their basic philosophy seems to be that if they repeat the lie that the park is in trouble often enough, it will become true. Meanwhile, I walked across the Brooklyn Bridge this morning, which gave me a clear view of the truckloads of dirt that have been brought in over the past week to create the new landscape at pier 1. It's actually happening - right sam?

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 13, 2009 11:17 AM in response to City Looking to Take Over Brooklyn Bridge Park from State

Brooklyn Curious - I think you're right on the mark. FG is definitely a more desireable neighbrohood now. The housing stock is generally nice, there are more cool shops and restaurants, and FOrt Green Park is one of my faves in the city. Prices are a bit lower in Prospect Heights. Vanderbilt, Underhill and Washington have started to sprout up a cool collection of stores and restaurants, but still have a way to go. Given the current economic climate, I'd say that it'll take alot longer than I had originally hoped. Depending on where specifically you are in PH or FG subway access could be better in either neighborhood. PLus PH is closer to prospect park. I would say that in 5-8 PH will be were FG is today. By then, FG will fully park slopified. Good luck. There's no bad choice, they are both great neighborhoods. You might also look at Clinton Hill, which is similar to PH, with less subway access.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 10, 2009 10:49 AM in response to The Times Wraps Its Arms Around Fort Greene

Speaking of Ft Green restaurants - I've been meaning to stop into Red Bamboo on Dekalb for a while now, but haven't gotten around to it. Is it any good?

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 9, 2009 4:58 PM in response to The Times Wraps Its Arms Around Fort Greene

And yet, bxgirl - when I made the same criticism of Rob a couple of days ago - you jumped down my throat and called me the biggest jerk on brownstoner. Well, welcome to the "Rob should just STFU" club. Plenty of room.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 9, 2009 4:55 PM in response to The Times Wraps Its Arms Around Fort Greene

Prodigal Son - Accent mark has always been there.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 6, 2009 3:01 PM in response to Forte Marketing Effort Gets a Makeover

Anyone here surprised at all that Rob had his 28th and 29th birthday parties at hooters?

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 6, 2009 11:03 AM in response to Another Rumor: Fast Food for Gage & Tollner Space

My first brownstoner shout out! Now I've got to work on quote of the day...

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 5, 2009 5:13 PM in response to Inside Third & Bond: Week 74

Well, you're going to have venture out there this time next year when you have to pay off your debt by taking a dive into the East River....

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 4, 2009 3:33 PM in response to BREAKING: Koval Resigns From Conservancy

BHO - Koval is the president of the Conservancy, not of the Development Corporation - which is headed up by Regina Myer. The conservancy is basically an advocacy organization that has also provided some free programming in the park. Koval's resignation, while interesting, says nothing about the state of park construction. If Regina Myer were resigning, then you might have a point. Still it's sad because Koval has been a tireless advocate for the park.

By the way - have you walked by the park today? Lots of activity on Pier 1...

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 4, 2009 2:32 PM in response to BREAKING: Koval Resigns From Conservancy

Former Atlanta Falcons QB Michael Vick?

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 26, 2009 3:53 PM in response to Inside Third & Bond: Week 73

Yeah - the under 25 pound thing never made sense to me. I've got a tiny dog in the apt next door to mine and it's the loudest yappiest dog out there. I would much rather live next door to a 25+ lb lab or golden retriever. At the end of the day, why not just make sure that your demising walls are soundproof enough that neighbors won't hear eachother's noise (including dogs and Rob porn-star neighbros) and then this issue goes away...

Rob - this is what developing a project is like. It's hundreds of inter-related mini topics. Some are interesting, some are passable, some are tedious and boring. The point of this whoel "third & bond " thing is to show exactly that. It's not all sexy sales offices, granite countertops and million dollar prices...

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 26, 2009 12:15 PM in response to Inside Third & Bond: Week 73

BRG - watch what you say criticizing Rob. His mommy, bxgirl, may jump down your throat and remind you that this is a blog.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 26, 2009 12:08 PM in response to Open Thread

ennuiater - me too. the other day as i passed by, workers were dumping wheelbarrows full of wet concrete directly into the basement window.
Also - the park won't be boarded up for long. They are actually installing drainage and astro turf (to replace the concrete) for the soft ball fields.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 23, 2009 1:28 PM in response to Atlantic Yards Case Starts in State Appeals Court Today

No problem rob. I respect the fact that at least you seem to have a sense of humor...

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 23, 2009 1:09 PM in response to Atlantic Yards Case Starts in State Appeals Court Today

ennuiater -
Agreed. These are pretty nice houses. The ones to the right always depressed me a little. But someone's been renovating one of them over the past several months, and I'm trying to be optimistic that the "bones" of the houses are good enough that with a little TLC they can be nice. They remind me in a lot of ways of the houses just north of the old stone house in park slope. Of course Ratner already had his way and demolished the houses just to the left of this photo.

bxgirl - thanks for reminding me that there are posters on this site even more annoying than rob.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 23, 2009 12:57 PM in response to Atlantic Yards Case Starts in State Appeals Court Today

that should be made, not maid.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 23, 2009 12:37 PM in response to Atlantic Yards Case Starts in State Appeals Court Today

Right bxgirl. Because I'm the only one who comments when there are inane posts. Please.

I'm not allowed to tell someone to STFU when they annoy me? Says who? Looks like you were doing just that in your last post. Who died and maid you the arbiter of what people are allowed to post.

I'm really just trying to point out to Rob that there a more effective, mature, and less selfish way of becoming an informed citizen than the way he's been doing it. This isn't really about you. Not sure why you feel the need to stick your nose in it. If Rob's got a problem with my comment, I'm sure he's able to respond himself with your mothering...

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 23, 2009 12:36 PM in response to Atlantic Yards Case Starts in State Appeals Court Today

I don't mean to discourage people from asking questions - I love that people ask questions. Lord knows that I've done my share of both answering and asking questions on this site.

What bugs me is rob's consistent pattern of asking people to explain complicated issues to him in one sentence. If a topic comes up on brownstoner that I don't know enough about and am curious, first I google it and try to figure it out myself before bugging people about it. Asking people for help is something you do only after you've tried to help yourself- unless you're a lazy,immature teenager. I'm not doing a character assasination simply because he asked a question. I'm expressing frustration based on a several-month consistent pattern of behavior.

But whatever, if you want to deal with this crap - feel free. It looks like you and rob were made for eachother.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 23, 2009 12:02 PM in response to Atlantic Yards Case Starts in State Appeals Court Today

Actually Rob, I got a great night's sleep last night. Best in a months really. I'm just tired of your intellectual laziness.

Bxgirl - please don't encourage this kind of behavior. If people keep spoonfeeding him, he's never gonna actually make any effort to figure this stuff out himself.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 23, 2009 11:00 AM in response to Atlantic Yards Case Starts in State Appeals Court Today

Rob - once again you show why we should just ignore your posts.

There's no one-sentence summary of Atlantic Yards - one of the most important and complicated development issues to hit Brooklyn in decades. I honestly can't believe you've been on this blog this long and haven't taken the time to figure this out.

There are many resources on the web you can go to catch up on this issue. Why not spend some effort to educate yourself rather than have people spoonfeed you. This is why some people still insist that you're a 16 year old. Go spend a couple of hours reading the Atlantic Yards Report.

Congrats on finally going to prospect park. Next on your list: Go to a performance at BAM, stroll through the botanic gardins, try out the Brooklyn Museum of Arts, walk around downtown, basically try and leave the 5-block radius of your apt.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 23, 2009 10:13 AM in response to Atlantic Yards Case Starts in State Appeals Court Today

Even the top guy at the Navy yard does not get a bonus.

Also I'm pretty sure that EDC mangers do not get bonuses anymore either. They used to, but there there was some article about it in the press in the late 90's and it created a scandal, so they stopped doing it. They may have re-instituted it, but I doubt that.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 20, 2009 2:32 PM in response to Inside the Naval Hospital

Sam - dead wrong. I happen to know for a fact that Navy Yards managers do not earn any bonuses. Navy Yard is a non-profit. All proceeds are invested in the facility. In general you seem to be pretty informed. Not sure why you feel the need to make stuff like that up.

Also - clearly having an engineer produce designs to connect the buildings to utilites is not extremely complicated (though it would obviously take more the the couple of hours you describe). The difficulty is in figuring out how to pay for it. Both buildings are relatively far from Flsuhing Ave, so it would be a pretty long run for those pipes and conduits. You seem to have some real estate experience, so I'm sure you can appreciate how that can really start to add up and make it very difficult.

Did someone at the Navy Yard run over your puppy or something? You seem to have an irrational hatred of them.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 20, 2009 12:34 PM in response to Inside the Naval Hospital

THe Navy Yard is currently trying to figure out how to redevelop thses buildings. It's more complicated than it looks since the infrastructure systems serving these buildings are totally shot, which makes bringing them back to life a seriously expensive endeavor. Still there's been a lot of talk about finding a way to leverage off of Steiner Studios and create some sort of "back lot" media campus. If that happens it will be terrific, but it's not surprising that getting something like that off the ground will take alot of time, planning and an infusion of public subisdy to make it work. As I understand it, the Navy Yard is in the midst of trying to figure all this stuff out- which will take time. Anyone (like Sam) who thinks they could have figured it out alreay is kidding themselves. In the meantime the Navy Yard has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in fixing the roofs so the condition doesn't deteriorate and wind up like Admirals Row.

It's been said before, but I'll say it again - the Navy Yard are not the folks who let AR detriorate, that was the Feds. When the Navy Yard actually owns and controls historic buildings (both the surgeons house and the hospital are City landmarks) they actually make the effort to make sure the condition doesn't deteriorate while they figure out what to do with it.

My suggestion - turn it into a coop that sells only Israeli products. That's teach the idiots in park slope.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 20, 2009 12:03 PM in response to Inside the Naval Hospital

Freedom of speach means that you can say whatever you want, but it also means that I'm free to call you a dumbass when you say stupid ass shit like this....

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 20, 2009 11:06 AM in response to Proposed Ban Roiling Park Slope Co-op

Rob - glad it only took you 72 posts to figure out this post.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 19, 2009 1:38 PM in response to Inside Third & Bond: Week 72

Rob - no one is saying that your lack of intellectual curiosity about the City and the world around you and how it works means you have to leave town. We are saying that it means that we don't really value your uninformed opinions very much, and maybe you should comment a little less about things you clearly know nothing about.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 19, 2009 11:28 AM in response to How the Financial Crisis May Not Be So Bad for New York

Lots of Jewish misinformation going on in this thread that I will attempt to correct:

1) Lubavitch is a type of hasid. Worldwide Lubavtich headquarters are in Crown Heights (770 Eastern Parkway). Satmar is a different sect of Hasidic Jews, they are located primarily in Williamsburg and in Upstate NY in Kiyas Joel (near Monroe). The third common Hasidic Neighborhood in Brooklyn is borough park, which has a mish mash of several types of hasidic sects.

2) Hasidic women are in fact allowed to read the bible. Thay are forbidden from reading the talmud, which is a book of rabinnic discourse loosely based on the bible. That's what Yentl is about.

3) In my own personal experience as someone who can read hebrew, most of the orthodox women you see reading hebrew books on the subway are actually reading prayer books, not bibles. Jewish Law requires one to pray 3 times a day: first thing in the morning, mid afternoon and evening. These people are just trying to efficiently use their subway time by using it to pray. Not sure why that offends anyone. There's a ton of way more offensive things that most people do other than sit quietly and praying to themselves.

4) Those women who shave their heads and wear wigs do so because it's considered immodest to let men who are not your husband see your hair. So unless they plan on lifting those skirts and flashing the public, they do not shave it off down there.

5) Pretty sure that DIBS is right and Prop Joe just smells and has a small package.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 18, 2009 5:03 PM in response to Stereotyping Brooklyn Nabes and Missing the Point

You know what I love? Back when the market was soaring, some people observed that we were in a bubble that couldn;t possibly last. Others shouted back that "it's different this time" this is not a bubble, but a new economy caused by blah blah blah. Now that the market is in the tank, and some people are observing that it's only a matter of time before credit markets open back up and the markets correct themsleves, it seems like there are tons of people who are shouting back "it's different this time" this downturn is not your typical recession but a shift in paradigm blah blah blah.

When things are good, some people can't imagine that they'll ever be bad, and when things are bad, some people can never imagine that they'll ever be good again.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 5, 2009 4:27 PM in response to Quote of the Day

MM - not to take any side on this (I've already stated my positions in the myriad other postings on this issue), but I do want to clarify about the lead and asbestos. I don't think anyone was trying to imply that the lead and or asbestos problem couldn't be fixed. The only thing to keep in mind is that it would be extremely expensive to do so - possibly even prohibitively expensive. And "sensible precautions" is a nice idea - but in the real world there are actually very specific guidelines that people will have to follow - this an extremely regulated area for obvious and correct reasons.

Bottom line - almost anything is doable, it's just a matter of how much it will cost and whether or not the end result is worth the cost. While I don't argue about the historic importance of these buildings, I also have no doubt that renovating these houses will be EXTREMELY expensive. I'll leave it up to wiser people than me to figure out if it's worth it, or if there is some other preservation project out there that will provide a better bang for the buck.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 4, 2009 12:09 PM in response to Admiral's Row: Up Close and Personal

Townhouse Lady,

Always happy to provide some historical perspective - here's what happened (or at least how it was described to me): Whenever the federal government decides to close a base, they go through a specific process. First they go to all other federal agencies and see if they want the property, then they go to the states and local governments. In the case of the Navy Yard, the Navy decided the property was surplus in the mid 1960's. No other federal agency wanted it, so they approached NY State, who didn't want it and eventually, NYC who wanted it an bought it from the feds for about $24 million. That deal did not include Admirals Row, which the Navy held on to and actually continued to use to house people until the mid 1970's. In the mid 1970's the Navy decided that Admiral's row was surplus too and started the process again. This time, the Army National Guard decided that they wanted the property and they had some sort of plans to build a training facility on the site. So the property was transferred to them. For whatever reason (likely financial) the Army national guard never followed through with their plan and the property has been left to rot and deteriorate over the past 30 years. The National Guard has some sort of arrangement with the Army Corps of Engineers to "manage" the property for them, but we all can see how well that's worked out.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at February 4, 2009 11:14 AM in response to Admiral's Row: Up Close and Personal

Sam - Agreed, that SOMEONE on this thread has been exposed as a patronizing prick. I'm gonna go with the guy who suggested an 85 acre parking lot so that his car can have a nice view of the statue of liberty.

Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at January 28, 2009 4:44 PM in response to Pols Highlight Brooklyn Bridge Park's Money Probs