Zach's Profile
- Zach
- 2004
- 2006
- Brooklyn
- Greenpoint
Author's Posts
January 31, 2008
Vaguely apartment seeking
Hopefully this constitutes an appropriate use of the forum... I'm thinking about abandoning North Brooklyn come March 1 and figured I'd see if anybody a little further south had a spare apartment. 1BRs, on the cheap side (
Author's Comments
That block of Beadel is the SINGLE nice block over in that East Williamsburgy/Greenpoint Oil Swamp area. Vandervoort Avenue is just a dump truck conduit (there are environmental studies somewhere...), and is noisy all day and night. And the walk to the L takes forever and a half.
Plus, no amenities whatsoever. There's an Associated down in the projects, I guess, but most of the storefronts are still dusty and boarded.
Posted by: Zach at August 17, 2007 1:35 PM in response to Open House Picks
Also, can we just call that the "Detonated Gas Tank" district? That's one of the more interesting landmarks over there, and it's memorable.
Another neat thing over in these parts:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=40.718477,-73.93647&spn=0.001307,0.002511&t=h&z=19&om=1
Posted by: Zach at August 17, 2007 1:48 PM in response to Open House Picks
The Underground Railroad bit seems a little dubious to me, but either way this is a totally inappropriate use of eminent domain. Duffield Street and the surrounding area is the only human-scale place left in Downtown Brooklyn. It ought to be a damn historic district just for how out of the ordinary it is compared to the eight-lane avenues and anonymous glass towers on all sides.
Posted by: Zach at August 21, 2007 9:16 AM in response to HPD OK’s Seizure of Duffield St. Homes
There are floorplans.
I'm priced out of ever buying in my neighborhood. Ever. Living in the apartment here that's the same size as my walkup around the damn corner would triple my rent. After $100K down. Plus condo fees.
Posted by: Zach at August 21, 2007 1:38 PM in response to Condos of the Day: Maze at 447 Humboldt Street
Northside Piers looks silly but will presumably drive my rent down in the long term. On the waterfront, context doesn't feel as relevant, and Kent Ave is mostly empty low-rise industrial buildings, with townhouses and factories scattered around haphazardly. I'd say it's basically a win.
Posted by: Zach at August 24, 2007 6:03 PM in response to Glass Construction Towering Over Brooklyn
Uh, since when does Bloomberg take campaign contributions? That's one hell of an ad hominem.
Posted by: Zach at September 1, 2007 7:06 PM in response to Spitzer Puts the Kibosh on DOB Inspection Bill
re Carol: Um, really? Carroll Gardens and Red Hook, taken together, have 16,000 housing units. Even throwing, say, 1,000 more on top of that in tall buildings and additions should put a pretty significant dent in the existing market. If you got 5,000 new units in there (gasp), it's likely you'd see a significant slowdown.
Up in Williamsburg and Greenpoint, we're slated for something like 20,000 (on top of 45,000 existing), and you can bet that's going to slow down rent creep around here. With inflation around 3% or whatever, sooner or later that means that market-rate apartments have decreasing real rents. It's sort of silly to claim that new units won't lower rent -- the market's not infinite.
Posted by: Zach at September 14, 2007 11:39 AM in response to Size Doesn't Matter on Luquer Street?
re Chopper:
I think there is definitely a displacement effect, even with zillion-dollar condos. I live in a grubby old-law walkup, which is fine enough because I am nonrich. But there's plenty of people living in my building who have tons upon tons of money and are still sitting in their $900/month 2-bedrooms, in part just to save money, but also because there's not that much they could buy around here (aside from the two or three decaying frame houses on the market). With the money they saved, I really wouldn't be surprised if they dropped $300K and went and lived at Maze or something.
Like Carly Simon's famous apartment on Central Park West, but less insane, basically. Or it happens in more stages... high-income renters move out of the nicer apartments, middle-to-high-income renters move up into those apartments, etc., etc. Supply is supply, whether it's on the luxury end or the bargain end -- if someone's goal is just "live in Carroll Gardens," they probably look at a wide range.
Posted by: Zach at September 14, 2007 12:31 PM in response to Size Doesn't Matter on Luquer Street?
Eh, I think they should landmark it. It's practically the only intact townhouse block in Williamsburg (although there's a few other nice ones on Southside). Williamsburg is the one place where there's plenty of high-density housing going up (in fact, they're adding some in the background of this photo).
Posted by: Zach at September 21, 2007 10:09 AM in response to Push to Make Burg's Fillmore Place a Historic District

250K is still a lot of money in America, but going by the 2-and-a-half rule, a couple making $100K could swing one of these. That's still a fair chunk of change, but hardly unheard of. NYC had 550,000 households making at least $100,000 in 2005 (out of 3MM households total). This is affordable to the top 20%... if you do the same numbers for Brooklyn, it's the top 10%.
Actually, that sucks. Never mind. $250K is very high for a one-bedroom in Brooklyn, even though it isn't. I think I have to move to Philly now.
Posted by: Zach at August 16, 2007 1:42 PM in response to Crown Heights Condos Fly Off the Shelves