"Hasidim like Benetton because they are only allowed to wear natural fibers. Since benetton clothing is mostly made of wool, silk and cotton they have alot to choose from."

Not true. Not sure where you're getting that from. Hasidim won't wear clothes made out of fabric that mixes wool and linen, since that's shatnez (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shatnes) but there's no restriction on articial fibers.

Posted by: bkre at November 20, 2009 11:54 AM in response to Huh? Benetton for Bed Stuy Stretch of Bedford Avenue

I'm sorry, I thought the line was "this will be worthless once AY is built". When did that change to "this will be worth MORE once AY is built"?

Posted by: bkre at November 18, 2009 3:18 PM in response to Streetlevel: Vinnie's Styles Opening New Store on Flatbush

FOr what it's worth I believe this one is Ratner, not Boymelgreen. Don't mix up your evil Brooklyn Developers...

Posted by: bkre at November 18, 2009 11:53 AM in response to Atlantic Terminal Station: So Close!

1) I didn't call you an opponent of the park - I called you an opponent of the park plan. I admit that you are pro-park, but anti-this plan. I didn't think that was being critical at all - wouldn't you agree that that's an acurate statement, that you're an opponent of this park plan?

2)I know that you didn't intially bring up indoor recreation, I did. But once the subject came up you offered that it could easily happen in 1BBP, which I was debunking.

3)Different type of landscapes have different types of maintenace costs. If you're going to start to parse them then you should discount any comparisons to Hudson RIver Park too since that is mostly hardscape. Surely it's cheaper to sweep hardscape than to mow, prune, plantt, etc? ALso, Hudson RIver park also includes water in their acrage number. It's actually very commonplace among waterfront parks. If you had perspective amongst many parks of this type you wouldn't fall for Judi Francis' lies.

4)The ESDC is a big organiztion. Somethings they have doen well, others they have done poorly. THe people working on Brooklyn Bridge park are not the same people working on Atlantic Yards. ANd my information comes froma variety of sources, including the City Parks Department and the regional plan association. All of your info seems to be coming from Judi Francis.

5)I admited in my statement that Battery Park CIty was different becuase of the different ratio of Park to Development. My point was that the notion of using Development revenue to fund maintenance of a park is not a new idea. However different the ratios are, Battery Park City Proves that point. And your point about teardrop point is misleading. Teardrop is in fact a neighbrohood park, but the other parks there are decidedly regional. I don't live anywhere near there yet I go there all the time. I've seen many 4th of July concerts there.

6)You're statement about the street is totally false. THe streets will look and feel like public streets and the they will connect Atlantic Ave to Joralemon Street. Everyone will be able to see exactly how flase this is when the portion of the park near Atlantic Ave opens in a couple of months. In fact if you go to the corner of furman and atlantic you can already see it for yourself. THe curbs and paved roads have already been installed and you can see them yourself. Looks alot like a public road and nothing like a driveway.

7)Again you are missing my point on the PIRC. My point is that the PIRC will not generate enough money to fund the park. Squadron's formulas are full of holes. ALso the revenue that will be generated will not be generated in a timeframe that matches up with when the park needs the money.

8)THe purpose of the maps are to help people understand what they're looking at when they see the construction that is currently happening. Since there's no development happening now, that wasn't labeleld, Make sense to me, but what do I know, I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

Hope I did my share to slow the Judi Francis propoganda machine.

Posted by: bkre at November 16, 2009 8:09 PM in response to Brooklyn Bridge Park Progress Report

To respond to some of your points:
1) Indoor recreational facilities require large column free spaces with at lest 20 feet of ceiling height. Those are 2 qualities that are unavailable in 1BBP. It's actually pretty typical of opponents of the park plan to suggest alternatives that sound like they would work but really don't upon further inspection.

2)My point was there are large lawns being built RIGHT NOW. And the soccer fields to be built on pier 5 actually are indeed funded. The piers that are not yet funded are pier 2 (which includes basketball courts), Pier 3 (which in another large lawn) and half of Pier 6. ALso, I am very confident these piers will get built. Look at Hudson River Park - that has been built in phases over years and in the beginning only the first phases were funded. Every year another section was funded. I have full confidence that that's what will happen here.

3)The 85 acres includes 12 acres of water and 8 cares of development, so the remaining land left for park is 65 acres. The General Project Plan which is the document that allowed up to 20% of the project to be used for development, was including the water area, so it's only appropriate to include the water area when comparing the fact that this plan uses less than 10% to that 20% number in the GPP. Also, it is appropriate to use the water area when calculating the maintenance/acre costs for 2 reasons. First, the water area will provide a substantial amount of recreation space. Wave attenuators will create a safe harbor zone that will be conducive to kayaking and conoeing. The water will also house a marina. Secondly, the water areas of the park add significantly to the maintenance costs. They will have to pick up trash from and otherwise clean up the waterfront area and any debris that flows into the water near the park. Also, repairing and maintaining the waterfront, both the piers and the bulkheads, will be a significant maintenance cost for this park going forward. Maintenance parks per acre are actually completely in line with what the City's Park Department has said it expects to pay for first class waterfront parks.

4)If you keep on going forward with "perhaps this" and "maybe that" then this park will never get built. This park has already been waiting for 20 years. Do you really want to make the park dependent on re-doing the BQE. The BQE project is only beginning now and even DOT says construction will not start for 10 years. In the real world that means 20 years. Do you really want to wait another 20 years for this park while the DOT maybe figures something out? I don't.
5&6) My point was that you believe so strongly in the PIRC plan, but can't explain how the math actually works. You just take it on faith that it works because you don't really understand the math. I spoke to an ESDC representative and he could explain to me in detail how their plan yields enough revenue. You can't say anything that has more detal than the fact that the PIRC plan will redirect a portion of the additional revenue from rezonings to the park. Will those rezoning create enough revenue? When will that revenue come in compared to when it is needed? There are a million questions like that which are extremely important that you and M Squadron can't answer.

7) No state parks are deeded park land. Empire Fulton Ferry Park, Riverside State Park on the west side of Manhattan, and East River State Park in Williamsburg are all State parks that are not deeded parkland. Yet you don't hear anyone yelling and screaming that those parks are going to be turned into jai alai fields. WHy is that? It's because this issue is a red herring made up by Mrs Francis in order to fool people who don't have perspective of how the whole system works.

8)"If it worked someone would have tried already" is a ridiculous statement that assumes tht there will be no new ideas again ever. Also this model does exist and is used in Battery Park City - just they use alot more buildings for alot less parkland. Also the lie that this park will just be a front lawn for the condo will become exposed once Pier 1 opens and people see how much bigger the parkland is than the development sites. It will not feel like a front lawn at all. It'll feel like a huge park with a tiny portion at the end used as development. Finally - look at the park plan - almost all of these development sites are separate from the park area by a road. So if a road is all you need to be satisfied - then you've already got your road. Housing is not antithetical to parkland - it's complementary. It provides residents who will activate the parkland and make it a vibrant, urban, safe place.

Posted by: bkre at November 15, 2009 11:44 AM in response to Brooklyn Bridge Park Progress Report

bklyn20 in general is giving good information, unfotunately he/she also is repeating a bunch of lies that have been put forth by Judi Francis and her "Brooklyn Brdige Park Defense Fund". So to debunk them:
1)THere are plenty of large lawns and playing fields in this design. Just look at the photos in this post and you can see the large lawns. And the next phase of construction is Pier 3 which will include 3 soccer fields.
2)According to a presentation given back in January, building the marsh land is actuallly cheaper than the alternative. What would be REALLY expensive would be to build all of these large indoor facilities bklyn20 wants
3)THe berms actually don't take up that much space, and there are several entrances between the berms along Furman Street. Having taken a tour this summer I can attest to the fact that without the berms it's way too loud there to be a park.
4) THe PIRC plan is all smoke and mirrors. I've seen Squadron Present it and he totally glosses over the math of how his plan will actually produce the money he claims it will. I've tried to understand and the math simply doesn't work. My bet is that bklyn20 can't really explain it either and doesn't really understand it - but he/she is willing to belive in it anyway because she wants it to be true. I don't really understand the point about building glass towers in Fort green since you'd have to own the land to make money of these towers - ESDC owns this land and doesn't own any land in Fort Green or Prosepect. Also those would involve destroying existing parkland, which would clearly be worse. The GPP for this park allowed up to 20% of the leand to be used for development. This plan uses less than 10%. WHat exactly are you complaining about?
5) Finally, I've heard ESDC people say that once the park is built they'd be open to protecting it with an easement or something like that. It's seems like silly criticism to say it's not parkland. If it looks and feels like parkland, and will protected once it's complete, then who cares if it's officially deemed parkland?

Posted by: bkre at November 14, 2009 7:09 PM in response to Brooklyn Bridge Park Progress Report

There is a plan to connect Squibb to the park in the manner described by Minard. It is currently unfunded (as are a coupl eof other portion of the park) but it is definitely still in the design. The hope is that once the portions of the park that are currently under constrcuction open up, then there will be a groundswell of support for the city to provide the funding to finsih the park, inlcuding this pedestrian bridge.

Posted by: bkre at November 13, 2009 1:27 PM in response to Brooklyn Bridge Park Progress Report

Stripes will do nothing. To fix the problem you need to make the off ramp 2-lanes. Right it's that one lane pinch point that causes the backup.

And North Hieghts is dead on about the cadman plaza exit on the other side too. Connect diectly to the BQE and get rid off one of the most annoying constant traffic backups in south brooklyn.

Posted by: bkre at November 3, 2009 12:02 PM in response to Squadron Helps Drivers Get Off (The FDR)

Is it just me, or is that block of South Portland simply the most beautiful brownstone block in the entire City?

Posted by: bkre at November 3, 2009 11:49 AM in response to Walkabout : The Italianate Style, part 1

According to the Condo Plan for One Brooklyn Bridge Park, unit #t8 is one of the rooftop cabana units that face the east river located above the lower portion of the building on the west. Unit #t8 was originally priced at $145,000. Not sure what they'd be asking for the cabana units today.

Posted by: bkre at November 3, 2009 11:45 AM in response to Last Week's Biggest Sales

FSRQ - I agree with your criticism about how this zoning doesn't take into acount proximity to mass transit, but your other comment (about smith and court)has already been accounted for in this zoning. Take a look at the zoning map. Most of the neighborhood is being zoned r6b. Court St is being zoned r6a (more FAR and higher bldg heights allowed) and both Smith and Court Streets will have a c2-4 overlay.

Posted by: bkre at October 29, 2009 4:04 PM in response to Carroll Gardens Downzoning Sails Through Council

I'm not sure, but i think the windows were already bricked up. But either way, not so strange. They are going to be using it as an art storage facility. The #1 enemy of most artwork is exposure to natural sunlight.

Posted by: bkre at October 23, 2009 11:02 AM in response to Work in Progress at Christie's Red Hook Warehouse

When I was in there, the clocks were active, it was pretty quiet, and you could not hear any ticking or any other noise coming from the machinery. The clocks are on the floor with the kitcen, living and dining room, so I'm not sure that putting shades on the clock is a big deal. All the bedrooms are on the upper floors. Plus, there's a bathub in what i assume is the master bath that has it's own window framing the statue of liberty. Pretty sweet.

Posted by: bkre at October 21, 2009 3:23 PM in response to All About the Clocktower

I've been in the space and can tell you that the pictures definitely don't do it justice. The windows do not feel small at all. I think the issue here is perspective - the ceiling heights are very tall, which makes it look like it has small windows. In real life they feel very generous, let in alot of light and frame some pretty amazing views. Obviously $25 million is alot of money, and I don't know that I could honestly say that any house or apartment was "worth" $25 million. But all of you who are claiming some desgin fault with this place are just not understanding. It's an extremely special place.

Posted by: bkre at October 21, 2009 12:49 PM in response to All About the Clocktower

I'm actually impressed with that paragraph from NY Mag. That's probably the best summary of this project I've ever seen. Of course NY magazine will be worthless once AY is built...

Posted by: bkre at October 16, 2009 1:00 PM in response to Atlantic Yards, the Nets, and the Times

"But then I figured in another twenty years no one will remember him and things will get renamed for a minor celebrity or something. "

I for one can't wait till they rename it "Paris Hilton State Park" and wipe Robert Moses off the map.

Posted by: bkre at October 7, 2009 5:22 PM in response to Prices Drop at the Oro Tower

bxgirl - I hear variations on that question all the time? The Empire State Building went up so fast - why does modern construction take so long? There are alot of very good reasons for that, but I'd like to focus on one - safety. Building a skyscraper today means you have to follow a ton of regulations to keep all the workers safe. One thing people don't like to talk about is that 6 people died during the construction of the empire state building - none died during the construction of oro. I'm sure you agree that you'd rather construction lasted a couple of months longer if it makes the work site safer for everyone.

Posted by: bkre at October 7, 2009 2:19 PM in response to Prices Drop at the Oro Tower

The dean street field is not open yet? I've seen kids playing on it for the last week or so...

Posted by: bkre at October 1, 2009 3:13 PM in response to Turf Looking Good to Go at Dean Street Playground

MM - I do find these posts very interesting. I think one thing that would make them better would be to include a map showing all the locations of the specific buildings you mention in these posts. I find myself flipping back and forth between your post and google maps all the time. Also it would make it easier for when I eventually try to plan my own private walking tour to check our the buildings you highlight. Thanks.

Posted by: bkre at September 22, 2009 12:35 PM in response to Walkabout with Montrose: All Things Luxurious

If I remember correctly it was put on the market about two years ago and bought by Bistricer, who is the developer of the BellTel lofts in Metrotech. This all happened right before the crash though, so i imagine nothing's gonna happen there for a while.

Posted by: bkre at September 16, 2009 12:32 PM in response to Hospital Sells Building and Closes Down

In general I'm bothered by the density, lack of public space and subsidied involved in the project.

But I have to say I really like this design - more than the Gehry version even.

People who are forecasting gloom and doom don't know what they're talking about. They're probably the same people who were saying that the IKEA was going to lead to massive traffic jams in Red Hook. In general, people don't understand how traffic really works and like to get all dramatic with nightmare scenarios the rarely materialize. 1,100 parking spaces is really not that many. Remember that the arena will seat almost 20,000 fans. Even if thos ecars all carry 2 passengers, that's still about 10% of all people coming to the arena.

I agree that the intersection is currently a nightmare and think it would be terrific if there could be some sort of reallignemnt to rationalize traffic flow there. I just don't really see how this arena is really going to make it worse than it already is. All you'll have to do is drive there once to realize that next time you should leave the car home and take mass transit. Even people coming from Jersey can take a PATH into lower manhattan and then hop on the train.

Posted by: bkre at September 10, 2009 1:47 PM in response to Ourousoff Weighs In On Barclay's Center Design

Makes sense. Wasn't the original opening for this thing scheduled for the 80's? I kid, I kid....

Posted by: bkre at September 9, 2009 11:03 AM in response to A Peek Inside the Atlantic Terminal Station

jscheff - I know you're new to this, so I'll help you out. The Brooklyn Bridge Park Conservancy is a private advocacy group who's mission is to promote the notion of building Brooklyn Bridge Park. Also they do some programming in the existing portions of the park, like the movie series. The Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corp is the City/State funded public entity that was created to design and buld the park. The renderings you reference were created by the development corporation, not by the conservancy. The two entities agree on alot and work together often, but I still think that someone who is blogging on this topic should know the difference.

Also - anyone notice how quiet all those folks like Sam and BHO who used to always add comments like "never gonna happen" when a Brooklyn Bridge Park comment came up are being lately? What do you think the chances are that one of those guys will have to guts to actually admit they were wrong on this one.

....Splash!!!

Posted by: bkre at September 8, 2009 11:48 AM in response to Brooklyn Bridge Park's Spiral Pool Taking Shape

"...but the majority are borderline retarded, violent, and dull."

ANd as a retarded violent dullard, rob should know...

Posted by: bkre at August 27, 2009 2:01 PM in response to Sunset Park Finally Getting Its Own High School

smeyer - that's really interesting. What's your source for that tidbit?

Posted by: bkre at August 27, 2009 12:33 PM in response to The Three Minute Miracle

THe one that I posted? First off I have no association with it, I just saw that it was posted recently. And secondly, judging from the pictures, it looks like it's facing the Pacific Street side of the building, which is towards AY. Not really sure how much work they'll be doing there or how loud it'll be and of course whether AY will even get a construction loan and start any construction any time soon.

Posted by: bkre at August 24, 2009 2:29 PM in response to Rental Picks: Prospect Heights

If you're looking for a rental property that's actually in Prospect heights, there's this one:

http://newyork.craigslist.org/brk/abo/1335114899.html

Posted by: bkre at August 24, 2009 1:51 PM in response to Rental Picks: Prospect Heights

Sorry - my last comment at 1:55 was directed at the What - not to any of the posters immediately before mine.

Posted by: bkre at August 21, 2009 2:42 PM in response to Immigrant Groups Fight Sunset Park Rezoning

Just because you were born and raised here (as were many of us, despite what you like to believe)doesn't make you an expert. And yes, sometimes things that happened in 1913 are more relevent to a current situation than things that happened in 1974. And finally, just because noone ever taught you how to form a cogent argument or how to communicate effectively, doesn't make it my responsibility.

Posted by: bkre at August 21, 2009 1:55 PM in response to Immigrant Groups Fight Sunset Park Rezoning

What - to say that never in the history of this city has a whole neighborhood had to confront the issue of gentrification (which I'm assuming is what you're trying to say correcting for your typos and horrible grammar), just shows that you posses a very minimal knowledge of the history of the development of this City. When you talk about the history of this City - you claim to be an expert on everything that happened from the 70's on through today. But you're ignoring more than 100 years of the development of this City that predates that era. When it comes to the issue of neighborhood development and gentrification, as the good book says, there ain't nothing new under the sun.

Posted by: bkre at August 21, 2009 12:01 PM in response to Immigrant Groups Fight Sunset Park Rezoning

I hope you're not calling me a shill Biff. All you have to do is check my commenting history to see that's not true. I just happen to like this building. I can't afford it (even with the price cuts) but I still like it. Especially now that everyone seems to have accepted the fact that the park is actually happening and is no longer a mirage.

Also - if you look at my earlier comments I also said that I think the shuttle will go away once the developer sell more units...

Posted by: bkre at August 18, 2009 4:32 PM in response to Price Cuts at One Brooklyn Bridge Park

You all must be really old or really out of shape. I know people in the building so i've done that walk a bunch of times. Yes, it's uphill, but it's a fairly gentle slope and I find that I'm not breathing hard or sweating at all when I get to the borough hall stop. Y'all gots to hit the gym people! 20 minutes on the elliptical 3 times a week. Come on!

Posted by: bkre at August 18, 2009 4:08 PM in response to Price Cuts at One Brooklyn Bridge Park

It's about 10 minutes to Borough hall which has thr 2,3,4 and 5. Also the developer is currently running a shuttle bus to take you to the borough hall stop. Obviously that may go away once the building is sold out, but at least for now, it's convenient. And finally, the Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corp just announced last month that they are building a water taxi dock right at pier 6, which is 2 minutes away from this building. I don't know whether there's going to be commuter service to manhattan, but I bet they give it a shot at first at least. It's a big construction zone right now, but the area around this building is supposed to be finished by the end of the year, which is not that long of a wait.

Posted by: bkre at August 18, 2009 12:16 PM in response to Price Cuts at One Brooklyn Bridge Park

Seriously - I know that some neighborhood borders are up for dispute, but Washington Ave is pretty commonly agreed upon as the PH/CH border. I've seen some brokers try to stretch past Gradn even sometimes all the way to Classon. Which is clearly just a marketing ploy. But this is a full block and a half even past that. This place is probably closer to whatever the neighborhood on the other side of CH is ( I have no idea) than to PH.

Posted by: bkre at August 17, 2009 1:34 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 358 Eastern Parkway, #8

We already know that antidope is smarter than GS in one respect. antidope didn't invest $10 million of equity on a ovepriced highrise on the edge of fort green. GS did. So there's at least one situation in which antidope was smarter than GS. Are you saying it couldn't happen again?

Also - once GS's equity is wiped out, that frees up Euro HYpo to sell it at market rates. GS needed to earn a return on their equity. Euro Hyps just neads to cover their exposure. It's a much different incentive.

Posted by: bkre at August 14, 2009 12:02 PM in response to Clarett, Goldman Lose Control of Forté

Benson - last time I checked, Euro Hypo was a bank right? You don't think they can figure out a way to offer financing it means crawling out from under this deal?

And by the way - people are closing on units with financing atOne Brooklyn Bridge Park. Last time I checked that building was less than 40% sold too. So it is happening.

Posted by: bkre at August 14, 2009 11:59 AM in response to Clarett, Goldman Lose Control of Forté

Ditmas snark - There will be financing available for this. Just because benson says there will be no financing doesn't make it so. It's not like this has never happened before. Construction lenders have foreclosed on developers and found a way to seel the units with financing. There will be financing and these units will sell for about $500/SF.

And then they will open a restaurant in the retail space and DIBS and the What can go on their date.

Posted by: bkre at August 14, 2009 11:13 AM in response to Clarett, Goldman Lose Control of Forté

Finishes in the Forte are actually pretty nice. The layouts are definitely a bit unconventional with all of those no-right angles, but I think that some people are probably into that. How many times have we heard people complain about people living in glass boxes. This is definitely not a glass box. The problem with Forte has always been that it's been priced as if it were the nicest building in the nicest neighborhood and it's clearly not. The proximity to the nevins street subway and to BAM is definitely a plus, but the immediate surrounding area still has a ways to go. This thing came out of the gate at around $800/SF which was nuts. It's currently priced at about $650/SF - which is where it should have been 2 years ago. Those of you who think that a building of this quality with these views, finishes, a doorman, even on a "not totally there yet" stretch of fort greene will go for $350 are dreaming. Look around. Things in Park Slope and Prime Fort Green are still going for about $600-$700/SF and most of Prospect Heights is still going for $500-$600/SF. This will move in 2 seconds if prices drop down to $500/SF.

Posted by: bkre at August 14, 2009 10:52 AM in response to Clarett, Goldman Lose Control of Forté

bklyn20 - even with the housing, there are still three astroturf soccer fields planned for Brooklyn Bridge Park, and I think I remember reading that those feilds will open up in about 2 years. Also, the housing (except 360 Furman) doesn't reallt take up that much space. Even if you took away all of the housing, you wouldn't have gained enough space to add back even one whole soccer field.

Posted by: bkre at August 12, 2009 11:54 PM in response to Closing Bell: (Astro)turf War

All very entertaining scenarios. The reality is much more mundane. They are doing some local law 11 repair work to the brick facade and also doing some repair work to the rooftop surfaces. If you look at the Dean Street entrance you'll notice that they recently extended the sidewalk bridge to go all the way up to through the courtyard to the front gate. They also temporarily closed the rooftop playground because of the work.

Posted by: bkre at August 7, 2009 11:04 AM in response to What's That on the Newswalk Building?

Levine owned the land pre-upzoning.

Posted by: bkre at August 6, 2009 12:41 PM in response to Taking the Edge Off of the Edge? Nope, It Turns Out

Good question. Yes, yes it does.

Posted by: bkre at August 5, 2009 3:17 PM in response to Development Watch: 80 Dekalb Getting Close

I was lost on the twitter comment yesterday, but I'm fluent in zoning - so for those of you who want to understand what's really going on here: R6B allows a 2.0 FAR, max bldg hieght of 50' after a setback at 40'. R7A allows for 4.0 FAR and a max bldg hight of 80' after a setback at 65'. So these people are basically arguing about 30' of bldg height versus housing for poor old people.

Posted by: bkre at July 28, 2009 10:42 AM in response to Lefferts Place Threatened by Healthcare Developer

1) Rob reads exterminator blogs? WTF?

2) I seem to remember that at the same time that they put up 20 units for rent, they also instituted some price drops on this bldg- something like 20%. SO they're not just plugging up their ears and screaming LALALALA.

3) FLoating world - you should head over there again. You's see that constrcution of the park around this building is well underway. SUre maybe they won't have money to finish the park for a while, but the portion of the part immediately surrounding this building will be open by spring. That's what really matters. And the "scary" walk to BH involves crossing furman, going about 20 feet under the BQE and then being on beautiful BH street. Not really so bad.

Posted by: bkre at July 27, 2009 2:31 PM in response to Renting 1 BBP: 'We Would Like Things to be Different'

I don't think I understood a single sentence in that entire post. I guess I'm getting old.

Posted by: bkre at July 27, 2009 10:42 AM in response to BK.LY Launches

This whole installation has been pretty messed up. They have rolled the turf out, waited a couple of days and then rolled it back at least 3 times now. They've also left tubs of the glue out on the lawn just sitting there for days. I know it's been a rainy summer, but I don't understand why it's so much harder to install this lawn than anywhere else. I know that parks has installed artifical turf lawns all over the city - you'd think they know how to do it by now.

Posted by: bkre at July 24, 2009 3:24 PM in response to Dean Street Turf Field Delayed

To be fair, I'm pretty sure that Veronica Hackett (the developer) lives in an apt in Manhattan, not in a McMansion in NJ. And while I would agree that all of the surrounding neighborhoods are full of young families with kids, this is a a different neighborhood - it's downtown brooklyn. I would think that your primary market would be young single people who work in Lower Manhattan and want their own place. Look at the rental building at 180 Montague or the Courthouse building on Atlantic and Court (the two closest rental buildings) - both of those buildings are full of that demographic and are also mostly studios and one-bedrooms. And they're both full.

Posted by: bkre at July 13, 2009 1:54 PM in response to Details Leaked on 111 Lawrence Rents

The plumber leaked the rents? That doesn't sound like a smart way to continue being the plumber on one of the largest construction projects in brooklyn right now. Look for Joe B to soon be listed as the "former plumbing foreman". Dumbass.

Posted by: bkre at July 13, 2009 1:22 PM in response to Details Leaked on 111 Lawrence Rents

and squatters, sam - your forgot about the squatters. And the wild dogs.

Posted by: bkre at July 10, 2009 1:55 PM in response to Navy Yard Kicks Off Supermarket RFP Process

MM - I find it somewhat puzzling that you, who are often one of the more reasonable commenters on this site, are so often completely off base when it comes to this subject.

First, it's unfair to claim that the Navy Yard should have fixed the site but instead, passed the buck. It was never their property, nor was it their responsibility. Should you be blamed if your neighbor's roof leaks? The guilty party in this case is pretty clear - it was the feds. No sense in blaming the inncoent bystanders.

Second, are you seriously using this RFP as proof positive that the site is easily accesible? Anyone who knows anything about this part of brooklyn knows that, while the site has many positive attributes, easy access to transit is not one of them. This RFP is basically a marketing document meant to attract potential developers. Of course it's gonna say that it's got great transit. Do you also believe that Miller Light tastes great and is less filling?

Posted by: bkre at July 10, 2009 1:10 PM in response to Navy Yard Kicks Off Supermarket RFP Process