David,I think you are ascribing an awful lot of "build it and they will come" theory to AY. If AY was the only area of building, what you say is true. But it's not. And brooklyn is an enormous borough. And as far as blaming a scaled down project for greater stress on the subway/mass transit system, what you're proposing then is that we not worry about the outer areas and their poor mass transit, but simply improve it for those who can afford to live in the AY. Which means those people further out will still need to rely on their cars, which they will drive everywhere, including into AY. A hub is not just the big station, its a central feed for the system and the problem is with the outlying lines.

and that doesn't change the fact that the outlying areas are going to remain heavily car dependent and polluted,while people who don't have the financial resources to live in the AY will be displaced further and further out. All AY is doing is overloading an already crowded area (around the yards) and putting increased strain on already strained transit hub, area resources and traffic.

Above and beyond the fact that people are not sardines, what kind of civic planning concentrates on overbuilding in one area creating new problems, while not addressing the old problems? Because one area will impact another. I don't see that scaling back the project is what causes the problem of people "who can't live/work in NYC"- that's happening because their neighborhoods are being gentrified and all the building going on seems to be luxury housing. Certainly not working class housing- but then neither will AY be.and while the biggest industry in NYC may be the financial markets, it's the working class that keeps the City running and it seems to me AY will not help their situation anyway.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 5:50 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

Anon 4:48- Fact: only one person can register as bx2bklyn on typekey. No one else can register as bx2bklyn through typekey. That's why Mr. B set it up. And on this matter I'm finished.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 4:52 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

tried both, and at this point why should I do that? That's exactly what the troll wants. I can only keep reminding people I don't post unless I'm signed in.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 4:46 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

4:27- you're misunderstanding what I said. I said I do not post unless I am signed into typekey. You will always see that icon if the post is really mine. I can't control someone using my name to post on brownstoner, only the way they do it. If there is no icon after my name, I didn't post it.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 4:40 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

and you'll notice that the troll has to post using my name but can't with the typekey icon because I registered.

But you already knew that since you're the one doing it.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 4:26 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

oops- 3:53.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 4:16 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

I don't argue that it's not, david. I never did. And if you bother to really remember all the previous discussions, most "anti-AY people have no argument with developing the area- it's how its done. I'm opting for quality over quantity because you and I both know that sheer quantity does not make for quality. Hope I made that simple enough for you to understand because if you can't grasp the slippery slope argument I can't help you. There's still is a great deal of validity in the argument, and I am quite well aware how it can be used both ways. However a school and an arena are 2 vastly different venues and if a society can't put a school at a higher priority than an arena, it gets what it deserves.

(note to 3:51 & 55- thanks, and sadly, 3:55 my life is not so exciting (if you're judging based on the troll's posted links.) those aren't my links, and I don't bother to click on them after getting tricked when the troll began posting them months ago).

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 4:15 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

Oh yeah- you're some spokesman for Bensonhurst and the pro-AY crowd. Your eloquence simply spoke volumes. NOT.As for your version of Brooklyn pride- what? A new Jersey team bought here and paid for by a midwesterner???? That's Ratner, av joe- your 4th point is not only a wonder of irrationality, but also schizophrenic.

You're no blue collar average Joe- those are hardworking, caring men and women who care about their families first and foremost, not a sports franchise, Frank Gehry or "best positioning " (and what the hell is that about??). Blue collar, by the way, refers to the shirt associated with certain jobs- it doesn't mean uneducated or unintelligent. I venture to guess you are no blue-collar worker but actually the "yuppie, uppity, know it all" you claim to despise. My best guess is that you are a Ratner PR flack and not a very capable one at that.

So if you are so desperate to celebrate Brooklyn Pride maybe you should check out all the stuff Brooklyn does have- the Gardens, the museums, Coney Island, Keyspan Park, etc etc etc. If you think Brooklyn pride is predicated on the Ohio-born Ratner and the New Jersey Nets, I highly doubt you live in Brooklyn at all.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 3:21 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

I most certainly do realize. Still doesn't make it right for someone to take someone else's property. And once you start down that slippery slope, how long before your neighbor decides he has a right to your house just because he could build a prettier one and we all know that a prettier neighborhood would be more to the public good? should I have to give up my house because you want to put a Mcdonalds there? all your arguments are doing is opening the door to taking away property rights of private citizens. And even more importantly, for not very good reasons. there is no justificatiopn for using eminent domain in the AY project- there is plenty enough space without stealing it (and I use the word intentionally in this case) from other property owners. So unless you are going to come up with a very narrowly defined set of circumstances and protections regarding eminent domain, you may as well just come right out and tell homeowners and businesses that they have no rights at all, especially when a huge private developer decides he wants their property.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 2:34 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

David- considering that supreme Court justices are just as prone to outside pressures (althought they'll tell you they are not) as any politician, a look at the history of the supreme Court will prove to you that even the intent of the original constitution can be corrupted and subverted. Do I think money plays a huge part in this? Yes. Political friendships? Yes again. The Supreme Court is about interpreting the constitution and I believe that those interpretations are based more on politics, money and friends, than on pure constitutional law. And it also seems to determine the definition of "public good." The Nets a public good? Well then by all means let give all sports teams someone's house to build on. And by all means let the taxpayers fund it. If its "entertainment" by all means, lets distract the public with entertainment.

Except, again, there is nothing in the Constitution that even comes close to considering that the AY project is a form of public good that deserves to use eminent domain.

By the way, contractor and developer are 2 very different people. I never used the word contractor, and it is incorrect anyway in the context of what i was saying.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 1:56 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

Both U-Haul and those "crappy" auto repair shops not only provide needed services, but also jobs. How nice eminent domain can be put to work for you by screwing a whole lot of other people, including the taxpayers who can watch their money fill your- and Ratner's- coffers.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 1:29 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

"Eminent Domain is not "stealing" - it is a process outlined in the Constitution and requires just compensation "- yes David, but that's not the enitre story. eminent domain was also defined so as to limit its use to specific areas. using eminent domain for private developers like ratner was never the intent. Not only is the use of ED for Ratner's project illegal if you go by the constitutional intent, but the end use will not be for the general public, but only for who can afford to pay Ratner for its use. A public road is for everyone. A bridge is for everyone. the Nets are for those who pay for the tickets, and the profit goes to Ratner, not the general public or the public project. So if using ed for private development is illegal, then "stealing" is the proper definition.

Public good has been increasingly broadly defined by those greedy for money, and power, and who seem to be increasingly smug in the idea that the public is so stupid it doesn't doesn't know when its being screwed. I would never underestimate the public, if i were them.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 28, 2007 1:19 PM in response to ESDC Forced to Cough Up Financial Docs on AY

Bk4life-

Now that what bubble? gave you what for, I'd also like to add what does your "typical renter" comment mean? I rent. Plenty of people rent- and guess what. Plenty of them pay rent which you homeowners need to keep your houses. With all that education you claim to have, you couldn't come up with a less ignorant comment than that?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 23, 2007 1:04 AM in response to House of the Day: 1219 Bergen Street

I htink people are less "afraid" of odern design, primarily because its familiar. But like anon at 10:10 says, the problem is with the character and craft. Modern design can be classic- or vry cheesy- its very heavily dependent on the quality of the materials because a lot of the craft is hidden. When you see a gorgeous carved marble fireplace, the craftsmanship is up front/in your face. It seems to me antique furnishings or homes are as much about the artistry of the craftsman as about the finished product. You are meant to see it. Modern showcases the product more than the process- but you are supposed to recognize the quality of the product by what you don't see. The more "perfect" or "clean" looking it is, the better it is.

It really isn't easier to design in a modern style- it just looks that way because the lines are simpler. But to doing it well- that stands the test of time.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 23, 2007 12:48 AM in response to Brownstone Renos: A Contrast In Styles

Sorry Jack Slade- I'm a Bronx girl so just to do one last revisit- The bronx is huge and up until very recently no one paid much attention except to movies like Fort Apache, the Bronx, and to the infamous fire history (The Bronx is Burning). But maybe Mott Haven was landmarked before its time- if you don't know, the Bronx is justly renowned for the grand Concourse and its wonderful Art Deco era buildings, not for its brownstones. My family still lives up there, and like every other part of NYC some areas are better than others. But it is coming back if for no other reason than Manhattan is bursting at the seams and it has some fabulous housing stock with its deco apartment buildings.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 22, 2007 5:15 PM in response to House of the Day: 1219 Bergen Street

I had my bathroom floor done in concrete. bad idea. I guess the contractor screwed up the mix because the top layer was gritty and crumbled away after a few months. And it was cold and uncomfortable underfoot. Can't afford to redo it now, but this past wekend I bought those interlocking foam floor mats and put them down until I can fix the floor. They look great, were easy to put down and they feel wonderful. Now I am not sure if I will do tile or get something similar but in a better grade.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 22, 2007 4:19 PM in response to Brownstone Renos: A Contrast In Styles

Again posting for Crown Heights Proud:
d8, the Crown Heights North Landmark area is so large that when Landmarks designated the area, they divided it into 4 phases, each to be officially landmarked one at a time, over an unspecified amount of time. This house is in the first phase, and will be landmarked this spring. A couple of blocks over - Park Place, for example, will be landmarked in Phase 2, and other areas to follow.

This block is around the corner from the Children's Museum, and is a very nice, quiet block. While Crown Heights is by no means perfect, to intimate that this house is in the middle of a war zone is the usual crap that really is not accurate. Landmarks would not bother to designate an entire district if it was going the way of a Baghdad neighborhood, what a waste of time, money and effort that would be.

With AY breaking ground, PH, CH, and parts of BS too expensive, people are going to be in CHN in droves. Only jealousy, not some vague desire to "warn" the rest of mankind, would inspire this usual rant. We have beautiful blocks with beautiful homes. If you want to join us here, and help make it better for everyone, you are welcome.

CHP

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 22, 2007 3:55 PM in response to House of the Day: 1219 Bergen Street

FYI to all- I NEVER EVER post links to tinyurl.com and tell everyone do not click on those links. If you see Bx2Bklyn without the typekey icon- it ain't me. hate to spoil the troll's fun (or add to it) but those posts are not and NEVER have been mine.

I can't stop that piece of mentally deficient garbage from posting (and he will) but I will reiterate as often as necessary those links are not posted by me. And I don't often post these days because of socially challenged malicious twits like him. For all of you who think it's a matter of just ignoring him, when he associates my id with the links he posts, it's impossible to ignore.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 22, 2007 3:35 PM in response to Brownstone Renos: A Contrast In Styles

Sorry- the anon 2:00 post was me. for some reason it didn't post my typekey id

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 22, 2007 2:05 PM in response to Brownstone Renos: A Contrast In Styles

Crown Heights Proud asked me to post this -computer took a sick day :-) :
I'm with Mr. B. all the way on this. Modern can be great, but don't destroy a house with detail to get it. There are plenty that have been stripped of detail, and they often cost less for it.

In answer to "maybe there's hope" - it is quite possible to recreate the detailing through salvage. It just takes a great deal of time and money. There are plenty of people selling all kinds of salvage, but it certainly ain't cheap. If you were to go that route, be prepared to do it a little at a time, as what you may need for a certain room may not be available right away. Personally, I'd do as much of my salvage shopping as far away from the city as possible. The prices here are absurd. I buy little bits here and there, whenever possible, and love incorporating it into my home.

There is a wonderful, over the top book about people decorating with salvage. It's called Extraordinary Interiors by Brian Coleman and Dan Mayers. Coleman is an editor at large for Old House Journal Interiors, and is a consumate salvager. His apartment in the Village is in the book. My favorite spread is a house in SoHo almost entirely done in first class salvage elements. All very inspiring, and very, very expensive. But, like a good house museum, it's fun to look and get ideas.

While I would not want to live in a period perfect museum (my cats would certainly not allow it anyway), I admire those who are comfortable doing so. I think that is a lifestyle choice, and has as much value as someone who lives in an empty looking room with modernistic square furniture and all their personal belongings hidden. In my opinion, as much of a museum look, just a different museum.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 22, 2007 1:01 PM in response to Brownstone Renos: A Contrast In Styles

and wasn't it you, Eryximachus, who was whining the other day about how hard it is for 20-somethings who BARELY make "six figures" and whose parents are too poor to help, to find living space?

Shouldn't you should be heading out to that trailer park in Podunk?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 16, 2007 11:03 AM in response to Friday Links

there's been a lot of great photos on this site. wish there was a way you could order a copy for framing. Maybe mr. B could set up a cafe press type thing?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 16, 2007 10:53 AM in response to Thursday On The Record

Publically at a community board meeting? Oh yeah- that is really so public and really got the word out to the general public.

As has been said- this property really belongs to the people, despite you and the city bureaucrats' delusions of grandeur and stewardship. And CHP (thanks buddy!) is right- all smoke and mirrors on the Yard's part. but that's the role of petty bureaucrats- sit behind a desk, obfuscate, play little political games aand manipulate the truth (c'mon- you're in bed with George Bush, aren't you?) and basically do what they have decided the people want, without bothering to listen to the people at all. I'll give you that Ella, you're an excellent shill for the Navy Yard, albeit of limited capacity. I've dealt too long with your type of swiftboat deskwarmer. And I am sick of you.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 16, 2007 10:44 AM in response to A Last-Ditch Effort to Save Admiral's Row

First of all, Ella, you know nothing about what I do, what I know or what I think. So all the assumptions are on your part. I happen to have a museum background and I have a very good idea about non-profits and how they work. in fact I work for one now. what I do know about the Intrepid is that yes, it's popular, and that translates into money- not just for the museum (which most likely still operates on grant funding I'm sure, and donation) but for the area as well. It's a tourist attraction- a huge one- it brings big bucks to the City that way. Many special, major events are held on the Intrepid that also bring in money.

See, Ella, creative people know how to take an important piece of history and look at ways of supporting it. Money people with vision know how to market it. Educators see a piece of history that they hope will inspire youth. And so it goes. The benefits are not necessarily monetary but they are very very real. Frivolous? Pretty Houses? How about ignorance and lack of education or pride.

As for the supermarket- how kind of you to become concerned after all these years. Your sudden concern for the community is about making money at your convenience.If you didn't have AR to tear down, I highly doubt you would be so "concerned" for the needs of the community.

It's all very well to jump and down insisting I'm wrong, but as the Basuto proverb says,""If a man does away with his traditional way of living and throws away his good customs, he had better first make certain that he has something of value to replace them."
and he doesn't mean a supermarket.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 16, 2007 1:00 AM in response to A Last-Ditch Effort to Save Admiral's Row

Sorry, but no. I never post links to other sites and would caution everyone not to click on links that are not specifically real estate sites relating to the content on brownstoner. I also never post without signing into passport.

Rhana- yep. You leaving?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 16, 2007 12:27 AM in response to Co-op of the Day: 125 Eastern Parkway 3 Bedroom

JoshK-

I never said "deserve"- I said "need" and that's a very differnt thing. I totally agree that no one needs to live in Manhattan (I tried it and hated it- ergo, here I am in Brooklyn).

But I think there is a further issue that too many people forget about city living. Business desperately needs employees to function. NYC has moved further and further way from any kind of manufacturing (indeed too expensive for them), and while kissing corporate butt is stifling the small mom and pop businesses which are an enormous part of the economic engine which employs hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers. NYC has had huge increases in so-called service industries, which are heavily dependent on people rather than technology. Think what the economy of this city would be without restaurants, theaters etc.

The enormous salaries paid to those in the financial services extends to only a small sector of the labor market so the majority of people do fall in the lower to middle income area in terms of salary. The majority of workers, in terms of people, falls into the lower income levels. But however you slice it- business needs labor to function. And if labor can't afford to live without reasonable access to their jobs (that doesn't involve a 2 hour trip in both directions), they can't get to work, or they can't afford to get to work because of the travel expense. They can't afford to work for the salaries offered because everything is too expensive.

So businesses not only lose workers through high turnover, but replacing and training new people costs them. Big business is better able to absorb the cost but smaller businesses take a hit. Without the big business breaks corporations get, they are being forced out of business. That effects the economy because again, without small business the economic engine breaks.

It's the domino theory. One thing can't fall without setting off a chain reaction. Parts of Manhattan and the rest of the city have to remain affordable and liveable (please everyone- no comments about getting 6 roommates for a 1 bedroom in a rapidly gentrifying Harlem) for even lower income people.

So fix RC/RS- set income caps or whatever, but breaking it will do more than force out lower i come people. It hurts business.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 15, 2007 12:50 PM in response to $25 MacArthur Grant for Affordable Housing Research

Anon 11:35:
Good- Paris can breathe a sigh of relief. (Wish NYC had the same option)

Thanks CHP for the history- I think Eastern Pkway and the Grand Concourse are magnificent, assets not only to Brooklyn and the Bronx, but to the entire city as well..

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 15, 2007 12:17 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 125 Eastern Parkway 3 Bedroom

That's the real question, Jimmy legs. But the Bloomberg administration has a history of doing the forest before they figured out what the trees are.They will go for the big showy stuff (like Jet stadiums and Nets Arenas) but neglect the basic administration of even the most important agencies. Another example: the tremendous cutback in Fire Marshals at a time when suspicious are rising. I can't remember the exact numbers but it is on the order of a couple of hundred to less than 50. That's typical for this administration. Don't forget- he is a financial genius and businessman but not a civic one.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 15, 2007 12:06 PM in response to HPD: Understaffed, Incompetent or Both?

The Navy yard is owned by the City and the BNYDC, while a not-for-profit organization is hardly a charity. it is a managing agency

Granted the Navy Yard is fighting an uphill battle, but it is still an immensely historic area, and AR is a row full of historic buildings. If you think people aren't interested in military history or wouldn't be thrilled to do a tour of the Navy yard, then you obviously don't know what the Intrepid is. And if you think the Intrepid doesn't make money, you are delusional. If The BNYDC really looked into all these plans, as you claim, then the reason they could not make it work was that they were too lazy to make it work.

Yes the Navy yard is an industrial park, not a museum, but seeing as how successful it is (as asserted by the Mayor -http://www.gothamgazette.com/community/36/officialword) and is continued expansion, they cannot claim to be desperate.

Don't know how many of you remember the old South St. Seaport, before it became a theme park. It was full of character, odd, curious, alive with history. Old seamen used to be down there- incredible living history- what an education. Today it's the disney version, pretty, bland, and lifeless.Do your kids get educated at the food court? Or learn about whaling days in Williams-Sonoma? Not bloody likely. That's the real shame- you are all too willing to allow the destruction of an important piece of Americana, and of Brooklyn in order to give us...shopping! Sets a great example for the future. Just great.

You don't hold back the future by holding onto the past. You enrich it. And Ella- I'll throw out another literary quote you'll probably also dismiss: those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 15, 2007 12:31 AM in response to A Last-Ditch Effort to Save Admiral's Row

Actually ella- if anyone is pontificating, it was you. As for people disparaging the City government, (in your opinion, those who don't know what they are talking about), in fact anyone who lives in this City and has been affected by the decision making of those " most moral, intelligent and imaginative people" you know, I bet dollars to donuts they know a lot more than you think. They see the results- like the school bus re-routing. That was an sign of intelligent life, just not in this universe. from all of my dealings with the City on issues, the decision-makers have developed a know-it-all arrogance that they feel entitles them to make decisions based on their friends, the money they can make and the need to stay in office. I've seen enough of it to know first hand how they work.

So just where are those intelligent, creative moral types if the best they can come up with is to tear down an important part of American history and put up a supermarket?

too bad you don't see the connection between what Margaret Mead said and CHP. Instead of disparaging her ideas, seems to me a creative, intelligent member of the City Government would have listened to her and tried to come with solutions that could keep everyone happy. Instead they went for the option most likely to produce an negative reaction and they knew it.

All that proves is that the person with the real brains and creativity is CHP. Sorry Ella- methinks you are mired in your muddy thinking.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 7:36 PM in response to A Last-Ditch Effort to Save Admiral's Row

anon, 6:14- theres no reason at all except someone's greed

a-non- not nearly as much as they blew trying to get the Jets stadium built.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 6:23 PM in response to A Last-Ditch Effort to Save Admiral's Row

'Meanwhile, 20 somethings like me who barely make 6 figures have poor parents will never be able to afford a place that is convenient to Manhattan."

You gotta love this guy's sense of humor.

If you can't make it on "barely" 6 figures the problem is you, not the market. Sorry about the parents too. Have you spoken to them about having had you when they really couldn't afford you?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 6:11 PM in response to Brownstoner Reader Survey Results

I live near eastern parkway and the one thing it is, is a beautiful boulevard, much like the grand concourse. People who have been to Paris have told me it is so like boulevards there. No matter how beautiful a neighborhood is, places like Eastern Parkway and the grand Concourse have a grandeur about them that just can't be matched. It's a plus for everyone- and the City too.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 6:03 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 125 Eastern Parkway 3 Bedroom

Perhaps some people should heed the words of Margaret Mead: "Never believe that a few caring people can't change the world - for indeed that's all who ever have" I'm sure CHP does.

Ella- you sound like a community board member with some sort of investment (political or otherwise) in this. As you should well be aware, politics is swampy ground. Don't bet too surely that what CHP and the rest of us want for Admiral's Row is a pipe dream.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 5:52 PM in response to A Last-Ditch Effort to Save Admiral's Row

Of course it's not worth it- after all aren't we giving all that money to those who promise sports arenas? and how much money did our Mayor blow just trying to get a football stadium on the West Side. Oh- and what about all those tax write offs the City gives? And the breaks to landlords who are supposed to build affordable housing and then never do. Please.

Maybe if the City prioritized better, we'd all get what we need and still keep Admiral's row. Which, by the way, is hardly the only available space.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 2:05 PM in response to A Last-Ditch Effort to Save Admiral's Row

SPer- very very right. the only thing I would say though is that while it is easy for the control/stabilization program to be abused, the majority of people on it are the ones who desperately need it. I don't see how it discourages construction because rent control and stabilization don't apply to new construction.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 1:48 PM in response to $25 MacArthur Grant for Affordable Housing Research

I think it's appalling that the City would do this. We spend so much money on crap in this City, (how much did they spend reworking the school bus routes, I wonder?) 25 mil - Bloomberg donates way more than that each year to arts organizations- it's pocket money to him. So why tear down a huge piece of this country's history, (and Brooklyn's as well?) But Bloomberg's history of dealing with these kinds of issues is not good. No money for Admiral's Row but millions for the Ratner Project? He must think we're all stupid.

I just contacted one of the veteran's organizations I do vollie work for and asked if this was something they could help with.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 12:53 PM in response to A Last-Ditch Effort to Save Admiral's Row

doesn't the visitor counter tally ISP addresses- in which case wouldn't that number be hits, rather than unique visitors?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 12:50 PM in response to Brownstoner Reader Survey Results

doesn't the visitor counter tally ISP addresses- in which case wouldn't that number be hits, rahter than unique visitors?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 12:49 PM in response to Brownstoner Reader Survey Results

Sorry- I only see them as pets. Obviously you have other interests- CACC will be arriving at your front door shortly to pick you up. Hope you get adopted before the 7 day waiting period.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 12:47 PM in response to Brownstoner Reader Survey Results

I think it's appalling that the City would do this. We spend so much money on crap in this City, (how much did they spend reworking the school bus routes, I wonder?) 25 mil - Bloomberg donates way more than that each year to arts organizations- it's pocket money to him. So why tear down a huge piece of this country's history, (and Brooklyn's as well?) But Bloomberg's history of dealing with these kinds of issues is not good. No money for Admiral's Row but millions for the Ratner Project? He must think we're all stupid.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 12:40 PM in response to City Trying to Demolish Admiral's Row

Sorry to disappoint. the Miss America Pageant people won't let me wear my banner because of copyright issues, and they take the tiara back when the next person wins. I don't do nude without that banner. However I'm sure any one of my cats will be more than happy to pose (even action shots!)totally in the buff for that. we all do what we can. :-)

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 14, 2007 11:57 AM in response to Brownstoner Reader Survey Results

It's also worth mentioning that the organization behind the drive to landmark the Crown Heights North neighborhood is the Crown heights North Association. they are the ones who began the process and have been getting it through the LPC. In addition they have been helping the school as well. Not only are preservationists being proactive about saving history, but helping to make the building safe and viable.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 13, 2007 10:59 AM in response to LPC Calendaring Considering Adventist Complex

Anon 5:10- sure it does. I'm comparing the money you spend for the amount of space you get. Never said my personal preference affected anything.And as it were, the conversation was about residential, not commercial rents.

Anon 10:30- a little late for the bandwagon aren't you? Been there, done that.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 13, 2007 10:52 AM in response to All-or-Nothing Brownstone Rental in Slope

Don't know why the above post didn't show my typekey id Bx2Bklyn - I was signed in when I posted.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 13, 2007 1:49 AM in response to A Couple of Things

what bubble?- I dunno, you could be right. I took it in the context of the rest of the blurb, which hardly sounded like fan mail. "bad" I get- never heard "sickest" used like this before, but then who can keep up? Seems other people took it literally too, except they thought it meant open season on the guy for wanting to rent instead of sell.

thanks amerileed for the history of the place. It's true- if you look at prices in Manhattan, 8-10K is not unheard of and for less space. I'd take a Brooklyn brownstone over a Manhattan apartment anyday.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 13, 2007 1:00 AM in response to All-or-Nothing Brownstone Rental in Slope

FYI- the lovely space in the photo just above the gorgeous triple window is what used to be the kitchen ( form the 70's I think.) Once water damamge rendered it unusable, they used the room for storing whatever.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 13, 2007 12:45 AM in response to House of the Day: Crown Heights Grand Dame

I have 15$ in my savings account you can have! Seriously- i wish there was a way to do it. A B&B seems to be the only way to use the whole house without redoing the entryway. Or a commune because to reconfigure the entry and staircase would be a crime. Now to relive the heartbreak again of seeing that wonderful old house and hoping the right person buys it.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 13, 2007 12:42 AM in response to House of the Day: Crown Heights Grand Dame

Wow- this must be the sickest thread on the web. So the guy wants to rent out the house- if you don't want to rent it, you're entitled but jeesh. You people carry on like he personally attacked you and destroyed your homes. And you jumped on the bandwagon too Mr.B. Why is this the sickest rental in Brooklyn? why can't he keep his property and choose to rent it out? I thought it was still a free country. There's always been this anti-rental thing going on on Brownstoner, but get a grip people.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 12, 2007 3:21 PM in response to All-or-Nothing Brownstone Rental in Slope

fixer upper is an understatement! I've been in that house and it was truly fabulous. That said, it had some serious structural issues, serious layout issues, serious living issues- you nme it, it had an issue. The basement was a wreck, there was an anormous of water damage there and in other parts of the house, the front wall was sagging (although from the picture this may have been shored up), and at least 5 dumpsters worth of junk. No kitchen to speak of - the 60's era (?)kitchen had been in the basement and badly damamged by water. No longer usuable ( or even entering). the ones upstairs all needed gut rehabs. Same for the bathrooms, but if i remember correctly there was a wonderful upstairs bathromm that had one of those full body showers, but it looked later than the original period of the house. The huge bay on the side also should be shored up- the list was endless. One could easily spend at least 750,000 on renovation and structural work. Did I mention new heating and electrical and plumbing?

The house originally was asking over 900,000 and went for around 650,00. I think there were actually 2 flippers- one who was in construction and intending to renovate for himself and his family, and then the present one who is flipping the house. Not sure if I'm right about that.

But I did weep over this one- whata beauty- and I think it will sit for a long long time before it gets sold again. menwhile it will most likely continue to deteriorate.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at February 12, 2007 3:09 PM in response to House of the Day: Crown Heights Grand Dame

Jeremy -free speech is still a right in this country. Agreed. But I call it like I see it and to be frank, while it's not my aesthetic, many of the buildings put up in Hasidic neighborhoods are a far cry better than the crap I see going up everywhere else. I don't object to anyone calling a building ugly- I find it repulsive when when one particular group is constantly singled out as if they are the only ones to blame. Nor do I see anyone else who puts up a crappy building being identified by racial or religious group. And if the shoe fits, wear it- your "West bank" comment only served to illustrate my point.

FYI- I am Jewish too, and Mentch is right. Until you have been singled out for being a Jew, or a Black, or Buddhist or any other minority, until you have been refused service because of the color of your skin, beaten up because of your beliefs, or told you you don't belong because you don't believe in Jesus, you don't have a clue what it feels like or even how to recognize it. And yes- I speak from experience.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at January 19, 2007 12:47 AM in response to Sin-A-Gog Outrage: This Is Getting Ridiculous

I'm also a little uncomfortable with some of the comments. And why do the satmars and Hasidic groups get so much attention here? If anyone wants to take a look at houses of worship that endanger their congregations there are plenty of churches to go around, not to mention all those little storefront places. Yet no one says anything about them. This just seems like an attempt to drum up hysteria and more bad feeling (very successfully with anon 11:28). I am all for facts and truth but this thread seems to be stretching.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at January 18, 2007 4:58 PM in response to Sin-A-Gog Outrage: This Is Getting Ridiculous

I was mugged (with a gun to my head) in Brooklyn Heights in the 90's. There were people up and down the street too at the same time. Crime happens- anytime, anywhere. But it is interesting that the discussion lines on this site always seem to break down along racial lines. I don't see anyone getting overly upset at black-on-black crime- which is happens far more than interracial. Or when a Black woman is raped, which is nearly ignored as opposed to the rape of a white woman. My point is every community and group suffers from crime and every racial and cultural group perpetuates its share. We also tend to ignore the way we all help perpetuate crime- whether it's Wall St. traders who love shoving drugs into their bodies or the hit-and-run/drunk drivers who don't get charged with murder, the white supremacists who blow up buildings or the CEOs ripping of millions of dollars and people. We all contribute, so how about we stop making it a racial issue when it is a social one. None of us should be feeling too smug about our role.As for Mr. Rushkof and his wife- its obvious Brooklyn is not for them. They seem shocked that they found out they are not entitled to safety by virtue of where they live. Newsflash- there is no entitlement with life. Money doesn't buy invulnerability. And terrible things happen in small towns too.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at January 10, 2007 1:30 PM in response to Let's Talk About the Rushkoffs, Dammit

I think there is plenty of crap architecture from all cultural groups- no need to single out the Hasids as the inventors of it.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at January 9, 2007 5:42 PM in response to Actually, Greene Avenue Atrocity IS for Sale

Don't know what the final prices were but both houses are now marked sold. I have been in the dean St house- it was truly droolworthy. Lots of original detail, in good shape,even the original embossed wallpaper.

It's around the corner from me and yes, CnHgtN is still up and coming, it is definitely on the rise. It's a great neighborhood.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at January 9, 2007 11:36 AM in response to Head-to-Head in Crown Heights

"And even better for you free marketters out there, he is pointing out that the market is rejecting it." Exactly the point, putnam-denizen. Mr. B's point is not that the building doesn't "fit in his neighborhood" but that developers should not expect to make a killing when they throw up a piece of garbage, do a little cosmetic touch up and throw in the cheapest hardwood floor they can. In essence developers like these simply believe that people are stupid and will buy anything so long as it has a granite countertop. It's not an issue of putting up badly needed housing (this was intended as luxury housing- and the demand is for middle to low income housing), it also becomes a safety issue. Crap construction creates unsafe structures. The demand for housing doesn't justify putting up an unsafe building.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at January 8, 2007 9:07 PM in response to Keep Passing Broken Windows

I had a friend who tried to develop a McMansion project upstate in Westchester and you're right Tinarina. The have a book, and the client picks and chooses. Part of the problem really is that while theses homes are called "custom," they are really prefab with choices.

They go up relatively quickly and cheaply- costs get cut somewhere. The materials they use, in sheer quantity alone is huge- offsetting that would be cutting down as much as possible in construction and labor. Old framing was set at -what was it? 16 inches. They are more spread out in new construction. Less material cost and less labor. Cast urethane architectural elements are much cheaper than carved wood. etc. The scale is to ego, not biology or practicality. I bet in a 100 years most of those houses (if they are still standing) will have been broken down into apartments and sro's. McMansions are built huge and flashy. All for show. the old Victorian mansions were built for similar reasons, but also with the underlying idea that quality was the important issue. The Astors, the Hearsts, the robber barons- they demanded the best for their money. Granted they would be totally unaffordable except to the richest, but nothing changes the fact that McMansions are a sad imitation of what architecture should be.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at November 13, 2006 12:19 PM in response to Harvard Soph Sees Upside of Bubble Bursting

I thought the Times article was interesting too- more for the exposure of the extremely cynical manipulation of the race issue. I realize the Times wants to walk a fine line, considering their connection to ratner, but at least they put the issue out there.

As for living in a mostly Black neighborhood- I've found it to be pretty much the same as living in a white one. People are people- cultural and economic issues aside- and the important things are the same. Family, work,health, home- everyone has those same concerns. But until the day people are willing to understand that, race will always be an issue. And so is ignorance, courtesy of those like Eryximachus. what was that Shakespeare said? "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

I have always believed in the Great Melting Pot. I never thought it meant that we would all give up our identities, or cultural histories. I thought we were making soup- tomatoes are still tomatoes, beef is still beef, veggies are still veggies- but together they make a great soup. and it's much healthier than that slice of American pie we seem to be gobbling down at the expense of our fellows. Cuisine tip of the day. :-)

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at November 13, 2006 11:52 AM in response to Making Atlantic Yards a Black-and-White Issue

I honestly have to say that worrying if a building will be ugly seems to pale in comparison to the fact that it would be an opportunity to build expanded libraries in these neighborhoods. The apartments are icing on the cake- and I have always taken a strong stance to protecting brownstone neighborhoods. But if an ugly building is the only way to get an expanded library I'm all for it. Visual is only one aesthetic- a library contains them all and opens them to all.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at November 13, 2006 11:28 AM in response to Library Plan a Win-Win on Paper

I had thought those buildings were landmarked. what a devastating loss for Brooklyn history. I had heard Marty has aspirations to Mayor- he's sure not getting my vote. Bloomberg is ruthless and insensitive. We have money to burn for Nets arenas, giveaways to developers of luxury housing, and yet nothing to preserve these historic buildings. Loser is right- there's plenty of room without tearing down the houses. Anon 12:15 has the right of it too. If the City really cared about the tenants of the Farragut Houses they'd spend money making them liveable.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at October 25, 2006 1:37 PM in response to Marty and Mayor Deal Death Blow to B'kln History

I won't even begin to comment on people like Dave and Josh K. I think CHP said very well. There's a lot of reasons why comparing this to ratnerville doesn't hold water. The first is to point out that apartment buildings are needed and this one looks like it will be a positive addition. It looks like the builder actually cares about how it looks in context, it's being built for people who desperately need it, it's going to add retail space- a plus to the neighborhood, it doesn't depend on taxpayers to fund it- that's just to start. We don't have to rehash the problems and negatives of ratnerville- everyone knows the story. Suffice it to say these two projects are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Ratner could learn a few things from them about how to actually improve a neighborhood, not steamroller it.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at October 25, 2006 2:07 AM in response to Affordable Housing Groundbreaking in East NY

I've loved this places for years- it's a brilliant blast of imagination in a city that sorely needs it. It's an artwork that needs to be saved- I'm personally sick of the bland, pretentious crap that's passed off as "art" these days. How wonderful to be given a glimpse into the workings of artistic imaginations - vision, passion, dedication- all too rare today. Art doesn't have to be pretty- but at the very least you know with this building, what you see is what you get. That's an artistic honesty I think we need more of.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at October 16, 2006 4:03 PM in response to Video: Broken Angel Clips from 'Block Party'

I have loved that building for years. It is a true work of folk art and deserves to be preserved. Maybe it's just that this society no longer values art, or we are coming to believe that new is good, old is bad. Or maybe the real collapse is the failure of our imaginations, it's all been disneyfied- you don't have to work at imagination any more. Just google disney and they'll do it for you. Sad when we no longer appreciate people like the Woods who are individualistic and creative and living their art. I guess they didn't put out the slick brochure with the simpering photos that ratner did.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at October 16, 2006 3:40 PM in response to An Appeal From the Owners of the Broken Angel

If you need any further convincing that firehouses should not be closed, it should be pointed out that firefighters don't just "do" fires. they have advanced training in hazmat and disaster response- something we very obviously need to worry about in this day and age. They are not a business, they are not a corporate asset. They are insurance, so closing any of them is a huge mistake. engine 212 is a case in point. The People's Firehouse, 212, was the only one in the area with a chemical unit. Williamsburg is the happy home to Radiac. Radiac is a hazardous chemical waste plant and also takes care of nuclear waste as well. Now that Brooklyn is booming, only a fool would think the less is more. Hmmm...isn't that what rummy said about the military forces we put in Iraq? And look at those results. All of the closed firehouses were vibrant parts of their communities- 204 and 212 were heavily involved in their neighborhoods and friendly with everyone.

If anyone wants to know more about the battle to save the firehouses you can look at www.nofirecuts.com. It's not been updated lately but the information is still valid. There's a lot more to the issue than just, "oh yeah- there's another modern firehouse just 3 blocks from this one." If you know how the response system works, you'll see that close proximity is only one issue, and often not the most important one.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at October 16, 2006 3:28 PM in response to City to Sell Firehouses in W'burg and Cobble Hill

FYI- the brownstonertroll blog is of course the troll. He has been posting about me (giving CHP a much needed rest, I guess). I'm sure he will of course claim it's all me- alas. Would that my mind could be so evil. So the bx2bklyn name is no longer going to be in use. I don't care when he posts stupidity, I do care when he uses my handle to post links to truly disgusting photos, as he has done again. It's not me folks.

So if you see bx2bklyn being used, it's the troll. I'm done with it.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 14, 2006 6:06 PM in response to To Register or Not to Register

they were stomach-churning. I'm sure there is a way to track him but it's probably very complicated. Takes a techie, I'm sure.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 14, 2006 3:42 PM in response to To Register or Not to Register

Need further proof registration was a good thing? Look on the brownstonertroll blog where the troll has again posted a link to some awful picture using my handle. Nothing is worth this aggravation. So now we go back to the same old same old. Interesting that on other blogs they talked about how bad the postings were getting. What kind of rep is that to have?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 14, 2006 3:19 PM in response to To Register or Not to Register

So the concensus is this is not a delightful melange of various architectural styles paying homage to art through the ages? Darn.

It sorta seems like the poor relation to the architectural monstrosity on Court St. with B&N, and the theater. This is your architect. THis is your architect on drugs.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 11, 2006 11:09 AM in response to The Shame of Fulton Hitting Market

What?! You don't see its subtle yet understated, rustic yet rough, less is less charm? Why this is a stellar example of a homage to Mondrian's later works, clean, simple, blocky, but yet...pure in a workmanlike sort of way.

Oh crap. It's really ugly.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 10, 2006 7:29 PM in response to Big Fat (and Squat) Bummer on Underhill

Well, OE & MrLomez- I have to say we must agree to disagree.

MrLomez- you haven't presented anything with any substance if you admit the numbers you gave are both speculation and estimation. You make odd comments such as: "The more high income housing you build, the less strain on public schools. So complaints about a lack of affordable housing in the plan and a shortage of classrooms rings false to me." and "The point is that AY is big project, but Brooklyn is a big place. Nothing I have seen refutes this central reality." Yet you claim you have presented your case clearly and in detail. I don't think so.

It's obvious no argument or fact will make you rethink your position, so its simply absurd to try. I understand your objection is that DDDB is shrill (you aren't the only one. I think it hurts them also), but you also refuse to consider there is truth in anything they say, so it's a losing proposition to debate. We will never see eye to eye.

And fyi- as far as insults go- you wrote,"Stop with the wailing, and start being a little analytical." That comment wouldn't win you debate points either.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 10, 2006 7:22 PM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

I think anyone looking at our posts will immediately see who is being analytical and who isn't (hint: you). You've presented some of the most obscure, lame excuses for logic I have ever read. Even a high school debate team knows to use primary sources, and to stick to the point.

You make arguments such as: "The point is that AY is big project, but Brooklyn is a big place. Nothing I have seen refutes this central reality." You said absolutely nothing here, (ok- so you mastered doublespeak when you read 1984. A dubious accomplishment), and the majority of your posts are in the same vein. My suggestion to you: get real and stop thinking you can obscure your lack of facts with meaningless verbiage.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 10, 2006 9:06 AM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

oops- I meant, this is too big and important.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 9, 2006 9:51 PM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

Honestly your arguments are so obscure they make no sense. "The more high income housing you build, the less strain on public schools. So complaints about a lack of affordable housing in the plan and a shortage of classrooms rings false to me." What on earth are you saying? The richer you are, the more likely you are to send your kid to a private school, not public, ergo we should build only hi income housing so as to alleviate the pressure on public schools? How does this make sense? What would you like to do with the poor and low income folk? Let them all live on the street?

The more parking, the more traffic? Parking is the end result of getting to a destination. The arena wants to be an enormous attraction- that's what will generate the traffic. Did it ever occur to you that the cause of traffic are streets too narrow or not laid out for the high density areas now being built? Sheesh- Brooklyn's street plan evolved out of roadways for horses and wagons, almost 300 years old in some places. Face it- any hi density project is going to bring in a lot of cars. Especially hi-income housing because the rich love their cars.

No one assumes that infrastructure is static- that's your opinion, but not the case. What the protest is about, is that the powers that be are trying to do as little as possible to upgrade the infrastructure to accomodate the extra strain the AY will cause in the area. And while the development hasn't happened yet, it would be a huge mistake to build it based on speculation and estimation. This is to be and too important. If speculation is the best response you have for what should be expertly researched facts, then your whole argument is invalid.

If you want to raise the level of this debate to a level acknowledging the complexity and planning challenges, then your level of response has to be much higher, and that means starting with statistics from an primary source , not wikipedia, and truly understanding the complexity and challenges.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 9, 2006 9:49 PM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

Oops- that is, you can't use addition when you need calculus.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 9, 2006 7:00 PM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

"Wikipedia is an online free-content encyclopedia that anyone can edit" and yes, as wonderful as it is, where did they get their stats? And you've used stats that you yourself guesstimated. So what you're saying is that these statistics are not from an official City source, and the numbers you've arrived at are based on your own interpretation? What qualifies you? Not to be disrespectful, MrLomez- but why are your statistics any better than the numbers quoted by DDDB?

As far as schools and supermarkets- yes- it's a dynamic resource. So what? That's possibility, not actuality. Saying there is no structural limit to school capacity is meaningless if there is no structure in the first place.So basically you haven't addressed the issue at all.

Whether or not mass transportation has reached historical highs system-wide is not the issue. The issue is how functional is it system-wide and you will find that in the outer boroughs the subway system and the bus system are far from satisfactory. The Bronx, Queens and Brooklyn are enormous in size compared to Manhattan, yet the subway system is centralized around Manhattan. In the outer boroughs, as you get further out,stations are spread further out.This leaves thousands of workers, families, students, even potential Nets fans in the position of trying to get to a station however they can and that could mean as much as 2 buses and then subway. And in general, those are usually working class and poor neighborhoods who have the stress of a daily commute that is long and difficult. Your numbers are useless because by factoring in Manhattan as if all parts of the system are equal to Manhattan, you come up with an average that looks fine on paper, and like hell in subway car. YOu can use addition when you need calculus.

Cities do grow (well... not all.)but not at an even or evenly distributed rate. Touting the Atlantic Ave. hub as the answer is simply ignoring the reality of thousands of New Yorkers who have to use a car to get food, go to work or to a Nets game because mass transit is few and far between. And depending on slick media spin (especially when its empty) still doesn't make it better.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 9, 2006 6:31 PM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

MrLomez- you have said your piece on impact but I have asked you more than once for the source of your traffic stats and you refuse to reply. And yes I have noticed we very unfortunately have a Republican mayor and governor. The mayor however became a Republican in order to run for office. Up to then he was a lifelong Democrat. Nothing like a man who sells out, right? There wasn't much focus at all on the AY project at that time. People had much more important worries, like Iraq, terrorism, the whittling away of women's rights and the increasingly disgusting attack on homosexuals and their rights. Bloomberg made sure to avoid mention of AY, especially since he got burned on the Westside Stadium (yay!!). But Bloomberg is also elitist, and arrogant, stating that he was elected to do what he thought best. And that is erroneous. We vote because we want someone in office who will act on our best interests.

I don't get your argument about elected officials supporting the project as if we are to accept their "wisdom" and their "honesty" as a given. It's paternalistic and foolish to expect that once a pol is elected he is free to do as he pleases. If that were the case we wouldn't need the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

As far as the failure of democracy, because the entire process was flawed and decided by persons in powerful positions with prior ties to Ratner, and the circumvention of the public review process, I think we can safely say democracy and law had nothing to do with their decisions and cronyism everything. Whether or not state land usage is subject to referendum, the point is the people are the state and it is the state which is supposed to act FOR the people, all of the people, not a select group. So when the MTA sells the air rights for a paltry 100 million or so, and the state gives Ratner huge tax abatements and money, I question who is really benefiting. So far Ratner is making out like a bandit. Please don't tell me about all the jobs and new housing.

1. Construction workers are not the only people who need jobs. When the job is over, they're gone. THe job creation for the long haul is hardly rosy for the AY- low wage scale for the most part.

2. An in-depth analysis of the subsidized housing shows maybe 900 apartments set aside for truly low income people, and the balance of the over 2000 others are subsidized for families with incomes the range from about 75,000 up to 119,000 (if I remember correctly). I know plenty of people who have raised families on that and without subsidies. If you can make that kind of money, and I make far far less, why the hell should I subsidize you? If you can't live within your means at that income level, there is something wrong with you. Life is very different at 35,000 than 100,000.

3. The amount of money Ratner paid to the MTA is more than made up for by the abatements and grants.

4. As the project strains services and roads in the area, the fixes will once again come out of the public's pocket.(Got the source of those stats for me yet?)

5. The size and scale of the project will put the AY area very close if not over the tipping point where density helps the environment and starts to impact negatively. And the impact on surrounding neighborhoods will be enormous and not for the better.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 9, 2006 2:52 PM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

Mr. Lomez- I think your approach is more on the order of an intellectual exercise, rather than a reality-based assessment of the issues.Nor does it serve your argument to assume anything about who is in opposition to AY. You cannot fit the facts to the argument- you have to fit the argument to the facts.

So far you've stated a number of stats, but no information on where they are from. Especially with traffic numbers, you seem to be laying out the best case scenario- overly optimistic and not grounded in reality.

You say:"The AY project has long lead time and an exhaustive review process. This is how planning is supposed to work."- yet all reports show very clearly that Ratner was able to use his contacts to circumvent the review process and bulldoze ahead. I don't think this is how planning is supposed to work. I wouldn't even put the blame on the developers for Williamsburg. Are suggesting everyone should crowd into a 5 block area surrounding subway stations? That's an impossibility. And the problem isn't even the number of trains- its the number of stations, and services.

Of course we should be pushing for more planning, schools, etc. But to just barrel ahead with a project of this magnitude before your ducks are in a row is only asking for trouble once it's built. Then they'll slap a few band-aids on the problem and forget about it. Planning has to be proactive, not mitigated after the fact.

High urban density is good up to a point. The your problems start to tip the other way. Environmental quality levels go down, traffic gets worse, as does mass transit, area resources are stretched to the vanishing point. And lets also not forget there is a very real psychological/stress factor to be dealt with. Studies have shown that the more crowded rats in a cage are, the more violent they become. Rat race indeed!

You make a good point about zealotry, and DDB's biggest problem has been that- their attacks have hurt, rather than helped. Yet I wonder at the deafening silence regarding Ratner and his cronies' bullying, hardball tactics from the pro-AYers.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 9, 2006 12:58 PM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

Same here Hal- especially with Brooklyn being turned into Pete Seeger's "little boxes made of ticky-tacky." Kids love it because it's a happy color- I prefer a different shade (love violets) but it's more important to me that the owner was expressing himself and his individuality.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 9, 2006 12:22 PM in response to Brown-stone? Not Exactly

I don't have a car and I use mass transit everywhere. That said, while it is possible and realistic to deal with mass transit if you have kids, the truth is it can be very uncomfortable, difficult and sometimes unsafe. It also puts pressure on you to plan your day around rush hours because of the crowding. And carrying strollers, with the baby in it, up and down the stairs is dangerous but done all the time. I think it's unfair to fault families who would rather drive under those circumstances. Everyone has their comfort level when it comes to their kids.

But the trade-off is the environment. I think it would be illegal on some level to say only families with kids can have cars in the city, but what would it be like if the city imposed limits on the kind of car you can own- ie, has to be built to environmental standards, must get a certain amount of mileage per gal, can't be larger than a certain size and must use alternative fuels? ANd NO HUMMERS!

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 9, 2006 10:36 AM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

Traffic is indeed not a self-correcting problem. It simply gets worse. If that's science, its the science of creationism, not Einstein. And insofar as the transport hub- it's a hub in downtown. The people living in the rest of the borough find subway stations few and far between-ever look at a subway map? Maybe the transportation problem doesn't worry you because you don't think cars are a reliable form of transport but reality trumps your opinion.Cars are here to stay and then some. 5000 additional cars aren't a big issue? You have drunk the Kool-aid. By neither acknowledging the strain on area resources, or assuming they will "self-correct." I can only think that your source of information must have been the AY flyer Ratner put out. And actually it is about democracy, economics and class. Foremost is the cynical assumption that Ratner could sell the project to the Black community by preying on their biggest needs. As some pointed out, Blacks were in the forefront of gentrification in the surrounding neighborhoods. Blacks, the working poor, the elderly- they will all be affected. You say residents just don't want to share their little bit of heaven with new residents. I think the question is why should they want to see the character and quality of life in their neighborhoods be destroyed when they have worked so hard to bring these neighborhoods back? The democratic issue is whether or not a developer with friends in high places should be allowed to circumvent laws and regulations. It's a question of why the people who pay taxes are made voiceless by the very people they elect. It's a question of why the people we elect care so little about us that they are more than happy to give our tax money to a man who truly doesn't need it to overbuild an area that will be badly impacted in a negative way.

All in all I get the impression that you feel if everyone can't have the same quality of life, then no one should have any.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 8, 2006 9:02 PM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

The problem with that, OE-from-WT, is that it isn't always possible for kids to go to the school of their choice. Too many kids and not enough good quality schools.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 8, 2006 5:12 PM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

OE-from WT- you must be a cock-eyed optimist. If it were true that people being stuck in traffic for hours makes them take mass transportation, then the LIE wouldn't be the parking lot it is twice a day. And as for your observation that the more crowded a school the better it is- my jaw hit the floor. I have no idea how you came to that conclusion, but you need a reality check, bad. And I am also a product of NYC Public Schools- and I got a great education.

As for the "mahattanization" of Brooklyn- it will happen- AY is just the first wave. Drunk fans are just another issue on top of all the rest. By the way you must not be keeping up with this topic because you would know that misbehaving drunk people on Smith St. is not considered ok with anyone. (Or as CHP said- delusional).

I can understand if you support the AY project- that's your perogative. But I certainly get suspicious about someone who willfully denies the impact that most experts see happening. You either consider yourself more intelligent and far-sighted than the experts, or you simply do not comprehend the impact the AY will have on the area.

Misspriss- I know I might be overly sensitive to race issues, but I somehow got the feeling he was saying the old "give them the Roman circus" thing to keep em down. But then I also found Clintonhillhomeowner's use of the word "ghetto" several times also obnoxious. Only a truly ignorant New Yorker would use a loaded code word like that, rather than simply saying it'll be nice of the streets were busier at night or some such.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 8, 2006 5:01 PM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

Amen to that, TonyTone!

Agreed, Petunia- it was a great article. I also found it interesting that one of the project's AY supporters had this to say "There’s a class of people who are going to the opera. And there’s another class of folks who will go to a basketball game and get a cup of beer.”

Which brings up yet another very disturbing fact. They sell beer at the games. How good will it be to have thousands of drunk Nets fans screaming and yelling after a game? And the other implication of his statement is that Black people are only interested in beer and basketball, as opposed to Opera. In other words, the Arena is "catering to the lower classes." My closest friend is a Black opera singer (and I know of quite a few others). So I thought that was pretty insulting to the Black community.

As for Bertha Lewis- I can't help but be amazed that she thinks 900 units of subsidized housing is going to stop lower income folk from being pushed out. If anything, the AY will accelerate the gentrification she speaks so scornfully of.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 8, 2006 11:17 AM in response to Learning to Oppose the Atlantic Yards Project

Odd as it may sound, I would call the union offices and tell them what's happening. No hard hats? These guys can't be union. No netting, protective measures? Doesn't sound like a union job to me. The union will get on their asses either way. And hopefully residents are taking pictures.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 7, 2006 10:26 AM in response to Pillaging Clifton Place MMG-Style

very unusual- it's just a little strange looking to me- the big massive base- almost like it should be in an old stone castle, and then the delicate trim and scalloping at the top. Still- would not kick it out of bed. I love it.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 4, 2006 2:00 PM in response to Interesting Fireplace to Go With Slick Fence

Hi Jay, it's always nice to meet neighbors- even in cyberspace. Thanks for clarifying your post- I honestly don't care how we accomplish keeping out the trolls- whatever works.What it does sound like to me is Akismet could mean a lot more work for Mr. B. And how would that work? Would there be a time delay before posts appear?

As a veteran of the troll fest wars I am probably more touchy about this than most others. CHProud was really raked over the coals too- and who knows how many others. We wound up fighting the troll instead of having good, lively threads. But if you think about it and look back, the trolls got bad in the last couple of months. Despite the PLG bashing, many of the regular posters had very very lively discussions (I think Brownbomber & dreadnaught can vouch for that), and used our names.

So I don't know what the answer is- I imagine you could register as "anon" and at least we could keep them all straight (anon 1, anon 2, etc.) My biggest concern was that Brownstoner was becoming all about entertaining the troll. Not good.

Let's see what happens. I still think the troll is still very much around-isn't that so, crownheightsPROWD?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 4, 2006 12:18 PM in response to What Do You Think of Restricted Commenting?

In a word, jarirf? Greed.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 4, 2006 12:00 PM in response to Scarano Cuts Deal, Gives Up Self-Certification

Jay- I live in Crown Heights too- what does that have to do with logging in? And while you may think what we had before was "Brooklyn in all its wild crazy diversity", what you really had was a large group of people who care about Brooklyn (and believe me who are a wild and crazy bunch) and one- or possibly 2- really malevolent trolls who started fights, argued with themselves, posted under at least 10 + different names as well as anonymous, and posted links to truly terrible photos using my screen name, for one. I know someone else's name was also used. People who followed those links were treated to pictures of a horribly burned black man, a beheaded Black man and a third picture I knew enough at that point not to click on. If that's your idea of a lively discussion you can have it. There's already been some pretty lively posts (just ask dreadnaught!)- but what I am not seeing, are all the racially offensive posts, and really obnoxious posts. So really, what you're complaining about is the loss of the ability to make offensive comments and false accusations behind the shield of "anonymous", or multiple names. No thank you.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 4, 2006 1:19 AM in response to What Do You Think of Restricted Commenting?

I do what gardensgal does- I refresh the page and that does it. Sometimes it your internet settings. If you don't ask the browser to automatically update the page your on, you have to do it manually.

As one of the victims of the troll I have to say I have truly enjoyed these last few weeks. I think we can still have open and lively discussions, despite the log in. But the troll was so out of control that I hated coming to the forum any longer, and I know several others felt the same. And even all of that garbage could be dealt with but posting the links to those awful pictures with my screen name was the end. A more despicable, disgusting and blog -destructive act is hard to imagine. And the pictures were horribly racist as well. CHP was also victimized- the Troll picked a name identical to hers but for one letter.What other reason would you have for picking a name so close to someone elses? It's hardly coincidental.

If the log in puts a damper on discussion then maybe too many of us hid behind anonymous when we should have had the courage of our convictions.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 3, 2006 5:34 PM in response to What Do You Think of Restricted Commenting?

Ah- it must be dump on tenants day on the forum. Everyone just assumed the tenant is a bitch or a spoiled brat but the landlady makes clear the tenant asked first. Unfortunately she made a bad purchasing decision and now has to have more work done. So lets actually assume the tenant may be a little insensitive moneywise when she bought the dishwasher, but not that she is trying to run roughshod over the landlord.

That said, speaking as a tenant if I were in the same situation I would have checked to make sure I knew a price range the landlady would find acceptable, and if the connections would work. I think the responsibility for putting in a new faucet really is the tenant's. Why not simply tell her she pciked it out, you were more than generous in trying to accomodate her and since you also offered to pay for the dishwasher, she has to pay for the extra plumbing work and fixtures. She can take it or leave it, but I'm sure she also realizes that her situation is enviable. Now it's her turn to show she can be a good tenant. In your tenant's defense, you say yourself you said nothing about the size and price- but until you do make your feelings known, she can only assume everything is fine.In truth she isn't making you do anything- it's your house, your property, your money. Like I used to tell my sister when her kids ran wild- you're the parent! And maybe she'll surprise you by being reasonable and more than willing to compromise.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 3, 2006 12:49 AM in response to Need Tenant Issue Advice

What is it they say, Mateo? No good deed goes unpunished? Well, even if the OP didn't find it useful, I did. Any tips like that that people can pass along are always much appreciated to those of us without bucks to throw around. Maybe you can answer my related question? I have a beautiful piece of old tin ceiling that I am using as a backsplash for my freestanding clawfoot. What caulking would you recommend to seal the edges? I get confused with all the choices.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 3, 2006 12:19 AM in response to Bathroom Caulking Job

and away we go- nope. We went at it with sledgehammers and chisels. Took about a day. Once you break the surface it can go pretty quickly. I like using a cold chisel and tapping with a hammer carefully to get off stubborn pieces. And we wore masks and eye protectors.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 2, 2006 1:30 PM in response to House of the Day: Caton Park Fixer-Upper

CHP- your comments were dead-on. And lets not forget that Acorn was only one of a group of community organizations that signed on with Ratner. I always felt that their decision was based more on the mistaken notion that they were actually necessary for Ratner to be successful. Acorn got a nice "donation" from Ratner, too after all- and their first press conference after the signing was a wonder of chest thumping back patting.

Ratner is one of those highly successful, rich developers who is also ruthless. What other kind would have the chutzpah to factor in eminent domain as necessary to the fulfillment of his project? Like he didn't own enough land in the area already?

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 1, 2006 5:05 PM in response to Bertha Lewis Defends ACORN's Deal with FCR

I agree with you, CHP- Bertha Lewis, despite everything she's done before, made a huge mistake. And I think it's hurt Acorn's credibility. Now I think her economic arguments are classic business sense- and very obviously laid out for her by Ratner. And that's tied into the agreement she signed with FCR.

Where she really begins to worry me is her saying that all of the subsidized and moderate income apartments will be mixed throughout the project.She's in fantasyland here. Not because I don't think its a good idea (I do think so) but it is so unrealistic on anyone's part to think that someone who can afford a market rate luxury apartment will want to live on the same floor or in the same building with those who live in subsidized apartments. People with money pay big bucks to live among other rich people in hi-end communities, insulated from the rest of us. What makes Bertha Lewis or Ratner think they're going to plunk down big bucks to "mingle" with us common folk? The first time there is a problem, you know who will be blamed.

My guess is as the project gets underway, Ratner will fall back on his loophole about building affordable housing "elsewhere." If he sees that the luxury spaces are not getting taken, he'll assume it's because of the subsidized groups, and act accordingly. Personally I believe Bertha Lewis did it for the interests of Acorn, but Ratner did it in a cynical ploy to manipulate neighborhood groups and make his job easier.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 1, 2006 1:09 PM in response to Bertha Lewis Defends ACORN's Deal with FCR

It's difficult for me to read Bertha Lewis' comments without remembering she signed an agreement with FCR about public statements also. In fact she sounds so much like a developer that I have to think FCR wrote much of what she says.

I'm the last one to be against affordable housing, but the question is, will FCR actually carry through on their promise? They seem to have made sure they built in a few loopholes, and the apartments set aside for low income families is about half the number of subsidized spaces they are setting aside for families making up to 100,000+. Somehow I ddin't think Acorn's constituency was in that income bracket.So she got a pittance for people who really need help in housing and a big plus for people who can't make ends meet on up to @100,000$ a year. Big whoop. If you're making that much money in a job you should be smart enough to budget your money.

While I agree with her about the very low percentages of low income housing being built, and that developers are taking advantage of the laws to subsidize building luxury housing, I disagree that FCR will do any better. In fact Ratner willl make out like...er...a fat rat.

For the amount of public money and incentives he is going to get, he should be putting in a lot more housing for low/moderate income housing, and the income levels should be adjusted downward.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 1, 2006 9:56 AM in response to Bertha Lewis Defends ACORN's Deal with FCR

Truthfully, theres some stuff I know I can't do but I love doing the sweat equity thing! There's something so satisfying about bringing a house back to its former beauty that really grabs the artist in me. It isn't even about money for me (I have none how can it be an issue?) but doing the work myself. I helped a friend expose the brick in her kitchen- I had a great time doing it, and nothing beats that feeling of accomplishment.

Of course that said, I hope to be able someday to pay someone to put down a tile floor- that wasn't fun.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at August 1, 2006 9:40 AM in response to House of the Day: Caton Park Fixer-Upper

Hey Brownbomber, not that I myself could ever be accused of using vinegar instead of honey...right? ;-)

It is hard to get the nuances of what someone writes, but one thing is obvious- we're all passionate about Brooklyn and its future.Nothing wrong with that-and its hard to see nieghborhoods changing so much and losing things that made it so wonderful in the first place. None of us can stop change from happening, but I do think we can do something about how it happens, and hopefully mitigate the worst aspects. Change isn't necessarily bad either. But we'll be making very painful tradeoffs no matter what. Maybe change isn't the right word, but growth. And growing pains.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 29, 2006 12:00 AM in response to The War For Brooklyn

Wow- is this pick on Dreadnaught day? Brownbomber- you know I have lots of respect for you but isn't it unfair to accuse Dreadnaught of hijacking a thread? Most of us thought it was a pretty good discussion for all that it got heated a bit.It even extended to the WTC- and it obviously interested people because they kept posting. What would there have been to say about the Civil War House other than it's a damn shame what's happening? Are we just supposed to stick totally and narrowly to the topic to the exclusion of anything else? I wouldn't think so- it's fascinating to see how threads develop- sometimes good, sometimes not, but always interesting. Dreadnaught hasn't said anything to warrant the reactions he's getting here so how about we all keep it civil?

Marcy- why is he a fascist? He's presenting his opinion like all of us have. But to accuse him of fascism seems a little over the top. Unless I'm mistaken all of us pretty much want the same thing for Brooklyn- we just want it in different ways.

I've always associated Manhattan with skyscrapers (which I happen to love), crowds, lack of sunlight, etc. People love Brooklyn for not being Manhattan. I guess the current urban philisophy is build big and dense, make a more economic use of resources and the environment. I'm not so sure that's the answer. Densely populated areas actually form their own sub set ecosystem within the city ecosystem. Some of those will put demands on the city at the cost of other neighborhoods. As we pack people in more and more closely, and build higher and higher, the cost inevitably goes up to maintain them. And there is a psychological price to pay as well. We definitely need a new way of urban thinking-piling people up on top of each other is not the way. I wish I could say I know what is, but the truth is I don't. Nor, at the moment, do I think anyone else does either.

Not to worry CrownHeightsProud- we can always tell the real thing from a cheap imitation. :-)

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 28, 2006 5:12 PM in response to The War For Brooklyn

I think Gehry is talented but his ego has gotten way way out of hand. More bluntly, I believe great architecture can't be built without a great architect. And no architect is great if he does not build first and foremost buildings actual for human beings, and for the site they will inhabit. Otherwise they are just futile exercises in imagination. Truly great buildings use those elements and make them reality. Like the Gothic Cathedrals or the Roman Aqueduct.

Sure the Atlantic Yards are ugly, but they aren't destroying the surrounding neighborhoods, draining resources and straining utilities. But if Gehry's plan will. Building for the sake of filling an empty space seems foolish to me, and since the project could be done in much better ways, I wonder why the "talented" Gehry hasn't figured out how.

What was both amazing and heartbreaking about the Towers was that after they were destroyed, the remains themselves were such powerful architectural statements. They were an iconic statement about loss, politics and spirituality. Like a ruined Gothic Cathedral. Maybe we just needed to see them that way, but the Towers spoke much more eloquently after their destruction than when they were whole. Still, if it could bring everyone back, I'd say build a whole slew of them.

At the risk of bringing down much ridicule on my head, I will say I thought the Libeskind design was wonderful-although I didn't like his individual building designs.I agree with you about the Freedom Tower, dreadnaught. The problem with the Tower is that it is a political statement driving the design.

I agree with Dreadnaught about Portland St. too. It is the architecture that creates the wonderful neighborhoods we live in. Once the character of these older neighborhoods are destroyed, that's it.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 27, 2006 6:41 PM in response to Civil War Era Gem Facing Wrecking Ball

marcy- you made a good point about confusion. I think the new PATH station- if it get built according to the original design- will be an incredible addition. The Freedom Tower-not so much. But I think there is a point to be made- and dreadnought does - that things like incorporating natural materials and the environment into modern buildings, although they may be part of the intellectual structure of Modernism, in reality it isn't often done. So you get showpieces like Neutra, then you get the Fedders that pop up like weeds. Most buildings today- even when they are extreme looking, always seem to me to be watered down expressions of "Less is More." I think that there is a backlash against Modernism- I may be stretching here, but McMansions seem to be the opposite of modern architecture. They want to be Versaille (sp.?) and of course they're not. McMansions seem to be the trend everywhere- not wonderful houses like Fallingwater. THey're a nightmare amalgamation of misconstrued Beaux Arte and more is more.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 27, 2006 3:47 PM in response to Civil War Era Gem Facing Wrecking Ball

Sorry- just wanted to clarify the golden mean comment. It's a natural proportion that is inherently accepted- when things are not built to that proportion they are uncomfortable for us. I'm not good at explaining eactly what the golden mean is- maybe dreadnaught can help me out here. I'm an artist but a self taught, outsider artist.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 27, 2006 2:47 PM in response to Civil War Era Gem Facing Wrecking Ball

Marcy- the Ian Schrager site is beautiful, and although it's not my taste but I do recognize its beauty. Unfortunately most modern buildings always seem to me to be a case of the Emperor's New Clothes- much like dreadnaught's dead on comment about critics and Abstract art. When you have to explain a building instead of the building speaking for itself, I think that is a failing of the design.

A more telling aspect is that so much of the architecture of the past survives and is still in use today. (Not nearly enough, of course, but still). It has an adaptability that much, if not most modern architecture does not, and a human scale that transcends generations. The modern era saw the construction of buildings that were not humanly scaled, hard-edged, and the opposite of natural and organic forms, which human beings evolved within. (sorry- the old anthro degree and stuff). At some point we seem to have passed from designing a building that answers human needs to designing buildings that force people to accept the building's needs.

I would use the WTC as a case in point- built to a glorious soaring scale, but the buildings made you feel like an unimportant ant. Much like the natural golden mean that artists use, there comes a point where we overstep what makes us comfortable. It's the difference between being in a wonderful Gothic Cathedral and the Towers. The Towers and the plaza created a zone of discomfort because the designers didn't pay attention to the fact that people would actually use the buildings. The Towers were awe-inspiring, beautiful in their way, and ultimately deadly. I don't have to go into the construction and mechanics of their fall- suffice it to say everything I read seemed to say they designed the Towers to fall (pancake) when I think they should have built them to stand forever. And to some degree, most modern architecture is not build to stand forever- just long enough to fulfill its function. IMHO.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 27, 2006 2:42 PM in response to Civil War Era Gem Facing Wrecking Ball

I wish I were as articulate as some of the other posters here who so clearly stated what is so important about preserving our architectural heritage. All I can say when I think of this beautiful old house being torn down is what a heartbreak. There's a reason these buildings have stood for so long. they have lasting power for numerous reasons and like dreadnaught says, 90% of modern architecture doesn't. I think part of the reason is that older buildings were designed differently in intent. They were designed as social/cultural statements (of both the architect and the client- ie. the Woolworth building, they were designed to be pleasing to the eye and they were designed first and foremost to be lived in and used by real live people. Most modern architecture today goes up designed to be built under budget constraints, be an ego statement by the architect, and basically designed to fit all the parameters before they are designed for people. Seems as we get further and further away from the early 20th century, the buildings get weirder, uglier, less well designed and less people oriented. Well, that's my take on it anyway. Someday we'll look around Brooklyn and see nothing but fedders and the corpse brides of Gehry.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 27, 2006 12:28 PM in response to Civil War Era Gem Facing Wrecking Ball

Lostinbrooklyn- I can tell you from first hand experience it's hell. I lived on Schermerhorn between Court and Boerum and everything you said happened.

Darco- there are other considerations that are just as important as more housing stock- the developers follow that law. It's not just for aesthetic reasons, or nostalgia- it's also a matter of safety and controlled growth.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 26, 2006 10:40 PM in response to BSA Gives the Heisman to Katan

Yes- Acorn did much in the past but how do you explain Lewis' behavior with AY? Not much of the agreement Acorn signed, along with other community groups, is going to be done the way it was promised. How can she go back to her constitutiency and say "I fought to get like 200+ subsidized apts. for your income level and over 400 apartments promised in subsidized housing for people with income levels up to 100,000?" How do you respect someone who signed an agreement stating she would say nothing about the AY development that didn't toe the Ratner party line? And Acorn got paid for it. How objective are they now? How trustworthy can they be if they are agreeable to being muzzled by the very company that paid them? Looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.

As far as slandering or ridiculing Lewis- I think you're overreacting. I suggest you get a dictionary and look up the meaning of those words. I agree with Shahn- I want them to picket too- but where are they? I believe Lewis compromised Acorn's credibility and it's a shame. And I thinks the facts bear me out.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 26, 2006 5:10 PM in response to Development Doesn't Stop with Atlantic Yards

CHpWd- you can expect people on this board to not take you seriously when you very obviously pick a board name meant to harrass one person, and then consistently attack that person without reason. When will you figure it out that CHP earned her respected status with her knowledge and well thought out posts and those of us who have read them these many months know where she stands. You should wise up- we all understand what you're trying to do here. At least you can't use someone else's screen name anymore- you did enough damage with that.

Mateo- thank you for that information regarding Wilson. I honestly never realized that about how desegregation caused the Black middle class to leave their urban communities and the effect it had. I grew up in a mixed neighborhood and I live in one now that is rapidly becoming more mixed- I wouldn't want to live any other way. These neighborhood are full of life and sound, the neighbors are friendly, it's classic NY. I've always thought such neighborhoods were vital to the health of the city, but until you posted about Wilson I couldn't point to the factual reason why.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 26, 2006 4:51 PM in response to Commentator Balks at Mayor's Housing Plan

I think we also deal with a different aesthetic today. Thanks to architects like Mies Van der Rohe, less is more became a design choice. Unfortunately most people don't understand that the basis for that is using very hi end, luxurious materials- the more is a lot more. The beautiful detail on buildings was part and parcel of urban living because it was part of a visual way of life. Our visual perspective is much different so the visual choices we make are different too. The other big factor is that there are far fewer craftsmen around to carry one the traditions of the past. They went through rigorous training and apprenticeships, a system that barely exists today. Masters would pass down their techniques to apprentices, who handed them down when they became masters.

I also firmly believe that art,music,literature etc. and beauty in architecture and neighborhood are crucial factors in our psychological health as individuals and as a society. Slums don't depress just those who look at them, they deperss the hell out of those who have to live in them. I think it's odd that we have all of these rules and regulations in place for building -where they can go, how big they can be, how many windows per floor, etc. But nowhere do we rule that the building must be well designed or beautiful.Developers today cut corners where they can- other than paying for the utilitarian design to make sure the building meets most DOB regulations, they see money put into making a building beautiful or aesthetically pleasing as an extra, unnecessary expense.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 26, 2006 3:56 PM in response to Bedford Bummers: Number 805

Agreed, teoNYC- they do on occasion become elitist and ethnocentric. As a Jew I've read some obnoxious stuff on this blog and I know there is a great deal of ill feeling between members of the Hasidim and the neighborhoods they reside in. A lot is hype and innuendo, and some folk love to point out the shortcomings of the Hasidic community.

On a realistic level, they have a powerful voice in the City, for many reasons. But the closed window gates I can see no reason for other than child safety. The fire code states that there must be 2 modes of exit from a building or apartment. In my apartment we have sprinklers so the landlord is not required to have external fire excapes- but I still have to have 2 means of exit from the apartment. In my case 2 doors. I don't know if that is the case in these apartments now being built. The other major problem is that in case of fire firefighters often have to go through the windows to rescue people or put water on the fire. The grates prevent that. So whether or not there are interior fire escapes, firefighters face increased difficulties in fighting the fire or rescuing people who are trapped inside.THey really are supposed to be the type that can open.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 26, 2006 1:58 PM in response to Bedford Bummers: Number 727

Putnam-denizen,I'm with you 100%. It's very clear that every aspect of urban living has an impact on every other aspect, no matter how distant. Gelinas I'm sure knows that but admitting it will not serve her purposes. I always thought the mark of a successful society is how well all of its people are doing- not whether or not one particular group is doing better than the rest. And there is good reason- when one group prospers at the expense of the others, the social fabric is weakened, then torn. I don't know if that makes me a "leftie" (I am anyway), or a "commie" but I do know it makes me a realist and history will back me up.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 26, 2006 10:28 AM in response to Commentator Balks at Mayor's Housing Plan

I assumed they are enclosed for child safety.And yes they are a fire hazard and I also wonder why it's allowed. I know the firemen have complained many times they are unsafe. SO when they finally have a tragedy, the CIty can only blame itself for not enforcing fire laws and codes. But it's ok to close firehouses, I guess. Go figure.

Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at July 25, 2006 5:42 PM in response to Bedford Bummers: Number 727

You're right, Mateo- the misspelled Crownheightsprowd is not the real CHP- just a cheap wannabe.

Nicole Gelinas always writes like a second tier Ann Coulter. Neither is good anyway- just very good at poorly thought out, ideological verbiage. And when that doesn't work- go for the insults. What many people f