Taste police, mandating, advocating elitist views, the photo crop conspiracy by Jon and Lisa- oh come on. You're sounding more paranoid by the second.

You're trying to make this about the tenants, and you know perfectly well this is about sleazy developers who produce crap buildings that hurt the neighborhoods, and often the people in them who wind up have to deal with the problems of shoddy workmanship and fire hazards. As for who pays for the taste police (not that there will be any, but ok)-maybe we can get some volunteer work out of all the stock brokers and genius financiers who are holding their hands out to the taxpayers for a bailout? (Yeah- that's about as ridiculous as your arguments).

"I see no contradiction in the statements I put out. These buildings are liked by those who rent or buy the apartments, because it satisfies their current need (as I said)." Nice try at backpedaling but you said "This is the "community" we are talking about here, and, they like these homes. If they did not, developers wouldn't build them." That's a far cry from what you claim to be saying now.

Posted by: east river at September 23, 2008 9:34 AM in response to A Brownstone [Still] Dies in Brooklyn

"They certainly do not love this building, and as soon as they can afford better, they'll be out of it. "

And I quote: "This is the "community" we are talking about here, and, they like these homes. If they did not, developers wouldn't build them." Please read what you wrote.

It's a strange argument you're trying to make, "Am I the one advocating that moderate income folks cannot buy a place of their own free will, simply because it does not pass the "taste" test of someone with more bucks?" That's like trying to make the lipstick on a pig comment all about Palin because you are desperate to make a point. What does free will of the buyer have to do with the crappy taste of the builder? If he were forced to put up a better building, they would buy into that - using the same free will- and get a better buy. Who's stopping them? You don't usually stretch so much to make an point. We've gone head to head many times and with all due respect, I'm used to much better talking points from you.

I don't think people are more interested in picking a fight with you than they are with anyone else- this is brownstoner after all. But you come on like gangbusters, make your pronouncements and then act shocked that anyone disagrees. You've attacked people plenty of times, with little or no provocation on other threads, so I'm a little amused that you seem a bit thin skinned here.

Posted by: east river at September 22, 2008 5:57 PM in response to A Brownstone [Still] Dies in Brooklyn

benson- I'm gonna go with bxgrl and dibs on this one. If anyone is being disingenuous it's you. The argument of not dictating taste is sketchy at best. And while you may not shop Payless, what they do offer, and this developer doesn't, is style. (disclaimer: there's godawful expensive style too). Payless sells the idea that style can be affordable and they do sell knockoffs of more expensive styles.

These places aren't being built because the developer wants to appeal to his "demographic" The only thing you can say when you look at this place is the guy is beyond cheap and doesn't care as long as it sells. Never make the mistake of thinking this "demographic" loves this stuff- They buy or rent them because they can afford them, not because they like them. It has nothing to do with market appeal and everything to do with squeezing out a buck.

One last point- considering how much the design aesthetic of the western world owes to Asia, I think its pretty ignorant to claim they like these buildings. That's your elitist arrogance.

Posted by: east river at September 22, 2008 4:42 PM in response to A Brownstone [Still] Dies in Brooklyn

That's always been the problem- striking a balance. I wonder if there could be a compromise type of landmarking- so that houses must be salvaged and the facades kept, but perhaps making allowances for FAR so that they could be added to, so long as it kept within the boundaries of period architecture(s).So you could conceivably put up a building as the one here, but it would have to have a period referenced facade, not necessarily a reproduction. But in terms of materials, ornament, etc. So it wouldn't be landmarking per se, but a regulation of area design.

Posted by: east river at September 22, 2008 3:34 PM in response to A Brownstone [Still] Dies in Brooklyn

I just want the parlor. I just want the parlor. Ok- I'll settle for just the pier mirror.

But the kitchen- no, thank you.

Posted by: east river at September 22, 2008 3:02 PM in response to House of the Day: 147 St. James Place

True, THL- but it's just a matter of time I'm afraid before he discovers it and we get the mutant designer clothing bubble that will rise up and kill us with polyester come Oct. 16th. Sigh.

Posted by: east river at September 12, 2008 7:49 PM in response to Bird Blog: Week 17

I don't think anyone could misconstrue your comments wasder, I think bxgrl just didn't want to see this particular subject to develop into an acrimonious back and forth.

I myself sometimes think many people ignore 9-11 because thinking about it is so much more painful and frightening. I've been guilty of that myself on occasion. I think we'll all in agreement about how What reacts, and maybe the thread was an opportunistic post. But at the very least it gave you and bxgrl and bren a chance to express that you remember and I think that's a lot more important. I would have liked brownstoner to have posted a thread about it. But then I want a lot of things I'll never get so...

Posted by: east river at September 12, 2008 6:49 PM in response to 911 Memorial....

Montrose- what about all the little restaurants that opened in Bed-stuy, like on Tompkins st.?

Posted by: east river at September 12, 2008 6:32 PM in response to Crown Height & Bed Sty - Walking Around

I like it- I'm sick of all the food threads,HOTDs selling for $1 mil++++ and endless discussions of coops. It's different I like reading about the experience of designing it green. What's the big deal about skipping it if it bores you? Oh...wait...I forgot. this is brownstoner.com.

Posted by: east river at September 12, 2008 6:20 PM in response to Bird Blog: Week 17

I've spent more than my fair share of time hanging out at B&N. Part of its charm- for those of you who like B&N -is that it encourages people to hang out, read and hopefully, buy books. I've never seen crowds of teens rampaging through and certainly never attacking anyone. I've gone numerous times to the theater and never had a problem If there is, pressure should be brought to bear on the company.

Can anyone verify that the theater and book store have been constant problems, or caused an uptick in area crime?

Posted by: east river at September 12, 2008 5:06 PM in response to Wild Teens Trash Court Street B&N, Assault Manager

Nicely done, ScottLee - we've all been drenched in irony at some point in our lives. Lord knows I have.

Posted by: east river at September 12, 2008 2:36 PM in response to Wild Teens Trash Court Street B&N, Assault Manager

Did you include yourself in that comment about posters, ScottLee?

Kids can be jerks, but its our responsibility to teach them so they can grow up to be responsible adults. It's not just the family that fails, it's the society as well. Simply blowing these kids off as animals is to miss the whole point of their behavior. They've been failed by everyone. Doesn't mean I think they should get off, they shouldn't. That's part of the teaching process. But calling them animals won't fix anything and marginalizes the fact that their problems become everyone's problems.

Posted by: east river at September 12, 2008 1:56 PM in response to Wild Teens Trash Court Street B&N, Assault Manager

Maybe bicyclists should learn to get off and walk their damn bikes on the sidewalk, instead of riding in between pedestrians and acting like the sidewalk is their own personal indy500 race track?

fsrq wasn't out of line- especially in reference to Adams. It's a huge roadway- people zipping off the bridge at high speed, huge amounts of traffic in both directions. A little reality here. It's dangerous. No one is blaming the father- no way. but if I had a kid, like fsqr, I wouldn't have him- or me- bike riding there. The city is stupid to even put bike lanes on major thoroughfares like that. Sorry- there it is. On high speed roadways, bike lanes are stupid. Riding a bike in the middle of high speed traffic is asking for trouble.

Posted by: east river at September 9, 2008 2:22 PM in response to Brooklyn's Dangerous Intersections

I'm on this one with dittoberg and fsrq. As pro bike as I am, bike riders need to get a grip on their egos. Save the planet won't do much when you're sending pedestrians to the hospital. A few weeks ago I watched a father with 2 very young kids biking down the street. The kids were on bikes behind the father- he couldn't see them. How much sense does that make? None to me.

I've been nearly hit, I've been yelled at on the Brooklyn Bridge when the subways were flooded and thousands of people had to walk across the bridge to work. the pedestrian lane wasn't wide enough to hold us all, yet bikers kept shouting and zipping by, nearly causing several accidents.

I think it's horribly sad a child was killed. I can't even address it- its such a painful thing. Kids and animals- can't stand to see them hurt.

The roads need an overhaul, the rules need an overhaul, more importantly drivers, bikers and pedestrians need an overhaul.but frankly, whether or not you're hit by a 200 pound guy on a bike, or a 2 ton vehicle, the effects are equally deadly so saying one or the other as more to blame is foolish.

Posted by: east river at September 9, 2008 2:09 PM in response to Brooklyn's Dangerous Intersections

s'odd. Maybe different depending on where the school was. My schools were all in my neighborhood. In fact my elementary school was right down the block. One of the things my mother did was volunteer in the school library. Of course my father worked all the time but it seemed mothers in the neighborhood wee actively involved. Not agressively, the way I get the impression parents are now. But nonetheless.

Posted by: east river at September 3, 2008 6:28 PM in response to Condo Growth Imperils Schools

"was born in 1964 and my brother in 1968. neither of our parents ever:
attended a PTA meeting
did fund raising
helped us with our homework
ran a scouting meeting
assisted our teachers
or basically anything related to our going to school. "

Whoa- that's sad. And I'm surprised because I was always under the impression the schools in the burbs had more active parents than in NYC. Fundraising probably not though considering schools didn't have the same financial problems they have today.

Still, if as fsqr says, great schools depend on the parents involvement, and he also says pre 1960's schools had great reputations, seems to me bxgrl is correct about parents being involved even back then.

Posted by: east river at September 3, 2008 4:47 PM in response to Condo Growth Imperils Schools

"it's a common issue on this blog that many people approach the market/pricing with an agenda inherent in the position from which they are looking at things (i.e. people tend to defend their own neighborhoods)"

I don't see where defending your neighborhood necessarily means you have an agenda. It's kinda laughable to even think that if Mrs Limestone posts on brownstoner she likes her nabe, it's going to affect the market. But wouldn't that make a lot of us happy.

Factually speaking, the tradition on brownstoner has been to attack a neighborhood or demean it, which does make those who love where they live, defend it. Last week's Crown Heights North thread is a case in point (note to all: never NEVER get Montrose Morris pissed!)

You gotta give them the fact since they live in the neighborhood. they must know something the blogs, brokers or internet can"t fill in for you- Perspective. But to assume they are defending the neighborhood because of some personal market agenda is sort of adding insult to injury.

Posted by: east river at September 3, 2008 4:24 PM in response to House of the Day: 102 Windsor Place

Don't make me say I agree with the What on this. Please don't make me go there.

Posted by: east river at September 3, 2008 4:08 PM in response to Big Boxes Go to Flatbush

that's what he said.

Posted by: east river at September 3, 2008 4:04 PM in response to Announcing "Ask the Brooklyn Borough Historian"

jeez. Mrs. limestone is entitled to her opinion without beeing accused having a "vested interest." and since she lives in the neighborhood, I'd say her opinion is more on the educated experience side.

Posted by: east river at September 3, 2008 3:57 PM in response to House of the Day: 102 Windsor Place

I didn't like the layout- the kitchen runs along 2 walls (at least in 2A and 2B- no center island, no subdivider. called it an eat in kitchen but it's actually a corner kitchen open to the living room. Uh-uh. Not for that kind of money.

Posted by: east river at September 3, 2008 3:08 PM in response to Condos of the Day: 153 Lincoln Place

I more shocked I don't see more homeowners with big bald spots where they've pulled their hair out.

Posted by: east river at September 3, 2008 1:43 PM in response to The Luxury of the Garage

ah, there's the rub. Enforcement. You sound like a really good guy, steve. Read your blog the other day. So...when can you come over and renovate my place?? (that's a hint!)

Posted by: east river at September 2, 2008 8:23 PM in response to The Luxury of the Garage

I second that Town House Lady!

Posted by: east river at September 2, 2008 8:12 PM in response to House of the Day: 139 Clifton Place

townhouseLady- gary lists him/her/itself as a woman. Go figure.

gary does seem to love race baiting however I and many others find you to be a perfectly lovely poster. You got gc angry- it's a badge of honor!

Posted by: east river at September 2, 2008 8:09 PM in response to The Luxury of the Garage

is it me- that was a great response. and no one can fault what you said. You put in your time and both you and Montrose have been nothing but honest about your neighborhood. I'm a great believer in peace of mind. If only there were more to go around.

No one wants to live in an unsafe neighborhood. Crown Heights is so large it's really a bunch of little neighborhoods and like all of New York, it changes block by block- to wit some of the comments of those who have lived in higher end neighborhoods, along side projects. Since most of us aren't rich, we live where we can and make the best of it.

Crown Heights is one of those neighborhoods that you never hear about except in negative terms. But when CHN got landmarked, some people should have gotten a clue. Only a solid group of middle-class and working community minded people would have the wherewithal to go after landmark status. Or the real estate and financial sophistication to understand what landmark status could accomplish. And those people are long time residents, the majority non-white, and grew up in Crown Heights. They're doctors, lawyers, real estate agents, business people, artists... I'm simply pointing out that Park Slope, the Heights, Carroll gardens, etc. are not the only neighborhoods with smart and savvy homeowners who love their neighborhood. But if you haven't been to the neighborhood, making Crown Heights out to be the Brooklyn version of Escape from New York is about as ignorant as you can get.

Posted by: east river at August 30, 2008 4:23 PM in response to House of the Day: 1094 Park Place

I wouldn't think so, z. You would be within your personal home and within the building- even the terrace.

Standing naked on the balcony might be a little different! More of a share the fun thing.

Posted by: east river at August 30, 2008 11:53 AM in response to Is Your Stoop Private Property?

This is such a fascinating topic. I so wanted to jump in on it but decided I'd rather have a nice, calm weekend without aggravating the ulcer! Enjoy the holiday everyone and come back Tuesday with loins girded and ready to do battle :-) (sorry bxgrl, I stole your little smiley face icon)

Posted by: east river at August 30, 2008 11:50 AM in response to The Many Dimensions of NIMBY

And here I thought it was going to be a nice quiet weekend. Nice post, by the way pensnyc, although you'll probably get bashed for using the words" Most of the people making comments on Crown Heights have never even been here before." Or maybe not. Seems only if you're bxgrl, you not allowed.

Is it me- your response to Montrose Morris was way off base. Lurker- great enthusiasm, less caffeine, please ;-)

Montose- when it comes to Gary Cooper, my gut feeling is she's thick as a brick. [Lurker- where did you find that hilarious quote?]. Isn't it ironic she perceives herself as the "black sheep" of the family for buying in Brooklyn? That's so laughable and insulting on so many levels. But as always you made a spirited and well written defense. Too much so perhaps. We may have gotten rid of the faded type guests but certainly not rid of the trolls.

Posted by: east river at August 30, 2008 11:45 AM in response to House of the Day: 1094 Park Place

gary cooper-I so hate to disabuse you about affluent people in Crown Heights but they actually do live here. You simply don't know them.

*sigh* Don't know why any of us even bother.

Great post as usual NOP. The reality is often a far cry from what the ASSumers think.

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 11:51 PM in response to House of the Day: 1094 Park Place

Last year I bought several cherry tomato plants. Watered them, fed them, cared for them, talked to them. 8 tomatoes, folks. 8.

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 8:39 PM in response to Caprese Diem: Where are the good, ripe, reasonably priced tomatoes?!

I shop at Home Depot and when I can, at costco. I don't have a car so it's when a friend and I rent a zipcar. There is a huge demand for these types of stores but I still can't but wonder if there is a better way to handle the way they interact with the community and with overall urban planning. I'm also a proponent of having my cake and eating it too- not always successfully.

Yet I don't quite see how having big box stores in areas that are difficult to reach makes sense when we are complaining about the traffic congestion, the environment, global warming and the price of gas. One the one hand it promotes the use of cars, while decrying that very thing. As my father would say, talking out of both sides of our mouths.

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 8:15 PM in response to More Big Box Shops for Red Hook

I really dislike these threads that descend into neighborhood bashing. Happens far too much and there's no real reason for it. I've seen that house too- it's a beaut. I don't think the market is there for it at that price but then I think NYC real estate has been incredibly bloated the last few years...omigod, the dreaded MREB. Sorry- I didn't mean to mention that. (How many What days do we have left now?)

That aside, many neighborhoods are are having problems- Williamsburg and Clinton Hill for instance seem to be having an uptick. But it's not hard to understand the frustration of crown Heights residents who daily see the hard work of their neighbors and community to make things better. You don't get to see that from the outside. You can't appreciate how far these neighborhoods have come.

Yet let someone who lives in crown Heights defend it, there are those who dismiss them, or insult them. It used to be PLG. Crown Heights is just the lastest in a long line of neighborhoods brownstoners have fun bashing.

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 7:50 PM in response to House of the Day: 1094 Park Place

You can't carry much home on a shuttle and it doesn't leave you off by your door so bulky stuff, heavy stuff, basically items you can get real discounts with if you buy in bulk, you really can't take advantage of. And yes there's car service- but unless you live close by, it's expensive.

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 12:49 PM in response to More Big Box Shops for Red Hook

Hmmm...good point benson. Gee I hated saying that.

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 12:44 PM in response to BHA Wants Waterfalls Shut Down

You can only say that AY is not destroying neighborhoods if you believe that AY exists in a vacuum and not on NYC streets. Maybe "destroying" is not entirely accurate- perhaps it would have been better to say that it stopped the comeback of a neighborhood in its tracks and it did so unnecessarily.

"She wrote an entire book that argued population density was the catalyst for civilization itself."

She did and history bears her out. But you're leaving out the more relevant part of her argument- how cities deal with population density. She argued for smaller scale and neighborhood integrity. She played a part in the fall of Robert Moses who certainly advocated the warehousing of people into high density projects which we know are unsuccessful in so many ways and ripped apart neighborhoods with the enthusiasm of a dog attacking a piece of meat.

But polemicist, why don't you put your money where your mouth is? there's plenty of high density housing available. Why not move into one because I'm betting you don't and won't.

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 12:41 PM in response to Modernism in the City/Gehry in Brooklyn

Anyone surprised? I thought the falling down look of Gehry's design was a sly slap at what he thinks the future of Brooklyn is.

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 11:09 AM in response to Modernism in the City/Gehry in Brooklyn

Stalin would be so proud of him. He trashed Venice yesterday too.

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 10:07 AM in response to Thursday Links

Isn't BJ's a Walmart company?

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 10:02 AM in response to More Big Box Shops for Red Hook

turn 'em off. My sympathies are with the trees!

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 9:59 AM in response to BHA Wants Waterfalls Shut Down

"THIS is the era in which Moses operated, and he worked within these constraints to get things done."

benson-Just wanted to add something to bxgrl's comments on Moses because your statement is really inaccurate and despite what you think, she seems to know quite a bit about the era.

Moses wasn't just immensely influential in NYC and NYS. His ideas influenced urban planning in cities all over the country. The man had major clout. He had power, and access to major money, so in his heyday, he pretty much could do whatever he wanted. And He had virtually free rein. He controlled the direction of public transportation and road development. He ran agencies that operated without public scrutiny. It's far more likely the Cincinnati City fathers abandoned their subway because Robert Moses believed in the car culture. By emphasizing this, he set in motion the future of bumper to bumper traffic, dependence on oil and pollution.

I'll posit another idea for you. Years ago the trains wee the major means of moving goods across the country. trucks were localized. the system must have worked- just look around you and you'll see exactly how successful the movement of goods in and out of the City was. Look at the skyscrapers that went up, the homes that were built, the parks and hotels. The trains and trolley systems. All before Robert Moses and his roads.

The population in the 20's-30's was well over 7,000,000. Not all that much smaller than today- my point being the roads he built were conducive to making us car-dependent, not more efficient. He had a grand vision of linking the cities, grand spaces, public parks and massive housing projects to warehouse the poor. Mass transit just didn't fit into that vision and that's the real reason he basically ignored it.

Posted by: east river at August 28, 2008 3:26 AM in response to Restoring Downtown Brooklyn to Its Former Grandeur

A great historical society is kind of after the fact. It's not substitute for the real thing. As for Lisa's statement being a sermon? You're sounding a little touchy there. Brownstoner started out as a blog for those interested in brownstone Brooklyn. Old brownstones- Jon loves them. Why get on Lisa for posting articles that have to do with historical buildings and Brooklyn history? You go on the attack every other day. How about giving her a break? Don't like the subject? Don't read the thread.

Who can argue with the premise that we tore down things in the name of progress that were more successful and beneficial to the city as a whole, than the garbage erected over their rubble? For all Robert Moses accomplished, in many cases the price was too high.

Posted by: east river at August 27, 2008 11:33 AM in response to Restoring Downtown Brooklyn to Its Former Grandeur

Ah- another What sighting at 10:27. You can tell by the quality of the writing.

Posted by: east river at August 26, 2008 11:46 PM in response to House of the Day: 1252 Dean Street

Guess it does sam- Renters aren't the ones posting that homeowners are schmutzes.

And I believe you mean "financially secure." Psychologically secure people don't need to denigrate those who rent instead of own.

Posted by: east river at August 26, 2008 11:41 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 193 Sterling Place

wine lover, I can't even begin to reply to your posts because they are so full of ignorance and assumptions that by the time I finished just laying out the details I will have far more gray hair than I already do. Thanks for your opinions, they added nothing.

Posted by: east river at August 26, 2008 8:58 PM in response to Can't Cut It In Brooklyn? Try Buffalo.

"not just a shmutz who rents." Do you people ever listen to yourselves? The arrogance and condescension just oozes out of your pores. As if being a homeowner makes you a better human being? Not judging by this thread.

Posted by: east river at August 26, 2008 8:52 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 193 Sterling Place

So the very fact that an area is up for rezoning can make it a self-fulfilling prophecy. Landlords hold back the properties, so they sit empty. The city looks at it says, let's go ahead and rezone because its so obvious this area is underutilized.

Posted by: east river at August 26, 2008 3:52 PM in response to Rezoning Puts the Squeeze on Manufacturing

Biff- There's a Stephen King novel that can explain it far better than I in full and exciting detail. The one with the clown in the sewer (for the life of me I can't remember the name). However there's a classic scene in the junkyard that explains it all.

Posted by: east river at August 26, 2008 3:44 PM in response to Can't Cut It In Brooklyn? Try Buffalo.

I'm one of those who doesn't get the sniping about smaller cities or living in Buffalo. Granted it's not NY but for some people that's exactly what they want. More power to 'em.

Posted by: east river at August 26, 2008 3:41 PM in response to Can't Cut It In Brooklyn? Try Buffalo.

Polemicist- you don't see the obvious contradiction in that? If she can't take care of herself how can she perform basic menial tasks? Put her to work? And who's is going to stand guard to see that she gets up every morning to go to her menial job? Or stand over her as she does it? Of course you'll see how much more expensive that will be once you apply benson's time/cost formula (works out to $467.4236859 per every 15 minutes).Yes. Kidding.

fyi- enjoyed the coop thread. Nice to see you in a little more depth. Don't always agree with you but interesting nonetheless.

Posted by: east river at August 22, 2008 4:07 PM in response to Return of the Stoop Pooper