Myrtle and Flatbush Building Boom, From Above
We stopped by the offices of the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership at 15 Metrotech Center last week. It turns out to be the perfect perch for keeping an eye on the Flatbush Extension building boom. Pictured here, clockwise from top right: 1) 180 Myrtle, supermarket kingpin and aspiring politican John Catsimatidis’ 500-unit mixed-use development; 2) 156…
We stopped by the offices of the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership at 15 Metrotech Center last week. It turns out to be the perfect perch for keeping an eye on the Flatbush Extension building boom. Pictured here, clockwise from top right: 1) 180 Myrtle, supermarket kingpin and aspiring politican John Catsimatidis’ 500-unit mixed-use development; 2) 156 Myrtle, BFC’s 37-story condo project currently in high gear; 3) 157 Myrtle, the half-block of low-rise properties awaiting the wrecking ball courtesy of rentals-only developer AvalonBay. Kinda puts it all in perspective, huh. GMAP
12:10: your views are misguided. The cost to operate the elevators and heat/cool a multifamily building are insiginificant compared to the energy expended on automobile transportation.
There is a reason this country was once entirely either rural or urban. The future of this country, from an energy efficient standpoint, is the construction of high-density apartment buildings the likes of which you condemn. Anything else is inefficient and will result in not only excessive expenditures on transportation, but more pollution from internal combustion engines.
Your belief that elevators to reach the high floors is exceptionally energy intensive is flat out wrong and deceptive. The simple fact such equipment uses electricity ALONE is a huge asset – it is the inefficiency of internal combustion engines that is the biggest problem in this country.
Your rant is one of someone who has co-opted environmental policy to your own selfish interests, ie the rich homeowner. Your plan leaves no room for the masses who cannot afford a luxury such as that you enjoy. Intelligent, high density urban planning is universally recognized as the solution to both further environmental problems as well as the coming rise in energy prices.
OK Mr. construction lender. The men across the table bought the land at inflated prices, and want to start building fast so they don’t lose 421-a tax abatements.
If they start now, it will be two years before they finish, and lots of other people will finish first.
If you make the loan, your firm could lose big time, while future buyers/renters get more affordable housing.
But if you don’t, if the deals don’t make sense anymore, do they really need as many construction lenders like you?
Hmmmmm.
12:33, get your own life.
Thanks 12:33…maybe I will.
Yes, 12:30. You’re correct. Does anyone here realize projects have been torn down in Newark as well?
This is a nationwide push to privatize city-owned land (i.e. public property) and that includes land on which housing developments have been built.
I’ll close here because 12:33 gave the ol’ “Tell Me Less” nudge…always so gracious.
Ciao,
FG/Grammar Lady
keep building here. I LOVE ALL OF IT.
Good point, 12:30 (the first). When was the last time that happened in NYC? In Brooklyn?
FortGreener, get your own blog.
“Can’t imagine they’ll fill all the new condos and rentals in downtown Brooklyn. Especially near the projects.”
Oh they will. But at a considerably lower cost to renters and buyers throughout the city. As the population remains unchanged (and even decreasing in the short run), flipping has flopped and inventory has skyrocketed, supply/demand will fill all vacancies at much lower costs. More and more roommates will become solo. More and more trios will become duos.
Housing projects in other cities have been demolished for mixed-income or higher end housing. Chicago is an excellent example. Today’s NYDN had the following article:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/10/24/2007-10-24_feds_eye_new_york_building_sale_at_housi-1.html
It makes some sense, and stranger things have happened.