City Council Signs Off on Prospect Heights Landmarking
On Thursday, the City Council voted 47-0 in favor of the creation of the Prospect Heights Historic District; LPC had voted for the designation back in June. Just thought you’d wanna know. Prospect Heights Landmarking: The Video [Brownstoner] Prospect Heights Landmarked! [Brownstoner] Landmarks to Consider Prospect Heights Historic District [Brownstoner] Photo by Tracy Collins
On Thursday, the City Council voted 47-0 in favor of the creation of the Prospect Heights Historic District; LPC had voted for the designation back in June. Just thought you’d wanna know.
Prospect Heights Landmarking: The Video [Brownstoner]
Prospect Heights Landmarked! [Brownstoner]
Landmarks to Consider Prospect Heights Historic District [Brownstoner]
Photo by Tracy Collins
Well Packards, like brownstones, are less rare and they command $75,000-1,000,000. You of all people should understand the aesthetic attraction as caretaker for a brownstone.
Uh-oh!! The “hall monitor” of Brownstoner is here – Bxgrl.
I’m sorry, Bxgrl. I’m really trying to cleanse my thought process. I’ll practice the script some more.
“But an impractical 1932 Duesenberg will continue to sell for over $1,000,000 while a Miata or a camry will be $15,000-20,000.”
DIBS;
I don’t dispute that. Duesenberg’s should be rare, however. Touche’!
Another day, another rant from benson. Whyever do you bother to even post here? It’s called “Brownstoner.com”? And fyi- landmarking is a good thing, especially in less wealthy neighborhoods because a lot of this housing stock is owned by less wealthy working class people and it stabilizes the RE values, and even adds to it. You can complain about Bklyn Heights but landmarking made that neighborhood- its one of the most desirable neighborhoods in the city. Same for Park Slope and Cobble Hill. Homeowners saw the values of their property go up and the neighborhoods get better amenities.
Landmarking has nothing to do with affordable housing. It’s not getting built because developers don’t want to build it. Look at any nonlandmarked brownstone neighborhood and tell me lack of landmarking brought a whole slew of affordable housing on the market.That’s a baseless argument and a look out your window will prove it.
benson you are correct.
But an impractical 1932 Duesenberg will continue to sell for over $1,000,000 while a Miata or a camry will be $15,000-20,000.
One more thought.
Anytime you find the City Council voting for something 47-0,you know that the thinking process has been turned off. This is a certainty.
quote:
“redneck discussion”
how utterfly offensive.
*rob*
“I do have a nagging suspicion that a city that turns its back on the majority of its hard-working citizens is going to be in trouble. We can’t all be stockbrokers and dermatologists. A milion plus dollars is an awful lot of money for a house or apartment.”
Minard;
This pretty much sums up my thoughts. The only thing I would add is that – (Please put your hands over your ears, Brownstoners) – is that MANY folks will not find brownstones to be a viable form of housing, at ANY price. These homes were built for another day, when servants were cheap and plentiful. Many of the things that the vast majority of common folks need – a place to park the car (Yes, the CAR!), multiple bathrooms and a limited number of flights, are not provided.
I know folks here shudder at the thought of these modern condos, but I’ll just take mine as an example. It provides a 3 BR, 2 BA 1350 square foot space on a single level, with elevator access. It provides a parking space. It provides modern heating and air conditioning. It is WHOLE lot more energy-eficient than these drafty homes.
From an environmental POV, I wonder about the wisdom of freezing the development of the central part of the city, which has good mass transit. Doing so only pushes development to the outer edges, increasing the use of cars.
You forgot the thre “Mea culpas.”