Downtown Brooklyn Development [Archive] - Page 3

BrooklynRider

September 22nd, 2007, 11:56 PM

New Angles of 200 Livingston - looking pretty good!

1. http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160231.jpg

2. http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160233.jpg

The horrid Luxe+Pop is below. How this POS managed to take five years to build is beyond me. It is bad in a way that even Gene Kaufman could not dream up. The brick work is atrocious and the teatment on the south facade versus the west facade is mind boggling. Whoa be the sucker that buys a unit in this instant blight. I was shooting pics of 200 Livingston Street and this local woman came up and asked me if I was an architect. She was very friendly, but quickly went off on how absolutely offensive Luxe-Pop is. She knew her stuff about new development and, like everyone other person in Brooklyn with eyesight, she just could not believe how ugly this building had come out.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160234.jpg

BrooklynRider

September 22nd, 2007, 11:59 PM

1. http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160304.jpg

2.http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160238.jpg

3. http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160236.jpg

4. http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160243.jpg

6. http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160247.jpg

BrooklynLove

September 23rd, 2007, 01:23 PM

LOVEly. anyone who can make it over should check out the new livingston building in person - it's looking really slick. this immediate area is going to be something else if all the plans in the works come to fruition. i'm a big half glass full kind of guy when it comes to brooklyn, but even i would have been a bit skeptical if you told me back in 1985 that downtown bk would be what it may be come 2020. these are great times to be a brooklynite. drink it up, peoples.

bklynite

September 26th, 2007, 01:37 PM

According to this it's 40-some condos in a five story building--could be excellent for that intersection:

http://www.110livingston.net/2007/09/26/236-240-atlantic-ave-update/

Derek2k3

September 27th, 2007, 02:09 PM

Worse than expected.

AvalonBay Fort Greene
http://www.goldmancopeland.com/images/Avalon%20Fort%20Greene%20Web.jpg

http://www.goldmancopeland.com/current-bytype-detail.cfm?id=1575

antinimby

September 27th, 2007, 02:20 PM

Avalon SUCKS!!

What a completely waste of a potentially great development site.

I don't know who to hate more, Kaufman, McSam, Poon, O'Hara, NIMBYs or Avalon. There are just so many to hate in this unlucky city.

BrooklynRider

September 27th, 2007, 03:06 PM

I think we are going to end up with the great wall of Brooklyn along Flatbush Ave.

BrooklynLove

September 27th, 2007, 08:26 PM

man, that thing is almost a carbon copy of the chunk they just put up in LIC. i'm not hating though - i can think of many less desirable uses for that space. this aint ya mama's flatbush-x anymore.

investordude

September 27th, 2007, 11:38 PM

I think its unreasonable to expect Avalon Bay to build the Taj Mahal for renters. I applaud Avalon for building market rate rentals in a city that has really only seen condo development recently. And as a bonus, the renters in these units will be affluent young people who will demand and improve surrounding retail. The craptacular retail scene is the main challenge to advancing the cause of a vibrant downtown Brooklyn nightlife scene, and this is a huge step. Once the good retail follows these renters, the flashy developments will follow.

sfenn1117

September 28th, 2007, 01:17 AM

Shameful

krulltime

September 28th, 2007, 03:42 AM

What a waste of opportunity. I bet the one next to st john the divine will be unispiring as this.

lofter1

September 28th, 2007, 10:40 AM

Anyone know where precisely the AvalonBay Fort Greene development will rise?

antinimby

September 28th, 2007, 09:04 PM

343 Gold St.

I'm still bummed. F****** Avalon.

Why do they always have to choose the most horrid designs?

Heck, that new Boricua Village (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=189008&postcount=99) AFFORDABLE HOUSING project in the Bronx looks so much more elegant and stylish compared to their typical Avalon crapitecture.

lofter1

September 28th, 2007, 09:44 PM

Well, heck that Avalon Bay Fort Greene (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=343+gold+street,+brooklyn,+new+york&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=30.875284,58.535156&ie=UTF8&ll=40.689685,-73.981676&spn=0.028831,0.057163&z=14&iwloc=addr&om=1) ^^^ ain't even in Fort Greene ...

The walk along the approach to the Manhattan Bridge is going to be a very different experience.

Derek2k3

September 29th, 2007, 01:57 AM

It's technically still Ft. Greene. Across Flatbush is Dtwn. Bk..
Thank Leticia for that 400' cap, no way this would be so squat and wide without it (albeit probably just as ugly). Imagine the oppressive wall when half a dozen similar height towers rise next to this. I guess she wanted to mimic the projects across the street on a larger scale.

lofter1

September 29th, 2007, 02:42 AM

Most folks I know put that edge of Fort Greene at Myrtle Avenue.

BrooklynRider

September 29th, 2007, 11:31 PM

A beautiful day for a walk around town:

1. Gene Kaufman's atrocious work comes to Brooklyn. Site of his horrid Sheraton and aloft Hotels.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160488.jpg

2. The Frame house from another century that I believe will see the wrecking ball for Karl Fischer's hotel beauty.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160487.jpg

3. 212 Livingston Street cladding starts. It is shaping up to be a beauty amongst some real Brooklyn beasts. (no exposed floorplates - now, that's special)

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160485.jpg

4. This is around the block on Schermerhorn Street; right behind the State Townhouses. I'm not sure if this is the new building for lower income housing. Very interesting construction. Suspended steel base and concrete structure. If it is the lower income housing, it will only rise 11 stories. Not sure if that base could support much more. Anyone know definitively what this is?

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160486.jpg

5. Richard Meier's "On Prospect Park" lives up to the expectation. Just beautiful in a beautiful setting.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160504.jpg

6. Another of "On Prospect Park."

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160506.jpg

7. Finally, after dinner at the new "A.O.C. Bistro" on Fifth Avenue in Brooklyn, I came across this sign outside a cafe:

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160507.jpg

BrooklynRider

September 29th, 2007, 11:36 PM

I'm providing the link below to a map from a previous post for reference to the following site photos.

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=181505&postcount=468

1. Site #7: 156 Myrtle Avenue

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160490.jpg

2. Site #7: 156 Myrtle Ave

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160491.jpg

3. Site #7: 156 Myrtle Ave

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160495.jpg

4. Site #7: 156 Myrtle Ave

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160493.jpg

5. Site #5: Oro II - this is prepared - I imagine its waiting for sales to be substantially moving at Oro I before it proceeds.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160497.jpg

6. Site #12: Avalon Site - Myrtle Avenue frontage

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160496.jpg

BrooklynRider

September 29th, 2007, 11:41 PM

7. Site #14 - This along Tillary next to McDonalds. It is a HUGE site as evidence in picture number "8" where you can see that extendd beyong the Public Storage building quite a way.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160498.jpg

8. Site #14 - big site

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160499.jpg

9. this one is off the map. It seem to be a window replacement and a replacement of the horrid old facade with concrete (look around the windows.) These two floors have taken forever, but they are nearing completion on all sides of the building. I had hoped that this would one day see the wrecking ball.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160500.jpg

krulltime

September 30th, 2007, 12:27 AM

Nice update BrooklynRider. :)

Yeah that last building just doesn't belong in this city. It looks too third worldish. I really love the Richard Meier one.

investordude

September 30th, 2007, 12:57 AM

My God - the current site is atrocious. I'm not crazy about Avalon's architecture, but it will be an improvement over that site for sure.

Derek2k3

September 30th, 2007, 01:45 AM

Well it looks like that b/c they're being prepared for demolition. It was a cute little block-front with mom & pop stores...quite out of place withthe Flatbush 'expressway' and Metrotech across the street though.

antinimby

September 30th, 2007, 01:23 PM

My God - the current site is atrocious. I'm not crazy about Avalon's architecture, but it will be an improvement over that site for sure.That's just horrible rationale. Just because a site is bad does not mean any disgusting, poorly designed, humongously hideous building should just be plopped down on it.

You replace something bad with something superior. Avalon, you are a disgusting, filthy company and I hope you one day very soon will go bankrupt, slimeballs.

investordude

October 1st, 2007, 01:29 AM

I think New York has failed to satisfy the market for unsubsidized rentals especially outside Manhattan. I applaud Avalon, especially because they bring affluent renters to areas where I'd like to see affluent people drive retail improvements at street level. No place with so much potential is held back by crappy retail like downtown Brooklyn and Long Island City.

As long as Avalon continues to help reverse that, I'm fine with them building. I also don't think there LIC or Jersey City buildings look that bad to me. It's easy to have nice renderings turn into ugly buildings, which is what you see from their competitors usually.

BrooklynRider

October 1st, 2007, 02:42 PM

I am looking forward to the new influx of Brooklynites, but find your statements about "affluent renters" rather offensive. This is not a poverty stricken area. Many of your posts regarding Brooklyn and downtown Brooklyn in particular smack of slightly racially charged polemics. Whether you are black or not, the desire should be to see a healthy diverse community. The "out with the old" approach can be nothing more than a campaign to remove the minority population that remained dedicated to Brooklyn in its worst moments.

investordude

October 1st, 2007, 05:49 PM

With all due respect, you're the one making the completely inaccurate assumption that if I want affluent people in the area, they must be white - I certainly didn't say that, because its not true that affluenct people are mostly white in Brooklyn/Queens anymore. There was an article in the Times a while back about how African Americans are the wealthiest group in Queens today, and how Brooklyn is catching up fast.

I think you have the usual liberal loser attitude to bring up race when you can't defend your arguments logically. Here's what's wrong with Brooklyn retail. When you have facts to dispute this, I'll be interested - if you just want to launch ad hominem attacks against me, well then screw you :)

1) inadequate 24 hour nightlife and bar scence
2) fast food restaurants predominate and are poorly maintained and operated relative to similar franchises in Manhattan.
3) lack of trendy high end restaurants, as well as relatively poor dining options at the low end when compared to Brooklyn Heights and other surrounding nabes
4) too homogeneous a stock of old and decaying housing to the north of downtown
5) way too much automobile related retail along the Manhattan bridge
6) unpleasant street scape by MetroTech - in fact, the affluent renters seem to be leading to a redesign of streets that aren't good for pedestrians, so more power to them.

All of these problems will go away when more affluent people (of all races and creeds) move in and use their clout to influence change for the better as we've seen in other neighborhoods and we see in Jersey City as well.

investordude

October 1st, 2007, 06:03 PM

The other flaw in your argument is that people who live there now are displaced by Avalon in large numbers. I don't but it. The picture of the current Avalon site shows Avalon is repalcing low density uses with high density uses. The law of supply and demand is that more housing leads to more efficient prices that benefit everyone. And an extra bonus - presumably Avalon purchased this property from some people who invested in the neighborhood during its worst days. Those people will presumably no longer be poor now that they have received money for their property. As such, they will be able to afford to live in the improving neighborhood if they want to.

We've seen time and again that liberal claims of displacement are wrong. Go to Philly - no displacement, but lots of abandonment. Go to Harlem, and what you see is abandoned buildings replaced by used buildings and abandoned store fronts replaced by used store fronts. Capitalism works and generally benefits everyone, although obviously there will be some small segment of government bureaucrats and corrupt middlemen that loses out.

And another thing - if people really are poor here, presumably its because their economic skills are no longer useful in New York, which has seen manufacturing jobs move to other US locations. Sometimes, jobs relocate to less expensive areas of the country, and that's life. People can then choose whether to retrain and stay in New York or follow their work to wherever those jobs have gone, hopefully with capital from the sale of their New York property.

So, hooray for capitalism, the true equalizer. You can go live in Myanmar or Iran if you think state concern for equality is the way to help the poor and reduce ethnic tension.

Xemu

October 1st, 2007, 10:58 PM

4. This is around the block on Schermerhorn Street; right behind the State Townhouses. I'm not sure if this is the new building for lower income housing. Very interesting construction. Suspended steel base and concrete structure. If it is the lower income housing, it will only rise 11 stories. Not sure if that base could support much more. Anyone know definitively what this is?

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160486.jpg BR great pictures! This is Schermerhorn House. It is being built by an group called Common Ground. From their website (http://www.commonground.org/):
Schermerhorn House, Common Ground’s newest construction project, will provide 217 units of permanent, affordable housing for single adults, with more than fifty percent of the units reserved for formerly homeless and special needs individuals. Low income working tenants, including local actors and artists, will occupy the remainder of the units. On-site property management will be provided by Common Ground, with the Actors’ Fund offering on-site social services.It's been a really interesting to watch rise. The steel base took forever to build. It topped out a couple weeks ago complete with a little flag. The crane arrived last week. I think the base so complex because of the subway tracks below. Here's a rendering of the finished product:
http://www.commonground.org/images/schermerhorn_polshek.jpg

BrooklynRider

October 2nd, 2007, 12:00 AM

What I said:

I am looking forward to the new influx of Brooklynites, but find your statements about "affluent renters" rather offensive. This is not a poverty stricken area. Many of your posts regarding Brooklyn and downtown Brooklyn in particular smack of slightly racially charged polemics.

I never attacked YOU. I took issues with the ideas you promote.

Here's what you said:

...I think you have the usual liberal loser attitude to bring up race when you can't defend your arguments logically... When you have facts to dispute this, I'll be interested - if you just want to launch ad hominem attacks against me, well then screw you :)...

You can go live in Myanmar or Iran if you think state concern for equality is the way to help the poor and reduce ethnic tension.

Very Rush Limbaugh / Sean Hannity / Bill O'Reilly. I am very careful in all of my postings to ensure I make no personal attacks.

Here's some other quotes by you from this very thread that leads to my perspective on the theme of your posts...

I'm sorry - I don't think the city should help these businesses. They're crap...the city should allow creative destruction to get rid of slum oriented business and allow prosperity to happen.

Anyone who thinks the city is better off with the existing merchants is either misguided or corrupt.

My complaint with Brooklyn is not architecture - its the retail scene at the Fulton mall. Let's get an entreprenuer to buy some fast food chains and replace them with a nice French cafe to appeal to Europeans...

Sorry, the area that is spoken about in these quotes is predominantly black owned business serving black clientele. I do think you make some valid points in some of your posts, but this constant drumming to bulldoze the community that kept this district alive undermines the "good intent" you believe is inherent in what you have posted.

I made an observation about your posts based on some of your past posts as I've cited. I never attacked you.

I'm not up for tit for tat responding, although I invite you to exercise that prerogative.

BrooklynRider

October 2nd, 2007, 12:02 AM

I think the base so complex because of the subway tracks below.

Ah, I totally forgot about the train lines. The base makes much better sense now.

Thanks for the rendering. I'm excited to see how this turns out. Any rendering of what will go up to the west of this property?

investordude

October 2nd, 2007, 12:50 AM

I believe, because you politically disagree with me, you're trying to infer something I said when its very obvious that isn't what I said. This is a standard liberal tactic when confronted with an argument you can't deal with - play the race card and associate me with Rush Limbaugh or some other hated figure (I don't like Rush Limbaugh, for the record).

But just in case you genuinely misunderstood me, here's what I meant by European - someone of European citizenship living or investing in New York real estate - it was not a racial thing about white versus black people as I think you well know. Why should we want to attract foreign buyers from Europe?

1) New York is on the Atlantic Ocean.
2) The dollar is weak, and European countries have fewer capital controls and easier visa entry requirements to buy an apartment in New York than most of the rest of the world.
3) As many real estate articles have noted, European buyers and foreign buyers generally are a major force driving real estate in New York and you'd be insane to ignore that if you were the developer. Many people have commented foreign demand has helped New York weather the subprime crisis, so there really is an economic reason to seek international buyers in the current political climate.
4) the presence of these European buyers doesn't cause the existing people to go away, as there is new construction coming online to meet new demand
5) My hypothesis is that European buyers may like Brooklyn's older neighborhoods because it looks more like many European cities than Manhattan. Given their appetite for Brooklyn, I say pull them downtown since downtown Brooklyn clearly has some old world charms and is close to Manhattan

I guess the reason I'm coming down hard in response to you is you don't even know me, you're twisting my words to say things I clearly didn't, and you're resorting to ad hominem attacks against me without justification. It's completely outrageous to play the race card because you don't agree with my market analysis, and frankly I think you should apologize to me.

BrooklynRider

October 2nd, 2007, 08:36 AM

I can't say that I agree with your assessment that I'm playing "the race card." Rather, I think you are showing disdain for what exists in downtown Brooklyn. To a degree, it amplifies the opposing argument "develop, don't destroy Brooklyn."

While I'm sorry your feelings are hurt by my attack on the ideas you expressed, I offer no apology for my opinion.

investordude

October 2nd, 2007, 11:28 AM

Well, its worth pointing out that DDDB has been attacked as racist by some African Americans who support Atlantic Yards - I don't agree with this tactic even though I want Atlantic Yards, but it just shows the race card can be played both ways, even when its not relevant.

Anyways, I've had a good nights sleep and am no longer mad :) It's been an interesting argument.

investordude

October 2nd, 2007, 11:29 AM

I like the looks of this one - http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=27&id=15777

BrooklynLove

October 3rd, 2007, 09:04 AM

can't we all just get along?

downtown bk development = sum good. yes, there are some negative aspects to this sweeping development, but at the end of the day this a good thing for bk. anyone who spent some time over by the intersection of tillary and gold back in the day would be out of their mind to poo poo this modern day renassaince.

build dem buildings, corporate guys!

antinimby

October 3rd, 2007, 02:06 PM

They've cleared the site for 80 Dekalb Ave. already. There was a lot of activity when I was there last week.

Kondylis is the architect.

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/6796/80dekalbxo3.jpg

krulltime

October 4th, 2007, 12:06 AM

3. 212 Livingston Street cladding starts. It is shaping up to be a beauty amongst some real Brooklyn beasts. (no exposed floorplates - now, that's special)

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160485.jpg

Is this one under construction this building?

http://www.pbase.com/image/86660982.jpg

http://www.sbjgroup.com/

investordude

October 4th, 2007, 01:59 AM

From archpaper, that sounds like 189 Schermerhorn. But, there's a brownstoner link that says 189 schermerhorn and 200 livingston are the same building. Yes, 200 livingston is under development by the way:

Brownstoner:
http://brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2007/04/development_wat_76.php

Here's from archpaper:

http://www.archpaper.com/images/feature_13_05/developers_34.jpg 189 Schermerhorn Street
Location: 189 Schermerhorn Street
Developer: Procida Realty and Second Development Services
Architect(s): The Stephen B. Jacobs Group
Consultant(s): Rosenwasser Grossman Consulting Engineers, Sideris Consulting Engineers
Size: 25 and 6 floors, 214 units
Completion (est.): 2007 Architect Stephen Jacobs split this development into a 25-story tower and a 6-story block, and separated them with a courtyard. In the block, there are 15 larger townhouselike apartments, while in the tower, the apartments are somewhat smaller but have a view.

antinimby

October 4th, 2007, 02:45 PM

Is this one under construction this building?Yes.

BrooklynRider

October 11th, 2007, 08:04 PM

Famed Harlem Soul Food Restaurant Coming to Brooklyn’s Fulton Mall

Amy Ruth’s Signs Lease for Historic Gage & Tollner Site

By Linda Collins
Brooklyn Daily Eagle

DOWNTOWN BROOKLYN — The famed Harlem soul food restaurant, Amy Ruth’s, has signed a lease for the former Gage & Tollner restaurant space at 372-374 Fulton St. on the Fulton Mall in Downtown Brooklyn.

Robert F. Hebron IV of Ingram & Hebron Realty confirmed to the Eagle yesterday that the home-style-southern-cooking icon will operate in the historic landmarked space formerly occupied by Gage & Tollner and more recently by TGI Fridays.

“We are very excited to be bringing such a renowned restaurant to the area,” said Hebron. “The menu will contain all of the Harlem eatery’s traditional favorites as well as new choices giving a nod to the restaurant’s Downtown Brooklyn past and present.”

Hebron added, “It is a very well established restaurant and the New York Post [two weeks ago], in its coverage of ‘The Top 10 Overrated Meals,’ named Amy Ruth’s one of the ‘5 Real Deals.’”

New York Magazine’s Chloe Osborne describes it as follows: “Amy Ruth’s feels as if it has always existed. It’s confident and comfortable.” The magazine, which also awards it a “critic’s choice,” says it is a tribute to a southern grandmother’s cooking and to a number of noteworthy African Americans, suggesting that readers order “The Rev. Al Sharpton” (fried or smothered chicken and waffles), “The Stan Hoffman & Lu Willard” (BBQ spare ribs), or any other soul-food staple: fried chicken, catfish, collard greens, or ham hocks.

A more formal announcement about the new location will be made by Amy Ruth’s owners later this fall, possibly when an opening date is determined.

That is expected by year’s end, said Hebron, who represented both tenant and landlord in the transaction.

© Brooklyn Daily Eagle 2007

investordude

October 11th, 2007, 08:47 PM

This is great news about finally getting some quality restaurants in that area. It's also, referring to the previous spat, an example of how capitalism creates a more inclusive but better neighborhood that's better for everyone - and an example of what I was getting at when I said I hope affluent residents create an enviroment for better services in the nabe.

BrooklynRider

October 12th, 2007, 02:33 PM

I definitely share your enthusiasm for this development.

investordude

October 12th, 2007, 03:39 PM

They ran a blurb about steel rising at 156 Myrtle today. They seem to suggest the developer has building approval and is ready to role at 85 flatbush for the "Flatiron" building.

I'm not sure why they feel confident in this though.

BrooklynRider

October 13th, 2007, 01:05 AM

That site is d-e-a-d.

Nothing is happening.

Each month there is a report that ground is supposed to break "next month." That is one I've dismissed as a freakish rendering of something that isn't getting built (and thank God - it was rather garish.)

investordude

October 15th, 2007, 08:21 PM

investordude

October 17th, 2007, 12:33 PM

Looks like the next Oro building will include a hotel, according to the hype here. Apparently, Brooklyn is trying to recruit Nordstroms to the Fulton Mall, although I think its very unlikely that will happen prior to a Manhattan flagship for them. http://www.nypost.com/seven/10162007/realestate/upside_downtown.htm?page=1

The article is mostly hype, and again contains the dubious assertion 85 flatbush is really happening, but one can dream...

investordude

October 17th, 2007, 12:40 PM

I checked the DOB website and it looks like as of 10/17 (today), Avalon Fort Greene is officially approved.

It's only 393 feet tall despite 41 stories. I'm hoping Albee Square gets a move on though. The NYPost articled I claimed above claims that will take until 2011, which seems like a very long time to wait for a building that's only 60 stories tall.

antinimby

October 17th, 2007, 03:20 PM

The Avalon is disgusting, so naturally, it would be approved quickly. :mad:

BrooklynLove

October 19th, 2007, 02:09 PM

bye bye nasty parking garage

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/WorkPermitDataServlet?allisn=0001724175&allisn2=0001433286&allbin=3000351&requestid=1 (http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/WorkPermitDataServlet?allisn=0001724175&allisn2=0001433286&allbin=3000351&requestid=1)

Clarknt67

October 24th, 2007, 06:30 PM

http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/runninscared/archives/2007/10/save_our_neighb.php

I think there are 2 interesting things about this.

1) Given the low turnout for this, I think it shows most people want economic redevelopment and new people (with new money) in the nabe. 100 people doesn't even sound like enough to represent the displaced merchants, let alone the broader community.
2) My second point is the city would save itself a hassle by allowing this person to keep their property. I don't really buy that they should make the property a museum since its unclear what role the house played, but I also don't think the park is important. There's Fort Greene Park, Brooklyn Bridge Park and Prospect Park, all within a mile or two and convenient by subway. Some public space would be nice, but I am not sure the public benefit here is great enough to take away the property by force.
I have to disagree with you on the park. They are trying to develop the area to both residential and office tenants. A park will attract both. Of course people will rent a office without adjacent park, but if you were looking to rent in the area, to be close to work, the lack of nearby green space would be a big minus. The closest is fort greene, but that's quite a ways away if you're on the schmerhorn/livingston housing corridor. None of them are a convenient walking distance. If they really want to push the density in Downtown Brooklyn as they seem intent on doing, no one will regret the park in years to come.

(Plus, it will make lunch hours more pleasant for office goers. Even though I rarely go, I appreciate Bryant Park is so close to my office.)

investordude

October 25th, 2007, 11:02 AM

from the nypost:

150 Myrtle Ave.
Fear not, New York. Should we ever experience another citywide blackout as we did in 2003, this 38-story, 240-unit condo building will be ready.
The Downtown Brooklyn development at 150 Myrtle Ave. (which hasn't formerly announced its name yet, though the name being floated is "Toren") recently got a $3 million grant to build a co-generation plant within the building that will provide residents with electricity.
"I'm 99 percent certain that we're the only new building in New York that has something like that," says Donald Capoccia, managing partner at BFC Partners, which is developing the property.
The building (which is applying for silver LEED certification) will have energy-saving features including motion detectors, special heating controls and a "reflective index" on the roof, which will reflect the sun rather than absorb heat during the warmer months. There will also be a fitness center, pool, library, Pilates studio and roof garden.
The building is expected to be complete in the first quarter of 2009, with pricing to be announced.

investordude

October 25th, 2007, 04:03 PM

On brownstoner 10/25: http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/downtown_brooklyn/

BrooklynRider

October 25th, 2007, 05:29 PM

Crappy rendering. It's hard to offer a comment. The street wall leading up to the tower resembles an urban detention center.

lofter1

October 25th, 2007, 07:21 PM

It ^^^ isn't looking too promising:

http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/redapplerender1.jpg

The architect's website (http://www.dattner.com/) says it will be 400 feet and that "the tower floor plan cantilevers on the upper floors creating larger floors and a distinctive architectural expression ... extensive glazed areas above ... a contemporary aesthetic that expresses th resurgence of Dowsntown Brooklyn."

antinimby

October 25th, 2007, 07:47 PM

And all that is nothing compared to the truly horror show just across the street that will be the Avalon Fort Greene (:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:!!!) :

http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/avalonmyrtlemontage1007.jpg

lofter1

October 25th, 2007, 09:05 PM

One thing is for sure ... the entry walking into Brooklyn from the bridges will be an entirely different experience.

ramvid01

October 25th, 2007, 09:32 PM

That Avalon Fort Greene is so visually sterilizing that it has to make you wonder why Avalon wastes their money on an 'architect' It looks exactly like Avalon Riverview II but just wider. Terrible.:mad:

investordude

October 25th, 2007, 10:28 PM

I believe this one will have underground parking. The above ground parking at the LIC site is the real deal breaker on aesthetics, if you ask me. Otherwise, the building is bulky but bearable.

BrooklynLove

October 26th, 2007, 02:40 PM

no above ground parking makes a big difference. that stretch of garages along 5th street in LIC is a real bummer. i think that once this avalon building is up alongside the 4 other neighborring towers, it won't look all that bad contextually. could have been much worse.

investordude

October 26th, 2007, 03:10 PM

BrooklynLove

October 26th, 2007, 04:00 PM

agreed that in the short-term more likely than not nothing open that late but as more and more resi development continues forward in the immediate area we'll start seeing some more late night stuff. i'm viewing this whole wave of renewal like the finanical district development wave but 5-10 years its junior. once all of the fbx and fulton mall/albee square stuff has happened and solidified, this entire area of downtown bk is going to have a fundamentally different atmosphere.

investordude

October 26th, 2007, 04:33 PM

I wonder if the new hotels on Duffield will get street exposed retail rest/bars. I'd guess it will have them, since its a Sheraton, but it won't help as much if the entrance in inside the hotel. The hotels over there seem to be almost ready to sprout above fence level.

BrooklynLove

October 26th, 2007, 04:47 PM

i think that a lot of this will be a bit evolutionary if you will - as volume of retail grows in the area of fbx and albee, stuff will trend more toward street/sidewalk openness.

Clarknt67

October 26th, 2007, 04:48 PM

My guess is we'll get a good store here: http://brooklynpaper.com/stories/30/42/30_42munimall.html

Here's hoping it's not a bank or a drugstore :)

Actually, I think this place, if they touched up the plaza a bit, would be a great place for a marquee restaurant or bar to enliven Brooklyn at night a bit. But more likely we'll get something that closes at night.

I hope you're right, but I'm not optimistic. It's odd the courthouse apartment's retail space just down the street sat completly empty for well over a year (and still has vacancies), and the building across State St, too has a premium retail space sitting empty for at least a year as well. It seems odd to me being surrounded by so many well-heeled brownstone homes and so much daily foot traffic why they can't find retailers unless they are just charging unrealistic rates.

Agree with you on the Banks & Drugstores, ENOUGH. In the last year I've lost my dollar store, a pizza slice place and a barber all to BANKS! Total waste for me.

BrooklynRider

October 28th, 2007, 06:48 PM

Not much really going on.

1. The Atlantic Terminal crawls along. Anticipated completion is some time after hell freeezes over.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160546.jpg

2. For lack of much else to snap photos of, here's Rockwell Place.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160547.jpg

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160548.jpg

3. Elevator is gone and facade complete at Forte.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160545.jpg

4. BFC's Myrtle Avenue project inches upward.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160550.jpg

5. This is interesting. Scaffolding is going up around the garage at Willoughby and Flatbush (old Thor site.) I'm too lazy to see what's in at DOB as far as applications. I sure hope it's not just a paint job on this lot.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd121/BrooklynRiderRob/EighthAve24thStreet200709160549.jpg

antinimby

October 28th, 2007, 06:53 PM

Are they re-doing Atlantic Terminal already?

BrooklynRider

October 29th, 2007, 12:09 AM

It's been under comstruction since 2000? 2001?

Ratner project - NEVER ENDING!!!

investordude

October 29th, 2007, 01:26 AM

I like the pics. It would certainly be exciting if they demolish that parking lot - so ugly.

JCMAN320

October 29th, 2007, 09:43 AM

I'm really disappointed with Forte, it looks so unfinished with that concrete color. Looks so drab and depressing.

lofter1

October 29th, 2007, 09:51 AM

Wait until folks move in and start installing curtains and moving their stuff right up near the windows.

It will look as nice as the new stuff in Manhattan (http://curbed.com/archives/2007/10/10/curbedwire_one_ten_3rd_goes_third_world_11_spring_ gets_recalculated_more_condos_on_burgs_n_3rd.php) :cool:

JCMAN320

October 29th, 2007, 04:34 PM

Lol lofter, like that one person said get ready to see more of those types of buildings popping up with people displaying themselves like animals in a zoo. Yikes.

lofter1

October 29th, 2007, 07:39 PM

Ensconced behind their glass walls, iPhone (+ cam) in hand, virtually connecting with the outside -- for all the world to see.

Blade Runner Arriveth.

BrooklynLove

October 29th, 2007, 09:22 PM

I like the pics. It would certainly be exciting if they demolish that parking lot - so ugly.

it's coming down for sure. i linked the demo permit back at post 562

investordude

October 30th, 2007, 12:17 PM

http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=5&id=16367

This is great for downtown Brooklyn, but could they make it a little nicer - this one looks a lot more ugly than the Sheraton buildings on Duffield to me? Still, if you get this hotel, the Sheratons, and a Hilton, I think these tourists will start wanting bars and nightlife, which will be good for the scene in downtown Brooklyn.

BrooklynRider

October 30th, 2007, 03:06 PM

It looks like another Luxe-Pop. Blech!

I do agree that hotels in Brooklyn is a great idea. It will serve as the best alternative to Manhattan prices - if, indeed, they are lower than Manhattan rates.

antinimby

October 30th, 2007, 07:00 PM

Ugh, Gene Kaufman again. I hate that despicable m*therf*ckin' son of a b*tch!! :mad::mad::mad:

http://www.brooklyneagle.com/inc/miniaturka.php?plik=102907143805.jpg&szerokosc=200

BrooklynLove

October 30th, 2007, 08:52 PM

when i saw that rendering i figured (hoped) that it must be an abstracted concept rendering intended for approx elevation representation. fingers crossed.

BrooklynLove

October 30th, 2007, 08:55 PM

and speaking of lux-pop, it really does look bad - especially when viewed from the west. it's almost like boymelgreen gave up toward the end and kind of said aw f*** it - just get it done as quickly and cheaply as possible.

antinimby

October 30th, 2007, 09:06 PM

If you're familiar with Gene Kaufman, then you would know that isn't abstract anything. That is exactly what it will end up looking like, perhaps even worse.

lofter1

October 30th, 2007, 09:44 PM

uh-oh -- more of the Manhattanization of Brooklyn :eek:

BrooklynRider

October 30th, 2007, 11:42 PM

If you're familiar with Gene Kaufman, then you would know that isn't abstract anything. That is exactly what it will end up looking like, perhaps even worse.

It's going to look like they decided to change brick after three floors. Gene Kaufman has no soul - none!

:mad:

sfenn1117

October 30th, 2007, 11:45 PM

I'm sick of his preschool architecture.

antinimby

October 31st, 2007, 10:06 PM

Between the hideous Avalon monstrosity and the various McSam/Kaufman filthy hotels planned for Downtown, I think we here need to write a collaborative letter to the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership to let them know that they have to do something to prevent these dirtbags from putting up these eyesores.

Specifically, we need to ask them to be more strict in requiring better building design and better architecture. Their whole purpose is to rejuvenate DT Brooklyn but if they allow those monstrosities to go up, then they are hurting their own efforts.

Anybody in for a little letter writing? :)

(I would except I'm not good at writing formal professional letters)

investordude

October 31st, 2007, 10:50 PM

We've got nothing - these are mostly as of right developments. Besides, even if they weren't, the community wants jobs, and Hilton, Sheraton, Avalon Bay have more political power than we do. I don't see any way to stop these projects unless they don't get financed - and the financiers are probably demanding midrange hotels that are built for a low cost.

BrooklynRider

November 1st, 2007, 01:19 AM

Building this crap is appealing to the Iowa pear-shaped lady demographic.

Xemu

November 1st, 2007, 10:57 AM

This article's noting too new but the video (http://www.nypost.com/video/?vxSiteId=0db7b365-a288-4708-857b-8bdb545cbd0f&vxChannel=NY+Post&vxClipId=1458_186632&vxBitrate=300&format=flash) the Post has to go with it (narrated by Ian McKellen!) is great. There's also a gallery (http://www.nypost.com/seven/11012007/news/regionalnews/brooklyn2012/photo01.htm) of renderings. One wonders if this will eventually get built.

B'KLYN REACHES FOR THE SKIES By RICH CALDER
November 1, 2007 -- Here's a first glimpse of Downtown Brooklyn's bold future. Animated video and renderings obtained by The Post yesterday portray spectacular views of how $9.5 billion in projects now in the works will transform the gritty area's skyline over the next five years.
"We're talking about a number of prominent, tall buildings designed by great architects like Frank Gehry emerging from what is now parking lots and underused buildings," said Joe Chan, president of the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, which commissioned the renderings.
"This sends a message to the entire city - and even the world - that Brooklyn is in a period of unprecedented growth."
The public-private entity today is expected to officially release the four-minute animated video and renderings illustrating just how Brooklyn's commercial and cultural center will look in 2012 when 56 planned projects are completed.
The projects will bring 14,300 new residential units, 1,800 hotel rooms and 3.2 million square feet of office and retail space.
That includes the nearly $4 billion Gehry-designed Atlantic Yards project - which will bring an NBA arena and 16 new skyscrapers to Prospect Heights - and more than 50 other projects running along or near Flatbush Avenue north of Atlantic Yards to the Manhattan Bridge in DUMBO.
"What we're doing is creating one of the most exciting city centers in America in what was an underperforming area just a few years ago," said Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff, who cited the planned Brooklyn Academy of Music Cultural Center and relocation of the NBA's New Jersey Nets as key factors.
In his video narrative, international theater and film star Ian McKellen says "visitors will cross the Manhattan Bridge to explore an exciting world of new restaurants, hotels and cultural venues."
McKellen did the voice-over for free while starring in a production of Shakespeare's "King Lear" earlier this year at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, whose planned $500 million cultural district is featured prominently in both the new video and renderings produced by Manhattan-based Animation + Images.
The BAM project calls for creating a new 299-seat theater for a group called The Theatre for a New Audience and building a new public plaza and mixed-use buildings that will include mixed-income housing.
One rendering shows how a section just south of the MetroTech office complex would be transformed into a vibrant park called "Willoughby Square," which would sit atop a 700-car garage and be surrounded by new hotels and a massive building called "City Point."
City Point is a $750 million development expected to exceed the 511-foot Williamsburg Bank tower as Brooklyn's tallest building and transform the former Albee Square Mall site into 900 apartments and 600,000 square feet of retail.
Another rendering shows how Flatbush Avenue would evolve from a lackluster thoroughfare into a grand, tree-lined gateway to Brooklyn featuring towers on both sides like the $400 million Oro condos off Gold Street. Of the 14,300 planned new apartments and condos, 22 percent are set aside as affordable housing for low- and middle-income families.

investordude

November 1st, 2007, 11:15 AM

the video is great. My take - Albee Square is the most important new skyline component.

My other take - about half of this stuff won't really get built :(

krulltime

November 1st, 2007, 01:03 PM

BrooklynRider

November 1st, 2007, 02:57 PM

Not to spoil the party, but Joe Chan releases the same tired press release every 45 days.

Cranes over a city signify development - not cheerleading.

lofter1

November 1st, 2007, 04:45 PM

One big project shown in that Vid is already dead.

Seems to mean something when you feel the need to hire the Wizard Gandalf to hawk your pie-in-the-sky plans.

sfenn1117

November 1st, 2007, 05:13 PM

^Which one? The library? Even so, I'd assume a different design (cheaper and less impressive) will still be built on the land.

MidtownGuy

November 1st, 2007, 05:13 PM

I chuckled at the voice too:)...guess it has more gravitas than one with a Brooklyn accent:rolleyes:

lofter1

November 1st, 2007, 05:27 PM

Sir Ian doesn't come cheap when schilling for real estate moguls (I'd be willing to guess)

Xemu

November 1st, 2007, 10:13 PM

Or maybe he does. From the article:
McKellen did the voice-over for free while starring in a production of Shakespeare's "King Lear" earlier this year at the Brooklyn Academy of Music.

lofter1

November 2nd, 2007, 01:42 AM

well shut my mouth :o

BrooklynRider

November 3rd, 2007, 02:48 AM

$9 Billion Makeover To Transform Downtown Brooklyn

By Dennis Holt
Brooklyn Daily Eagle

DOWNTOWN BROOKLYN — What will Downtown Brooklyn look like in five years? The first public presentation of the new look, as revealed by the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, was shown yesterday to the press.

Called an “architectural animation,” the presentation reveals the results of all the new construction that is under way, or is slated to soon get under way, in four distinct areas of Downtown. With one or two exceptions, all the structures shown represent final designs, not speculative concepts.

And the numbers involving these 50 projects are impressive. All told, they involve 23 million square feet of development costing about $9 billion. This comes down to 1.6 million square feet of new office space, the same amount of space for new retail stores, 1,800 new hotel rooms and 14,300 residential units.

Calling this “the power of partnership,” Robert Catell, co-chairman of the partnership’s board of directors, said that what will be built is a “new city.” Catell, chairman of KeySpan, was one of the Brooklyn business leaders responsible for the development of MetroTech in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Joe Chan, president of the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, noted that his public-private group was formed about a year ago. “We felt it was proper for an update on what has happened and what is happening,” he said.

The visual presentation, part of which is narrated by actor Ian McKellen, who played King Lear at BAM this fall, will be shown as a promotion tool. However, it will also have a variety of other audiences, probably more than the producers imagine.

Among the many parts that will make up this new center of things is the 1.5-million-square-foot development on the site of the old Albee Square Mall, which will now be called City Point. Its rendering suggests that it may become the tallest building in Brooklyn.

At the moment, the development will consist of 475,000 square feet of retail space, 125,000 square feet of office space, mixed-income residential units and parking. It is already being compared to the Time-Warner Center in Manhattan. Demolition of the old mall building’s existing parking garage will begin in a few weeks. (hooray - that explains the photo I tought)

Part of that new area will also include Willoughby Square Park, a 1.2-acre space that will sit atop a 600-unit parking garage. An RFP to do the actual construction work has been released. Two new hotels are being built on Duffield Street, and other major developments along Willoughby Street are under way. (like what? I saw nothing other than some new sidewalks by Bellofts) It was noted that the city is investing $103 million to create the BAM Cultural Center. A new Danspace Project building with mixed-income housing and new retail space is being planned, and the developer of this new project will be announced in a “matter of days” according to Chan.
Beginning early next year, the complete overhaul of Flatbush Avenue from Tillary Street to Atlantic Avenue, costing about $15 million, will begin. It is expected to take about a year to complete. (I'm holding my breath for this project in 3...2...1...)

Catel reported that “important and meaningful” new interest has taken place in the last month in developing new commercial office space, and he seemed encouraged about that development. Without naming names, Chan implied that one or two additional well-known restaurateurs are expressing keen interest in Downtown Brooklyn, as are some “top-flight” national retailers. He also speculated that a high-priced “flag” hotel could be coming to the borough. (What the hell is a "flag" hotel?)

© Brooklyn Daily Eagle 2007

MidtownGuy

November 3rd, 2007, 12:27 PM

It's great that they're going to spruce up Flatbush and make it a fitting entry into the great borough of Brooklyn. There should be trees planted all along it.

BrooklynLove

November 3rd, 2007, 12:46 PM

i can see it now - 2020 nba championships - bk nets vs. whoever. tv broadcast does one of those evening venue context shots where they start from the arena and then pan out showing the surrounding city environs - think about how awesome it's going to look as the camera takes in all the new development stretching from AY down flatbush into downtown bk, with the manhattan skyline in the backgroud. for a glimpse preview just walk down flatbush during the day from park slope to downtown and take in the panoramas of downtown bk. this is going to be so great.

BrooklynRider

November 4th, 2007, 12:05 AM

New Downtown Face: Vision of the future

By Dana Rubinstein
The Brooklyn Paper

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/assets/photos/30/43/30_43_downtownplan2007_i.jpg
Downtown Brooklyn Partnership

Downtown planners on Thursday rolled out a glitzy vision of Downtown Brooklyn as a 24/7 destination — and neighborhood — putting snazzy window dressing on a retrenchment of the original notion that the Flatbush Avenue corridor and surrounding streets would be a booming business district.

The Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, the quasi-governmental agency charged with creating the “new Downtown,” presented glitzy renderings (pictured) of what the area will supposedly look like in five years.

The slideshow, complete with a voiceover by stage legend Ian McKellan (Brooklyn Academy of Music’s own King Lear), forecasted that the area bounded by Tillary, Fulton and Jay Streets and Flatbush Avenue Extension, plus the blocks around BAM, would become “a true urban center.”

The Partnership predicted $9.5 billion in new private development that includes 14,301 residential units, 1,803 hotel rooms and 1.6 million square feet of new retail space. The animated renderings — plus the Partnership’s commitment to building a central park called “Willoughby Square” — will be used to help lure new investors to the area.

Absent from the Partnership’s presentation was mention of the city’s original plan for Downtown Brooklyn to become a booming business district. Where the Partnership once saw 4.5 million square feet of new office space, it now predicts 1.6 million.

“The 4.5 million square feet was the total capacity that could be created,” said Partnership President Joe Chan. “We don’t really see it as a failure. The growth of the commercial sector was one goal of the [2004] Downtown Brooklyn Plan. The other was the creation of a 24/7 community. Clearly, on the residential end, we’re doing better than we ever thought we would.”

Indeed, as Chan pointed out, three new residential skyscrapers have topped out in the past year: the Forte in Fort Greene, the Oro on Flatbush Avenue, and be@Schermerhorn. Several more have broken ground.

But the Partnership’s hope for a 24/7 residential community is facing the harsh reality of a sudden downturn in the real-estate market and on Wall Street — economic conditions that recently prompted Mayor Bloomberg to demand cutbacks from his commissioners.

The presentation was held on the 23rd floor of One Metrotech Center, an artifact of a previous Downtown Brooklyn redevelopment scheme, where Chan has his offices.

The Downtown czar offered these predictions:

• Within two weeks, a developer will be selected for a part of the BAM Cultural District, which includes the controversial new home for the Manhattan based Dancespace Project, an experimental group that is displacing a homegrown music venue called Amber Art and Music Space.:rolleyes:

• Shortly thereafter, the city will select a developer for Willoughby Square, the 1.5-acre park and underground parking garage. The controversial project will require the city to condemn homes linked by historians to the Underground Railroad.:rolleyes:

• By early spring, construction will begin on the Theater for a New Audience near BAM, and on the $15-million city-funded beautification of Flatbush Avenue, a gritty thoroughfare that Chan dubbed an “iconic boulevard.”:rolleyes:

BrooklynLove

November 4th, 2007, 09:33 AM

rome wasn't built in a day. the dot-com explosion combined with enron et al and 9-11 didn't stop things, and the current market issues are not going to either. in fact, it will likely make things stronger in the long run - the blessing in disguise of temp slowdown and retrenchments is that new participants can enter the market. my sense is that the commercial component will once again come back in a greater degree once the other aspects of downtown bk development advance more - grand scale developments like this happen exponentially, not consistently or all at once - the further along you get, the more intense the development gets. 2 examples would be the battery park city - wfc area and canary wharf in london.

investordude

November 4th, 2007, 03:14 PM

I mean - isn't it better to have a mixed use neighborhood? There's 12 million square feet of office space in downtown Brooklyn. What was missing was hotel and high end residential. The free market is working beautifully here. They are building 12 million square feet of office space a subway stop away in lower Manhattan which seems like it will be enough to make sure that people living here get jobs assuming they have a place to live.

antinimby

November 4th, 2007, 06:47 PM

What's the whole point of all this excitement when the architecture of these new buildings will be for the most part, ugly. That mind-numbingly, putrid-looking Avalon FG slab alone will send the skyline many notches down the ladder.

BrooklynRider

November 4th, 2007, 11:47 PM

The free market is working beautifully here.

There really isn't any "free market" in New York City development. We have things like 421-a's, tax abatements, low interest loans, Liberty Bonds, eminent domain, and incentives to commercial developers and tenants, to name but a few factors. None of that is "free market."

investordude

November 4th, 2007, 11:51 PM

BrooklynRider, I couldn't agree with you more that the goverment distorts development in Brooklyn primarily for the worse. I'm just saying to the extent developers could in this particular instance decide if housing or office should be built, the decision to build housing is the right one so we end up with a mixed use neighborhood instead of a desolate office park.

But I absolutely agree the free market is largely absent from real estate in New York and that's incredibly bad for the city.

BrooklynRider

November 5th, 2007, 12:05 AM

I have to look at the rezoning plan, but I think everything to the east of Flatbush was zoned for residential.

lofter1

November 5th, 2007, 09:40 AM

If you were to enlist the so-called "free market" into NYC development then would not everything be far more expensive than it already is? An example: The MTA runs at a loss, so all of that would have to be made up for via higher taxes (or a lousier transportation system) which, in turn, would cause a higher cost of living and a further squeezing of NYC residents.

The machine that makes NYC run is a very complex one. Pull a thread out here and you'll impact something over there.

investordude

November 5th, 2007, 11:04 AM

What I actually see is that cities with fewer regulations have cheaper housing. Think about how much of the cost of a new building is regulatory these days. Regulation and rent control create artificial scarcity that drives up prices. Chicago (by no means a free market) has an easier zoning process, and as a result of these reduced regulatory costs, is about half as expensive. Look at the Solow buildings on the east side. A completely reasonable proposal has taken years of approval, tremendous uncertainty, and now he's paying a huge bribe to the city on schools and affordable housing which ultimately gets paid for by the apartment buyers. All of that works together to artificially raise costs.

investordude

November 5th, 2007, 11:21 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/boroughs/brooklyn/2007/11/05/2007-11-05_target_signs_deal_to_open_a_store_at_cit.html

I personally think this sounds like hype rather than reality, except maybe for the Target. But still, its encouraging that retailers are considering Brooklyn.

lofter1

November 5th, 2007, 11:32 AM

To label as a a "bribe" what a developer must give in return for a zoning variance which allows him to build more than another developer would be able to do under the same cirumstances (and thereby earn a far greater return) displays a bias.

Not sure what world it is that unregulated developers do right by all at the expense of none.

investordude

November 5th, 2007, 02:33 PM

You bet, I'm biased towards trying to treat people equally. Why should new residents be disproportionately responsible for social services? That's great if you're a politician, because you reward established residents and cancel out the voices of new voters by making sure the residents of affordable housing are "screened" to be likely to vote for you. But why is it good for society?

I don't expect developers to do things out of the goodness of their hearts, but that's why they pay taxes just like everyone else. The things they should be required to pay for are things that benefit them more than other residents, like parks nearby, etc.

ASchwarz

November 5th, 2007, 02:50 PM

I've never understood why if people want affordable housing, they choose to only make developers pay for it. Why not tax everyone for this good, rather than only tax developers? They just pass the costs on to consumers, which drives up the cost of all market-rate housing, which defeats the original purpose (increase affordable housing supply)?

Why not be fair and have a tax on all for affordable housing?

Also, what does zoning and density have to do with affordable housing? Completely separate issues. This artifical intertwining of the issues is just because politicans are afraid to raise taxes and so have to find a small group of people to fund their political promises.

investordude

November 5th, 2007, 07:06 PM

This doesn't seem like it will create a genuinely world class theater/music destination, but it might create an off-off-off broadway kind of environment.

http://www.therealdeal.net/breaking_news/2007/11/05/1194308908.php

BrooklynRider

November 5th, 2007, 07:41 PM

I think the inclusion of a Target at the new building is no big deal. The problem I have with Target is that the store in Brooklyn is ghetto and a real dump. Shelves mostly empty, merchandise tossed everywhere, employees with no sense of service, and bad attitude. It's a real dump - however profitable.

As for affordable housing, it is hardly the developers who "pay" more. They actually make money on the deal. Look at residential development all over the city. 421-a's were supposed to be used to spur "affordable" development. Instead we get developers building on the cheap and charging exhorbitant prices (and getting them) because the taxes are so attractive.

This city gets two kinds of housing: luxury and low-income. What is "affordable housing" anyway? It's a term tossed about, but "affordable" is relative.

This city is a ticking bomb with housing.

I think the ideas espoused above by ASchwarz and Investordude are old, disproven theories. One need only run through the threads on WNY to see those old arguments that free market housing will bring down pricing. (It didn't happen.) New condos will make old prewar units cheaper as people go after the modern amenities. (It didn't happen.) Ending rent control and stabilization will cause a decline in market rates. (Rent Stabilized & Controlled apartment are a fraction of what they once were in the market and there's been NO shift.)

What we have is city-planning, building permits, development, project funding - every aspect of development in NYC has NO social conscience.

Xemu

November 5th, 2007, 08:13 PM

Some interesting little nuggets in this Daily Eagle article. Regarding the market going in at 200 Schermerhorn, Brownstoner (http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2007/11/streetlevel_a_n.php) reported the space rented today.

Winick Realty Group Takes on 4 Downtown Retail Projects
by Linda Collins, published online 10-19-2007

Sites Include Mobil Gas Station, BellTel Lofts, State Renaissance Court, 395 Flatbush Ave. Extension

By Linda Collins
Brooklyn Daily Eagle
DOWNTOWN BROOKLYN — Four major Downtown Brooklyn developments have given Winick Realty Group, a Manhattan-based retail leasing firm that has been very active in Brooklyn in the past few years, the nod to handle the leasing of their retail spaces.

Two of the projects are existing buildings — the landmarked former telephone building now known as BellTel Lofts and an office building at 395 Flatbush Ave. Extension, home to an Applebee’s and a McDonald’s at street level.

And two are brand new construction in different stages — the former Mobil gas station site at Atlantic Avenue and Boerum Place and State Renaissance Court at 200 Schermerhorn St.

All of the retail spaces will obviously benefit from the advantage of having large numbers of residential units above them, and nearby — with more shoppers to come from the surrounding projects currently under development.

Mobil Gas Station
This site, which was cleared several years ago and has been basically sitting vacant (except for parking) while it gets its ducks (approvals) in order, is now ready to go, according Frank Terzulli a senior broker and partner at Winick Realty.

“The permits are in place and we’re 18-24 months away. There is some work going on but no structure yet,” he said.

When finished, the retail space in the seven-story mixed-use building will be 11,300 square feet on the ground floor and 4,000 square feet in the basement.

“They are building high-end residential there so we are seeking a use that obviously would complement the building, and it will be a national company,” Terzulli said. “We’re looking for retail like we have on Montague Street in the Heights or on Seventh Avenue in Park Slope.”

Terzulli, who is banking on the popularity of Trader Joe’s and Urban Outfitters, sees a change in the needs of that area.

“Before it was a 9-to-5 population, now it is definitely geared to residential,” he said.

BellTel Lofts
The very large retail site at 101 Willoughby St. is comprised of three spaces — a 7,200 square-foot corner piece, a 7,100 square foot piece and a 25,000 selling concourse at a lower level.

“It could be one retailer but not likely,” said Terzulli, who said he is seeking a nice restaurant for the corner space at Willoughby and Bridge Street and has been approached by banks and other businesses as well.

State Renaissance Court
This new building at Schermerhorn and Bond streets has close to 20,000 square feet of available retail in five storefronts facing Schermerhorn.

“We have a very high-end gourmet market going in the larger (11,500 square feet) corner space,” he said, adding that details are not finalized as yet. But he is also looking at resident- and community-related services, like drycleaners, medical offices, etc.

395 Flat.Ave.Ext.
This office building, which is largely occupied by Verizon upstairs and is anchored at two corners by an Applebee’s and McDonald’s, is being reconfigured at street level, according to Terzulli.

The retail storefronts between the two eateries, which were set back creating a large and unusable plaza, are now being brought out to the street creating several larger retail spaces.

“It will be quite a dramatic change when it is done,” he said.

© Brooklyn Daily Eagle 2007

investordude

November 5th, 2007, 11:28 PM

i don't see how you can say its a disproven theory if no one ever tried it. But where people have moved towards a slightly freer market, prices are much lower than in New York - just look at Chicago or even Vancouver. Some of that is because land is cheaper, but its not the whole story.

By the way, your point about 421-a just makes my point. It's politically convenient deal, but it has nothing to do with sincere attempts at affordable housing. It's a crime we don't take those tax abatements and reapply them to things the city really does need, like schools and better pay for the police and middle class tax cuts. But politicans and the establishment wins with this crony arrangment.

BrooklynRider

November 6th, 2007, 08:25 AM

I think that, if you dig deeper into Vancouver, you'll find its planning was a massive failure. Residential overtook commercial development and it cannibalized its job base. There's thread in one of the forums about it.

I've been to Chicago a number of times. It, like NYC, is a rapidly changing city. I can't assume anything about its housing either way.

investordude

November 6th, 2007, 02:42 PM

I have, and Vancouver is not a failure. It may be a failure of centralized planning, also known to capitalists as a success :) Vancouver is Canada's San Francisco - like SF, most tech and natural resource businesses are located outside the downtown core and people reverse commute. So what? Vancouver and San Francisco are the two richest cities in their respective societies and are wildly popular cities to most reasonable people. The difference between them is Vancouver tries to allow sensible development while protecting the enviornemnt, so they don't have the absurd artificially high prices in rent controlled and corrupt San Francisco. The Toronto/New York price disparity is even more jarring, because Toronto tries to allow some development and they don't have the legitimate need to protect the natural beauty of Vancouver's harbor.

investordude

November 6th, 2007, 02:45 PM

The BAM cultural district looks awfully like a housing project to me in the renderings. Over 50% affordable, and I've never heard of the dance group that is suppossed to be an anchor for a "world class" theater district.

I'm more down on it than I was yesterday. Hopefully the credit crunch will prevent it from getting built the way they are proposing.

investordude

November 8th, 2007, 10:46 AM

http://www.nysun.com/article/66134?page_no=1

Embedded in the gratuitous Brooklyn hype article is the claim W is looking to build a hotel near the Brooklyn Academy of Music.

investordude

November 9th, 2007, 04:44 PM

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/30/44/30_44dtowninfrastructure.html

Fresh from claiming there's a security problem with Altantic Yards, they are now claiming the area lacks the infrastructure (notwithstanding the fact of course Brooklyn was much more heavily populated during its heyday in the 1950s and was able to deal with the infrastructure then).

investordude

November 9th, 2007, 05:04 PM

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/30/44/30_44duffield.html

Claims eminent domain is a prerequisite to building this - my take is its unreasonable to use eminent domain to stimulate a hotel development that I suspect would happen anyway. Whether they really should seize these properties for a park or not, doing it to help along the hotel seems wrong - the hotel should buy the property if its that important.

antinimby

November 10th, 2007, 12:19 AM

Fresh from claiming there's a security problem with Altantic Yards, they are now claiming the area lacks the infrastructure (notwithstanding the fact of course Brooklyn was much more heavily populated during its heyday in the 1950s and was able to deal with the infrastructure then).Yeah, I read that and find it to be just more uninformed NIMBY whining.

At 2.5 million people, Brooklyn I believe is about the size of Chicago, larger than cities like Philadelphia, San Francisco, Seattle, Atlanta, Boston, Phoenix, Denver, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, etc., and yet its skyline and downtown is smaller and less impressive than all of those cities.

Yet, I believe its mass transit networks ranks up there with the best of those cities so there is absolutely no reason why the extra density would be so much more unbearable in Brookyn.

BrooklynLove

November 11th, 2007, 08:02 PM

i was walking the dog today and noticed the following items:

1) 2 back-hoes sitting at the ready in the bk flatiron plot

2) excavation underway on both plots across from mcds and adjacent to the storage buildings by the bqe entrance

3) people moving in at belltell

4) multitude of rising skeletons, demo, and demo prep all around livingston and fulton

antinimby

November 13th, 2007, 05:35 AM

Local planner gets job for centerpiece of BAM district

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/assets/photos/30/44/30_44_dancespacerendering_z.jpg
--------------------------------------------------------------------studioMDA
The city named local developer Carlton Brown and the architecture firm
studioAMD to build a new home for a dance company— plus hundreds
of units of housing — on the corner of Ashland and Fulton streets near
the Brooklyn Academy of Music in Fort Greene.

By Dana Rubinstein
The Brooklyn Paper
November 10, 2007 (http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/30/44/30_44bamdistrict.html)

The centerpiece of a world-class arts district that’s going up around the Brooklyn Academy of Music will be built by a Fort Greene developer.

Local activists hailed the city’s selection of Carlton Brown and his architect partner, studioMDA with Behnisch Architects, as the developers of the 36-story focal point of the so-called BAM Cultural District, at the southwest corner of Ashland Place and Fulton Street.

The building will house Dancespace Project, a Manhattan-based experimental dance troupe, and 187 apartments, 30 for-sale units and 157 rentals. More than half of the rental units will be affordable housing, said Seth Donlin, a spokesman for the city’s Department of Housing Preservation and Development.

“Their level of affordability was great,” said Donlin, explaining why the local developer was chosen for the plum project. “And the design of the building architecturally was fantastic.”

Of the 157 rental studios and one-, two- and three-bedroom units, 96 will be affordable to families of four making between $28,360 and $92,170 and between $19,840 and $64,480 for a single person. The project also includes such eco-friendly elements as green roofs and a gray water system that will reuse waste water.

The selection marks a coup for local activists, who have clamored for Brown since competition began heating up for the project in August.

As The Brooklyn Paper reported then, Brown, who has lived in the neighborhood for a quarter-century, was initially eliminated from the competition. But after Councilwoman Letitia James (D–Fort Greene) and local activists raised a ruckus, Brown’s proposal was resurrected.

“We’re absolutely ecstatic [that Brown got the project],” said James on Monday.

Brown’s firm, Full Spectrum, is also developing the green Trenton Town Center in New Jersey and co-developing the Solaire in Tribeca. StudioMDA was founded by a former director of Zaha Hadid Architects.

Construction on the project, which will displace a locally owned music venue called Amber Art and Music Space, is slated to begin in spring 2009 and be completed in winter 2010.

©2007 The Brooklyn Paper

sfenn1117

November 13th, 2007, 04:43 PM

Looks like the norm in London nowadays. This is an excellent development in every way.

BrooklynLove

November 13th, 2007, 05:31 PM

cheers. brilliant even.

investordude

November 14th, 2007, 01:46 PM

http://duffieldst.blogspot.com/2007/11/victory-rfp-for-abolitionist.html

This appears to be the city's conciliatory gesture while seizing the underground railroad houses for the parking lot. I still am uneasy about seizing someone's land to build a parking lot though. That combines the two worst elements of urban renewal projects - property confiscation and building parking lots. The park will help downtown Brooklyn if they do it right, but the history on these things isn't inspiring.

ASchwarz

November 14th, 2007, 02:40 PM

They weren't underground railroad houses. The city paid a consulting agency big bucks to research the issue and couldn't come up with a scintilla of evidence. They do know that there was an underground railroad presence in the area, but they have no clue where.

The property owner is making the underground railroad claim to stop the city from taking her house. She does have tunnels beneath her home, which the city thinks were used for prohibition. They do not date to the era of slavery.

investordude

November 14th, 2007, 04:05 PM

Yeah, i doubt the houses were really part of the underground railroad. But I still question property seizures to build parking lots and museums that, as you just pointed out, may be premised on a fiction.

ablarc

November 15th, 2007, 09:04 AM

Parking lots in the city are always bad. Eminenet domain used to build something bad for the city is truly an abomination.

Let them build a multi-story garage with ground floor shops.

Xemu

November 15th, 2007, 10:30 AM

They're plaining to build an underground parking garage with park on top a la Post Office Square in Boston. I think the battle over these houses has been really fascinating. Both sides seem intent to ignore the arguments of the other. When it comes to housing and preservation in Brooklyn it sometimes seems like everyone is talking past each other.

ablarc

November 15th, 2007, 02:06 PM

They're plaining to build an underground parking garage with park on top a la Post Office Square in Boston.
Well then, all's well; the misunderstanding's due to sloppy language. All the difference in the world between a parking lot and underground parking topped by a park.

BrooklynLove

November 15th, 2007, 11:37 PM

putting the truth of the situation to the side ... is it not surprisinig that hard facts evidencing specific underground railroad usage would be difficult to come by? it was called the "underground railroad" for a reason - secrecy.

Xemu

November 16th, 2007, 11:28 AM

Good point Bklove. To continue the idea further, assuming the houses were part of the underground railroad does that make them worth saving? It always seemed to me the real motivation of the people trying to save these buildings had less to do with persevering history and more to do with preserving "low rise Brooklyn".

lofter1

November 16th, 2007, 12:05 PM

Re: Whatever few buildings that are still standing and which were once way stations along the Underground Railroad ...

If the mere fact of their continued existence ~ 150 years after the fact does not qualify them for preservation then the whole idea of historical preservation is somewhat baseless, no?

A brass plaque in their place wouldn't seem to do the trick.

Even if the owner / occupant pushing for preservation has additional motives, how does that diminish the original building's historical importance?

investordude

November 16th, 2007, 12:42 PM

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/30/45/30_45goldst.html

Nothing too exciting - I think these are midrises, now "towers."

MidtownGuy

November 16th, 2007, 02:05 PM

It's just mind boggling how quickly things are happening in that neighborhood.
I lived on Ashland Pl. before coming to midtown (about 8 years ago) and it was so diffferent then. I don't think I could have ever imagined 2 highrises going up on that block (and probably more to come). It looks like if I had waited, midtown would have eventually come to me!

BrooklynLove

November 16th, 2007, 02:32 PM

Xemu

November 16th, 2007, 03:44 PM

Even if the owner / occupant pushing for preservation has additional motives, how does that diminish the original building's historical importance?

You have a point there. Though I don't think it helps their case to be disingenuous. Personally I feel there's a lot of disingenuous arguments thrown around (by both sides) in debates about the direction development in Brooklyn is taking.

So my question is: Do these buildings merit saving because of their age? Their history? A combination of the two? Does the fact that they are located in a booming downtown high-rise district matter?

Personally I think they should go, though I definitely have reservations about eminent domain. Of course I'll be the first to admit I have a vested interest in Downtown Brooklyn and am biased.

antinimby

November 17th, 2007, 02:49 AM

so we are talking about the actual current site of McDs, not the plots among the storage buildings, across gold, right? if so, that's sweet music to my ears b/c i was under the impression that the parcel owner had no immediate plans to develop that space.The three buildings proposal that was just announced (I wouldn't call 12-14 stories "towers") will be on the McDonald's site. The storage buildings across Gold Street are an entirely separate project.

BrooklynLove

November 17th, 2007, 06:53 PM

noticed demo perimeter fence going up today

investordude

November 18th, 2007, 10:55 AM

Anybody know where this new hotel is? http://investor.choicehotels.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=99348&p=irol-newsArticle&t=Regular&id=1033287&

I predict a slightly ugly building based on renderings of cambria suites in other cities - but on the flip side these tend to be somewhat upscale like the Embassy Suites brand so they might make a nicer building for New York given you can charge higher rates here.

Lance75

November 18th, 2007, 11:20 AM

The Cambria Suites hotel is slated to go up on the parking lot next to 110 Livingston.

I also would've preferred a more established hotel (although a W was probably a pipe dream), but overall I think it's great news--it'll fill in the awful car lot on Livingston and Schermerhorn and bring more pedestrian life to the immediate area.

BrooklynRider

November 18th, 2007, 03:32 PM

They fancy themselves an upmarket hotelier, but reality is that they are 4-stars at best. They are making a move into NY with this hotel and another going up on 35th Street in Manhattan.

I think Brooklyn will be an outpost for 3 and 4 star hotels catering primarily to the Cruiseline industry, local ballroom / meeting space needs, and New York Convention Spillover. The reality in NY is that we do not have the hotel capacity to host the largest of conventions and industry pricing is outrageous in Manhattan where some downscale hotels such as Marriot Courtyards and Hilton Garden Inns are commanding $300 - $400 a night.

Jersey is seeing a surge in convention visitors who simply commute to Manhattan / Javits Center. The W Hoboken is likely to be a red-hot property with extremely high occupancy rates. It is worth noting that, when it opened and for some time thereafter, the Brooklyn Marriott had the highest daily occupancy of ALL Marriotts.

investordude

November 18th, 2007, 06:14 PM

BrooklynRider, McSam actually made a point similar to yours that there is too much upper midmarket product coming online in Brooklyn, and he may not know architecture but certainly understands this business so that's a red flag.

But I actually have a contrarian view - if you look at Lower Manhattan, there are very few hotels for a business district of its size. So if you combine the office district in Brooklyn itself (12 million square feet) with a post WTC/Goldman/JP Morgan rebuilt (12 million additional square feet), I think there will be a lot of junior level bankers from overseas staying a these hotels as well when they are doing business in NY. That will significantly boost the success of these new hotels.

investordude

November 18th, 2007, 06:16 PM

Err, sorry BrooklynRider, I misread your post - I think we agree. Anyway, I'll just add that with the WTC coming online, hotel demand will explode and Brooklyn is the only realistic place to build a lot of hotels near the new downtown - I think McSam doesn't see that when he claims these hotels can't survive the surge in supply.

BrooklynLove

November 18th, 2007, 11:50 PM

and those visiting teams need to stay somewhere when playing the nets!

BrooklynRider

November 19th, 2007, 03:15 PM

I thought the Holiday Inn Express in Park Slope was for that purpose.

BrooklynLove

November 19th, 2007, 09:15 PM

but nba players aint gonna settle for a holiday inn express, especially when in nyc. hotels in downtown bk will be the move - easy shot down fbush to the arena, easy access to bqe for drive to airports, easy access into manhattan to ball before/after playing ball.

BrooklynLove

November 21st, 2007, 01:48 PM

i know that i must sound like one by now, but this is just all so exciting to me. we are so lucky to be alive during the second brooklyn boom. with the recent action over on the other side of fbx (avalon and the myrtle parcels), this really seems to be picking up steam.

investordude

November 23rd, 2007, 09:53 AM

http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=5&id=16863

By the way, it would certainly be exciting if the building above gets built.

Hamilton

November 24th, 2007, 07:41 PM

This city gets two kinds of housing: luxury and low-income. What is "affordable housing" anyway? It's a term tossed about, but "affordable" is relative.

This city is a ticking bomb with housing.

I think the ideas espoused above by ASchwarz and Investordude are old, disproven theories. One need only run through the threads on WNY to see those old arguments that free market housing will bring down pricing. (It didn't happen.) New condos will make old prewar units cheaper as people go after the modern amenities. (It didn't happen.) Ending rent control and stabilization will cause a decline in market rates. (Rent Stabilized & Controlled apartment are a fraction of what they once were in the market and there's been NO shift.)

What we have is city-planning, building permits, development, project funding - every aspect of development in NYC has NO social conscience.

These theories are hardly disproven; there's a reason the NYC housing market is still a textbook example in most Econ 101 classes.
In one post you say that there is no free market in NYC, and in the next you say that the drop in the bucket of free-market deregulation we've seen, and the fact that prices have not fallen, disproves the benefit of free-market housing.

The truth is, overregulation and politics have kept supply low in New York, and as you've said yourself, we're far from a free market. Rent decontrol is a gradual process which is far from being finished, as is new construction, given this city's regulatory process and vociferous, near-sighted, and selfish community boards. Don't even get me started
on zoning in New York, which is as restrictive as ever, with City Planning downzoning hundreds of blocks a year.

What's really ironic is when the same groups protest the lack of affordable housing and new high-rises or mid-rises at the same time. You're protesting the only way out.

Anyway, rent decontrol will not be enough to end the housing supply crunch in New York. Lower the total costs of getting a building built by 20%, however, and you'll see a lot of smaller developers enter the market, and a lot of lots that were previously marginal for development built. Or raise residential FAR's by 20%, and you'll induce the same development boom. Development is good for affordable housing, not bad. More development means a bigger amount of real estate all around. The truth is the current construction "boom" is only the tip of the iceberg of what New York needs to stem its housing woes. Once demand at current (unaffordable) prices is met, construction may well stop. That doesn't have to be the case, if it becomes easier to build housing.

ablarc

November 24th, 2007, 10:05 PM

^ Less regulation is the key. Less onerous building codes and zoning.

investordude

November 25th, 2007, 02:25 PM

ablarc

November 25th, 2007, 02:46 PM

I like how the developer of the Holiday Inn Brooklyn has computed that even though the hotel boom in Brooklyn is starting to look like a bubble, his hotel will be the last one needed and will precisely match all future demand. At least his opinion doesn't seem biased ...

Still, I'm glad the hotel is going to get built.
Bring back the St. George!

BrooklynRider

November 25th, 2007, 09:28 PM

I like the building and I'm anxious to see that low-rise pile go away.

In other news...

Gene Kaufman's nightmare hotel is out of the ground and up to two stories. :mad:

BrooklynLove

November 26th, 2007, 03:25 PM

out of curiosity i popped into the lobby when walking by the other day - it looks very nice, and i love the landscaping they put in on ashland - nice open plaza.

investordude

November 26th, 2007, 09:23 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2007/11/26/2007-11-26_state_stalled_on_bridge_park_new_leader_.html

Looks like we finally are staring to get the pieces ready to break ground on this.

antinimby

November 27th, 2007, 02:44 AM

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/30/46/30_46hotel.html
I like how the developer of the Holiday Inn Brooklyn has computed that even though the hotel boom in Brooklyn is starting to look like a bubble, his hotel will be the last one needed and will precisely match all future demand. At least his opinion doesn't seem biased ...
Still, I'm glad the hotel is going to get built.It'll be ugly. Those are the same folks, if I'm correct, that are behind those Kaufman atrocities on W. 40/39 Sts. next to the Port Authority Bus Terminal in Manhattan, otherwise known as "Kaufman row."

investordude

November 27th, 2007, 01:12 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2007/11/27/2007-11-27_starbucks_and_other_chain_brands_expandi-1.html

I'm glad to see national retailers have stopped relining the outer boroughs. Of course, liberal prima donnas are saying this is a catastrophe - but that's because they already have a Starbucks in their neighborhood and want to deny that to other neighborhoods. Hopefully, sanity will prevail and we won't end up with some wacko communist policy on chain stores like they've implemented in San Francisco. http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=27&id=16890

BrooklynRider

November 27th, 2007, 03:21 PM

It might be time to untangle all these developments into individual threads.

sfenn1117

November 27th, 2007, 05:20 PM

Derek, is the official address 107 Lawrence Street? It might be time to untangle all these developments into individual threads.

Yeah, now that the outer boroughs have their own forum we should give the biggest projects their own thread. This downtown Brooklyn thread is becoming overloaded

Derek2k3

November 27th, 2007, 06:00 PM

True. Brooklyn only has 1 tower above 500' but now we could get 6+ more.

1. City Tech Tower ~1,000'
2. Gallery at Albee Square 600'+
3. 388 Bridge Street 528'
4. 111 Lawrence Street 511'
5. One Hanson Place 512'
6. Miss Brooklyn 511'
7. Red Hook Lane Tower ~500'

Also there's that tower that appeared on Ismael Leyva website.

111 Lawrence, was discussed a few pages back in the thread. This is the NYC Tech property, 285 Jay Street (http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/PropertyProfileOverviewServlet?boro=3&houseno=285+&street=Jay+Street&go2=+GO+&requestid=0)

sfenn1117

November 27th, 2007, 06:09 PM

Also there's that tower that appeared on Ismael Leyva website.

66 Rockwell Pl?

http://i10.tinypic.com/8gid0dc.jpg

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/JobDetailsServlet?requestid=2&allisn=0001273569&allboroughname=&allnumbhous=&allstrt=

50 stories 617'

BrooklynLove

November 27th, 2007, 07:18 PM

if we start splitting individual buildings up into different threads i may have to quit my job in order to keep up

Derek2k3

November 27th, 2007, 10:46 PM

66 Rockwell Pl?

Yup, thanx.

BrooklynRider

November 28th, 2007, 12:44 AM

Please post any info, pictures, comments, complaints, links, and related witty repartee in the new "Brooklyn: City Tech Tower by Renzo Piano."

Posts related to 111 Lawrence Street by GKV have been moved to new thread "Brooklyn: 111 Lawrence Street."

The gods of organizational skills thank you.

BrooklynRider

November 28th, 2007, 03:09 PM

Development Watch: Acadia Starts Albee Demo (http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2007/11/development_wat_161.php)

http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/flatbush112807.jpg

As the Brooklyn Eagle noted (http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=5&id=16889) earlier this week, demolition has begun at the Albee Square parking garage, site of the future 650-unit residential tower that will be brought to you by the nice folks at Acadia Realty Trust; when we stopped by yesterday, we saw the digger doing its thing on the roof (inset). As you may recall, Acadia bought the property from Thor Equities early last summer for $120 million. At the time, the building (rendered below) was rumored to come in at somewhere between 40 and 60 stories. It's also slated to have at least 475,000 square feet of retail space and 125,000 square feet of Class A office space. Think there will be adequate demand for the latter?

http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/albeerendering1107.jpg

http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2007/11/development_wat_161.php#trackback