Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 83

Thread: LES Pathmark may get new condo tower

  1. #16

    Default

    i think that pathmark is the highest grossiing supermarket in manhattan.

    Also, i think they still have about 40 years on their lease, hence the previous proposals calling for it to remain open- but who knows

  2. #17

    Default

    ^ Will they build a parking garage for the Pathmark?

  3. #18

    Default

    theres actually already an underground garage under pathmark. the entrance is in the rear off southstreet.

  4. #19
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by friedrice View Post
    i think that pathmark is the highest grossiing supermarket in manhattan.
    I find that totally illogical and hard to believe. How can a forlorn looking store that's not only NOT expanding but actually in retreat is the most lucrative in all of Manhattan?

    Unless you have something more concrete to back that up, I think I'll trust my intuition that they are in trouble.

  5. #20
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    According to the NY Sun the highest grossing Pathmark is at 125 / Lex (bottom of page 2) ...


    The highest grossing Pathmark in the chain is located on 125th Street and
    Lexington Avenue and the second is at 146th Street and Bradhurst Avenue.

  6. #21

  7. #22
    Senior Member NewYorkDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by investordude View Post
    I have to say that seems like a really silly reason not to build this - worrying about keeping a pathmark. It's called supply and demand - if there is demand for a supermarket (which there would be if this closes) another one will sprout up, either in the base of this tower or is some underutilized space around there. Meanwhile, the area will get new residents whose buying power will help attract additional retail and help the neighborhood grow, so that it isn't a place where the loss of 1 supermarket has a major impact on people's lives.
    Building just to build, and rid something considered to some an eyesore, seems an even sillier reason to me. Not to mention, if the current design is what we'll see, I dont see whats so great about it.

  8. #23

    Default

    There is no "current design", unless you have some insider knowledge. Those sketches are just massing studies.

  9. #24
    Senior Member NewYorkDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
    As for all the crying about the supermarket, Pathmark is an old-style grocery chain that just doesn't work anymore, in Manhattan. Management knows that and so they're looking to get out.

    Economics tells us that eventually somebody will come in to fill its void that better meets the needs of the changing demographics of the city. Whole Foods is an example.
    I'd take a PathMark over another Whole Foods any day. Not everyone can afford to shop at Whole Foods, so it cant fill the entire void.
    Last edited by NewYorkDoc; November 5th, 2007 at 04:58 PM.

  10. #25
    Senior Member NewYorkDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ASchwarz View Post
    There is no "current design", unless you have some insider knowledge. Those sketches are just massing studies.
    I guess we'll have to wait and see what we get.

  11. #26
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    A YIMBY Crowd Rallies on the Lower East Side



    By Mathew R. Warren
    December 20, 2007, 3:20 pm

    It’s not every day that a community rallies in support of a chain store. But that is what a group of Lower East Side and Chinatown residents did today, in support of the Pathmark at 227 Cherry Street. Call them YIMBY’s. Yes in my backyard.

    Of course, they are opposed to something — namely, the possibility that the supermarket will be sold for $250 million to make way for luxury condos.
    About 100 demonstrators armed with petitions gathered at the store, holding signs that read “Stop Gentrification!” and chanting, “$250 million for condos we can’t live in, that’s crazy!”

    Harvey Epstein, a Lower East Side resident who is director of the Community Development Project at the Urban Justice Center, said, “If they put in luxury condos it’s going to bring in higher income people. It will further spur gentrification and result in the displacement of our low-income people.”

    The protest was organized by O.U.R. Waterfront (Organizing and Uniting Residents on the Waterfront), an alliance of community-based organizations. The demonstrators were joined by Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, and representatives from the offices of State Senator Martin Conner and City Councilman Alan Gerson.

    “As elected officials, it is our job to listen to the voices of the community and act in their best interest,” Ms. Gotbaum said. “We need this Pathmark to remain open as a symbol of our commitment to listening to New York’s communities.”

    The immediate area includes more than 20 public housing residences, and the Pathmark on Cherry Street has served the neighborhood’s lower-income population for more than two decades.

    “If I had to go someplace else, it would be at least six blocks away, and it would be very difficult for me,” said Gussie Lamar, 84, who lives just across the street from the supermarket and uses a wheelchair.

    Not only would they lose a supermarket in an area with few consumer options, residents said, but they also depend on the Pathmark’s affordable prices, which they said they would be unable to find at other locations.

    Ed Novack, 71, a lifelong resident of the Lower East Side, held up a receipt that listed his total savings from using his Pathmark card for the year at $1,116.03.

    “I can’t afford to go shopping anywhere else,” said Mr. Novak, who lives on a fixed income.

    GOLES (Good Old Lower East Side), a community group, handed out surveys to residents for a report they plan to present the Community Board 3.

    “Residents are generally kicked out of the process of deciding what comes in and what goes out of their community,” said Angel Seda, 26, a community organizer for GOLES, who was raised in the nearby Jacob Riis Houses. “This survey is a community assessment to show what the people want in area.”

    Workers at the Pathmark declined to comment about the protest, but a manager, who would not give his name, said he had yet to hear anything definitive about the supermarket closing.

    Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

  12. #27

    Default

    More NIMBY B.S.

    There are two similarly-priced supermarkets within a few blocks of the Pathmark. Nobody will go without food. There are about a million much cheaper, much healthier grocery options in Chinatown, which is basically across the street.

    Nobody will be replaced by the luxury development. If you are poor and living in Manhattan in 2007, you do not pay market rents. These people are mostly in protected public or Mitchell-Lama housing, with maybe a handful in rent control and HPD/HUD programs. It's irrelevent what happens to the local market rates, since none of them are subject to the market.

  13. #28
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    I was about to say. What they're calling for is bordering on the absurd. Let's say the Pathmark some way or another goes out of business, does that mean that in order for these people to have continued access to a grocery store, perhaps the government will then have to provide that, too?

    They live in these horribly designed towers-in-the-park projects that if they were designed well, would have retail on the ground floor and thus this problem of not having stores nearby wouldn't be a problem. In other words, the very buildings they are living in are the cause of their problems, not some other offsite property.

  14. #29
    The Dude Abides
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    NYC - Financial District
    Posts
    4,418

    Default

    Something tells me these people, while "for" Pathmark, would be against Wal-Mart if it were to be the retail anchor for this new development.

  15. #30
    Forum Veteran MidtownGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    East Midtown
    Posts
    6,832

    Default

    You're right. Walmart sucks.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. WTC Tower One - by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill
    By JMGarcia in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 14512
    Last Post: October 23rd, 2016, 12:11 PM
  2. Trump World Tower - 845 United Nations Plaza - Condo - by Costas Kondylis
    By emmeka in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 118
    Last Post: June 16th, 2014, 04:43 PM
  3. Sears Tower a.k.a. Willis Tower - Chicago - by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill
    By ddny in forum World Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: October 7th, 2011, 01:58 AM
  4. New Calatrava-designed Tower in Chicago to surpass Sears Tower
    By Pottebaum in forum World Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 720
    Last Post: February 25th, 2011, 03:06 PM
  5. New tower near the ESB
    By londonlawyer in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: August 23rd, 2005, 08:14 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software