Reply With QuoteAwesome photo! I can see my apartment from a unique angle. Apologies for my earlier innocent shot from the BB that was worth (literally) a thousand words.
Yes
No
Ditto. Thanks for putting that up here AN.
Awesome photo! I can see my apartment from a unique angle. Apologies for my earlier innocent shot from the BB that was worth (literally) a thousand words.
Hardly a soap box. I just read that the kids coming to the school were from overflow in Tribeca, not downtown at all, which is what I've been saying. Also, the school seems maybe even for k-third grade or at most through 8, which no doubt reflects what I've said -- residents are afraid of the older kids. And the number of apartments in the Gehry equals, I'd say, about 900 or whatever, the total at Southbridge. If Gehry had the Southbridge site and filled it with MIT style dorms, low rises, for upper-class yuppies, you guys would have loved it. What is the average rent going to be in Gehry? And do you honestly think these people need to send their kids to public school? I wonder of the 900 apartments if you have 9 kids going there. But then I wonder how many kids are produced from this site?
Zip
I have hunted in vain for even one picture of any real views of the tanning and printing buildings you so loved (no one else seems to have loved them, ever). I can't remember them and I assume they looked more or less like the remaining ones around Peck (so decrepit mostly that mainly facades were preserved, if anything). I remember mainly really dark and dangerous streets around the bridge, a no man's land at night. Southbridge, of course, was introduced as part of a renewal of lower Manhattan, better than the abandoned buildings. In any case, it seems odd you are blaming the Southbridge people for the apartment buildings themselves, much less the destructions of the older buildings.
I don't think this is bullshit at all. There has been a 20 +year old fight over Millstein's attempt to build a tower on Pearl. You merely represent one view and want to be deaf dumb and blind (presumably this is the aesthetic posture you prefer) and so so snobby and condescending. You are the cliche.Originally Posted by antinimby
Enough of that BS. Let's steer this thread back to something most here will enjoy seeing instead: pics!
moonman82
Lizbeth - you're all over the map. First the issue is the physical space, now it's socioeconomic. The only solution I can see to your complaints would be an end to all development. Your wish seems to be for no change.
Find one post where I said that I loved them.
Find one post where I blamed residents for anything. In fact, just the opposite.In any case, it seems odd you are blaming the Southbridge people for the apartment buildings themselves, much less the destructions of the older buildings.
In fact, forget the whole thing. This discussion has been going around in circles, and is now over.
8 Spruce St.
Liz, it seems you are getting frustrated here, may I suggest keeping your posts limited to only to making a brief 'commentary'. If you can find any links, cut/paste articles, or graphics, that may help to illustrate your point.
I, for one, do hope to see you post here at Wiredny more frequently: only less contentiously.
Cheers.
Yes lisbith you are right. We are all wrong. Only you know what's best. We are snobby, evil and stupid. You are highly intelligent. You know it all. Please bless us with more of your deep wisdom.
This Gehry tower is horrible. It will ruin the area. It will ruin the lives of the people living there, poor, rich and all. We must now march against it. We must not allow it to go any further. It must be stopped now. We must demand that the whole thing must be torn down, piece-by-piece.
The building is evil and will destroy the city. The city does not need towers in that area. Only the buildings the size of Southbridge is allowed. They are ugly but they provide the less fortunate with a place to live in this very horrible city and getting more horrible with each new huge tower.
We mustn't let this continue anymore. We must fight!
lisbeth, you are our savior with your unequal wisdom and intelligence. You are our leader. We must obey.
Yes, yes, yes.
You must now tell us how to proceed. We are at your command. We bow in your godly presence.
Let's organize and all the readers must now gather at the site later today at 3PM and protest.
(By the way, will you be able to get here from RI in time?)
I'm glad you're so brave when anything I might say is censored. I think you guys are the SAME guys posting forever in the same way about buildings. You resent other input and censor it, declaring you're the majority and democratic. In fact, you are fascist in the extreme and have selected out a cult of phallic skyscraper fanatics (however critical of any veins popping out on any singular specimen). I don't think the issues I've raised were inappropriate nor circular, I was adding detail in every post at least. What was useless were the remarks like yours, BULLSHIT ... so very smart and funky New York. Whatever, you guys are allowed because you can shill for the business of the site. I am not allowed because I am critical. VERY SIMPLE.
What are you talking about, our great lisbeth?
I've already conceded that you are 100% right and we are all wrong, as wrong as wrong can be. Yes, we are full of BULLSHIT, as you say.
We are agreeing with you, what more do you want?
Oh great one, now please tell us how quickly you can get down here from RI for that afternoon protest.
I came across an article about how the abutters to Gehry were up in arms because of five years of construction, including about six months of pile driving which alone can destroy anyone. These weren't even the Southbridge people. But I began with those two photos in mind, one of the tower looking insanely tall and inappropriate in a rendering, and the other with the tower beginning to loom over Southbridge. Loom. But people here argued it was in a different ZONE -- like across the street? Or argued it was 600 feet away, which had to be twice as far as it was from Gold. And argued that the Seaport in fact was ZONED to be populated by towers (but not the part I meant, which was why Millstein never has gotten his). ZONING is a big thing, a ZONE is DIFFERENT when mere feet away from another ZONE. But when I mention a neighborhood and I thought the kids weren't from below the bridge who would go to the Gehry school -- and in fact found out they seemingly will come from Tribeca and this much much further away ... why, no one cares, then the CITY is important. Whatever. I don't suppose you are arguing with a real deck here, what you are arguing about is that the Gehry is GOOD and it is GOOD, period, end of discussion, go away and drop dead.
Oh crap, what's going on here.
Lizbeth Li, you were sent a PM earlier. You should read it.
This discussion is going nowhere because you continually make uninformed claims; they are refuted; and you just jump to something else.
Like this...
I told you that NY neighborhoods are not separate towns.
School District 2 covers all of Downtown, Greenwich Village, Soho, and parts of the Upper East Side. The "Tribeca School" PS 234 doesn't just enroll students from that neighborhood, Neither does PS.IS 89 across the street.
Your ignorance of the subject has everyone talking in circles. And like last year at this time, when you left in a huff asking to be banned since you weren't coming back; you're becoming increasingly hostile.
This time I'll accommodate you.
We are obviously not talking about the same things. You are talking about RULES that allow whatever the RULES allow and I am talking about the quality of life for a particular neighborhood. You claim that your RULES are the only subjects worthy of discussion and unless I follow the RULES that BE then I am not allowed to discuss anything. Like I said, your RULES can claim that a ZONE is completely different from another ZONE a foot away, but your RULES can incorporate whatever huge area as a school district. And you think you are somehow wonderful because you can cite the rules??? Don't you know given the laws in this country every living person would be in jail? Don't you know that given the DSM that 50% of all Americans are nuts in any given year? What are the RULES? And you guys are flamboyantly deconstructed flying high swooning over the CHAOS Gerhry brings??? No, this is silly. You remind me of 60-year-olds on Harleys, only the anorectic version.
Goodbye Lizbeth
Go Giants.
See you later folks.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks