Flatbush Avenue Will Never Be The Same Again

Article I saw on the Real Deal about these said they'll prob be $800-900 a square foot.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 9:52 AM

I can't believe these people that are so anti-high-rise live in NYC. If you want to live in some anachronism/tourist trap/museum go live in Europe.
Only way this city is going to continue to be leading world city is to ignore provincialism of narrow minded thinkers.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 9:57 AM

These two projects are great news. It will not destroy any historical structures. Have any of you actually hung out on the Flatbush extension off the Man. Bridge in Bkln? This will provide a much needed facelift to an otherwise desolate stretch of road. It will also be a great contrast to the surrounding landmarked brownstone neighborhoods. A thriving, modern (with historical structures preserved and landmarked) downtown Brooklyn will be a great thing. I'm all for the upscaling of this area. Downtown Brooklyn is now an island of downscale shops surrounding by beautiful upscale brownstone neighborhoods (Bkln Heights, Dumbo, Vinegar Hill, Ft. Greene/Clinton Hill. What is out of context now is the current state of Downtown Brooklyn vis a vis the surrounding neighborhoods. Bring it on!

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 10:18 AM

Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens, etc - its all NYC and not trying to make a 'copy' of Manhattan.
For NYC to prosper and grow econmically we can't be so NIMBYish...and need to have areas where
we grow 'upward' - since we can't grow outward much anymore. See how Hudson shore line in Jersey is being built up - and taking business,etc that could be in NYC if weren't for anti-growth attitudes of people living in some fantasy-world.
Downtown Brooklyn area (because of public transportation infrastructure) is prime spot for 'upward' growth and hope it continues for NYC's sake.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 10:36 AM

I'm the anon from 10.18.

I agree that we need to landmark those buildings in Downtown Brooklyn that have historical significance. I'm a huge supporter of that effort. At the same time, I think that so long as such preservation is achieved, having significant new development in the form of highrise buildings or otherwise in Downtown Brooklyn is a great thing. It should be another true "downtown" neighborhood in NY, and Bkln specifically, that attracts retail and commercial businesses as well as residential development. It needs to thrive 24/7 and cater to the surrounding neighborhoods too.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 10:56 AM

Bkln Boy, what are you rambling about. This thread is discussing two new towers going up on Flatbush just off of the Manhattan Bridge, adjancent to Bklyn Height, Downtown Brooklyn, Ft. Greene...

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 11:14 AM

I agree with the poster who commented about the "urban environment". This is a *city*, folks. If you want quaint mains streets with garden and no traffic, the rest of America is out there waiting for you.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 11:14 AM

I'm glad to see someone investing in this underused area, but I'd never want to live there. The area is isolated except for the heavy traffic. Flatbush Avenue itself is ugly, wide and busy.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 11:41 AM

Anon at 11.41, that's why Downtown Brooklyn needs to respond in kind to the demographics of the neighborhoods surrounding it. Hopefully this will speed up such upscaling.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 11:44 AM

I for one am truly excited about new high rises being built on flatbush. My first reaction is, bring it on.

Flatbush ave looks like a 'half-baked' job at this point.

However, I don't want to be a total real estate whore and deny the need for landmarking and historical preservation.

I think the real downside of this debate is that there is no middle ground.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 11:47 AM

As always I am asking- who in their right mind wants to live at the corner of Flatbush and Tillary? Traffic night and day going on the bridge and the BQE. Busy streets that children can't cross on their own until the reach puberty. No stores - excepting the McDonalds? It isn't DUMBO, it isn't PS or PH with their charm -Its an ugly intersection. I hope there is a sharp correction in the housing market that brings people to their senses.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 11:53 AM

Not to get off subject but has anyone been inside the Washington Mutual bank that's right off flatbush (on Dekalb)?
It's truly amazing.
Would hate to see that building get torn down.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 11:55 AM

Couldn't agree more:

"how do you think you get housing that more people can afford?

you build more housing.

how do you get people to build more housing?

you allow people to make a profit.

Allow the market to work (and eliminate rent stabilization!), and eventually you would have plenty of affordable housing for everyone. Like Philly. Like most other American cities."

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 12:03 PM

FltBsh4Ever, you can't compare NYC or Brooklyn (if you want to be specific) to Buffalo and Detroit. Those cities were solidly reliant on a single industry (automotive or industrial/manufacturing). NYC's industries are more diverse than that (financial, advertising, telecom, etc). So I don't buy the argument that building more high rises is needed in order for the city to thrive.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 12:12 PM

More and more people realize how great Bklyn is. You can't forbid them from settling, or from refusing to move to the burbs. You have to put them somewhere. That doesn't mean un-landmarking all of Bklyn and turning it over to developers. But it means building something, somewhere.

So, where? Let's nominate some sites and strategies if you hate this one.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 12:30 PM

I'm not against it. I want the skyscrapers to be built right there in downtown brooklyn I just don't want to see all the architectural gems in the fulton mall bull-dozed.
The interior of the WAMU bank has some really incredible details. It feels as if the ceilings are 70 feet high on the inside. Would hate to lose that.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 12:38 PM

"So, where? Let's nominate some sites and strategies if you hate this one."

Excellent suggestion, anon 12:30, but don't bet on any ideas coming your way. The anti-development hordes love to complain, but they suddenly fall mute when pressed for specific alternatives.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 12:39 PM

Why would you have all the grocery stores and amenities in an area that's not residential? If they put up residential towers, some enterprising person(s) will open a store to serve the hungry residents. Build it and they will come.

It's an ugly area, why not have some mid priced residential units that you don't have to be either a subsidized circus performer or a MD of a fortune 500 to afford?

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 12:53 PM

Well, just to start the ball rolling, I nominate the corner of Flatbush, Empire, and Ocean for a 30 story condo. Yes, this is PLG. What's there now is a fast food restaurant facing a major entrance to Prospect Park and the Botanical Gardens. Attach this building to the beautiful but somewhat desolate old brewery next door and you would have a fine addition to a low-rise neighborhood.

Empire Blvd could certainly use mid-rise development.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 12:53 PM

I just hope they don't look like 85 Adams (Beacon Tower). Personally, I think that building is such an eyesore. I don't understand why the entire western portion of the building doesn't have any windows. I'm guessing that it's not a lot line.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 3:38 PM

Does anyone know what these buildings will look like? Will it look like the Hearst Tower in midtown (:>
Can you post some links to developers website. Would love to see what they will look like before I jump to any conclusions.
By the way, is the Dime Savings Bank the building that currently has a WAMU branch?

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 3:57 PM

Yes, WAMU was Dime

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 4:57 PM

I think the old Dime Savings bank should be made into a cell phone/sports jersey store with lots of large signage all over the outside letting me know how cool the merchandise is. ;)

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 5:09 PM

Nothing like making people who are different from you feel welcome in 'your' neighborhood babs. Why not say hello rather than stope dead and stare at them. Good job. Must have been "pretty funny" as you say.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 7:29 PM

The other day two black guys dressed like hip-hop types passed me on Henry Street. They were telling each other, "Yo," and went into Starbucks. Later they came into the panini shop. Everyone (myself and the store clerks included) stopped dead and stared at them.

Hey, that's not offensive, is it?

Posted by: Anonymous at April 4, 2006 9:56 PM

Good points, anon 9:56. I'm sure that babs will come on and find some justification for her double-standard.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 8:02 AM

Anon 8:02, come on, it's nyc, nobody says hi to a stranger that they meet in the streets (whether it's a panini store, starbucks, a plexiglass encased liquor store or, a pizza shop).
Talk about puttin words into people's mouth. How can you assume that Babs was staring at them because they were white. Why couldn't you give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that she was staring at them because they were "dressed like grunge/hipster".
Maybe staring isn't the best way to make someone feel welcome but there's no need to jump to a conclusion about race. Heck, I don't even know whether Babs is white, black or green.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 1:01 PM

Ok so here we go again. Standing and gaping at someone because they are a different color than most of the people in your neighborhood is not racist but god forbid you post anything detrimental about public housing and out come the fried chicken and watermelon comments. Talk about hypocrisy.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 1:19 PM

I don't think babs -- whatever color she is -- meant any offense, but it's worth considering how it would have gone over if someone equally well intentioned had made the same post with the races flipped.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 2:08 PM

From what I've read of bab's comments in the past, she sounds reasonable and educated.
Not the type that would talk of denying anyone the right to live in a neighborhood because of their race or socioeconomic background.
I think you're jumping the gun and putting words into her mouth again. You don't know if her 'stare' represented a thought like 'what are you doing here, get back to your own neighborhoods'. Or if it was mere surprise that the hipsters are also moving into her neighborhood.

Three years ago, you'd rarely see someone white walking east of Classon ave. I remember 'staring' with surprise the first time that I saw a group of white kids strolling down a block in Bed Stuy. I wasn't hateful or prejudiced. I was just in awe that gentrification had proceeded that far east.

And I welcomed it all with open arms. It took 15 seconds for me to adjust to the new reality and for the stare to end. I was driving at the time; so it made no difference to these kids.

I interpreted babs comments as surprise that there were hipsters living in her neighborhood.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 2:14 PM

You're right. We all need to work on being less defensive and jumping to unwarranted conclusions. But you've got to admit that there've been some horribly blatant, racist comments posted on this blog recently.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 2:19 PM

I think if the races were flipped in the babs scenario, there would be no "understanding" on behalf of many on this board. There is always talk of how snobby white gentrifiers are and how they don't speak to their new neighbors. Well, if the reactions of babs and co are anything to go by, whites are not exactly welcomed. It is not acceptable to act that way, no matter what color you are and no matter how openminded you think you are. It reveals your own prejudice. You can call it what you want, and you might not be some all out racist, but it is telling none the less of your attitude and your upbringing if you think it is ok to stop and stare at someone who is a different color from you and the rest of the residents in your neighborhood.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 2:52 PM

There's a wealth of differences between someone with a lot of money telling you to pack your things and hurry up and get out of the neighborhood because your type 'doesn't belong here no more',
vs.
someone staring at you because they're surprised or slightly distrustful or scared of the changes that you'll bring to the neighborhood.

And if you can't see the difference then you're still stuck in your black vs. white world.

Since when has staring become a crime. Impolite maybe.

I used to conduct business in Bay Ridge as an appraiser and I can't begin to tell you the number of times that people 'stared' at me while I was walking down the street. Not to mention the number of times that real estate agents in the area assumed that I was a delivery boy despite the fact that I was wearing a dress shirt, tie, slacks and dress shoes.

You have to peel back the layers behind those stares to know the difference. And the stare that a black man gets in Bay Ridge is quite different from the stare that a white man gets in Bed Stuy.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 3:08 PM

Sure, right. How about everyone stop staring and making people feel uncomfortable, whatever your motives. Quit defending bad behavior, it tarnishes a whole group of people when you try to do so.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 3:25 PM

Anon 3.08pm implied it was less problematic if people stare at white people in a black neighborhood if:

"someone staring at you because they're surprised or slightly distrustful or scared of the changes that you'll bring to the neighborhood".

Again, flip the races around and that statement would never fly. Maybe a group of prejudiced white people are staring at a black guy in an all white neighborhood because "they're surprised or slightly distrustful or scared of the changes that you'll bring to the neighborhood". Doesn't make it right in either case. Defending bad elements who behave in a biased way or way that would be interpreted by most as racist or prejudiced in some sense is a losing proposition. Better to focus your efforts on getting people to act with some sense of decorum and not trying to explain away their bad behavior. Defending bad apples only leads to further stereotyping of the entire group as having the same attitude as the bad apples.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 3:31 PM

I think the only one getting tarnished here is Babs. Seems like you're on an agenda to defame her to me.
I remember getting stared at, by 'locals' sitting on the stoop of a brownstone, in Bed Stuy. It made no difference that I was also black. Fact is that I was a new face. It unnerved me a bit and my immediate response was to check my clothes and zipper just to make sure nothing was out of the order. It took a while for me to realize that it was a 'cultural' thing and sometimes a stare is just a stare, nothing more, nothing less.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 3:42 PM

Anon 03:31 PM, I would say that they're both equally bad. But are you implying that Babs was staring because she was getting ready to set it off and "steal your wall, watch and Ipod".

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 3:48 PM

Retractions, anyone?
See, just as I suspected.
Now my question for those of you who were harassing her is...would you have been as offended if someone else had made an inappropriate comment about the poor folks in the project, or about black kids hanging out on Clinton Ave, or about black kids sullying the image of the fulton mall.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 3:59 PM

Babs, sorry for the confusion on your email.

Anon 3.59, of course people would jump on an inappropriate comment about poor folks in the project or about black kids hanging out on Clinton Ave, or abotu black kids sullying the image of Fulton mall. We've all seen those threads and they usually go on for over 100 posts because you get the same thing, people defending bad behavior or inappropriate comments with some sort of justification for the bad behavior/comment.

Again, babs, good on you for clarifying what was a post that did not read so well.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 4:16 PM

Anon@331

You're right, it was an idiotic comment and I wanted to retract it after I posted it. The point that I was trying to make was that people in the historically poorer neighborhoods tend to stare a lot (older people especially), just because you're a new face. It's an informal neighborhood watch system.

It took many visit to Bed Stuy before I realized that this is what was going on. Eventually they got use to me, stopped staring and began saying hi.

There was no getting over the stares in Bay Ridge. I simply wasn't wanted there. The ice never melted no matter how often I visited the area. I'm not saying this to indict the entire neighborhood. I just think that there is a higher percentage of people who are prejudiced there than anywhere else in Brooklyn.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 4:26 PM

Who knows, maybe they are. Let's just all take it easy and try to do our own part to keep things civil and respectful in our own lives. :)

Posted by: Anonymous at April 5, 2006 5:40 PM

Is it going to look like that monstosity going up on the North side of the Manhattan Bridge. These buildings are totally out of character with the surrounding neighborhoods.
There is definitely a crash coming when this kind of excessive building is taking place. I am also curious as to who will want to live in these buildings given the barrenness of the surrounding areas - except for traffic which they will have more than enough of .

Posted by: Anonymous at December 7, 2006 1:00 PM