Karma Is a Bitch: 185 Ocean Developer Sucking Wind
One of the galling chapters in the now-waning development boom of this decade was when a developer paid 33% over asking price for the turn-of-the-century brick house (above left) at 185 Ocean Avenue and proceeded to waste little time in tearing it down in order to put up an eight-story apartment building. (Dollar signs in…
One of the galling chapters in the now-waning development boom of this decade was when a developer paid 33% over asking price for the turn-of-the-century brick house (above left) at 185 Ocean Avenue and proceeded to waste little time in tearing it down in order to put up an eight-story apartment building. (Dollar signs in their eyes, the greedy neighbors tried to cash in but were too late to the party.) After paying $1,200,000 for a 30-by-150-foot property with a beautiful house on it, the developer now is trying to get $2,500,000 for the same piece of land with a big hole in the ground (above right). Where do we sign up! While the developer may lose some money on this deal, the real losers are the community and appreciators of Brooklyn’s architectural history.
185 Ocean Avenue [Corcoran] GMAP
PLG House Razed, 8-Story Building Planned [Brownstoner]
Ocean’s 13: Landmarking Against a Ticking Time Bomb [Brownstoner]
PLG Shocker! 185 Ocean Closes 33% Above Ask [Brownstoner]
Why is no one talking about the other downside to the hole in the ground and the huge walls, the miniature homeless camp blocking the sidewalk in front of 185?
“Montrose, I make your blood boil because I consistently prove how you understand absolutely nothing about economics or productive human activity. If you were in charge, Brooklyn would look like Lagos……You really just don’t understand how or why anything gets built. Everywhere governments believe as you do, people live in abject squalor in slums unimaginable to any civilized people many centuries ago. I have the entire history of real estate development in the US on my side. What do you have? Nothing but concrete barracks in communist countries.”
Polemicist, I take your scorn and ridicule as the highest praise. If I had any doubt as to whether or not I was in the right, that doubt is gone. Keep it up, the more you say, the worse you sound, and the more idiotic and shrill your arguments become. I’m just going to keep doing what I’m doing – working to preserve my lovely, low density, 19th century neighborhood, and do what I can for the cause of preservation anywhere else I can. See you on the battlefield.
Cheers!
MM, as usual, you have said it all! Thanks so much for raising the bar of responsible, intelligent discussion in this thread. I never realized you “got into power,” but, in my book, you can take the lead any day!
Miss Muffet: When you get the chance, please take the time to read the whole thread. This discussion is not about sizing up the benjamins so much as it’s about the classic tension between historic preservation and unregulated, solely profit-driven and mindlessly destructive real estate development. As for the handful of those who invade a blogsite by the name of “Brownstoner” in order to rail against the passions of the urban old house lovers who congregate here. . . well, it’s those folk who are blowing the hot air just to get a rise of steam in the rest of us. Meh. Fuhgeddaboutem!
Bxgirl: I don’t know whether to laugh or cry about winning a badge of honor from a confused troll who goes by the name polemicist. A true polemicist is one who can artfully and convincingly advance a controversial line of argument, most typically within the realm of religion, philosophy or politics. Given that definition, I certainly don’t see any polemicist around these parts!
President-elect Obama’s house is too old and too tasteful to be a McMansion. It was built in 1910. It’s just a very nice house — there are similar neo-Georgian houses on President St. in Crown Heights, as well as elsewhere in Brooklyn, and some of them have even been torn down for true McMansions (think Ocean Parkway). (And how much do I love saying, “Presdient-elect Obama!”)
Montrose, I make your blood boil because I consistently prove how you understand absolutely nothing about economics or productive human activity. If you were in charge, Brooklyn would look like Lagos.
“I also had some pithy and scathing remarks aimed at Polemicist, who has the singular ability on this blog to make my blood boil. He cares nothing about affordable housing, it’s his straw man for any argument about preservation, but is amazingly absent from real discussions on the subject. He totally ignores the fact that if built, the apartments would be neither affordable, nor make even a dent in housing needs, as 8 units of unnecessary luxury housing is all about money, not about filling the need for anything except a Park view.”
I actually chime in very frequently about affordable housing – I am something of an expert in HFA and HDC affordable housing programs as a matter of fact. I think you’ll find very few discussions where I haven’t corrected someone on the various programs offered by those agencies.
I once again must tell that supply and demand economics applies to real estate, like everything else. When there is a shortage, prices are high. It is the same with every product. These 8 units won’t make a difference, but if we built 10,000 buildings of this size – it would make a huge difference. The reason this fight is so desperate is because we have had nearly a half century of dense, foolish citizens not understanding this fact.
You really just don’t understand how or why anything gets built. Everywhere governments believe as you do, people live in abject squalor in slums unimaginable to any civilized people many centuries ago. I have the entire history of real estate development in the US on my side. What do you have? Nothing but concrete barracks in communist countries.
“He sees these houses as “nothing special”, and has some horrible utopian nightmare of every street with access to public transportation or a park as the site of huge high density dwellings, as if that could possibly be the ideal way to live in any city. ”
They ARE nothing special. There are tens of thousands of similar houses. I really want you to tell some family living in a 1-bedroom apartment that building more housing so they can afford something better is a “horrible utopian nightmare”. This is why I want to get you on video. Let’s stand in front of these houses – I want you to tell the world in person you think building an apartment building on this street, that is similar to a dozen others right next door, is a horrible utopian nightmare. You won’t do it, because you know how crazy it sounds.
“Now these people have the nerve to want to hold onto their homes and their neigborhood’s integrity, in the face of new and expensive development, so they are “wackjobs” for defending themselves and their choices. Yeah, right.”
They are whackjobs for using the power of the state to restrict productive economic activity, the rights of their neighbors, and future owners of the property. If the previous nutjob wants to hold on to his/her house – don’t sell it! No one is forcing anyone to sell here. There is nothing to defend against. What we DO have is someone nutjob thinking they are justified in taking away the rights of their neighbors.
“The public good is served by keeping that which makes our neighborhoods desireable, and here in Brooklyn, that means rows of low density row houses, combined with the apartment buildings, and other housing that was built to complement, enhance, and serve the needs of a diverse community. ”
Total nonsense and BS. Who are YOU to decide what makes neighborhoods desirable? And how on earth could you possibly claim these rowhouses and other buildings were “built to complement, enhance, and serve the needs of a diverse community?” That is also totally crazy. Housing is built when the population grows. It is not built for anything more than to meet the demands of the people for housing. Back before people like you got into power, they used beauty to attract customers. Now, because of an endless housing shortage, that is unnecessary.
Almost every single apartment building in Brooklyn was built from 1900 to 1940, when in each decade the population increased at LEAST 25%. All the houses you love were built when the borough had a population of 800,000 – a tiny fraction of what it is today.
You seem to be under the delusional belief that once upon a time, the land was empty and overnight this amazing mixture of parks, apartment buildings, and townhouses were planned by some great central planner to give you the city you have today. That is not the way it happened, sorry to burst your bubble. Places like Ocean Avenue, by the way, were ALWAYS intended to have medium density apartment buildings. The Brooklyn fathers anticipated the borough becoming something like Berlin or Paris of that era.
“Preserving the work of one of Brooklyn’s best, and most important 19th century architects is investing in our collective history, so future generations can see how a master created the limestones forming a unified row, with their interconnecting front laws and inner sidewalks.”
I have said many times I appreciate this sentiment, but there are literally hundreds of city blocks protected already. We need not turn this borough into a museum, and it is an extremist view to suggest every old building should be protected.
“The public loses NOTHING from historic preservation. Quite the contrary. People flock to our neighborhoods, in part, because they are beautiful. ”
No, the public loses developable land and thus affordable housing. I agree historical preservation results in higher prices – as I have said, housing shortages do that. BUT, my argument is people should pay for this. You should not be allowed to profit from the law.
“They aren’t flocking to high density bland boxes on 4th Avenue.”
Actually they
what’s revenge? that the developer got choked on his own greed? As for housing the masses- 8 apartments, and I guarantee you, the developer’s idea of affordable housing and my idea of affordable housing will be at opposite ends of the spectrum. But I learned a long time ago, brooklynista that facts and rationality have no place in poley/benson world. Having been on the receiving end many times of their version of “dialogue” let me welcome you to the honor club. You join a number of us here in the lala land of their scorn. It’s a badge of honor 🙂
Well, I don’t have to time to read this whole long thread but I think the accusation of greed comes from the price being asked for this land. As usual, it’s the price, stupid. How people blow tons of hot air over the other issues, and ignore what is one of, if not THE key variable at issue, is beyond me.
I typed up a compelling argument for the architectural and social value of these houses, and a passionate defense of the homeowners, PLG, preservation, and housing. It dawned on me that I’d only be preaching to the choir for those who agree that these homes are worthy to stay right where they are, and that Brooklynista is right, which she is.
I also had some pithy and scathing remarks aimed at Polemicist, who has the singular ability on this blog to make my blood boil. He cares nothing about affordable housing, it’s his straw man for any argument about preservation, but is amazingly absent from real discussions on the subject. He totally ignores the fact that if built, the apartments would be neither affordable, nor make even a dent in housing needs, as 8 units of unnecessary luxury housing is all about money, not about filling the need for anything except a Park view.
He sees these houses as “nothing special”, and has some horrible utopian nightmare of every street with access to public transportation or a park as the site of huge high density dwellings, as if that could possibly be the ideal way to live in any city. He has nothing but ridicule and scorn for people of ordinary means who took a chance many years ago, for the most part, to put down roots on a block many considered too dangerous, precisely because of the very apartment buildings he celebrates. Now these people have the nerve to want to hold onto their homes and their neigborhood’s integrity, in the face of new and expensive development, so they are “wackjobs” for defending themselves and their choices. Yeah, right.
The public good is served by keeping that which makes our neighborhoods desireable, and here in Brooklyn, that means rows of low density row houses, combined with the apartment buildings, and other housing that was built to complement, enhance, and serve the needs of a diverse community. Preserving the work of one of Brooklyn’s best, and most important 19th century architects is investing in our collective history, so future generations can see how a master created the limestones forming a unified row, with their interconnecting front laws and inner sidewalks. The uniform English basement facades, the balustrades, even the shrubs and garden plots make this look like an English terrace row. That is worthy of consideration for preservation. More importantly, the people in those houses, who kept the row intact and beautiful, should not have to worry that greed, Hatfield and McCoy rivalries and short sightedness are going to take their enjoyment of their homes away from them.
The public loses NOTHING from historic preservation. Quite the contrary. People flock to our neighborhoods, in part, because they are beautiful. They aren’t flocking to high density bland boxes on 4th Avenue. Historic neighborhoods, whether villages, small cities or Brooklyn, give people an intangible feeling of belonging, and part of that is due to the architecture, and the history in every building and streetcorner. That does not mean that everything is static and must never change, but protection is necessary in many cases. I’m glad for it, and will continue to fight for it, and defend those who do as well.
I live on the block as well. 185 ocean was a nice house but it was by no means unique. the developer isnt evil for wanting to build in this spot. He was a small business man who got caught when the music stopped.
Most of the block is apt buildings in various states of repair. I expect that there were once single family dwellings on most, if not all, of the the land adjacent to the park. It’s an excellent location for multifamily dwellings.
Now the lot will go to the highest builder. I suspect the lot will eventually end up in a bank’s hands. Eventually, it will be returned to productive use. In the meantime it’s an eyesore and an inconvenience to its immediate neighbors.
PS I love the revenge motivation. they definitely won.