morehousingnow

Foreclosures: Location, Location, Location

2009-10-15T08:51:00.000-07:00

Once again we see headlines about foreclosures and once again the MSM just glosses over the topic. Foreclosures in NY are approximately 0.19 while in Nevada it's 21 times higher at 4.35. One simply cannot broad brush a topic as important as this -- unless your sole concern is selling copy and gloom-and-doom is what helps sells your paper.

Say "No" To "Contextual Height" Arguments

2009-09-30T15:27:00.000-07:00

More Contextual Building Madness

2009-09-30T15:26:00.000-07:00

New York, in its infinite wisdom has decided to

preserve the established low-density character of the Far Rockaway and Mott Creek communities and ensure that future residential development would be consistent with the existing one- and two-family, detached and semi-detached housing mix that typifies much of the area.

Why? Why does a developer's decision 100 years ago have to dictate the way we live today? Is the architecture in the Rockaways so unique that it needs to stay as it is? Do you not realize that by passing such a ruling that it is a disincentive for individuals to improve the area? Do you truly want to be dependent on the city to improve the area?

Would you believe that the city considers the above building an "Out-of-Context Development"?

The above building is what NYC wants to preserve. Are you f*cking kidding me?

Is the argument that you want to have areas of low population density? Hah! I guess you've never been to the Rock; with 8, 10, 12 people in 2 and 3 bedroom apartments. A 50 foot building is out-of-context next to 20 foot buildings, but in time, when there are more and more 50 foot buildings it will be the 20 foot buildings that will be out-of-context. This is NYC for Gotham's sake, not Nebraska or Kansas or what-have-you.

Bad Neighborhoods in NYC, a color coded map

2009-09-25T14:24:00.000-07:00

Was going through one of the NYC boards and came across a post asking

Can anyone have a map of NYC with bad neighborhoods colored in?

You know, so I can know where to avoid.

Some of the responses follow

for some reason,this query
has me LM@O.
---
same here- LOL!!! And you have to admit that it's a very reasonable request. Hey I too would want one for my kitchen wall to study it, as well as one showing me which neighborhood restaurants keep failing to meet health code standards. Heck, why not just put them together on the same map? Call it the "The Newcomers Map to New York's Bad Neighborhoods & Bad Restaurants".

Call me crrrrrrazy...but I have a feeling that the chances of you just going about your tourist-y business and then stumbling into a rough hood in Brooklyn or the Bronx is fairly slim. Especially if you're just chilling in Manhattan. You probably have a better chance of some crusty punks on St. Marks stealing your wallet. The only thing that's gonna mug you is taxes.
---
So I thought I would help

An interesting article from Milwaukee

2009-09-17T14:34:00.000-07:00

So why do so many of our leaders seem indifferent to the success of landlords?

The latest affront is a bill by state Rep. Marlin Schneider (D-Wisconsin Rapids) to limit access to CCAP, the Web site detailing court cases. Schneider tinkered with the bill last week, but he didn't fix the part that worries landlords. Under the bill, the system won't show cases until a court finds a defendant guilty or makes an eviction final.

Here's the problem: Landlords use CCAP to screen tenants. It's perfectly legal, says Tristan Pettit, a Milwaukee lawyer who heads the Apartment Association of Southeastern Wisconsin. It's a splendid way of learning that a prospective tenant is getting evicted for stiffing his current landlord.

While the bill makes the cases public eventually, the trick is that most evictions settle first, says Pettit. Landlords find that cheaper than months of legal process, and courts press for it. But under Schneider's bill, settlements leave no public record.

Worse, Schneider's bill would keep landlords from spotting troublemakers. Say a tenant is pushing drugs but, because there are witness problems, prosecutors make a deal on a lesser charge. The public record would no longer show the very real drug trouble, which can and should make a landlord wary.

"Basically, you're renting blind," said Tim Ballering, who owns 400 units in Milwaukee. Landlords, he feels, were collateral damage in Schneider's ongoing crusade to give criminals a second (or third or fourth) chance. Still, the lawmaker keeps trying to purge public records, landlords keep complaining, and all that happens is that more lawmakers sign on. Milwaukee Democratic Reps. Fred Kessler and Polly Williams co-sponsored Schneider's bill.

It's not just Schneider. Milwaukee city officials, too, don't make it easy for landlords. The city's an expensive place to own apartments, many say. Taxes are high, and "there are just so many regulations against us," said Pettit. Don't get him started about the nuisance property law, by which landlords can get in trouble if a tenant calls 911 needlessly.

The Department of Neighborhood Services until lately was a particular cross. "There was a real culture of hatred in the city towards property owners," said Ballering. "Starting with DNS."

Ballering, Pettit and others said things are improving under DNS's new commissioner. Others credit police with cleaning up prostitution and gang trouble.

Still, for every step forward, there are another couple steps toward proposals such as landlord licensing. A study done for DNS found that idea had "very uncertain benefits" elsewhere, while for landlords it's pure cost. Yet it seems to be moving forward.

Why? Why do Milwaukee lawmakers co-sponsor Schneider's regrettable lunacy? Why did our city, in which 55% of residents rent, ever come to make those who offer rentals feel as if they were at best merely tolerated?

"It doesn't seem that the city sees what we offer and that it's necessary," said Pettit.

The Public Policy Forum a few months back said Milwaukee's really short of low-cost rentals. If more people went into the business, researchers said, it could help. Yet Ballering, who's owned for 32 years, told his son to find another occupation: "It's such a difficult business," said Ballering.

"There's better things to do with your life."

Not what a city in need of rental housing wants to hear from entrepreneurs who provide it.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/59534347.html

Sounds like NYC is not as bad as it could be.

Home Sales Going Up or Going Down?

2009-08-18T18:21:00.001-07:00

Newspaper articles such as the BBCs blare: Surprise dip in US home building.

Construction of new US homes posted a surprise fall in July, ending three straight months of increases, Commerce Department figures have shown.
Suggesting the housing market recovery remains weak, the number of new properties built last month fell 1% to an annual rate of 581,000 properties.

And yet July single-family starts were strongest since October, and have risen 5 months in a row. What accounts for this? Well maybe that multi-family starts are considerably more volatile than single-family?I still think that things are getting better. We'll see how multi-family starts go in the next few months. NY has definately not climbed out of its doldrums but the moment it the national economy is and is perceived to be growing than NY real estate will do just fine.

Forecast : Upturn in US Home Values: Leading Indicators are Bullish on Real Estate

2009-08-16T18:06:00.000-07:00

ECRI's U.S. Leading Home Price Index (USLHPI)which was "designed to predict cyclical turns in real home prices, has now been rising for five months." ECRI's data is made available only to clients and as MHN is not a privileged client we are not privi to the data behind the ECRI graphs. However they are a trusted source and their conclusions are quite promising.

The implication is clear: this is a genuine cyclical upturn in the level of the USLHPI. Such an upturn in the USLHPI amounts to a forecast of a cyclical upturn in the level of home prices this year…"

ECRI’s apparent optimism about the economy is very much at odds with a stubbornly downbeat consensus. When almost every seasoned analyst is so pessimistic, doubts about the likelihood of an upturn are entirely understandable.

But we also know that this is precisely the phase of the business cycle when, in the wake of a major crisis, a “giant error of pessimism” runs rampant. It is therefore especially important to remember at this juncture that the opinions we express are based not on our gut feel, but on a system of objective leading indicators with a stronger theoretical foundation and a more rigorously tried and tested record that any others in existence. Its real-time track record is also unrivaled. Our confidence in their predictive power is based on long experience with these indicators.

While more analysts are coming around to our view about the economic recovery, there are plenty that remain doubtful. Only the reality of the recovery will convince such skeptics, but by then it will be much too late for decision makers to take timely steps to stay ahead of the curve.

We understand that some will be incredulous about our home price upturn call, coming on the heels of our business cycle recovery forecast… it is worth remembering that our apparent boldness is merely a reflection of what our objective leading indexes are telling us today."

As stated earlier ECRI is a trusted source. It is unfortunate that I don't have the data from which they derived this conclusion. If this is true it will have a substantial impact on NYC real estate. Real Estate prices is based upon demand and people are here because of the jobs.

Now before it sounds as if I have nothing but praise for ECRI let me say that they are professional contrarians and make their money by having people buy their data and their analysis. They spend a lot of time upselling their products. I read one of their books, "Beating the Business Cycle," and too much of the book was spent praising ECRI and upselling their data.

Di Fara's Pizza

2009-08-16T09:30:00.001-07:00

Possibly the best pizza in NYC. If you love pizza and are in NYC you must go as the owner and chef is in his 80s and will not be with us forever.

Toll Brothers

2009-08-12T08:16:00.000-07:00

Toll Brothers showed their first annual increase in signed contracts in four years. A 3 percent year over year increase, mostly in the luxury end. And, what I find most promising are that cancellation rates, now at 8.5 percent, are returning to historical levels of 7 percent and that incentives are being removed and margins are increasing.

Superfund the Gowanus? No!!!

2009-07-28T17:26:00.000-07:00

“It may take time but with the EPA we will know that it’s being done right, by the experts, once and for all.” http://www.superfundgowanus.org

Well, that’s hopeful thinking. The EPA may be experts at diagnosing a problem; listing the pollutants in the contaminated area; but they are not experts at solving the problem. Having the EPA manage the clean-up will be like having a contractor come to fix your kitchen; demolish it and then leave – not for months or years but decades. And, unlike the nightmare of a normal remodel you won’t be able to find another contractor because the EPA is, at that time, the only game in town. You won’t be able to call your local TV channel for an expose, nor will the Better Business Bureau be able to help you.

It would be best to have the EPA list the problems and to confirm that the work was done as promised.

Why is the EPA not the answer? The Brooklyn Paper editorial (July 10, 2009) in favor of the Superfund explains it perfectly.

The feds favor an approach that identifies polluters … and then forces them to pay for their toxic handiwork. That process is often mired in litigation. ...

You think? First the sued companies have to still be in business; then the government has to prove liability and the extent of the liability; and finally the company has to have the funds to be able to pay for the clean-up. This is a stupid, do-nothing approach. The right approach is to get developers who want to capitalize on the area to pay a portion of the clean-up funds; have the City, State, and Federal governments pay for the rest of the clean-up and have their investment repaid by the tax dollars that would result from the sale and use of the reclaimed properties. This would be a true example of “stimulus spending.” We would create usable and more valuable property generating millions of tax dollars per year.

The developers would have an incentive to get the job done – the EPA doesn’t. We wouldn’t trust that developers would do the job correctly so the EPA will verify that the toxins are encapsulated properly, removed and disposed of according to law.

New York, Brooklyn, the Gowanus and neighboring communities will get beautiful new homes, shops, and a “river walk.” Local, State and the Federal governments will get tax dollars from the sale and use of these properties and then could spend the monies in a myriad of ways.

We need to get this area cleaned-up; we don’t need years or decades of lawsuits; tens of millions of dollars spent on lawyers; more bankrupt companies with more unemployed workers before anything is even started. We need this started now so that in 5-10 years Brooklyn is even more beautiful than it is now.

If you don’t want the area to change then Superfund the Gowanus. If you want to bring in new housing, new shops, new jobs; a beautiful river walk; millions in tax revenue for schools and a social safety net then the Superfund is not for you.

Tacos in Brooklyn

2008-01-10T21:01:00.000-08:00

There's a place on the corner of 23rd and Fifth Avenue that I have been going to for a few years. At first it was a Mexican grocery store which opened up a small taco grill. A few months ago they added changed the place around. The grocery store section became a lot smaller and the taco section expanded.

These are not your California burritos but the traditional: 2 corn tortillas wrapping a grilled meat, salsa, guacamole and jalepenos. Excellent and mouth watering. I love the carnitas.

Funny thing on the day I ask the owner if he minds if I tell the gringo world about his place I get mediocre carnitas. Now it could be a bad day, the regular cook wasn't there, but it is a bad omen.

Insider's Note: This area of Fifth Avenue has had a large Mexican population (and restaurants and grocery stores) for quite a while -- 10, 15 years or more.

Across the street, on the corner of 22nd Street there is another Mexican taco place. They originally had a small taco stand in the middle of the block. They were excellent. I haven't been to the new fancier sit-down restaurant.

BID Madness

2008-01-09T16:46:00.000-08:00

Why is this catching on now? Not because NYC is falling apart. The garbage is being collected, the streets are safe, graffitti is not out of control so why are BID coming to Brooklyn? They will probably succeed in creating one on Fifth Ave in Park Slope and are trying to create a BID on Court Street (Cobble Hill and Carrol Gardens).

So what's going on here? I don't know. My guess is power, personal power. Several people want something done in the neighborhood; they want to do it; and they want to get paid for it.

How do you get new streetlights put in -- streetlights with a retro 19th C feel? Start a BID. How do you put the neighborhood stores on the map? Start a BID. How do you get a start in community politics? Oh that's easy be president of the local BID. And guess what? You can get paid doing what you love by taxing all the neighborhood businesses and building owners.

I would not be so adamant against BIDs if they weren't created in such a dishonest fashion; if the BID was a voluntary organization; and if people could disolve their membership in the BID if they no longer wanted to be part of it. But that's not the case. A BID is not voluntary, at least not once its started. You cannot opt out of it if you are within the BID's jurisdiction.

Worst of all is the means by which a BID is started. Did you know that when the vote takes place that if you do not vote NO, if you abstain, or did not know of the pending vote, that your vote counts as a YES vote? That's right the voting is not limited to the people who actually vote. If 51% of the voters either vote YES or do not vote at all then the BID goes through.

This is disgusting and any and all supporters of a BID who employ such dishonest methods ought to be considered as thieves and shake-down artists.

Been very busy but will be back soon

2006-02-16T21:59:00.000-08:00

Another Example of Anti-Development Foolishness

2005-12-04T16:53:00.000-08:00

We have another example of anti-development foolishness. This time across the river in the Lower East Side. A homeowner is building a six-story condo which people decry as being “out of character” with the neighborhood. I’m sorry but I have NO sympathy with this CRAP. If a six story building is too high for you move back to Nebraska. This is NYC we’re talking about. Streets filled with six story buildings (55-60 feet) are not oppressive. Some of the most beautiful spaces in NYC, Brooklyn Heights, Park Slope, the West Village are replete with six story buildings.

Douglas Brenner has lived on the block for 25 years; he is a physicist, not a developer and he is getting grief for doing what this city desperately needs. He is building housing. We should be applauding his actions, not putting impediments in his path. Douglas, other people and organizations may revile your actions but More Housing Now applauds you and urges you on.

The story, as it is being presented by the New York Post has Mr. Brenner combining his existing home with the new building – it was a vacant lot next door – and creating one six-unit condo. What possible rational could there be against this project?

An immediate neighbor may loose sunlight for his plants. This is a real issue and, we the residents of this wonderful city, should arrive at a standard compensation for the loss. This should not, for any reason, be cause to stop construction but some form of compensation should be arrived at. See Open Posts: Loss of Sunlight at the right for discussions on this issue.

Construction brings noise and inconvenience to neighbors. Lots of things are annoying when living next to people: music, arguments, honking … and if you’ve every lived on a busy avenue you know that there can be an infinite amount of annoyances. But this is one of the prices we pay to live in the big city. Move to suburbia or the country and you won’t have these annoyances but you’ll have plenty of others. We have dealt with construction by limiting work hours, the rest you have to deal with. If it comforts you at all you can remind yourself that these are homes that are being built. Families are going to live here and that is good for NYC, good for the country and good for the planet.

You don’t like change. I sympathize but chances are you, or your parents, were part of an earlier change; and the people that were there before were not happy about you and yours changing the feel of their neighborhood. I’m not belittling your experience but this is the New York experience.

You don’t like middle and upper-middle class people. You think these yuppie scum should live in their own repulsive neighborhoods and not come to your neighborhood. Well, if there was enough housing for them elsewhere they WOULDN’T be coming to your neighborhood. If people like you didn’t stop the development elsewhere chances are you wouldn’t be seeing your own neighborhood being developed. If you had any brains you would have been promoting development in other neighborhoods. Now yuppie scum are coming to your neighborhood. Reap what you sowed.

So Who's a shill?

2005-12-04T16:50:00.000-08:00

So what motivates the anti-development forces? Many seem to think that people who promote new development are “shills” for big developers. In that vein are anti-development folks shills for large Manhattan landlords? Are they just fronts for rental apartment owners who don’t like the fact that Brooklyn is siphoning off people who otherwise would have been competing to live in NYC apartments? Are they shills intent upon helping Manhattan landlords drive apartment prices up and vacancies down? Yeah, that’s the ticket, anti-development folks don’t believe a word they say; they’re just shills for Manhattan landlords.

Encourage Building Owners to Build the Maximum Available

2005-11-29T19:12:00.000-08:00

Instead of down zoning whole areas of NYC we ought to be doing everything we can to encourage owners of buildings to build to the maximum available to them. Take a look at this photo. It’s more than a photo of a bar and two restaurants, it epitomizes the waste and opportunity cost that is holding New York and Brooklyn back. Here are three – among many – one story buildings on Fifth Ave. There could be, and should be, another 3 or 4 floors of apartments and commercial space. We ought to be doing everything we can via the tax and zoning code to persuade the owners of these and other buildings to build up. We need more housing. We want more people to move to NYC and Brooklyn; for them to pay taxes here; for them to buy goods and services here. Our city needs to attract and keep people here. One of the best ways we can do that is to dramatically increase our housing stock.

NYC is famous for wasting opportunities such as the West Side railways, Governor’s Island and now, foolishness on top of foolishness, we are wasting a golden opportunity. Investments go in cycles, right now people are intent on investing in their homes (yes there are speculators but we’re not talking about them here). If they don’t buy here in NYC, they’ll buy elsewhere – and pay taxes elsewhere, and shop elsewhere.

Down Zoning Reduces the Value of People’s Homes and Inflates Prices

2005-11-29T19:10:00.000-08:00

For those people who think nothing about the down zoning. Consider this – you are devaluating people’s property, you are reducing the amount of housing stock and you are inflating the cost of apartments, especially for lower-income people.

Yes property can be worth less and still have inflated housing prices. Doesn’t make sense to you? Let’s look at an example. If a property is restricted to having 2 apartments instead of 5, even if the price of each of those two properties doubles the property will be worth less than if there were 5 apartments at the original price.

Example: Because of zoning restrictions two apartments go up in price from $100,000 to $200,000. The property is now worth $400,000. However if there weren’t zoning restrictions the building could have had 5 apartments. Let’s say that as a result of the increase in housing stock the value of each apartment stayed at $100,000. The property with 5 apartments at $100,000 is worth $500,000, the property with 2 apartments is worth $400,000. We have here a simple example where down zoning devaluates a person’s property and still inflates the cost of housing for everyone else.

Those of you who are concerned about housing prices and making this city more affordable should keep this in mind: every time you restrict building you take away from the owner of the property, you take away from other property owners in the neighborhood and you increase the cost of housing for everyone.

Gowanus Against Development

2005-11-28T20:51:00.000-08:00

Well, it looks as if another group of people have fallen prey to the anti-development nonsense.

Hello, if there’s any area in Brooklyn that badly needs development it’s the Gowanus. How can anybody be against turning the Gowanus into Brooklyn’s version of the San Antonio River Walk?

The Gowanus used to be a cesspool. You had to close your windows while driving over it the stench was so bad. And now, only a few years after the clean-up began, you can see the potential. Can you think of anything more beautiful than brownstone streets with restaurants and shops lining the Gowanus? How can anybody who loves NYC be against that?

Well some can. Once again the primary fear is that poor and working class families will be pushed out. Again, the solution is more housing not less; more upper-middle class housing not less.

"They call it gentrification, I call it genocide," she said. "They're killing neighborhoods."

This fear is not irrational, but blaming new construction is.

From Open Sewer to Gentrification [NY Times]

For some history on the gowanus check out gowanuscanal.org

Steel prices and the Bush Administration Tariffs

2005-11-28T20:48:00.000-08:00

If you care about housing prices in NYC you would care about the price of building here. We have a lot of arcane rules that inflate the cost of building. Politics being what it is changing most of these rules would be close to impossible. However there are some things that can be done. The price of steel has gone up incredibly, mostly due to increased energy costs, but also due to tariffs put in by the Bush administration in an effort to win over union votes.

We in NYC are being hurt by these higher steel prices. Housing and office space becomes more expensive -- raising the cost of business and increasing prices for all of us. It makes it harder on the poor and is a disincentive for businesses and the middle class to stay in NYC. Our congresspeople and senators, along with congresspeople from other major cities ought to be doing what they can for their constituency and work to remove these tariffs.

I Stand in Opposition to the Down Zoning

2005-11-16T19:30:00.000-08:00

I stand in opposition to the down zoning in the south slope in particular and in Brooklyn in general. We don’t need less building, we need more. Much more. The south-slope needs more 5 and 6 story buildings such as we have in center-slope. I have never heard anyone say that center slope is oppressive. The current zoning limit of 55’ is fine. Since people are so concerned about the scale of the new buildings enforce the building limit – don’t allow height variances for any reason.

However the down zoning restricts the FAR to a ridiculous amount. If people are concerned about the height of the buildings why limit the FAR? How do fewer and smaller apartments help the community? This is the key flaw in the down zoning and the main reason I stand in opposition to the proposed plan.

Restricting housing means higher prices for everyone. We need more housing -- and for those of you concerned about affordable housing -- we also need more large apartments, more upper-middle class housing and we need it now. When middle class people can’t afford housing in middle-class neighborhoods they find it in poor and working-class neighborhoods. And since they have more money they out-bid their working class neighbors for the apartments. As the neighborhood changes – gentrifies -- housing prices rise and poor and working-class people are unable to stay. If you’re concerned about working class people make certain that middle and upper-middle class people have housing. If they don’t have housing the poor will suffer.

Restricting housing supplies means more than higher prices. It means that the middle and upper-middle class will look elsewhere for housing. Jersey City, for example, is booming and will continue to grab an every higher percentage of upper middle class and wealthy families who could have been living here, shopping here – which means more jobs – and paying taxes here.

As conscientious Americans we want more people living in cities. City-dwellers consume less energy and produce less pollution than do our suburban-sprawl counterparts. We should be promoting life here in NYC and for that to happen we need more apartments, more large apartments, more buildings not less.

The above is a transcript of what I had intended to say at the City Council Meeting. I was angry beyond belief at the "I've got mine, f**k everyone else mentality" that I ad-libbed a little too much.

Brooklyn is Booming

2005-11-08T21:23:00.000-08:00

My dream, and the dream of a lot of other people, is being realized. Shops and restaurants are coming as are off-off Broadway venues. This is a good thing. We all recognize that there can be over-development. Nobody wants fifty families in an area where once there were three and we all recognize and appreciate that our government officials have the right and responsibility to oversee and limit development.

At issue is what is being done and how it is being done. We have competing values, we want to limit the height of buildings and maximize the building of new homes.

We have a housing shortage. For years people have been leaving NYC as soon as they’ve been economically able to. Our population level was maintained because new immigrants kept arriving. Now we have a problem. Middle class immigrants are staying and the children of those who left a generation earlier are coming back to NYC. Not only that but some of those same folks who left are retiring, not to Florida, but here in NYC where they’re within walking distance and a quick cab ride to everywhere they want to go.

The downside is that the poor and the barely surviving working class are being squeezed out of their homes and unable to find housing at an affordable price. Middle class families: teachers, university professors, architects, artists, engineers and other professionals are buying up 2, 3, and 4 family houses for the same price that would get them a 2 bedroom place in the city. They want more space for themselves and their children but, in taking over an entire building for themselves, they reduce our available housing stock and displace 1, 2 or 3 families, usually poor or struggling working class.

We could solve some of our housing shortage by preventing one family from living in a space allocated for two, three or four. Thankfully we haven’t done that. That would be a horrible mistake. But we are making other mistakes as tragic.

This zoning plan is enshrining building decisions made by developers one hundred years ago. This is Brooklyn, not Nebraska. Why are we romanticizing two-story, quickly built wood-frame buildings? We need to maximize the availability of housing units and, just as importantly maximize their size (square footage). We need more, many more large apartments to supply the demand of growing families. We need apartments so that middle class families don’t feel that their only option is to take over a three or four family row house for themselves.

The good news is that we can satisfy this need without building bigger buildings. The bad news is that we have to change our archaic zoning laws, and we all appreciate how difficult that task is.

Another reason for maximizing building is tax revenue. How many tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars in tax revenue are New York City’s coffers going to lose if we continue this hastily constructed, counter-productive zoning change? That’s a lot of teachers, firemen, street cleaning crews, etc... Jersey City, for example, welcomes development. Upper-middle class and luxury condos are being built there at an amazing pace. For every New Yorker who relocates there we loose a tax payer. We want to entice the well-off to live in New York, to live in Brooklyn. Their taxes help pay for social services and their daily purchases bring businesses and help provide jobs for everyone.

Construction equals construction jobs. Maybe it was my years working construction that makes this resonate in me more than others but construction puts food in the bellies of tens of thousands of New Yorkers; allows many of them the where-with-all to go to school get college and graduate degrees and let them, in their older and greyer years, do something a little less bone-weary than swinging a beater and climbing columns. Construction is a good thing. Yes, it is noisy and disruptive, and change can be disturbing but let’s be reasonable. Let’s promote the building of 5 and 6 story buildings throughout South Brooklyn.

Statue of Minerva

2005-11-08T21:21:00.000-08:00

There are so many people now mentioning the Statue of Minerva in Greenwood Cemetery. Nobody cared, mentioned or knew about the Statue until anti-development folks found a talking point. I’ve spoken to people who’ve lived within a block from the Statue for their entire life who never knew it existed. These are people who played ball on Seventh Avenue and 22nd Street as kids 40 years ago; who got married and had their own kids play ball there. I’ve been on numerous tours through Greenwood Cemetery and have, over the years, spoken to several amateur historians interested in the cemetery and the statue was never stressed if mentioned at all. The statue was drawn out of obscurity for one reason only -- as a means of halting the development on Seventh Ave between 22nd and 23rd Street.

If you care about the symbolism of the Statue of Minerva -- that it is returning a salute to the Statue of Liberty -- what you would care about would be that people would have interest in the history of their neighborhood, in the Revolutionary War battle that took place here in the summer of 1776. We all remember Bunker Hill and the Boston Tea Party but who remembers that the first significant military conflict between the British and the Colonialists took place in Brooklyn, from Greenwood Cemetery to Brooklyn Heights.

In fact if those who evoke the Statue of Minerva so often actually cared for the symbolism and for the history that it represents they could do so without stopping new development. It would matter little if the statue was moved over 10 or 20 feet or if it was placed on a higher pedestal. The exact spot on which the Statue rests is not important, it’s the heights on which the battle raged, where Greenwood Cemetery now rests that’s important.

This battle is costing the developer hundreds of thousands of dollars. Good!, you say. Why? How does putting money in the bank’s hands instead of the developer help you or the neighborhood? The project has already been scaled down. Now the developer has to take a chunk out of the building – to let the Statue of Minerva to see the Statue of Liberty. The developer also has to build a full-scale mock up on the site for people to see that the view is not obstructed. How about a trade? Instead of taking out a chunk of the now smaller building let’s move the statue over ten feet, or twenty feet and place the statue on a pedestal. In exchange for letting the developer build; for reducing legal and finance costs the developer could put money into local organizations such as the Old Stone House that actually promotes the Battle of Brooklyn. Every year this organization and others like it promote walking tours, lectures, demonstrations and reenactments of the Battle of Brooklyn.

If you’re truly in love with the history and the symbolism of the Statue of Minerva that would be a far better tribute than having the statue return to obscurity a few months after the building has been completed.

More Housing Now

2005-11-08T21:04:00.000-08:00

The purpose of this site is to get more apartments built in Brooklyn. Right now people are stopping new housing from being built because they are more offended by developers -- who could also be called home builders -- making money than by the fact that there is not enough housing in Brooklyn. This site is for you, making the argument that housing is what we need and that developers have a role to play.

Others simply do not like change. Some fear the change because they think they will be forced to move and don't see where could go. To these people I say that that is why you should support more middle and upper-middle class housing. Middle class people have to live somewhere. If housing isn't built for them they will buy out poor and working-class housing.

Some don't like the demographic change. Their neighborhood is changing around them; the smells and institutions that have existed for a generation or more is slowly disappearing. It's a traumatic experience for those living through it and should not be belittled. However, this is the story of New York. Your parents displaced the demographic group that existed before you and those people felt just as bewildered and just as dismayed by the disappearance of what they held dear. I sympathize, but as with all immigrant groups before you who were displaced, this is the Brooklyn experience.

Some don't like the middle and upper middle class because they are wealthy and don't want to live among them. Too fucking bad. Maybe now you'll won't go out of your way to prevent luxury condos. They wouldn't be coming to your neighborhood if they had a place to live elsewhere.

Loss of Sunlight

2001-12-12T12:12:00.000-08:00

At times, when new buildings are built, they block the sunlight from their neighbor's property. This is a real issue and, we the residents of this wonderful city, should arrive at a standard compensation for the loss. This should not, for any reason, be cause to stop construction but some form of compensation should be arrived at.