Williamsburg Waterfront Projects Reborn

Interesting (as in reality-challenged) take on the state of the Williamsburg waterfront by Crain’s:

The seven-block stretch of Kent Avenue running from North Third Street up to North 10th along the waterfront in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, is making a comeback. Activity on the strip—which became one of the borough’s hottest areas for residential development during the boom years, and something of a ghost town during the recession—is picking up again.

With the exception of 111 Kent (the zig-zag condo at North 7th and Kent), there wasn’t a single stalled project on the Williamsburg waterfront. 175 Kent started post-boom, and has been progressing steadily; same with 157 Kent, the skinny condo next door to the north. For the record, 80 Metropolitan, 56 Metropolitan, 175 Kent, 184 Kent, 157 Kent, Northside Piers 2, Edge South and Edge North were all constructed during the recession; Northside 1 and North 8 were finished before the recession (and 184 Kent was a condo-cum-rental well before the bust).

Four years after the opening of the Northside Piers luxury high-rise—the first of Toll Brothers Inc.’s planned three-building complex—55% of the 180 units are sold or in contract. Sales also are perking up next door at The Edge, where deals on 160 of the 565 units have closed and 100 are in contract.

I had to check the dateline on the article, but it really is April, 2011 (and not April 1). Clearly the numbers they are running for Northside Piers are for tower #2, which opened in 2010; tower #1 (was it really finished four years ago?) sold out long ago.

(At the Edge, the innumeracy seems to run in the opposite direction – according to their math (swallowed whole by the Eagle):

160 / 565 = .5

(OK, they did say “almost” 50% – I guess 28%, rounded up, is closer to 50% than 0%).)

Things are looking up on the waterfront in other ways too:

other pieces of the new residential strip are also coming together—including a soccer field in Bushwick Inlet Park along the waterfront, which is expected to be available to the public shortly.

Who were all those people playing on the field all last summer??

To reach trendy restaurants and hip bars, however, the new crowd still must walk over to Bedford Avenue or North Sixth Street and mingle with the old crowd.

OK – you didn’t really go to Williamsburg, did you? Maybe this really is an April 1 dateline after all.

RIP Brooklyn Night Bazaar

The organizer behind this Brooklyn Night Bazaar concept has decided not to go forward with the project this year. I was actually supposed to meet with him yesterday morning, but got a call that the whole thing was being put off until next year. Hopefully next time around he’ll have a better organized (and communicated) plan in place – after hearing from opponents and supporters and reading through everything that the organizer published, I still have no idea whether or not this was a serious endeavor, what it really was (a market? a concert venue? an open-air night club?), and what the impact on/benefit for the neighborhood was.

I guess we’ll see.

Brooklyn Night Bazaar

03/28/2011 | Comment

Bazaar

I don’t know what to make of this whole Brooklyn Night Bazaar thing. Apparently, the powers that be behind it have been working on the project for 8 months. They’ve raised some money, but the whole thing has a sort of slapped together feel to it (except the website, which looks like some attention was paid to it).

The details are fuzzy and malleable, and it’s not clear if this is a drinks venue, a flea market or a concert venue. A lot of people are freaked out about the potential crowds, noise and drunkenness, but many others are supporting the project. It’s also not clear if there is a lease (the promoter claims to have an “agreement” with the landlord), or even if this proposed use is allowed under zoning (grandfathered manufacturing, but zoned for high density residential with a commercial overlay along West Street only – picture Northside Piers or the Edge).

So stay tuned, I guess. This ride might be a bit bumpy.



✦✦

Digital Subscription Prices Vizualized

Via Gruber (again), a handy infographic on what’s wrong the Times online subscription pricing. For what the Times is charging, you could subscribe to the Economist and the Wall Street Journal (both quality publications) and still have enough left over for a Netflix account.

Williamsburgh Savings Bank Plans Revealed (Somewhat)

The Architects Newspaper has some stunning photos of the interior and exterior of the Williamsburgh Savings Bank at Broadway and Driggs (George B. Post, 1875 and 1905).

They also have news on the plan for the building, which is for a catering hall and gallery/museum. But no word on what is to happen on the former parking lot to the west. Though, as A|N notes, it is as-of-right for residential with ground floor retail (also no word on the floor area – the bank may well have excess air rights that can transferred over to the development site portion of the project).

Pricing Should Be Simple

John Gruber:

One thing many companies — in any industry — can learn from Apple is the importance of simple pricing. If you make it easy for people to understand how much they’re paying, and what they’re paying for, it is more likely that they’ll buy it.

Amen.

I used to pay a dollar a day to read the Times, plus more on Sunday. I stopped buying the daily paper when they raised the price to $1.25 or $1.50 – just more change to fish around for, plus I could read it online for free. I read most of the paper online on a daily basis, using a variety of devices from a variety of locations. I even buy the physical paper on occasion (usually Sundays). I get it all (mostly) for free, but I would gladly pay for the content (as I do for other content). I pay $30 a year just to get access to their crossword puzzles.

In other words, I should be the Times’ ideal demographic for their new pay service. But I’m not buying.

$455 a year for unlimited device access is too much. Paying less and only being able to read the paper from some devices is not progress.

$185 a year ($15 per month) is closer to reasonable, and I would probably buy in at that level (though I suspect I would be a minority). But that means buying a physical (paper) subscription that I don’t want and won’t read most days. So after someone drives a physical paper to my house, I will just throw it straight into recycling.

Way to be green, Grey Lady.

P.S. If I understand their FAQs (yes, there are more than one) right, I’ll still have to pony up $30 a year for the crossword.