Nobody can touch the Western Empire (Boulevard) for smorgasbord of yummy greasy fast food.
Friday, September 27, 2013
Good News For Fans of Fast Food
Nobody can touch the Western Empire (Boulevard) for smorgasbord of yummy greasy fast food.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
I have to see it to believe it when it comes to Checkers. I've made a bet with my boy on which spot will open first, 7-11 or Checkers. 7-11 was my pick.
Yeah, Checkers is taking forever to open. I don't eat much fast food, but when I go down South, I treat myself to a "big Buford." Will this branch have some outdoor seating? I always thoguht that was cool...
I've said it before and I'll say it again and again...Empire is a huge missed opportunity. With proper leadership, it could be developed for affordable and market rate large-scale apartment buildings. Who needs a Checkers right near the park when hundreds of people of all backgrounds could be LIVING there? Storage space? Near the Garden? You've got to be KIDDING me. Where's the vision? Where's the land-use policy?
And yeah, I'll try the Buford. But it'll go down with gulp of bitterness and a belch of dismay.
Yes, I totally agree. It is very much a wasted opportunity. Right now, Empire looks like the kind of road you see when you pull off the highway to get gas in some random upstate town,
so what is involved with changing the zoning of both sides of Empire from Ocean to Nostrand. I believe it's now C7 or C8, which allows for all sorts of wasteful surface lots like Western Beef. There could still be vibrant commercial while allowing for development like along 4th ave in Park Slope, and a new residential district there would be anchored by the B/Q/S/2/5. Crazy that they've let it be like this for so long. What's the process of changing zoning entail?
Anon 10:59. What do you mean by "they've let it be like this?" Don't you mean "we?" When the likes of Bloomberg and Trump come along and try to dictate the development of a neighborhood then I'd agree there's a "they" involved. What there is here is absolute apathy, and look what you get. No leadership, and not to point fingers, but no involvement from the community.
Land use policy can be driven by the community. Email me if you want to be involved. There will be votes coming up at CB9 (and hopefully CB8 too) about taking a new look at zoning. I can guarantee that someone in particular will be missing from the process. Someone who would actually have the title and clout to become a "they."
What's involved is opening the process, first by petitioning the City to consider rezoning. This is already being done by the CB9 ULURP (Uniform Land Use Review Procedure) committee chaired by Mike Cetera. The meetings are posted on the CB9 website, and anyone can join the committee, though voting is done by Board members only on usually on committee recommendation - so yes, you can very much have a say in the process.
Here's the broad strokes of how this stuff happens:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/ap/step5_ulurp.shtml
A gazillion fast food restaurants in PLG vs. only 1 sit down restaurant and 2 coffeehouses is not really "gentrification". So calm down on that front, everybody who has been worked up.
Hey Mr. One-track mind...is your only qualification for gentrification coffee houses and restaurants?
Yeah, gee sorry I'm not the same person you called a troll on the other thread. I actually just now read that thread. Looks like there's more than one of us saying 2 coffeehouses and a restaurant don't equal gentrification. But I wasn't bashing the neighborhood in pointing that out.
The Q didn't call you a troll. That was someone else. Had I determined you were a troll I would have taken your comment down.
The process of gentrification, in itself an annoying, overused and inaccurate term, is about the middle-class replacing lower income residents. It can come with new buildings, higher rents, higher home prices, a lot of fixed up buildings and homes, a landlord class that sees dollar signs dancing in their heads and starts pushing out older residents and renting to (as two landlords on my block have openly said to members of our block association "we're going to start renting only to white people and turn this place around." The mean and median incomes rise, and one dominant culture starts to see an encroachment by another, usually of the bourgeoisie. Signs of the "later" stage are often amenities that cater to the bourgeoisie.
If you've followed trends in Brooklyn of the last 25 years, you'll see that it's only recently that the process has been sped up, crazily. Used to be it took awhile for the businesses to follow. Now, if the infrastructure is there (like in northern Crown Heights) investors will move their businesses there in a flash. Trust me, there's a ton of money sitting on the sidelines waiting for the green light.
The Mrs. was talking yesterday to a business owner on "hip" Franklin, who owns one of the first mom and pops to "upscale" the street. She has to move - her lease is up and they want to triple the rent.
The time to discuss these issues is now. But clearly, some are in denial. It's okay. It's just my opinion. But when landlords are actively expressing racist and classist renting policies, we've got a problem. At the very least, we could take a look at that, and take a stand.
*This is my first post in this thread*
Where the eff is my taco bell? And the problem with more condos and places to live is that we are still developing a 'hood with lots of people and few places relative to how many people are living here. While fast food isn't the best answer, we need to start developing all the businesses here before throwing more people in. I know many will say "put the people in and the business will come" but at some point you reach a critical mass where people say," That's no more or less affordable than some other neighborhoods and there is nothing to do there." Let's not overlook the fact that a lot of rental prices here are starting to mirror those in other areas of Brooklyn and even Manhattan with comparable commutes and more entertainment/food opportunities.
I have been looking at that Checkers layout just trying to figure out exactly how anyone is going to get in the drive through entrance on Washington. You either take a southbound left across an impossible lane of traffic, or a northbound hairpin right turn. That intersection is already a mess. This will get interesting.
I specifically love that beautiful building across the street from Wendy's which is used as some sort of a command center. What a waste !!!
It's true, Q, it is such a misused term. Which is why any discussion about "gentrification" as it's often defined in Brooklyn is impossible for me. The anti-gentrifiers are too often intellectually and even morally inconsistent. Why are my husband and I seen as the gentrifiers and another family who happen to be black, are not gentrifiers even though they earn more money than we do and also moved here from Park Slope? Makes me not understand the term as it pertains to economic changes. And why is it the year we moved in several years ago some of the very same old timers who are anti-gentrification voices here (white, on LMA and PLGNA) were freaking out on the listserv about rumors of a Costco opening on Empire Blvd, hating the idea, when a Costco would bring 50 to 100 jobs to the neighborhood? Costco treats its employees very well. We'd be so lucky to have a Costco on Empire instead of storage buildings each employing only a couple people. If you care about people being able to afford apartments then you need to care about jobs. But they didn't even think about that. Or, another anti-gentrification voice who listed her house recently for a million dollars more than she bought it for. Seems it's okay for her to profit from change but the rest of us should feel guilty about it. Then there's all the ignoring the fact black residents here with kids are thrilled with the neighborhood becoming safer and some of the schools becoming more integrated and getting more parent involvement. At least that's what I've heard from them. Maybe some folks aren't out there talking to those parents. It is an important issue that merits more serious, thoughtful discussion on it than what we see. It's also a way bigger issue than whites moving in. NYC has to figure out how to provide good jobs, affordable apts, and good schools to lift each generation so they can keep up with the inflation all of us deal with.
I agree there could be better use for Empire but I do use one of the storage units there because its climate controlled and its required for my sales job. It's the only such facility within a considerable radius of PLG. I asked a worker there and she said the facility has been around for 8 years.
If another such facility opened up in PLG I would symbolically give my business to them and away from Empire.
As for Costco, while that may have been a legit rumor, all the Costcos I've known are very close to an interstate highway.
Anon 4:06. Unlike many other commenters on the issue, I really try to avoid the conflation of the words "white" and "gentrifier." It's simplistic, and generally offensive. The bourgeoisie in Brooklyn are a many-hued crowd. (My preferred term is bourgie since a) it's French and sounds despicably snooty and b) it's not as tarnished with NYC racial bias. Come over to Ft. Greene, where I work. It's a veritable bourgie black renaissance over here - the fashions, the ideas, the businesses. MoCADA is in the ground floor, and Laurie Cumbo its founder is now the City Councilwoman. Its most recent councilwoman is about to be Public Advocate. It's most recent Assemblymen is now Congressman Hakeem Jeffries. I've met all these folks, and damned if they aren't a new generation of leaders destined to shake things up.
I sense, Anon 4:06, a certain defensiveness in your tone. And you paint things as either/or. Isn't it possible that these issues don't fall neatly into stereotypes? We're so used to defining things as left/right, liberal/conservative, rich/poor, big government/libertarian, black/white, gentrifier/nongentrifier...
When someone recently commented here that they were "the only white person on Nostrand Avenue day and night" I found that very telling. Only someone with their eyes closed or their guard up would see the street as all black (or all white for that matter), and therefore make conclusions about what's going on. Brooklyn in the 21st century is way more complex than that. And, in my opinion, way more exciting.
Hoosier: In that case, I suggest they put the Costco near Rogers, since the speed limit there is apparently 65 miles per hour. They'll feel right at home.
Don't you think CB9 needs to tackle the issue with what to do with the Ebbets Field Apartments. There are a ton of violent drug dealers living there. Is there anyway we can tear down those apartments and rebuild high end condos instead?
If I'm defensive or seem so it's because I've been stereotyped. I thought I was pointing out the silliness of doing that.
This is why I don't like landlords and why I don't want to have any relationship with my landlord. I just do my part by paying rent and you do your part by fixing and upgrading the stuff around here. I hate the fact that there's no redress for landlords who behave like those two neanderthals you mentioned Q.
Anon 6:11. I'm tempted to let your comment speak for itself, as perhaps you're goading me. But for the sake of the newcomer, I will say this. Ebbets Apartments are an eyesore. They do suffer problems with a FEW bad tenants, and recently had a very intense violent gang busted, a gang by the way with the brilliant name of Six Tre Outlaw Gangsta Disciples Folk Nation. Rather than work to rid the apartments (not projects as people assume) of problems, your solution is to tear them down.
There are 12,000 residents in those buildings. That's right, more than 10% of our community district. You are advocating eliminating housing for 12,000 people, honest hard-working people with families. There are more than 3,000 children living there.
With that kind of density, there are bound to be problems. But since the vast majority of those people pose no threat to you or society, I would like to suggest that your solution is cruel and uninformed.
Not just cruel, but STUPID.
There are many apartment buildings all over NYC that has had it's share of thugs but those problems went away without displacing thousands of residents from their homes.
But what if a developer gave pay outs to all 12,000 residents? Would that be so wrong.
How much? It wouldn't be worth it over the long haul for any tenant to except anything less than a down payment on a house or coop. At least 50K. So at least $60 million.
If it didn't come as on "offer," that would be eminent domain and a public good would need to be cited (no matter how spurious the claim). Can't see how displacing 12,000 people from functioning buildings could pass muster.
These apartments are rent stabilized, and as such it would be pretty foolish for longtimers to accept a payout, though many would of course, not recognizing the crap of the deal over the long haul.
If a buyer chooses to buy a big apartment building with a lot of protected tenants, the City assumes they will continue to run it is a rental. Taking it private is a project that could achieve the goals of higher income, or rather coop or condo. Babs could fill you in on how that happens.
I think you will quickly see why this a project of epic proportions. Though it's happened with cooperative housing in the City like on the Lower East Side.
I'm trying to take your question seriously, if in fact it wasn't meant to be rhetorical.
We shop at the Rite Aid across from the Ebbets houses frequently and have for years and the people shopping there from Ebbets are lovely. Friendly. They're FINE. Those types are the majority in those apts, the miscreants are the minority. One also gets the feeling the NYPD and the city keeps a close eye on that place with the history it's had with the gang Q mentions.
Post a Comment