The New York Times Discovers PLG (Again)

I don't know if this appeared in today's paper or if it will appear in the Real Estate section over the weekend, but the New York Times feature on PLG is already online - and includes a quote from my coblogger/wife, Carrie. 

It is a pretty straightforward promo piece about a gentrifying neighborhood. Nice people, proximity to nice things (Prospect Park and the Brooklyn Botanic Gardens), good housing stock, and wait a second... a scoop!

One project now going up is in a busy section. A company called Park Tower secured permits in June to build a 24-story, 88-unit building next to the Prospect Park subway stop at 510 Flatbush Avenue.

The old Lincoln Road tower is back again! The last I had heard, the project was essentially dead due to the general economic malaise in the city. In part this may be because the address for the L-shaped lot is not "27 Lincoln Road," as we'd always assumed because that was the building that got torn down, but rather "510 Flatbush Avenue." It may not be a real scoop, however. I don't see any permits filed after 2008 for either address on the Department of Buildings website - though it is possible that the filings haven't yet made their way online.

The real estate prices cited in the article seem a bit high to me. A local who works for Corcoran is quoted estimating that "... single-family houses range widely, from around $700,000 up to $1.3 million. Two-family houses ... cost around $900,000 — more if they are in the historic district, and less if they are smaller or need more work..." This seems high in July 2010 despite knowing that there have, in fact, been sales in that price range because of the limited sales going on in the neighborhood in general.

In any event, the article shines a nice light on our little hamlet and quotes people I know and like. I'll stop picking nits now.

Image via Benjamin Norman for The New York Times

Comments

[Seth]

I remember when the New York Times had an interactive real estate map and when you clicked on PLG... nothing happened.

Ah, the good old days.

[Bob Marvin]

Not THAT much of a scoop; the permit has been posted on the Lincoln Road construction fence for some time. AFAIK construction hasn't resumed, so we'll have to wait and see. I will, of course, miss the PLG Arts murals (when and IF) but we knew they were temporary and, in any case, the particle board fence panels are deteriorating from the rear, as we anticipated, even though our priming has protected the front).

The article wasn't bad--it was the most positive of four NYT PLG "Living In" articles published over the last 30 some odd years. I wish they had mentioned more of the new restaurants though, as well as our new second Historic District.

[ceelledee]

I suppose you're right, Charles, that the story "shines a nice light" on a few aspects of our "little hamlet." But, in typical NY Times fashion, it leaves a lot more of our great community in the dark. For example, how do you mention K-Dog and Dunebuggy (a great thing, btw), without also mentioning the rest of the developing Lincoln Road corridor? How do you miss Maple Street School or PLG Arts? After a pretty well-publicized landmark preservation fight, how do you not mention that a nabe as small as PLG has TWO historic districts -- not just one? How does Rutland Road become Rutland Street? And, no issue whatsoever with the folk who were quoted ( great going on Carrie's quote and the mention of Hawthornestreet), how come there weren't any comments from our unofficial nabe historians such as Bob Marvin or Bob Thomason?

I know. I know. Clearly, this article is a sign that the New York Times -- well, they are a changing. There was one point at which the only major press coverage we could get of PLG were of things like drug dealing and gang violence. So, now we've got a surface puff piece with no bad news. I guess we should just thank our lucky stars for such and not take serious issue with it.

[Charles Star]

Bob - the scoop that I thought they had was that permits were filed "in June" - but it doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny. That said, Carrie thought she saw some people on the site recently, so who knows.

[Seth]

"...how come there weren't any comments from our unofficial nabe historians such as Bob Marvin or Bob Thomason?"

I thought the same thing...

[Hal]

i think the prices reflected in the article are beacuse of the recent sales of over-priced houses both in and out of the historic district. a house outside the district sold for nearly a million in 2010, which was really shocking for most of us. so i don't think the new york times numbers are to far off.

i've always wondered if people differentiate between lefferts manor and prospect lefferts garden outside the neighborhood. this article proves that they dont.

[Jeanne]

I thought it was great. Thank you to those who made themselves available to the NYT. It's fresh and more "news" to NYT real estate section readers to hear from new residents: why they came here, what's going on now and what's happening next. The history of the neighborhood has been covered to death in the press and on blogs. Which is obviously why the NYT didn't feel compelled to focus on it. Plus the Lefferts Manor Association website stands as a great reference for the history of LM.

[ceelledee]

I don't think the history of PLG has been covered to death in the mainstream press, or even on blogs, at all'! I also don't think there was anything wrong with interviewing "new" or newer residents. But, as a long time resident, a bit more balance would still have been appreciated. Hopefully, "what's happening next" is a vision that includes all the residents of PLG, both newcomers and oldtimers alike.

[Charles Star]

ceelledee - Not every article can cover everything. Focusing on what the article doesn't have misses the point of the article: it is a jumping off point for people to do their own research about PLG.

This article was exactly one full page and was never going to be any longer than that. And they didn't only interview the newcomers: CB9's Pearl Miles gets a paragraph to talk about the neighborhood as well.

[ceelledee]

Charles, please. I was not expecting a surface story in the NYT Real Estate section to cover "everything" about PLG. Unlike you and Jeanne, however, I didn't think the article to be "great." As I've said already, I didn't think it to be terrible either. IMHO, it was just "ok" and I fault the reporter for what looked like spotty research and some carelessness in reporting. (Rutland Street? C'mon!)

Sure, I would have liked to have seen a broader cross-section of those selected for interviews but, as I've said already, I take no issue with those who were. If anything, the thing that probably annoyed me the most about that article was its failure to note that there is now more than one HD in PLG and that the second one (an example of "what's happening now") is the recent, celebrated result of a hard-fought, well-publicized, pro-preservation effort. In fact, given that the article was real estate-focused, it seems to me that an especially interesting aspect of "what's happening now" is the contrast between the building of a major new high-rise development on Lincoln Road against the City's recent award of HD status to 12 little houses on the Park, just around the corner on Ocean (In addition to that other new high rise development going up on Ocean as well). Look, as a former journalist and current Ocean on the Park homeowner, that's just my opinion and perspective. I assume we're all entitled to read the same thing but have different responses. I'm just sharing mine, is all.

[Bob Marvin]

I agree that the omission of the Ocean on the Park HD was a big disappointment. I actually don't mind not having been interviewed [except that I'd have pointed out our new HD]. I've repeated the story about how I "discovered" PLG 35 years ago many times, most recently in the May house tour issue of the LM Echo. I really like reading similar, but more recent versions and think they're more relevant to present day house hunters.