With the Atlantic yard

Really? Are they trying to get farther away by moving from CH to BS, or are they anticipating some kind of rising market in BS as a result of the yards? Either way I'm not sure I follow--CH seems pretty far away to suffer a negative environmental impact from the construction and/or crowding, and if anything it might benefit more from the project than BS.

I will say that I think the jury is out on whether property values in the area will rise or fall as a result of AY. There have been a lot of predictions both ways but I think the effect is hard to predict. If I had to guess I'd say surrounding property values will decrease slightly, but the effect may be ambiguous. As a very interested party, I'll be watching intently to see what happens.

Why? I guess you could argue that the influx of people into the AY area will create lots of vibrancy and small businesses in the surrounding areas, improve safety, and therefore lead to a lot of people being drawn to the nearby neighborhoods. On the other hand, the project will increase the supply of housing by--what, 7000 or so?--units, creating serious competition for other landlords in the area. 7000 units is a LOT of units, and while there does seem to be limitless demand for housing, this project would have to have a truly fantastic impact on the neighborhood for it to create enough demand to offset all of this increased supply so much that prices actually rise. Combine that with the traffic congestion, noise from construction and increased crowding on train lines, not to mention dubious effects such as massive shadows and "destruction" of the neighborhood's character, and one might really doubt the claim that demand will increase so much.

Interesting. Definitely could happen, although I think it would happen in Clinton Hill too, if not more so. CH is not so close to the project that it will be directly hurt, so I think you could turn a profit in either stuy or CH. Bed stuy is still less convenient from a transportation standpoint than either CH or fort greene. But I agree that there may definitely be a migration out of the immediate surrounding area. If values drop enough, maybe I can even buy here someday! That would be nice.

fgbyebye wrote: we live in the heart of fort greene and know several neighbors who have recently sold their houses or are in the process of doing so to move away from the increasing noise/traffic/congestion in the area.

but won't it be years before the congestion comes? won't the AY project take like a decade to finish?

"Bed Stuy and Crown Heights have lots of potential, but are still very risky investments at this point. They could "blow up", but a downturn could leave buyers high and dry. If I had money to burn (I don't) it would be worth rolling the dice, but I wouldn't put my nest egg into a venture like that."

I couldn't disagree more. This is New York, and it will continue to develop and expand, as it always has. Brownstone nabes will always increase in value as there is a limited amount of stock. You couldn't make a better investment than those areas, in my opinion.

I haven't heard about anyone moving because of AY sounds like realtors just trying to shill bed-stuy.

I still find this fascinating and a bit confusing. Please tell me, is your friends' logic that prices will rise higher in Bed Stuy than in Fort Greene as a result of AY? Do they think that AY will hurt FG but help BS? Or just that it will help BS even more? It's one thing to invest generally in bed stuy thinking it's on the up and up, but to specifically move from fort greene into bed stuy seems like such a short distance for no particular reason. Can you please explain further? Thanks.

that is exactly the point. many people who originally moved to fg/ch for the low key neighborhood-y vibe realize that those days are numbered. yes, bs is very close by, and that's the appeal-you don't have to move far to escape the chaos. i hear people talking about this all the time.

Well, any win-win for displaced AY "victims" moving into Bed Stuy and surrounding areas needs to be tempered with realistic and doable plans for all the people in low income apts who will be displaced by these "refugees". As these people buy and renovate brownstones that were rooming houses and 6 family dwellings, and turn them into 1 and 2 family homes, many parts of the community are going to be totally uprooted by these changes. We can't keep pushing the poor out to the sea. The economic restructuring of Bed Stuy in the next 10 years is going to be huge, and because BS is so large, will be the equivilent of the restructuring of a small city. Plans need to be made - doable programs need to start to be implemented to create jobs, affordable housing, and keep BS from being like Haiti, enclaves of privilege surrounded by desperate and increasingly angry poor people.

Not to throw cold water on a topic, but this truly is more than some well heeled homeowners annoyed with the decline of their quality of life, just picking up from point A and moving over to point B, with no effect to anything, or anyone else.

yes, how about taking the $200 million in taxpayers subsidies (welfare queen) that the city is forking over to FCR to run their advertising and marketing machine and redistributing that money to fund additional affordable housing units for cops, firemen, teachers, restaurant workers, etc.
We are not taking care of the very people that our livelihood and future is dependent on.

The people that rent in Bed Stuy need to be brought into the game. They need to become homeowners and landlords, just like everyone else is.

This would not help everyone, but it would create a much wider swath of stakeholders making decisions that do affect the whole community.

What if it started today: 0% down loans (with reasonable interest) backed by the government, just like your student loan, for neighborhood residents interested in staying in their gentrifying neighborhood.

Residents would have to prove that they are residents, submit their tax info and whatnot to a financial counselor that would help them figure out whether or not this is a good idea, and approval would depend upon things like job stability, credit history and history as a renter.

Classes could be offered on things like good landlording and home improvement and making community decisions.

This would cost money, but how much? These people would be paying for their own homes, and if someone forecloses, well, the program could stand to gain from increased property values.

(not that I want anyone to foreclose... I am just saying that the risk is low because it's a loan with collateral)

I mean, they offer free classes in everything to everyone. Why not something that will actually change people's lives and give them actual economic power?

Oh, and at least one of the housing projects should go condo in a similar way, with zero down and counselors available to discuss home ownership with you.

This would be a small city government program that would actually *help* the working poor, and it's nothing that folks don't already do.

I certainly can't afford my 'Stone... I rent much of it out and work my tail off in the interest of my long-term financial security.

This will not help the truly destitute. But it will make people who were once destitute or close to it into neighborhood decisionmakers.

Having all your eggs in one brownstone doesn't seem like the wisest "wealth creation strategy" to me, as I don't want my home and my financial well-being tied to the same mast.

The last 50 years don't tell you as much about the next 50 as we'd like, in my view, and under David's strategy it would only take one major event to make you homeless and broke at the same time.

I view my home as a liability (I have to have one and it bleeds cash every month in maintenance & taxes, if not mortgage as well), and I use my assets to reduce the double penetration risk of a liability that would increase if the real estate market went against me. In that scenario, I'd prefer that my assets also increase and offset the increased liability and prevent the balance sheet from, well, tipping over.

Not that real estate is a bad investment - just that leveraging your home to finance your investing, especially in something with the same risk profile, has a ring of tragedy to my ears.

I know you have to take serious risks to make serious money, but this one doesn't appeal to me. Then again, I'm some shmuck posting on some forum - what do I know? Maybe Warren Buffet would be buying Bed Stuy with his bottom dollar right now.

what do you think fg and ch were like before 5 years ago? i'll tell you because i've lived here my whole adult life...they were both predominantly black neighborhoods with a high level of ownership...sound familiar? bs will only improve, as far as the brownstone areas are concerned. with more movement comes more amenities, and that is good for renters and owners alike. why should it be any different than the other brownstone nabes? there are projects galore in ft greene and clinton hill...and so what? the people that i know who are moving to bs are doing so because they love the homes and the trees and the people. and it's a damn good investment. it's pretty simple.

there certainly are projects in ch-next to the 88th precinct and next to pratt. the projects aren't "isolated" on the "other side of the park" in fg. what about those people who live on washington park? or off of myrtle? they live next door to them. i don't want to argue, but this is ny, and projects haven't ever gotten in the way of improving neighborhoods. look at boerum hill, dumbo etc.

I agree with fgmama.

I have a problem with the statement about the high incarceration rate. Not to be flip with a serious subject, but if people are in jail, then they aren't in the neighborhood. Unless you are intimating that they are in and out, and the streets are overrun with former guests of the Greybar Hotel. If a fear of being anywhere near ex-cons is a concern, forget Bed Stuy - don't ride the subways, buses, walk the streets, and stay out of Wall Street bars. In other words, New York ain't for you.

Other than that, I think Guest is quite correct that BS has the ability to be a hotbed of black economic growth. But that does not preclude in inclusion of others. Black economic growth is tied into white economic growth, and the growth of all segements of a population. We're all in this together, and need to work together, All the new money coming into BS is not all "white" money, nor are all of the wealthier newcomers all white.

I think BS is a choice investment for anyone, but I hope that most who choose to invest here also choose to live here, and aid in making the entire community a better place.

I also agree that home ownership, or apartment ownership is a first step towards wealth creation. Social programs that can help anyone buy where they live will help stabilize neighborhoods, and that includes the projects.