'Brooklyn' Brewery Can't Find a Home

I'm all for new urbanism, but I really hate when people forget what it is to be "urban" and try to make it into some fanciful paradise of sustainability and social equality. You can't have Target without faceless capitalism, folks.

Brooklyn needs to remain, Brooklyn ... We seem to be compelled to destroy History and Heritage by erecting chrome & glass monuments to Yuppie Extremism and the oxymoronic penchant for New Age "Kitsch" .......  If the Brooklyn Brewery cannot find another suitable place to build, perhaps they should investigate how deep they can safely and intelligently go underneath the existing facility ... and/or how high they can safely and intelligently go above the Plant ....... Can their operating expenses be reduced by the use of gravity conveniently enhanced by increasing the height of the building ??? Can they produce a batter Product by putting their Bulk Storage compartments below ground level, making it easier to maintain cooler conditions ???  Can it all be done with positive increase, to CONserve and PREserve Brooklyn and all it has ever been ??? Now, if we could only get the Dodgers to move back home .......

This is a new chapter in the ongoing saga of the changing face of the city in general and the borough in particular.  Gentrification has always been a double-edged sword and the troubles of the Brooklyn Brewery are one more example of how carefully decisions must be made in the process.

It would be foolish (if not wicked) to stunt the progress of an entire neighborhood simply because we have grown sentimental about one or two institutions that can no longer pull their own weight in the modern world.  On the other hand, we can destroy that which is best in ourselves by charging headlong into a "progress" that isn't really all that progressive and destroy our favorite treasures in the process, only to find out what we have done after it's too late.

The battle for the soul of Brooklyn has already been long and nasty and there is no end in sight.  The Red Hook developments, mentioned in the opening article, have been the subject of fierce debates between historians and developers, each unwilling to give an inch.  The former insists that the charm of the old, rough-and-tumble neighborhood is irreplaceable while the latter points out that the neighborhood's residents (and those nearby) will have an easier time making rent and sending their kids to school with the proposed changes.  BOTH sides are almost undoubtedly right.  The question is one of priority.

When the old Penn Station was destroyed in 1963, the resulting outrage provoked into existence New York's landmark laws.  Today, any building in the city that is considered architecturally interesting, important, or influential, becomes eligible to be designated a landmark and spared the wrecking ball.  But this protection only applies to the building itself, not the institutions within it.  And, poignant as it may be, this is proper.  A landmark synagogue on the Lower East Side is now being used as a Buddhist temple as Chinatown continues to expand into the surrounding neighborhoods.  It would be patently absurd to insist that the temple remain Jewish even though there is no longer a congregation to sustain it while the local Buddhists have no place to practice their religion.  Landmarking applies to the structure but not to the use.

One strange thing about gentrification is how a new, Yuppie class moves into an old factory district and then starts to complain about the smell and noise from the local factories.  What did you expect!? 

But New Yorkers in general, and Brooklynites in particular, are a resourceful and resiliant people.  I do not think the Brewery will become a casualty of gentrification.  It is well loved and, when its lot appears dire enough, someone with deep pockets and influence will notice what is about to be lost and come to the rescue.  It has happened this way so often throughout our history.  Just ask Jackie O. and Isaac Stern who led the fight to save two of our most beloved endangered institutions, Grand Central Terminal and Carnegie Hall.

"shortly after they arrive, they set about making it just like the  place they left"

Which often means bland, overpriced, and crowded.

But in a good way. yeah. 

[This posting is (partially) tongue in cheek...]  Perhaps the Brooklyn Brewery could maintain its headquarters in Brooklyn and put its production facilities 'offshore':  for the Miami market, perhaps The Bahamas?  For the Texas market, perhaps Monterrey, Mexico?  And then there's always the 'pirate radio model': buy an old ship, fit it out as a brewery, and float it just outside the territorial limits in the Atlantic (perhaps offshore from Atlantic City?).  And if the health benefits of beer could be shown to be definitive, perhaps Brooklyn Brewery and Mayor Bloomberg could work up some kind of public/private partnership in which beer could be injected into the Croton Aquaduct, thereby introducing this psychoactive drug into the public water supply, thereby making large numbers of New Yorkers much happier than they would otherwise be.  Finally, the Brooklyn Brewery could possibly have its plant annexed into Lithuania (without actually moving its physical location).  Since NO ONE in their right mind would want to live in Lithuania, making the brewery would reduce its real estate value to almost nothing... and besides, by offering to set up a missile shield deal with the U.S. government, New Yorkers could be protected from incoming Iranian nuclear missiles (still in the planning stage, but what the heck...).  I'm sure the Lithuanians would be glad to give Brooklyn Brewery tax-free status, especially since such a nuclear defense wouldn't antagonize their friendly (?) neighbor Russia, while simultaneously demonstrating fealty to their great friend the United States....  Yep, Brooklyn Brewery, there are a lot of ways to survive in the land formerly known as Brooklyn, New York....

i'm not familiar with "gentrification" issues in the greater New York region, but here in L.A. we have areas that are being gentrified or should be.  The so-called 'housing crisis' has impacted that movement somewhat.

L.A. has been described as 80 villages looking for a city.  I like the idea of small surburban villages, urban villages and a mix of rural and high density. Community is important.  but in L.A. it 's very much an immigrant city and many are just passing through. There's always a sense of change and impermanence here.

It's difficult to maintain our housing heritage and balance that with the demand or need to constantly create new buildings.  

L.A. has become a multicultural, ethnically diverse group of villages and communities....I like it...there's hope for L.A. 

I'm unfamiliar with New York in general, but I do know that making urban industrial centers more habitable and people-friendly on the European model is a good idea. Having mixed-use areas with public transportation, shops and services such as grocery, clothing, entertainment, and,mmmm-bakeries!, and yes, breweries with beer gardens, within walking distance is both more civilized to my way of thinking and also healthier, since we all are no doubt familiar with the so-called French Paradox: eat what you like and stay healthier and way chicer than everyone else in the world. Well, not really. French people have the same concerns everyone else does, they just eat fabulous food in smaller portions and walk a lot. I haven't been back in a few years, but I don't remember all-you-can-eat pig troughs ANYWHERE in Europe, and the incidence of obesity is far less than we suffer. There's another topic for another day, perhaps...

Well-intentioned city planners and those who cater to developers (as well as other interest groups) are constantly jockeying for supremacy on issues such as sprawl, school construction, limitations on industry, environmental concerns, historic preservation, and livability or quality of life issues in neighborhoods. The results are often imbalances in the regulation of mixed use areas, and many urban centers struggle with fairness issues while attemptimg to rejuvenate impoverished or deteriorating formerly robust inner-city districts.

In my small city, there has been a slow, but blossoming rejuvenation of our crumbling and blighted downtown by forward-thinking developers and city leaders, resulting in light rail implementation, refurbishing and repurposing of lovely old downtown buildings, and the ingress of great eateries, entertainment venues, art galleries, renovated antique hotels, and yes, local breweries with beer gardens! Amid all the backpatting those involved engaged in, there was much self-congratulation about the construction of apartments, condos, and lofts to bring residential spaces back downtown. The problem with that, which has received little coverage in glossy local magazines and breathless newspaper articles about cityscape views and fabulous interior appointments, is that all these putative living spaces are so expensive that ordinary citizens who might wish to move downtown can not afford them, and they are owned, predictably, by those of stratospheric incomes and by corporate interests. They're primarily used as weekend getaways and second homes, and for incoming corporate executives until they find a suitable McMansion in the upscale suburban neighborhoods. Affordable housing seems to have been overlooked in the excitement. It would be wonderful if the people who work in the district could also afford to live there, and if those who enjoy downtown habitation could find a modest dwelling with a price tag that doesn't cause shortness of breath. Maybe all those empty flats will eventually get noticed by the developers-there are only so many rich citizens who need downtown toy homes, and that limit seems to have been reached before the spots were near taken.

On an optimistic note, the dog food factory that was inexplicably allowed to be built many years ago behind a beautiful Greek Revival marble City Hall will soon be a smelly memory, so progress certainly is a good thing in this instance! One may hope that similar progress is being made updating the quixotic local zoning regulations.

I wish Brooklyn Brewery all the best. It sounds to me like they are an asset to their borough, and should be encouraged rather than blocked in their desire to do more in their chosen spot. The big problem I see is that real estate that was formerly going at fire sale prices becomes essentially unattainable to those who can do the most with it, when their efforts come to fruition. In a perfect world there would be some allowance for the beneficial participation in the revaluing of said properties, but greed can really gum up the works.

Greetings:  As I have said, I live on a small Island on the Coast of NC.  Commercial properties butt up right next to single family residential properties,  There are no buffer zones.  The residential lots that are in this position are relatively new R1 lots, as the board of alderman rezoned these lots because residential property is much more valuable than the old established commercial lots.  Supply and demand, as folks will pay a premium to have a beach front house.  Now, as my Pirate friend, DPR stated, folks who move into these houses right next to commercial start to complain about noise, traffic, drunks, etc.  What did they expect!  But complain they do and itirritates me as I am the central business district.  It's like building your house at the end of a runway and bitching about all the airplanes.  Now with the price of land (sand) going up to the stars, it makes it very hard for business to thrive because of the taxes, due to land revaluations.  I don't know if this is a country wide problem or just a local one.  I don't get across the bridge much and much enjoy living here in my bubble surrounded by water.  Some may call this progress...Not all progress is forward.

Peter Lake:  RE: Yesterdays topic.  Curling.  I am pretty proficient at broom handling.  I wonder how I could get a spot on that team?  I think it would be odd for my kids to know I got a gold medal in the Olympics because of my broom handling skills.  (I do have really clean floors)

On a serious note, this issue involves change, and human reactions to change...  No one expects (at least no one I know expects) Rome to look precisely as it did during the reign of Caesar Augustus.  Then again, here's one reaction to the then new Eiffel Tower(built in 1889)  ""And during twenty years we shall see, stretching over the entire city, still thrilling with the genius of so many centuries, we shall see stretching out like a black blot the odious shadow of the odious column built up of riveted iron plates."It's all about PERCEPTIONS and judgments, people.  Since we live in an era of increasing change, it's fascinating to see some folks cling to familiar things, while other rush in to replace 'old stuff'.  And it's also political:  is Impresssionism a desecration of art, or a flowering of new approaches to light and color?  (Or both?)  Amid all the noise and complaining and expressions of love and hate, one thing continues... change.  Love it or not, it's here to stay.Mr. Hindy may protest: ""We are the Brooklyn Brewery, and we want to be in Brooklyn," but not all our wishes come true -- and all things eventually die.

Yeah  Well,  maybe all these Housing Crises are simply because we don't have anywhere to coddle 12-Million Illegal Aliens in a fashion that will assuage the Guilty White Liberals feelings, while we force Social Security Benefits on those who have never contributed to the Program ... while they all inheirit Citizenship by default ... Some Progress .......

Capt Neptune ( and everybody else who lives in paradise)  knows this:

The Brooklyn Brewery didn't exist 12 years ago. And now it is a victim of the trend it rode in on.  

Those of us in the south have ALWAYS sold our most precious commodities too cheaply to people from away- quilts, seagrass baskets, and land. It never crossed our minds that along with the land, the Come Hyahs were also buying the right to participate in local government.  

And, of course, even the longest standing Bin Hyahs were once Come Hyahs themselves. But there is only so much sand, be it on/in Park Place, Park Slope, or just down the road from the Grove Park Inn.  No matter how much we pay or ask, it will likely seem cheap in the long run. And we will likely wish we'd held out for more money and bought more ourselves.

My advice to one and all: Live and make it where it's cheap and sell it where it isn't. Be glad we live in the electronic age. And,  that sunscreen thing, too.

Now, how do we download beer? 

Olivia,

You have eloquently illustrated my point that gentrification is a double-edged sword.  On the one hand, it does get crime and grime off the streets.  With the other hand, it prevents ordinary people of average income from living there.

I spent this evening in Harlem, eating a mostrously caloric soul food dinner (so worth every calorie!) and listening to the best jazz I've heard in years.  You should see Harlem today.  It's gorgeous.  For those of you who hear "Harlem" and immediately conjure up images from Shaft, remember that that movie was accurate in 1971.  But a lot has happened in four decades, largely for the better and somewhat for the worse.  A beautiful new apartment complex called the Harriett Tubman Gardens has risen in the last few years, adding a healthy dose of beauty, class and grace to the area.  That's the good news.  The bad news is the apartments start at $1.2 million.  As I said... Double-edged sword.

I'd LOVE to see Harlem, DPR. Sounds like what happened to Beale Street in Memphis, except they went overboard there on the commercialism and tourist traps. It was a slum, now it's prime real estate but all glitz. I hope Harlem keeps it under control.

Some of my best evenings are spent at my little jazz club. I listen to Norleans refugees who've found a home here, drink mojitos, order dinner from the fabulous Italian restaurant associated with the club (run by REAL Italians), and generally have a wonderfully civilized and saxy night. Even in my little city, these things are possible.

Greetings:  I came upon an interesting quote today from Mark Twain. "I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way."    Amen