For Startup Entrepreneurs.

Are you an entrepreneur? Are you responsible for managing your company’s office space needs? If so, help NYCEDC to better assist startup companies to find real estate by taking the NYC Startup Real Estate Survey (https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/nytm)

When is a Hotel Really a Hotel?

In 1997, I moved to New York, fresh out of college. For the first 2 years I lived here, I lived in Brooklyn Heights.

I didn't know many people back then. I lived first with a family friend whose grown sons had moved out, then with two roommates on the north end of Brooklyn Heights that I didn't socialize much with. I worked a lot of hours at my unpaid internship at a professional sports league office, and when I was done, I had no money and no one to spend it with.

So my first few months in New York, when I wasn't at a game, I spent my free time roaming the city, starting with my adopted neighborhood Brooklyn Heights. I wandered up and down the promenade and Henry Street where I lived. And I wandered up and down Montague Street where most of the shops were and still are. It may have seemed a lonely existence (and it was sometimes) but it was good for me, learning the streets of my new city and the buildings that lined them.

As Montague drew closer to the Promenade (a route I often took for the sheer sightliness) I came to know a large marble-columned edifice with arched porticoes, a building that stood far above its closest neighbors. As I recall, it had an awning, and the awning was embossed "Bossert Hotel". I never saw doormen there, or anyone going in or coming out, really. But it looked like a nice building. I imagined it was one of those old-time hotels with small rooms appointed in antiques.

So when my dad & stepmother said they were coming for a visit, I looked the number to the Bossert Hotel up in the phone book (remember when those were useful?) and called. A nice-sounding man answered the phone with the building's name.

"Hi, I'd like to if there are rooms available," I told him.

"Sorry?"

"My father's coming to town and I'm trying to find him a place to stay," I repeated. "Do you have rooms available for the Friday after next?"

"Umm, this isn't that kind of hotel," the nice man said.

"What kind of hotel is it?" I asked, envisioning some kind of extended stay requirement.

"This is a residence for Jehovah's Witnesses. We don't take paying guests."

"Oh."  I was really disappointed, not just because I wanted my father and stepmother to stay near my home, but because I really wanted to see the inside of the building. But Dad came and stayed in Manhattan, and I kept wandering past the Bossert Hotel, wondering what it was like in there, trying to catch a glimpse through windows positioned to reflect the sunlight back out. Eventually I moved out of Brooklyn Heights. To this day I never have seen the inside of the Bossert Hotel.

But that may be about to change. Apparently the Watchtower Society has put the building on the market and it's in contract now. According to this Brownstoner post, plans have now been filed to make the building back into a real hotel.  New York certainly needs the hotel rooms.  I am really looking forward to it, though, because I love to see beautiful buildings, inside and out. Here's hoping that the developers give it an inside (or preserve its inside) that matches the beauty of the outside I have so marveled at all these years.

REBNY opposes New Brooklyn Heights Commercial Landmark District

An interesting situation is unfolding at the eastern edge of Brooklyn Heights.  In September 2011 the NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission approved a landmark district called the "Borough Hall Skyscraper Historic District". This area includes 21 commercial buildings from the late 19th and early 20th century, from 7 story Romanesque-style to a modernist skyscraper, and several Art Deco era buildings as well. I frequent the area, and have often admired several of the included buildings, though I find the skyscrapers somewhat forbidding.

This week, Crains New York reported that the Real Estate Board of New York - an industry advocacy group representing most of the real estate agencies in Manhattan and many in the outer boroughs (my agency - M. Woods & Associates LTD -  is also a member of REBNY) - sent out direct mail to residents in the area asking them to oppose the landmark district and to press their City Council members to vote down the designation.  According to the Crain's article, the City Council has never denied or adjusted the borders of a historic district after it was approved by the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC).

The reason is because LPC has such a long process of considering proposed landmark districts, that most of the arguments have been hashed out by the time it gets to City Council. LPC has often designated smaller areas that ones proposed by preservationist lobbies such as the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation (of which I am a member).  In this case, the Municipal Art Society of New York, Brooklyn Heights Association and New York Landmarks Conservancy proposed the Borough Hall Skyscraper Historic District.

Again, I frequent the area, and I do love the older Gothic and Romanesque buildings that were designated. I think there is a reason to protect these buildings. They are rather low buildings that are now in zoning districts that would allow much higher buildings, and therefore in danger of being torn down.  But I am undecided as to whether it is necessary to include the skyscrapers. After all, it's these are the tallest commercial buildings to be found in Brooklyn (with the exception of nearby Metrotech), now that the Williamsburg Savings Bank is mostly condominums.  In addition, which of these buildings is in danger of being torn down?  There are thousands of Art Deco era buildings on Manhattan that have been in service just as long, and are not deemed to deserve landmark status.

The reason given on the Municipal Art Society's web page speaks about recognizing the tremendous commercial growth that the district experienced "after (italics mine) the borough was consolidated into Greater New York."


REBNY's commentary has to do with the increased bureaucracy inherent with a landmark designation. It takes longer and is more costly to maintain the buildings' facades. I particularly note the quote from REBNY president Steven Spinola“The city just continues to landmark away its economic future.”  To some extent, I agree.  I support the landmarking of examples of past great architecture - I am around it more than most.  I am so grateful that the Village and Brooklyn Heights and Park Slope - all areas I love to be around - have been deemed worthy of landmark status.


But this issue has caused me to examine why I am so happy about it. And the truth came to me when I pondered when I thought about which buildings in this new district seemed deserving, others superfluous. The answer: height. While I love looking at all the Greenwich Village townhouses, I love more the sun on my face!  Same with Park Slope and Brooklyn Heights Brownstones. The townhouses are lovely, but I grew up in a Cape Cod and see the beauty there too.  Skyscrapers, in my opinion, don't need landmarks. But we do need more height restrictions in neighborhoods around the city. 


Another beef I have with Art Deco sky scrapers is the relatively small amount of window area they sport relative to their facade size. I worked in office buildings for many years, and often felt so stifled. How many occupational health studies have been done in office buildings that come up with a recommendation that more sunlight = more happy and productive workers? 


So here, I think REBNY has a point: we need to be able to innovate and upgrade. Particularly I think that is true of our commercial properties. It's hard enough with residential properties. Commercial properties should be icons of our future, not hallowed relics of our storied past.