I read this earlier and was disappointed in the times for running it. They basically let one of their reporters bitch about a neighbor in print.
It’s very easy to imagine how they’d report this if no reporter of theirs lived on the block. It would be about how a block full of entitled people got mad because an even more entitled person was doing construction. The tone would be making fun of the lot of them since it’s the fvcking city and there’s always construction everywhere, etc...
-------------------------------- If you think looting is bad wait until I tell you about civil forfeiture.
Posts: 33811 | Location: On the Hudson | Registered: 20 April 2005
I was opining in how *the times* might normally cover such a bru-ha-ha on such an exclusive block. But for the fact that one of their reporters lives there.
-------------------------------- If you think looting is bad wait until I tell you about civil forfeiture.
Posts: 33811 | Location: On the Hudson | Registered: 20 April 2005
I totally missed that there's a reporter living there...
Still, it seems to me that this goes beyond the normal construction. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. And of course, I've never lived in a city like NYC so there are lots of... I guess expectations I have about noise (or lack of it) that surely wouldn't hold up in such an urban environment...
Originally posted by jon-nyc: Jesus. Of course not.
I was opining in how *the times* might normally cover such a bru-ha-ha on such an exclusive block. But for the fact that one of their reporters lives there.
I think you've got it wrong. I think that they might write exactly the same story, if they came across the same fact pattern. Because it's still a story of the ultra-rich doing as they like, the consequences to everyone else be damned. And that's a story that the Times likes.
So they tore down two classic buildings, saving only the facade (per landmark rules) and are putting in a basement pool with a new mansion above it?
Why not build that from the ground up on land in a toney suburb then? I don't get it.
I don't understand the craze for outdoor pools in the northeast anyway, to be honest. They're only usable 1/3 of the year and are an expensive nuisance to clean, heat and maintain. We have neighbors in two homes across the street from us (also a historic district) and they took losses when they had to sell...bet they thought those pools would be golden for their property values.
-------------------------------- “It's hard to win an argument with a smart person. It's damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person." -- Bill Murray
Posts: 13890 | Location: The outer burrows | Registered: 27 April 2005
I agree about pools. I remember telling real estate agents that if it had a pool, don't show it to me. One showed me a place anyway with a pool. I said I'd have to pay for it three times - once in the purchase price, once to fill it in, and again on the property tax levy. Her response was 'if you fill it in they'll reduce your tax levy'. Great.
I have nothing against pools in wormer climates. I used to take care of ours when we lived in Florida, so I know the amount of work that goes into them. It's one thing when you use it 9 months out of the year, and never have to empty it even in the 'cold' months. But up here? No way.
-------------------------------- If you think looting is bad wait until I tell you about civil forfeiture.
Posts: 33811 | Location: On the Hudson | Registered: 20 April 2005
The marker of status is to have (and flaunt) things you don't need. A Land Rover with a brush guard that will never be driven off-road. A Brietling aviator watch when a Timex does the same thing (other than calculate fuel consumption) for a minuscule fraction of the price. An outdoor pool in New England. A nine-foot Boesendorfer that will never be played. Anything and everything in Individual 1's apartment.
Having ridiculously impractical things is how you show that you have more money than brains.
Originally posted by RealPlayer: So they tore down two classic buildings, saving only the facade (per landmark rules) and are putting in a basement pool with a new mansion above it?
Why not build that from the ground up on land in a toney suburb then? I don't get it.
I don't understand the craze for outdoor pools in the northeast anyway, to be honest. They're only usable 1/3 of the year and are an expensive nuisance to clean, heat and maintain. We have neighbors in two homes across the street from us (also a historic district) and they took losses when they had to sell...bet they thought those pools would be golden for their property values.
It's about three blocks from Lincoln Center. And half a block from Columbus Avenue. You can't get that in the suburbs.
Originally posted by jon-nyc: I agree about pools. I remember telling real estate agents that if it had a pool, don't show it to me. One showed me a place anyway with a pool. I said I'd have to pay for it three times - once in the purchase price, once to fill it in, and again on the property tax levy. Her response was 'if you fill it in they'll reduce your tax levy'. Great.
I have nothing against pools in wormer climates. I used to take care of ours when we lived in Florida, so I know the amount of work that goes into them. It's one thing when you use it 9 months out of the year, and never have to empty it even in the 'cold' months. But up here? No way.
An underground pool can be used 12 months of the year. And one of the richest men in France isn't concerned about the cost of pool service.
I remember telling real estate agents that if it had a pool, don't show it to me.
Yep, we did that. And down here, you probably could use a pool a lot more often. But we didn't want to deal with the upkeep, repairs, and whatever else there might be in fees.
As someone once said, New York should be a nice place if they ever finish building it.
-------------------------------- “It's hard to win an argument with a smart person. It's damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person." -- Bill Murray
Posts: 13890 | Location: The outer burrows | Registered: 27 April 2005
