Dubai Debt Issues Push Stocks Down
Family Gets Early Christmas Gift From Ellen DeGeneres
Photos of D Train Murder Depict Bloody Panic
Mayor: Sex Trafficking Victims, Please Speak Up
Stuy Pyro Leaves Notes In Hieroglyphics
The possibilities of a hyper-gentrified Red Hook - one with an Ikea, at least - are debated in a NY Times feature. On one side are Brooklyn natives and some working class who hail an Ikea store as the benign benefactor, a company to bring in hundreds of jobs; on the other side are residents who worry that the quality of Red Hook life will decline, with growing traffic (imagine the trucks on one-lane streets), noise, and asthma incidence. What Gothamist finds interesting about the anti-Ikea folks is their desire to keep the quiet, on-the-fringes city experience, versus the bustling city. It's an interesting evolution - how much development can the formerly abandoned areas of the city take. Higher traffic is a valid concern, especially since subway access is less available out there, but given the demand for an Ikea, with the masses of young people, what other options are there? Or is it another nail in the coffin, especially since, as one reader once pointed out, Red Hook might be over.
The City Council approved the Ikea plan last October. Gothamist on Red Hook and its development. And here's the Brooklyn archive of Curbed, blog-crack for the real estaties.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
No, actually I think the anti-Ikea folks are trying to do is prevent NYC from becoming nothing more than suburban sprawl -- choked with traffic, dominated by bigbox and chain stores, devoid of character and vitality. While Red Hook probably could use some development and jobs, it will not find salvation in parking lots and big corporations.
As far as big corporations go, I'd much rather see an Ikea than a Wal-Mart, Starbucks, McDonalds, etc.
NYC is certainly becoming just another homogenized American city. When urban flight reversed, and the suburbanites flocked back to the cities, they recreated in urban areas what appealed to them about the suburbs. Notice the Home Depot in Chelsea.
I still think Ikea can't be compared to the likes of Home Depot or Wal-Mart. Ikea is very much a European company, and actually caters more to the urbanite than most other houseware chains. Most of Ikea's inventory caters to living efficiently in small spaces, which is the antithesis of sprawl. It doesn't scream "red state suburban soccer mom" as much as a Home Depot.
Anyway, it's our turn. American imperialism has put our McDonalds and Wal-Marts all over the globe; yet we raise a fuss when a European company puts their business here. And one that sells cool cheap kitchenware, at that!
look at the picture of the plan--all that prime waterfront squarefootage being taken up by the Ikea PARKING lot--that's a crime--put the parking lot somewhere else--put the ikea somewhere off the waterfront--put some mixed income housing and some shops and or a little park on the waterfront. put ikea a block or two back from the waterfront.
Prime waterfront square footage....Walk around Red Hook much? It's mostly abandoned, desolate crumbly warehouses. Not very many people live there...except for that crazy old man who lives in that old fisherman's shack by the water (watch out for him! He eats children!) Many movie studios set up their sound stages there for the simple fact that there's so much unused space.
"kiss me baby ikea": I think you miss part of the point -- it's not simply about the "evilness" of the corporation that makes this a bad idea. It's the fact that this is very simply a bad use for the land in question, *and* we're further giving away control of our communities to corporations who have no stake in them.
"Captain Red Hook": so we should bulldoze those potentially beautiful warehouses and replace them with a warehouse that will invariably be uglier, and with parking lots? And give the surrounding neighborhoods lots more traffic and pollution to boot? They're already saddled with the BQE. So there's no other possible uses for the area besides an Ikea? Wow, that's some expansive thinking there.
Basically want to point out that there is an IKEA in Elizabeth, NJ. Those are of us from NJ certainly do not consider Elizabeth as a "hyper gentrified" region of our state.
Not by any means whatsoever.
Why do people think that New York City residents should have to pay more than suburbanites for basic goods like food, clothing and furniture? The reason that people left the city is that they could have a better life in the suburbs. If bringing a little of the suburbs into the city is what it takes to make it more affordable and livable, why the opposition?