NYC's future = disneyland for yuppies ?? (Clinton: for rent, loans, school)

[Guywithacause]

Lol...we keep going in circles here. There are plenty of vacant lots along train lines yet no development..so why would anyone assert expanding train lines to encourage development as a solution? As a result, the 'housing crisis' that exists in NYC has NOTHING to do with train service, nor will it be solved by expanding train service. Travel along the 6 line from 125 to Parkchester and you will see plenty of vacant lots...travel along the 2/5 train from 149st - 180st and you will see plenty of vacant lots! The same applies to other train lines in Brooklyn, for example. So again..why are you pushing more/expanded train service when there are plenty of lots all around train lines!! It makes no sense...although I am sure in what ever books you are reading it makes perfect sense.

[OhBeeHave]

And no NYC's future is far from being Disneyland anytime soon. Has anyone actually ventured outside of Rockefeller Center and Times Square?!

I realize I am entering this late. Sorry.

Last night I walked from Penn to W46 & 8th -- the closer I came to TS the more it looked like a mall with all the national stores. I could have stayed home for that. Only thing the mall lacks is hot air rising up through the grates, the smell of stale urine and hordes of tourists stopping dead in front of you yammering in a foreign language while pointing at something.

The only things the area had in common with Disneyland is the commercialization and the hordes of tourists stopping dead in front of you yammering in a foreign language while pointing at something.

[Guywithacause]

Yes Times Square is basically a large outdoor mall with tourists from around the world. But walk a few blocks West and it is decideldy different and very NYC, with Hells Kitchen's small scale housing, variety of ethnic restaurants, and diverse residents.

So although there are some mainstream areas..so what? 99% of the rest of the city is anything but mainstream.

[bmwguydc]

Clinton (aka Hell's Kitchen) is not exactly the picture of diversity these days, since much of that character has been obliterated by the new apartment towers and an influx of new residents in the last decade or two. While there are still some smaller-scale buildings in the area, the area really has merged with Chelsea in scope and character, and has finally (thankfully) lost the grit that used to make this part of the city a little more nerve-racking.

I agree, however, that Times Square is a large outdoor mall, and while it's now less gritty, a good thing, it's just more of the same that you can find in Anytown, USA. This same encroachment of the mainstream American consumerist culture has made inroads in other areas of the city as well, though there has not been a successful bid to bring in some of the heavy hitting big box stores, Ikea aside.

[Fred314X]

That's all right...NYC doesn't actually need the big box stores. Evidently, our wonderful former Mayor Giuliani felt otherwise; he was the one who opened the door for them. But the absence of these stores was what made New York unique among big cities in the United States, and so the less of them we've got, the better off we are.

Maybe it's a good sign that Starbucks had to close 600 stores. They were overreaching themselves, in the first place. And let's face it; New York has never been known for its discriminating taste in coffee.

[Guywithacause]

I think Hells Kitchen (sorry it ain't Clinton anymore than 116 and 3rd avenue is the Upper-Upper East Side) still retains plenty of diversity...you are confusing poverty and crime with diversity. There are plenty of different kinds of people there making it far more diverse than the days it was just "the poor and wretched." Before there were few if any restuarants or amenities, today there are tons from around the world...and a cross-section of people living and visiting the area, versus what it was before: filthy, crime ridden, lacking basic amenities, with no reason for anyone to be/go/live there.

[bmwguydc]

I am not confusing it with poverty and despair. I know the area very well, and have had many friends move into that area, and have witnessed the changes for myself. It is much less diverse now than it was ten years ago, with few enclaves that can be attributed to its former residents. I use the name Clinton as that's what most people who are newer to the city can identify, especially now that the area is marketed in tandem with Chelsea.

[Guywithacause]

Stop saying Clinton and you will see how quickly people don't use that name either. And yes it was poorer 10 years ago..and higher crime, more hardcore drug use..so if that is what you mean by more diverse..then I agree. There are still plenty of old timers around and the area is still gritty..except now people don't have to avoid the area like before...now anyone and everyone goes there..making it far more diverse today than 10 years ago.

[bmwguydc]

Why do we keep having to have words put into what was said? I am not lamenting the loss of crime in the area at all, and I use the term Clinton because it's been that since I was a child, the name having originated long before I was born as per life-long Chelsea residents.

[cjma79]

Originally Posted by bmwguydc

Why do we keep having to have words put into what was said? I am not lamenting the loss of crime in the area at all, and I use the term Clinton because it's been that since I was a child, the name having originated long before I was born as per life-long Chelsea residents.

I am sorry but where is Clinton??? is it the same as Chelsea???
My mother grew up in Chelsea back in the 60's....