Could East Williamsburg and Bushburg be banned?
Brooklyn Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries wants to forbid real estate brokers from inventing names for neighborhoods where they list apartments, or face heavy fines.
The bill, the Neighborhood Integrity Act, would force brokers to submit name changes to community boards, City Council and the mayor for approval — those who don’t could receive fines and a possible revocation of their real estate license.
That could spell the end of made-up places such as Procro (Prospect Heights/ Crown Heights), GoCaGa (Gowanus/ Carroll Gardens) and BoCoCa (Boerum Hill Carroll Gardens, Cobble Hill).
But it won’t just apply to acronyms.
Labels such as West Bushwick, Bushburg, Morgantown, and others might also be banned. It’s not clear how the creeping borders of actual neighborhoods would be regulated, such as with the case of East Williamsburg, which brokers — though admittedly few others — continue to try to use when renting apartments in deepest Bushwick.
The most annoying and perhaps the most heinous of violators, the media, would not be affected.
Jeffries says that he wrote the bill out of frustration with brokers’ ability to invent names for existing neighborhoods and move existing boundaries in order to move units.
"This allows [brokers] to raise rental and homeowner prices for people looking to reside in the more affluent Prospect Heights and pushes out the traditional, working class families who have historically resided in Crown Heights, for example," said Jeffries spokeswoman Lupe Todd. "Neighborhoods change. Communities evolve. But the real estate industry should not be the decision-maker. This legislation will put the choice back in the hands of the community."
But some brokers say that they aren’t the ones forcing the name change — it’s coming from the new residents moving to those places.
"There’s always going to be slang names from neighborhoods," said David Maundrell, owner of AptsandLofts.com. "I never try to rebrand a neighborhood. It’s not how I work."
Brooklyn neighborhoods have been changing since the Dutch landed 400 years ago — much of what they named "Boswijck" is now Williamsburg.
But names can be hard to untack.
Nearly a century ago downtown Brooklyn’s waterfront was called Fulton Landing — until the Walentas brothers bought a slew of inexpensive manufacturing buildings and rebranded the neighborhood "DUMBO" (Down Under the Manhattan Bridge Overpass) in 1978, perhaps the best example of the kind of invention Jeffries hopes to eliminate.
And Wyckoff Heights, a name for a small area around the Bushwick-Ridgewood border, took off in the 1970s and ’80s when the area’s residents, struggling with arson and crime, looked to dissociate with Bushwick. The name didn’t catch on with many, though it still shows up in real estate listings.
Artist Kevin Regan, who has lived in his fair share of acronymic neighborhoods and in the Bushwick area for over ten years, hates some names, but likes art writer James Kalm’s "Mojo" for the area between the Morgan and Jefferson stops on the L train.
"He used it in a couple of his Brooklyn Rail articles," said Regan. "I don’t have much opinion other than that I hate Robertasville."
But Community Board 4 member Austen Martinez thinks people should just stick to one name for the neighborhood.
"There shouldn’t be an east and west and south, it should be one Bushwick, and that’s it," said Martinez.
gimme April 29th, 2011 at 6:31 pm
some o’ the ladies around here put the bush in da burg, hihoooo
Dresden April 29th, 2011 at 7:27 pm
Hakeem Jeffries – this is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard. If someone moves into a hood and believes what their broker tells them… in today’s world of Google being about to educate them… it’s their problem. Not the broker’s.
John Dereszewski April 30th, 2011 at 11:21 am
Wow, what a silly idea.
The fact is that developers have been “naming” neighborhoods forever and that the names have either taken off or died accordingly to the public’s reaction.
Williamsburg provides a good case in point. Just after 1800, two competing developments, named Williamsburg and Yorkton, were established near the East River. Williamsburg quickly went bankrupt while Yorkton took off. However, it was the name of the failed venture that stuck in the public mind.
Bushwick, as we know it, might have become Boronsville if the name of its first residential development had stuck. It did not as people were more comfortable with the older name. (Another one of Brooklyn’s original towns, New Utreicht, was not so fortunate.)
The good assemblyman should have checked his history before supporting the name of Crown Heights. In fact, Crown Heights was created by developers as a replacement for its former name – Crow’s Hill – which besides being less fashionable was very much associated with a Black community that resided there. It looks that things have really gone full circle with Crown Heights.
I could think of many examples of such name changes. When the developer Cord Meyer decided that the town of Newtown was becomming overly associated with the fumes of Newtown Creek, he took action – and Elmhurst was born. He did the same with Forest Hills, which had previously been called Whitepot.
Perhaps my favorite example concerns the origion of Ridgewood. When, in the 1890′s or so, developers were looking for an attractive lure for would be residents, they chose the name of the Ridgewood Reservoir. Interestingly, the reservoir was itself named after the Ridgewood Lakes, situated in what is now Nassau County, which provided some of its water supply. So, we have the name of a lake in central Long Island to thank for the name of this community. One final footnote. Prior to being named Ridgewood, the community was, for many years popularly known as East Williamsburg!
I’ve said enough. hopefully someone else can come up with other examples of this.
Vertigo May 1st, 2011 at 12:19 am
I always feel the people who want to keep NYC from changing are the people with the least understanding of it. They might even have grown up here, and want to preserve the New York they know, without looking back and seeing that its very nature has is change, and every generation wanted to prevent that change. They don’t seem to get that the very vitality that they cherish about the city is the thing that defies all the laws and choking regulations they have put on her.
The Germans wanted to keep the italians out, they fought against the irish and the Polish, the Dominicans didn’t want the Puerto Ricans, who didn’t want the Mexicans, who don’t want the mix of races we now call the Hipsters. The area we currently consider Williamsburg used to be Greenpoint.
Hilton May 1st, 2011 at 6:37 am
I always thought the new name was Bushlick !
Christopher May 1st, 2011 at 8:46 am
Thank you John. Following the name changes in NYC history is part of the fun!
Chicago, where I grew up, actually has an official community map that lists all the names of the community areas and their boundaries. It was created in the 1970s to better understand how communities worked and to track social services. Even still within those communities, neighborhood names are fuzzy and evolving. This is always the way it has been.
Like language itself, this is something that doesn’t need to be regulated as the people (and their brokers!) will establish names all on their own.
ROB May 1st, 2011 at 1:22 pm
Its bushwick not anything else if you want to live bushburg east willyburg go there this is BUSHWICK
Bailey May 1st, 2011 at 4:14 pm
I think this is a great idea. People need to stop inventing names for neighborhoods that already have names. Bushwick and Williamsburg have been the names of these neigborhoods for over 100 years. As a native I am totally disgusted by people calling Bushwick East Williamsburg or Morgantown. Bushwick is even older because that was the name given to it by the Dutch settlers that came here in the 1600′s. Sorry but making trendy names for a neighborhood so large with such a rich history is just a shady ploy to sell or rent property. If you can’t accept the actual name of the neighborhood then maybe you should find somewhere else to live.
digamma May 1st, 2011 at 5:29 pm
Most New York neighborhoods aren’t legal entities. I can tell you when you’ve gone from one community board to another, or from one police precinct to another, or from Manhattan to Brooklyn, but Williamsburg is an informal designation. I’ve had lots of barroom arguments with people about Williamsburg’s borders, but I wouldn’t feel comfortable repeating any of them in front of a judge.
The geography nerd in me wants this law to be passed and see court challenges in which people dig up old Times articles from the 1930s to justify neighborhood names.
david May 1st, 2011 at 6:31 pm
To all you new residents, remember this politician “”"”"”"”"Hakem Jeffries”"”"”"”"”, when its time to vote, he openly wants to empower the existing population over the new population. G…..How about a law ,,,,to make laws against people’s origination against the law. race ,sex, etc….
Fathead May 1st, 2011 at 11:20 pm
That’s like if they re-named Chinatown, “Smelly Gross Garbage Fish Town”. It cannot be done!
M.C. May 2nd, 2011 at 1:32 am
This wouldn’t stop me from calling the Morgan Stop neighborhood “NoFlu,” or, North of Flushing. It’s entirely appropriate.
“Mojo” is godawful. The Brooklyn Rail needs to get with it.
GP May 2nd, 2011 at 9:53 am
Before you all trash talk on this politician and his proposed bill, take a look at this :
http://assembly.state.ny.us/mem/Hakeem-Jeffries/bio/
He is actually trying to stand up for REAL New Yorkers (AKA the people who were born and raised here, still live here, etc). He seems like the opposite of Bloomberg, who is all about getting rich yuppies moved into the city.
Brandon May 2nd, 2011 at 5:18 pm
Can they please ban the Northwestward neighborhood creep of “Bushwick,” too? Sorry dudes, but the area around the Morgan and Montrose stops is still (East) Williamsburg. Put that on my tombstone.
A side note, much of what is now considered Bushwick used to be called Ridgewood, Brooklyn (all the way down to Central Ave on some maps).
John Dereszewski May 3rd, 2011 at 7:57 am
Brandon, I need to disagree with you a bit on the “western creep” of Bushwick, at least as it concerns the Morgan/Bogart area. Since, I think it’s fair to say, that most of the people who either live, visit or own (recently established) businesses and galleries in this area relate more to Bushwick than to Williamsburg, calling it part of Bushwick is not inaccurate – though I personally prefer the more distinct name of Morgantown. This whole development here is really interesting, since it represents a reversal of past historical trends through which Williamsburg “pushed” Bushwick from its initial home and into its “new lots”. (I agree with you, however, that the Montrose Ave. station area cannot be considered anything other than part of East Williamsburg.)
By the way, you are entirely correct that Ridgewood once occupied a significant part of what we now call Bushwick, though I don’t think it ever went as far down as Central Ave. The 11237 zip code boundary along Wilson and Knickerbocker probably provides the best measurement of where, historically, Bushwick ended and Ridgewood began.
Until Ridgewood’s “retreat” to the Queens line, the residents of the entirely made-up neighborhood of Wyckoff Heights had no problem referring to themselves as Ridgewoodites. They only “invented” this neighborhood when the horror is being considered part of Bushwick emerged as a possibility.
charlie May 3rd, 2011 at 3:05 pm
East Williamsburg Industrial Zone… It is what it is, folks.
Brandon May 3rd, 2011 at 7:43 pm
Being pedantic per my M.O., I’d argue most of the people calling the area around the Morgan stop “Bushwick” just don’t know any better because that’s what they hear their pals and the media calling it… and then there’s the whole myth that “East Williamsburg was made up by realtors and doesn’t exist.” But better than “Morgantown,” anyway… that’s a college town in West Virginia!
I’ve been doing some casual Ridgewood history studies as of late… I forget where I saw/read it described as going down to Central (maybe the AIA NY Guide? Otherwise somewhere in the Archives at the Queens Central Library)… here’s one showing Hamburg Ave (now Irving) as the border, anyway: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/fbx/?set=a.146569922063277.30775.146126935440909#!/photo.php?fbid=146571512063118&set=a.146569922063277.30775.146126935440909&type=1&theater
Brandon May 3rd, 2011 at 7:46 pm
(Actually what I love about the map above as it shows Ridgewood WHOLLY in Brooklyn), with hinterlands such as Germania Heights and, yes, Wyckoff Heights occupuying the Queens side (Armbruster 1912)… anyway, I’ll write a blog post about all of this eventually.
Brandon May 3rd, 2011 at 7:55 pm
…and note Flushing shown as the border, even then! I kid, mostly… but just find it slightly bothersome that the “image” painted by the media of “Bushwick” (you know, 20-year old artist transplants living in former industrial lofts, upscale locavore pizza, etc etc) is predominately based in the reality of an area that is not even technically/historically Bushwick proper… a very large neighborhood stretching out to Broadway Junction, and predominantly traditional apartments/rowhouses and families… I’ve got to wonder what folks living out at the Chauncey stop think about all the hype surrounding their neighborhood… I suppose this is no different than gentrified Northside Williamsburg dominating nearly all discussion of that neighborhood, alive and substantial as the Italian, Latino, and Hasidic dominated sections still are, in both population and land area.
John Dereszewski May 4th, 2011 at 7:52 am
Actually, Flushing Avenue – or as it was once called, the Newtown Plank Road – served as the boundary between the original town of Bushwick, which was situated to the north, and its “new lots”, which encompassed what we now know as Bushwick, or at least Community District 4. So, the historic roots of a “north of Flushing Ave.” Bushwick are very strong, and it was only the rapid expansion of Williamsburg into this area during the 19th century that created the neighborhood configuration that currently exists.
And, as I noted earlier, the recent Bushwick oriented developments that have occurred during the past decade in the Morgan/Bogart area may represent at least a minor reversal of this historic trend.
listentome! May 4th, 2011 at 8:37 am
Honestly, who gives a shit what people want to call a neighborhood. If you don’t like it, don’t call it that. It’s not too difficult to look at real estate ads on Craigslist and know that when some POS RA is calling the corner of Throop and Gates “williamsburg”, is total BS.
But let’s be honest, this whole Bloomberg, yuppie, midwest hating thing has got to fucking stop! I have seen first hand what Brooklyn looked like before gentrification, it wasn’t pretty, it wasn’t safe, and it certainly wasn’t a giving the name Brooklyn a positive vibe! Long live Safe, quiet, clean, drug free neighborhoods!
spiritross May 4th, 2011 at 12:59 pm
Bushburg?
What the hell are you talkign about?
It’s WEST BUSHWICK though the proper historical name is Bushwick Greens
This is one of the four villages – the others were Green Point, Bushwick Shore and Bushwick Crossroads.
Has been for years and no politician can make it other wise
Just the facts
Metropolitan Ave and the adjacent area south and East to Flushing Ave bordered to the West on Union and Broadway and on the West – respectively.
That is Bushwick Greens – it has been that for 400 years so I don’t think it’s changing anytime soon.
What people call “Northside” or even more mistakenly Williamsburg is Buskwick Shore East River to Metropolitan and Newton Creek to Broadway
Williamsburg is only south of Broadway
Green Point is the North west corner boarder by Norman.
and Bushwick Crossroads is South and East of Flushing Ave to Highland Park and the cemeteries
Realtors and Politicians and boring people that think they are creative come and go
History never changes
Just the facts
Get it right
Michael May 4th, 2011 at 3:50 pm
It’s true that the original town center of Boswijck was where today’s White Castle is on Metropolitan and Bushwick Avenues, then expanded southeasterly to the “new lots” of today’s more commonly known area as being the true Bushwick…
As someone who’s lived off the Morgan stop for 9 years, i’ve seen all sorts of proposals for the name of this area. One (funny) favorite is NeBoHe (Near Boar’s Head). I absolutely hate how the term “Morgantown” has proliferated as much as it has.
I’ve always advocated for “East Williamsburg Industrial Valley” as the East Willamsburg Valley Industrial Corporation (EWVIDCO) has been been a presence in the area since the early 80′s. (Although their mission is to attract and retain industrial businesses, i’m not sure if new residents living in spaces they fight to retain for industry would make them happy).
As the area around the Morgan stop was once boggy terminus of Newtown creek, this is what creates the “valley” in the landscape. Obviously the “industrial” part pays homage to the areas reputation as a center of industry.
Also, maps from 1873 show the area, almost over to today’s Maspeth, as being labeled East Williamsburg, so can we please just start going with East Willliamsburg Industrial Valley and scrap this whole Morgantown nonsense.
Michael May 4th, 2011 at 3:51 pm
** EWIV for short
Michael May 4th, 2011 at 5:13 pm
here is the link to an 1973 map showing what we call Ridgewood and Bushwick today as being labeled East Williamsburg:
http://www.bklyn-genealogy-info.com/Map/Newtown.html
Michael May 4th, 2011 at 5:14 pm
correction.. 1873 map
Brandon May 4th, 2011 at 9:31 pm
Regarding the map above, yes, the Northern part of Ridgewood (around Forest and Metropolitan) was ineed known as East Williamsburgh… meanwhile, what was originally known as Ridgewood is now part of Glendale!
Seems like things coalesced sometime around the turn of the century to presently understood boundaries… for the most part.
By the way, “East Williamsburg Industrial Valley”? That’s just cumbersome. Plain old East Williamsburg seems easier… and does anyone actually call it Morgantown in casual conversation with a straight face? I thought that term was just an invention of this blog.
Brandon May 4th, 2011 at 9:32 pm
We should have a neighborhood map/history dork party at Gottscheer Hall sometime.
John Dereszewski May 5th, 2011 at 7:47 pm
Brandon, I would love to attend a history/dork party! Let’s set the date and time. (Dorks of the world unite!!)
Alas, it seems that most of the current occupants of the area do NOT like Morgantown as a local name. So, who am I, as an outsider, to dispute this. Morgantown should, thus, go down the toilet bowl of rejected neighborhood names – unless any local would like to resurresct it. On the other hand, East Williamsburg seems too general a term, since it would place the Morgan/Bogart area in part of a much broader – and very different – community that can be called East Williamsburg. I think the unique quality of this very special area should be recognized – but then, what do I know.
Michael, that 1873 map was great! The designation of what would become Ridgewood as East Williamsburg was hardly a passing fancy but served as the community’s popular name for several generations. (The First Presbyterian Church of Ridgewood was, until around 1930, still called the First Pres. Church of East Williamsburg.) The fact is that what is now Ridgewood began more of an off-shoot of developing Brooklyn communities – who approached it via Metropolitan and Myrtle Avenues rather than the less accessible Queens based communities. So, when Ridgewood actually developed in the late 1890′s/ early 1900′s. it did so as an extension of Brooklyn Bushwick, not Queens Newtown.
Hope this keeps the thread runnning.
Jimmy Legs May 17th, 2011 at 12:07 pm
i thought bushburg was just the name of a development company, i don’t think anybody is calling any part of town that. i think a neighborhood’s name grows organically. case in point: does anybody call Hell’s Kitchen “Clinton” like the realtors wanted?
Patrick May 26th, 2011 at 2:27 pm
I’m so sorry I missed this story when it first came out. And especially the comments here. This is a rich vein of Brooklyn history!
Assemblyman Jeffries generally seems like a cool fellow, but this bill is completely bone-headed. This is like trying to legislate evolution! Like it or not, real estate developers have always been the ones to give places their names. There’s a two block long street in a small town in California called Patrick Street, because my grandfather was the developer. Other streets there are named after my cousins.
Yes, it’s frustrating looking at ads on craigslist for Williamsburg apartments, and finding listings at the Wilson stop. However – Morgantown? For better or for worse, it was the kids who live there that started calling it that, and the realtors picked up on it. Is he next going to want to ban hipsters from giving places nicknames?
This is just silly, Assemblyman. Stick to stop and frisk and affordable housing for your constituents.