Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

whybother5000 t1_irvj4ja wrote

JC is as old as BK with similar industrial histories so such similarities aren’t surprising. Bk was still an exotic outpost relative to the city in the 2000s. Remember when sex and city had Miranda saying she didn’t do Brooklyn to the cabbie who also didn’t do Brooklyn?

Difference is we’ll never become another Bk since we’re not on the MTA and then there’s the “jersey” discount/stigma.

12

TacoCityJC t1_irvjzts wrote

What the fuck is Groves street!?!?

10

kittyglitther t1_irvdf6h wrote

Comparing every city, sidewalk, farm, and suburb to Brooklyn? I thought we stopped doing that around 2017?

9

newworldorder69 t1_irvi954 wrote

Only northern Brooklyn is bougie. No one ever thinks of the southern part of Brooklyn, which is nothing like the northern gentrified part.

9

GoHuskies1984 t1_irvlgs7 wrote

Nobody outside of Brooklyn thinks about south Brooklyn. Reminds of how people from outside JC think JC is just Grove St and the waterfront.

12

possums101 t1_irvn9yn wrote

Congratulations you’ve discovered architecture. There’s lots and lots of cities on the east coast that have this look. Because they were developed/designed by similar people.

4

zero_cool_protege t1_irvnwyw wrote

Yes the two have a shared history. If you look at a map they are both mirror images of each other on either side of Manhattan. They were both early dutch settlements, Brooklyn and Bergen (Now JC). They were both industrial centers starting in the 1800s and a lot of those buildings still remain.

3

DontBeEvil1 t1_irwr928 wrote

No. It reminds of Brooklyn AFTER it became gentrified.

1