« Bed Stuy Kitchen Reno: Reclaiming the Parlor Floor Bridge-Crossing Gets Tourist-Friendly »
January 8, 2007
Keep Passing Broken Windows
We have to admit to feeling a certain satisfaction as the developers of one of the biggest eyesores and examples of crapola design in Clinton Hill have struggled to find suckers to move into their new building. They gave up trying to find a buyer a while ago and have spent the last couple of months looking for renters. Just last night we noticed some lights on in the top unit for the first time. Still no takers for the lower triplex, which includes this broken window on the second floor (it's been like this for several weeks). We can only hope that other developers of the Fedders variety take note of how long it has taken to get just one apartment rented here.
Irresponsible Developers Try to Dump New-Build [Brownstoner] GMAP
Nothing Like A Little Lopsided Construction [Brownstoner]
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/273
Comments
We have to admit to feeling a certain satisfaction ???
why do you take joy in other peoples bad luck? say what you will about new construction . i don't know what was there before this building but . do you prefer vacant lots? Old home ready to fall? a while ago you ( brownstoner) were dogging the buildings built by the hasidics on bedford and flushing ave's . but they took lots that were empty for YRS and made them into homes . unless you can do something better . shut the fuck !!
Posted by: electricgreek at January 8, 2007 11:24 AM
This developer made a conscious decision to build an ugly, poorly constructed blight on the neighborhood. Luck had nothing to do with it.
Posted by: Brownstoner at January 8, 2007 11:29 AM
what might be ugly to you ,might be nice to some1 else.
why do you think you live in clinton hill? cause of people like you ? NOT . devolpers are the reason why clintion hill is what it is now . they started with brownstones . knocking down homes that were beyond repair . now vacant lots are being built up .
Posted by: electricgreek at January 8, 2007 11:37 AM
i'd rather have a vacant lot, or better still turn it into a community garden
Posted by: loser at January 8, 2007 11:45 AM
vacant lot huh ?
so if there were cars parking in the vacant lot you would bitch about that too ? weeds? garbage ? then you would have rats . like i said can you do better?
Posted by: electricgreek at January 8, 2007 11:50 AM
electricgeek - you are clueless. The simple fact of developers putting up places of any crap-ass quality does not a desirable neighborhood make. Clinton hill is desireable because the TYPE of buildings that were put there. Use your brain cells to try figure out why clinton hill is more desireable to financially well-off than Woodside for example. Its the architecture dumbass.
Posted by: NOT at January 8, 2007 11:51 AM
You betcha. Feel like putting up the dough?
Posted by: Brownstoner at January 8, 2007 11:52 AM
I was thinking the same - it must be a complete mystery to electricgeek as to why some areas of town have more demand than others despite similar transport. He seems to think that development per se is the answer. Must be at 60V.
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 11:55 AM
egeek, have you seen the house in question? the 'developers' who built the original brownstones in the area have little connection to the guys building this kind of monstrosity now.
Posted by: Jimmy Legs at January 8, 2007 11:55 AM
what if when you were renovating your brownstone some asshole was breaking your windows ?
would you like it ? i would think not . my mother always tells me . don't laugh at other people's misfortune .
just like your not happy about the new construction in your neighborhood ,im sure there were old time residents that weren't happy seeing you ( a white guy ) moving into there hood . should they of broken your windows?
Posted by: electricgreek at January 8, 2007 11:56 AM
the old time residents were white. I think you must be pretty young, born in the 60s?
Posted by: loser at January 8, 2007 11:58 AM
Yes, white people are evil
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 11:59 AM
i own a number of brownstones myself . and i do understand the whole new construction thing . i refuse to buy new construction myself . hell i live in a 96 yr old home in bayside myself . but to be gald that people are breaking windows on some1 else's property is sad .
btw jimmy 1 of your friends racheal ,is living in 1 of my places in bushwick
Posted by: electricgreek at January 8, 2007 12:01 PM
To be clear, we were not expressing satisfaction at the fact that someone had thrown a rock into this window--that's bad news under any circumstances. We were expressing satisfaction that this developer, who thought he could just slap up this piece of crap, collect his money and hit road, leaving the neighborhood with a major eyesore, did not succeed in his plan and has suffered some economic pain for selfish, short-sighted decisions.
Posted by: Brownstoner at January 8, 2007 12:04 PM
Hey EG - nice with the subtle accusation of racism to the non-white residents to Clinton Hill. Most "long-time" residents aren't racist - so they don't care about the skin color of the person moving into the neighborhood. Keep your racsim in bayside.
Posted by: thanks at January 8, 2007 12:05 PM
Please post in a civil and respectful manner
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 12:05 PM
electricgreek,
Clinton Hill is a desirable area not because of developers but because it is a neighborhood of, mostly, 19th century landmarked rowhouses and freestanding mansions filled by a community that has, and continues to, care about and maintain the old places.
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 12:08 PM
no racists here buddy
Posted by: electricgreek at January 8, 2007 12:09 PM
I agree with the last post. I have no idea why you guys are so negative and continue to wish misfortune on the owner of this building!!! Shit, I live across the street from the building and although it's not pretty it sure is better than the junky vacant lot that was there before!
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 12:12 PM
Is it such a hard task to interpolate that the original post is suggesting that if future developers realize that just slapping together a piece-o-crap development may not garner the financial windfall they had anticipated? And therefore will think longer and harder b/4 doing it themselves?
I don't think there is any elitist under or overtones in the post.
No need for any racist comments or accusations.
It's also not hard to recognize that the majority of the readership here is fairly homogenous in that most have a HUGE appreciation for Brownstones.
Posted by: NewStoner at January 8, 2007 12:25 PM
face it the place is gross. the neighborhood is not. buildings like these don't belong anywhere in brooklyn. race always has something to do with everything in american society. a hell hole like this would never go up in brooklyn heights. face facts, sad but true, and it shouldn't have gone up in clinton hill.
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 12:38 PM
Dear E-Greek,
Stay in Bayside. You obviously don't have a clue about Clinton Hill or about good design or about this particular site. Secondly, I agree with the poster who said, "Keep your racism in Bayside." Lastly, maybe the sloping floors, strange floor plans, and bayside-finishes are really hiding severe structural problems causing the windows to burst.
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 12:46 PM
anon 12:12....
i totally disagree. the fully vacant lot was much more preferable to what was built there. i'm just glad that their bizarre construction was only done on half of the vacant lot and they didn't rip up the tree on the other half. everything about this building is weird. from lot size to the sunken backyard, materials choices, weird undersized windows, odd railings and lighting. not to mention the ramshackle construction (you should have seen it before the stucco went up, looked like it was slapped together by 12 year olds).
i hope they leave the corner lot with the tree on it vacant...
my 2¢
Posted by: benno at January 8, 2007 12:50 PM
face it . there not building any new brownstones . those days are over . as much we all love them ( yes i do love brownstones) there not building them anymore . say what you want now but . if that lot stayed vacant you would not be happy about that either . the population of NYC is growing and people have to live somewhere . 10 more yrs and there will be no more vacant lots in brooklyn . like i said before i don't like new construction myself but something has to be built on these vacant lots .
Posted by: electricgreek at January 8, 2007 12:53 PM
So long as design is regarded as some kind of froufrou that you slap on if you have spare money lying around, instead of an art/science of resolving financial, legal, and technical challenges through space and structure, the micro-Trump fuckwads that risk the life and limb of others to build tomorrow's slums today will continue to find apologists such as our friend the Hellene. Word up.
Posted by: DC at January 8, 2007 12:55 PM
That stretch of Grand from Greene to Gates is pretty much uninspiring. The greenish rowhouses between Lex and Greene are as bad as they come.
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 1:10 PM
if you were here in nyc before this rebuilding. vacant lots suck. and in bad areas that still have vacant lots, you'll change your tune.
Posted by: armchair_warrior at January 8, 2007 1:18 PM
fess up Brownstoner, we all know you were the one who broke that window!
and egeek, i had heard there was some interconnectivity going on here. i hope you're not gouging her on rent! :)
Posted by: Jimmy Legs at January 8, 2007 1:42 PM
no one is asking that they build new brownstones, but a sense of design and something that will last would be much appreciated. in brooklyn heights, a house was destroyed by fire and guess what it has to be rebuilt to look exactly the way it did before the fire. take a look at 298 and 300 waverly avenue, there was a vacant lot there and the developers built carriage houses which are almost exact replicas of the originals. they look fantastic. why can't all developers be as considerate of their environment?
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 1:42 PM
Actually they do build new brownstones - ie. quality infill. Around the corner on Greene nearer to Washington; carriage house on Waverly featured about a month ago; new townhouse on State in Boerum Hill. All of those are examples of tasteful and high-end design. My colleague who lives across the street from this piece of crap calls it the Gaza Strip. What Mr. Brownstoner is trying to express is a community standard of design. And even better for you free marketters out there, he is pointing out that the market is rejecting it. Maybe next time the developer will actually hire an architect or base his/her building on something more attractive than a bunker.
Posted by: putnam-denizen at January 8, 2007 2:02 PM
Anon 1:10--
This building is on Greene, not Grand. The block is actually pretty nice. The rowhouses across the street are some of my favorites; too bad they're not landmarked.
Even if I had no problems with the aesthetics of this building, let's not forget that it has EXTERNAL GAS PIPES AND METERS on the front of the house, on the first floor. Thank you DOB!
Posted by: tinarina at January 8, 2007 2:08 PM
Heh, is it just me or does the window look broken on the inside? I've seen a lot of that in the new crapdevelopment around my hood. A building is fixed up but vacant, or a new building is still vacant and the developers just leave the broken interior panes as-is. Until it sells I guess?
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 2:50 PM
The window is broken on the inside - happens all the time in construction. Someone swings a 2x4 or a pipe the wrong way, and crack.
Doesn't excuse the fact its a horrendously ugly building. Guess this goes to show that you can't just build anything, put a Profile refigerator in it and expect it to sell.
Posted by: Halden at January 8, 2007 3:08 PM
armchair_warrior, all these carpet baggers arrived after Giuliani. They do not know how NYC was before.
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 3:21 PM
armchair warrior & electrogeek:
For almost 20yrs I have lived down the block from the vacant lot that this building was built on. I will take the vacant lot anyday. How can you begin to justify this piece of crap?
Posted by: Anon on Greene at January 8, 2007 3:28 PM
True indeed the DOB final touches. It's going to be a blast when the next drunk swerves off the road and right into one of those corner Fedder building.
Posted by: anon at January 8, 2007 4:37 PM
I like living in my bunker. I feel safe in my bunker.
Posted by: pfa at January 8, 2007 4:58 PM
Electro geek - I hear the developers are actually installing 3 ready made sheets of brick walls, crazy glue them together, sod the front, then hide while they wait for the next sucker to buy. If no sucker in 6 months then they Section 8.
I'll take a vacant lot and a strong block association any day.
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 5:25 PM
Oh yeah let's not forget the shots of the costruction of this place - uneven rows of block, gaping holes. All covered by a nice stucco layer. Yummy. Quality.
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 5:42 PM
pull that 20 years out of your asses did ya? lol i love the net.
not defending the building but it beats any vacant lot any time!
Posted by: armchair_warrior at January 8, 2007 5:57 PM
nope, really and truly 20 years and we have the scars to prove it.
Posted by: anon on Greene at January 8, 2007 6:16 PM
Vacant lot versus building is false dichotomy. Given where I live (Putnam and Irving), I certainy am in favor of filling in vacant lots and empty buildings. It just amazes me how in such a heated market developers around here are missing the mark. (Mostrosity on Fulton/Classon comes to mind).. well, maybe that isn't fair. On Irving between Putnam and Gates three new multi-families went in. The only true loser is closest to Putnam - already looks like it is falling apart, has a drive way which is always full of trash (okay can't blame the developer for that, I guess). Middle one is actually attractive if you ignore the fedders plates. And one closest to gates has nice detailing (altho when they wer being marketted at 400k for a half floor one bedroom, I wondered at their sanity). Maybe it mught be worth compiling a bunch of photos of suuccessful developments. I would love it to include some modern projects as well, but the successful ones semm to be limited to single family homes (House in Fort Greene across from Brooklyn tech comes to mind).
Posted by: Anonymous at January 8, 2007 7:43 PM
Are all these "anything's better than a vacant lot" types saying that there is no such thing as decent, aesthetically pleasing, well built construction in NYC anymore? Sounds like a self-serving justification of shoddy construction for quick profit.
Posted by: carla at January 8, 2007 8:05 PM
"And even better for you free marketters out there, he is pointing out that the market is rejecting it." Exactly the point, putnam-denizen. Mr. B's point is not that the building doesn't "fit in his neighborhood" but that developers should not expect to make a killing when they throw up a piece of garbage, do a little cosmetic touch up and throw in the cheapest hardwood floor they can. In essence developers like these simply believe that people are stupid and will buy anything so long as it has a granite countertop. It's not an issue of putting up badly needed housing (this was intended as luxury housing- and the demand is for middle to low income housing), it also becomes a safety issue. Crap construction creates unsafe structures. The demand for housing doesn't justify putting up an unsafe building.
Posted by: Bx2Bklyn at January 8, 2007 9:07 PM
a nyc firefighter mentioned to me recently that he becomes especially worried when he has to go into one of these newly constructed buildings -- something about how the nature of the construction makes it easier for the floors to give way in an inferno. though on the other hand, it strikes me that it would be easier to smash through walls in search of victims.
Posted by: pfa at January 8, 2007 9:49 PM
What is double sketch about that building is that it has these expansive windows that look out on the bus stop, which means that the bus stop is looking in.
I call bullshit on the third floor tenants--I think the lights are on a timer. Anyone across the street got better information? You ought to be able to see right in since they have no type of curtains.
Posted by: nosy neighbor at January 8, 2007 10:09 PM
Anonymous at January 8, 2007 7:43 PM says "Maybe it mught be worth compiling a bunch of photos of suuccessful developments. I would love it to include some modern projects as well..."
This looks to me like a seriously good idea, Mr. Brownstoner. How about a section for photos/info on new Brooklyn development done the right way? Any visitor to this site knows all too well what crappy construction looks like, but I suspect much of the better new construction goes unnoticed, precisely because the quality of design allows it to blend in. I like the idea of making an example of the good stuff and the developers and architects who build it.
Posted by: Anonymous at January 9, 2007 8:37 AM
Latest Restaurant Additions
-
Happy End
added March 11, 2010 12:00 PM in Greenpoint -
The Blue Stove
added March 10, 2010 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Madina
added March 9, 2010 12:00 PM in Kensington -
Cataldo's
added March 8, 2010 12:00 PM in Prospect Heights -
La Locanda
added March 5, 2010 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Manhattan 3 Decker Restaurant
added March 4, 2010 12:00 PM in Greenpoint -
San Remo
added March 3, 2010 12:00 PM in Ditmas Park -
Fanny
added March 2, 2010 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Pio Pio Riko
added March 1, 2010 12:00 PM in Greenpoint -
Santa Fe Grill
added February 26, 2010 12:00 PM in Park Slope
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.