« Residential Sales in Brooklyn HOTD: Greenpoint Home For The Aged Hits Market »

March 16, 2007

Nice Try in Vinegar Hill

newbrownstone031607.jpg
We've always got our antennae up for decent affordable housing on a brownstone scale. We're not sure whether this example on Evans Street in Vinegar Hill qualifies as affordable (lowercase or uppercase) but it does strike us as a good attempt at modest townhouse-style homes. It uses nice brick, the scale is contextual and the driveways on not too conspicuous. And while the cornices and lintels aren't perfect, they show effort. And look: No Con Ed meters on the facade. It can be done! These places also have the added benefit of looking out at the Commandant's House. These three-story houses were developed by a group called Vinegar Hill Group, LLC and sold in 2005 in the low $800,000's. Does anyone know if there was any government funding or subsidies involved and/or income requirements of buyers? GMAP P*Shark




Posted by Brownstoner at 10:54 AM | Comments (35)
Categories: Architecture, Brooklyn, Dumbo

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/741

Comments

I want to get rid of my ugly meters in front of my house. It makes the front entrance look like some kind of utility space. If anyone knows how to get rid of them (legally), please share your knowledge.

Posted by: victor at March 16, 2007 10:15 AM

$800,000 is not affordable housing.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 16, 2007 10:17 AM

affordability's relevant. low-to-moderate-income housing it's not.

Posted by: Amit at March 16, 2007 10:31 AM

I agree that they look pretty good. Simple, with at least a little decorative flair on cornice and corners. As usual, it's the proportions that are the rub. Cornice is, indeed, a bit small (but, then, one could argue that they represent a valid, sleeker, modern take on the idea of a cornice), and the windows on parlor level should be more generous. Also, I'd prefer not to see garage doors--but ya gotta admit that it would be nice to have a garage, and carriage houses have garage doors, too. All in all, much nicer than most new construction. Modest kudos.

Posted by: bob999 at March 16, 2007 10:32 AM

affordability's relative. low-to-moderate-income housing it's not.

Posted by: Amit at March 16, 2007 10:33 AM

And thank you, Victor, for wanting to move your meters. I don't think there is any legal issue whatever--it's your house, it's your meter, and you can put it wherever you damned well please. Am I wrong? Even if I *am* wrong, this strikes me as an excellent example of a situation in which it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission. Screw Edison. Go for it.

Posted by: bob999 at March 16, 2007 10:35 AM

I think it's very "Disney Worldsque." Would have liked a modern take on a townhouse instead especially in VH.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 16, 2007 10:42 AM

The prices went as high as $1.1 Million. They are confiugred as two family homes, but I do not know how many are used that way. They had to be built that way under the zoning.

The fixtures were not high end, but they are really nice buildings. My only objection is that there is no seperation in the brickwork to make them look like seperate buildings.

I nearly bought one, but in my research discovered the sewage treatment plant across the street. At times the odor there is really bad and long term exposure to hydrogen sulfide is not a good thing.

Posted by: flyintheointment at March 16, 2007 10:42 AM

I think it's so funny you think these were built as affordable housing!

I looked at these (handled by an odd local resident/broker/owner). Nothing subsidized about them, they just sorta look that way. They were poorly done IMO (driveways were a bit off-center from garage doors, the unit we looked at had a fire hydrant put in middle of driveway at last minute) and why they made them 2-family is beyond me. They could have spent 20% more building them and asked 35% more money.

And yes, right across from sewage and con ed field across the way.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 16, 2007 10:49 AM

bob999,

You can't just move the meters. Besides the fact that its a major electrical project, you need a permit and DOB won't let you move them if you are not in line with coned's rules. I'm still looking for the loop-hole that lets me fix this eyesore.

Posted by: victor at March 16, 2007 10:55 AM

Now you guys report developments over TWO YEARS OLD? Thanks for the update, numbnuts.

Posted by: Avez at March 16, 2007 11:00 AM

That;s interesting, Victor. You need a permit from whom--DOB? Hmmm. Could you perhaps enclose them in some kind of box--maybe a box that doubles as a mailbox?

Posted by: bob999 at March 16, 2007 11:02 AM

Earth to Avez: This isn't a newsy post about development. It's a discussion about architecture and aesthetics.

Posted by: brownstoner at March 16, 2007 11:13 AM

Victor,
If you press coned, they will allow you to move them. Just ask for higher ups and you will soon find out that they cannot force you to keep your meters planted on your facade. They don't make it easy though. It takes work and it costs money.

Posted by: jw at March 16, 2007 11:21 AM

OK, here's my aesthetic commentary. Not bad. I think these scaled down newly constructed brick buildings would look vastly better with some simple additions, i.e. attractive white/grey lintels and a little stonework around the doorways. The doorway I think could make or break the look of these simple houses. You can tell I am not an architect, who could probably use all the correct terms. You posted a pretty nice newly constructed brick 4 story the other day which had a nice lintel and some stonework and it really enhances the front.

Posted by: donatella at March 16, 2007 11:35 AM

Does ConEd offer remote metering yet? I think Keyspan started implementing it.

Not that it helps when the meter is already outside.

Posted by: Girgis at March 16, 2007 11:39 AM

I think in their context - a industrial area - they are trying to take look of warehouse, old industrial buildings - not just townhouse, rowhouse look. And I think works quite well for the location. I did walk by them during construction phase.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 16, 2007 11:50 AM

question for our host - what made you think that these may have been affordable housing?

Posted by: Anonymous at March 16, 2007 11:52 AM

Well, most of these townhouse-style developments you see around Brooklyn are affordable/subsidized. And while they look better than most of those, they don't look nice enough to have been made on a purely for-profit basis. Then again, when they were in the planning stages 3 or 4 years ago, the developers may not have though that this corner of Vinegar Hill could attract high-end buyers. Frankly, we love how peaceful it is on this street.

Posted by: brownstoner at March 16, 2007 11:57 AM

Well, I guess these do try to fit in with the warehouse district surroundings. I am struck by the finishing on the fronts of these new constructs. The ones in the neighborhood townhouse context with nice doorway finishing seem to most attractive. And the quality of the bricks makes a huge difference too.

Posted by: donatella at March 16, 2007 11:58 AM

The buildings were all sold by the builder for approx. $750,000 each a few years ago. No income restrictions, and the owners got the tax abatement credit from the city.
F.Y.I. the builder, Vinegar Hill Group, LLC, is the worst. They did some big screw-ups, one being a defective roof, in these buildings which have cost the current owners a decent amount of money to correct.

Posted by: none at March 16, 2007 11:59 AM

When I looked at these, I was escorted by the builder/broker guy. a guy who bought there was looking at his unit and stopped by to ask this guy where the washer/dryer hookup was that was supposed to be in garage. The builder/broker said, "maybe those didn't get done. You can fight me about it later if you really want to make a big deal out of it" and later turned to me to say what a moron people were. I thought he was the moron.

The work looked like crap to me.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 16, 2007 12:09 PM

Great from the street, not perfect but compared to what what we usually see going up, terrific. Nice brick!!! Can't tell what the windows are made of or if they are real divided light, but the 6 over 6 is a nice touch, especially if real.

And again, how much more expensive would it be to build these than the typical fedders? Can't be that much, so why build a fedders???

Posted by: SeamusMacD at March 16, 2007 1:58 PM

exactly, seamus.

Posted by: brownstoner at March 16, 2007 5:19 PM

When we moved in we supposedly had the kind of remote Keyspan reader that they could read from the front courtyard of our brownstone, but after about six months of estimated bills (and me being too lazy to go read the meter for them) they put in a new remote reader that they can read as they drive down the street - they don't even have to stop. They did this completely at their expense (but our meter was already inside).

I asked them if ConEd had remote readers and they said yes, but you have to pay. They guessed that they charged about $100-150 to do it, but I never checked it out. It's on the list of things to do around here...

Posted by: Amy at March 16, 2007 6:25 PM

Tolerable. I usually don't condone fauxld-world, but at least the embellishments aren't overdone. This sort of attempt usually results in a tragic scale, but these buildings have scale on their side. You've identified the wrong errors, though. Those look like snap-in windowpanes, and there are other charm-barn elements that while in this case remain subtle, are nonetheless what I would consider flaws. I'd honestly rather see meters outside than the silly lanterns and paneled garage doors (it's a GARAGE for keeping your honda, not a carriage house on waverly ave).

Posted by: Matthew Remy at March 17, 2007 1:04 AM

Pretty good. For the worst, go to St. Marks between Brooklyn & Kinston Avenue, across from Brower Park. A cheesy house was inserted into a block of magnificent limestones. Disgusting?

Posted by: Gary Fonville at March 17, 2007 5:18 AM

"Nice brick"? You're kidding, right? This place looks like a contemporary version of the projects. The big deal about the ConEd meters? Um, it's one block from a gigantic power plant! Keep aiming high, New Yorkers! And good luck with the tumor eradication!

Posted by: Henri at March 17, 2007 7:56 AM

Its a great area. I have been there a few times to visit friends. Those buildings are not the best, but not the worst compared to what I have seen.
Overall, I would say that they got a good deal.

Posted by: sometime at March 18, 2007 2:45 AM

ghetto. The scale should have been much smaller -- like, invisible.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 18, 2007 1:03 PM

Any residence with that many garage entrances and curb cuts interrupting the sidewalk gets a big thumbs down from me. It might as well be a "Fedders Special."

Posted by: JF at March 18, 2007 4:13 PM

JW, thanks for the tip.

Posted by: victor at March 18, 2007 7:36 PM

Looks like an STD Clinic in Clevland

Posted by: Mark at March 19, 2007 7:11 AM

I heard they were sue-ing the developer who built the project, for poor work that he did. But otherwise, I've heard folks in the development are pretty happy way over there....

Posted by: Joe at March 19, 2007 6:28 PM

It's obvious that I do not keep up much with blogs that concern my hood. Vin hil used to be quite, now it's over run. These particular buildings are a shame to construction in general. Yes the over all design is pleasing, but the workmanship is horrible, with lintels and headers turned upside down. Why they did that, keeps me wondering. I have heard that they leak like a sieve and most buyers were very unhappy. I'm glad it's not on my block

Posted by: guest at August 20, 2007 4:03 PM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions