« An AP Writer With Much Love for Bklyn Heroes Das Haus Gets Zwei Price Cuts »

May 31, 2007

'Kodachrome' Building Underpromises, Overdelivers

spencerstcolors.jpg
spencerearly.jpg
It's such a rare occasion for us to be positively surprised by a new development in this part of town that we just had to regurgitate this post that appeared on Bed Stuy Blog yesterday. This 47,000-square-foot project at 192 Spencer in the western part of Bed Stuy gave us no particular reason to expect anything but a Fedders outcome when we stopped by in February (bottom photo). But the new exterior (top photo), which earned it the moniker of Kodachrome building on BSB, is great, we think: At once playful and clean with big windows and appropriate massing given the number of old four-, five- and six-story factory buildings in the immediate vicinity. Assuming that this will be a condo (which may not be correct), does anyone know when these will start getting marketed or who is handling it? What do you think the price per square foot will be?
Kodachrome Give Us Those Nice Bright Colors [Bed Stuy Blog] GMAP P*Shark
Development Watch: Spencer Street Boomtown [Brownstoner] DOB




Posted by Brownstoner at 11:15 AM | Comments (31)
Categories: Development

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/1274

Comments

This reminds me of the toy buildings I used to build with a plastic erector set I had as a little boy in the 1960's. It had the exact same types of facade panels.

Posted by: Serge at May 31, 2007 11:21 AM

Aw. Adorable. Doesn't take much to make something look not-hideous. I love the very classic Mondrian palette (modernism being the new historic architecture). And quality looks decent, judging by the slim aluminum window frames (as opposed to thick vinyl crap).

Ok, so now, who hates it?

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 11:22 AM

gosh, i really like it.

looks good.

Posted by: anon at May 31, 2007 11:35 AM

I hate it. It looks like a newfangled European government building. It's cute. If you think Belgian bureaucrats who watch too much Almodovar are cute.

Posted by: sylvia at May 31, 2007 11:38 AM

Nice. It has mid century modern feeling. Very Eames, very Mondrian. I saw same kind of concept in the public housing in Europe. I don't remember exactly where...

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 11:42 AM

i have a 3 fam on this block what price do u think i can ask for it?

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 11:50 AM

BLING!

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 11:59 AM

LOVE IT! further evidence that this part of bed stuy/clinton hill is HOT, HOT, HOT. i agree with 11:22-good design makes all the difference. this makes me happy.

Posted by: architectinpastlife at May 31, 2007 12:11 PM

I love it. I also like Belgians, and how much Almodovar is too much Almodovar?

Posted by: bob999 at May 31, 2007 12:20 PM

agreed, bob.

can't get enough almodovar myself.

a cute belgian bureacrat doesn't sound half bad either...

Posted by: anon at May 31, 2007 12:27 PM

This "thing" is grotesque. By comparison, Fedders never looked so good!

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 12:40 PM

CHEESE

Posted by: ANON at May 31, 2007 12:50 PM

Are you kidding, 12:40? Nobody could prefer a Fedders building over any other kind of building. No matter what their tastes. Unless seriously aesthetically challenged.

You should know this kind of Mondrian-esque facade actually dates back several decades. Since you prefer old over new.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 12:57 PM

It looks a lot like my college dorm building constructed in the '60s.

Posted by: waverly at May 31, 2007 1:15 PM

Heck, it looks more interesting than On Prospect Park.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 1:18 PM

i guess $550 per sq ft

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 1:21 PM

i guess $550 per sq ft

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 1:21 PM

i guess $550 per sq ft

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 1:21 PM

Is it really "better" than Fedders to just copy an old, over-used facade style?

And besides, Mondrian is not executed very well here considering that there is not enough randomness in this composition. Changing the color of the panel is not random enough. Poorly done IMHO.

Posted by: jigman at May 31, 2007 1:32 PM

Isn't that what everyone of this site likes - "old, over-used facade style"? Albeit in brownstone and italianate detail? I assume Jigman is a strawman to provoke outrage, more postings, and higher ad revenue for Mr. B? Darn it, fell for it myself...

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 1:51 PM

Hilarious 1:51. It's true. "old over-used facade style" is exactly what brownstoners love. So what's the complaint?

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 2:34 PM

I love it. Amazing how much the street and neighborhood as changed in the past 3 years.

This area is basically the intersection where the Satmar Hasidic are pushing up from the South (as they cannot expand into hip Williamsburg, every development on Bedbord South of Myrtle is Hasidic) and the Yuppie Overflow from Carrol Gardens/Fort Green/Clinton Hill are converging.

Very interesting dynamic going on.

Posted by: 197 at May 31, 2007 2:45 PM

It looks like the partridge family bus.
So cutesy it makes me want to puke.
I doubt it will look as nice in a few years, rather it will be quite dated looking.

Still, it's better than a fedders building and I'm just glad I don't have to live there.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 3:45 PM

I'd rather have a Frank Gehry building in my neighborhood than that crap. I don't get why everyone complains about the AY... at least it's not going to look like this.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 31, 2007 3:47 PM

Anon at 3:47 -- if you think that the complaints about AY are about the aesthetics, you really haven't beeen paying attention.

Posted by: SPer at May 31, 2007 4:07 PM

I think this building is a big joke. Who would live in that thing? After a couple of years you would go mad.

Posted by: bklynboy at May 31, 2007 4:11 PM

My point about "over-used facade style" is that if you are going to copy something...at least do it well. This is not done well.

Posted by: jigman at May 31, 2007 4:43 PM

3:47- you are in for a very hideous surprise in the form of ay. this building is great. what's wrong with a bit of color? the proportion is good and i strongly disagree that it will look dated. go on, be bland...

Posted by: anon at May 31, 2007 4:57 PM

I wonder if its as ugly on the inside as it is on the outside. So if the panels are the same color on the inside you have to color coordinate your decor with primary colors.
Either way its very corny.

Posted by: ANON at June 1, 2007 10:01 AM

Ok so people mentioned that the area is changing nicely, bit how can it last? in my opinion as long as Marcy projcts are within 5 blocks it will never be a clean safe place to live. I dont see real estate in this area of Bed-Sty/ Carol Gardens appreciatinog too much.

Posted by: luciferbumps at June 2, 2007 5:20 PM

Gotta Disagree with luciferbumps that since there is public housing nearby a neighborhood can't appreciate too much. Look at how much Real Estate has gone up in Red Hook and there is public Housing.

There are HUGE public housing 2 blocks from Smith Street and 3 blocks from Atlantic street and look at how that neighborhood did.

Public Housing is not make or break for a neighborhood. Like most of NYC, BedStuy is safer that is been in the past 30 years

Posted by: 197 at June 4, 2007 5:33 PM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions