« Parlor Kitchen #1: Architect-Designed in The Slope Today On The Forum »

July 27, 2007

What's Up With 140 Degraw Street?

When we first passed by this unconventional work-in-progress on Degraw Street at Tiffany Place we assumed it was a piece of new construction. Looking at the photo from a couple of years ago on Property Shark, however, makes it clear that it's merely an alteration of an existing brick rowhouse, a fact which is confirmed by DOB filings. And what an alteration it is: The house couldn't have been much more than 3,000 square feet originally and now it's been supersized to 6,600 square feet. Anyone know how the developer—who's creating six residential units—was able to build this much with a 2.43 FAR?
GMAP P*Shark DOB

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/1714

Comments

what the hell is that peice of monstrosity?

Posted by: anon at July 27, 2007 11:05 AM

abomination! Makes me more dizzy looking at it than the Broken Angel did.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 11:08 AM

I'd have to see the rest of the block before I really had an opinion, but on its own, I kind of dig it.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 11:20 AM

Good way to screw up the original look of the block! Why do so many people design with no consideration to the look of block? People like this should live on a island, because that's how they really think!

ME! ME! ME!

Posted by: anon at July 27, 2007 11:22 AM

Dear God.

Posted by: EJ at July 27, 2007 11:22 AM

My guess is they are trying to use Quality Housing Program rules for a wide street, putting them in R6A, but even then the building's 3.4 FAR seems to exceed limits.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 11:39 AM

omg that is fugly. worst thing I've seen here to date.

Posted by: tag482 at July 27, 2007 11:53 AM

You guessed it...

Posted by: webster at July 27, 2007 12:04 PM

Major Fugly! Nice old house ruined. I feel particularly bad for the next door neighbor who has to look into the new addition.

Posted by: GHB at July 27, 2007 12:05 PM

seems kind of cool actually, though i'd have to see it in person.

Posted by: z at July 27, 2007 12:08 PM

This ain'st some landmarked "Place" in Carroll Gardens. It's on the other side of the BQE - just up the block from a chicken slaughter house!

I think it's the perfect spot for some modern design.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 12:13 PM

In their partial defense, this is a fairly mundane block with the BQE on on end and the container docks on the other. Across the street are the butt-ends of two big Tiffany Place buildings.

Posted by: CarrollGardner at July 27, 2007 12:24 PM

I am normally not on the side of the modernists but I agree with 12:13. It's on the other side of the BQE and it is difficult to pick out a uniform building characteristic in what is dubbed Carroll Gardens-West that is worth preserving. Well done and a vast improvement, I would say.

Posted by: crouchback at July 27, 2007 12:24 PM

Oh Dear God NO! What are people doing to Brooklyn. Brooklyn is loosing it's charm with foolishness like this!

Posted by: A Clinton Hill Lady at July 27, 2007 12:52 PM

a real architect designed this? why did they leave that sliver of the old facade? it doesn't matter where it's located, it's badly done. D-minus.

Posted by: timmy, age 8 at July 27, 2007 12:57 PM

I'm not much of a modernist, but I've walked by that house on the way to B61/Moonshine and the photo doesn't do it justice. Looks a lot better live.

Posted by: BklynJace at July 27, 2007 1:38 PM

So this is not a long uninterupted row of houses that now has this building sticking out? And up?

Posted by: anonymous at July 27, 2007 1:57 PM

My gf lives a couple blocks from here an I drive by it everytime I'm there an I have to say I actually like it. Its nice seeing people go a little wild. Maybe I'm biased cause I work in the architecture field. I say a mixture of old an new can live together and everyone has there own opinions

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 2:39 PM

Brooklyn is loosing its charm? meaning the 60's, 70's Queens housing that was constructed in empty lots in CarGard, the removing of orig. entry doors and replace with suburban track housing doors all over,etc ,etc,etc added the charm we are loosing?

Sometimes I think you people have blinders on. Decades of ugly sidings, stripping of cornices, and now some people are doing some very innovative, upscale redesign of houses that need something - and you thing thing loosing its charm.
Take a look around and see what was done in last 50 years before this last decade and tell me it is being ruined today.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 2:48 PM

if you don't like it.. then petition to get the wanna-be carrol gardens neighborhood "carroll gardens west, aka red hook" a historic district.

but - it's probably not worthy of that distinction.. so there you go.

Posted by: busta at July 27, 2007 3:11 PM

It is a very-very beautful design. One of the best things built in Brooklyn in recent years. It is very elegant, makes an appropriate , well calculated accent in the monotonity of the block. I never saw it alive, but now I really want to go and see. Who is the architect, any idea?

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 3:21 PM

A bit of history: the first clients of young Le Corbusier were Americans, because at that time in France there was no market for his modern villas: French were mostly conservative while Americans had much more advanced taste. Looking at these comments one may ask: what happened to Americans?! Looks like 80 years later the situation is completely opposite. Now we have to go to Europe to learn the way modern architecture is being done in historic neighborhoods.
Nice project…well done.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 3:43 PM

This isn't really a question of architectural style for me. It is a concern about scale. It's too tall and too close to the sidewalk.

Posted by: anonymous at July 27, 2007 3:56 PM

We still haven't figured out how they pushed the FAR to 3.4

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 4:02 PM

Hah, comparing this to Le Corbusier.

Architect on the project, is that you?

Let me give you a more appropriate history lesson:

Most of Le Corbusier's signature villas work was in the period of the 1910s-1930s, before Europe blew itself to pieces.

Of course Europeans were conservative before the utter devastation of WWII, and of course they had no choice but embrace the modern in the wake of that devastation.

Duh...

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 4:04 PM

Seriously, this looks like something Fred Sanford would cobble together.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 4:11 PM

Or someone named Arthur which this site loves so much.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 4:17 PM

Arthur? Oh. HA.

Yes, let us call this house "Broken."

Nothing else, just "Broken," period.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 4:24 PM

Le Corbusier? What? This building has nothing to do with modernism or any other architectural philosophy.

Posted by: anon at July 27, 2007 4:50 PM

It's Gross

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 4:58 PM

looks like the top floor's gonna get awful cold in the winter.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 5:00 PM

To 4:04: I am not an architect. And your history lesson is not valid, since I am mostluy talking about France and Paris, which were not devastated with WWII (unlike Poland that was devastated and you are hardly going to find that amount of moderninsm you are finding in France).
To: 4:50 -First, if you paid attention, I am not comparing this building to Le Corbusier. Second: to imbed new structure into existing contextual block with different angle and with floor-to-ceiling windows for contrasting effect – yes, this is modernistic approach and even sort of philosophy, if you want (as common-place philosophy as it can be)

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 5:44 PM

Oh yes, it bears no resemblance to any buildings by any famous modernists or other well known architects because it's style is so ... new and cutting edge.

If you paid attention, I did not say that you said (LOL) it looked like Le Corbusier. I was just marveling over the presence of such a name in this discussion.

Maybe the French would like this (not any that I know) but in the US this looks like the smaller version of a suburban movie theater or amusement ride entrance.

Posted by: anon at July 27, 2007 6:04 PM

5:44,
You act as if the current French appreciation of modernism had absolutely zero to do with the last 60 years of German Avant Garde, as if the last six decades of modern architecture and engineering that came out of Germany (to rebuild all the Greek Revival, Baroque, and other classic-inspired structures in Berlin etc. that were reduced to rubble) right next door to France had nothing to do with how they have come to reverse course, embrace modern architecture, and come to revere that previously-overlooked Swiss Le Corbusier chap?

Hah, comical.

Suggestion: Go to the library, and get to know that of which you speak.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 6:24 PM

He is French, no?

Posted by: anon at July 27, 2007 6:30 PM

Born in Switzerland. Spent a lotta time in France (and died in his riviera home) but born Swiss.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 6:47 PM

6:24 Dear God, who denies this?! BWTY, Le Corbusier and Mies were working together in the same office of P. Behrens as employees for quite a while! Mies is from the same beloved German Bauhaus, and no need to mention the influence of Mies on the American architecture. All I was trying to say is that the cries like 11:22, 11:53 or 12:05 are such as if there was no any influence whatsoever. That is amazing.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 6:48 PM

Yes, I like it...
Switzerland is another coutry "devastated" by the WWII, today is home of lot of cutting edge modern architecture. Ridiculous.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 6:54 PM

6:54, are you reading some other blog?

Nothing of the kind was said here.

By the way, on a separate note not yet mentioned by anyone else (but now just bastardized and mocked by you), you also seem to be oblivious to the fact that yes in fact, Switzerland is a major historic epicenter of design, but more in the areas of graphic and print design.

Swiss Design is all around you. Major minimalist design influence in recent decades.

But no one mentioned that, we were all merely pointing out that the French got much of ther modernidm from the Germans and the Dutch.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 7:36 PM

I walk by here several time a day. Basically, the only thing left from the old building is the tiny bit of the facade you see; everything else was more or less reipped out and rebuilt. The new building is slowly growing into the block, it all seems very clever and fluid. It fits right in and is does not look too in-your-face. The angled windows are very smart, with each large section looking down Tiffany Pl. and the smaller sections are getting a nice glimpse of the harbor. Really impressive. Then take a look at the awfulness being built two doors down (giant garage door, fedder's special), now that's a monstrosity.

Posted by: Taksa at July 27, 2007 7:50 PM

O.K. lets put this issue Finally to rest. the number presented on the DOB web page is a "gross" square footage, this number includes floor area which isn't created toward "zoning" FAR. st(I.E. Cellars & mechanical Spaces aren't Counted. this number is only "of interest" to the DOB because this is the number they use to determine the filing fees.

Posted by: Chesico at July 27, 2007 8:28 PM

O.K. lets put this issue finally to rest. the number presented on the DOB web page is a "gross" square footage, this number includes floor area which isn't credited toward "zoning" FAR. (I.E. Cellars & mechanical Spaces aren't Counted towards FAR) This number is only "of interest" to the DOB because this is the number they use to determine the filing fees.

Posted by: Chesico at July 27, 2007 8:31 PM

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Posted by: Anonymous at July 27, 2007 10:34 PM

« Parlor Kitchen #1: Architect-Designed in The Slope Today On The Forum »

July 27, 2007

What's Up With 140 Degraw Street?

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions