« Slope Church Garden Goes Condo Man on the Street: How's the Novo Look to You? »
October 25, 2007
Catsimatidis on Myrtle Revealed
In the comments section of yesterday's post about the building boom at Flatbush and Myrtle, a reader steered us towards the website of Dattner Architects. Turns out the renderings for the Catsimatidis (aka Red Apple Group) project on Myrtle Avenue between Prince and Ashland Place are up there for the viewing, though as far as we know they haven't been published anywhere else yet. (This view is from Ashland looking west towards Flatbush.) There's also more detail about the development than we've seen before. Here's most of the project description from the website:
The development contains 660 apartments in a 37-story tower and 415 mixed-income apartments in mid-rise buildings ranging from 8 to 14 stories in height. Under a 50-30-20 plan, 50% of the mixed income housing will be market rate, 30% will be middle-income affordable and 20% will be low-income affordable. The development includes approximately 290,000 sf of commercial space and sub-grade parking.
The dramatic apartment tower rises to 400 feet...The tower floor plan cantilevers on the upper floors, creating larger apartments and a distinctive architectural expression. The adjoining mid-rise buildings step down from 14 stories to 8 stories to the east, mediating in scale between the height and density of downtown Brooklyn and the lower scale neighborhood of Ft. Greene. A masonry base along Myrtle Avenue balances the residential character of the neighborhood with a continuous retail presernce along the street. More extensive glazed areas above give the buildings a sense of lightness.
The whole concept seems pretty well thought through to us.
Myrtle and Flatbush Building Boom, From Above [Brownstoner] GMAP
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/2689
Comments
Actually, I think the mixed-income is located where it is because of the zoning. Height limitations dictate that the tower has to go at the western end of the site and the tower is the greatest revenue generator. Red Apple should be applauded for mixing incomes through-out the shorter buildings, rather than segregating them in one building or less satisfactory, off-site.
Posted by: g man at October 25, 2007 10:15 AM
If this goes forward as it looks, it will be great for an area where something like this is desperately needed. Love the impression of the row-house brick proportions along the street, a nod to history we almost never see from large development planners. Really nice.
Posted by: guest at October 25, 2007 11:10 AM
I think the tower is really attractive. Kinda wish the project wasn't as huge as it is, but maybe it's the rendering that makes it look so massive.
Posted by: Rehab at October 25, 2007 12:04 PM
Well thought out. As 11:10 said, a nod to the historical context, and mixed income housing on site, as per g-man's comment. I think it looks just fine. Good job.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at October 25, 2007 12:14 PM
I hate to spoil things (and there are only a handful of posts) but we seem to have found a project that people like. I think the Dattner firm does above average work in general.
On the issue of size: Did anyone see the birds-eye rendering on the cover of the most recent quarterly real estate report in the Brooklyn Eagle? Amazing how the the Red Apple, BFC and Avalon Bay buildings dwarf everything around them. The gateway to Myrtle Avenue.
Posted by: g man at October 25, 2007 1:30 PM
Hate it!
Just kidding. It actually looks alright. Will reality measure up to the computer renderings? Does it ever?
Posted by: guest at October 25, 2007 2:03 PM
This looks pretty good. I wish this is what AY was going to look like.
Posted by: guest at October 25, 2007 2:08 PM
gman @ 1:30, could you link us to that please?
Posted by: guest at October 25, 2007 2:08 PM
it's better than most new stuff here.. only thing I don't really like is the uniformity of the smaller buildings, they could use a little more variation. other than that, yum
Posted by: guest at October 25, 2007 2:25 PM
I agree -- this really does look better than most new development projects in Brooklyn. I especially appreciate it as someone who once lived at Kingsview (the coop complex at Ashland and Myrtle) and remembers all too well the crummy stretch of Myrtle this will replace.
Posted by: guest at October 25, 2007 2:35 PM
This will be worthless once the AY is built.
Posted by: guest at October 25, 2007 3:05 PM
I would if I could. I don't see it on the Eagle website. The real estate quarterly is an insert in the newspaper.
Posted by: g man at October 25, 2007 3:52 PM
They forgot to include the housing projects across the street in their rendering.
Posted by: guest at October 27, 2007 11:35 PM
it's a photo montage and the NYCHA community center is right there! BTW, there are some truly beautiful trees in the projects. Come on down and see.
Posted by: guest at October 28, 2007 10:22 AM
As a born Brooklynite, it is appalling to see the devastation of our neighborhoods by people who don’t grasp Brooklyn for what it truly is and desire something they envision it to be. Those of us that are of and from Brooklyn truly know what it means to be a Brooklynite. Having this influx of out of towners, natives are being misplaced and the flavor of the boro is vanishing, much thanks to transplanted wannabes. I really see little regard for the lives of those this is ultimately affecting. Show consideration for those that made the boro what it is and the reason so many outsiders continue to pour into a boro that really has little appreciation for transplants in such great numbers. Sorry, but you are destroying this once great boro.
Posted by: cheights829 at October 31, 2007 10:09 AM
I read a discussion regarding getting out of a condo contract, prior to closing, in light of the new realities in the real estate market. My opinion would be that the buyer may have some leverage with the developer of an unfinished building since the one thing that every developer wants to avoid is litigation prior to final approval by the attorney generals office and prior to selling all of the apartments. The reason for this is that all law suits must be disclosed to the AG and this must be included in offering. Depending upon the nature of the litigation, such a disclosure can have an immense effect in the time it takes the AG to approve the plan and even greater effect on the ability for the other buyers to get a mortgage.
The worse type of litigation that a developer can face is issues regarding disputes of property boundary. In such cases, banks are often forced to back off from providing mortgages to buyers, regardless of the banks relationship with the developer, since boundary litigation places an substantial level of obstacles to sell and package the mortgage on the open market. Some examples that come to mind include the cases where entire walls had to be removed because of minimal infractions and in cases where cornices or overhangs infringed on the adjacent property. My advice to any developer in such a case is to negotiate, negotiate, negotiate and at all costs, avoid litigation. In cases where a person wants to back out of the deal, I recommend to the developer to sweeten the deal and again, avoid any litigation for the reasons mentioned above. It is important to also consider what other potential buyers would think of litigation against a contracted buyer. One method might be to reduce the price, offer free maintenance for a period of time or perhaps exchange the contracted apartment for a “better” or larger apartment. Settle such disputes. A developer must handle disputes with “silk gloves” and swallow their pride, with the end objective of sales in mind
Posted by: guest at January 15, 2008 9:09 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.