Bait-and-Switch in Bay Ridge by Basile Builders

that's disgraceful! what is DOB going to do about it?

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 10:44 AM

To the people who complained yesterday about the landmarking in Midwood and Fiske Terrace, THIS is why it is necessary. I don't want to hear about how new Fedders condos are going to help the housing crisis in Bay Ridge, because that's crap. These homes may not have been the architectural equivilent of a Pfizer mansion, but so what? They were the family homes in a neighborhood that has been traditionally one and two family homes since the day they were built. That part of BR has always had a suburban feel. Not anymore. Worse yet, it sounds as if one of the owners was bamboozled into selling on spurious grounds. AND the scummy developer lied through his teeth. This is just out and out wrong. The only good that can come out of it is if this finally causes Bay Ridgers to pressure their elected officials to work with them to get parts of the neighborhood landmarked as soon as possible, before there is nothing left.

Preservationista

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 10:52 AM

Is it possible for people selling their homes to put into the contract that the houses will not be torn down. Then they can sue for breach of contract? We really need LPC to move on these neighborhoods, I live in DPW and a lot of houses are going like this!!

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 11:34 AM

Who cares? Someone is putting the land to obviously better use. It's simple economics. If any of you "cared" about these houses so much you could have bought them yourselves and dumped endless amounts of money "restoring" them to what you believe to be their former glory.

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 12:02 PM

The reason people want to live in Park Slope is not because of the restaurants - it's the historical streetscapes, and the homes therein, whether an apartment or a whole house. The same goes for any historic neighborhood. There's something about looking down a block and seeing good architecture doing what it should - making the urban landscape inviting and creating neighborhoods. That applies in Ditmas Park or Bed Stuy.

Tearing down for the sake of "creating housing" is crap. These people are not interested in doing something about the lack of middle class housing in Bay Ridge, they care about making the most money possible from their investment. As someone said, there is plenty of available and already fallow land around to do the same thing. Why lie to a community and to a homeowner unless you are doing something not on the up and up? There is no way anything contextual can be built here, the only thing contextural would be 3 late Victorian houses.

Preservationists do not want to save every old building. We want to see perfectly good housing preserved, and neighborhoods remaining intact and retaining their personalities. The creation of more housing is not the antithesis of this philosophy, it just needs to be done in a different way than this was.

"Who cares?" We all should.

Preservationista

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 12:24 PM

Yeah but Preservationista, the reason there are such great restaurants and stores in Park Slope (which is a huge reason for that neighborhood's appeal, don't deny it) is because of the higher density buildings on the park. If those were instead all houses, Park Slope would SO not have the amenities it has. I agree it stinks to take blocks that are all one-family homes and build condos there. It's inappropriate. But in the photo it does look like there's a big coop building on the corner. That would have once been an old house sitting on that corner. Bay Ridge allowed tons of historic houses to be torn down in the 20's when they built all the pre-war coop and apartment buildings. The destruction of Bay Ridge as a mostly suburban community happened a long time ago. The remaining blocks comprised mostly or entirely of houses should be landmarked and pronto.

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 12:43 PM

12:43, I only used Park Slope as an example because its physical beauty is a great part of its draw. All things being equal, money-wise, I'd much rather live in Park Slope over living on the Upper East side east of Third Ave, a place with lots of great stores and restaurants, but no charm whatsoever.

I understand that much of Bay Ridge's suburban qualities disappeared long ago, but that shouldn't mean that the remaining sections should follow, and I am glad that we agree on that.

Most outlying Bklyn neighborhoods have had necessary higher density buildings replace single family homes. That is the changing nature of cities, and I do not advocate making any neighborhood a static time bubble, solely for aesthetic purposes. There must be a sensible way to progress and preservation to co-exist. Lying ain't it.

Preservationista

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 1:42 PM

Eurximachus on steroids?

Dude, have a cup of chai and chill.

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 3:44 PM

Polemicist-

When you graduate from college you will see the world is more complicated than your cherished copy of the Fountainhead.

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 4:29 PM

Weren't there mansions all along the park that were torn down to build pre-war apartment buildings?

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 5:28 PM

Bay Ridge has many fine restaurants. No need for more density for that reason.

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 5:54 PM

gee what a surprise ... a piece of shit convicted felon THIEF actually lied about his true intentions? At least he paid for the property and didn't just swindle it boiler room style as his not so distant m.o. would indicate. He is a fraud and and utter disgrazia.

Google rocco and see what comes up. for me the condo bubble couldn't burst soon enough.

Posted by: guest at October 2, 2007 9:08 PM

Guest at 2:02 - take a walk around the greater Victorian Flatbush area and you will see that LOTS of new owners are putting their money where their mouth is, making serious sacrifices to restore these old homes. This people are not super wealthy, for the post part. A lot of them are middle class to lower eschelon upper middle class (which doesn't mean rich in this city, sometimes just getting by within a traditional middle class sense). People with kids, big mortgages, car payments, etc... Yes, some disposable income, but not exactly swimming in it. And look who's building next to them. Outfits like this who tear down neighboring houses before the residential public even knows they're on the market. High rises move in, robbing hard working families of the natural light and space, the architectural charm that drew them to these houses in the first place.

It's happening in Ditmas Park West as I type. It's a crime. Yeah, a twenty story building can house more people. But what about the middle class? We can't afford a family home in the Heights or the Slope anymore. Oh, I forgot this is New York. Home only to the poor and the uber rich. Make those horrible hard working family types raise their kids in the soul destroying suburbs. I mean, that's where we belong, right?

Posted by: guest at October 3, 2007 10:14 AM

Wait, if the poor can live here- why can't the middle class?

Posted by: guest at October 4, 2007 2:24 PM

If keeping the beautiful, historic buildings in my neighborhood means that I have to continue renting for another couple of years, that's OK with me. I don't understand the ghoulish Bay Ridge types who cheer each time another beautiful historic building gets bulldozed. Do they think they'll be able to afford one of the tacky, overpriced condos we're getting in exchange for our lost quality of life? The joke's on you, folks.

Posted by: guest at October 28, 2007 2:26 PM

Unfortunately, Bay Ridge has been forgotten and overlooked architecturally. The demolition of these houses and the renovation/add-ons that happen toarchitecurally prevalent homes in this neighborhood are atrocious.

This neighborhood is not landmarked, therefore it is not protected. Prominenet Houses that once had grace and character are changed so drastically that they have no architectural style.

I have lived in Bay Ridge Brooklyn all my life. My husband (architect) and I (interior designer) are looking to purchase a house. We are disguisted by the high prices in Bay Ridge, for homes that bear no style and have new low-end renovations.

We were in Crown heights today, where we found charming blocks with rows and rows of preserved townhouses, tons of details and affordable prices.

There's much to be said about perserving architecture...that's what draws people to a neighborhood.

Save the architecture of Bay Ridge, before we decide to move out!

Posted by: guest at November 5, 2007 12:00 AM

My great-grandmother's house on 72nd. Street in Bay Ridge was one of the oldest houses in that area-- when she moved there in about 1910, there was a farm across the street (where my family house was built in 1912). Her house looks nothing like it did, thanks to the new owner "rehabbing" it. Sure, it was wood and rotting, but still... it could have been repaired: he's a contractor! Now it's character is gone forever...

Posted by: guest at November 21, 2007 11:12 PM