« Wednesday Food & Drink Round-Up COTD: First Listings at Clermont Greene Hit the Market »

November 14, 2007

Development Watch: 110 4th Avenue

1104thAvenue.jpg
We’ve been checking out the development site at 4th Avenue and Warren Street for around six months now, where a crew’s been readying the foundation for a 49-unit building called the Park Slope Court (see rendering on jump). Tona Development, which had a hand in the Novo and Hotel Le Bleu, is behind the planned 58,000-square-footer. The building’s a Scarano design that’s slated to have interiors by Andres Escobar, who also worked on Le Bleu. Like the looks of it? GMAP DOB

4tandwarren.JPG




Posted by Gabby at 12:01 PM | Comments (38)
Categories: Development, Park Slope

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/2894

Comments

REALLY like this.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:12 PM

Beats Fedders.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:16 PM

Ehhhh... could certainly be worse. Looks like the cover of a geometry textbook. We have cubes, rectangles, circles. No triangles?

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:16 PM

Yeah looks fine but it is completly self-defeating to fail to use the ground floor of all these new buildings for retail.

The biggest hurdle 4th Ave developers face is that 4th Ave is an ugly highway. The only way you are going to improve the road is to being out a more vibrant street life (which aint easy with its 8 lanes of traffic). The most effective (and nearly only) way to make the block more vibrant is to put pedestrians on it - which requires retail space.

Besides with the current crunch the eventual owners of these condos may appreciate the income a retail lease can provide.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:17 PM

Oh what a lovely experience it will be to look out over 4th ave from those balconies. I never understand who these developers think they're fooling with this type of 'outdoor space'.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:22 PM

Yawn. These posts have grown so damn predictable: post about any new building and then sit back as 40+ people bitch about it. You people hate anything and everything built after 1930.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:30 PM

Some people actually like to see 'life' racing around them (that would be the crazy traffic on 4th ave)...

Diffrent Strokes for Diffrent Folks.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:46 PM

Another insane, grotesque, twisted, contorted, bizarre, brainsick, demented, lunatic, freakish, death-camp, torture-chamber.

Look! It stands up, it's tall, it's got four sides, there's glass and brick and other building materials. It's interior is subdivided into individual chambers called 'apartments' where people will live (live!). What could they possibly be thinking? It's pure genocide. My god, they have balconies! Hiroshima all over again. And are those trees and potted plants outside of it? Stalin labor camp! What kind of insanity are they trying to unleash here?

Has darkness decended? Are we in the late times? Is this the sign of the armageddon?

"And when he opened the seventh seal, there followed a silence in heaven about the space of half an hour. And I saw the seven angels that stand before God; and there were given unto them seven trumpets. And another angel came and stood over the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should add it unto the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, went up before God out of the angel's hand. And the angel taketh the censer; and he filled it with the fire of the altar, and cast it upon the earth: and there followed thunders, and voices, and lightnings, and an earthquake. And the seven angels that had the seven trumpets prepared themselves to sound.

And the first sounded, and there followed hail and fire, mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of the earth was burnt up, and the third part of the trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up. And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood; and there died the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, even they that had life; and the third part of the ships was destroyed.

And the third angel sounded, and there fell from heaven a great star, burning as a torch, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of the waters; and the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter. And the fourth angel sounded, and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; that the third part of them should be darkened, and the day should not shine for the third part of it, and the night in like manner.

And I saw, and I heard an eagle, flying in mid heaven, saying with a great voice, Woe, woe, woe, for them that dwell on the earth, by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, who are yet to sound."

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:50 PM

12:50- post of the year.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:54 PM

12:30 - It's not about hating anything done after 1930. The problem is these buildings (especially the Scarano ones) are fundamentally modernist buildings(by modernist I am talking Radiant City / Moses era / CIAM modernist). They pay little attention to context, street life, or the craft of building. Instead buildings such as these favor design concepts of transplantability and economy by way of reductive thinking.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 12:56 PM

No no no, this is not a modernist building at all. There's no honesty or simplicity here, and it certainly doesn't avoid unnecessary ornamentation (WTF portholes?). It's not something Jane Jacobs would ever live in, but it's not exactly Mies, either. Anyway, my point is: this thing mostly looks like a Transformer, and will probably turn into an airplane and take off as soon as it's built, so don't worry.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:10 PM

4th Avenue ... deh deh neh ... more than meets the eye.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:16 PM

12:50 - Didn't you basically make this same post yesterday? It was funny once but it pales on the retelling.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:20 PM

Yay, more new rentals coming to 4th!

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:21 PM

"They pay little attention to context, street life, or the craft of building."


context? you mean staples and a taxi depot?

street life? three homeless people??

craft of the building? this is the best on the avenue.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:21 PM

I can only imagine what they'll be charging for the unobstructed views of the KFC

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:26 PM

1:20. I was warming up to this. I am hitting my stride. I am raising the bar. I am firing on all cylinders. I'm shooting for the moon. I am over the rainbow. I am looking for a miracle. I am laughing to beat the band. I am dancing on a cloud. I am floating on the air. I am going for the gold. I am running for the roses. I am high upon a hilltop. I am twisting the night away.

Thanks for following my stuff so closely

Yours truly,
12:50

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:34 PM

Where did you find that rendering??

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 2:09 PM

Guest 1:10 is right-- this is emphatically not a Modernist building (as distinguished from "modern" or "new"). This building is from the current school of architecture known as Shit Sandwich, albeit not the shittiest of all possible sandwiches. Modernism was a movement that happened mid-century, and it had definite principles; form following function, clean, simple lines, lack of purely decorative ornament, and most definitely, high quality (and probably many others--I'm not an architect). Think Mies, Neutra, Bauhaus, Eames, Le Corbusier, etc. This building's greatest flaw, IMO, aside from not providing retail on the ground floor, is its mishmash of cubes stuck here and there with little rhyme or reason, those circular windows for no particular reason, its hulky clunkiness and lack of elegance in proportion. Hey, Architect in Brooklyn, care to elaborate?

By the way, many people on this blog LOVE contemporary work when it's done well, like the oft-cited 14 Townhouses, including those of us who live in ancient piles. I, personally, like to mix an old house with contempo furniture.

Posted by: Rehab at November 14, 2007 2:35 PM

Actually, I think there is retail on the ground. those are big, albeit frosted, windows on the ground floor. It actually looks like a perfect spot for a ..... BANK!

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:01 PM

Actually, I for one would LOVE a Citibank there...
And that's about it in terms of banks!

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:12 PM

There's a new citibank on 5th.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:23 PM

where is the new citibank on 5th?

i know of a new chase on 5th, but no new citibank...

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:26 PM

I don't know of a citibank on 5th, just the one on 7th.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 3:42 PM

There are two factors that limit the creation of high quality architecture as was built in the past:

1) Extensive money lending. In the past, houses, office buildings, etc were built with cash. Banks would rarely lend for more than 50% of the value. The limitation of financial models is that cannot qualify the value of beauty - and as such, banks will only lend on fundamentals that are fairly universal. These universal factors necessarily preclude the kinds of whimsical architectural elements the average brownstoner reader admires. Unfortunately, the accountant and the artist have fundamentally different ways of quantifying and qualifying value, and this will never change.

2) Restrictive zoning laws that produce shortages of real estate. In a sellers market, basic needs must be met before other needs are given consideration. Just as a starving man would not complain when he can only purchase hardtack and swill, a person desperate for housing will not complain as long as he gets a roof over his head. This is a secondary consideration, but is still a big one in Brooklyn in comparison with someplace like Chicago.

In time, the usury based economy we have today will end, and hopefully people will start to make decisions using real money they have earned rather than debt created out of thin air by a bank. When that happens, we just might see a revitalization of all form of art.

Posted by: Polemicist at November 14, 2007 3:49 PM

Folks, relax.
This Building is not going to look like on this picture: the Brownstoner posted a very old rendition of it.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 4:29 PM

Agreed, Polemicist. Would also point out that the usury based economy you mention is what prevents people from building beautiful *modern* buildings, too, because that also requires more money than the average building. It requires hiring a real architect, using good materials, and perhaps rarest of all, having taste, sensitivity, and an understanding of the impact of a building on the nabe. Again, many of us here love the old and the new when it's done well.

Posted by: Rehab at November 14, 2007 5:27 PM

It is very ugly. Whenever you see pictures of Brooklyn, to set the scene they always show streets full of beautiful brownstones, not modern buildings. Why don't the builders get the message.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 7:14 PM

"In time, the usury based economy we have today will end"

And be replaced with what? Poleguy, your posts make less sense with each passing day.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 7:46 PM

By the way, if you are a real oldtimer, you remember when the Citibank was on 5'th Avenue, not 7'th

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 8:07 PM

There will be retail on the ground floor so relax and stop trying to fit these jobs into a nice neat little box of old or new and allow your mind to open to something that is basically easy to look at like a piece of art that has layers of expressive meanings.

It could be worse it could have been designed by Karl Fisher or worse yet Henry Radusky.

BTW post 12:50 must be his marketing guy.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:27 PM

No, you sound like the architect, how do you know there will be retail, schmuck?

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:48 PM

Dear moron at 11.48,

do you really think 4th will be upzoned without adding a comm overlay in the zone!!!

you shouldn't be allowed to post here for the next 2 weeks MORON!!!!

you people will always complain about every single building in NYC, but I can never understand why? do you prefer those big brick boxes going up a few blocks down from this one, like the novo and the crest and hotel le bleu.

why can't you people enjoy this transformation that Brooklyn is going through.

Hey moron at 11.48 your docked understand!!!!

Yours truly,

Mike Jeje

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 3:03 AM

I would call this a well-proportioned POS. In other words, some truly horrendous elements (portholes, blocky slab framing, prison-like grids) have been arranged in a fairly well-organized manner, and so the whole thing doesn't seem to look as bad as it really is. But make no mistake: It's awful. At best, Miami Beach circa 1987. This will also look considerably worse in-person than it does in this highly idealized rendering.

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 7:45 AM

I think they know street level will be retail space because that is what DOB permit and application say (check the link).
But, of course, so much easier to make snap judgment and be critical of everything.

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 15, 2007 9:39 AM

Funny... I live in Park Slope Court and it's located at 270 5th Street. Do these people ever check to see if a name is already taken?

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 10:43 AM

Speaking of Le Bleu, now that they have finally opened, does anybody know how they're doing?

Posted by: guest at November 15, 2007 2:25 PM

I live at 111 4th so I'm tickled pink that they are jacking my rent for the one bedroom by $200 because of the vibrancy that is VERY VERY slowly being brought to 4th Ave. Someone said 4th Ave was going to be the new Park Avenue of Brooklyn in a few years. Should I be scared?

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 12:31 PM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions