« Dock Street Protesters: 20% There on Signatures Residential Sales in Brooklyn »
December 7, 2007
270 Greene Avenue: Not a Good Looking Building
When we first wrote about 270 Greene Avenue near the eastern edge of Clinton Hill over a year ago, one commenter had this to say:
This project in particular scares me. It's prime real estate really, just happens to lie one block out of the historic district. I go by it everyday and have a number of reasons for thinking its another cheapo. Hope i'm wrong.
Now that the building's nearing completion, it's fair to say that the commenter was not wrong. What a bummer.
Development Watch: 270 Greene Avenue [Brownstoner] GMAP P*Shark DOB
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/3086
Comments
classy
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 10:07 AM
Just saw a presentation on the new zoning text amendments last night and I have to wonder if it would have done anything to prevent a structure from getting designed like this. I would be curious if anyone else familiar with the proposed amendments has any thoughts?
I'm thinking the provision for rear dormers or expanded site coverage might have allowed a little more flexibility but how would you ever get a lame-o developer to think about these provisions?
Posted by: Pheights at December 7, 2007 10:12 AM
The stripes are a nice touch.
Posted by: champura at December 7, 2007 10:17 AM
Whoever invented that Dryvit stucco shit should A) have his feet encased in the stuff and B) be thrown into the East River.
Posted by: Rehab at December 7, 2007 10:39 AM
Fedders FTW!
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 10:41 AM
This is an ugly building. Is there anything else to really discuss?
People always make some 'gaza strip' reference which seems at best culturally misguided. There are probably more buildings like this in brooklyn now than there are in the middle east.
No different than people around the world point at the things they think are ugly and saying "Looks like Brooklyn!"
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 10:45 AM
Rehab is advocating summary capital punishment for crimes of aesthetics. Let the revolution begin!
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 10:58 AM
compared to what's been there for the last thirty odd years this is great. this block is the weak link. it is the clearest site of division between bs and ch. this is an improvement. now, paint that bus stop wall!
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 11:06 AM
No, this really does look like something from the Gaza Strip.
And people are right to think of Brooklyn when they see something ugly. most of brooklyn is really, really ugly. even the pretty sections have ugly bits.
Don't ask me why people are paying so much to live here. It ain't the aesthetics.
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 11:08 AM
hey it looks like a bigger version of the thing down the street! obviously, someone has a vision for that block.
Posted by: Jimmy Legs at December 7, 2007 11:12 AM
WAMU CLOSING BROKER!
http://www.nypost.com/seven/12062007/business/wamu_closing_broker_45521.htm
Boy the shit is getting good! If you hear someone laughing their asses off, that's me!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end.......
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 11:25 AM
My buddy is a regional manager at WAMU and couldn't get a mortgage through them (well, they didn't turn him down but they made him jump through all these hoops 'til he said 'fuck it'). He had to play his military card but still ended up getting his mortgage through another bank. Shit is really fucked up right now.
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 11:36 AM
can anyone tell me what recourse residents have to stop these lame projects from being built? Is there enough community cohesion to petition for developers' corporate licenses to be revoked? Can;t we pressure City Council members to enforce certain standards for new development? Scarano is just one example, and this buildign above also seems beyond the pale in terms of responsible, competent design. These people are demonstrably not working for the benefit of the districts they operate in. What does it take to get the city to revoke their corporate license?
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 12:14 PM
i'm holding my breath to see what's going up on the next block over on greene, btwn franklin & bedford. there are two massive lots with new condos going up...has anyone seen drawings? could potentially make or break this stretch. like a lot of bk, you have 1 block that's ugly, and then right next door it'll be gorgeous, as is greene btwn bedford/nostrand.
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 12:39 PM
12:14pm. You could buy up all the land in your neighborhood and retire it. Owning = control.
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 12:41 PM
12:41 - not really, you have building codes, Dob permits, FAR, etc. The use of your property is highly regulated, especially in NYC
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 1:12 PM
1:12. Dob permits don't cover somebody's idea of attractiveness. If they did, half the buildings in New York wouldn't get built.
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 1:24 PM
I have to say, this building in not nearly as bad as I expected. It's not great, but as 11:06 says, it beats looking at what was there. And it could have been a LOT worse. Down the block at the corner of Grand is the building commonly referred to on this site as the ugliest in Brookyn.
To the guest who commented at 12:39, the building going up on Greene near Franklin Ave. is supposed to be 12 floors, so they're only about a third of the way up. (YIKES! I think it got approved before the rezoning.)
The lot that's closer to Classon (the two lots, I believe, are one block west of where the original poster indicated) has a basement/foundation that looks to be about the size of a regular brownstone. I can see it from my roof. So maybe that second lot is going to be filled with row houses or something. (But more than likely, it's the beginning of something bigger.)
Posted by: BKNYKEV at December 7, 2007 1:33 PM
BKNYKEV. Excuse me, but did't you see B'stoner rule this one a bummer? Get with the program.
Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 2:01 PM
re: zoning changes and community's rights to stop development (separate comments).
first, the zoning changes: changing the bulk will certainly the way a building engages the street. however, i don't really think your issue is with the bulk. its the choice of materials, fenestration etc.
which brings us to the second comment, regarding the community 'stopping' such development.
what an awful idea. i'm sorry, but design by committee never, ever works. what aesthetic guidelines would a community impose? and how would they execute control?
unless it is a landmarked community (which I don't have a problem with) it sounds, at best, communist. and, to be frank, the interests of the existing residents is always going to be at odds with new development, and most likely, at odds with the overall best interest of the future of the community.
Posted by: guest at December 9, 2007 9:44 AM
Interesting, 9:44. So in a landmarked zone, esthetics by committee is ok, but not otherwise? I guess communism is in the eyes of the beholder.
Posted by: cmu at December 9, 2007 7:27 PM
Can someone tell me what is wrong with the building. It's vast an improvement from what was there before. Perhaps another developer would have chosen a brick facade. Who knows if that would have been a better idea.
I walk by the building often have taken note that others people seem to think it looks fine as well. I also think until the windows (i guess) are installed on the right side of the buiding and the shed is removed the jury is still out.
What is with the comment from the guy "...get with the program" does the Brownstoner have a program ? If it involves determining what is acceptable esthetics for the community I dare him to say that for the record. Otherwise, a comment to the contrary would be constructive.
Posted by: guest at January 8, 2008 6:52 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.