« One Hanson’s Penthouses Tower Units Hit the Market Dumbo Getting Its Own Green Market »
February 12, 2008
4th Avenue 2.0: Renderings Appear for 6th St. Building
After last night’s Carroll Gardens Neighborhood Association meeting we nosed around the website of KSQ Architects—the White Plains-based firm that’s replaced Robert Scarano on 360 Smith Street—and found that KSQ has also signed on to design a new building on 4th Avenue and 6th Street. Baruch Singer and Rosma Development own the site in question, and way back when they’d hired Enrique Norten/Ten Arquitectos for the project (we were big fans of the Norten design, which looked a lot different from almost every other recent-vintage 4th Avenue building). Anyhow, the KSQ renderings for this building (more on jump) seem a bit more intriguing than the old crop of 4th Avenue condos—more like the under-construction Argyle, less like the Novo and Crest. Far as we can tell, the DOB has yet to issue new building permits for this job aside from OK’ing the demolition of the old warehouse on the property, which came down a couple months ago.
Development Watch: No-Go on Norten/Singer Team-Up [Brownstoner] GMAP
4th Avenue, the Boulevard of Broken Promises? [Brownstoner] P*Shark DOB
Renderings from the KSQ Architects website.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/3858
Comments
That's a huge improvement over the Boymelgreen crap, for sure.
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 10:07 AM
Couple of the links are screwed up. They take you to today's 360 Carroll post.
Posted by: johnife at February 12, 2008 10:07 AM
Sorry, I meant 360 Smith.
Posted by: johnife at February 12, 2008 10:08 AM
RETAIL RETAIL RETAIL - these developers are retarded - If you want to make 4th Ave a liveable pedestrian strip it needs retail and besides on undeserved 4th Ave - I'd bet on retail before housing in the current climate.
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 10:15 AM
i hate it. The old design looked better.
Posted by: blowfish at February 12, 2008 10:17 AM
I totally agree with the retail aspect. These developers are all fools that are so short-sighted. What good are all of these condos without the retail ammenities that should follow.
Without it, all of these condos will just become low-end rentals that are just a fringe extension of Park Slope.
Posted by: newsouthsloper at February 12, 2008 10:28 AM
Kind of like arriving at the bar after last call, isn't it?
Speaking of late to the party, what's up with Argyle? I haven't seen any workers on the site in weeks.
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 10:34 AM
This part of PS actually NEEDS a large drugstore - how much more money would the developers make (and how much easier would financing be) if they got a Duane Reade to net lease a ground floor location here.
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 10:40 AM
just a few blocks away at 5th and 9th there are 3 big drug stores - CVS, Rite-Aid, and Neergard - open 24 hrs. That isn't enough drugstores in the area for you?
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 11:05 AM
No its not - assuming you live in the new Condos on 4th Ave (Novo/Crest) it is approximately a half a mile to those drug stores (and if you live further north on 5th it is even further). Therefore a 1 MILE round trip to the drug store. Sorry but in terms of 'pedestrian' friendly - this is not very convenient (although I don't know why they should be so clustered at 9th St either)
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 11:13 AM
Park and Fifth Avenues in Manhattan don't have much retail - it's all on Madison Avenue.
Posted by: Polemicist at February 12, 2008 11:14 AM
Polemicist - true but Park and 5th Ave also dont have Pep Boys, Car Washes, subways or Drive-through McDonalds either.
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 11:23 AM
Polemicist: Only IF you never leave the Upper East Side. Below 57th Fifth is all retail at street level. Park is retail below 34th. Above 57th Madison, Lexington, and avenues east are dominated by retail.
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 11:41 AM
Yes, I was referring to the Upper East Side. When people talk about Fourth Avenue being the new Park Avenue of Brooklyn, I hardly imagine they were thinking of the Midtown East office district, or Park Avenue South - which really was only renamed from Fourth Avenue as a way to capitalize on the actual Park Avenue.
I'm simply saying that having a mature residential avenue does not necessarily require a large number of retail establishments.
The problem with Park Slope is there is not yet sufficient density to make retail work like it does in Manhattan. It would be nice to have Fifth Avenue and Fourth Avenue lined with retail shops, but it's just not going to happen.
I live off of Fifth Avenue and you know what? Most restaurants are empty, even on weekends. Bars don't seem to be doing too well either. Half the people I talk to at the bar at Blue Ribbon are from outside the neighborhood.
There are just not enough people to support all these shops, and I'm not sure the paltry development that has occurred on fourth ave thus far is enough to make that much of a difference. The neighborhood will need several thousand new residents to make it work.
There are obviously a lot of things to complain about, but it's not like we can magically convince shopkeepers to open dozens of new establishments on Fourth Avenue.
Lastly, having the west side of the street zoned M1 is also a real big problem. I still don't know what the hell the DCP and the city council were thinking with that.
Posted by: Polemicist at February 12, 2008 12:50 PM
"magically convince shopkeepers to open dozens of new establishments"
Not without any storefronts to put them in.
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 1:04 PM
Polemicist:
All good points, although I do agree with much of what the StreetsBlog article said: There's a difference between non-retail street level and putting massive air vents on the avenue (I'm looking at you CREST!). At least have some windows for a lobby on 4th Ave.
One nitpick with your post, that side of 4th Ave (in that area only) is zoned C8-2 (heavy repair shops).
Still bad but not as bad as M-1 ... agree, should have been changed as part of the re-zoning.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/zone/bk_zonedex.shtml
Posted by: Mr Joist at February 12, 2008 1:19 PM
It would be nice to have Fifth Avenue and Fourth Avenue lined with retail shops, but it's just not going to happen.
-5th Ave is already lined with retail - although I agree with you that many of these establishments appear to be barely holding on - however I do not believe that is a function of not enough residents and rather an abundance of (very similar) restaurants and bars and too many "lifestyle" stores that sell stuff that people do not need everyday (the rock store would be the poster child here)
Further 4th Ave should have an advantage in that these new buildings should/could have larger space available then you'd find in the 20' wide buildings found on 5th. Drugstores, furniture stores, supermarkets, etc... are much more practical on 4th then 5th. Not to mention that the proximity to the subways and 4th Ave itself makes the retail more attractive.
I find it hard to believe that residential density is the problem, compared to even the densest suburban area, the number of residents:retail is far better in P.S. (not to mention per capita income of these residents) and the suburbs have no problems attracting retailers.
The problem is/was that during the boom, the residential was better per sf then retail - that I believe has changed but the developers have been slow to recognize this.
I do however agree the west-side zoning is dumb
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 1:27 PM
What are you talking about, no retail? There's Victoria's across the street for all your breakfast sandwich needs. Plus a laundromat one block away and the soon to be Balducci's-esque greengrocer on the opposite corner (at least according to The Argyle's rendering!).
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 1:40 PM
Doesnt McDonalds count as Retail?
What about the bodega and smoke shop btw 8th and 9th? or Pep Boys?
These things take time. First you need the new building and well heeled residents, then retail will slide into the empty and undeveloped spots. These retailers are not going to go out on a limb and put the cart before the horse.
Posted by: guest at February 12, 2008 3:06 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.