« Apple May Set Up Shop at The Edge After All Atomic Wings Picks Up the Slack on Smith »

February 11, 2009

How Unfortunate: 669 Classon Avenue

669-Classon-Avenue-0209.jpg
The person who designed this doesn't even deserve to have an architectural license but what about the building code that allows it? GMAP




Posted by Brownstoner at 10:29 AM | Comments (34)
Categories: Architecture, Crown Heights

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/8334

Comments

I thought this discussion was reserved for fridays??? But you are dead right on both points. This is a travesty.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 11, 2009 10:33 AM

this is painful...

Posted by: SouthParker at February 11, 2009 10:37 AM

tag with "lou dobbs" pls.

Posted by: bklynite at February 11, 2009 10:39 AM

on the other hand, you could just place trees and other sizable plants in front of it to make it more appealing

Posted by: SouthParker at February 11, 2009 10:40 AM

3 stories and only 2 fedders...looking good!

Posted by: bayridgegirl at February 11, 2009 10:41 AM

benson? benson? BENSON???????

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 11, 2009 10:41 AM

It has room to park my leased Escalade, so I'm OK with it.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 11, 2009 10:44 AM

What a perfect recreation spot!

I'd love to put up one of those giant "portable" hot tubs, a grill, some lounge chairs for sunbathing.

I'd also hang a sign on the gate:

"American Dream"

It would be an ongoing art installation for the passersby.

Posted by: TownhouseLady at February 11, 2009 10:51 AM

Oh, it's bad.

Posted by: East New York at February 11, 2009 10:54 AM

hahahahahahahahaha. Torn down in 10-15 years, my guess.

Posted by: KHuebbe at February 11, 2009 11:01 AM

Serious question: What would be the reasoning for setting it back that far?

Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at February 11, 2009 11:03 AM

Snappy
Serious Answer: Parking

Posted by: bayridgegirl at February 11, 2009 11:04 AM

If it was any further set back, it'd be on the next block.

Does one need to have an architect to do one of these, or is there a template that the developer just submits? I would hate to take 3 years and thousands of dollars to get my masters in architecture, pay even more to take the state certification test, and then churn these puppies out day after day, when a CAD program can do just as good a job for the price of the software. It's not like there's a whole lot of creativity here.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at February 11, 2009 11:05 AM

"Serious question: What would be the reasoning for setting it back that far?"

basketball court!

Posted by: promenade at February 11, 2009 11:06 AM

Definitely for parking. Check out the size of the gate on that fence.

Posted by: TownhouseLady at February 11, 2009 11:08 AM

Obviously to have room at Christmas time for the lit wired deer with bobbing heads and the humongous inflatable Santas and Sleighs.

Posted by: bxgrl at February 11, 2009 11:10 AM

Going to the Deli will feel like walking up the block and around the corner.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at February 11, 2009 11:12 AM

R6 zoning would be my guess is the culprit. That and a very uninventive architect.

Posted by: Action Jackson at February 11, 2009 11:16 AM

Do a google maps street view and you'll see another 1 directly across street. What bugs me most - is how they get the curb cut. WHen and where are they allowed?

Posted by: Petebklyn at February 11, 2009 11:19 AM

Good grief, are the coins an ode to the historical architecture of the hood?

Posted by: DeLepp at February 11, 2009 11:24 AM

Really sad and ugly architecture thats not only dirt cheap but also wasteful of valuable space. Maybe large potted plants and some trees will conceal this monstrosity and spare the neighbors the eyesore...An Architect in Brooklyn any suggestions on how to improve this?

Posted by: pierre de taille at February 11, 2009 11:31 AM

Sure, it's ugly. But the buildings on either side aren't exactly bursting with architectural merit either, so who cares?

Posted by: Sparafucile at February 11, 2009 11:31 AM

As much as I wish that fedder specials and chrome gates weren't so prolific, I don't think that the DOB should be making aesthetic decisions. If the building is architecturally sound, it is. You don't have to like chrome fences, but someone clearly does.

Given that, don't you think building so far back is a net positive? It means that someone could plant some climbing fine on a fence and maybe hide the whole thing from view.

I'm not suggesting that the architect planned this, but Classon is a freeway, and being that far back from the street would probably be far preferable to being right on the street.

And ... according to Property Shark a buyer who put 10% down in 2006 is already in arrears.

Posted by: serpentor at February 11, 2009 11:32 AM

That wasn't architected, that was just built.

Posted by: neilw at February 11, 2009 11:38 AM

It's the NYC Zoning that allows, and requires it. Site is in R6, so not a contextual zone (i.e. R6B) which requires new construction buildings align with adjacent lots.

Also, parking is required for 70% of Dwelling Units (50% req for small lots, which may be applicable in this case), hence the permitted curb cut. In my opinion all "Brownstone Brooklyn" should be contextual zoning.

Posted by: ppw_girlz at February 11, 2009 11:44 AM

If any of you people think that these owners/renters are going to go out and but bushes and trees and vines to make this place more pleasing then you are taking some serious hallucinogens.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 11, 2009 11:48 AM

PS. Am I the only one who thinks that a ball court in the front yard wouldn't be so bad? I grew up playing handball against the wall of my house, and there are worse things a kid could do than play basketball.

Like sparafucile said: it isn't like that stretch of Classon is some well preserved Brownstone paradise. I don't think the place is that bad.

Posted by: serpentor at February 11, 2009 11:50 AM

That's an awesome building.

Posted by: Xander Crews at February 11, 2009 12:18 PM

What do you mean, who "designed" it? Nobody designed it. That was their first mistake.

Posted by: mopar at February 11, 2009 12:30 PM

I'm with Xander - I think it's awesome. It's the 2008 equivalent of a log cabin....

Posted by: lalaland at February 11, 2009 12:50 PM

oh come on, it's right next to an ugly bodega and right across the street from a similarly ugly and set back building. it's not pretty, but it's hardly destroying the architectural harmony (such as it is) of this block. and yes, the front area is used for parking -- see the van parked there in google street view.

Posted by: z at February 11, 2009 12:51 PM

Those chrome gate atrocities are popping up everywhere. We call them "Dr. Evil's 3-D Fence of Doom."

Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at February 11, 2009 6:18 PM

"Really sad and ugly architecture thats not only dirt cheap but also wasteful of valuable space. Maybe large potted plants and some trees will conceal this monstrosity and spare the neighbors the eyesore...An Architect in Brooklyn any suggestions on how to improve this?"

Dynamite.

Posted by: an architect in Brooklyn at February 11, 2009 8:02 PM

"Nothin' like lettin' the little tykes play on that cee-mented front yard." I hope they are well stocked in band aids.

Posted by: brownman at February 11, 2009 8:40 PM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions