« Slope's Love=? Closing Checking In On 14 Hope Street »
February 13, 2009
The Blanching of 330 Park Place

While its five condo units wither on the vine, the brick exterior of 330 Park Place continues to get whiter and whiter. It must be contagious: A outbreak of mortar streaks occurred last year at 364. St. Mark's Avenue. By all accounts, it doesn't pose any structural or other issues, but you'd think if you were selling the place you'd want to clean it up.
Condos of the Day: 330 Park Place [Ahrlty.com] GMAP P*Shark
Overbuilt in Prospect Heights: 330 Park Place [Brownstoner]
330 Park Place: As Bad As Everyone Feared? [Brownstoner]
Developer Non Grata: 330 Park Place Destruction [Brownstoner]
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/8339
Comments
If someone spells leach as leech I'm gonna kill 'em
Posted by: dittoburg at February 13, 2009 11:15 AM
Leech therapy might work.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 13, 2009 11:19 AM
Please print a before and after picture so you can really appreciate this monstrosity. This block was almost all brownstones with a maybe one house built in the 20'th century. Now it has this with that white contraption on the front. It shows the developers total disrespect for the neighborhood and the people who live there.
Posted by: mimi at February 13, 2009 11:24 AM
I've see this all over this winter on bricks. Does anyone actually know what causes it?
Posted by: jawbreaker at February 13, 2009 11:34 AM
Jaw: I here leeches are the problem.
Posted by: Miss Chiff at February 13, 2009 11:51 AM
As to leeches, we'd need a little blood-letting before they'd really be effective.
The discoloration is most likely efflorescence, or "new building bloom," i.e. salts crystallizing on the surface of masonry materials.
Posted by: vinca at February 13, 2009 11:51 AM
I pass this monstrosity every morning. For all of its lovely, restored townhouses PH sure has it's share of Scarano stillbirths and these ugly-ass condos.
Posted by: Fjorder at February 13, 2009 11:51 AM
people, i mentioned this on a different thread a few months ago but here goes again. it's called efflorescence. i'm too lazy this AM to explain so here is a wiki address. scroll down to "primary efflorescence"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efflorescence
Posted by: bowl of dicks at February 13, 2009 11:58 AM
The best part is that the company marketing the condos uses a picture of the picturesque tree-lined classic limestones in the neighborhood and has no pics of the exterior of the actual building. It really says something when your broker is too embarrassed to advertise the product.
Posted by: Shoots and Leaves at February 13, 2009 12:00 PM
The demolition of the house that had previously stood on the site and its replacement by this monstrosity (it looks far worse in the flesh than in the photo, with a stepped back vertical extension that rises to 6 floors) was a major impetus to the recent landmarking initiative in Prospect Heights. All done under a renovation permit, btw. The efflorescence is a particularly obvious sign of the poor workmanship that went into this POS.
Posted by: 1929 at February 13, 2009 12:28 PM
1929 is correct, efflorescence is a direct result of cutting corners / saving $$, during construction. it can easily be avoided by using ad-mixes in the mortar.
Posted by: bowl of dicks at February 13, 2009 12:32 PM
I agree the builder cut corners but there are other cases of efflorescence. I met some people from SC who manufacture bricks that will effloresce (sp?) because of the clay used. They had a dickens of a time selling product until they started marketing as architectural bricks that were suppose to give an aged look very quickly.
Posted by: Hot For Brooklyn at February 13, 2009 12:55 PM
All it reflects is that the bricks were exposed to moisture - could be from shoddy construction, could be from the way the bricks were stored, could be from the way the bricks were manufactured....the white is simply minerals left from evaporating water that comes through the bricks.
Posted by: fsrg at February 13, 2009 2:05 PM

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