« Streetlevel: Flowers for Dumbo Closing Bell: Party Time for PACC »

October 21, 2009

Development Watch: 574 4th Avenue

574%204th%20avenue%2010-2009.JPG
Last time we took a look at the big 80-unit development on 4th Avenue and 16th Street, its construction netting had come down partially and the facade was starting to be visible. The finished product is starting to come into clearer focus, with the exterior's shiny metallic stuff now on display as well. No question: This one is classic 4th Avenue and classic Bricolage. By the by, a poster on the Forum said yesterday that there's a rumor swirling around the neighborhood that this building will be housing for recovering drug addicts, but we called the developer's office and they said that's bull—it's just going to be a regular rental.
Development Watch: 574 4th Avenue [Brownstoner]
Development Watch: 574 4th Avenue [Brownstoner] GMAP
Development Watch: 574 4th Avenue Gets Going [Brownstoner]




Posted by Gabby at 2:40 PM | Comments (16)
Categories: 4th Avenue, Development

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/11928

Comments

You may have to be drugged to rent there though.

Posted by: Maly at October 21, 2009 2:52 PM

Maly, perhaps you have a point. Your point is even more emphasized if you were to purchase instead of rent at 500 Fourth Avenue. Ridiculous pricing and a border line location that is so out of synch. with the insane pricing especially in today's market.

Posted by: foulplay at October 21, 2009 2:56 PM

"This one is classic 4th Avenue and classic Bricolage"

I'm sorry, but is that code for "fugly"?

Posted by: CarrollGardened at October 21, 2009 2:59 PM

Gabby - Thanks for following up on my point re: the drug rehab. I knew it sounded ridiculous when I heard it, but you never know. I e-mailed the Community board to see if they knew anything. Glad at least the developer is dispelling the rumor.

Posted by: newsouthsloper at October 21, 2009 3:03 PM

More rental inventory. Lower rents. Lower prices. Horay!

***Bill Thompson for Mayor***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at October 21, 2009 3:05 PM

Definately fugly, but as a rental it will probably fare OK. Very close to transportation and a significant discount to renting a few blocks east - hopefully.

Posted by: newsouthsloper at October 21, 2009 3:05 PM

Can we consider all of these new 4th avenue buildings as "shadow inventory" in the condo market? were they all, at some stage of development, intended to be condos, and if that's the case, is the legal re-conversion straightforward? I think the profit outlook 2-3 years ago would have pointed to condo development as a no-brainer strategy, over rentals.

In my mind, every hole in the ground in a residential area of brooklyn is shadow sales inventory, regardless of its stated purpose.

Even going forward from here, as long as price/rent ratios stay close to where they are, the sales value of a square foot of condo is much higher than the value of the future rental cashflow -- so there should be continued incentive to re-convert rentals as soon as the market will bear it.

Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 21, 2009 3:15 PM

I agree Joe- If I recall correctly, this was originally intended to be a condo development at inception per conversations with some of the contractors we had early in the construction.

Posted by: newsouthsloper at October 21, 2009 3:27 PM

these rental buildings are killing me! Is the pricing out yet on the Brooklyner?

Posted by: bitter_bubble_buyer at October 21, 2009 3:35 PM

Yup, the one story mechanic garages and dilapidated wood frames that previously occupied this space were much nicer. Nope, the recovering drug addicts will be residing up the block on 5th ave and 16th, which eveyone seems to be okay with. Must be the choice of brick color and lack of balconies, that's it!

Posted by: ou812 at October 21, 2009 3:44 PM

That thing is built like a "brick shit house" (pun intended).

I have never seen so much steel go into one building, well in the South Slope that is. I assume it's due to its proximity, ahem next to, the Gowanus Expressway and the R train.

But it's all location, location, location right?

Big no on this one.

BTW, 575 6th Ave. is not just ex-drug addicts. It is folks transitioning out of shelters who need specialized and assisted care...including seniors and youth's aging out of foster care. A bit of a controversial in the neighborhood until everyone learned the overall scope of the project by 5th Ave Comm.

I'd be more concerned at the renters in this building on 4th Ave who truly have to be nuts to rent there...

Posted by: Action Jackson at October 21, 2009 3:56 PM

Sorry, I meant 575 FIFTH Ave (at 16th St.) not 6th Ave...

Posted by: Action Jackson at October 21, 2009 3:58 PM

Close to the subway. Easy walk to park slope amenities. It's not so bad. I'd rather live up the hill on 7th where I am now (sometimes I take the D instead of the F and boy do I hate that walk up to 7th Ave at the end of a long day). But for someone who wants to be in the area but maybe get a bit of a discount, why not?

Posted by: Stuart at October 21, 2009 6:13 PM

it doesnt look much different than alot of the large apartment buildings below the park. Just bigger and uglier.

Posted by: Santa at October 22, 2009 8:12 AM

It is ugly, so very ugly. The location is sucky, like who wants to listen to the expressway when the windows are open.

They could have picked out better looking bricks. The tan ones, well.....vomit.

Posted by: STARGAZER at October 22, 2009 9:09 AM

Renters/Buyers on 4th ave have a choice. These developments are consumer driven and if end consumers say no to either purchasing or renting at a price that makes it economically viable for the developer, they wouldn't proceed to continuouslly building them (In at least that fashion). Who's to blame here, the developer who keeps putting it up or the consumer who keeps buying it?

Posted by: ou812 at October 22, 2009 11:49 AM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions