Newsletter |
« Development Watch: 203 North 7th Street Monday Blogwrap »
13

Closing Bell: More Architectural Regrets in The Slope

Categories: Architecture, Closing Bell, Park Slope

slope-buildings-122109b.jpg
The blog Save Park Slope has the second in its series on architectural eyesores that could have been prevented if the Park Slope Historic District were larger; the first post is here.



By Brownstoner at December 21, 2009 4:00 PM | Comments (13)

13 Comments

By Butterfly on December 21, 2009 4:07 PM

the one on the right is kinda sorta funky for what it is. it's the brick color that is just plain ugly. if it was a different material i think it would be fine.

the one on the left looks sorta normal, no? except that it's so big next to the other house?

definitely worse out there

*rob*

By bivouac on December 21, 2009 4:11 PM

Ha ha! We looked at an apartment in the building on the left. The building was an abomination on the block, looming over everything, and the apartment itself was laughable. You couldn't pay me to live there.

If I were a developer (and I'm glad I'm not), I might consider hiring someone with a little taste to design a project for me instead of building another of these piles of pooh that keep showing up everywhere.

By benson on December 21, 2009 4:27 PM

Regarding the photo on the left: yes, one can certainly see that the older buildings on this bloack are truly "historical" and have outstanding architecture. Surely,at this moment of tremendous fiscal and economic stress for our nation and city, the powers-that-be should turn their attention to marshal the power of the state to preserving these homes, and impeding the development of new, modern housing.

Navel-gazing,anyone??

By Petebklyn on December 21, 2009 4:39 PM

you can't be serious if you think that block on left would ever get landmark designation.

By wine lover on December 21, 2009 4:41 PM

oh benson - saying out loud what everyone is thinking! that block is a total snore. historic district! omg. it's just too much.

By DitmasSnark on December 21, 2009 4:41 PM

I'll just walk over to the building in the right photo, peer down though the ground-level slanty-glass wall, and gaze at someone else's navel (etc).

By bupe on December 21, 2009 5:20 PM

Oy, the tall building is down the street from me (on another block), and the "Juliette" (WTF?) is one street over...

By Action Jackson on December 21, 2009 6:34 PM

I think Mr. B should do a series on these types of new buildings...

WAIT, he does everyday, there are so many of them effing up every 'nabe, mixed housing stock or not.

Was a good idea, though.

By Butterfly on December 21, 2009 6:40 PM

or if someone with photoshop talent (or not) can cut out all these new buildings and place them next to each other and create a big new neighborhood of all these kinds of buildings, next to each other of course, so they are all in context.. and then youd get a glimpse into the phoenix mentality that is in the these architects' minds and see these buildings for the true archietctural gems they are!

im being serious btw, it would be an awesome projects that i would totally do if i had photoshop or any kind of artistic motivation.

*rob*

By young archi on December 21, 2009 8:03 PM

there are some truly hideous buildings on this link.
this is why I really prefer to work in Landmarks districts - you're somewhat constricted by historical precedents but your client is required to match your detailing and not cheap out too much!

That said, I think pharmacies and grocery stores - no matter how ugly - are part of the fabric of any neighborhood. I know they aren't doing this, but the presentation somewhat implies that Landmarks is against necessary services like supermarkets and drug stores...which it obviously is not...

By salome on December 21, 2009 8:09 PM

My house is the little one on the left. I agree that it's not landmark material but the building next door is more than just an eyesore. Part of the reason for keeping neighborhoods a particular height is so the large building next door doesn't dump it's full water and snow load on a small house not ever meant to absorb that kind of load. We have to get roof work done every year. And that's just one of many problems. These large buildings don't belong next to small ones-historical or not.

By slopefarm on December 22, 2009 8:31 AM

Two of my faves showed up on the link. 6th Ave @ 13th Street -- house used to look like the one next door. That is not infill construction -- they busted open the brownstone facade, put in a front extension with a stone face, and stuccoed up the rest of the exterior. Marred an otherwise neat row of small brownstones.

12th St. brutalist butterfly -- we've all commented before. Truly awful, but hard to envision landmarking that stretch of 12th Street. A few historic homes on the block but a lot of junk and infill.

By Jail_Bait on December 22, 2009 10:13 AM

Here's what you do -- make half of Brooklyn part of the park slope historic district, that way everyone can: i) honestly say that they live in park slope and ii) live in a brownstone. A committee of amateur architects will come and tell you what to do with your house and the commenters on brownstoner can write about how "in character" everything is.

There comes a point where enough is enough -- and that website is obnoxious.

Where are people supposed to shop if there are no key foods or rite aids?

Post a comment

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

Related Posts with Thumbnails