Site for Glassy PLG Tower Hits the Market
The site once slated for a glassy, 20-story development in PLG overlooking Prospect Park is now being marketed for sale or for joint venture. The still-empty lot had approved plans for 86 residential units as well as retail space, but met protest back in 2008. (Remember concerns about unsuspecting birds smashing into the glass walls?)…
The site once slated for a glassy, 20-story development in PLG overlooking Prospect Park is now being marketed for sale or for joint venture. The still-empty lot had approved plans for 86 residential units as well as retail space, but met protest back in 2008. (Remember concerns about unsuspecting birds smashing into the glass walls?) Now it looks like things have fizzled out. “We completely acknowledge that the award winning plans are ambitious for today’s market conditions and may have to be amended to accommodate a more modest rental project,” said the project’s broker, who also suggested the possibility of repositioning the proposed condo development for a rental product ready by 2013 or 2014. GMAP
Or as I said at the time (yes, Brenda, tell us what you really think!):
http://ayearinthepark.typepad.com/prospect_a_year_in_the_pa/2008/03/lost-horizon.html
The visibility of this palace of conspicuous consumption from within Prospect Park would have been an offense to Olmsted and Vaux’s plan to create an illusion of tranquil countryside–a plan (and an illusion) that are integral to the park’s genius. The bloated bubble has burst, and grotesqueries like this are the soap scum it has left behind, and I say, hurray! Hope something decent, contextual, and accessible to working-class residents gets built there soon.
Here, here, LM – but I don’t think a mixed development is any less likely than luxury condos or rentals here, especially considering the city’s purported initiative to build and rehabilitate affordable housing in NYC. There may actually be more government than private funds available at the moment, especially as lenders consider the community opposition to the proposed structure – yes, the market turndown and Henry Herbst’s financial problems had a lot to do with the project’s derailment, but local protests played their part, and this adds another risk factor to any financing proposals. Bruce Ratner may be able to buy everyone from the Governor on down, but not any developer likely to come here.
And you may be right, Heather, but On Prospect Park (the official name, as One PPW it isn’t and One Prospect Park, which they wanted initially, was turned down by the city) is already built and this isn’t. So that isn’t an excuse not to stand up against it.
good, I’m glad…. i am sick of all these high rises already.
ugh !!! Gimme a nice 4 story brick tenement anyday !!
I think I’m with the camp that doesn’t see anything wrong with this building that isn’t also wrong with One PPW.
We live a few blocks away from this site and take the subway at this station. We love our neighborhood and look forward to continued organic change that slowly transforms it as the population mix is altered. What we don’t want is a big-bucks infusion in the hopes of creating another Park Slope. This is the largest potential site in the immediate area and could have too big an impact.
A mixed affordable/market building of no more than 12 stories, done with classical taste would be so very welcome but seems unlikely given the market (even today’s market).
The mere weight of such a large structure on that site next to a flimsy-looking retaining wall separating it from the subway tracks alone makes it a safety hazard. That’s why test drilling for the original proposed structure was held off until a proper site evaluation could be conducted (thank you DOB, for once). The demand is for $1000 one bedrooms, NOT high-priced new construction. Check out prices at the new rental buildings around downtown/Fort Greene. Not the answer. And high-density affordable doesn’t work, unless you can get to 60/40 market/affordable – otherwise, you’re just building new projects, and I think everyone will agree that model doesn’t work (why all new 100% affordable buildings are low- to medium-rise).
And PS, as a semi-immediate neighbor, I’m thrilled (not) you think my arguments have some validity, and I will continue to do my darndest to keep anything out of scale out of my neighborhood.
How can you think that there is not enough rental stock in PLG and decry high-density housing in the same breath? And why would an open subway station be less desirable for such a project, when in fact it’s the exact opposite? Low-rise housing next to open tracks is not exactly desirable. This is what makes this lot perfect for high-rise, just like being at the intersection of Flatbush/bridge traffic/downtown makes it a perfect location for high-rise buildings. My point is that particular location is even better than Oro or Toren as it is right by the subway, and the tracks are coming above ground. You seem to be saying that the very proximity to the subway tracks makes a high-rise undesirable.
You were posting yesterday about investor landlords who are churning RS apartments to get to destabilize units; how better to remove demand than by building new rentals? and where better to locate high-rise buildings than next to open tracks?
Oops, I meant the other side of GAP, although the Brooklyn Museum/Eastern Parkway stop is the other side of Eastern Parkway as well.