stevek's Profile
- Steve
- birth
- 2006
- Brooklyn
- Park Slope
- Co-op
- Male
- 39
Author's Posts
February 29, 2008
The Forte Condo
It's been several weeks since new owners have been able to occupy their apartments in the Forte building in "The BAM Cultural District." I've seen a few lights on at night. So I'm wondering how's it going? Anyone on this blog buy in the building or know someone who has? Any news there or is this one of the rare occasions when there are no complaints?
February 28, 2008
326 State Street
I saw a post about the snow on the sidewalk in front of 326 State Street so I thought I'd pass along my experience checking out an apartment inside the modern looking building.
I went to an open house at that condo. The developer/architect made the strangest choices in how they used the space. The rooms are small. The living/dining room in one apartment was so small that, after deciding on whether you wanted them to install a spiral stair case or a regular stair case to the balcony above the kitchen (where the washer/dryer and mechanical closets are), you'd be hard pressed to fit in anything more than a couch, a chair and a coffee table. yet they opted to create a minimum of 14 foot ceilings in each apartment. Had they forgone the ridiculously high ceilings, they would have wound up with larger foot prints for each apartment and normal size rooms rather than something that feels like overgrown walk-in closets.
Also, for some completely bizarre and unexplained reason, when you climb up to the balcony space in most of the apartments, they built a platform in the "storage room." The platform is made out of plywood painted black and it takes up the entire square footage of the room so that you have to basically crawl around on it. When I questioned the realtor about why they did this, he said so that you don't have to leave your things on the floor. (That seemed like the oddest answer because they essentially built a second, unfinished floor and created 2 feet of dead space beneath it.) I said why would that be a problem? He didn't have a reasonable answer. He also told me that once you buy an apartment, you can rip out the platform and do whatever you want with the small windowless room, turn it into an office, whatever. So why the heck did they build the useless platform in the first place? Everyone is going to rip them out. Maybe it had something to do with the FAR (floor to area ratio) zoning.
Also, with the floor to ceiling windows in those 14 foot tall rooms, any owner is going to have to pay a fortune in window dressings after moving in!
Author's Comments
After reading brownstoner and about half a dozen other blogs, I don't think I've ever come across a comment about a new development where anyone had a positive comment about the appearance of th structure. So your hideous remark means nothing to me.
Back to my original topic which was a request for comments from anyone who has moved into the building already.
Posted by: stevek at March 2, 2008 6:05 PM in response to The Forte Condo
I'm surprised. Having gone to an open house, I thought the quality of work was ok. Maybe there are a few questionable design choices but that's the case in every building these days. There's no storage space, not even a bike room, although the salesperson told me they were working on creating a back room by the lobby. That's an issue for some. But overall, given the location and sturdy construction of a high rise building, I felt that the apartments were a good value.
Posted by: stevek at February 29, 2008 4:34 PM in response to The Forte Condo
I didn't realize that someone claiming to be the architect Scarano posted about this in an earlier thread. I thought I'd refresh your memory but before doing so, here's my response to what Scarano had to say:
"I hate to burst Mr. Scarano's bubble, but when I went to an open house, the Fillmore real estate angent most definitely told me that owners can remove the black painted plywood platforms in those mezzanine storage rooms. He most definitely told me that the same floor on the mezzanine balcony extends into the storage room and if the plywood box is removed, the room can be used as an office or for whatever use the owner has in mind.
Mr. Scarano, if the same beams that support my weight, the weight of the hot water heater, the weight of the washer and dryer, and in at least one apartment the weight of a second bathroom, and those beams extended into the mezzanine storage space, how in the world would removing the plywood box harm the structural integrity of that room? Why wouldn't those beams support the weight of a human being or two and some furniture?"
From Scarano on October 5th, 2007:
To all,
Ok, now it is time to set the record straight.
First, this building was filed, reviewed and approved by the Dept of buildings under a standard filing (NOT PROFESSIONALLY CERTIFIED). This careful and complete examination CLEARLY showed the raised areas of the mezzanine level as storage (NON_HABITABLE SPACES) for the unit, NOT A BEDROOM, OFFICE, STUDY, ETC. The construction of this raised area was done in such a way that it is not possible to remove it without affecting the structural intergity of the entire level since the beams are at two different elevations. The items that exist on this MEZZANINE including a mechanical equiptment room, washer/dryer units and the storage area are there to give additional space to the lower level of the unit.Speaking to the owner today, NO ONE said anything to anyone who visited the open house this weekend about the ability to take this out since that is actually not even possible. I believe that someone has created this entire story in their own mind.
As far as the floors being spongy this condition is quite normal since a prefinished wood floating floor was installed over padding to accomodate the RADIANT FLOOR HEATING SYSTEM that was put in. This premier heating system is much healthier for the occupants of the unit and more environmentally sensitive than a convential sysem as it costs about twice as much as a traditional system would.
Every aspect the zoning and building code was followed to the letter which is how this project was allowed to be approved and permitted in the first place.
Lastly, concerning the layouts. Todays modern brownstone buildings, which is what this is one of, give a greater degree of fire safety to the unit owners since the entire building is constructed with non-combustable materials, have a steel and concrete exit stair and are fully sprinklered. Many of the old units on the market rely on escaping through a fire escape during an emergency and it is these same firescapes that contribute to more than half of the burglaries in the borough.
Today buyers have asked us for high ceilings and large windowed spaces which give the feeling of a loft environment. Since the price of a square foot of real estate has gone through the roof sizes of rooms have been brought down to what is an absolutely minimum functional area to be "AFFORDABLE " to a greater percentage of the population.
This overall change coupled with the contemporary finishes is what is being presented here.
The Department of Buildings, the developer, the architect and the builder have all done their job here and people are still free in this country to decide if what is being presented is right for them or not.
The false allegations, made up stories, spun verisions of reality, delusional rantings and general off color comments about our work will now be addressed each and every time they are raised by me. Since it is obvious that many people are worried about me, my jobs and my office I will attempt to educate them about construction and development activities in New York City.
Thank you for your attention,
Robert M. Scarano Jr, AIA, FARA, ALA
Posted by: guest at October 5, 2007 12:39 PM
Posted by: stevek at February 29, 2008 10:31 AM in response to 326 State Street
Geez, when was that downtown Brooklyn photo taken... the one that illustrate's the Atlantic Yards Project's size... was that taken in 1898 or somehwere near there? I mean it doesn't show one single high rise building that actually exists in the downtown footprint. Talk about giving people a false perspective.
Posted by: stevek at February 29, 2008 10:24 AM in response to Weekend Events
Ha, that's funny. So he's a Corcoran broker that's actually the agent for another apartment listed for sale in the building? Doesn't that violate some sort of conflict of interest? I mean he's got every reason to sell that other apartment at an inflated, unrealistic price to an unsuspecting customer so that the value of his damaged apartment increases. I wonder if he'll disclose the flooding issue to prospective buyers. Hmmm.... ya think? But would anyone be surprised if a Corcoran broker did something unethical? After all, isn't that how the mega-brokerage was born?
Posted by: stevek at February 29, 2008 10:18 AM in response to When Condo Investments Go Bad: Toy Factory Loft Edition
I really hope the Friends of the Gowanus don't try to kill this project. Those folks are probably exactly the type of people who would shop at a Whole Foods. Did the Lowes store have this much trouble building it's location next to the wetland, uh, I mean canal? What a joke!
Posted by: stevek at February 28, 2008 5:22 PM in response to Streetlevel: Obstacles Remain for Whole Foods
I didn't realize that someone claiming to be the architect Scarano posted about this in an earlier thread. I thought I'd refresh your memory but before doing so, here's my response to what Scarano had to say:
"I hate to burst Mr. Scarano's bubble, but when I went to an open house, the Fillmore real estate angent most definitely told me that owners can remove the black painted plywood platforms in those mezzanine storage rooms. He most definitely told me that the same floor on the mezzanine balcony extends into the storage room and if the plywood box is removed, the room can be used as an office or for whatever use the owner has in mind.
Mr. Scarano, if the same beams that support my weight, the weight of the hot water heater, the weight of the washer and dryer, and in at least one apartment the weight of a second bathroom, and those beams extended into the mezzanine storage space, how in the world would removing the plywood box harm the structural integrity of that room? Why wouldn't those beams support the weight of a human being or two and some furniture?"
From Scarano on October 5th, 2007:
To all,
Ok, now it is time to set the record straight.
First, this building was filed, reviewed and approved by the Dept of buildings under a standard filing (NOT PROFESSIONALLY CERTIFIED). This careful and complete examination CLEARLY showed the raised areas of the mezzanine level as storage (NON_HABITABLE SPACES) for the unit, NOT A BEDROOM, OFFICE, STUDY, ETC. The construction of this raised area was done in such a way that it is not possible to remove it without affecting the structural intergity of the entire level since the beams are at two different elevations. The items that exist on this MEZZANINE including a mechanical equiptment room, washer/dryer units and the storage area are there to give additional space to the lower level of the unit.Speaking to the owner today, NO ONE said anything to anyone who visited the open house this weekend about the ability to take this out since that is actually not even possible. I believe that someone has created this entire story in their own mind.
As far as the floors being spongy this condition is quite normal since a prefinished wood floating floor was installed over padding to accomodate the RADIANT FLOOR HEATING SYSTEM that was put in. This premier heating system is much healthier for the occupants of the unit and more environmentally sensitive than a convential sysem as it costs about twice as much as a traditional system would.
Every aspect the zoning and building code was followed to the letter which is how this project was allowed to be approved and permitted in the first place.
Lastly, concerning the layouts. Todays modern brownstone buildings, which is what this is one of, give a greater degree of fire safety to the unit owners since the entire building is constructed with non-combustable materials, have a steel and concrete exit stair and are fully sprinklered. Many of the old units on the market rely on escaping through a fire escape during an emergency and it is these same firescapes that contribute to more than half of the burglaries in the borough.
Today buyers have asked us for high ceilings and large windowed spaces which give the feeling of a loft environment. Since the price of a square foot of real estate has gone through the roof sizes of rooms have been brought down to what is an absolutely minimum functional area to be "AFFORDABLE " to a greater percentage of the population.
This overall change coupled with the contemporary finishes is what is being presented here.
The Department of Buildings, the developer, the architect and the builder have all done their job here and people are still free in this country to decide if what is being presented is right for them or not.
The false allegations, made up stories, spun verisions of reality, delusional rantings and general off color comments about our work will now be addressed each and every time they are raised by me. Since it is obvious that many people are worried about me, my jobs and my office I will attempt to educate them about construction and development activities in New York City.
Thank you for your attention,
Robert M. Scarano Jr, AIA, FARA, ALA
Posted by: guest at October 5, 2007 12:39 PM
Posted by: stevek at February 28, 2008 11:09 AM in response to Closing Bell: Neighbors Want 326 State to Clean Up Its Act
The point of the tax abatement is to have the housing built and occupiable before the additional 1 million residents come to New York. Many of those units may go ownerless for a year or two or three, but over time they will be bought up by new arrivals to the city. Until then, developers do have the option to act as landlords and rent them out at whatever rents the market can bare.
Posted by: stevek at February 28, 2008 10:57 AM in response to As Condo Sales Languish, Builders Slam 421-a Reform
I hate to burst Mr. Scarano's bubble, but when I went to an open house, the Fillmore real estate angent most definitely told me that owners can remove the black painted plywood platforms in those mezzanine storage rooms. He most definitely told me that the same floor on the mezzanine balcony extends into the storage room and if the plywood box is removed, the room can be used as an office or for whatever use the owner has in mind.
Mr. Scarano, if the same beams that support my weight, the weight of the hot water heater, the weight of the washer and dryer, and in at least one apartment the weight of a second bathroom, and those beams extended into the mezzanine storage space, how in the world would removing the plywood box harm the structural integrity of that room? Why wouldn't those beams support the weight of a human being or two and some furniture?
Posted by: stevek at February 28, 2008 10:54 AM in response to 326 State Street: Fudging the Mezzanines
Responses to Author's Forum Comments
it's hideous.
i think that's the main issue.
looks like it should be in the houston suburbs.
quality products sell in nyc. that's a fact.
so there's your reason why this one isn't...
Posted by: guest at February 29, 2008 11:34 PM in response to The Forte Condo
After reading brownstoner and about half a dozen other blogs, I don't think I've ever come across a comment about a new development where anyone had a positive comment about the appearance of th structure. So your hideous remark means nothing to me.
Back to my original topic which was a request for comments from anyone who has moved into the building already.
Posted by: stevek at March 2, 2008 6:05 PM in response to The Forte Condo
I have compared Forte Condo with other up and coming Condos eg Oro, 150 Myrtle in the same area and I feel their asking price is extremely high. Considering their bad layout designs I was appalled by their tiny cubical rooms and mini bath tubs. For a near 6 figure property I would expect more then that.
The other complaint I have was that there isn't any storage area even for a bicycle. Further the gym room at the basement was pretty small and stuffy for a 30 stories condo beside there is no swimming pool or sauna. These are the normal standard of modern condo living.
I would not consider buying unless there is another drastic price dropped. They dropped the price recently at almost $100K But still at more then $850 sq ft is just too much.
Posted by: nychguy at August 19, 2008 10:29 PM in response to The Forte Condo
I totally agree with the above. Went for the open house a few weeks ago. Not only were the bedrooms small the baths is tiny. Appliances eg washers, oven, fridge were not of famous brand. Not I would expect for a near $900 per sq ft apartment. The fact that since these unit living space is so small and there are wall to wall windows thus reducing walls for installing any cabinets for storage they should provide at least storeroom space at the basement.
For that price range I want a swimming pool and sauna amenities. Until the price drop to say below $750 a sq ft I wouldn't touch it. Hence so many units are still available.
The sponsor ought to wake up instead of prolonging another realistic price reduction. Perhaps the sponsors has lots of money to pay fir interest to the bank for unsold units. I predict soon this condo will go part rental if it continues not to sell.
There are a few new and nicer blocks of luxury condo coming up at the same neighborhood so it will be interesting to watch if sales will ever pick up for Forte.
Posted by: Mandy at August 21, 2008 2:21 PM in response to The Forte Condo
I was told the same thing by an Oro agent. They building is no longer going to be a condo but instead is being built as a hotel. Apparently, the glut of new condos in Brooklyn along with the credit crunch doesn't make a new high rise condo building particularly appealing to financers at the moment. It's taking too long for their liking for a building to be sold out. Good news for those of us in the market for a new apartment.
Posted by: stevek at March 2, 2008 6:08 PM in response to What's Up with Oro Part Deux?