Modern Design: Brooklyn Plagued by Mediocrity
We had just read Nicolai Ouroussoff’s article yesterday raving about Jean Nouvel’s two new residential buildings in Manhattan (which we share his enthusiasm for) on the subway and were walking down Washington Street towards our office in Dumbo when we were confronted with this vision of the Beacon and J Condo. All we could think…
We had just read Nicolai Ouroussoff’s article yesterday raving about Jean Nouvel’s two new residential buildings in Manhattan (which we share his enthusiasm for) on the subway and were walking down Washington Street towards our office in Dumbo when we were confronted with this vision of the Beacon and J Condo. All we could think was, “How mediocre.” The following statement from the Ouroussoff piece certainly couldn’t have been written about either of the new Dumbo towers or much else that’s been built in Brooklyn during the current building boom: “Mr. Nouvel doesn’t reject this history; he tips his hat to it, showing us what can be accomplished through ingenious planning and calculated consideration of the setting.” Besides Richard Meier’s design for On Prospect Park, there’s very little recent architecture that would merit the attention of critics. (The fiberglass house on Vanderbilt Avenue is one exception. What are some others?) We understand that the economics probably aren’t as compelling for starchitect-designed developments, but that’s no excuse for the lackluster buildings that will define the skyline for decades to come. There are certainly plenty of un-famous architects out there who could do better than the status quo. The hurdle: A little imagination and appetite for risk on the part of developers.
Seductive Machines for City Living [NY Times]
Its like all the developers and architects in New York City took a crap pill… now all they can build is crap. Its more apparent in Brooklyn because the new crap is so much taller than the old. In Manhattan they actually have nice old tall buildings that makes the new crap squeezed between them harder to focus on.
Some of the architecture in the Times article looks great. OnProspectPark’s OK. But its such a low percentage of what’s going up. Look at all the 8′ ceiling, crappy brick, small windowed “luxury” condo buidings going up all over manhattan… they would’ve barely passed for Mitchell-Lama buildings in the 60s. And half of the glass buildings look like they belong in an office park in Parsippany, NJ.
Sad really. Do they teach design anymore in architecture school or just bean counting and how to win the project?
THIS architect is in agreement with Mr B. The path for good design now does not lie in recreating nineteenth century facades, nor does it lie in “couture” or boutique efforts. Both of these pursuits will always be marginal; the value-engineering (that is, cutting everything to the bone) of most current developments does not allow for either approach.
But time and again we see efforts Mr B links too where plenty of money was spent, but not well. Were I some overarching czar of development, I would push developers to understand the applications of scale and proportion, light and shadow, layers, public and private, what materials can and cannot do, and finally what rules should be respected and what are worth breaking.
–an architect in Brooklyn
PS I don’t love love J-condo, but it really could be so much worse. There are interesting things going on with the facade, and no, I had nothing to do with it.
I think the new addition on 110 Livingston is very cool and is a great addition to the Downtown Brooklyn skyline. It’s a glittering little jewel box. I like it.
Certainly a building’s exterior becomes less important as building density increases. Who can even get a decent look at the exterior of an Upper East Side building with all that visual clutter around it? But this “J” condominium has plenty of space around it. It should be prettier.
Meanwhile, there hasn’t been much interesting post-war residential architecture in NYC due to cost and greed. Anyone know why Chicago has a plethora of interesting post-war residential buildings?
this site represents the view of those that accept the mediocrity, unfortunately. all the “brownstoners” want all real estate to have the “look and feel” of the late 1800’s. until Brooklynites become more open minded towards their neighborhoods, the Meier’s of the world – and the REAL money, I might add, will just stay away. the meier building is easily the most architechturally significant building to be raised in brooklyn in the last 100 years and all people do is criticize it. it’s a joke.
Really Brownstoner?… I say this with all sincerity; you should really read a few architecture/urban design books before passing yourself off as an expert. Just the basic ones would help.
You’re absolutely right. Can’t think of anything recent on the UES that’s compelling.
Although the you may appreciate a couple of the new apt. bldgs in Manhattan, I think to be fair you’d say most of the ones on that side of east river are also pretty mediocre.
I don’t think ones in Brooklyn are any more(or less) appealing on average.
Same can said for Queens, NJ or rest of country.
The Nouvel ones are more modest in scale compared to the bigger projects in Manhattan. I think issue is even in upper price ranges, the percentage of buyers impressed by outsign design of bldg is small.
That fiber glass building may look interesting if you have a rear view but from the front it looks unfinished and doesn’t fit the neighborhood at all.