Scarano: Licensed to Ill?
New York has a piece this week about how Robert Scarano may get his architecture license revoked. That’s not really news, but it gives the mag an excuse to rate Scarano’s buildings according to a “Shoddy Meter” (53 Java, where a truck recently overturned and damaged a neighboring building, gets top shoddy honors, beating out…
New York has a piece this week about how Robert Scarano may get his architecture license revoked. That’s not really news, but it gives the mag an excuse to rate Scarano’s buildings according to a “Shoddy Meter” (53 Java, where a truck recently overturned and damaged a neighboring building, gets top shoddy honors, beating out 333 Carroll Street, above). In the most interesting bit of the article, Scarano defends himself by saying his work as an architect doesn’t have bearing on all aspects of individual construction jobs. To say that the architect has some all-encompassing role in the overall construction activity is not the way that this process happens, he says. I am confident that the work we do is proper, accurate, complete, and meets all of the requirements of the zoning resolutions and build codes. (Numerous architects have made the same point in this forum.) And so it remains to be seen whether the state’s education department agrees with him.
De Blasio Continues To Go After Scarano [Brownstoner]
He Built This Borough (Badly) [NY Magazine]
10:21, Scarano is off the Carroll between 4th and 5th site, and has been replaced by an outfit called KSQ of White Plains. That site has acquired even more girders, but is a lot more active than its been for a while
but the point is that only a shitty developer would consider using Scarano, so chances are if Scarano is the architect then the development is shitty
and if the problem isnt zoning but safety then why not simply find out who the developer and builder are and yell and scream about them – what good does it due to blame someone who has no control over that aspect of a job?
Bob – Except RS isn’t a developer OR an employee of a Developer
Well said johnife.
Polemicist, why not look up the DOB page on 333 Carroll. See how RS has counted the floors and do the math yourself. Either he can’t add or he is breaking the rules and the law. As for your ‘blocking the view’ defense, if you had this next door to you and knew it was being built illegally would you complain? I may be wrong, but it seems the most agressive comments on this site usually come from non-owners. Oh and by the way, they are working on the site (illegally)today since 7am.
11:50,
I see no dishonesty in opponents of excess development taking advantage of illegal actions of developers, or their employees, as a tactic. Developers would be well advised to stop giving the “other side” ammunition. By breaking the law, they undermine their own position.
The point most people are making isnt that RS is a wonderful architect who should be given a key to the city – rather if you want to have any credibility (r u listening B-stoner) you have to at least be truthful!
Knowingly filing plans that you know are a violation of FAR and other zoning and then self-certifying them is certainly legitimate grounds for a license revocation or suspension.
BUT
You sound like a bunch of cackling hens when you make ridiculous claims (like an architect is responsible or controls worksite safety for 1). This cackling undermines your credibility and in the long run undercuts your agenda. (which is presumably to rid Brooklyn of a corrupt architect)
Personally I believe the real agenda for many is simply anti-development – which is fine but again you destroy your persuasiveness (on anti-dev) when you try to achieve your results through less than straightforward methods.
It is amazing how hard it is for people to simply be honest about there agenda and it is amusing to see such people constantly lose because they lie, and exaggerate and spin thereby destroying what may be a legitimate position. Atlantic Yards, Brooklyn Bridge Park, Duffield St are just a few examples of this phenomenon.
Personally
Polemicist,
The zoning code gives clear definitions of when any floor space gets counted towards FAR. Scarano’s designs have, over the course of several years, flouted those regulations. He did this by swearing on his permit applications, under his self-certification status, that his designs complied with zoning laws and by being confident that an understaffed, lazy, inefficient or corrupt (take your pick) Department of Buildings would not bother to uncover his lies. If it’s not against the law to knowingly make a false statement to a City agency that’s responsible for public safety, it damned-well should be.
If 333 Carroll St. is LEGAL then why is there still a SWO?