Quote of the Day
This is why developers build eyesore POS’s all over the place – because whoever objects is termed elitist and these concerns are dismissed. Demanding higher standards from developers altering our neighbor- hoods with the shittiest, cheapest condo buildings they can build is not snobbery. And I’m not suggesting city regulation – if more people spoke…
This is why developers build eyesore POS’s all over the place – because whoever objects is termed elitist and these concerns are dismissed. Demanding higher standards from developers altering our neighbor- hoods with the shittiest, cheapest condo buildings they can build is not snobbery. And I’m not suggesting city regulation – if more people spoke up then developers would maybe, maybe, give aesthetics 10 extra minutes of thought.
— by squaredrive in Horror Show Friday: 170 Clermont Avenue
just a note to square drive i think its a good idea instead of brownstoner being a digital rag for negativity they should do some emphasis on development done right show some examples have some with knowledge of design explain the merits of the design why exactly it is good design
the concept of design by government regulation that really sucks
that doesnt sound like it will promote much in the way of design or creativity
Design by the community and or design by committee that is not a formula for success. Aesthetics can be somewhat subjective. That being said there are I think there some buildings that even within an area of subjectivity one would agree are less than. I think that the concept of demanding higher standards and good design from the developers for the protection of the community is a lot easier said than done. And lets own up to it is elitist. If one could afford or desired only basic shelter with minimal concern as to wether he lived in a limestone or a building clad with aluminum siding would the design committee or the community , or the elitist pay this person the difference in cost between a limestone facade and aluminum siding so he can live in the community according to their somewhat subjective standards. My guess is talk is cheap and as long as it comes out of some else’s flesh everyone got an opinion as to how the other person should live or how the other person should build etc. The problem is not just the developers. Developers generally higher architects to design a building. As shocking as it might sound most architects are not necessarily great designers. The developer doesnt tell the architect design me a cheap POS that the community will find offensive. The developer (same as the community, Purchaser and Architect) may or may not recognize what constitutes quality design. Each certainly has their own priorities and values things a bit differently. Most are somewhat motivated by self interest many times defined in terms of making a profit(developer), getting a good deal (purchaser), making a living, pleasing a client, and trying to develop a good design (Architect), how does it effect me economically etc with little feeling as to anyone elses costs (the community). I believe thats where the problem lies. The community is willing to have the developer and the purchaser spend whatever it would take better architect, better materials, higher costs. They are not concerned wether the developer makes a profit or wether the purchaser will be able to afford the Mercedes Building as opposed to the Chevrolet Building. The Community wants all Mercedes Buildings becauase this is a community of people who appreciate Mercedes. Elitists The concept that if more people spoke up developers would somehow come up with better designs i find kind of innocent. I do believe if the purchasers of condominiums understood the value of good design and were willing to pay up for good design and top quality there would be developers and architects that would attempt to provide them with such. I also believe that if the purchasers were not willing to purchase condominiums of low quality design at any price (im mean cheap) those developers would surely be displaced by the market.
Oy…and on Passover week at that!!!!!!
One of the reasons I chose to live in an historic district is because I don’t want something like this popping up down the street from me. It would make me sad to have to look at it every day.
More areas need to be landmarked so we can hold on to at least a fragment of civilized urban environment.
Most of the city can still be “anything goes” where folks who don’t give a hoot can live peacefully with their off-kilter facades, grundgy dives, and state-of-the-art tattoo parlors.
But speaking for at least some of us, thank goodness there are historic districts and landmarks regulations.
Somebody’s been hitting the Manischewitz early today.
a lot of really horrible places are developed by hasidics. they eschew aesthetics. place zero value on it and think that people who do are living worthless lives.
the ironic part is that the hasids are the people who bought up all the “nobody wants them” warehouse buildings that first artists illegally live in (followed by everyone else). then after funding the hasids, everyone wonders why they have so much money to build.
of course, the self entitled “liberal” new yorker never stops to analyze that it was their illegal activity that helped to create the problem that they then complain about. cause if you are liberal, then all your illegal activity is okey dokey.
Squaredrive… I actually agree with you about this building (to an extent, though I’ve seen far worse), but I have to think that the whacked out reality that has been created with the properties that have some sort of aesthetic sense might actually be the CAUSE here.
These “horror show” properties find buyers… and, thus, the developers don’t get the message that their aesthetics are retarded. WHY do they find buyers so easily?? Because these are the only properties where a prospective buyer of more modest means can “find a break.” (And I’m being very liberal in my usage of ‘modest means’)
When a 3-bedroom brownstone *starts* at $2 million in a prime neighborhood and at $1 million in a “border area,” I’m not sure what you expect!!! And this doesn’t just apply to real estate for sale, this also affects rentals… If NoVo was built as a rental development, it would have filled up even faster…
I have a solution. Stop paying $2 million for a house worth $600k and then maybe these “horrors” won’t seem so attractive. However, as you know, the liberal concerned with community joy and happiness disappears when you suggest his/her brownstone shouldn’t sell for a 134% return after 2 years.
(There’s something to this argument. It’s not the most well thought out idea that’s come out of my head… but there’s a few pearls of wisdom in there.)
I suggest renaming this thread, “Things that make you go zzzzz.”
I understand Mr B’s point, but I think this thread is – in the end – as snarky and ineffectual as the “That’s Rather Hideous” posts on Curbed.
Is this virtual “Hall of Shame” of aesthetically challenged buildings going to change the mind of even one of the developers of said horrors?
Of course not. It’s preaching to the choir.
I agree squaredrive — he can ask readers to submit suggestions….and he can pick and chose. I think people that do a good job deserve attention as well.