Scarano's Bigger Sin?
“By dodging the rules, Scarano violates a commandment that architects don’t take, but should: first, do no harm. But his bigger sin is not just squeezing in slightly bigger buildings. It’s that he is fundamentally guilty of arrogant disdain for the city fabric, from the much-mocked “Finger Building” on North 8th Street in Williamsburg to…
“By dodging the rules, Scarano violates a commandment that architects don’t take, but should: first, do no harm. But his bigger sin is not just squeezing in slightly bigger buildings. It’s that he is fundamentally guilty of arrogant disdain for the city fabric, from the much-mocked “Finger Building” on North 8th Street in Williamsburg to the crassly insensitive gray splinter of a tower at 52 East 4th Street on the Bowery. New York has always grown upward, of course, but a tall building has to earn its height — to replace the light it blocks and the change it wreaks with a measure of brilliant design. Otherwise it becomes a double blot. Scarano’s buildings are poseurs: cheap, flashy structures dressed up in metal sheeting and tinted glass. The greatest architecture embodies the ethos of its era, but mediocre architecture can do the same thing more transparently. Scarano’s designs perfectly capture today’s rapacious spirit: Glitter and be greedy, and try not to get caught.”
— Justin Davidson in New York Magazine
I don’t think all of Scarano’s work is horrible, that is when compared to a lot of other stuff that’s quietly gone up in my nabe, for example.
I don’t think this era has seen any amount of worse architecture than any other era. The 1980s? Hell, those apts were WORSE.
On Prospect, 1 Bryant, Diller bldg, NYT building, 15CPW, TW Center, Westin TS, there are quite a few decent buildings that have gone up in the past decade.
In Brooklyn, bad design is rewarded thanks to the ambiguity and complexity of zoning regulations, a backward looking and bureaucratically impossible Department of Buildings, and a marketplace which does not recognize the value of good design. If you want to see more good design today, these are the things that need to change. Good luck!
Has anyone heard of any ways to give financial incentives for architecture that improves neighborhood character? Scarano could work for so long because there were lots of people who made money on architecture that, IMHO, hurt the value of neighboring properties.
Part of the problem is that often the first and only way to describe a property is SQUARE FEET. Number of square feet or price per square feet can be a pretty lame way to judge a home.
In my perfect world, I would put a tax on bad design and ugly buildings.
Could we develop a Brownstoner wiki to take a stab at this?
excuse me but i posted nothing of the kind. in fact, i say that there has been crap built thru the ages. and i pointed out 2 new condo projects (i guess not yours!) that look good and well built. your post is borderline anti-semitic btw. pls dont ask me to explain how cause if you cant see how upon re-reading your own post then you’re beyond help.
oh antidope please – everything needs to be repaired. it’s not like a single thing from the 19th century is hanging around in great condition without being re-done. i know, i’ve owned 2 19th century buildings. and, i’m sure that some scarano designed buildings are totally fine. please stop pretending that everyone in construction in 2010 is incompetent. it’s dumb.
meanwhile, scarano broke the law, but really, buyers want space, and he gave it to them.
i think the problems with the aesthetics do come from the developers though. many many in brooklyn are hassids, and they simply do not care.
ironically, several got their money from illegal rentals (zoned commericial spaces) by people who were willing to break the law in order to get space for less! soo… i my mind, the demand for space is ultimately to blame.
“Some developers will pay for it and the market certainly does demand it.”
Not to parse words, but if the market demanded high-quality architecture, all of Scarano’s buildings would be sitting empty.
That said, best of luck in your endeavors to find a better model.
on prospect park doesn’t meet you pos criteria, does it?
how about the toren?
agreed that many condos are unattractive and poorly built but i am willing to bet dollars to donuts that it’s always been this way. only ones left from 19th c are those that were built to last. many more (the fedders of the day) have been torn down.
Other cities around the country and in Europe are doing new, modern architecture in historic areas SO much better than anything Brooklyn is doing. Or Manhattan either for that matter. Modern isn’t the problem here. Tacky, unethical, unimaginative no-talents are the problem.
Antidope – buyers are partners and all costs, including my management fee are fixed. As far as competing within the existing paradigm goes we are working on a political solution. Not holding my breath on complete success with our model outside landmarked districts but you never know. We are currently working with a number of client/partners and are diligently pursuing our first redevelopment opportunity. I’ll let you know how it goes.