Out of Context on Tiffany Place
We were less than pleased to see this picture of the out-of-context building that going up on Tiffany Place over in Cobble Hill. Does anyone have any info on who the developer is? Though we assume there’s about a 99.9% chance that this will be a condo development, we’d appreciate any other details on the…
We were less than pleased to see this picture of the out-of-context building that going up on Tiffany Place over in Cobble Hill. Does anyone have any info on who the developer is? Though we assume there’s about a 99.9% chance that this will be a condo development, we’d appreciate any other details on the project.
It looks like it is set back, which is out of context with most of NYC. Personally, I really object to large buildings like this setting back from the street wall (very different when its on a townhouse scale). A shame that developers get a bonus for this.
Regarding community facilities, these are not required, they are an option for which you can receive another density bonus. There are parts of the code which require outdoor recreation areas, etc., but that is different from the community facility bonus.
I’m relieved I live in a landmarked area of Park Slope and don’t have to worry about something going up across the street. I’m sure historic preservation has increased, not decreased, the value of the properties on my block.
Why did the first comment I posted here disappear?
the developer is some fly-by-night wanna be named Tony. He’s cheap and uses low grade quality stuff. cuts corners and licks it and sticks it. can’t wait to see what they will look like. probably some low rate rental “new development”.
Max,
Where did you find that comm. centers, gyms, and rec. areas are required? Where is that clause? In my experience builders use a comm. facility to increase their FAR. They are usually used for medical offices. Rec. space is sometimes required for quality housing.
JoshK,
I think the issue is that it might be out of context with what is there now (I don’t know if it is or isn’t). Clearly farm animals would be out of context on this street even if they were common 100 years ago. I get your point, but are you suggesting that contextualism should not be considered in development? Do developers have ANY obligation to consider what is around them before they design a building? Interesting issue
FYI, all these community centers, gyms, recreation space, etc are required by the city’s “physical culture” clause. Wierd but true.
And yeah, it is going to be a monster.
This is going to be an 8-story building. It’s set back from the street quite a bit (for which they received more f.a.r.). There’s going to be a partial 9th floor for elevator and staircase housing. Two units per floor. “Community Center” on the first floor (more f.a.r.). Condos, of course. I live on the block. Some beautiful buildings, but as has been pointed out, they’re all different from eachother. I think this one might fit in nicely. The real abomination is what happened to the beautiful old factory building at the other end of the street (60 Tiffany). I’ll try to send a shot.
There was a 3 story industrial type building on that lot which was torn down to make room for this building, which is 9 stories.