The Big Reveal at 360 Smith
The scaffolding has finally come down at 360 Smith and the blogger Pardon Me For Asking isn’t very happy about what she can see. She calls the building, which has been under construction since 2008, “uninspired,” “out of scale,” “out of context,” and for good measure: “Fugly.” Clearly the building dwarfs its neighbors but the…
The scaffolding has finally come down at 360 Smith and the blogger Pardon Me For Asking isn’t very happy about what she can see. She calls the building, which has been under construction since 2008, “uninspired,” “out of scale,” “out of context,” and for good measure: “Fugly.” Clearly the building dwarfs its neighbors but the overall look doesn’t seem to be worse than most other new buildings that have popped up around town in recent years.
360 Smith Getting Its Facade [Brownstoner]
360 Smith Tops Out [Brownstoner] GMAP
Oh, I’m finished with school until next semester so I gotta get my last minute holiday jabs in.
blayze – don’t you have finals or something you should be studying for?
You gosh darn better!
Though I was merely trying to counter Benson’s point, which is knocking down old buildings so denser ones can be built for the middle class which in reality, are often market-rate and luxury oriented. It’s typical development babble.
But you can stay Scott.
So employees in the financial district do not have the right to live in Brooklyn?
I guess I better start packing.
Density and transit friendly it may be, but it won’t be affordable, that’s for sure. It’ll be a commuter lodge for employees of the financial district. Nothing more or less.
Tear it down, try again.
Hmmm…What smart growth is all about. Let’s put high density housing in an area that already has an overwhelmed school and sewage system, without upgrading either of those systems, and not insist that said building be built to high energy efficiency standards. Doesn’t sound so smart to me.
What many of the posters here are ignoring is that zoning standards were primarilly put into place not to preserve neighborhoods, but because of infrastructure requirements. This building is approximately 70′ tall, about 18′ over zoning, or close to 1/3 oversized, so I have to disagree with fsrq, this building would not get built in most cases and is controversial.
Anyone know if these units will be for sale or rentals?
Feh. Better than the steel-clad battleship Scarano had originally designed.
Contextual, size wise, it is not. Stylistically, debatable.
For context, think of CPW, with tall buildings facing the park on the corner, and brownstones lining the sidestreets. I don’t think the height is the problem. Just wish the design were a bit better. One other positive thing – it looks like the trees near the corner were preserved through construction. I’m going to hold off on any more criticism until we see what the ground floor/steetscape is like.