Checking In On The Vermeil
When we wrote about some price cuts at The Vermeil, the 22-unit development at 133 Sterling Place at the corner of 7th Avenue in Park Slope, there were only four units left, according to StreetEasy. Now, strangely, there are six available. There haven’t been any price cuts since then, though it looks like some of…
When we wrote about some price cuts at The Vermeil, the 22-unit development at 133 Sterling Place at the corner of 7th Avenue in Park Slope, there were only four units left, according to StreetEasy. Now, strangely, there are six available. There haven’t been any price cuts since then, though it looks like some of the apartments were temporarily pulled off the market in February and brought back again last week. The remaining units range from a 1,532-square-foot two-bedroom for $1,100,000 to a 1,711-square-foot three-bedroom for $1,299,000.
More Price Cuts at The Vermeil [Brownstoner] GMAP
Checking in on The Vermeil [Brownstoner]
Changing of the Guard at The Vermeil [Brownstoner]
First Closing at The Vermeil [Brownstoner]
Condo of the Day: Price Cut at The Vermeil [Brownstoner]
Update on the Vermeil [Brownstoner]
wpg: Because those styles you cite reflected some sense of aesthetics. The reality is that developers, left to their own devices, will build the Novo and the Argyle and anything else that squeezes every bit of FAR possible out of a lot at the expense of beauty. It’s very hard to police a code that requires some basic sense of aethetics, but requiring buildings to follow historic patterns is a reasonably (albeit limiting) proxy.
This is certainly what Brownstoner posters want in new developments – and yet once again here is more evidence that buyers generally dont care that much about exterior architecture (which makes sense to me but apparently not to most who read or post here).
The developer is either a diehard Brownstoner, an idiot or just a haza (sp?) – He’s got a really nice product (inside and out) but he is pricing it too high – cut the price, move some units – its not that complicated.
How is it there there is room for Federal, Greek Revival, Flemish, Queen Anne, Romanesque Revival, and other styles spanning close to 100 years but come 1900, nothing new can be added to the neighborhood (landmarked or not). Scale, proportion, massing, rhythm are not exclusive to historic periods. I agree that many (many!) new developments are quite awful for a multitude of reasons (often scale), I don’t however think as a progressive society we should limit our pallets to 19th century pastiche.
So this is on the site of the McCaddin Funeral Home. Does it also include the site of the ironically-named Pillar of Fire church, which burned in the plane crash?.
This is especially what we want new developments to look like inside historic districts.
hell yes, this is what most people want new development to look like.
Is this really what people want NEW developments to look like? I never really understood how with our cars, phones, PDAs, bicycles, stereos, appliances, books (graphics), etc we want something that reflects the spirit of our times. However with architecture, people’s aesthetic tastes seem stuck somewhere between 1840 and 1910.
Troy McClure – If it means I get a cool elevator in my basement where the floor on the first level opens up and I can ascend into my dining room while looking somber … then hell yes!
This is the plane crash site and was a funeral parlor until it got demo’d for this place to be built.
Very funny that someone complained about lack of original detail above. Do you really want funeral home detail in your apartment?