The Shame of Fulton Hitting Market

Materials on sale at HD? Naahh - they used what was left over from other job sites, or maybe what was left on the street somewhere.

Disgraceful. Unfortunately, in a city that is also disgracefully lacking in affordable housing, I wouldn't be surprised if it fills up very quickly. Young families, especially mostly minority families of limited means, and recent arrivals to this country, of many persuasions, are going to find this, on the face of it, the deal de jour.

You can't blame people who don't have a lot of choices or money for going for it, especially since to most people, new will always be the best option, and symbolizes quality and class, and they won't realise it probably is built badly and of the cheapest materials until it starts to fall apart.

The shame of it is that the builder could have easily done better, for the same amount of money, As I said in other discussions of this and similar buildings, to me, this shows a profound contempt on the developer's part for the very people who are giving them their profit. It would serve them right if no one moved in. If there were more choices available, maybe no one would.

Posted by: CrownHeightsProud at August 11, 2006 10:05 AM

I'm cynical enough to picture some young, smartass architectural grads coming up with this mess as some kind of slap in the face to conventional architecture, or some other statement towards the state of the world, or somesuch, BklynMosaic. Too bad they couldn't keep their statements to a smaller scale. I can also see some developer grabbing the idea as a way to use up the leftovers from 6 other projects. Everybody's happy except anyone who actually looks at this behemoth.

Way back when I was in college, I took a fascinating course which included a section on urban architecture. The professor, who was a practicing architect, was so enthusiastic about the possibilites of creating new housing in decaying cities (this was the 70's) that I was seriously thinking about becoming an architect myself. He had feasible ideas about creating pride of place for both cities and the residents of his buildings, and ideas that would be cost effective and attractive. I know he went on to be quite successful in other cities, but it's too bad that kind of enthusiasm in today's architects has been supressed and squashed in today's maximum profit at minimum cost and effort marketplace.

Posted by: CrownHeightsProud at August 11, 2006 11:12 AM

Yente, goodness knows I want affordable housing in the community, I'm not knocking that. It just burns me that, more than likely, the building is not constructed to last, they used thin sheetrock, the cheapest fixtures, and other shortcuts that are going to have people complaining in about a year, if not sooner.

And that's what's so unfair. The buyers/renters are not going to be the kind of people who run to attorneys and sue at the drop of a hat, or even complain on blogs like this. They don't know going into new construction, or even renovation, what to look for, how to evaluate the true value of an apartment. I'm not being a class snob here - MOST people, in all classes, don't know what to really look for when buying or renting. We are all blinded by the glow of new appliances, shiny floors, gleaming light fixtures, etc. We just aren't educated in the ways of houses and apartments, it takes experience and a genuine interest in the business of homebuilding to know to look under the kitchen sink, or see if the windows were put in correctly.

All that to say that I don't have any solution except for the wish that home worthiness classes were a part of the process of getting a mortgage. Until then, it's buyer beware, and the people who can least afford options are the ones who get hurt the most.

Posted by: CrownHeightsProud at August 11, 2006 12:50 PM

The other thing that gets me is that if this is indeed a POS inside as well as out, in a couple of years, after horror stories and people leaving in droves, it will end up being a really low end rental to people who really don't give a damn, or don't have any other choice. Then you'll get the crime, the dealers, the garbage and all of the horrors of urban living that no one wants. After much protest from the surrounding community and from social advocates, it will get shut down, and then torn down. That helps absolutely no one, not the community, the renters, or even the developer. Far fetched and cynical? Yeah. But not impossible. Why can't it just be done correctly in the first place?

Posted by: CrownHeightsProud at August 11, 2006 1:00 PM

Thank you Brown Bomber. 'Nuff said. It's too bad you can't stand outside and warn people not to spend their hard earned money on this crap. Consider it a timely intervention, a prevention of disaster.

Posted by: CrownHeightsProud at August 11, 2006 3:31 PM

Ownership of the land one lives on (today it's a home, or apartment) has been of premium importance since European fuedal times. There was a time in this country when only landowners could vote. When soldiers come back from wars they are offered grants and low interest loans to buy property. Our national mythology involves a small house with a picket fence, and the goal that is promoted to new comers to this country, as well as to the rest of us, is to work like crazy, save and one day, buy your own home. This is the quintissential American Dream.

Speaking only for myself here, that's why I get so heated over buildings like this. To me, it is the ultimate rip off to work hard, save till it hurts, and think that you have found something that you can invest in, sell down the road at a profit, as you move up to something better, and so you buy one of the units in this building, your American Dream, and get absolute crap.

Let's say you don't know enough to know the windows aren't installed correctly, let's say you have never heard of a house inspector, and have no idea you even should have one. Let's say you tour a unit that looks pretty good to your untrained eye. You pay your money, you move in, and in a year the floorboards are popping, the windows leak, the plumbing has problems, and little Johnny put his foot through the living room wall.

Where's the American Dream when you are told it's your responsibility, not the developer's to get all of that fixed? Where is it when you have to join in a class action suit with most of the rest of the building? What happens when you try to sell, and you can't unload the place, and your hard earned investment is in the toilet? This just isn't right, and should be stopped before it starts. Quality housing for middle income buyers is a possible and feasible goal. Other cities manage to do it, other places in NYC manage to do it. Why should a building like this be the only choice people have who want to stay in or move to Clinton Hill?

I know I'm just ranting here with no answers, maybe I'm just waiting for the troll to find me here, maybe some of us smart people could figure out a way to promote quality design and building practices for lower and middle class housing that provides a worthy investment in the American Dream, and makes money for the builder as well. Hmmmmm.

Posted by: CrownHeightsProud at August 11, 2006 11:55 PM

ItsAWrap, I don't think it's Great Gatsbyesque to work to have your own home, I'm talking about everyone's chance at having a piece of the rock, however small, not the North Fork. Many of the people who read and post here own their own homes, and we enjoy the tax breaks, the home equity, and the intangible sense of place that owning a house or an apartment brings. Outside of larger cities, most people in this country are homeowners, not renters. Coops and condos have made home ownership possible for people where traditional houses may not be available.

Why is it too much to ask that that investment be worth it in quality? What's so unrealistic about that? And in regard to your investment idea, I could not in good conscience, reward the builder by buying into this POS, and then turn around and ask anyone to pay $1350 a month,(which is more than either of my tenants pay for a far superior apt) for the dreck described by putnam-denizen and BrownBomber. Then they are supposed to just put up with, or pay for repairs to substandard work, or move? Sorry, couldn't do it.

If that makes me the new Upton Sinclair, thanks for the complement to being cast with one of the original muckrakers and social reformers. I do wish the commenter could find someone else, as US was anti-Semitic, as well as racist, but thanks for the back handed complement anyway.

Posted by: CrownHeightsProud at August 13, 2006 10:14 AM