« Residential Sales in Brooklyn Yowza! The Lamm Institute's For Sale »
March 12, 2007
Development Watch: Washington Bummer
The PACC development on the east side of Washington Avenue has shown its skin and the results are decidely underwhelming. This location deserved much better.
Development Watch: PACC on Washington [Brownstoner] GMAP
PACC Projects on Washington Moving Along [Brownstoner]
What a Difference a Week Makes [Brownstoner]
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/706
Comments
I agree that the building isn’t interesting—but it is so much better than what was there! The decrepit building and the bombed out van on the lawn are not missed!
Posted by: Anonymous at March 12, 2007 10:22 AM
That "decrepit" building could have been restored.
Posted by: brownstoner at March 12, 2007 10:32 AM
not the best not the worst
Posted by: clinton hillbilly at March 12, 2007 10:36 AM
I agree with Brownstoner on this one. It could have been restored. In fact, that whole side of the street could have been nice if all the buildings were restored.
The building that was razed across the street was not really salvagable in my opinion, though I really dislike the balconies that PACC added and the lack of set back with the adjacent buildings.
Balconies on the front of buildings in brownstone neighborhoods are out of context and end up being used to dry laundry, store bike and go for a smoke - because they are too small for anything else. If you want small balconies, put them in the back and preserve a handsome facade for the rest of the street.
Posted by: lp at March 12, 2007 10:41 AM
does anyone have any furhter info on the construction site on Washington between Atlantic and Fulton?
Posted by: Anonymous at March 12, 2007 10:44 AM
I couldnt agree more with the front balconies! They are awful! But at least the buildings in general are not terrible, like some of the new Fedders disasters in western Bed-Stuy.
Posted by: ClintonHiller at March 12, 2007 10:52 AM
Original Brownstone could have been restored, true... but this way more affordable residences will be constructed. If those condos actually go to people deserving of the "affordable" housing, I think it's great.
Posted by: BrooklynZoo at March 12, 2007 11:21 AM
Strangely asymetrical.
Posted by: Anonymous at March 12, 2007 11:50 AM
I believe that PACC restores the building when it is feasible to do so. They just began work on 420 Classon Avenue and I believe that they are restoring the building as much as possible. In order to get the funding needed sometimes it is necessary to offer a certain number of units of various sizes. Given that a gut rehab does not always cater to these needs, the only possibility is a tear-down. Given the choice of the previous eyesore or an unremarkable, but clean building - I'd choose the latter.
It seems everybody finds it very easy to sit back and critique these projects but don't really want to ever get their hands dirty.
Posted by: Anonymous at March 12, 2007 12:52 PM
its funny. i walk past this think multiple times daily and my general thought is that it could have been so much worse. this stretch of washington is already a bit of a lost cause. bit of a bummer but we've known this was coming for a long time.
Posted by: benno at March 12, 2007 1:20 PM
'thing' not 'think'. gotta start proofreading...
Posted by: benno at March 12, 2007 1:23 PM
i walked by the other day and noticed that there are also gaps between the facing and the structure - i forsee heating issues for years to come. as for the building between atlantic and fulton, they're moving forward furiously - they've been digging for a while, but finally look like they're starting to get the retaining walls poured. and they now have an architect placque outside - Stephen B Jacobs Group.
Posted by: dahl at March 12, 2007 1:43 PM
I've seen much worse. The brickwork is boring but not disgusting. I like the irregular fenestration. The long Fedders boxes are slightly nicer than the standard version. The shared lintels on the 2nd and 5th floors are weird.
Posted by: P at March 12, 2007 3:59 PM
I would have rather see something better, but is not that ugly, at least is not the crap on fulton and classon.
Posted by: Anonymous at March 12, 2007 5:19 PM
Scarano's Washington Ave or this. You decide. post them together Jon unless you have some other agenda to adress this week?
Posted by: The Shadow at March 12, 2007 10:59 PM
That's a silly comparison, Shadow. The Washington is a much better looking building. Of course, as far as we know, PACC hasn't violated numerous building codes in putting up its building.
Posted by: brownstoner at March 13, 2007 10:59 AM
PACC does these buildings with public money. Why can't they respect the building setback line on the block? Why don't they use African American workers? Why can't they respect the historic nature of the block just a little more? The renderings looked good, but the reality doesn't match up. Balconies on Wash. Ave??? This isn't Queens. Would anyone else get away with this?
Posted by: anon at March 13, 2007 3:32 PM
According to the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/24/realestate/24post.html?ex=1324616400&en=84f67c00ec537f42&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss) this project is actually the only affordable/market rate mixed condo development in NYC that has no government funding whatsoever. Also, the same article addresses the comment from dahl about the gaps that could cause heating issues for years to come. Apparently, the building has an "insulated cavity wall" that is specifically designed to ensure more efficient heating.
Posted by: anonymous at March 17, 2007 10:21 AM
Sorry I can't get the above link straight. The article is "Affordable Housing Without Subsidies" by Lisa Chamberlain from the December 24, 2006 Real Estate section.
Posted by: anonymous at March 17, 2007 10:32 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.