Vernon Jackson corner getting glassy; somber predictions for LIC landlords
10-17 Jackson Ave, Long Island City. Rendering courtesy of V Studios
The new development rising on the famous corner of Vernon Blvd & Jackson Ave is finally identified as 10-17 Jackson Ave, a 9-story condo development with ground floor retail:
“It will contain approximately 33 units and ground floor retail which is being built with the potential for a restaurant in mind. The exterior will be a combination of floor to ceiling ribbon glass, stainless steel shingles, and perforated aluminum screens. The architect says that he is going to pains to blend in with the community.”
In other Long Island City news, the muggings that occurred last week in Ravenswood were unfortunately brutal.
Marcus & Millichap predicts trouble for Long Island City landlords via the Observer:
“Vacancy is forecast to remain in check in popular Manhattan and Brooklyn neighborhoods such as the Upper East Side and Upper West Side, the Village, downtown Brooklyn and Park Slope as distressed renters take on roommates rather than move out of desirable locations. In contrast, supply concerns will mount in Long Island City, Midtown West, the Financial District and southeastern Harlem, where deliveries will be elevated and the threat of shadow rentals persists.”*
Lastly, but not least, a tenant at one of the Rockrose buildings was allegedly refused a lease renewal because he criticized the building online.
Vernon/Jackson mystery revealed; 10-17 Jackson Ave unshrined [A Fine Blog]
Reports of some nasty muggings in LIC [Gothamist]
Unwanted Roommates, Landlord’s saving grace [Observer]
Tenants encouraged to socialize, but not criticize [NY Times]
LIC/Astoria’s Steinway Piano factory goes solar [PR Newswire]
Because all the other buildings are hideous.
Cannot believe they torn down the classy Congro Building – which was the former Long Island Savings Bank, for this.
Lots o fun trying to get sleep with the railyards on one side the toll plaza on the other.
The railyards and the toll plaza? Wow, people really do have no idea what they are talking about. Neither of those will affect this building.
4, are you kidding? The building is just a stone’s throw from the railyard.
Oy. Why does it all have to look the same? The only building I thought that turned out surprisingly ok, is Ten63, despite the painfully pointy-ness of it. But the glass & brick facade looked worse in the rendering. This though, this just looks like boring new construction. Boo.
Hahhahhahah. All the developments who are in this phase of construction right now in this declining and officially depressed economy are FUCT. Poor poor developers. I love the bad news. Keep it coming.
I like that building. It has an interesting character but lets face it, LIC is becoming a mess of mish moshed architecture. Each building is just an advertisment for the architect/designer with disregard for anyhting else in the area.
I don’t know. Things are becoming very “random” here.
i hope a sushi restaurant opens on the ground floor.
What’s the deal with the stupid prow at the top of the building. What is that trying to reference?
walking the plank?
I hope a thin crust pizza place opens, along with some kind of asian fusion, that’s what LIC needs.
haha #11. that was funny.
One has to wonder why no building in LIC designed by Valgora (there are a number) has been completed. Developers love the guy because he convinces them he can seduce the community with his razzle dazzle b.s. I suppose he will again try to say this building reflects the original neighborhood, blah, blah. It’s another cheap looking Lego building. Yet this somehow suffices as the yuppie wet dream.
I’m all for new development but I’m hard pressed to see how this POS echoes the surrounding neighborhood. I mean, look at that picture. What the HELL is the architect trying to say? Even with a context of “meaning”, this is one ugly building–not to mention it has absolutely NOTHING to do with anything LIC-related in any way. Unless of course that it doeswn’t get built.
We live across the street from the soon-to-be eyesore and there are 3 floors up already. fyi–the traffic at the toll plaza and the LIRR railways are never heard.
How about a good soul/southern food restaurant? That would give some variety to the neighborhood eats.
Charlie.
Oh, Ok Charlie. We’ll get right on it.
18, don’t be a prick. Lay off, Charlie. Sounds like as good a recommendation as any on this board.
everyone knows that #9 & #12 are joking, right?
Of course, 20. But 18 was being an a**hole to Charlie.
Wouldn’t Lucky Mojo be considered soul/southern food?
I don’t understand the thought process behind architects and developers in LIC. Is it that we get all the leftovers from Manhattan? Not all of it is bad, but so much of it is. The architect who says that he (?) took pains to blend it in with the neighborhood is just delivering lip service. It’s plain by the rendering it has no relevance to LIC whatsoever. Except yeah, to serve the yuppy luxury condo fantasy. The only exceptions in LIC are when developers are forced to convert an older building, leaving an old, beautiful, historic facade.
To give an example and not just spew negativity, the architect in this case, could have done something to pay homage to the Congro building it knocked down. It could have been a more industrial motif. Keep the condo fantasy, just integrate LIC and it’s history that development is ruthlessly obliterating.
I’m going to buy stock in Windex after this building is built.
I would like an authentic Chinese place.
“Tenants encouraged to socialize, but not criticize ”
Wow, I was shocked to read about this. Anybody have more details?
“The only exceptions in LIC are when developers are forced to convert an older building, leaving an old, beautiful, historic facade.”
Besides the Badge building, when has this ever happened? Schwartz Chemical is a disaster, for the most part. There always seem to be countless reasons why the old graceful buildings get demolished, and yet plenty of other cities manage to do just that. So what do they know that we don’t?
25, I was initially shocked. But then I thought, why would any landlord out there want to renew the lease of some pain in the ass? I can’t imagine my old Italian landlady putting up with half the crap that guy and his girlfriend dished out. I’m lucky to get heat and hot water.
#19 – “Lay off, Charlie. Sounds like as good a recommendation as any on this board”
That comma before Charlie leads me to ask: Do you mean to ask Charlie to lay off, or for others to lay off Charlie? Reading the statement that follows would lead me to understand that you want others to lay off Charlie. Why? Charlie is a pompous, old git and needs a whoopin’. Every one of his posts makes me want to shove a sock in his big mouth.
Who else agrees?
Hey Eastcoasters, any inside scoop on the pain in the ass tenant Rockrose ousted? Were his transgressions that severe?
If you ask me Rockrose was justified. Tenants are a dime a dozen and they seem to have no probelem keeping their space leased. All things equal why would you want a guy like this in you midst when you could have a nice quiet tenant. Don’t like it? Buy a home and you can post whatever you want on a blog without fear of not having your lease renewed. Anyway I think there is more to the story than just that in the article. Chances are this guy was abusive to staff, withheld rent and fees, etc. You can’t rebutt this in a newspaper article without inviting potential lawsuits, etc. so the smartest thing to do in not renew the lease and ignore his parting shots.
#26, its very easy to make statements like that with nothing to back it up. Please cite a case study from one of these oter cities and I will tell you how it differes from LIC. Several facts working against the presevervation of building in LIC. 1) NYC is one of the most expensive places to build in the world and preservation is notiouriously labor intensive. 2) The old buildings that are being torn down were in many cases not properly maintained nor did they have any gainful use prior to their demolition which means that they are not in usuable condition. 3) Environmental concerns – you can’t take a chemical plant and turn it into apartments by slapping on some new paint and knocking down interior walls. 4) Density is required to make a projects feasible in NYC which is why no one is buiding two story buildings around here.
#26, Arris Lofts, the Powerhouse
Arris is a disaster. I would not use that as a example of sucessful preservation.
On an unrelated note, does anyone know any brunch places with bottomless drinks in LIC or elsewhere in Western Queens? I’ve found some in Manhattan/Brooklyn but still looking for one hear. A dude’s gotta save $, we’ve got a recession/depression on. Bloody marys get expensive.
We need a $15 cocktail.
19 & 21 how can you take totally light hearted humor and turn it so foul? pr*ck? a*hole? don’t you think that’s a bit strong? I just found it funny that people throw out these ideas like we should have this or that as if there’s some central clearinghouse that responds to requests. I didn’t realize that I would be perceived to be attacking anyone. Or is your motif to drive away anyone who is not you?
We need many $15 cocktails. Discounted, like all the condos in LIC. But you only get the discount at the bar. It’s still advertised as $15. Like all the condos in LIC.
(My personal fave is the unsecured rockrose buy-back guarantee.)
we need a place with good drinks specials and wings!
lucky mojos tries, but theyre confused about who they are or want to be.
#31, in support of #26:
http://www.acppubs.com/article/CA6437915.html
ftp://imgs.ebuild.com/woc/M00E019.pdf
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2007/10/23/plans_for_dainty_dot_building_now_daintier/
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-5388830.html
http://www.cambridgemainstreet.com/uploads/MainStFireNews_Jan25_08.pdf
I could keep going but this is just a sampling of how some facades have been preserved.
LIC is beginning to remind me of a forced “neighbourhood” with no real aim or particular goal towards the future. Kind of like Dubai on the East River :)
I love this damn place, but I fear for its lack of direction.
I was serious with my post. Why not a place like Sylvia’s? I grew up with that food. Do you think it will bring the neighborhood down? The responses attacking me, just show that they are deliberate. If I or anyone else (which happens often on this board) posts anything he/they don’t like, the one or the few, in all his/their collective infinite wisdom, choose the path of stupidity.
See # 28, no one agrees with you. Now let’s see some made up posts by you, in support of you. You’re just a troublemaker. Punks like you talk trash, but are of no action.
It’s once again time to ignore you.
Charlie.
Architecture seems to be one area where everyone agrees. Whenever a rendering for new building shows up, everyone agrees that it sucks. I’m not so fond of this particular rendering. Of the new buildings, I like the look of 10-63 best.
At least this is better than the horrible building with the light show. But not much. YUCK-O LIC. Definitely a lack of direction. Well, maybe the development slow-down will be good (for LIC) in the long-run. Development won’t go unchecked the way it has been. That and the 421a abatement expiration.
#31, re: your response to 26: there are many examples throughout the world where in particular facades are preserved. I tried to post links here but they didn’t make it through for some reason. Just try Googling “preserve, facade” and add any major City after that (Washington DC, Boston, Chicago, etc.)
You are absolutely right that there are higher costs as well as in some cases insurmountable challenges but there are compelling reasons to try to maintain some of the history and some of the presence of the past. You may agree or disagree with that statement but obviously there are many who feel preservation is important and that in some cases even if the bottom line is challenged.
What we see in LIC is a huge amount of money poured into tearing down and building cheap and fast with virtually zero regard for the past. To make matters worse, many of the new buildings already have shabby deteriorating portions of the interior and exterior.
I expect architects to have the vision and ability to creatively merge the ideas of the past, present, and future. Valgora (aka Studio V) is a huge disappointment because he talks the talk but doesn’t walk the walk.
Word on the street is that the architect did want to preserve the Cangro building and incorporate it in the new building, but the developer decided it would cost too much.
Rockrose are a bunch of crooks. If you read the article about what they explain the “troublemaking” one of them was a refusal on the tenant’s part to pay the amenities fee when the gym wasn’t finished yet. WHAT? That seems totally reasonable to me. How dare you charge an amenities fee for amenities that can’t be used.
44, I can believe that. To me it’s unfortunate on the part of the developer. I can’t entirely blame the architect but overall the architects, the AIA, etc. are doing very little to actively influence preservation or even the contextual design that zoning supposedly is base dupon. In fact the AIA has done the opposite – namely to try push a hugely pro-massive development agenda through proposed zoning changes. Present day architects seem to care more about job security than aesthetics. Can’t say I blame them but here we are.
We could blame the developer, his grandmother or the architect’s mother but if it is not economically feasible no one will preserve facades unless they are building something as a personal atrophy. The only way this could happen is if the city, state or federal government incentivizes it through tax breaks or additional buildable area for the project.
47, that is purely opinion. The ultimate economic outcome of preservation or for that matter modern design cannot be predicted. You are negating the fact that either a preserved building or a well thought out design can advance the value and appeal of the neighborhood. Look at Chelsea Market as an example of combining preservation and modern at the same time.
The present trend is nothing more than cheaply done quantity. I think the emptiness is starting to show and has a negative impact on development. But I’ll admit that too is opinion.
47, but why isn’t it economically feasible to build an attractive building that people want to live in instead of some ticky-tacky pile of garbage? Surely, people pay more for other quality, aesthetically pleasing products, so why not buildings? I might not know as much as you folks do about real estate, but for the life of me I don’t understand why creating something as simple as appealing, enduring human-scale architecture is so impossible in NYC. It just sounds like a convenient excuse to unload high-priced uglee on us.
Oh stop with preserving unless you spend *your* money to preserve it!
Stupid, you love talking about economic realities, so go buy it and preserve it, otherwise enough. NYC (and LIC) is too valuable to let old bitties refush to let a neighborhood b3e developed.
LIC is moving along just fine the way it is!
50, are you the guy responsible for the Walk the Plank Building? No wonder you’re feeling a little defensive.
50, you seem to think that a cheap bunch of mass produced angles is a beautiful thing. And you are also happy to insult anyone that disagrees with you. Did it ever occur to you there are young folks who are for preservation? Also had you read the comments more carefully, you would note I am equally railing against cheaply built poorly designed modern buildings.
Brokers and developers have had a feeding frenzy and many have swallowed their own hype. Wake up. The time has come for intelligent planning, attractive design, buildings that are part of the community not just in look but in how they encourage its occupants to be within the community.
And sadly, some of these cool looking buildings are pure crap under the walls.
This is #47. I for one would love for developers to preserve significant facades because of all of the reasons stated here however, keeping a facade in place while building a new structure is a costly endeavor. Not only is it costly but very risky because it could all come crumbling down if it is not done write or unforeseen conditions are not identified. Most developers know that these facades would increase the value of their project but not enough to cover the trouble and risk of preserving it. Then come the investors, banks and their construction experts. They will not invest in a project if they think the construction costs and risks do not satisfy their return expectations. This is not an opinion but reality because I myself underwrite development deals for investment funds. Unfortunately it all comes back to the mighty dollar and if you have a great idea but can’t finance it than it is just an idea.
A good example of a project that kept the existing structure is The Powerhouse and now it finds itself in a bad market. This project could have probably been finished and sold a year ago if they had demolished the existing building and put up a whole new structure. The project would have sold out and made an incredible profit. I do not know the details of the current economics of this project but I am sure that the developer would be much happier if he had sold-out all his units a year ago.
47/53, but why can’t the new buildings themselves be more attractive? The materials used in the new towers look so flimsy or clinical to me and I often wonder what they’ll look like 30, 50 years from now. There’s so little craftsmanship or care in their construction. I think that if the developers at least put more effort into design, they would more than make up for their costs.
Maybe #55 someday they too will be torn down and replaced with something else. Perhaps in the future there will be a day when the history we WANT to forget is torn down for a future we would like to see remain. Who knows? Maybe a hurricane or flood will wipe out the poorly built crap. NYC is a huge cycle of building and destruction and rebuilding. Maybe we’ll hit the positive rinse cycle at some point. In the meantime, I too, am very happy to see there is development slowdown. The market is correcting itself, and the community is learning to adjust to all the change that’s happened in the past 5 years. I have lived here for almost 15 years, and no change has been as exponential as the last 5, especially the last 3.
54, I think you meant to say “this is for 47″ since you are not 47. I am 47. Anyway now that we straightened that out I thank you for at least being a voice of reason on this otherwise contentious blog.
You said “This is not an opinion but reality because I myself underwrite development deals for investment funds. Unfortunately it all comes back to the mighty dollar and if you have a great idea but can’t finance it than it is just an idea.”
I am familiar with this field as well though I’m not in your shoes. The reality is it is generally not a field where there is vision. It’s cookie cutter template financing and well look at the nice mess the financial world has dealt us now. I don’t mean this as an attack. I’m pointing out that we are in a mess primarily driven by business ‘geniuses’ in investment firms, real estate, the auto industry, etc. Just as the auto industry needs to refocus so does the development industry. It’s hard to debate every nuance here. I know I’m not 100% correct but I also know the prevailing mentality has not been correct.
As for the Power House, I would not single them out as particularly interesting design or a well managed operation.
Preservation is important when its not your money being used.
#54 Amen. I bet if he could do it over again they woulds have opted to knock the entire thing down. As I said if you are for preservation put up or shut up. Decision are made not on how pretty old buildings look but on the basis of ensuring a profit when all is said and done. Perhaps there are others who are more alltruistic and would work for free, but I do not count myself among them. When I spend my time and put my money at risk I want to ensure the maximum amount of profit and the least amount of risk.
Development slowdown? Where? Ha there been two other new buildings that have broken ground this year already (Solarium, prism, and this building)
The idea that preservation is so very much more expensive than tearing down and building new is nothing more than propaganda from the pro-development-at- any-cost advocates. And yes, it is my money and it has been spent on preservation and I’m quite happy with the result. I don’t need to chop up my building to milk every last dime. I’m here because I like life here not because I’m trying to squeeze every dollar out of this year’s hot new neighborhood.
There are folks here both old timers and new comers who also are here to have a life. We wish the hypesters (sic) would just go away. You are as annoying and full of it as telemarketers.
#55 the reason these buildings look disposable is because they are. I don’t think many people that buy into them are looking to put down roots in LIC. Its mostly for investment or to ride it out a few years and flip them.
Of course with this new economy we’ll see who is genuinely interested in long term LIC living.
#61 we’ve heard the tired arguments before. You are on the losing side of this debate. I suggest you continue the head in the sand approach.
My apologies, on post #54 I said I was post #47 when I was really #48. Now that everybody is even more confused I will try to answer post #57.
As for the financial industry having little vision you might have a point for the most part. However, I would argue that the financial sector that got us into the mess that we are in today were the more adventurous ones, which took unprecedented risk with investments they themselves did not fully understand. This is probably why most conservative investors would not invest in projects that have higher risks or possible unforeseen problems like preserving a 100 yr old build. Please understand that I would love to be able to preserve architectural gems but all I am saying is that the current government programs or market do not incentivize this from happening. This is especially true here in NYC where land prices have been higher than most of the country which leaves very little wiggle room to make great buildings.
I would also like to say that his building might not be the best example of great architecture but at least there is an attempt to do something out of the box. I am surprised that not more people are outraged at the awful building being built on Jackson and 11th Ave. Now that is a great example of the cheapest type of construction ever. I guess people get fooled because it has a lot of brick, when glass is more expensive than brick. I bet that 95% of the materials in that building could be found in Home Depot which makes it as generic as vanilla ice cream.
Powerhouse easily cost $30-40 million more to develop than it otherwise would have if the developer knocked the existing walls down first and then built.
65, and you could be sure that the crap materials they would have used in the new exterior walls wouldn’t have been nearly as solid and beautiful as the stone and brick in the old Powerhouse
That thing that juts out from the top of this ugly building reminds me of the platform that Denethor jumps off from at Minas Tirith in Lord of the Rings.
I agree 66, I’m just saying that the cost is substantially higher. And I also have no problem with them removing the smokestakes. There was no aesthetic beauty to those things.
“Queens the happiest borough” Huh? Did they take into consideration the general tone of commenters on the Liqcity blog?????
Who needs the “happiest borough” anyway? Now if were the “hippiest borough,” that’s something to be proud of.
LOL. hippies.
63 says: “#61 we’ve heard the tired arguments before. You are on the losing side of this debate. I suggest you continue the head in the sand approach.”
Nice and intelligently argued – not. When all else fails hurl insults and use cliche phrases like “tired arguments” and “head in the sand”. Basically your comment does nothing to refute anything I said.
I again thank #64 with whom I have some (not all) intellectual disagreement but who has the common courtesy and intellect to get the fact that this about dialogue and exchanging views in order to arrive at something good.
I don’t care for the design of that building, and I’m going to register my opposition by not purchasing a condo in it.
I also don’t like Britney Spears, but I don’t support banning all bubblegum pop music, or mandating that all music sound like early 60’s vintage Elvis.
If it weren’t for people with bad taste, those of us with superior taste could never feel so smug and self-righteous about our own aesthetic judgment.
Am I right? 8)
#72, I’ve got no objection to exchanging views but if you wrote post 61, it was just baloney which does not help the discussion. Preservation will cost more than developing from scratch. One can make a strong argument that the costs are worth it, but to say it does not cost more and that this is just developer propaganda is pure BS.
74, I’ve spelled it out many times before. But since you or someone will attack me and call me names if I don’t offer something (an unfortunate change from the earlier civility) I’ll at least again point out that there are tons of examples where more money is spent than just the cheapo dirt bottom price. And in the end the profit is higher. So yes of course it costs more. That doesn’t mean it is not good profitable business to do it. If you can’t see that than I am indeed wasting my energy here. Or here’s another way to see it. If it costs less but you lose because it sucks and no one wants it and/or it brings the neighborhood values down because it’s cheap and ugly, was that really a savings?
What you don’t see is that we are actually for the same thing. It’s just that we disagree on how to go about it.
73, I do have the right to protest if Britney decides on her own to set up a bandstand on my block. The market is not the only place ideas are carried out – despite what some might think. There is something called zoning and city planning which is supposed to try to fulfill a variety of common needs.
More for 74. It really depends entirely on the situation. You are telling me that everytime you tear down and build anew it’s cheaper. To make that as a general statement is as ludicrous as the general statement would be if I said presevation is always less expensive. It depends on the cost of the land, the scale of the project, how much repair is needed. Not every preservation project starts with a run down building for example. That’s why I say it’s propaganda. It’s totally slanted toward the idea that everything should come down and be built over. Whatever you might feel emotionally, it’s just not true financially.
#76, but a run down building is what we are talking about.
This blog is getting boooooring.
Love the Lord of the Rings reference! Totally reminded me of that too.
I’m jealous of the number of comments on LIQCity!
77, What run down building? The power station had no structural issues and there were no environmental soil issues. The purchase price was $39 a buildable foot so their profit has been enormous. Surely could have built something better.
But the larger point in particular is that the focus on pure residential market rate towers is not necessarily the most sound economic policy. One reason to preserve an historic industrial building is to open up the possibilities of what it’s next use would be. A large cultural facility, an industrial co-op, etc. can diversify the ways that the local economy grows.
At present economic growth has been defined as trickle down to restaurants, bars, shops, and service that cater to the bedroom community. And we all can see now where that has gotten us.
I agree with 81. I think that the people in London understand this very well. Look at what developers have done with the old Battersea power plant, which looks very much like the Schwartz Chemical building. By transforming the moribund building into the Tate Modern, they have created a jewel that attracts millions of visitors every year and sparked the revitalization of the entire neighborhood. You never see this kind of visionary approach in NYC these days.
I came when I saw the rendering of this building.
Really, I did.
Send tips, feedback, and death threats to info [at] liqcity [dot] com
“The architect says that he is going to pains to blend in with the community.” So how is that hideous building supposed to blend in with the surrounding area?