Developer Acquires Rights to Citibank Building on Montague

The Real Deal reports that developer Jonathan Rose Companies has agreed to buy the building (photo) that houses Citibank’s Brooklyn Heights branch. According to the article, Rose acquired the rights to purchase the building from another real estate concern, Treeline Equities, which owns the office building at 189 Montague Street, two doors down from the Citibank building at 183 Montague.

The present owner of the Citibank building is Madison Capital, described in the Real Deal article as “retail oriented”. The building extends from Montague across the block to Pierrepont, where it has the address 140 Pierrepont Street (photo below).

The Citibank building appears to be two separate buildings, although they make up one property. The half facing Montague Street (photo at the top) is a very ornate neoclassical structure, both in its facade and interior. The half facing Pierrepont, photo directly above, is in the art deco style prevalent in the 1920s and ’30s. While the Montague side is capped with a peaked roof, the Pierrepont side has three floors of offices above the banking space. The Real Deal article says Madison Capital’s intent was to “redevelop the Pierrepont side” but to leave the Montague side “intact.” (The buildings lie outside the Brooklyn Heights Historic District, and neither is landmarked.)

There is no indication of Rose’s intent should it complete its acquisition of the Citibank buildings, but–and this is speculation–what seems a likely possibility is that the office spaces above the Pierrepont Street would be re-developed as residential, just as is being done with the former office space at the landmarked 177 Montague right next door. It’s also possible Rose may wish to build some extra stories above the Pierrepont side.

The Real Deal article notes that Treeline is not renewing office leases at 189 Montague, and may intend to convert it to residential.

Share this Story:

, , , , , , , , , ,

  • Buzz Gundersen

    Rose is one of the most socially-responsible developers in the country. We’d be lucky to have him here.

  • CassieVonMontague

    I looked him up b/c of your comment and found this glowing profile in the NYTimes: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/11/nyregion/in-person-developer-with-eye-to-profits-for-society.html?pagewanted=all

    Sounds as if you’re right.

  • nicky

    private deal public money .. ?? how refreshing

  • http://selfabsorbedboomer.blogspot.com ClaudeScales

    What public money?

  • MonroeOrange

    thank you Mr. Rose….and welcome to the blog…though you should probably post under your real name!

  • martinlschneider

    The developer’s fine ethics are irrelevant. Real Estate is real estate. If combining two or three building sites makes possible some huge, hi-rise which over ten or 20 years will pay off handsomely, so be it.
    There was a time, not long ago, when some visonaries in the Historic Heights District, attempted to protect the District with a height buffer zone. Prevent hi-rises abutting the District line and phase in rising heights of buildings as they move outward from the line. Tragically, no serious public support developed. So, naturally, a city administration always compliant with Real Estate interests, was happy to not have to deal with it and it sank into the murk of citizen apathy.
    What was it Jefferson said about liberty requiring constant vigilance? That applies to this kind of stuff, too.
    Now, a perfectly lovely, in fact extraordinary building seems to be on the edge of history’s
    dustbin. And, so, nothing is going to change except our environment and our skyline.

  • cindy sm

    The nature of the developer is a secondary issue. The density of development is the
    Central issue which needs to be the
    First connsideration.

    AND the first consideration on density is
    Geniuses, what my boyfriend always says;
    IF ANYONE INCREASES THE USE OF
    AN AREA DO WE OR DO WE NOT GET
    M-O-R-E PUBLIC SAFETY RESOURCES?

    DO WE GET MORE COPS? MORE FIRE
    AND MORE EMS???

    IF WE DONT, THEN SOME ONE IS
    MAKING OODLES OF CASH WHILE
    YOUR FAMILIES SAFETY IS BEING
    SPREAD MORE AND MORE THIN!!!
    Forget politics the above, brilliant
    Blogers all, is a basic matter of…
    LIFE AND DEATH.

  • Joe A

    Life and death. How dramatic. And in all caps – even more dramatic.

    However, finite public safety resources should be allocated by need. For an upscale community with a relatively low crime rate to complain about the allocation of police and fire services is truly precious. And more than a little obnoxious.

  • Heights Observer

    The amount of building going on here is certainly going to make the area more densely populated and there ARE safety consequences to that. Fires, dear sir, concern combustable material and burn equally hot whether an area is upscale or not. No need to srart a class war.

    PS: I also think the obnoxious one here is you.

  • Joe A

    Resources by need my dear sir. I know you have an overwhelming sense of entitlement but resources by need.

  • Heights Observer

    No, fire protection, utilities, hospitals etc, are allocated on population density, not by the income level of the community or the value of the property.

    As far as my sense of entitlement, I am but a middle class retired civil servant, who expects nothing more than adequate protection of community health and safety.

    You, however sound a little wet behind the ears without proper experience in life. It will be necessary to get some before you shoot off your mouth with erroneous assumptions.

    It would be like me saying that you are a real estate shill doing some blog work. Why else would you be doing this on a Saturday

  • Doug Biviano

    Well said.

    Welcome to Brooklyn Heigh-rise!

  • Doug Biviano

    More Hospitals, Schools, PreK and Libraries too? Oh, we’re getting the opposite…

  • Banet

    NW construction like this is actually far, far less combustible than the century-old construction all over the Heights.

    Proper firebreaks, hard-wired, monitored smoke alarms, sprinkler systems… all of it makes being a firefighter almost boring.

  • petercow

    The population density of Brooklyn Heights used to be much greater. All the single-family homes had been chopped up into apartments.

  • Andrew Porter

    Still shouting with your all-caps posts, I see…

  • Joe A

    1) I never said the services you describe are allocated by income level or value of property. I suggested just the opposite as a matter of fact that resources should be allocated by need.

    2) no, you are quite wrong when you suggest that such resources are allocated by population. (And you suggest I am naive?). Resources as I mentioned in my post should and are allocated by “community risk” one factor of which is population but only one factor. For example when determining how to allocate limited fire resources the following is taken into account :
    “Community risk level is typically established through an overall profile of the community based on the unique mixture of demographics, socioeconomic factors, occupancy risk, fire management zones, and the level of services currently provided.”

    Same with police services. Do you think a low crime high income community should have the same number of police officers per capita than a high crime low income community? If you do then you are the one “wet behind the ears”

    3) and finally your suggestion that I get some “experience in life” if curious considering I was a high ranking law enforcement officer for 20 years followed by 15 years as an executive in the private security sector. Your expertise on the matter?

  • cindy sm

    Firefighting is BORING?!!!

    Dose anyone remember the Margaret hotel
    Fire with burning material landing on roofs
    All over the heights?

    Want to know what a real high rise fire
    Is like? WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE
    HEALTH PROBLEMS WHICH CAN
    RESULT FROM A MAJOR FIRE? (My
    Boyfriend was at 170 Broadway on
    9-11)

    Police and EMS at proper levels are indispensable. Period. First of all
    Our economics MAKE us a target
    For violent crime. 40 years of crime
    Stats proves this.

    As far as thinning out EMS protection;
    How much is each additional Second
    Is worth when a child can’t breath
    Or a loved one has a flatline?

    Public safety, not commerce…and
    Not debt service is the legitimate
    First duty of government

  • cindy sm

    Remember the kind of people who
    Were AOL room monitors? Well…