Plan for Brooklyn’s First “Supertall” Revealed

This past August we noted a Crain’s piece that said developers had acquired the landmarked Dime Savings Bank building and an adjacent lot, and that, using air rights from the landmarked building, they could build something as tall as the Empire State Building on the lot, the address of which will be 340 Flatbush Avenue Extension. New York YIMBY has now provided a rendering of the building that may go there (see image), a SHoP Architects design that would stand 1,000 feet tall, claiming the title of tallest building in New York City outside Manhattan. According to the YIMBY story,, the building will be primarily residential, but with a substantial commercial component, some of which may be in the adjacent Dime Savings Bank building.

Image: SHoP Architects via New York YIMBY

Share this Story:

, , ,

  • Jorale-man

    Very contextual. Blends right in…

  • Remsen Street Dweller

    Yup, it looks like a giant finger giving Brooklyn the bird.

  • HereToStay

    Pretty cool. A city like ours needs to keep growing – and vertical is the way to go. We have a long way to go to turn around downtown Brooklyn – projects like this help attract folks to the hood.

  • Willow Street Watch

    I. have two reactions…
    1) This is an ideal target.
    2) I hope Regina and her entire board uses this in health

  • Concerned

    All you have is reaction. No active thought. Everything is an emergency to you, so why not classify this new building a “target”… Give us all a break.

  • CHatter

    Here’s the good part (I’m trying to have a glass-is-half-full day today)…ordinarily, these renderings seek to portray future build projects in utterly farcical, utopian shangri-la terms, with the full horror of the finished product only revealing itself after the thing is half-built and over budget. In a fit of (what? honesty?) the SHoP team seems to have skipped right over all of that nonsense, to a frank depiction of Orwellian dystopia, right here in the picture. A picture that they released to the public! How refreshing! If you zoom in to the very top of the tower, you can even make out a teeny-tiny picture of Sarumon going over his plans to raise an orc army to overrun Middle Earth–or, eh, Midtown.

  • William Spier

    I am not so sure much thought is given here to the social impact of such resource demanding structures. First of all, just saying a city like ours “needs to keep growing” is not necessarily true. You grow a city, town, village, when public and political support for infrastructure is there. This is sorely lacking in NYC, and part of this had to do with the tax laws that favor development. Even two income families often just rent in these buildings as blocks of units end up derivatives.

    The next question is who needs housing and where do we need that housing? Demographics show us that the city population is growing, but where is the greatest growth: it is in the Asian communities where large extended families pile into often inadequate housing. The growth of this cohort is significant and tests both socially funded needs as schools and parks as well as patchy public transportation along congested thoroughfares.

    Young creative people who come to NYC are housing challenged. More and more are free-lancers who cannot situate in full time jobs with businesses. The old neighborhoods where they thrived as artists, musicians, dancers etc. are gone in Manhattan and fragmenting in Brooklyn. What will be the culture of NYC in twenty years as the fragmentation of neighborhoods continues to push away real creativity, and I don’t algorithm creativity? Underused health clubs in elitist housing?

    A skyscraper building is not just a building. It just not bring “folks into the hood” (Is the Flatbush extension really part of a hood? Where are its parks? ) There is sociology to it. There is ownership hidden behind shell companies that invest in them–and tax benefits for them. So, this high structure, like so many others, goes up without planning and funding for area infrastructure adequacy. Eventually, the reality of this will set in and we will have to address City growth as not this sort of elitist stuff, but with real invested improvements in the working class neighborhoods,

    When you walk down the streets and see all the nannies pushing their charges to their next activity, do you ever wonder how they live? The private dollars put into this City are to support elite culture not necessarily growth.

  • Claude Scales

    This comment is in very poor taste, and touches on being a violation of our terms of use.

  • CHatter

    The Hawks’ shellacking of the Nets last Wednesday–now THAT was a bird giving Brooklyn the finger.

    I’m here all week folks.

  • Reggie

    No, Target is going into City Point.

  • Willow Street Watch

    Sorry for the borderline tone, but someone who was AT 9/11 tends to view structures primarily on the basis of safety in our modern worlld. As we all should. Tell, me what sane person wants to live in the fall circumference of a this, what? Nowhere is the structural engineering/ strength or resistance to intentional or nonintentional failure being discussed. Safety should Always be the first consideration.

    As far as the second comment, I agree it can be viewed as off color. I meant that that crowd should take up residence in the building. But it should have not been entered in a form in any way open to double entante. I agree that was remiss.

  • Willow Street Watch

    Well, if you drive out the thoughtful citizens who have an understanding or even a sense of the consequences of a management or thought direction in the civic arena/field, you change and degrade, perhaps fatally, the function of the city. We have degraded the basic stabilization factor, the glue, which held the real New York together; the upper middle call/lower upper class.

    In combination with the working class, they held the city in place as a stabilized social and functional structure. Highly educated on average and ethical, they provided support for the culture and even more importantly the strong limitations on what could go on. They provided the strong reactivity to questionable or outright wrongdoing behavior which kept the city within some kind of boundaries. But if you drive out or even discourage this population, you remove or surpress first, the energy/drive mechanism and the most fundamental safeguard system in this city.

    My parents used to remark in the sixties: “Change the people, change the city”….they were exactly correct….