Behold, the 'Massive' Penthouse Planned for 3rd Street
[nggallery id=56574 template=galleryview] Tomorrow Landmarks is scheduled to have a hearing on a proposed rooftop addition to 627 3rd Street, a limestone beauty in the Park Slope Historic District that was a House of the Day last year. We’ve heard from one of the property’s neighbors, who is not at all pleased about the addition…
[nggallery id=56574 template=galleryview]
Tomorrow Landmarks is scheduled to have a hearing on a proposed rooftop addition to 627 3rd Street, a limestone beauty in the Park Slope Historic District that was a House of the Day last year. We’ve heard from one of the property’s neighbors, who is not at all pleased about the addition that’s in the works. She sent in the photos above, as well as the following note:
Here are some pictures of the proposed penthouse at 627 Third Street. It is 20 feet wide (sitting on party walls of 625 and 629), 9 feet to 14 feet high and 24 feet long. It is obviously quite massive, but this is only a wooden mockup for LPC’s review; the final would be brick and limestone. Notice that our chimney would disappear into the new wall and would reappear in mini form 15 feet closer to the front of the house. The last picture is taken from PPW on the park side. The mass and size of the structure makes it appear that it is sitting on the roof of the first house, but in reality it is the third house down!!
Think this will be a sore thumb for the Slope? GMAP
There is precious little difference in the way the Commission regulates changes in individual landmarks versus buildings in historic districts. Both are subject to fairly stringent controls.
In fact, in historic districts there is the additional concern of harmonizing with the neighboring buildings not just with the building in question.
You are fooling yourself if you believe that if a house is “just in a historic district” that landmark stipulations are somehow more lax than for an individual landmark.
They will probably have to reduce the height and bulk of the addition somewhat. The hipped roof in particular seems out of keeping with the existing roofscape.
It is important to remember that if you buy a property in a landmark district, it is subject to serious restrictions vis-a-vis exterior alterations and additions.
If one tends towards the “property rights” end of the political spectrum, one would be well advised to steer clear of historic districts and buy property in a non-landmarked area. That is most of the city by the way.
it seems too small to be worth the hassle. what would it be? one, maybe two rooms?
it seems too small to be worth the hassle. what would it be? one, maybe two rooms?