30 Henry Application Returns to Landmarks Tomorrow


The application for a new five-story, six-unit Brooklyn Heights condo at 30 Henry Street hits the Landmarks Preservation Commission for a second time tomorrow. At the previous LPC meeting about the proposal, the commission didn’t take action on the plans because there wasn’t a quorum. All the renderings can be found here. If you’re interested in speaking at the public hearing, it begins at approximately 10:45 a.m. Think this design will make it through this time around?
No Decision From LPC on 30 Henry Build [Brownstoner]
Renderings Revealed for 30 Henry Street [Brownstoner]
30 Henry Street Chasing a Waterfall [Brownstoner]
Brooklyn Eagle Building on the Market [Brownstoner] GMAP

8 Comment

  • Given the design is cookie-cutter modern landmark wannabe, probably passes.

  • The main entry and the garage entry are given the same treatment.
    That could get you an “F” in Design 101.
    Also. the fenestration pattern is very static. It should be more varied and visually interesting.

  • The main entry and the garage entry are given the same treatment.
    That could get you an “F” in Design 101.
    Also. the fenestration pattern is very static. It should be more varied and visually interesting.

  • by the makers of “the Fedders”, we present “Fedders Lux”! Still crappy, but this time in a nicer ‘hood

  • I don’t believe the public is allowed to speak on this item anymore. It’s listed in the “public meeting” (as opposed to “public hearing”) section of the agenda. It had its hearing (where the public is allowed to testify) in December; while a quorum is required to take action on an item, a quorum isn’t required to sucessfully complete a hearing. A public meeting is a meeting of the commission open to the public but where the public isn’t permitted to testify. Any parliamentarians want to weigh in to confirm my understanding?

  • I don’t believe the public is allowed to speak on this item anymore. It’s listed in the “public meeting” (as opposed to “public hearing”) section of the agenda. It had its hearing (where the public is allowed to testify) in December; while a quorum is required to take action on an item, a quorum isn’t required to sucessfully complete a hearing. A public meeting is a meeting of the commission open to the public but where the public isn’t permitted to testify. Any parliamentarians want to weigh in to confirm my understanding?

  • northheights, you are mistaken, They laid the item over expressly to hear comments from the Brooklyn Heights community. Get your ass over there!

    • OK, you’re (mostly) correct. If I had bothered to read the results of the original hearing before posting, I would have seen that the commission agreed to leave the record open for 30 days, which means the “public hearing” (testimony allowed) can continue at today’s “public meeting” on the item. However, in my defense, as a general matter, testimony is only allowed at a public meeting if the commission OKs it (which they did here), whereas the express purpose of a public hearing is to allow testimony. And to complete my nitpicking, I don’t think the item was laid over (as you wrote), which would have meant it didn’t go before the hearing at all – it did receive a hearing, which the commission decided to continue to the next meeting.

      Back to reality – did anyone attend today?