« Brownstoner Garden Days 3 and 4 A Slice of Old Poplar Street »

May 15, 2006

Cutting Corners on Landmark Windows?

building
We've been watching the renovation of this 5-story brownstone in Clinton Hill with interest as the property was a bit of a run-down eyesore for quite some time before the owner finally geared up at the end of last year to convert the thing to condos. Last week we were struck by what's happening with the windows. This is in a landmark district so presumably the owner got the windows approved by LPC. But if you look carefully at the windows on the side of the house, there is a gap of probably three or four inches between the top of the window and the frame, suggesting that someone screwed up the measurements or perhaps took a financial shortcut and didn't buy custom-sized windows. Given what's happened on the side, we wonder whether the framing that was just put into the front windows suggests that the windows here will be similarly undersized? Any thoughts?




Posted by Brownstoner at 10:40 AM | Comments (25)

Comments

It's possible - certainly not everyone actually installs what they spec with LPC, and some don't go thru LPC at all. I recently replaced all front windows with Landmark-approved wood framed ones, but most people on our block have replaced with aluminum. Our neighbor actually replaced their octagonal mansard roof tiles with rectangular strips of tar paper!! It is sad to see, but there also can be serious cost differences involved, so it's not surprising either.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 15, 2006 11:13 AM

Concerned citizens have to report violations to Landmarks. They are not omnipresent or omniscient.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/html/working_with/report_violation.shtml

Posted by: crouchback at May 15, 2006 11:40 AM

um, it just looks like the actual window is open, creating the illusion of a gap between the frame.

Posted by: brooklyn agent at May 15, 2006 11:40 AM

It's open at the bottom--but the gap at the top is because the window is too small.

Posted by: Brownstoner at May 15, 2006 11:55 AM

No--when you zoom in on the image, its the bottom sash that's open. The gap is clearly on tghe top.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at May 15, 2006 11:57 AM

Whoops--I hit the send button too late--Mr B. made the same observation just before me.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at May 15, 2006 11:58 AM

good grief.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 15, 2006 12:18 PM

Here's an alternative.. Notice how the entire building has already been scrapped off and the 'base coat' of cement has been added.. Notice how the upper window on the far right is in the process of having brownstone stucco applied to the cement base. This is were everything goes from 'rough' dimensions to final detail.

Notice also the bottom windows. It looks like the entire window box has been 'reframed' plumb and square. The wood framing sticks out farther than the cement base, but is flush with the final stucco finish. I think i can almost make out some would framing in the gap that you highlighted. Which would lead me to believe that these window box frames where squared and plumbed before the window was put in.

Is it possible that the gap above the side window will be filled in? Maybe they could be adding detail to the window to make it look more like the front windows with their moulding and trim. That would pretty much cover any gap you see now.


Posted by: ItsAWrap at May 15, 2006 12:32 PM

I noticed an ad on the Corcoran website for multiple three bedroom condos with the address listed as "at the corner of Grand and Greene". I'm not Sherlock Holmes, but what are the odds that those condos are going to be coming from this building? It is a deep building, and I'll bet with the right layout you could squeeze three bedooms in.

Posted by: Shahn Andersen at May 15, 2006 1:14 PM

Ok, just to fuel the speculation, the link to the listing, and a blurb which states that it is a "corner townhouse conversion". It actually says Grand Avenue between Gates and Greene, which could be a number of buildings (not Grand at Greene as I stated above), but this sounds like it might be the one. Come to think of it, it could also be that god-awful thing at the corner of Gates and Grand...

http://www.corcoran.com/property/listing.aspx?Region=NYC&ListingID=876453

Terrific corner townhouse conversion in very exciting community. Excellent for small families. Three real bedrooms. Sun drenched East and Southern Exposure. Some nice detail throughout.

Posted by: Shahn Andersen at May 15, 2006 1:18 PM

you people are losers.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 15, 2006 1:44 PM

I know that you shamelessly admit to have "an unhealthy obsession with historic Brooklyn brownstones", but this one took me by surprise.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 15, 2006 1:54 PM

I don't think this building is the Corcoran listing because this is at the corner of Gates and Grand and doesn't have southern exposure other than the side of the small yard. And I wonder how much detail survived in this house because it was missing a roof and many window panes for a long time. The front door used to be chained but would flap in the breeze.

Posted by: Drew at May 15, 2006 2:02 PM

The building in the photograph is not between Greene and Gates, but on Grand at the southeast corner of Gates. Maybe the Corcoran ad is for the resale of a unit in the building on the east side of Grand just south of Greene which was gutted and enlarged a few years ago. It was mentioned in Brownstoner a few months (?) ago in a comparison with the newly constructed building next to it.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 15, 2006 2:08 PM

The building in the photograph is not between Greene and Gates, but on Grand at the southeast corner of Gates. Maybe the Corcoran ad is for the resale of a unit in the building on the east side of Grand just south of Greene which was gutted and enlarged a few years ago. It was mentioned in Brownstoner a few months (?) ago in a comparison with the newly constructed building next to it.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 15, 2006 2:09 PM

my question is why are the windows in the front one over one and the back two over two? is this permissable? why aren't they all the same?!

Posted by: Anonymous at May 15, 2006 2:25 PM

this building is on the corner of grand and gates. the corcoran listing is on the corner of grand and greene above "the hole in the wall" store. this building has maintained it's architecutural integrity, they have all of the stuff stored away. the corcoran listing is not nearly as nice as this one.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 15, 2006 2:29 PM

2:25 - its quite possible the windows were not the same front to back historically. 2/2 windows would have been cheaper, and therefore more likely to be used on a secondary elevation.

Posted by: Halden at May 15, 2006 3:11 PM

ok... unhealthy obsession doesnt even describe it... I mean really.... get a life. Not everyone has the same trust fund as Brownstoner... and not everyone has as much time as to be concerned about a 3 inch gap in a side window of a building that is CURRENTLY UNDERGOING renovation. At least LPC dorks get paid to monitor and rule on this stuff.
How do you know it's not just a temporary fix until the right size window arrives?????
You just throw some random idea out there and the rest of your Brownstoner fascist crew eats it up.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 15, 2006 9:36 PM

anon 9:36pm. i am not a trust fund kid like you think brownstoner is, i live on the block, am african american and have concerns. we are trying to make the block a nicer place. people in brooklyn heights wouldn't stand for mediocrity why should we? the blog is about brownstones, perhaps you need to get a life because if you're not interested in these subjects you need to be doing something else!

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 9:52 AM

Anon 9.36pm. People who buy and live in landmarked areas, and pay a premium for it, do it specifically because they know that landmark restrictions hold property owners to higher standard when it comes to external renovations and restoration. That's why people who actually live in such neighborhoods get concerned when a neighbor appears to be cutting corners, it affects the rest of the block if a mediocre job it done in violation of landmark restrictions.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 16, 2006 11:10 AM

We only wish we had a trust fund! It's called debt, the American dream.

Posted by: Brownstoner at May 16, 2006 11:17 AM

I'm sorry. Maybe some of you need to step outside your boxes so you'd care about larger issues. Take a trip to a third world country where people live in shacks. I think they'd be happy to have ANY windows. It would be really mean and trivial to report the owners of this building, but go on...you obviously have nothing better to do.

Posted by: Yente at May 17, 2006 12:27 PM

Yente, that's the point, it is not a third world country. It is a landmarked block with specific regulations regarding exterior renovations to preserve the character and high craftsmanship of the nabe. Don't like the nitpicking, fine, done move into a landmarked neighborhood. Worried more about third world poverty, then go an volunteer or donate money, I'd support you in that, but we can't tell others what to care about.

Posted by: Anonymous at May 17, 2006 6:12 PM

I am in the beginning stages of looking into replacing landmark windows with new LPC-approved windows. Anyone have any tips or recommendations re: acquiring LPC-approved windows, contractors for installation, and what the LPC approval process involves? Input much appreciated!

Posted by: Anonymous at October 9, 2006 9:16 AM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions