« Is myThai Your Kind of Thai? House of the Day: 408 Stuyvesant Avenue »

December 5, 2006

When It Comes to the Stoop, Size Does Matter

houses
In some ways, this batch of six new townhouses on Lexington between Franklin and Bedford isn't so bad--the bay windows and the cornice are a nice touch and the brick choice is unoffensive. But the proportion of the stoops is throws the whole thing off. (Check out the close-up photo on the jump.) Instead of setting the ground floor a couple of feet below grade in the style of older brownstones, it's right at street level. This means that the stoop has to be that much higher and, therefore, deeper (which perhaps has something to do with why the houses are set back several feet from the adjacent facades). The result is a stoop that is massive in proportion to the three-story house. Does anyone know if there's some kind of building code that results in a decision like this or is it just bad design?
GMAP

stoops




Posted by Brownstoner at 11:28 AM | Comments (24)
Categories: Development

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/94

Comments

Actually from the perspective of a ground floor resident this design is great.

Posted by: David at December 5, 2006 11:50 AM

jeez, that'll make the residents feel like they're marching up courthouse steps every day.

ah, but think of all the storage space under the steps!

Posted by: Jimmy Legs at December 5, 2006 12:24 PM

My guess is the deeper set back of the facade will allow for parking spaces between the stoops. Ugh.

Posted by: Kutter at December 5, 2006 12:55 PM

I wonder if it has anything to do with requirements for wheelchair accessibility to the garden floor. Any architects out there who can speak to this?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 5, 2006 2:41 PM

Looks STOOPid - about 10 steps too many IMO.

Posted by: North Sleeper at December 5, 2006 2:53 PM

It is due to ADA requirements - new buildings must be accessible.

Posted by: Anon at December 5, 2006 3:09 PM

those are a helluva lotta steps to go up/down in show & ice. and carrying furniture or packages.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 5, 2006 3:28 PM

Storage space under the steps? That's a jr. one bedroom.

Posted by: steveo at December 5, 2006 3:30 PM

Storage space under the steps? That's a jr. one bedroom.

Posted by: steveo at December 5, 2006 3:31 PM

Bullshit! This is bad design, period. A decent architect would have made sure that it not only met its neighbors neatly and didn't leave ugly party walls, but didn't look ridiculous after it was all said and done.

BTW, why can't FEDDERS develop a facade sensitive AC coil box that looks like an architectural feature, like a circular black iron look, or copper(wouldn't that be nice)? These rectangular AC's look absolutly atrocious and are an abomination of architecture.

Discraceful! It makes American ingenuity and architectural integrity in residential construction look worse than it already is.

Posted by: Bryan at December 5, 2006 3:51 PM

Bad Design from whose perspective - not to the person whose been living in a so called "garden apt" which is actually a below grade pseudo-basement.

Face it, you people hate everything. Its got approx 7 more (shorter) steps then yesterdays 'House of the Day'; oh my god the travesty!

Posted by: David at December 5, 2006 4:25 PM

I agree that people on this site hate everything built after 1930.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 5, 2006 5:08 PM

Only two more steps then I have, but my 1899 house has a dogleg stoop with an extra landing to break it up. I guess that would be two expensive for new construction :-(

Posted by: Bob Marvin at December 5, 2006 5:15 PM

Try getting a couch or any other "larger"piece of furniture through the doorway of the garden apartment.....impossible.

Posted by: anonymous at December 5, 2006 5:26 PM

I would think that the guess that this is to accomdate the disabled is right. Alternative would be that of the Atlantic Commons between Fulton and Atlantic in Fort Greene - street grade front door and no stoop. Internal stair for all apartments. Seems more sensible but I guess loses space inside.

Posted by: putnam-denizen at December 5, 2006 6:27 PM

I'm 99% sure its a zoning definition of the ground floor unit. if the lower unit is below grade 1" to 3' its a cellar, lower than that its a basement. Marketing/sales positioning aside, any square footage below grade isn't residential FAR and therefore can't besold/occupied as such. But as a bonus - Property tax law - which caused the typical english basement typology - taxes this at a different rate. If the developers were savy in zoning interpretation they could've built an extra floor to the allowable FAR and duplex'd the lower unit.

Posted by: CNB at December 5, 2006 7:10 PM

it is the whole "upstairs/downstairs" mentality.

with the patricians living upstairs and the plebians living below the stairs.

by the way, the wannabe bay windows look like crap.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 6, 2006 3:55 AM

a number of very nice buildings have been built since 1930.

Posted by: pfa at December 6, 2006 9:07 AM

To clear up cellar/basement designations once and for all: A cellar is a level that is more than 50% below the average curb height at the street and does not count towards FAR sq. ft. however no "habital rooms" are permitted. An accessory recreation room is not a habital room and therefore explains why there are so many basement/cellar duplexes and yet so few ping pong tables in the cellar; it's usually used as a master bedroom etc... A BASEMENT is a floor that is more than 50% above the curb height, nearly all brownstone garden levels are BASEMENTS. Basements count towards FAR. The cellar/basement designation is often unclear. Some buildings have cellars that seem to be more than 50% above the curb height and are often rented as apartments, though illegally. The ONLY evidence DOB accepts to determine cellar/basement designation is a survey that includes curb heights, cellar/basement floor height and ceiling height of that level. The C of O must accurately reflect this information.

Posted by: Brooklyn Architect at December 6, 2006 9:17 AM

Also, the crazy rediculous stoop height is to allow for handicap accessibility into the garden apartment - I agree. But this is not a requirement for 1 or 2 family homes! Are these three family homes? Overall these are pure crap. IMHO, you either exactly replicate the proportions, floor heights, window sizes, cornice sizes, stoop sizes, setback, etc... of historic townhouses adjacent or if zoning and building codes don't allow for that, you are free to make a case for a modern intervention that is sensitive to its context (materials, proportions, etc...). Crap like the above buildings serve to make the best case for modern infill architecture!!!!

Posted by: Brooklyn Architect at December 6, 2006 9:25 AM

ADA is the cause.

There are those who were concerned that it might eliminate the townhouse as a housing form.

The alternative is to have the front yard consisting of a ramp down.

Posted by: WT Economist at December 6, 2006 9:38 AM

ADA may be the cause and the lower apartments are now accessible. However the "ground floor" is far from accessible with all those stairs.

Posted by: Alison at December 6, 2006 11:17 AM

The bottom-floor entrance doesn't look *that* accessible either. Is that opening under the stoop big enough to maneuver a wheelchair through?

Posted by: Deb at December 6, 2006 2:20 PM

I believe these buildings are constructed throught the NYC Partnership's 2-3 family home program targeted at low-income first time homeowners, so cost definitely is a consideration. Usually the new homeowner needs the rental income to qualify for the mortgage. There are almost ALWAYS parking spaces in front of these buildings (Atlantic Commons being on of the exceptions) which does cause the setback. But often the owners' units are duplexes on the first two floors with the rental unit on the third (so you don't have to climb the stairs with your groceries, but your renter does).

Posted by: Anon at December 6, 2006 4:00 PM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions