A Curb Cut on Landmarked St. Marks Avenue? Really?
See this beautiful brownstone front yard at 97 St. Marks Avenue? Better enjoy it while you can, because the owner is getting ready to demolish it to create a driveway and garage despite the recent landmarking of Prospect Heights, according to a tipster and DOB filings. How could this happen? We’re not quite sure, but…
See this beautiful brownstone front yard at 97 St. Marks Avenue? Better enjoy it while you can, because the owner is getting ready to demolish it to create a driveway and garage despite the recent landmarking of Prospect Heights, according to a tipster and DOB filings. How could this happen? We’re not quite sure, but here’s the initial permit where it mentions converting a portion of the ground floor into a garage and here’s an amendment for the curb cut. The whole thing is eerily reminiscent of what happened at 174 Clinton Avenue a couple of years ago. The icing on the cake, according to a Forum post yesterday, is that the owner’s kicking out the old lady who sold him the house but continued to live in the garden apartment in order to do it. We’ll get back to you with what Landmarks has to say. Let’s hope this is all a big misunderstanding! Update: LPC confirms that they have no record of any applications for Landmark approval at this address. GMAP
Lo Kee, if you think that once you’ve bought a property you can ignore the laws pertaining to it just go ahead. Try not paying your property tax for two years and see how long your property remains your property.
If there’s a construction site being set up, it would seem that the neighbors who are concerned might need to step on it to halt the construction. Although sometimes things can be forced back the way they were, it’s not always the case.
Again, the question is how does this need to move procedurally. It seems there are enough facts to eestablish that DOB improperly issued the permit. How do you go about stopping action taken on an improperly issued permit?
Arkady, it was a rethorical question. I know they didn’t just fly in from Arizona, that was the point. It’s pretty obvious they were trying to pull a fast one. Now it will depend on the neighbors’ level of ire. With a bit of juice, the DOB will backtrack in a nano-second.
Ok…then, in light of Dave’s posts regarding the zoning violation, I ask my question again. If the DOB erroneously issued the permit, can they rescind it?
Just walked over there on my lunch break, there is a construction trailer and fencing set up.
DIBS – not missing the zoning issue – Minard and I were addressing the LPC issue that others raised. If the permit was issued legally, DOB can’t pull it. If it turns out that the zoning does not allow a curb cut, garage, whatever, then the permit might be invalidated.
Grand Army – LPC does not trump DOB. If the permit was issued prior to designation, and LPC had their 40-day to review, LPC can’t have it pulled. It appears, though, that at least in the case of the curb cut application, LPC did NOT have their 40 days. So that might be cause for invalidating that permit (zoning issues aside).
The plans were not necessarily made by Arizonans – a house on my block got approval for at least 3 things that have since been stopped on LPC. Maybe architects, etc. rely on mistakes by DOB & indolence/indifference on the part of neighbors.
If the DOB permit predates the landmarking it is grandfathered. This happens often in new districts. Owners are smart they know to pull the DOB permits prior to the new rules going into effect.
With a DOB permit that predates the Landmarks Commission’s jurisdiction, I think the owner is free to do the work. The LPC can’t fight a valid permit issued prior to designation.
And I do not believe the DOB can rescind a legally issued permit.
Posted by: Minard Lafever at September 23, 2009 12:47 PM
YOU ARE ALL MISSING THE OBVIOUS ZONING VIOLATION.
m4L — Why do you use the term squealed? There’s no ethical or moral issue used in drawing attention to the DOB permit being issued.
Posted by: Boerumresident at September 23, 2009 12:44 PM
cause that matches the hate toward this owner plus as others pointed out the neighbor squealed to this blog to try to embarass this owner. if throwing loosely ugly labels to this homeowner is fine then so too is a label thrown that neighbor’s way