373GrandAvePaint.jpg
We just got a tip that someone just started painting one of the brownstones on Grand Avenue between Gates and Putnam white this morning. (Yes, a certain blogger does live on this block.) Something tells us the Landmarks Preservation Commission didn’t sign off on this. If any readers are nearby, we’d appreciate a photo asap. If anyone from LPC is reading, please get on the stick! Update 7/27: Here’s the photo from about 11:20 this morning. The address is 373 Grand Avenue. LPC confirms that there are no permits out on this.

dailynews373grand.jpgUpdate 7/29: As the Daily News article reports, it turns out that—luckily—the owner was only repainting the area around the door. While we understand that some people feel it was an overreaction on our part to post about this before all the facts were known, here’s why we think it was warranted: First of all, had the painters been intending to paint the entire facade, every second counted when we got the tip (we were in fact in Dumbo, and not just across the street, when the tip came in, so popping over for a friendly chat was not an option); secondly, we were on the phone with LPC within five minutes of getting the tip, and LPC told us that (1) the owner had no permit for the painting and (2) that he had racked up, and failed to cure, several other landmark violations over the years. All these factors led us to conclude that, on balance, it was not worth taking the risk that something really destructive might happen. You know, better safe than sorry. With 20/20 hindsight, this was clearly the wrong call. Apologies to the owner—our obsession with historic brownstones may have gotten the better of us on this one.
Bottom photo by Rosier for the Daily News


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. Wow, I just walked by this house as I was walking back home from Target. It’s funny because I also wondered what were they doing with the white paint. And yes this is still America but the Historic rules are the rules. The only reason why a seller in the area can get over a million for one of theses properties is because NO ONE PAINTED THE FRONT OF THESE HOUSES WITH WHTIE PAINT!

  2. I’m surprised at the hositlity to landmarks on this blog (of all places).
    Most of the old houses in prime Clinton Hill and Fort Greene would be in the process of demolition right now and being replaced with bigger buildings if it were not for landmark protection.
    How dumb to be questioning landmark regs at this stage of the game.

  3. is it possible that they are just painting the archway? and is it possible that this is just primer?

    i mean, if they were painting the whole house, why take such care to cut the archway so cleanly??

  4. painting brownstone bright white is a Landmarks mortal sin.
    Hard to imagine what someone was thinking when they did this.
    were they high, is it a political statement, or did they do it to someone else’s house as a bad gag?

  5. “There is a purpose to Landmarking. One is to protect the historic BROWNstones. This is a disgrace.”

    no, the war in iraq is a disgrace. the lack of affordable health care in this country is a disgrace. our dependence on foreign oil is a disgrace.

    this is just someone painting their house white.

    when you pick yourself off the floor after fainting, get over it.

  6. the people who say it’s fine to paint this place are the same people who would say they’d like to see velveeta served at per se.

    ignore them. if it were up to them, they’d be proactively seeking a graffiti artist to spruce up notre dame cathedral.

1 26 27 28 29 30 31