Prospect Heights Owner Still Wants That Curb Cut!
The owner of the gorgeous brownstone at 97 St. Marks Avenue in Prospect Heights continues to gun for a curb cut. A reader let us know the owner has “an appearance before the BSA on Tuesday, 3/15….looks like they are still trying to get the curb cut and garage approved, even though the area is…
The owner of the gorgeous brownstone at 97 St. Marks Avenue in Prospect Heights continues to gun for a curb cut. A reader let us know the owner has “an appearance before the BSA on Tuesday, 3/15….looks like they are still trying to get the curb cut and garage approved, even though the area is now landmarked,” and a Board of Standards and Appeals employee confirmed that an appeal on the matter is calendared for that date. (The owner also has a separate appeal in to continue construction under prior zoning regs that hasn’t yet been calendared, according to the BSA.) This story is an old one: The application for a curb cut was originally filed shortly after the Prospect Heights landmarking in 2009 but the DOB slapped an SWO on it that still remains in place. Something tells us we haven’t heard the last of this one, unfortunately.
97 St. Marks Avenue Update [Brownstoner] GMAP
DOB Posts Letter of Intent to Revoke on St. Marks Ave [Brownstoner]
A Curb Cut on Landmarked St. Marks Avenue? Really? [Brownstoner]
And why do you care what she does within it? It’s her house. That’s the problem with people that push for landmarking. They think they have some innate right to decide what other people do with their property.
“Why is it ok to not let her do what she wants with her private property?”
Because her property is not an isolated house on top of a lonely hill, it’s in the middle of an urban landmarked district in a municipality with laws, rules and regulations, and all of those laws and rules say that curb cuts are not allowable except under very special conditions. Not to mention cutting a garage into a landmarked building.
None one can really do what they want with their properties. That’s the reality of living in any municipality.
As for everything else – what I disagree said.
What a jerk.
It’s in a landmark district. Usually when you live in a landmark district, you tend to just enjoy the gosh darn historic buildings around you without a constant desire to alter everything and settle for the darn subway or just park in the street.
She probably wasn’t a big proponent of the landmark designation if she acquired this gorgeous beauty before landmarking took place. I can only imagine the ikea gut renovation within.
also, she can already park legally on the street, so if she does, she’s going to take up a spot anyway, so what’s the big deal if she now only takes up the spot in front of her home?
Why is it ok to not let her do what she wants with her private property?
yes, exactly. so why, again, does it make sense to give this person a curb cut, giving her something no one else on the block has or can get, making it cheaper for her to park, and encouraging other people to think they might be able to do the same if they are sneaky enough and connected enough? when the zoning and landmarking laws are against her?
bxgrl, then you must HATE when people park on the street.
“if the city aproves this, good for the guy. who cares if his car is parked in his front yard? it’s his house, as long as the law aproves it let it be. move on from this topic already, jeez… ”
I don’t care if he- or she- parks the car in their front yard. I care that the public street is used for private purposes.
Anyone know what the fees are for curb cuts? Are they paid yearly? Seems like taxpayers should get something back.