Side Window Woes in Cobble Hill
A proposal to renovate 227 Clinton Street hit Community Board 6’s Landmarks and Land Use Committee last week, and it was rough-going from the start. Coming not long after Norah Jones finished installing her controversial side windows and began work on her swimming pool, the timing could not have been worse. The designers, who presented…
A proposal to renovate 227 Clinton Street hit Community Board 6’s Landmarks and Land Use Committee last week, and it was rough-going from the start. Coming not long after Norah Jones finished installing her controversial side windows and began work on her swimming pool, the timing could not have been worse. The designers, who presented the design shown after the jump, were there to try to rally support for four additional windows on the side of the brownstone, a modestly sized swimming pool, and an all-glass, two-story “tea room” in the back yard, with trellis and vines up each side. The committee felt that the side windows were out of historical context and that there was “no historical credibility for glass boxes on the backs of homes in Cobble Hill.” There was no opinion expressed about the swimming pool, although it’s only the second one to come in front of this community board since Norah’s. The only nod of approval from the committee was changing the the existing windows to a wood frame. The session ended with the committee saying it would testify against the entirety of the design at their Landmarks hearing. Tough luck!
This is only a committee of the community board and has no real authority,and rightfully so. The are moody, arbitrary and capricious and have no discernible standards other than “we don’t like it”.
They have an “advisory” position regarding LPC. And thankfully LPC often ignores them.
Twice they rejected my proposals and twice LPC approved them. To have to present to them is a complete waste of time.
CB6 approved something on our block that we didn’t like so we circulated a petition saying that & indicating that the impact would be great on us as neighbors & the decision was reversed. It can happen. These people could try getting their neighbors to endorse their design – as well as doing a better dog & pony w/ their presentation which, I agree, was poor. Babs’s point is a good one, too.
“A certain MM is available for research services……”
I hired Miss Muffet to do a home price survey 🙂
“DH – perfidious CB1 who approved a 40-story tower on the North Greenpoint waterfront (a neighborhood of 3 and 4 story buldings) against the wishes of the residents there, but eyeing the business opportunities it entails?”
For the most part….
If you’re looking for glass boxes in the 19th century, take a look at the Crystal Palace or a host of other conservatories, etc. Of course none of those make a very good precedent for a glass box extension on a row house – for that, you want to start by looking at tea porches, which were quite common on row houses prior to the Civil War. From there, there are a lot of other precedents that could bolster the argument for this proposal.
I was walking down Norah’s street the other day with my girlfriend. She had never been on the street and was unaware of the window controversy.
She looked up at the windows and said, “oh my God, those windows are hideous, they’ve destroyed the historic character of the block. How could they have allowed this?”
/sarcasm
DH – perfidious CB1 who approved a 40-story tower on the North Greenpoint waterfront (a neighborhood of 3 and 4 story buldings) against the wishes of the residents there, but eyeing the business opportunities it entails?
Montrose… very subtle whoring. I like it!
Regardless of ultimate disposition of this house, I would love to have a “glass box” one day. It would be an awesome place enjoy a cup o’ coffee and smell the flowers etc. Ahhh… to dream…
While “glass boxes”, ie greenhouses, are much more common in Europe than here, there is still historic precident for them in NYC. I think it’s paramount that the owners of this house get a first class presentation for their appearance before the LPC.
In fact, what they really should do is re-do the presentation, with some meaty research, and good artwork, and resubmit it to the next land-use meeting of their community board, and get their approval, before going to the LPC. It’s possible to override a CB at an LPC hearing, but it doesn’t happen very often. LPC does not like to do things that the community, as represented by a CB, does not approve of, unless it is of massive historic significance, and even then…..
A certain MM is available for research services……