All Is Not Well at 420 State Street
The construction at 420 State Street recently began and was already slapped with a stop work order due to construction contrary to the approved permits. We wrote back in March about the lot being approved for a four-story, single family home, but apparently construction is surpassing the expectation of the neighbors. Residents claim the building…
The construction at 420 State Street recently began and was already slapped with a stop work order due to construction contrary to the approved permits. We wrote back in March about the lot being approved for a four-story, single family home, but apparently construction is surpassing the expectation of the neighbors. Residents claim the building will exceed the footprint of the previous building (which was destroyed in an explosion in 2000) with a two-story extension going almost to the back of the lot with a 30-foot high fence. A zoning code violation complaint was filed by a neighbor, sharing the concern over the “severe loss of light, air, and view” if construction was to proceed. Last Friday, with the Stop Work Order, the borough commissioner issued a 15-day letter of intent to revoke the new building application, according to the DOB website. The developers and also owners, “Represent the worst of the me-generation,” gripes a neighbor. “How do they plan to live among the very people they have infuriated with their selfish scheme?”
New House for 420 State Street? [Brownstoner] GMAP P*Shark DOB
I used to wonder what all the fuss about big extensions was. I was with Rob — it’s their property. Then my nice neighbors built a completely legal extension twenty feet into their yard. My formerly capacious green tunnel view now stops abruptly at a blank, brown wall.
There are worse tragedies in the world, but I very much miss that big yard feeling. So, I feel the State Street neighbors’ pain.
I’m no expert at navigating the DOB website but the original permit application appears to indicate that it’s to be a 4-storey one-family house, 3,230 sq ft (ie. approx 20 ft x 40 ft per floor), covering 58% of the lot and including a 30ft back yard.
I don’t really understand the “mind your business and let them do whatever they like” school of thought in this thread. Surely it’s perfectly valid for neighbors to complain to DOB if they believe that construction is exceeding the approved footprint and will permamently block their light. And not just valid but necessary even, given the total dysfunction of DOB.
Bear in mind that there can be a real sense of urgency based on conditions on the ground. When people see something happening that appears to contradict the original plan, their instinct is to try to stop it before it becomes a reality that can’t (or won’t) be undone. Certainly it’s easy for non-professionals to look at a building site and miscontrue what’s happening. A foundation can have a much larger footprint than the finished building, for example. Maybe that’s the case here, maybe not.
A lot of these situations can be avoided when builders/owners/architects take the time to communicate clearly with their neighbors about a project. Maybe they did and the neighbors are all cranks. But with 7 complaints btw March and now it kinda makes you wonder.
I’m curious. Both Jonathan and Emily have posted on this topic, quoting anonymous neighbors. Twelve people (counting myself) have commented above. Show of hands; how many have actually looked at the plans? I bet Sid has; anyone else?
I am a big fan of the donut theory, but that is hard to justify here where this lot is only 80 deep to begin with, the building next door at 422 is probably 70 or 80′ deep, and the building behind this one is the enormous Ex-Lax building (with the empty parking lot probably visible from this lot.)
OTOH, a 30 foot fence is ridiculous.
This reminds me of the Bay Ridge spite wall in that the owners and developers can do anything they want without much consequence other than a stop work order that can be disobeyed.
As IMBY already noted, the borough commissioner lifted the SWO today. Lot line windows are accessary windows and are always subject to being blocked by neighboring buildings.
The minimum residential rear yard (barring a variance) is 30 feet in depth. The previous building, destroyed in the explosion, had a larger yard but that doesn’t constrain the new owners to follow suit. Are the neighbors proposing to buy unused development rights, or just take them by pseudo-eminent domain in the court of public opinion? How is it “selfish” to build in conformance with the zoning resolution and building code?
I find the whole way the initial post is written irresponsible, but I guess it is just my latest reminder that this is the blogosphere and not journalism.
true i guess you have a point about that…
*rob*
It would be one dark and smelly slum, Rob. Everything built to the lot line, no light except for the penthouse dwellers. Talk about owning the big lightbulb in the sky.
The stop work order was lifted yesterday. I guess living through an horrific explosion that almost kills you, makes one a little sensitive about quality of life issues like light and air.