Developer David Walentas has won permission to finish his Atlantic Avenue apartment building with"possible" rooftop cabanas, according to the Brooklyn Paper," despite an ongoing controversy that the cabanas break the 50-foot height limit in historic Cobble Hill.
McBrooklyn got this photo of the boxlike rooftop structures (yellow) at the end of March, before black shrouding was placed over them.
“Everything has been approved by the Department of Buildings and the Landmarks Preservation Commission,” Jed Walentas told the Brooklyn Paper, and both city agencies confirmed Walentas’s opinion.
Back in March, City Council Member Bill de Blasio’s office said that if the cabanas were not in the design approved by LPC and the Council, they would have to come down, according to the Brooklyn Eagle.
The historic district law allows "mechanical bulkheads" only -- not residential -- above the 50-foot limit. So what gives?
Photo by MK Metz
Monday, April 21, 2008
Rooftop Cabanas Okayed at 182 Atlantic?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
21 comments:
Don't see what all the fuss is about...cabanas, shbananas. Nice view of Atlantic. ave. though.
I've heard that top floor residents (who buy in) will have private staircases to their rooftop cabanas.
These are the same people who have done a great job building and growing DUMBO. Maybe they can help this kind of sad stretch of Atlantic between Court and Clinton.
10:21 What you could have also mentioned, is that these are the same developers who thought that they were/are 10 feet better (at least) than the rest of the neighborhood.
Thats right, the historic district's limits that have kept both the heights and c-hill as charming and valaued as they are were just a sugesstions in these people minds, and they tried to break it. And maybe with these cabanas/mechanicals they have.
Good test case for the Billy-de B. a lot of lip service against run amok devlopemnt lately as he runs for the next rung, butwhen a clear height limit is broken, and in his own district lets see what the man actually does/says/ (cando) against the deep pockets that may or may not support his next step.
(he's probably in PA as I write this)
(keep the news coming McBrooklyn! This is a live one!)
I think it may rest on the definition of "cabana." Is a cabana a roof mechanical, or a living space?
If this go through, I need to put a two story "cabanachanical" on my rooftop.
These guys have huge money and step on politicians (and the rest of us) for their mid-afternoon snack.
"So what gives?" McBrooklyn, I believe you to be wiser than you let on. But i'm in for another day -hook, line and holy cabanas.
The answer is: sexymoneypower trumps all, and believe that the recent 10ft slap back to mortal (read:the rest of us) standards so infuriated the DUmb-o lords, that they'll take this one to the mat and wait these pansy elected officials, building not-so-inspectors, and tired community not so actives out and get their way. (which is whatever they want: 51ft,61 ft 71 ft --
"it has all been approved."
Dear 11;15 not sure why you're so bunched up, how many jobs did you create today?
Stand down 1133,as you didn't address the potential law breaking nor the union-"non-union" labor question. As i dont consider non-union jobs, jobs as I hear thats what they use.
Move along McBrooklyn et All--this story is above our pay grade, and is best left for the big boys.
1;43 You're a downer for sure.
BTW--What genius decided that Atlantic Avenue Should have a measly 50ft Height restriction?
Does anyone else think thats kind of miserly and unsportsmanlike? Great for the living blocks, but c'mon how can this Ave grow up if it cant actually grow up?
And BTW, I'm all for following the letter and ok, the spirit-of laws. Not need to get cute if the system really works. (Thinking of a nfamous/prolific/creative
Brooklyn architect)
Nice way to get the conversation going---Brownstoner just put up a post linking to the BPaper story and the old rendering. Wonder if they will take a position on "Cabanagate?"
What ever you think about The Two Trees, at least they're still building.
mcBrooklyn, Were the cabanas in the approved design? And has anyone seen the signed copy? What a clerk says on the phone in confusion and on deadline, and what a developer wishes for and believes is his right are not the same things as a rock solid approved design that has cabanas on roof going over 50 ft height.
It looks like the City Planning Commission approved it on Sept 19, 2007 C070156ZSK
Thank you 449--
Will have to dumpster dive to actually see these plans as approved and what sort of rroftop shenangcabanas they approved or what they thought they were approving.
As I recall, the Mechanicals section gets real small in the fine print, and a comma here or a "whatever is needed" there and all of sudden cabanas were in fact approved: letter not the spirit.
I liked the Brooklyn Paper article which got this thing started, but I'm not sure about the price quoted for a DUMBO cabana. They said:$325,00., but my guess is that they meant $325,000.
I'd love to meet the sucker who paid that much for some wood on tar and a view that could be had for a walk to the promenade.
I predict Our Esteemed councilman De B.WIll rollover like a pup under shade now that the good ship HRC aint going to the WH and taking him out of the nabe.
Before this gets pretty, it's gonna get ugly.
And these people want us to trust them to build "appropriately" next to the Brooklyn Bridge?
I still cant believe that these guys haven't announced a solar intiative for their mechanicalcabans and get the greens on their side.
Perhaps they're holding the opening of trader joes hostage until this cabanagate gets resolved. The two Trees calculate that the greens and the foodies are more powerful then the 50-footers. Just thinking outloud.
Post a Comment