110 Amity Street: back on the market

As reported by Brownstoner and our many of our members, 110 Amity Street is back on the market. And yes, the Corcoran broker overseeing the offerings, which include adjacent properties, has the same last name as the developer who went before the Landmarks Preservation Commission last year. That is all we know at this point. If you know more than that, let us know.

110 Amity: good government at work

Today's hearing at the Landmarks Preservation Commission regarding 110 Amity Street was largely uneventful. Nadezhda Williams of the Historic Districts Council, Amy Breedlove of Cobble Hill, and I were the only people there to testify. We each saluted the cooperation of the developer, Jonathan Wachtel of Lucky Boy Development, and pointed out the few remaining features in dispute: the asymmetrical rail/wall design of the stoops, the height and design of the rear, and the doorways.

Only when the public testimony was over did the occasion become interesting as the commissioners went even further than the three of us and the statement from the CB6 Landmarks Committee. The commissioners objected to the flatness and material of the cornices, the lintels, and other details that they felt made the design's 'conversation' between traditional and modern 'confused'.

The outcome: the plan for the Lamm Building was approved, but the townhouse plans were set aside for further consultation between the developer and LPC staff. It's nice to see government go the extra mile without being beaten with a stick.

110 Amity: LPC hearing Tuesday

110 Amity Street will have its next hearing at the Landmarks Preservation Commission on Tuesday, June 10 at 9.30 a.m. The location is the LPC hearing room at 1 Centre Street. Mercifully, 110 Amity will be the first item on the agenda, so it will be important to get there for the start of the hearing.

People who intend to testify may want to mention of how little notice was given of the hearing. The meeting was only added to the LPC agenda on Friday afternoon, less than two full business days before the hearing.

The developer, Jonathan Wachtel, has genuinely listened to community output. His example should be emulated by others in his line of work.

Outstanding issues of concern to the community include the asymmetrical railings on the stoops, the design of the rear, and the height of the rear. We will mention all of these in our official CHA letter/testimony to LPC. If there is anything that we have forgotten, please let us know either by e-mail or by blog comment. Thanks.

110 Amity: drama-free vote

Last night the CB6 Landmarks Committee voted unanimously to approve with conditions the developer's latest plans. It must be said that the developer, Jonathan Wachtel, truly listened to community input and adapted his plans accordingly. The zinc siding is totally gone, replaced by brick. The committee only objected to three features:

-The material for the penthouses was not specified in the plans. The committee asked that it be wood or a non-shiny metal already in use in the neighborhood.
-The rear was deemed too modern.
-The rear should have a setback of at least one story.

The full board of CB6 will vote on it at its June 11 meeting. We will let you know when the item is calendared for a hearing at the Landmarks Preservation Commission.

110 Amity: more sequels than a horror movie

They're back. The developer and architects of 110 Amity Street will appear before the CB6 Landmarks Committee again this week.

Event details:
Thursday, May 29, 2008 at 6 p.m.
P.S 32 Auditorium
317 Hoyt Street
at Union and Hoyt Streets
Brooklyn, NY 11231

Since the developer is the rare sort who appears to be actually listening, it's important for people to come out and make their opinions and advice known. Penthouses, four-story rears, zinc siding? Now is your chance to be heard.

110 Amity: new CB6 committee vote

Because I ate some bad food (a wrap from Pacific Green) and wound up in the emergency room at LICH this week, I was unable to attend last night's meeting of the CB6 Land Use/Landmarks Committee. Roy Sloane was there and files this report:

The meeting was well attended by CH community residents (8-10). After the presentation by the architects and after considerable discussion by committee members and community residents, Jerry Armer made a motion to reject the four proposed infill buildings for the following reasons:

1) The extensive use of zinc on the sides, rear facades and penthouses is inconsistent with the character of the CH Historic District.

2) The committee was not convinced that the penthouses would not be visible from the street.

3) The full height (four story) extensions were too high and needed to be reduced to no more than three stories.

He did thank the architects and the developer for moving the project so far in the right direction and for listening to the community's concerns.

No action was taken on the proposed changes to the loggia on the roof of the LAMM building as the architect did not bring drawings and plans sufficient to facilitate a consideration by the committee. They will return to the next Land Use/Landmarks committee meeting to re-present.

110 Amity Street: first impressions

Earlier this evening, the Cobble Hill Association hosted a presentation of the new plans for 110 Amity Street by the developer, Jonathan Wachtel, and his two teams of architects—RKT+B for the Lamm Building, and BKSK for the townhouses. The plans for the Lamm Building remain the same: seven apartments with a glass-enclosed loggia on the roof. The townhouses have been redesigned from scratch since the last set of plans was shot down by the Landmarks Preservation Commission.

The tale of the tape:
-Four townhouses, one on Amity Street and three on Henry. The Amity townhouse will be 8 feet from the Lamm Building; the Henry townhouses will be 15 feet.
-Each townhouse will be occupied by a single family.
-The townhouses are 16 to 18 feet wide with heights of 50 feet and chimneys at 53 feet.
-The rears of the townhouses are flush with the one-floor rear-yard additions of the adjacent neighboring homes.
-The top floor of each townhouse is a penthouse set roughly in the east-west middle of the building. The penthouses are thus the fifth floor.

And the æsthetic features:
-The windows and facade of the Henry Street townhouses will be in line with those of the neighboring buildings and the streetwall.
-The front surface will be a combination of brownstone on the ground and parlor floors and brick on the upper floors.
-Each townhouse will have a traditional townhouse stoop but with an asymmetic feature: one side will have a rail and the other a solid face.
-The front lintels will be flush with the building. The lintel above the door will be a bronze plate with a light fixture behind it.
-Most of the side walls and all of the rear will be covered in zinc siding.
-The rear will have large bay windows.

The feature that provoked the most questions from the audience was the zinc siding, something not found in abundance, if at all, in Cobble Hill.

This Thursday, May 22, the CB6 Land Use/Landmarks committee will hold a public meeting and vote on the plans. Details:

PAL Miccio Center
110 West 9th Street
(between Clinton and Henry Streets)
Brooklyn, NY 11231
6:00 p.m.

All members of the public are entitled to attend and comment on the plans.

Meanwhile, feel free to post your comments here so that we can share thoughts about the plans and continue the conversation.

Amity Street horror redux?

110 Amity Street is back. Developer Jonathan Wachtel and his team will make a new presentation to the community this coming Monday.

Here are the details.

EVENT: Meeting with the developer and architects for 110 Amity Street (Lamm Building) to review the proposed plans.
DATE: Monday, May 19
TIME: 7.00 to 9.00 p.m.
PLACE: Long Island College Hospital, Conference Room C
The main entrance is on Hicks Street.
110 Amity Street is Block 296, Lot 5.

In our last encounter with this matter, the Landmarks Preservation Commission unanimously sided with us on January 8, 2008 and rejected the developer's plans for a mews with a row of townhouses or, as I called them, 'caves'. This will be the developer's second attempt to win us over. Let's hope he has learned from his experience.