Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rear Extension Stoop Restoration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves window replacements, stoop reconstruction and rear additions at 117 State Street with conditions
Summary
The Landmarks Preservation Commission approved replacement windows, a reconstructed stoop and a two‑story rear yard extension plus a rooftop addition at 117 State Street in Brooklyn Heights after debate about rear‑yard depth and visibility; several neighbors and preservation groups objected to the scale of the rear addition.
The Landmarks Preservation Commission approved a plan to replace windows, reconstruct a stoop and parlor‑floor entrance, and construct a two‑story rear yard extension plus a rooftop addition at 117 State Street in the Brooklyn Heights Historic District (LPC 25-07793), but the decision followed substantial neighbor opposition and a range of preservation recommendations.
Rachel Frankel presented the application for the Greek Revival rowhouse (built 1837–1839). The proposal calls for 1‑over‑1 double‑hung wood windows at the front to match the row’s mid‑20th‑century condition, reconstruction of a brownstone stoop and parlor‑floor door surround based on neighboring precedents, and a new two‑story, roughly 21‑foot‑4‑inch rear yard extension with a terrace above. The rooftop penthouse is modest and set back; the applicant presented mock‑up photos showing limited visibility from several vantage points.
The application drew strong neighborhood opposition. Adjacent owners at 115 and 119 State Street and other neighbors submitted letters and testified at the hearing, saying the proposed rear extension would protrude further into the rear‑yard “donut” than other recent additions on the row, would be highly visible from Sydney Place, and could threaten shared party walls during excavation. The Brooklyn Heights Association and multiple residents argued the scale was inappropriate; Brooklyn Community Board 2 recommended conditional disapproval, asking that the rear extension align with 115 State Street. Council Member Lincoln Restler sent a denial letter. Preservation groups (Historic Districts Council and Victorian Society) asked for 6‑over‑6 historic window configurations at the front and full documentation for ironwork and other historic elements.
Commissioners supported restorative front work (new windows, stoop) and found the rooftop addition minimally visible in staff‑verified mock‑up views. On the rear extension they balanced block context—many houses on the block already have rear additions and a large 19th‑century extension exists nearby—against neighbor concerns about visibility and construction impacts. The motion to approve carried with six in favor and two opposed. Commissioners asked the applicant to coordinate structural plans and neighbor access/underpinning agreements and to provide detailed drawings for the stoop and ironwork for staff review and salvage, where appropriate.
