Sunday, November 14, 2010

#200 Smith Street: Now You See It, Now You Don't

IMG_6191
Number 200 Smith Street In October 2010

031

A view of the building from Baltic Street in August 2009

And now...gone

IMG_6864

IMG_6866

IMG_6868

IMG_6867

Since when does a NYC Department Of Buildings permit for "proposed horizontal enlargement of 3rd floor" mean that you can take the entire structure down?  Yet that is exactly what happened to number 200 Smith Street at the corner of Baltic Street in Boerum Hill.  As first reported by Brownstoner,  demolition of the three-story structure began last week on Wednesday.  By Friday evening, most of the building was gone, dumped into a huge truck parked in front, ready to drive the debris evidence away.  


Now, I don't claim to understand the nuances of a Building Department permit, but the one posted on the construction fence sure doesn't state anything about a full demolition, does it?  


ShareThis

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

No, not many people understand the DOB and their labyrinth of permit types, and odd building codes (I think there are three different codes you can build under).

But more importantly, who cares what the permit says?

Anonymous said...

They're probably keeping a part of the original structure thereby skirting a permit for a complete tear down. I've seen it happen with some new condos that have gone up around Brooklyn. They tear down the original building but leave maybe one wall up from the original structure. It must be easier to get a permit for an altercation.

Anonymous said...

OMG - now we need permits for altercations????

:)

Kelly said...

Too funny! But here in Brooklyn, anything is possible.

abigail said...

No, that does definitely not seem kosher, and now the construction's waking us up in the morning from down the block.

Here's the inspector's complaint: http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/OverviewForComplaintServlet?requestid=4&vlcompdetlkey=0001359186

Not cool.

Katia said...

Oh, good. I am glad someone called it in to DOB.

Anonymous said...

I don't mean to be rude, but I've known that family for years and they are the nicest people I've known. You can't go around claiming that they had suspicious "evidence" or they're doing illegal activities.
"Anonymous" is correct in saying that the permit is legit and the construction is going as per agreement in the fact that they did not tear down the entire building. They left a section as shown on one of your pictures and they are allowed to remove and replace any unnecessary parts regardless of size. Of course you would know that if you and the person who filed the complaint had a better degree than a GED.
And based on reading your previous posts, I can tell that you are more interested in gaining "popularity" than posting factual information.

Anonymous said...

Oh please. They may be nice but it is ridiculous to say that this is less than demolition. Yeah, leave a tiny fraction of the original building and call it an alteration. YOU look at the picture. It is obviously an attempt to skirt the permit.