I just learned that the BSA has approved the application to resume construction at 144 North 8th Street (the Finger Building). BSA’s decision was based on a letter from DOB Deputy Counsel Felicia Miller, stating in part:

the permit issued in connection with Job # 301784399 for a 16 story building was a validly issued permit. We understand further that there is pending litigation regarding the applicant’s right to use roof top space at 115 Berry and 138 North 8th Street, as reflected in the plans. If they should loose that litigation, then the applicant will be in violation of open space requirements to the extent they decide to continue with construction beyond 10 stories. For this reason, there is a stop work Order in place for construction beyond 10 stories

144 North 8th Street (aka The Finger Building)
Photo: A Test of Will

The building permit for 144 North 8th, issued prior to the 2005 waterfront rezoning, expired in May, 2007 (two years after the enactment of the rezoning). Today’s BSA decision allows construction to proceed on the entire project. However, the pending litigation of which Miller speaks precludes any construction above the 10th story.

Here’s the kicker: for more than two years now local residents have wanted to sue to stop this project. Such a suit would have to be brought before BSA, and would be based on the fact that the building plans were not valid when approved (via self certification by Scarano Architects). But the neighbors can’t bring a case in front of BSA until DOB issues a “final determination” that the permit is valid. Now, one would think that a letter from a Deputy Counsel at DOB to the BSA – the very letter upon which BSA is basing its decision to allow the project to go forward – would constitute a “final determination”.

But it doesn’t.

According to DOB, a final certification can only come from the Brooklyn Borough Commissioner. Until such a determination is made, the public can’t challenge the validity of the permit in front of BSA. However, BSA is free to allow the permit to be renewed based on a not-so-final determination of the validity of the original permit by a DOB deputy counsel.

And the Deputy Counsel Borough Commissioner has, for over two years now, refused to issue such a determination.

Runs rings around you logically, eh?

When I linked to TRE’s Karl Fisher interview a few days ago, I said:

unfortunately, with the exception of 20 Bayard Street, just about every Fischer project is a box devoid of curved lines, angled lines, and, dare we say it, flair; which is probably for the better, as 20 Bayard is the worst of the opus

Photo: Curbed

When I wrote that, I hadn’t seen the base of the building since the sidewalk bridge came down. Today, Curbed posted this picture, and I have to say that I was wrong – I went way too easy on 20 Bayard. This is one of the ugliest things I have seen in ages – a senseless mashup of bad corporate park architecture and bad junior high school architecture. I can only assume that there is a cafeteria at that second floor apsis (and that it too sucks).

There is also a high degree of ridiculousness here (beyond the obvious ridiculousness of that central paired column with the metal collar). I mean M. C. Escher couldn’t find his way into this building. There’s a central stair leading to two sweeping stairs up to the second level, what looks like a secret portal between the two “columns” straight ahead, and two flanking stairs that look they’re townhouse entries. How the hell do you get into this place? Better yet, how do you get in if you’re wheelchair bound?? If the answer is a chair lift, Karl Fisher deserves to lose his license to practice architecture in polite society – chair lifts should be a last resort in rehab projects. (And if the answer is some at-grade entry off to the side somewhere, the Mayor’s Office for People with Disabilities should slap a huge-ass fine on this project for violating the spirit, if not the letter, of Local Law 58.)

The good news is that 227 Grand Street was going to be demolished anyhow. Unfortunately, gravity reared its ugly head before the demo crew could get to that end of the building.

This is all part of the Gandar’s demolition at the corner of Grand and Driggs (where a 14-story condo is proposed – that’s the former Stinger Club at the far right of the photo). The building in question was a three-story flat house, constructed in the mid-19th century. In all likelihood, the failure of this wall was related to vibrations caused by the ongoing demolition, as well as the demo itself. But its also very likely that the side wall was compromised years ago, as it is a former party wall that was never intended to be exposed to the elements. As we recall, the building next door was demolished about four or five years ago.

A stop work order has been issued on this project (for an expired permit, not as a result of this wall failure). According to our friends on the block (who took these photos today), workers have been busy on the site for the past few days. And they weren’t doing “emergency” repairs to keep this wall standing and ensure the public safety.