November 25, 2003
Statement of the Historic Districts Council
before the Landmarks Preservation Commission
Certificate of Appropriateness Hearing
The Historic Districts Council is the advocate
for New York City’s designated historic districts and neighborhoods
meriting preservation. Its Public Review Committee monitors proposed
changes within historic districts and changes to individual landmarks
and has reviewed these applications that were before the Commission.
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 035195
Manhattan, Block: 474 Lot: 37
44 Mercer Street - SoHo-Cast Iron Historic District
A commercial building constructed in 1855 and later altered. Application
is to demolish the existing building and to construct a new seven-story
building.
HDC Testimony
The Historic Districts Council believes that the design of the
front façade of this new building is appropriate for the
SoHo-Cast Iron Historic District. The front façade design
is an intelligent and well thought out solution.
That said, HDC strongly objects to the design
of the lot line windows on the highly visible southern façade.
Where lot line windows appear in warehouse and commercial loft
districts like SoHo, they are punched through the brickwork. The
proposed bands of windows have no precedent in SoHo, and they
introduce a vertical element in the building’s design where
one expects to see a horizontal element. In SoHo’s architecture,
it is the horizontal of the floorplates that dominates, thus the
vertical window bands on this building create a secondary façade
that is too modernistic in design. Any lot line windows should
be punched through the brickwork so that the new building better
relates to its neighbors.
When reviewing the boards, HDC’s Public Review Committee
was uncertain of the materials for the secondary façade.
It appeared on the computer rendering that the brick would be
a white or a light color. However, the materials board contained
un-labeled iron spot brick of a brownish red color. We hope that
the southern façade will be constructed of this brownish
iron spot brick, as a light colored brick would be highly inappropriate.
LPC Determination: No Action
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 042114
Manhattan, Block: 231 Lot: 8
427 Broadway - SoHo-Cast Iron Historic District
A Venetian Renaissance style warehouse building designed by Thomas
Jackson and built in 1870. Application is to legalize the replacement
of doors and the installation of a fence without the Landmarks
Preservation Commission permits, and to extend the fence.
HDC Testimony
As always, the Historic Districts Council objects to work done
without the permission of the Landmarks Preservation Commission.
When the Commission legalizes inappropriate proposals like the
one before us today, it in essence rewards buildings owners who
purposefully flout the Landmarks Law.
HDC doubts that the Commission would have approved
this fence and new door had the applicant come to the Commission
before doing the work. 427 Broadway is an outstanding building
in the SoHo-Cast Iron Historic District, with highly ornate cast
iron elements in the Venetian Renaissance and French Renaissance
manner. The illegal fence obscures the landmark and gives the
appearance that the building is imprisoned. It therefore must
be removed.
The new doors are not sympathetic to the wonderful
and elaborate cast iron details of the building. The applicant
should remove the existing doors. We ask the applicant to work
with the Commission staff to design replacement doors that match
those just to the east of this doorway, which appear to be historic
and are without a doubt more in keeping with the period and style
of the building.
LPC Determination: No Action
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 016687
Manhattan, Block: 629 Lot: 42
301 West 13th Street - Greenwich Village Historic District
An apartment building designed by William H. Cauvet and built
in 1852. Application is to install new storefront infill and doors
and to legalize the installation of through-the-wall air-conditioning
units and alterations to the secondary rear elevation without
Landmarks Preservation Commission permits.
HDC Testimony
The Historic Districts Council believes that applicant’s
design for a new storefront is a huge improvement over the existing
conditions. HDC compliments the applicant for removing the stucco
from the West 13th Street ground floor elevation. In addition,
HDC applauds the applicant for restoring the building’s
brownstone lintels and sills and for removing the paint from the
brick in the floors above the storefront. 301 West 13th Street
is an extremely prominent building because of its corner location.
Therefore, the applicant’s proposed improvements to the
building will have a positive impact on the Greenwich Village
Historic District.
LPC Determination: No Action
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 042704
Manhattan, Block: 629 Lot: 1
675 Hudson Street - Gansevoort Market Historic District
A vernacular/neo-Grec style factory building built in 1849, enlarged
in 1854-60 and altered circa 1884. Application is to install awnings
and lighting at the ground floor.
HDC Testimony
675 Hudson Street is extremely prominent in the Gansevoort Market
Historic District. Its triangular shape makes it the meatpacking
district’s version of the Flatiron Building. Thus, any changes
to this building will greatly affect the character of New York’s
newest historic district and should be reviewed with extreme care.
The Historic Districts Council does not object
to the new awnings and lighting. However, we had difficulty assessing
the appropriateness of this new storefront café because
of the lack of a drawing showing the existing conditions of the
building. Without such a drawing, it was impossible to determine
exactly where the applicant is proposing to cut into the original
fabric of the building to create the café window openings.
HDC is delighted that the applicant is proposing
to open the bricked up doors and windows at the ground floor level.
However, we feel that the new storefront design introduces a peculiar
store pattern of alternating windows and doors. The irregular
pattern clashes with the regular and symmetrical fenestration
pattern of the floors above. Moreover, HDC objects to the long
casement windows in the storefront that extend down nearly to
the sidewalk level. We hope that these windows do not cut into
the building’s historic fabric and ask that they terminate
at the lower edge of the brickwork so they do not cut into the
bulkhead. The base of this building visually supports the upper
floors, and we fear that the base will evaporate if the applicant
is allowed to remove so much of the bulkhead.
Lastly, HDC objects to the design of the storefront
doors, which are entirely designed in glass. We ask the applicant
to look at the doors on Hudson Street, right next to where the
“675 Hudson” sign is painted in the photograph on
the board. These doors appear to be historic and should be used
as a sample of what the new doors should look like.
LPC Determination: No Action
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 042706
Manhattan, Block: 1118 Lot: 52
56 West 66th Street – First Battery Armory Individual Landmark
An Armory building designed by Horgan and Slattery and constructed
in 1900-03. Application is to replace the windows.
HDC Testimony
The Historic Districts Council strongly objects to the proposal
to remove the historic wooden windows and replace them with inappropriate
aluminum windows. From the materials we reviewed, it appears as
if the existing windows are in good repair. We ask the Commission
to deny this application and require the applicant to either restore
the historic wooden windows, or if they are beyond repair, then
install wooden replacements that replicate the historic configuration.
LPC Determination: Approved.
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 033536
Manhattan, Block: 119 Lot: 36
257 Central Park West - Upper West Side/Central Park West Historic
District
A Beaux-Arts style apartment buidling designed by Mulliken &
Moeller, built in 1905-06. Application is to apply stone veneer
to the base of the building.
HDC Testimony
The Historic Districts Council is appalled at this application
to apply a stone veneer on top of the stone base of 257 Central
Park West. If the Commission were to approve this proposal, it
would be setting a dangerous precedent. It would in essence be
stating that a building’s original historic fabric is not
valuable and can be covered up for something that looks “more
historic.”
The applicant should be restoring and repairing
the existing stone rather than applying a limestone face. The
proposed stone veneer has a dreadful pattern that is entirely
inappropriate for this Beaux-Arts apartment building. Moreover,
the limestone veneer will be affixed over areas that are currently
bluestone, granite, and concrete. While the existing stone base
does not look perfect and has worn with time, it is much preferable
than a fake veneer that unnecessarily cleans up the building’s
base. HDC urges the Commission to deny this application and to
inform the applicant of the appropriate methods for cleaning and
repairing stone.
LPC Determination: No Action
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 042654
Manhattan, Block: 1247 Lot: 18,19,20,21,119
329,331,333,335,337 West 85th Street - Individual Landmarks
Five Queen Anne/Romanesque Revival style rowhouses built in 1890-91
and designed by Ralph S. Townsend Application is to install aluminum
sashes within existing square-headed window frames and to paint
the stone on the facades.
HDC Testimony
The Historic Districts Council found it difficult to assess the
appropriateness of this proposal because of the lack of a picture
of the existing conditions of the building. In all applications,
drawings and photographs of the existing conditions are essential
to the understanding of the proposal.
Nonetheless, HDC strongly objects to the proposal
to re-paint the brownstone of these Queen Anne rowhouses. As the
Commission knows, painting stone, especially brownstone, promotes
spalling and the general deterioration of the building material.
Paint traps moisture into the stone, which can be disastrous for
brownstone after several freeze-thaw cycles. We urge the applicant
to remove the existing paint and clean and repair the brownstone
before more damage is done to these individual landmarks.
Likewise, HDC objects to the installation of aluminum
windows sashes. The wooden windows should be repaired. However,
if the windows are beyond repair, then they should be replaced
with wooden windows that match the original configuration.
LPC Determination: Windows approved;
Paint not approved.
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 042335
Manhattan, Block: 1120 Lot: 29
75 Central Park West - Upper West Side/Central Park West Historic
District
A neo-Renaissance style apartment building built in 1928-29 designed
by Rosario Candela. Application is to legalize the installation
of single-pane windows without Landmarks Preservation Commission
permits, and the installation of through-the-wall air-conditioners
in non-compliance with Certificate of No Effect 99-5253.
HDC Testimony
As the Historic District Council frequently states, we vehemently
object to the legalization of inappropriate work done without
the permission of the Landmarks Preservation Commission. In this
instance, HDC doubts that the Commission would have approved the
installation of single pane windows had the applicant come to
the Commission before doing the work. Therefore, if the Commission
were to legalize this work, it would be rewarding the applicant
for flouting the Landmarks Law.
The window configuration on this lovely Rosario
Candela is a mess. In particular, the multitude of single pane
windows creates awkward voids in a building that destroy its architectural
integrity for the sake of the residents’ views. We urge
the Commission to deny the request for legalization, require the
applicant to restore the windows that were replaced, and work
with the applicant to develop an appropriate master plan that
will work towards restoring the building’s original window
configuration.
LPC Determination: No Action.
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 042507
Manhattan, Block: 1127 Lot: 18
27 West 74th Street - Upper West Side/Central Park West Historic
District
A Renaissance Revival style rowhouse designed by John H. Duncan
and built in 1889-90. Application is to install a stoop gate.
HDC Testimony
While the Historic Districts Council sympathizes with the applicant,
we, as a matter of policy, object to stoop gates. To pedestrians
on the street, stoop gates create cages out of a rowhouse’s
stoop area. This particular gate is especially inappropriate because
it is placed on a dog-legged stoop. The proposed gate will detract
from this neo-Renaissance style rowhouse and this wonderfully
Upper West Side block. We urge the Commission to deny this application.
LPC Determination: No Action.
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 042715
Manhattan, Block: 1408 Lot: 14
129 East 73rd Street - Upper East Side Historic District
A neo-Italian Renaissance style residence designed by Harry Allen
Jacobs and built in 1907-08. Application is to replace the front
doors.
HDC Testimony
The Historic Districts Council objects to the design of the new
front doors for this neo-Italian Renaissance style residence.
In general, the new design is too busy, and HDC would prefer something
that is much more simple. While the existing doors are not historic,
their simplicity enabled the building’s architecture to
take center stage.
A plainer design in which one design solution
fills the entire door space would ensure that the new doors do
not compete with the wonderful architectural elements of the building.
In particular, the cartouche above the door is unnecessary, as
there are already two cartouches on the building. HDC suggests
that the applicant look to the ironwork on the building’s
window guards and other ironwork on similar buildings for inspiration
for a less ornate door design.
LPC Determination: Approved.
Hearing Date:11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 032912
Manhattan, Block: 1377 Lot: 13
19 East 62nd Street - Upper East Side Historic District
A rowhouse built in 1871 and altered in the neo-Federal style
in 1917 by Harry Allen Jacobs. Application is to legalize the
installation of windows without Landmarks Preservation Commission
permits.
HDC Testimony
As always, HDC vehemently objects to work done by owners who flout
the Landmarks Law and do not apply for permits from the Landmarks
Preservation Commission. The LPC must hold all applicants to the
same level of appropriateness as others, even if the work has
already been done. Therefore, we ask if the Commission would have
approved these windows if they had come up for proper review before
being installed.
The Historic Districts Council strongly believes
that the windows installed without a permit are inappropriate
for this rowhouse. We urge the Commission to deny this application
for legalization and require the applicant to restore the original
window configuration.
LPC Determination: Denied.
Hearing Date: 11/25/2003
LPC Docket Number: 041390
Manhattan, Block: 1498 Lot: 61
12 East 87th Street - Carnegie Hill Historic District
A neo-Renaissance style apartment building built in 1911 and designed
by George and Edward Blum. Application is for buidling-wide window
replacement.
HDC Testimony
The Historic Districts Council sympathizes with the applicant’s
need to install air conditioning units, and we are thankful that
the applicant is not proposing to cut into the building’s
terra cotta. However, we vehemently object to the replacement
of these wooden casement windows with aluminum windows. The windows
seem to be in good condition, and their replacement is not necessary
for a solution to the air conditioning dilemma. Indeed, many of
the existing wooden casement windows currently adequately hold
window air conditioning units.
12 East 87th Street could better solve its air
conditioning problem with a master plan for a/c units rather than
a building-wide window replacement. By regularizing the placement
pattern of these units, the building’s wooden casement windows
can be retained. We ask the Commission to deny this application
and to work with the applicant to develop a solution that does
not require the replacement of these wonderful windows.
LPC Determination:
Approved.
Return to Recent Testimony
