July 24, 2007
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 the following applications that were before the
Commission.
Hearing Date: 7/24/2007
LPC Docket Number: 076550
Manhattan, Block: 1391, Lot: 21
35 East 76th Street - Upper East Side Historic District
An Art Deco style hotel designed by Sylvan Bien and built in 1929-1930.
Application is to establish a Master Plan governing the future
installation of windows.
HDC Testimony
HDC is opposed to a Master Plan that calls for single pane windows
on the Hotel Carlyle. No historic photos were included in the
presentation available for public review on Friday, a surprise
considering how famous the building is. They were not really necessary
though, as the renderings of what the hotel would look like with
single pane windows demonstrated exactly why such a proposal is
inappropriate. HDC has gone on record about our concerns over
the proliferation of glass as a primary building material in the
Upper East Side Historic District, even in fact, right across
the street from this site. This proposal is another example of
the validity of this concern, if approved, the single panes would
leave the building looking empty, like a smile missing teeth.
6 over 6 windows would be preferable; 1 over 1 acceptable; buy
single panes would create a blank stare on a previously lively
Art Deco landmark..
LPC Determination: Incomplete
Hearing Date: 7/24/2007
LPC Docket Number: 075736
Brooklyn, Block: 1077, Lot: 30
570 1st Street - Park Slope Historic District
A neo-Italianate Renaissance style rowhouse designed by Eisenla
& Carlson and built in 1910. Application is to construct a
rooftop bulkhead and install rooftop HVAC units.
HDC Testimony
There was no way to determine the visibility of this rooftop bulkhead
and HVAC units based on the two 11 x 17" print outs available
for public review on Friday. The two photos presented show the
roof hidden by a tree in full bloom, leading us to wonder what
it will look like in the winter. Also there was no map showing
from where these photos were taken or where other views might
be. HDC urges the commission to set this application aside until
more information is provided.
LPC Determination: Incomplete
Hearing Date: 7/24/2007
LPC Docket Number: 077987
Manhattan, Block: 830, Lot: 26
1182 Broadway - Madison Square North Historic District
A Beaux Arts style store and office building designed by William
L. Rouse and built in 1908-1910. Application is to install new
ground floor infill and replace the rooftop ballustrade.
HDC Testimony
If this were just a proposal for new ground floor infill and to
replace the rooftop balustrade, this would be an acceptable application.
However, this proposal is also asking for a 74-711, raising the
bar higher for an actual restoration.
HDC applauds the uncovering and restoration of the multi-pane
windows of the 1920s storefront, and we urge that the rest of
the storefront be restored. Instead of a wall of doors, something
that replicates the 1920s rhythm of the first floor (a store door
flanked by store windows and a building entryway on the right
side) would be more appropriate. In addition to the transoms proposed,
bulkheads should be added (the originals appear to be a cast metal
decorative grill). An especially interesting detail to recreate
is the building entryway with its arched pediment, a distinctive
element apparently from the original design that survived the
1920s renovation. At the top of the building, we question replacing
the entire terra-cotta balustrade with one of fiberglass. Is none
of the original material worth salvaging?
As the excellent historic photos included in this presentation
show, there is enough documentation on this building to provide
a basis for a real restoration, and a real reason for a 74-711.
LPC Determination: Incomplete
Hearing Date: 7/24/2007
LPC Docket Number: 078045
Manhattan, Block: 944, Lot: 54
1466 Broadway - Individual Landmark Historic District
A Beaux-Arts style hotel, designed by Marvin and Davis Architects
with Bruce Price, and built in 1902-1906 with an annex designed
by Phillip C. Brown and built in 1894. Application is to alter
the two-story commercial base, install canopies, construct a rooftop
addition, and to remove a fire-escape and install storefront infill
at the annex.
HDC Testimony
The proposed alterations to the 2-story base of the Knickerbocker
Hotel are an improvement. HDC feels though that an individual
landmark such as this deserves better than just an improvement
and recommends that the distinctive arched windows on the 2nd
floor be restored. The base otherwise feels too quiet and plain
for the rest of the elaborate Beaux-Arts building. The National
Register site would be eligible for tax benefits with a proper
restoration.
The rooftop addition would be visible on this distinctive roof.
The mansard is the perfect top to the classic hotel; a visible
rooftop bar would not be. On the annex, we find the storefront
acceptable, but regret the loss of the decorative, historic fire
escapes.
HDC is happy see this much-loved landmark returning to its original
role as a hotel. We hope that its vibrant appearance will also
be returned.
LPC Determination: Incomplete
Hearing Date: 7/24/2007
LPC Docket Number: 077709
Manhattan, Block: 1315, Lot: 24
220 East 42nd Street - Individual Landmark and Interior Landmark
Historic District
An Art Deco style office building and lobby designed by Raymond
Hood and built in 1929-1930 and altered in 1960 by Harrison &
Abramovitz. Application is to replace the desk and install turnstiles.
HDC Testimony
It was again difficult to judge the appropriateness of this application,
like others, due to a lack of historic photos or other documentation
regarding the historic nature of materials proposed to be lost.
For example, is the present desk from the 1930s, 1960s or 1980s?
HDC approves of the set of turnstiles on the left side of the
lobby and would like to see a similar set up on the right. Moving
the turnstiles back would allow the decorative floor pattern to
remain uninterrupted and the lobby area as a whole to retain its
landmark-worthy appearance.
LPC Determination: Approved
Hearing Date: 7/24/2007
LPC Docket Number: 077362
Manhattan, Block: 1150, Lot: 7
161 West 78th Street - Upper West Side/Central Park West Historic
District
A Renaissance Revival style rowhouse with neo-Grec elements designed
by Horn & Wilson and built in 1890. Application is to construct
a rear yard addition.
HDC Testimony
HDC finds this proposed rear yard addition inappropriate for two
reasons, its design and its massing. The bottom two floors with
predominantly glass doors flanked by large single pane windows
look like the front façade of a building, not the rear.
(In fact, the second floor fenestration would actually make a
nice store front with its small bulkheads and transoms.) In addition
to not knowing which way is front, the design gives the building
a less than stable appearance. All the glass leaves little for
the upper floors to visually rest upon.
In addition, HDC is opposed to the incremental fill in of every
bit of free space, a trend we have witnessed in this district
and others. No other extension in this core presently stretches
full across and extends above the first floor. The proposed would
leave neighbors in caves and ups the ante for them to build additions,
slowly (or not so slowly) making alleys out of garden cores.
LPC Determination: Approved
Hearing Date: 7/24/2007
LPC Docket Number: 079277
Manhattan, Block: 1390, Lot: 47
38, 40 East 76th Street - Upper East Side Historic District
Two Queen Anne style rowhouses designed by John G. Prague and
built in 1881-1882. Application is to demolish a rear extension
and alter the rear facades.
HDC Testimony
HDC does not approved of the proposed alterations to the rear
facades of these two rowhouses. The very modern design for the
first two floors with an abundance of glass looks rather like
a front façade. Even more inappropriate is the loss of
the distinction between was originally two separate buildings.
This is an unfortunate example of interior remodeling driving
the exterior design. An appropriate design would be one that respects
the history of two individual buildings and the fact that this
is a rear façade.
LPC Determination: Incomplete
Return to Recent Testimony
