From Chuck Lesnick, Yonkers City Council President, chuck.lesnick@yonkersny.gov

At my suggestion, the Landmarks Board last week implemented an executive order by Mayor Amicone that called for the Building Commissioner to notify the Landmarks Board whenever someone applies for a demolition permit in Yonkers on a property 75 years or older.The purpose of the Demolition Review Order is to keep Yonkers historical properties intact as Yonkers continues to grow and prosper.

After receiving the application, the Landmarks Board will review the property according to a number of established criteria to make an immediate determination on whether or not the property has historical significance. If a house is merely old and not historic, no action will be taken.

If it is, however, a true gem of a historical property, then a 180-day moratorium on demolition will be put in place. During this time, the Landmarks Board will work to create a landmarking application, hold public hearings, seek advice from the planning board, among other things before making a final determination as to whether to recommend it to the City Council for landmarking.

This Executive Order and the actions of the Landmarks Board does not change the existing law or procedure for landmarking. It is only expected to apply to a dozen potential historic properties per year where demolition permits are requested.

The demolition review order is a result of legislation that I proposed last year to save our true historic homes and buildings while we allow redevelopment of others and build for the future.

I’m glad the Mayor and the Landmarks Board have established a mechanism to determine which properties are truly historic and which are simply just old and have no historical impact on Yonkers future.

From the Brooklyn Eagle

http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=12&id=16944

Review & Comment:
Preservation Agonies

by Henrik Krogius (Krogius@brooklyneagle.net,
published online 11-28-2007

In the spring of 1953 alarm swept Brooklyn Heights. The new Promenade, open to the public for a little over two years, was threatened with view-blocking new warehouses across Furman Street that would rise 20 feet higher than the Promenade’s 50-foot level. The Brooklyn Heights Association mobilized a letter-writing campaign. Curiously as it seems now, people were advised not to complain about the loss of the view but to stress such factors as noise and noxious fumes bouncing back from the proposed warehouses and affecting the health and well-being of Heights residents. But of course the view was what really mattered to most people.

The campaign for the Promenade view is briefly alluded to by Anthony C. Wood in his new book, “Preserving New York: Winning the Right to Protect a City’s Landmarks”, as one of the many strands that went into the almost century-long efforts that eventuated in the city’s 1965 Landmarks Law. A variety of campaigns, such as an early one to curb the proliferation of billboards, helped generate a consciousness that the city could be more beautiful than it was shaping up to be. Indeed, the notion of beauty – whether in the distinction of architecture or in the quality of certain views – plays a central role in Wood’s history.

© Brooklyn Daily Eagle 2007

See also:

Cityroom Blog

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/27/rewriting-the-history-of-new-york-preservation/

November 27, 2007, 5:10 pm
Rewriting the History of New York Preservation
By Sewell Chan

A new book challenges the widely held notion that the destruction of the original Pennsylvania Station in 1963-64 — a watershed event in New York’s postwar history — gave birth to the movement to preserve landmarks and save the city’s architectural heritage.

To be sure, the demolition of Pennsylvania Station is widely seen today as a tragedy. The eagle-topped Beaux-Arts edifice had served since 1910 as an elegant neoclassical gateway; it was replaced with the squat, drab and never widely loved Madison Square Garden complex. In recent years, the destruction of Penn Station has assumed a greater and greater importance in the public imagination.

“The power and romance of this straightforward explanation of how New York City won the right to protect its landmarks is hard to resist,” Anthony C. Wood writes in the new book. “As the answer to the question ‘How did New York get its Landmarks Law?’ it suffers from just one fundamental problem. It is a myth.”

The book, “Preserving New York: Winning the Right to Protect a City’s Landmarks,” traces the history of the modern preservation system all the way back to the City Beautiful movement of the early 20th century.

“What grew out of the rubble of Pennsylvania Station was the powerful myth that New York’s Landmarks Law owed its very existence to the loss of that station,” Mr. Wood has said. “As wonderful a morality tale as that has become, it has just one problem: It just isn’t true. It’s robbed us of 50 years of wonderful history that is inspiring, informative and instructive.”

He added that his book marked an effort to “reclaim” that history.

Spitzer Signs Bill To Crack Down On Submission of Fraudulent Building Plans to the City

Governor Spitzer has signed into law Assembly Bill #7746 – an important component of Assemblymember Jim Brennan’s legislative package to improve regulation of construction and development – giving the Department of Buildings Commissioner the authority to refuse to accept plans from architects and engineers who have been found to have knowingly submitted false or inaccurate plans to the DOB in the past.

This “self-certification” bill, endorsed by the City and supported by many community boards and civic groups, empowers the Department of Buildings (DOB) to crack down on architects and engineers who abuse the professional certification system at the DOB.

Professional certification was designed to streamline the plan-permitting process at the DOB. But with the building boom in New York City, and the profits to be made, some professionals have abused the system to flout the Zoning Resolution and Building Code.

Brennan said, “This law gives DOB the tools to get tough with professionals who, frequently in league with developers, take advantage of the system and flout the law. It is hoped the new law will act as a powerful deterrent to illegal conduct.”

When the legislature re-convenes for Special Session later this summer – perhaps as early as July 16th – send an email and make your voice heard in the New York State Assembly in support of A.7935-A (Hoyt). This bill provides for an expanded rehabilitation tax credit program that includes increased incentives to support the rehabilitation of historic commercial and residential properties.

TAKE ACTION NOW

Historic downtowns, Main Streets, historic theaters and residential neighborhoods across the State will benefit from this legislation. It will create an additional financial incentive to restore and reuse New York State’s rich legacy of historic buildings, and provide a critical new tool in efforts to bring businesses and residents back to revitalized community cores, bringing new investment back to municipalities throughout New York State. This legislation is supported by a wide range of municipalities and economic development, historic preservation and environmental organizations.

The Senate has passed this legislation; it now needs the active support of your Assemblymember to assure it will come to a floor vote when session resumes later this year.

In order to secure passage of this critical program for downtown and neighborhood renewal, contact your Assemblymember and request 1) that they join in sponsorship with this legislation and 2) that they advocate with Ways & Means Committee Chair Denny Farrell for this bill to be brought to a floor vote during the special session of the Assembly later this summer.

TAKE ACTION NOW

This one slipped past us completely – what it means to renovations and older buildings is yet to be seen.

Council OK – Rules to affect new city construction

BY FRANK LOMBARDI
DAILY NEWS CITY HALL BUREAU

Posted Thursday, June 28th 2007, 4:00 AM

After four years of heavy lifting, the City Council finally voted yesterday to approve a modernized building code for the city.

The new code will affect the construction of homes, apartments, skyscrapers and other buildings throughout the city for decades to come.

Though it was a long time in the making, the highly technical legislation was readily approved by a vote of 47 to 0, with one abstention.

Once they aresigned into law by Mayor Bloomberg, the provisions will kick in starting July 2008. Builders will have the option of using either the existing code or the new one until July 2009, when the new code will become fully mandatory.

Council Speaker Christine Quinn (D-Manhattan), who oversaw protracted negotiations over the bill with the mayor and his administration, said the new code “will make our city safer and greener.”

The building code is a compendium of technical rules and specifications that dictates a wide range of construction practices, materials and methods. It was last updated in 1968, when John Lindsay was mayor and American Neil Armstrong had yet to step on the moon.

Some of the new requirements are:

Fire sprinklers will be mandatory, not just for high-rise apartment buildings but also for any new residential buildings with three or more units. That includes attached two-family homes, as well as one-family and two-family homes that have more than three stories.

Hardwired and interconnected smoke alarms will be required in each bedroom and other locations in multilevel dwelling units.

New high-rise buildings will need separate on-site water supplies for emergencies, including earthquakes, that might cut off city water.

Spurred by 9/11, new safety features will be required in high-rise residential buildings, including an internal communication system, wider stairs, elevator lobbies with smoke partitions and impact-resistant walls around stair and elevator enclosures.
Other features of the new code are intended to increase safety at construction sites. And yet other provisions are intended to encourage builders to use environmentally friendly or “green” materials, equipment or designs.

Builders can receive rebates of their permit fees for abiding by those code specifications.

In other business, the Council agreed by a 48-to-0 vote to ease a requirement that bars, taverns and other premises have a billiard-hall license if they have two or more pool tables.

Critics had complained that the requirement was bureaucratically burdensome. Such premises will now be allowed to have up to three tables without having to obtain the special license.

flombardi@nydailynews.com

THE SECTION 106 ESSENTIALS TRAINING
New York City

Don’t miss the only ACHP course being offered in the Northeast for 2007!

July 10-11, 2007
Hilton New York, NYC

This is the only Section 106 Essentials course taught by the Federal agency responsible for administering the National Historic Preservation Act’s Section 106 review process.

www.achp.gov/106

The Section 106 Essentials is a two‑day course designed for those who are new to Section 106 review or those who want a refresher on its basic operation. This course explains the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which applies any time a Federal, federally assisted, or federally approved activity might affect a property listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

Taught by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Staff who are engaged both on a daily basis and have practical hands-on experience with Section 106 issues.

Don Klima, Director of Federal Agency Programs, and Laura Dean, Program Analyst, will teach the New York course. Don has over 30 years of experience working with the Section 106 process. Starting his career in historic preservation with the Georgia State Historic Preservation Office, he joined the ACHP staff in 1978. His office now handles all of the ACHP’s Section 106 activities and is responsible for working with all Federal agencies seeking to improve consideration of historic properties in their programs.

Laura Dean, who has been with the ACHP for 13 years, has extensive experience with FERC and other licensing, permitting and assistance agencies.

For more information and registration, visit http://www.achp.gov/106 or contact Cindy Bienvenue at cbienvenue@achp.gov or 202-606-8521.

From the Preservation League of New York State

In 2006, New York State became the 28th state in the nation to enact a tax incentive to encourage the rehabilitation of historic commercial and residential properties.

A report recently released by the Brookings Institution suggests that such preservation tax credits can play an important role in returning struggling municipalities to prosperity.

The report, titled Restoring Prosperity in Older Industrial Cities, places the economic challenges of New York’s once-thriving cities in a broader regional and national context.

“As go cities, so goes the state – and as New York’s statewide preservation organization, we are strong advocates for policies to help revitalize cities and neighborhoods,” said Jay DiLorenzo, President of the Preservation League of New York State. “As the Brookings Institution study points out, reinvesting in our cities offers real hope of building sustainable neighborhoods for people of all income levels, and is more fiscally prudent at every level of government than many current land-use strategies.”

The Preservation League, which championed the effort to establish a preservation tax credit in 2006, is now leading a broad coalition to seek changes that will expand the program’s use. Senator Frank Padavan (R-C, Bellerose) and Assemblyman Sam Hoyt (D-Buffalo, Grand Island), are sponsoring the legislation (A.7935 / S.5425).

“Thanks to the leadership of Senator Padavan and Assemblyman Hoyt, the New York State Rehabilitation Tax Credit will be expanded to better serve municipal redevelopment and economic development goals in New York State,” said Daniel Mackay, Director of Public Policy for the Preservation League. “These enhancements will ensure that this program will match the economic and community redevelopment successes stimulated by such programs in other states, and we urge the Assembly and Senate to act swiftly to approve these bills.”

The Preservation League has been working with business, planning, philanthropic and environmental leaders from across the state to develop policy recommendations that could be implemented as part of a new urban and smart growth agenda emerging from the Brookings Institution report. An expansion of the rehabilitation tax credit was identified as a priority.

Recommended changes include:
Increase the commercial credit rate to 30% of qualified rehabilitation costs rather than 30% of federal credit value;
Remove the cap on the value of the commercial credit;
Create the ability to assign, transfer, or convey the commercial tax credits so that developers and financial interests without New York State Tax liabilities have additional incentive to invest in New York State projects; and
For the residential credit, expand the definition of “distressed areas” to increase the number of neighborhoods qualified for the program.

“The tax credit adopted in 2006 was a positive first step, but the Preservation League is already discussing the need to enhance this program with the administration of Governor Eliot Spitzer so that more communities can benefit,” said Mackay. “At least 26,000 additional residential buildings across the state would be eligible for incentives if these modest changes were implemented.”

According to DiLorenzo, rehabilitation tax credits have a demonstrated record of success in other states. “They encourage the preservation of important cultural and historic heritage, create incentives for the re-use of existing physical infrastructure, address affordable housing needs, and have proven to be highly effective at stimulating private investment in the redevelopment of urban cores. New York is well-positioned to seize upon new trends and attitudes which value cities’ special characteristics – and a stronger rehabilitation tax credit could be a powerful tool to fuel the revitalization of downtowns and surrounding neighborhoods.”

From our esteemed colleagues at Landmark West! (whom we are very grateful for jumping on the ball with this alert so we can simply cut & paste)

AT RISK: The Landmarks Preservation Commission and Historic Buildings and Neighborhoods Throughout NYC!

Unless YOU act right now, the already miniscule budget of the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) — the only city agency with the authority to protect New York’s historic buildings and neighborhoods — YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD — could be cut significantly in the coming weeks.

The City Council, now entering final budget negotiations, must hear from you. Immediately. Email/call/fax your local council member and members of the budget negotiating team TODAY. See contact information below.

Frustrated with the LPC? Their slowness to respond? The ever-quickening pace of development, eating away at the character of our communities? It will only get worse, unless the LPC has the resources it needs to carry out its vital mission. Landmark West! is part of a broad coalition advocating for a $1 million increase in the LPC budget on top of its current budget of just over $4 million — a modest amount of money that could make a world of difference in the LPC’s ability to protect the buildings and neighborhoods that matter to the people of our city. ACT NOW! Contact the Council, and forward this message to friends and colleagues.

Who is your council person? Go to http://www.cmap.nypirg.org/netmaps/MyGovernment/NYC/MyGovernmentNYC.asp?cmd=start.

Who are the council members on the budget negotiating team?

Quinn quinn@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (212) 564-7347; T: (212) 564-7757
Brewer gale.brewer@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (212) 873-0279; T: (212) 873-0282
Garodnick garodnick@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (212) 818-0706; T: (212) 818-0580
Baez baez@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 584-5725; T: (718) 584-6955
Comrie comrie@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 776-3798; T: (718) 776-3700
Dilan emdilan@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 642-8639; T: (718) 642-8664
McMahon mcmahon@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 556-7389; T: (718) 556-7370
Rivera rivera@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 842-6280; T: (718) 842-8100
Dickens dickens@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (212) 442-2732; T: (212) 678-4505
Fidler fidler@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 241-9316; T: (718) 241-9330
DiBlasio deblasio@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 854-1146; T: (718) 854-9791
Gallagher (gallagher@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 326-3549; T: (718) 366-3900)
Oddo oddo@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 980-1051; T: (718) 980-1017
Jackson jackson@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (212) 928-4177; T: (212) 928-1322
Arroyo arroyo@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 402-0539; T: (718) 402-6130
Reyna reyna@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 963-4527; T: (718) 963-3141
Weprin weprin@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 776-2302; T: (718) 465-8202
Katz katz@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 544-4452; T: (718) 544-8800

At-large members
Mark-Viverito viverito@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (212) 722-6378; T: (212) 828-9800
Martinez martinez@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (917) 521-1293; T: (917) 521-2616/2640
Seabrook seabrook@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 652-0703; T: (718) 994-9900
Sears sears@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 803-9832; T: (718) 803-6373
Stewart stewart@council.nyc.ny.us; F: (718) 951-8191; T: (718) 951-8177

Stay tuned to the latest preservation news. Please visit LANDMARK WEST’s “Watch-Blog” at www.landmarkwest.blogspot.com.

Cool Mil Small Fries for City, But Big to LPC

By Shane Miller

Brooklyn Downtown STAR

Dateline : Thursday, May 17, 2007

It only amounts to a miniscule portion of this year’s $50 billion-plus city budget, but preservationists say $1 million would make a huge difference for the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC).
“We have a Landmarks Commission with a hard-working and dedicated staff that is under-funded to do the job,” said Councilmwoman Jessica Lappin, chair of the Council’s Landmarks Committee.Last year, Lappin and colleagues Tony Avella and Diana Reyna were able to secure a $250,000 increase to LPC’s budget, which is approximately $4.3 million annually. With that additional funding, LPC was able to hire five more researchers who surveyed over 15,000 buildings.

According to Lappin, because of the staff, LPC is on track to designate over 1,000 buildings in 2006, a 2,000 percent increase over fiscal year 2005.”The money was well spent, but it was not enough,” the councilwoman said.

It certainly won’t be enough this time around, because the $250,000 boost was a one-time shot and won’t be renewed for the 2008 budget, which the City Council and mayor are negotiating right now. In addition to restoring the $250,000, preservationists are calling for the city to fund LPC to the tune of an additional $750,000.

“If we give another million to LPC, that will be .002 percent of the total budget, but represent a 25 percent increase in LPC’s budget,” said Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer. Stringer argued that there was more to lose than a few city jobs or programs. “What is at stake here is the cultural and architectural history of the city,” said Stringer. “Visitors to this city want to see the new New York and the old New York together.”

Avella agreed. “We have the best landmark law in the country, but I think we can all agree the commission has been underfunded,” said Avella. “Once they’re [potential landmarks] gone, we’ll never get them back.”

As more and more buildings and neighborhoods are landmarked, LPC is forced to becoming increasingly occupied with enforcement of regulations, meaning less man hours can be devoted to researching potentially new landmarks.

“LPC is the only city agency specifically charged with preserving the history of our city,” said Simeon Bankoff, executive director of the Historic Districts Council. “They are doing a great job, but they could do better.”

Frank Sanchis was Executive Director of LPC until he stepped down in 1986. He says over the last 20 years LPC has been experiencing systematic cuts. “When I was Director, we had over 70 staff members,” he said. “Now that number is somewhere in the 40s.”

No one would like to see LPC receive more funding than Denise Brown. Brown lives in Crown Heights, and has been working to have her neighborhood declared a historic district. She and her neighbors succeeded in getting North Crown Heights declared a historic district recently, achieving designation in a relatively quick two years. However, the neighborhood was first considered for designation back in 1978.

“Surprisingly, it hadn’t changed that much,” said Brown. “But over the last few years, as gentrification starts to encroach on the area, there have been a lot of changes.” The designation for North Crown Heights included approximately 480 buildings, but it was only Phase 1 of a four-phase landmarking process. Phase II includes an additional 600 to 800 buildings, but when or if it will be designated a historic district is up to LPC.

“We are working on Phase II, and additional funding would help us do that,” Brown said.