February 16, 2010
LPC Docket Number: 098343
Queens, Block: 8023, Lot: 1
300 Knollwood Ave – Douglaston Historic District
A Colonial Revival Style ranch house designed by Carl Salminen and built in 1950. Application is to demolish the house and construct a new house.
HDC Testimony
HDC is sorry to see yet another mid-century Colonial Revival Style ranch lost in this district. While they have been deemed outside the Douglaston’s period of significance, these houses are a part of the neighborhood’s history. A number of them have been demolished or completely altered in the past few years leading one to wonder the wisdom of permanently branding buildings with phrases like “no-style” and “noncontributing” in a field where our appreciation and respect for structures develops with the passage of time.
In exchange for this tidy, little, 1950’s Colonial Revival house, the district is getting a piece of the late 20th century, a McMansion. Although it sounds like the applicant has worked hard to create a contextual house, it is still rather blocky the proportions of certain elements are awkward. An important step in decreasing the massive feel would be to make the rear wing subordinate to the main block of the building. This form, which creates a varying roofline, is used throughout the Douglaston Historic District, both historically and on LPC-approved designs. The four-columned portico topped with a balcony is a bit over the top, not to mention the rather strange mound that leads up to it (instead of a traditional walkway or steps). The proportions of the windows should be restudied; as proposed they feel too square and squat. On the first floor, the window heads should align with the top of the door. On the second floor, they need a little more breathing room. The windows should either be brought down away from the cornice or the cornice should be simplified and raised up.
Finally the issue of materials needs to be addressed. The stucco mentioned must be real stucco and not EIFS. Asphalt roofing is not appropriate. If real slate is not used, at the very least a high quality faux slate should be. As is often stated by Commissioners, high quality, natural materials are a key component of this district and they must be used here also.
LPC Determination: Incomplete
LPC Docket Number: 104752
Brooklyn, Block: 1059, Lot: 64
181 Lincoln Place – Park Slope Historic District
A complex of school buildings including the original neo-Jacobean style Berkeley Institute designed by Walker and Morris and built in 1896, and a gymnasium designed by John Burke and built in 1937-38. Application is to construct an addition and a rooftop fence.
HDC Testimony
This project is very much like proposals we have unfortunately seen from institutions in historic districts around the city, incremental additions eating up residential blocks and permanently changing their character. The bunker-like design and massing of the proposed building, not to mention the tall and equally depressing barriers required for a rooftop recreation area, are hardly contextual, sympathetic additions to this historic block. As for adding ivy to the wall, Commissioners have insisted that projects cannot depend upon unregulated plantings. The architecture must stand up for itself.
Brownstone neighborhoods are an iconic piece of New York City, particularly Brooklyn. Their elegant architecture and layout that allowed 19th-century middle class families the luxury of living in private homes with easy access to city conveniences has continued to draw residents to neighborhoods like Park Slope for well over a century. As important to that sense of place the architecture creates are the spaces the rowhouses do not fill, the garden cores. Much of the sense of place of rowhouse living comes form the private backyards. Just as the ornamented street facades are the public face of the building, the rear yards are the private space of the residents. They are where you can have a conversation over a fence or, more likely, gaze peacefully into an empty sky, removed from what Jane Jacobs called “the ballet of the streets”. Both outdoor experiences, the public street and the private yard, are part of the essence of life in Park Slope. Unfortunately, the Berkley Carroll Plan will drag the public thoroughfare into the private space and adversely affect all its neighbors.
Expansion is not new to Berkley Carroll. Neighbors have endured incremental additions over the years until much of the space on the lot has been filled, both vertically and horizontally. Where and when will it end? Why not here and now? Take a step back, evaluate needs, both present and long term, and create a more holistic plan that will meet those needs while preserving the open space of this historic block.
LPC Determination: Incomplete
LPC Docket Number: 102162
Staten Island, Block: 1955, Lot: 1
201 Brielle Avenue – NYC Farm Colony-Seaview Hospital Historic District Historic District
A campus of hospital and dormitory buildings and grounds built in 1905-1917 designed by Raymond F. Almirall and Renwick, Aspinwall and Tucker. Application is to construct a playground and to install an artificial turf soccer field.
HDC Testimony
While every historic district is special in its own way, the New York Farm Colony-Seaview Hospital is one of only three historic districts in the borough of Staten Island and rather unique in the city for being an institutional complex. Additions and alterations to the district are important in helping the campus find a use today, but, as in the case recently of a proposed new structure known as Sapphire House, careful attention must be paid to ensure the character and quality of the historic district are upheld and enhanced.
HDC requests that a playground with some reference to the historic district be designed rather than just installation of stock equipment. In December of 2008, Commissioners asked that the proposed playground in Fort Totten, Queens be redesigned to recall the battlements of the fort. In just a month’s time, with a little extra creativity and presumably little damage to the budget, just such a playground was approved. We hope that something similar may be accomplished here.
HDC is not in favor of the use of artificial turf for a number of reasons. While we understand that the artificial turf made of recycled tires that was of particular health concern is no longer in use, there are still health and environmental issues to consider. In this era of talk of greening the city, vast fields of artificial turf do the opposite. They contribute to the urban heat island effect, absorbing sunlight and emitting heat. While grass fields have been found to be a few degrees cooler than their surroundings on hot summer days, synthetic turf fields have been known to be 30 degrees hotter. This poses not only an environmental issue, but also a health and safety issue for those on the field. Water is used to temporarily cool down the fields as well as to decrease static cling and wash away bacteria and fluids that may be on the fields – decreasing the argument that such artificial turf does not require water as natural fields do. On the economic side, the special report titled “A New Turf War” put out by New Yorkers for Parks in Spring 2006 found that the annual cost of synthetic versus natural fields was not considerably different. If environmental concerns and cost effectiveness are the main argument for artificial turf, one should also take into account the removal and disposal of such fields every eight to ten years.
Aesthetically, HDC is disturbed by the increasing artificiality of our city’s traditionally green spaces. With so few historic districts with public open spaces, a little extra effort should be put into keeping those we do have as natural and authentic as possible. Open, green areas were considered necessary for the treatment of tuberculosis patients at institutions like Seaview. The hospital’s designer Raymond F. Almirall described the abundant gardens and lawns as “beneficial to the morale of the patients,” and they continue to be something from which we can all benefit today.
LPC Determination: Incomplete
LPC Docket Number: 105626
Manhattan, Block: 16, Lot: 1
Pier A – Individual Landmark
A pier designed by George Sears Greene, Jr. and built in 1884-86, with an addition in 1900. Application is to repaint the exterior and modify window openings.
HDC Testimony
While the work proposed seems to be appropriate and we are happy to see Hugh Hardy’s team involved with this project, HDC would like to take this moment to express our concern for this individual landmark. With its setting on the harbor, Pier A is both a very prominent landmark and unfortunately one very exposed to the forces of nature. We urge the powers-that-be to make every effort to ensure Pier A’s stability, so that it does not fall apart or have to be dismantled as has saddly happen to other structures such as the Corn Exchange. The only thing more disheartening than seeing an unprotected historic building destroyed is watching a designated landmark crumble.
LPC Determination: Approved with modifications
LPC Docket Number: 104370
Manhattan, Block: 41, Lot: 15
60 Pine Street – Individual Landmark
A Romanesque Revival style clubhouse designed by Charles C. Haight, built in 1886-87, and modified with an extension designed by Warren & Wetmore and constructed in 1910-11. Application is to construct a rooftop addition, infill the non-visible interior courtyard, alter the Cedar Street facade and areaway to install a barrier-free access, and remove a fire escape.
HDC Testimony
To begin, for the record, I would like to state that Page Cowley is a member of HDC’s Board of Directors.
We would like to thank the applicant for a prior presentation and the consideration that has been given to this individual landmark. Great efforts have been made to preserve interior spaces that, while not landmarked, are important to the building and its history.
HDC finds the alterations that will allow for barrier-free access on the Cedar Street façade to be sensitive and appropriate. We also feel that narrowness of Pine Street and the height of club’s neighbors will render the rooftop addition imperceptible on the main façade.
The addition is more problematic though on the Cedar Street side where open corners at William Street will allow visibility. There is a considerable amount of volume being added here, and ways of shaving off the bulk, especially the visible bulk, should be explored. One possibility might be to set back the top red brick floor more by shaving off the front three rooms. Doing this would also allow for the railing to be pushed back, out of the line of visibility.
The Down Town Association is a little individual landmark in an area known for its skyscrapers. Its relatively small scale makes it an unusual piece of the Financial District, and it serves as an important memory of 19th-century downtown New York. HDC urges that this special quality be preserved as much as possible.
LPC Determination: Incomplete
LPC Docket Number: 103746
Manhattan, Block: 483, Lot: 7502
512 Broadway – SoHo-Cast Iron Historic District
A Renaissance Revival style store and loft building designed by Lamb & Wheller and built in 1881-82. Application is to install storefront infill.
HDC Testimony
While there are a number of a good elements to this proposed storefront infill, HDC is concerned with the rendering of the proposed and whether it is a screen on the windows or shelving behind that is illustrated.
As the signage was not part of the application description on the calendar, it was not reviewed by our committee.
LPC Determination: Approved with modifications
LPC Docket Number: 092601
Manhattan, Block: 619, Lot: 52
341 Bleecker Street – Greenwich Village Historic District
A vernacular style frame house with a brick façade built in 1820 and later altered. Application is to reconstruct the building.
HDC Testimony
HDC is curious whether bracing is a possiblity for this small 1820 house rather than rebuilding as repair of the original is always preferred to reconstruction. If rebuilding is truly the only way to go, details must be carefully examined. Is it possible to reuse the existing bricks? Will the mortar joint type, size and color be replicated? Why the change to a taller cornice? We fear that without careful attention to detail and reuse of historic fabric 341 Bleecker could end up like other less than successful “reconstructions” such as the Poe House, one replication that should not be replicated.
LPC Determination: Denied