January 18, 2011

Written by on Jan 19, 2011

LPC Docket Number: 114239
Brooklyn, Block: 1165, Lot: 17
268 Park Place – Prospect Heights Historic District
A Renaissance Revival style rowhouse with Romanesque Revival style elements designed by William H. Reynolds and built c. 1897. Application is to install rooftop skylights and solar panels, alter the areaway and modify rear façade.

HDC Testimony
HDC is pleased to see that this project proposes to retain the bay window, a distinctive feature of rowhouses in this historic district that has been disappearing lately.  While we do not object to enlarging window openings here, we do not find the awning and its framework, which will extend into the garden further than anything else in this row, to be an appropriate addition to this visible rear façade.  If enlarging the window openings creates a need for an awning for shade and privacy, wouldn’t it be simpler not to change the windows in the first place?  A late-19th-century rowhouse such as 268 Park Place was not designed purely to be in fashion, issues of practicality and livability were certainly taken into consideration.  With artificial lighting more expensive and far inferior to our own today, sufficient sunlight would have been one of those concerns.  Before altering and adding to this rowhouse, it is worth considering that William H. Reynolds might have solved the problem already.

LPC Determination: Approved

LPC Docket Number: 115352
Staten Island, Block: 955, Lot: 200
460 Brielle Avenue – NYC Farm Colony-Seaview Hospital Historic District
A group of hospital and dormitory buildings and grounds designed by Raymond F. Almirall and Renwich, Aspinwall & Tucker and built in 1905-1917. Application is to construct a new building.

e- seaview

HDC Testimony
As has been a problem with other proposals in the past for new structures or alterations in the New York City Farm Colony-Seaview Hospital Historic District, very little information or acknowledgement of the district was included in the proposal at public review on Friday.  There was no overall map of the district to show where the new construction is to be placed and what might be around it.  No contextual photos were given to judge the appropriateness of the project’s massing, size, materials, or design, which is hard to judge anwyway as there was no mention of the materials or the heights of the proposed.

The deck feature is a clear example of how the landmarked buildings should be used to guide the design of the new structures.  While a nice amenity, the deck is very out of keeping here, looking like an ocean dock.  The historic buildings were constructed to make the most of sunshine and fresh air that were important to treatment of tuberculosis patients, features even healthy residents and visitors now a days appreciate.  The porches and loggias of the landmarked structures should be referred to.

No materials were listed for the paving for the parking area, of which there is a considerable amount.  HDC asks that a permeable surface that will allow for grass growth, like that approved in 2009 for the Louis A. and Laura Stirn House Individual Landmark on Staten Island, be used.   Designer Raymond F. Almirall described the abundant gardens and green space of the grounds as “beneficial to the morale of the patients.”  They are equally welcomed today and should be preserved as much as possible.

In general, it seems very odd that historic buildings are continuing to go unused and allowed to deteriorate while new ones are proposed that would take up room in a district where green, open space was so highly prized.  Why not put some of those historic buildings to good use?  HDC is also curious if there is a master plan or something of the sorts that shows what exists, if it is used, and what is planned to be constructed. Over the recent years, we have seen proposals for a new playground, parking lots, and new structures.  These pieces do not happen in a vacuum.  They are all part of what was once a very cohesive, well-planned site.  The New York City 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.  While construction of a new building that continues the spirit and use of the historic Farm Colony and Seaview Hospital is a noble wish, there needs to be more consideration paid to the architectural expression of that mission found in the historic buildings in the district.

LPC Determination: Approved

LPC Docket Number: 114362
Manhattan, Block: 1400, Lot: 14
195-207 Broadway aka 2-18 Dey St. 160-170 Fulton – Individual Landmark and Interior Landmark
A neo-Classical style office building designed by William Welles Bosworth and built in phases from 1912-1922. Application is to create a new masonry opening, install a door, partitions, and a fire stair enclosure.
LPC Docket Number: 114203
Manhattan, Block: 1400, Lot: 14
195-207 Broadway aka 2-18 Dey St, 160-170 Fulton – Individual Landmark and Interior Landmark
A neo-Classical style office building designed by William Welles Bosworth and built in phases from 1912-1922. Application is to install lighting at the celing and to establish a master plan governing the future installation of stairs, signage display, light fixtures, partitions, furniture, and power connections.

e- attpg

HDC Testimony
HDC has many of the same objections to this proposal as we had four years ago when the first Certificates of Appropriateness were granted for this project.  Despite the overall approval by the LPC in 2007, a number of commissioners then did voice concern for how the overall experience of this vast hall with its forest of columns would be impacted, particularly by the inclusion of signage, furniture and merchandise.  Considering that the prior approval has set the path for much of what is now being presented, HDC proposes a compromise – leave the upper portion of the space uncluttered.  Primarily this would entail altering the proposed signage.

The American Telephone & Telegraph Building is not only an individual landmark, but also an interior landmark, arugably one of the city’s finest interior spaces.  The large, internally lit sign boxes proposed are not something that would be approved in an historic district, let alone an individual and interior landmark.  The excessive signage blocks views from the street of important details such as the chandeliers, coffered ceilings, and, of course, the columns and forms a distraction on, rather than  being a piece of, the very carefully designed façade.  This building is its own best advertisement – most passers-by can’t help but look inside.  The proposed display windows, in addition to the type of signage typically approved by the commission such as lettering in windows and in sign bands, will be more than sufficient.

The hall has over its history featured commercial uses such as the jewelry retail store Benedict Brothers and telephone-related customer service areas, but these intrusions were all kept relatively low in scale, as the designation report points out, so as not to impact the overall visual effect of the space.   It is not just the individual decorative features that are important here, but more so the ability to view them in repetition, to experience the design as a whole.  The interior takes cues from the hypostyle halls of ancient Egypt, a grand, open space meant to impress, to exude power and prestige.  Seeing as the majority of this space will now be divided up and full of merchandise, signage and retail furniture, HDC asks that at the very least the upper portions of this striking interior be left open to recall the original design intent and atmosphere of the hall.

LPC Determination: Incomplete


LPC Docket Number: 105631
Manhattan, Block: 550, Lot: 1
14A Washington Mews – Greenwich Village Historic District
An apartment building designed by J. E. Terhune and built in 1884. Application is to alter the areaway and side façade, and replace windows, and construct a rooftop bulkhead.

e - mews

HDC Testimony
HDC does not object to this proposal with the exception of what may seem like the least important feature of the project, filling in the air shaft.  Its chamfered corners instantly bring to mind the dumb-bell tenement design dictated by the Tenement House Law of 1879, enacted just five years prior to the construction of this building.  Considering its prominent visability from University Place, this would be a significant alteration.  Sometimes what is not there, the voids in a building, can be as expressive and important as what is there, and HDC asks that at least at the upper floors this piece of history be retained.

LPC Determination: Approved

LPC Docket Number: 108643
Manhattan, Block: 1399, Lot: 20
851 Lexington Avenue – Upper East Side Extension Historic District
A altered neo-Grec style rowhouse designed by Robert H. Coburn, and built in 1880-81. Application is to legalize the installation of storefront infill without LPC permits.

e- lex

HDC Testimony
HDC urges the Commission not to legalize this lackluster storefront infill as it is not something that would have been approved had it come here as a proposal for new work.  In fact, it resembles a proposal seen here just last month for a nail salon at 1012 Lexington Avenue – a proposal that the commission did not approve.  The Upper East Side Extension is still a relatively new designation, and early projects like this one will set the tone for the future character of the district.  A tax photo or other historic image should be found to help guide the new design, and more attention should be paid to details and articulation.

LPC Determination: Denied

Posted Under: HDC@LPC

January 18, 2011

Written by on Jan 19, 2011

LPC Docket Number: 114239
Brooklyn, Block: 1165, Lot: 17
268 Park Place – Prospect Heights Historic District
A Renaissance Revival style rowhouse with Romanesque Revival style elements designed by William H. Reynolds and built c. 1897. Application is to install rooftop skylights and solar panels, alter the areaway and modify rear façade.

HDC Testimony
HDC is pleased to see that this project proposes to retain the bay window, a distinctive feature of rowhouses in this historic district that has been disappearing lately.  While we do not object to enlarging window openings here, we do not find the awning and its framework, which will extend into the garden further than anything else in this row, to be an appropriate addition to this visible rear façade.  If enlarging the window openings creates a need for an awning for shade and privacy, wouldn’t it be simpler not to change the windows in the first place?  A late-19th-century rowhouse such as 268 Park Place was not designed purely to be in fashion, issues of practicality and livability were certainly taken into consideration.  With artificial lighting more expensive and far inferior to our own today, sufficient sunlight would have been one of those concerns.  Before altering and adding to this rowhouse, it is worth considering that William H. Reynolds might have solved the problem already.

LPC Determination: Approved

LPC Docket Number: 115352
Staten Island, Block: 955, Lot: 200
460 Brielle Avenue – NYC Farm Colony-Seaview Hospital Historic District
A group of hospital and dormitory buildings and grounds designed by Raymond F. Almirall and Renwich, Aspinwall & Tucker and built in 1905-1917. Application is to construct a new building.

e- seaview

HDC Testimony
As has been a problem with other proposals in the past for new structures or alterations in the New York City Farm Colony-Seaview Hospital Historic District, very little information or acknowledgement of the district was included in the proposal at public review on Friday.  There was no overall map of the district to show where the new construction is to be placed and what might be around it.  No contextual photos were given to judge the appropriateness of the project’s massing, size, materials, or design, which is hard to judge anwyway as there was no mention of the materials or the heights of the proposed.

The deck feature is a clear example of how the landmarked buildings should be used to guide the design of the new structures.  While a nice amenity, the deck is very out of keeping here, looking like an ocean dock.  The historic buildings were constructed to make the most of sunshine and fresh air that were important to treatment of tuberculosis patients, features even healthy residents and visitors now a days appreciate.  The porches and loggias of the landmarked structures should be referred to.

No materials were listed for the paving for the parking area, of which there is a considerable amount.  HDC asks that a permeable surface that will allow for grass growth, like that approved in 2009 for the Louis A. and Laura Stirn House Individual Landmark on Staten Island, be used.   Designer Raymond F. Almirall described the abundant gardens and green space of the grounds as “beneficial to the morale of the patients.”  They are equally welcomed today and should be preserved as much as possible.

In general, it seems very odd that historic buildings are continuing to go unused and allowed to deteriorate while new ones are proposed that would take up room in a district where green, open space was so highly prized.  Why not put some of those historic buildings to good use?  HDC is also curious if there is a master plan or something of the sorts that shows what exists, if it is used, and what is planned to be constructed. Over the recent years, we have seen proposals for a new playground, parking lots, and new structures.  These pieces do not happen in a vacuum.  They are all part of what was once a very cohesive, well-planned site.  The New York City 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.  While construction of a new building that continues the spirit and use of the historic Farm Colony and Seaview Hospital is a noble wish, there needs to be more consideration paid to the architectural expression of that mission found in the historic buildings in the district.

LPC Determination: Approved

LPC Docket Number: 114362
Manhattan, Block: 1400, Lot: 14
195-207 Broadway aka 2-18 Dey St. 160-170 Fulton – Individual Landmark and Interior Landmark
A neo-Classical style office building designed by William Welles Bosworth and built in phases from 1912-1922. Application is to create a new masonry opening, install a door, partitions, and a fire stair enclosure.
LPC Docket Number: 114203
Manhattan, Block: 1400, Lot: 14
195-207 Broadway aka 2-18 Dey St, 160-170 Fulton – Individual Landmark and Interior Landmark
A neo-Classical style office building designed by William Welles Bosworth and built in phases from 1912-1922. Application is to install lighting at the celing and to establish a master plan governing the future installation of stairs, signage display, light fixtures, partitions, furniture, and power connections.

e- attpg

HDC Testimony
HDC has many of the same objections to this proposal as we had four years ago when the first Certificates of Appropriateness were granted for this project.  Despite the overall approval by the LPC in 2007, a number of commissioners then did voice concern for how the overall experience of this vast hall with its forest of columns would be impacted, particularly by the inclusion of signage, furniture and merchandise.  Considering that the prior approval has set the path for much of what is now being presented, HDC proposes a compromise – leave the upper portion of the space uncluttered.  Primarily this would entail altering the proposed signage.

The American Telephone & Telegraph Building is not only an individual landmark, but also an interior landmark, arugably one of the city’s finest interior spaces.  The large, internally lit sign boxes proposed are not something that would be approved in an historic district, let alone an individual and interior landmark.  The excessive signage blocks views from the street of important details such as the chandeliers, coffered ceilings, and, of course, the columns and forms a distraction on, rather than  being a piece of, the very carefully designed façade.  This building is its own best advertisement – most passers-by can’t help but look inside.  The proposed display windows, in addition to the type of signage typically approved by the commission such as lettering in windows and in sign bands, will be more than sufficient.

The hall has over its history featured commercial uses such as the jewelry retail store Benedict Brothers and telephone-related customer service areas, but these intrusions were all kept relatively low in scale, as the designation report points out, so as not to impact the overall visual effect of the space.   It is not just the individual decorative features that are important here, but more so the ability to view them in repetition, to experience the design as a whole.  The interior takes cues from the hypostyle halls of ancient Egypt, a grand, open space meant to impress, to exude power and prestige.  Seeing as the majority of this space will now be divided up and full of merchandise, signage and retail furniture, HDC asks that at the very least the upper portions of this striking interior be left open to recall the original design intent and atmosphere of the hall.

LPC Determination: Incomplete


LPC Docket Number: 105631
Manhattan, Block: 550, Lot: 1
14A Washington Mews – Greenwich Village Historic District
An apartment building designed by J. E. Terhune and built in 1884. Application is to alter the areaway and side façade, and replace windows, and construct a rooftop bulkhead.

e - mews

HDC Testimony
HDC does not object to this proposal with the exception of what may seem like the least important feature of the project, filling in the air shaft.  Its chamfered corners instantly bring to mind the dumb-bell tenement design dictated by the Tenement House Law of 1879, enacted just five years prior to the construction of this building.  Considering its prominent visability from University Place, this would be a significant alteration.  Sometimes what is not there, the voids in a building, can be as expressive and important as what is there, and HDC asks that at least at the upper floors this piece of history be retained.

LPC Determination: Approved

LPC Docket Number: 108643
Manhattan, Block: 1399, Lot: 20
851 Lexington Avenue – Upper East Side Extension Historic District
A altered neo-Grec style rowhouse designed by Robert H. Coburn, and built in 1880-81. Application is to legalize the installation of storefront infill without LPC permits.

e- lex

HDC Testimony
HDC urges the Commission not to legalize this lackluster storefront infill as it is not something that would have been approved had it come here as a proposal for new work.  In fact, it resembles a proposal seen here just last month for a nail salon at 1012 Lexington Avenue – a proposal that the commission did not approve.  The Upper East Side Extension is still a relatively new designation, and early projects like this one will set the tone for the future character of the district.  A tax photo or other historic image should be found to help guide the new design, and more attention should be paid to details and articulation.

LPC Determination: Denied

Posted Under: HDC@LPC