September 21, 2010
LPC Docket Number: 111226
Manhattan, Block: 627, Lot: 7
34 Gansevoort Street – Gansevoort Market Historic District
An Italianate style French flats with store building designed by Charles Mettam and built in 1870. Application is to install signage.
HDC Testimony
HDC approves of the blade sign as it is a traditional type of signage in the Gansevoort Market Historic District and the proposed is nicely proportioned for this location. We find though that the signage comprisedof indiviual letters hanging down off the canopy paralel to the building is not something seen in this district and has no historic precedent. Enough signage will be provided by the blade sign and in the window, making the individual letters redundant and we ask that they not be approved.
LPC Determination: Approved
LPC Docket Number: 110613
Manhattan, Block: 644, Lot: 41
32-36 Little West 12th Street – Gansevoort Market Historic District
A neo-Grec style building designed by James Stroud and built in 1880. Application is to install signage and lighting.
HDC Testimony
HDC approves to the idea blade sign, a traditional type of singage in this district, but in this proposal we find that the proportions are off. At 6’x2′, it is rather thick and too long for this shallow canopy. In the last application the sign was longer, but its height was shorter than that proposed here and the canopy was considerably deeper. The size and proportions need to be played with a bit more here so that the sign does not take over the effect of the historic canopy. Although this application may meet the rules of a blade sign in other districts, the rules have not yet been adopted or exist for the Gansevoort Market Historic District. This is an opportunity to find a sign that works in this specific context.
Finally, the lighting seems discrete and HDC would urge its approval as long as it is ensured that the LED rope itself is not visible, just the light it gives off.
LPC Determination: Approved with modifications
LPC Docket Number: 093405
Manhattan, Block: 631, Lot: 39
533 Hudson Street aka 116 Charles St. – Greenwich Village Historic District
A federal style rowhouse built in 1827. Application is to install a roof deck and railings and legalize an HVAC unit.
HDC Testimony
While HDC does not object to the roof deck rail, the HVAC unit illegally installed is very visible and surely not something the commission would have approved at a hearing. If a lower profile unit cannot be installed or its placement moved back, ways to screen the unit need to be investigated.
LPC Determination: Approved with modifications
LPC Docket Number: 109490
Manhattan, Block: 850, Lot: 1
149 Fifth Avenue – Ladies’ Mile Historic District
A neo-Renaissance style store and loft building designed by Maynicke & Franke and built in 1918. Application is to replace doors and install security grilles.
HDC Testimony
HDC does not have an objection to the security grilles, if they are required by code. As opposed to changing the historic windows themselves, the grilles are less of an intervention and reversible, and we find that their simple, utilitarian design does not call attention to them.
We are troubled however by the proposed removal of the historic, paneled elevator doors and their replacement with plain, flat ones. The elevator doors on this 1918 store and loft building are important pieces of the building’s historic function, much like fire shutters are to other historic industrial buildings. Still in operation over ninety years later, the doors should be restored and retained or replaced with new doors with matching paneling. HDC questions the need for flat doors.
After a conversation with an elevator consultant, one of our committee members reported that it seems that the requirements for vertically sliding doors, like those in the proposal, are being confused with the requirements for horizontally sliding doors, which, for new or modernized elevators, would have to comply with rule 2.11.11.5.2. That rule states that a gap of no more than .0375 inches is allowed. This rule only applies to horizontally sliding doors and only to new or modernized installations.
There is no retroactive provision in the New York City Building Code Appendix K3 that would require a gap of less than 3/8 of an inch between the door panel of a vertical bi-parting or slide up to open entrance assembly and the entrance frame on a freight elevator. Additionally, the requirement according to rule 2.11.12.4.5 for a new elevator or a modernized elevator where the doors are replaced or modified is that the clearance between the panel and frame lintel, between the panel and the sill, and between the panels of multi speed entrances not exceed one inch. And so, recessed panels would be fine at this location on either restored or replaced doors.
We urge the staff to work with the applicant to clear up the code issues and install historically appropriate doors at 149 Fifth Avenue.
LPC Determination: Incomplete
LPC Docket Number: 102591
Manhattan, Block: 1296, Lot: 1002
110 East 42nd Street – Individual Landmark and Interior Landmark
An Academic Italian Romanesque style bank and office building and banking hall designed by York & Sawyer and W. Louis Ayres and built in 1921-23 with an addition built in 1931-33. Application is to legalize alterations within the designated banking hall.
HDC Testimony
Sometimes it is difficult to pick out the alterations referenced in a proposal to legalize work done without permits. This however was not the case in this application. HDC was struck by the poor quality of the illegal work which harshly standouts against the exquisite craftsmanship of this interior landmark.
The door surrounds of the restrooms are chunky, projecting from the wall unlike in the original design, and we hope those signs are not meant to be permanent. Any signage should follow the font and color scheme of historic signage in the banking hall.
The lighting and sound booths, resembling little more than bunkers, overwhelm the corners of the room. Something lighter is needed instead, possibly something that plays off of the idea of bank teller booths with a removable panels inserted to create enclosures. The commission would not approve of clumsy, plywood intrusions on the exterior of a landmarked stone structure, even if they were easily removable, and such plans should not be legalized in an interior landmark.
LPC Determination: Incomplete
LPC Docket Number: 109867
Manhattan, Block: 1505, Lot: 10
15 East 93rd Street – Carnegie Hill Historic District
One of a row of four houses built in 1891-92 in the Queen Anne style and designed by William Graul, and altered in 1929-30. Application is to restore façade details.
HDC Testimony
HDC finds that this proposal is a good attempt at a restoration, but a few changes are necessary to ensure that the result is not merely a collage of nice details.
Of the four houses in the row at 15-21 East 93rd Street designed by Williams Graul and constructed in 1891-1892, 19 and 21 retain the most original detail. There are differences between the two though, raising the question of which should be followed for the alterations at 15. The applicant has gone with a little from both. Based though on the configuration of the parlor floors and the entrance surrounds it seems that 15 and 21 would have been mirror images of one another, while 17 and 19 continued the mirroring pattern of the group. With this in mind, HDC feels a design that follows the design of 21, on the far right hand end of the row, would be more appropriate for number 15.
LPC Determination: Approved