| Certificate of Appropriateness Testimony
LPC-22-09276
236 Albany Avenue – Crown Heights North III Historic District
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
An altered Renaissance Revival-style rowhouse designed by Irving B. Ells and built c. 1899. Application is to legalize storefront infill and windows installed without Landmarks Preservation Commission permit(s).
HDC believes that this proposal needs further study. The 1940’s tax photo should guide the applicant toward the appropriate windows for this project. It would appear that the applicant can simply remove the clip in divided lights so the windows read as 2 over 2. Further, the storefront cornice in the tax photo should serve as the template for restoring that feature to the building. HDC believes these two corrections would largely mitigate this project’s shortcomings.  LPC-22-11906
233-17 38th Drive – Douglaston Historic District
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
A vacant lot created by a sub-division. Application is to construct a new house and install a driveway and curb cut.
Architect: Gino O. Longo
HDC finds this project completely inappropriate and we ask LPC to reject this project in its entirety. Some of the major concerns we have are that the proportions are incorrect, there is no hierarchy between floors and therefore no hierarchy between window sizes, and the use of materials is inappropriate.
 |
HDC has no issue with the proposal to extensively renovate or add on to this structure. However, we find the proposed design to be too large and not appropriately detailed. Our specific comments are as follows:
1. The third floor extension is too massive and is unlike anything else in the district. We recommend that the roofline be pulled down to the floor level of the attic, so that this is in scale with the neighboring historic houses. The ridge height is acceptable.
2. The addition at the third floor makes the second floor out of proportion (too tall) for the rest of the structure.
3. The new roof gable at the east elevation is out of character with the proposed alterations of both the main Shore Road and Hollywood elevations of the house and of historic houses in the district. The roof slope must be increased and the roofline/eaves brought down to the third floor level to make the proportions work.
4. The proposed changes to the garage at the Hollywood Avenue facade do not work, the gable looks as if it was tacked on as an afterthought. The garage doors should be divided and carriage style doors used, or a simpler door should be employed.
5. The new front porch is massive and the large stuccoed piers supporting the porch deck are inappropriate and out of scale with the house. A wood porch with more delicately sized members and trim would be more appropriate.
.jpg)
HDC supports this proposal but feels that the storefront should be painted black to harmonize with its neighbors.
.jpg)
LPC-22-12128
HDC is generally opposed to gates on stoops as they are anti-urban. In this case the location may warrant this unfortunate accessory and we appreciate the sensitivity of the design. That said, our preference is for the stoop to remain open to the city.
The courtyard of this buildings brick wall appears to be in relatively good condition and only in need of repointing. EIFS will trap massive amounts of moisture in the existing brick wall and result in its actual deterioration. We ask the Commission to reject use of this process.
HDC finds the proposed gate change and canopy inappropriate. We are confident the architect can find a code-compliant way of maintaining the existing handsome gate.
