Item 1
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN
118755- Block 531, lot 44-
54 Great Jones Street – NoHo Extension Historic District
An Italianate style multiple dwelling with store built c.1851. Application is to install a wall sign.
While a painted wall sign could be considered here at 54 Great Jones Street, a vinyl wall sign is simply inappropriate in its material and its attachments for any historic district. Outside the historic district, NoHo already suffers from too many of these façade-covering commercial intrusions. HDC urges the Commission to reject this application and halt now what could become a very bad precedent.
LPC determination: Approved with modifications
Item 2
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN
114204- Block 545, lot 26-
740-744 Broadway aka 2 Astor Place – NoHo Historic District
A Beaux-Arts style lofts building designed by Francis H. Kimball and built in 1910-12. Application is to install new storefront infill, signage and awnings.
As HDC often asks for on large store and loft buildings, a storefront and signage master plan that could unite the base of this Beaux-Arts structure would be the best option for 2 Astor Place. The awnings in this application are primarily only signage, and their number and impact needs to be reduced. The entrance awning with its enclosed sides advertising the store looks like a grandfathered condition, not something the Commission would approve today. A simpler awning, open on the sides, would be much more appropriate. The branding nature of the second floor awnings is apparent by their awkward placement which would allow ample sunlight to enter through the upper, unprotected portion of the windows. The awnings should be redesigned to fit the openings properly, and their number and placement on the façade should be reconsidered, perhaps limiting them to the prominent corner.
LPC determination: Approved
Item 3
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN
119198- Block 526, lot 51-
88 MacDougal Street – MacDougal Sullivan Gardens Historic District
A rowhouse built in 1844 and remodeled in the neo-Federal style by Hyde and Joannes in the 1920’s. Application is to paint the front façade.
When considering repainting the façade of 88 MacDougal Street the book-matched pairing rhythm of the block. Whether darker or lighter, HDC feels 88 should match with 90 as other pairs here do.
LPC determination: Approved
Item 7
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN
110180- Block 613, lot 59-
61 Greenwich Street – Greenwich Village Historic District
An empty lot. Application is to construct a new building for the ventilation of subway lines.
Designing a new building in an historic district is never an easy feat. Designing a mechanical structure on a prominent corner of a primarily residential and commercial neighborhood is even more difficult. The proposed unfortunately, with its residential-like façade floating over a solid base and mechanicals looming over the top, is an uncomfortable mash-up. Some of the most successful infrastructure, pumping stations, electrical substations and the like, are buildings that accept what they are and even celebrate the important part they play in New Yorkers everyday lives. Rather than trying to partially hide behind pieces of a faux façade, a building that respects its historic surroundings but stays true to its basic nature should be created.
LPC determination: Negative advisory report
Item 15
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN
100756- Block 1251, lot 37-
186 Riverside Drive – Riverside – West End Historic District
A neo-Renaissance style apartment building, designed by Emery Roth and built in 1927-28. Application is to establish a Master Plan governing the future replacement of windows.
HDC is happy to see a Master Plan governing the future replacement of windows proposed here at 186 Riverside Drive. Unfortunately though, we do not find the proposed an appropriate long term plan for this Emery Roth apartment building. The proposal indicates two types of windows with differing proportions that will give noticeably differing site lines, particularly if placed adjacent to one another. A single window should be chosen instead. The original yellowish color rather than a dark finish should be used in order to highlight the divisions in the windows, an important feature on this building. One-over-one windows are no replacement for the original six-over-one configuration. While Roth did design buildings with one-over-ones, the buildings shown as examples have much more ornate façades than 186. With less design decoration on its façade, the windows of 186 become a more prominent design detail. That is one of the beauties of Roth’s designs – their balance. They are not too fancy, not too plain, but somehow instead just right.
LPC determination: Approved