Landmark building permit details
| Location | 50-52 LAIGHT STREET, MANHATTAN |
|---|---|
| Issue date | August 21, 2006 |
| (?) COFA | COFA 06-8978 |
Certificates of Appropriateness (COFAs) are issued by the landmarks commission when it approves such things as building construction, demolition and visible additions to historic property. The certificates require a public hearing and the entire process can take several months. |
|
| Docket | 06-8549 |
| Historic district | Tribeca North |
| Landmark name | N/A |
| Expiration date | May 16, 2012 |
| Text |
Pursuant to Section 25-307 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York, the Landmarks Preservation Commission, at the Public Meeting of May 16, 2006, following the Public Meeting of May 2, 2006, following the Public Meeting and Public Hearing of January 24, 2006, voted to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed work at the subject premises, as put forth in your application completed on December 29, 2005. This permit will expire on May 16, 2012. The proposed work, as approved, consists of demolishing the two existing one-story, red brick garage style buildings; and constructing a new brick and limestone, eight-story building featuring a seven-story street wall with an open seventh floor and a two-story set back, all constructed in a red brick; dark green painted wood two-over-two double-hung windows; and wood storefront. The proposal, as initially presented to the Commission included a more liberal use of cast stone, fiberglass spandrel panels and limestone banding throughout the façade; a greater floor to ceiling ratio at the top floor setback; a stucco lot line façade with full return at the cornice; and a stucco façade for the two-story set back . The work was shown on presentation boards consisting of drawings and photographs, dated December 12, 2005, photomontages within the streetscape and material samples, and a wood model prepared by German Longoria of Sullen Defrancis Architecture, and presented at the Public Hearing and Public Meeting. In reviewing the application, the Commission noted that the Tribeca North Historic District designation report describes 50 Laight Street as a one-story garage built by George W. Swiller in 1940, and that 52 Laight Street as a one-story freight terminal building designed by Augustus N. Allen and built in 1919. The Commission finally noted that 52 Laight Street replaced a 2 1/2-story brick dwelling; that 50 Laight Street replaced a 5-story tenement house; and that buildings are flanked by five story plus masonry buildings dating to the 1870's. With regard to this proposal, the Commission found that the existing buildings are not architecturally notable in themselves, have been altered over time, and do not contribute to the special architectural character of the streetscape or the historic district, and therefore, their demolition will not result in the elimination of significant historic structures or fabric; that the height of the primary facade of the new building will relate well to the other buildings in the streetscape; that the floor to ceiling heights of the new building will be proportional to those found on the adjacent buildings, and will support a relationship between the new building and its neighbors; that the facade of the new building will be composed in a traditional arrangement of base, shaft and termination which is characteristic of multi-story buildings in this historic district; that the details and fenestration of the facade, including cast stone intermediate cornices, and paired two-over-two wood windows, and brick paneled spandrels is in keeping with rhythm and pattern of primary facades of buildings of this size and scale found throughout the historic district; that the materials and finishes used for the facade will be harmonious with the materials of the streetscape and are consistent with the materials and the color palette found on many buildings within the Tribeca North Historic District; that the use of brick cladding and simple punched window openings on the lot line elevation will evoke the scale, materials and articulation of historic lot line facades; that the use of limestone and wood infill at the commercial base, with limited lighting and signage, is simple and understated, and is in keeping with utilitarian buildings found in the historic district; that the limited visibility of the top floor set back, visible only at an oblique angle from the west is consistent with the profiles of many buildings with rooftop bulkheads in the historic district; and that the proposed loggia, incorporating arched masonry opening and railings, while not typical of buildings in the historic district, will allow for the facade to achieve a height complimentary to the street wall and will maintain a well revolved fenestration pattern. Based on these findings, the Commission determined that the work is appropriate to the building and to the historic district, and voted to approve this application. However, in voting to grant this approval, the Commission made its determination subject to the stipulation that two sets of final signed and sealed drawings, showing the approved work, which are to be filed at the Department of Buildings, be submitted to the staff of the Commission for review and approval. Subsequently, on August 10, 2006, the staff of the Commission received drawingsT1.0, A0.0, A1.0, A1.1, A1.2, A1.3, A1.4, A1.5, A1.6, A1.7. A1.8, A2.0, A2.1, A2.2, A2.3, A5.0, dated February 6, 2006; last revised June 19, 2006, prepared by Anthony Ehiedu Ugbeor, P.E., S1 through S11, dated September 23, 2004, prepared by Neil Wexler, P.E., M1 through M7, P1 through P6 and SP1 through SP4, dated last revised August 2, 2006, prepared by Gabor M. Szakal, P.E. and E1 through E12, dated August 4, 2006, prepared by Joseph A. Scaltro, P.E. Accordingly, staff reviewed the drawings and found that the proposal approved by the Commission has been maintained. Therefore, these drawings are being marked approved by the Commission with a perforated seal, and this Certificate of Appropriateness is being issued. This permit is issued on the basis of the building and site conditions described in the application and disclosed during the review process. By accepting this permit, the applicant agrees to notify the Commission if the actual building or site conditions vary or if original or historic building fabric is discovered. The Commission reserves the right to amend or revoke this permit, upon written notice to the applicant, in the event that the actual building or site conditions are materially different from those described in the application or disclosed during the review process. All approved drawings are marked approved by the Commission with a perforated seal indicating the date of approval. The work is limited to what is contained in the perforated documents. Other work or amendments to this filing must be reviewed and approved separately. The applicant is hereby put on notice that performing or maintaining any work not explicitly authorized by this permit may make the applicant liable for criminal and/or civil penalties, including imprisonment and fines. This letter constitutes the permit; a copy must be prominently displayed at the site while work is in progress. Please direct inquiries to Kim Valente. PAGE 2 Issued: 8/21/06 DOCKET: 06-8549 Robert B. Tierney Chair PLEASE NOTE: PERFORATED DRAWINGS AND A COPY OF THIS PERMIT HAVE BEEN SENT TO: German G. Longoria, Sullen Defrancis Architecture cc: Sullen Defrancis Architecture; Metropolis Group, Inc.; William Neeley, Deputy Director of Preservation PAGE 3 Issued: 8/21/06 DOCKET: 06-8549 |
Added to EveryBlock on January 16, 2008.
Comments
Other landmark building permits nearby
- Manhattan
- 10013
- Precinct 1
- Manhattan CB 1
- State Assembly District 66
- State Senate District 25
- Congressional District 8
- City Council District 1
- Tribeca
- More landmark building permits in New York City
- Subscribe to e-mail updates nearby:
