Landmark building permit details
| Location | 107 EAST 70TH STREET, MANHATTAN |
|---|---|
| Issue date | February 3, 2009 |
| (?) COFA | COFA 09-6685 |
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 | 09-4318 |
| Historic district | Upper East Side |
| Landmark name | N/A |
| Expiration date | June 17, 2014 |
| 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 June 17, 2008, following the Public Hearing of the same date, the Landmarks Preservation Commission voted to approve a proposal for the installation of a barrier-free access ramp, construction of rooftop additions, and legalization of the application of a masonry coating at the subject premises, as put forward in your application completed on May 22, 2008. The approval will expire on June 17, 2014. The proposed work, as approved, consists of modifications to the areaway, including the relocation of an existing wrought iron gate to a new opening in the areaway wall, the installation of cast stone and stucco infill at the existing opening, the creation of an opening in the areaway wall at the stoop, the construction of a concrete ramp with a metal railing and planters and the reconfiguration of stairs within the areaway; the construction of planting beds within the areaway; the replacement of paired wood doors at the westernmost ground floor entrance with a pair of wood paneled doors of differing widths; the removal of the existing stucco stair and elevator bulkhead, and replacemnt with a lower brick stair bulkhead and a separate brick elevator bulkhead; the removal of mechanical equipment and ductwork from the roof; the installation of a new chilling tower and dunnage; and the legalization of a cementitious masonry coating applied to limestone; as shown in existing conditions photographs and drawings labeled "Context Plan," "Historic Photographs," "Existing Conditions Photographs," "Existing Conditions Photographs," "Proposed Modifications to 70th Street Entry: Plans," "Proposed Modifications to 70th Street Entry: Elevations," "70th Street Entrance," and "Sight Line Studies"; dated May 19, 2008; "Existing Stone Coating" and "Sight Line Studies," dated June 17, 2008; all prepared by Beyer Blinder Belle; and submitted as components of the application, and presented at the Public Hearing and Public Meeting. In reviewing this proposal, the Commission notes that the Upper East Side Historic District designation report describes 107 East 70th Street as a Tudor Revival style residence designed by Walker & Gillette and built in 1920-21; and that the style, scale, materials, and details of the building are among the features that contribute to the special architectural and historic character of the Upper East Side Historic District. With regard to this proposal, the Commission found that the existing masonry coating cannot be removed without incurring substantial damage to historic fabric and that it approximates the color of the underlying limestone; that the proposed ramp is modest in scale and that its presence will not overwhelm the appearance of the building; that the placement of the ramp allows it to be largely concealed behind the areaway wall, and it will not detract from the composition of the building's primary façade; that relocating the iron gate at the areaway and creating a new opening at the stoop will allow for accessibility into the building, while maintaining well-scaled openings based on those currently existing areaway wall; that the materials of the ramp, including tinted concrete and black wrought iron, are in keeping with the materials palette and ironwork pattern of the building; that the construction of the new rooftop additions, the removal and replacement of the existing stair and elevator bulkhead will not cause the destruction of any significant historic fabric; that the additions will only be visible from Park Avenue and East 70th Street at an angle to the front facade; that the new stair bulkhead will be lower and less visible that the existing stair and elevator bulkhead, therefore minimizing its presence on the street; that the brick cladding will be harmonious with the materials palette and style of the building; and that the simple massing and details of the new bulkheads will not draw undue attention to themselves, or call attention away from the main facade. Based on these findings, the Commission determined the proposed work to be appropriate to the building and the historic district. The work, therefore, is approved. However, in voting to grant this approval, the Commission stipulated that a set of unmounted copies of the presentation drawings and two final signed and sealed copies of the Department of Buildings filing drawings for the approved work be submitted to the staff of the Commission for review and approval. Subsequently, on February 3, 2009, the Landmarks Preservation Commission received final drawings labeled G0.01, G0.02, G0.03, D1.00a, D1.00b, D1.01, D1.02, D1.02m, D1.03, D1.04, D1.05, D1.06, D1.07, A1.00a, A1.00b, A1.01, A1.02, A1.02m, A1.03, A1.04, A1.05, A1.06, A1.07, A6.01; dated July 16, 2008; drawings labeled A5.02, A5.03, and A6.11; dated October 10, 2008; drawings labeled A4.01, A4.02, A4.03, and A4.04,; dated October 27, 2008; a drawing labeled A8.55, dated November 11, 2008; drawings labeled LPC3 through LPC8, dated November 20, 2008; drawings labeled A3.01, A3.02, A3.03, A3.04, A4.11, A4.12, A4.13, A4.14, and A4.21; dated revised December 18, 2008; all prepared by Elizabeth Robin Leber, R.A.; and an elevation drawing of the existing conditions labeled PR3.01, dated April 29, 2008. Accordingly, staff reviewed the drawings and found that the proposal has been amended to include the installation of a Siamese connection in the new areaway wall infill; the replacement of damaged limestone units with cast stone units at the areaway wall; the modification of the design of the replacement doors at the westernmost ground floor entrance; the installation of an intercom, card reader, and 28" by 28" bronze plaque near the main entrance; the replacement of one-over-one, six-over-six, and eight-over-eight double-hung wood windows with six-over-six and eight-over-eight double-hung aluminum-clad wood windows at the north and west elevations and the penthouses; the resetting of leaded glass and replacement of window sills at existing wood and leaded glass windows at the third and fourth floors of the south, west, and north elevations; the in kind replacement of multi-pane wood casements and fixed multi-pane wood windows and multi-pane double-hung wood windows with aluminum-clad wood windows at the south and west elevations of the fifth floor and penthouse level structures; the removal of metal cladding, replacement of the sill and resetting glazing at the arched windows and French doors at the west elevation of the fifth floor; salvaging leaded glass and installing it in new wood sash frames to match the existing at the fifth floor of the west elevation; the modification of window and door openings at the penthouse level; the removal of two existing windows at cellar level light wells at the north elevation and installation of masonry infill; the removal of masonry infill at former window openings and installation of six-over-six double-hung aluminum-clad wood windows within those openings and the replacement of a door and transom window at the basement level of the north elevation; façade work, including selective limestone patching; selective repointing; selective brick replacement; façade cleaning; the removal of the stone roof slab above the easternmost second floor oriel at the south elevation and replacement with a cast stone unit; the installation of brick infill at existing façade penetrations at the first floor of the south elevation; the removal of two light fixtures at the south elevation; the installation of brick infill at eleven window openings and one former HVAC louver penetration at the light well elevations; the installation of a 48"-high non-reflective glass guardrail set 3" back from the existing stone PAGE 2 Issued: 2/3/09 DOCKET: 09-4318 balustrade at the fifth floor; the installation of stone pavers at the fifth floor terrace; the removal and replacement of an existing metal guardrail at the south elevation and the installation of a 42"-high painted metal guardrail at the fifth floor rear terrace; exterior work at the penthouse level, including the removal and replacement of a metal security fence; the removal and reconstruction of the north parapet; the installation of a 42"-high painted metal guardrail; the removal of existing skylights; patching the bituminous roofing membrane at areas of demolition; the replacement of the batten seam copper fifth floor roof; work at the roof, including the removal of a hatch; patching the bituminous roofing membrane at areas of demolition; the replacement of the batten seam copper penthouse roof; exterior work at the rear yard, including the installation of soil infill at two cellar level light wells, the removal of concrete slabs, the installation of a metal grate, and 2' deep excavation in the rear yard. The Commission reviewed the drawings and found that the cast stone units will match the existing limestone will match the existing stone in terms of profile, color, and texture; that the installation of the intercom, card reader, and bronze plaque will be at areas of unadorned masonry, will not obscure any of the building's architectural features; and that the installation will be reversible. With regard to the windows at secondary facades, the Commission finds, in accordance with the Rules of the City of New York, Title 63, Section 3-04(d) that the new windows will match the historic windows in terms of configuration, and finish. With regard to the window repairs, the Commission finds that the work is restorative and will retain the historic leaded glass, only replacing deteriorated wood elements, and that the work will result in the long-term preservation of these special windows. With regard to the modification of window openings, the Commission finds, in accordance with the Rules of the City of New York, Title 63, Section 3-04, (d)(2), that the existing openings are to be modified in terms of height and width, and such modification does not alter or destroy protected features. With regard to the façade work, the Commission finds that the proposed work will protect the building from damage due to water infiltration and will aid in the long-term preservation of the building; that the patching mortar will match the existing stone in terms of profile, color, and texture; that the pointing mortar will be compatible with the historic masonry in terms of composition, and will match the historic mortar in terms of color, texture, and tooling; that the replacement brick will match the original brick in terms of color, texture, size, and decorative pattern; that the cleaning will be undertaken using the gentlest method possible without damaging the masonry facade; and that the proposed work will help return the facade closer to its original appearance. With regard to the removal of the light fixtures at the south façade, the infill of window openings at the light well elevations, and the removal of skylights and hatches, the Commission finds that they are not significant features and that their removal will not cause the demolition of, or damage to, any decorative masonry or other significant architectural features of the building. With regard to the installation of the glass guardrail at the fifth floor, the Commission finds that the guardrail will not be mounted to the balustrade, will have non-reflective glass, and will be minimally visible from any public thoroughfares. With regard to the reconstruction of the north parapet, the Commission finds that the work will eliminate potentially unstable conditions, and protect the building's facades and underlying structure from damage due to water infiltration. With regard to the installation of guardrails, pavers, and security fence at the roof levels, the Commission finds, in accordance with the Rules of the City of New York, Title 63, Section 2-19(c)(2), that the work at the roof consists solely of mechanical equipment; that it will not result in damage to, or demolition of, any significant features of the roof of the building; and that the new condensers will be only minimally visible from public thoroughfares. With regard to the replacement of roofing materials, the Commission finds that the proposed roof will match the historic in terms of materials and details; and that the replacement of the roof will aid in the long term preservation of the building and will prevent water damage. With regard to the work at the rear yard, the Commission finds that it will not alter the scale of the building, or disrupt the relationship of the rear yard to surrounding rear yards; and that the proposal approved by the Commission has been maintained. Based on this and the above findings, the drawings are marked approved with a perforated seal, and Certificate of Appropriateness 09-6685 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 PAGE 3 Issued: 2/3/09 DOCKET: 09-4318 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 Blaire Walsh. Robert B. Tierney Chair PLEASE NOTE: PERFORATED DRAWINGS AND A COPY OF THIS PERMIT HAVE BEEN SENT TO: Aaron Lamport, Beyer Blinder Belle Architects & Planners cc: Jared Knowles, Deputy Director of Preservation/LPC PAGE 4 Issued: 2/3/09 DOCKET: 09-4318 |
Added to EveryBlock on February 25, 2009.
Comments
- Subscribe to e-mail updates nearby:
- Upper East Side - Carnegie Hill
- Manhattan
- 10021
- Precinct 19
- Manhattan CB 8
- State Assembly District 73
- State Senate District 26
- Congressional District 14
- City Council District 4
