Landmark building permit details
| Location | 49-53 GROVE STREET, MANHATTAN |
|---|---|
| Issue date | April 8, 2009 |
| (?) COFA | COFA 09-8689 |
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 | 09-7974 |
| Historic district | Greenwich Village |
| Landmark name | N/A |
| Expiration date | April 8, 2013 |
| 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 January 20, 2009, following the Public Hearing of the same date, voted to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed work at the subject premises, as put forward in your application completed December 23, 2008, and as you were informed in Status Update Letter 09-6803 (LPC 07-4285), issued January 20, 2009. The proposed work, as approved, consists of replacing one-hundred, thirty-five (135) existing multi-light, steel, casement windows throughout the Grove Street and Bleecker Street facades and two-hundred, sixty-six (266) windows throughout the secondary lot-line, courtyard and air and light well facades, including a mix of one-over-one and two-over-two, double-hung wood and metal windows, with four hundred and one (401) beige-painted, metal, one-over-one, double-hung windows. The work was shown on four presentation boards, labeled L1 through L4 by the Commission staff and dated (presented) January 20, 2009, consisting of photographs, notes and site plans; and five presentation boards, labeled A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4 and A-5; dated February 2008, February 2, 2008 and November 11, 2008; prepared by Philip Toscano Architects; and consisting of drawings, all submitted by Philip Toscano and Mary Dierickx and presented at the Public Hearing and Public Meeting. In reviewing this proposal, the Commission noted that the Greenwich Village Historic District Designation Report describes 49-53 1/2 Grove Street (aka 317-321 Bleecker Street) as two six-story buildings designed by Herter Brothers and built in 1889; and that the buildings' style, scale, materials and details are among the features that contribute to the special architectural and historic character of the historic district. The Commission also noted that Warning Letter 06-0144 was issued on September 23, 2005 for "cutting casement windows for A/C units without permit(s)," and advanced to a Notice of Violation on April 12, 2006; and that Warning Letters 08-1166, 08-1167 and 08-1168 were issued on April 22, 2008 for the "installation of conduit above northernmost storefront on Bleecker Street without permit(s);" the "installation of lights and conduits above storefront window at 321 Bleecker Street ("Aromatherapy Blending Bar") without permit(s);" and the "installation of security camera and painting banding on facade at 49 Grove Street without permit(s)" respectively. With regard to this proposal, the Commission found that the existing casement windows are not original to the buildings and were not part of a larger redesign of the buildings, therefore their removal will not eliminate an original feature or disrupt a significant later façade composition; that the configuration of the existing windows, featuring closely spaced muntins, is not well integrated into the design of the buildings and distracts attention away from the prominence of the horizontal masonry bands, a significant feature of the facades, therefore the replacement of these windows with one-over-one, double-hung windows will help return the historic unity and hierarchies to these facades; that the proposed one-over-one, double-hung windows will match the dimensions, operation and configuration of the original windows at the primary facades and will closely replicate the historic details, thereby returning the buildings closer to their original appearance; that although the proposed one-over-one, double-hung windows at the secondary facades will not match the original configuration of the two-over-two, double-hung windows, only a small percentage of these windows will be visible from any public thoroughfares and the proposed configuration will be in keeping with the configuration of windows at secondary facades of buildings of this type, style and age, therefore, the change in window configuration at the secondary facades will not significantly alter the character of the buildings; that the proposed window finish will be in keeping with the color palette of buildings of this type, style and age and will be uniform throughout the buildings; that all of the windows will be replaced at once, thereby helping to maintain a unified appearance at the buildings; and that the proposed work will support the special architectural and historic character of the buildings or historic district. Based on these findings, the Commission determined the work to be appropriate to the building and the historic district and voted to approve it with the stipulation that the profile proposed for the primary facades be revised to better recall the contours of brickmolds on windows of primary facades of buildings of this age and style. The Commission authorized the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness upon receipt, review and approval of two sets of signed and sealed Department of Building filing drawings showing the approved design. Subsequently, on March 3, 2009, March 13, 2009, March 27, 2009 and April 6, 2009, the Commission received written specifications; photographs of the historic wood brickmolds at the primary facades, after the removal of metal cladding; a paint sample (Benjamin Moore Quincy Tan HC-25); current condition photographs of windows at the secondary facades; a plan and survey count of the 266 windows at the secondary facades; and final filing drawings A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5, and A-6, dated March 24, 2009 and prepared by Philip Toscano, RA. Accordingly, staff reviewed these materials and noted that the existing historic brickmold at the primary facades, exposed by the removal of the panning, features a simple square profile, with a bead detail, and that the proposed profile at the primary Grove Street and Bleecker Street facades has not been changed from the design presented at the Public Hearing and Meeting. Additionally, the proposal has been modified to include a square brickmold profile, without a bead detail, at the secondary lot line, courtyard and air and light well facades, as well as to incorporate a bronze finish, instead of the beige finish, at windows at the secondary facades which are not visible from any public thoroughfares. With regard to this work, staff found that the proposed brickmold profile at the primary facades will be in keeping with the historic contours of the brickmolds at these buildings; that the simplified profile detail and bronze finish will only be used at windows at secondary facades; and that the bronze-finished windows will not be visible from any public thoroughfares. Based on these and the above findings, the drawings have been marked approved with a perforated seal, and Certificate of Appropriateness 09-8689 is being issued. PLEASE NOTE: Notice of Violation 06-0144 will remain in effect until the work approved under this permit has been completed and inspected for compliance. NOTE THAT THIS PERMIT CONTAINS A COMPLIANCE DATE OF OCTOBER 8, 2009. Failure to complete the corrective work by this date may result in the issuance of a Notice of Violation (NOV) originating from the Environmental Control Board in accordance with Title 63 of the Rules of the City of New York, Section 7-02 (c). Second NOVs would require a court appearance and a civil fine may be imposed. Once the corrective work is completed, promptly submit a written request for a PAGE 2 Issued: 4/8/09 DOCKET: 09-7974 Notice of Compliance from the building owner, along with a photograph documenting the finished work, to the Commission. 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 Bernadette Artus. Robert B. Tierney Chair PLEASE NOTE: PERFORATED DRAWINGS AND A COPY OF THIS PERMIT HAVE BEEN SENT TO: Mary B. Dierickx, Historic Preservation Consulting cc: Caroline Kane Levy/Deputy Director of Preservation/LPC PAGE 3 Issued: 4/8/09 DOCKET: 09-7974 |
Added to EveryBlock on May 1, 2009.
Comments
- Subscribe to e-mail updates nearby:
- West Village
- Manhattan
- 10014
- Precinct 6
- Manhattan CB 2
- Greenwich Village
- State Assembly District 66
- State Senate District 29
- Congressional District 8
- City Council District 3
