Kate Daly, Executive Director of the Landmarks Preservation Commission. Image Credit: LPC.

I would like to respond to a recent CityLand guest commentary by Andrew Berman of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation (GVSHP) that suggested that the Landmarks Preservation Commission practice of notifying property owners prior to “calendaring” a property is detrimental to the landmarks process. The Commission’s successful record can be directly attributed to our efforts to ensure that all stakeholders are aware of, and help build support for, landmark designations in their neighborhoods. (more…)

Andrew Berman, Executive Director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation.

Nearly 50 years ago the city passed its landmarks law, with the goal of ensuring that historically significant sites and areas could be saved before they might be destroyed, as happened with Penn Station and countless other fallen landmarks. The law gave the city the right to landmark a property or area, but only after notifying the owner that they were considering doing so, holding a hearing at which the owner and anyone else could present their case for or against, and a public vote was taken. As a result, some of our city’s most iconic buildings, sites, and neighborhoods have been preserved. (more…)

Steven Spinola, president of REBNY

The Landmarks Preservation Commission’s (LPC) process for designating New York City historic districts is being used more and more to take the place of zoning.  The designation of historic districts has been pursued to promote many different agendas: to address issues of height and scale, to stop new development and to limit development on vacant or near-vacant sites by purposefully including these sites within the boundaries of historic districts.  These objectives are contrary to the intent of the NYC Landmarks Law and touch on actions specifically disallowed by that law, such as limiting the height and bulk of buildings and other characteristics governed by zoning regulations.

This continuing drift toward misusing the landmarks law as a planning tool to limit change across entire neighborhoods is evident in the remarks by Otis Pearsall, a noted preservationist, at the 2011 Fitch Forum symposium on the history of preservation law:

(more…)

Proposed East Village/Lower East Side Historic District. Credit: LPC

New district would encompass more than 300 buildings in an area that was home to successive waves of immigrant groups. On June 26, 2012, Landmarks heard extensive testimony on the proposed designation of the East Village/Lower East Side Historic District. The proposed district would encompass approximately 330 buildings located primarily along Second Avenue between St. Marks Place and East 2nd Street and adjacent side streets. A portion of the district would extend along East 6th and East 7th Streets, reaching Avenue A.

The area is largely characterized by multi-family 19th century tenement buildings that housed various immigrant groups newly arrived to the country. The area became home to German and Irish immigrants as wealthier New Yorkers moved uptown, and in time became known as Kleindeutschland (Little Germany). Later, the area became home to Jewish and Eastern European immigrants, and Second Avenue became a focal point for lower Manhattan’s Jewish community, gaining the title of the “Yiddish Rialto.” After World War II, the neighborhood came to be dominated by Latin American immigrants. Realtors began calling the neighborhood the “East Village” shortly after the removal of the elevated Third Avenue subway line in 1955. The area has a rich legacy in the arts, and in social activism. Landmarks calendared the district on June 28, 2011.

(more…)

Extension would bring roughly 582 buildings under Landmarks’ jurisdiction. On August 10, 2010, Landmarks moved to calendar the proposed Park Slope Historic District Extension, the first step toward landmarking. The extension would include approximately 582 buildings located to the southwest of the original 1973-designated Park Slope Historic District, which encompasses 1,975 structures.

The proposed district is bounded by 7th Street to the north, 15th Street to the south, Eighth Avenue to the east, and Seventh Avenue to the west. The district would include the properties along the northwestern curve of the traffic circle at Bartel-Pritchard Square, across from Prospect Park’s south- west entrance. A small pocket of properties along Prospect Park West between 9th and 10th Streets would also be included within the district. The proposed extension features a mix of rowhouses and apartment buildings, with many dating to the 1880s and incorporating Italianate and Queen Anne-style architectural design. The properties closest to Prospect Park include early 20th century neo-Classical style architecture. The extension’s notable structures include two 19th century firehouses, the former Ansonia Clock Factory built in 1879, and the Renaissance Revival-style Acme Hall built by Charles Nickenig and featuring a ballroom, bowling alley, and meeting rooms.

Before calendaring, Chair Robert B. Tierney thanked Landmarks staff and the neighborhood advocates who were instrumental in proposing the district. Landmarks did not set a date for a public hearing.

LPC: Park Slope Historic District Extension, Brooklyn (LP-2443) (Aug.10, 2010).