LANDMARKSFPO Holland Plaza designated . . . . . 94 7-story building in Rendering of proposed development along 126th Street, Willets Point. Image Credit: EDC . Greenwich HD ...... 95 UWS building CITY PLANNING COMMISSION District in Queens on the west and addition debated ...... 98 east sides of Citi Field, home of the SoHo residences approved . . . . 100 New York Mets. Text Amendment/Special Permits Steinway showroom The Special Willets Point Dis- considered ...... 101 Willets Point, Queens trict was approved by the City Church designation changed . . . 102 Willets Point Proposal Council in 2008. The rezoning was Heard at City Planning controversial; area businesses and Commission residents were concerned over the CITYLAND COMMENTARY relocation of businesses, the possi- Ross Sandler ...... 92 23-acre proposal will include en- bility of eminent domain, and traf- vironmental cleanup, expressway fic congestion. As a result, a lawsuit ramps, affordable housing, and re- was filed against the City by busi- GUEST COMMENTARY tail and entertainment complex . The ness owners and residents but was City Planning Commission held a dismissed by the New York County Scott M . Stringer ...... 97 public hearing on land use actions to Supreme Court in 2010. EDC pub- Alexander Garvin ...... 99. facilitate Phase 1 of the Willets Point lished a request for proposals in May Development Project on July 10, 2011, asking developers to propose CHARTS 2013. The application was submit- plans for Phase 1 of the develop- DCP Pipeline ...... C-1. ted by the New York City Economic ment. In June 2012, Mayor Michael ULURP Pipeline ...... C-2 Development Corporation and the Bloomberg announced that the City BSA Pipeline ...... C-2 Queens Development Group, LLC, a had come to an agreement with the Landmarks Pipeline ...... C-3 joint venture of Sterling Equities and Queens Development Group for CityAdmin .org New Decisions . . C-5 Related Companies. Phase 1, to be Phase 1 of the development plans. split into Phase 1A and 1B, includes As proposed in the plan, Phase environmental cleanup, economic 1A is scheduled to begin in 2014 improvements, mixed use devel- with environmental remediation of, opments, parking, and infrastruc- and demolition of the existing structure improvements on a portion tures on, a 23-acre section of the of the 61-acre Special Willets Point Special Willets (cont’d on page 93)

www.CityLandNYC.org 91 COMMENTARY The Court has ruled on street hails: now let’s work together The Bloomberg administration successfully defended the 2013 state law authorizing outer borough street hail taxi service and the sale of additional yellow cab medallions for wheel chair accessible vehicles. The battles over the state law and other taxi policies have left the industry and its TLC regulators deeply divided and distrustful of each other. Divorce is not possible, so the industry and the regulators still have to find ways to achieve the goals they share: a viable, safe and fair yellow cab and car service industry. The TLC and the industry’s unsuccessful attempts to find a middle ground on key issues led to litigation and delays. The street hail law is a prime example. There are areas outside of Manhattan where street hails make complete economic sense, but there are much larger areas where only base-managed liveries can economically oper- ate. The state law opens all areas for street hails by up to 18,000 cars. Approaches other than the state law would not have been as challenging to the taxi and livery industry. Neither the industry nor the City was well served by the resulting battle. A primary shared goal is the need to expand and protect the yellow cab industry. The medallion system created massive investment expectations. But it also created massive economic incentives for owners and drivers to stay on the road and serve the traveling public. Demand for yellow cabs exceeds supply, a growth spurred by new residential and commercial neighborhoods, and tourism. If the numbers of yellow cabs had grown in keeping with demand, yellow cabs would be pushing into the territories previously occupied by the liveries, rather than the liveries pushing into the yellow cab territory. More yellow medallions would provide safer and fairer service, and also protect the value of the medallions already issued. Traffic is another shared goal. The Bloomberg administration has been enormously creative in adapting street space for pedestrian and bicycle use, but little of that attention has been focused on taxi speeds, curb access and taxi lines. Street scrambles for taxis still exist. More attention to how traffic affects taxis would serve both safety and fairness. It is time for the industry and the City to begin to work together. That is what the traveling public needs. Ross Sandler CITYLAND Ross Sandler Drew Carroll ’12 Jesse Denno Professor of Law and Director, Amber Gonzalez ’12 Staff Writer, Production Asst . The Center expresses appreciation to the Center for New York City Law Fellows Sarah Knowles Brian J. Kaszuba ’04 Lebasi Lashley Administrative Coordinator individuals and foundations supporting the CityLand Editor Art Director Center and its work: The Steven and Sheila Aresty Petting Zoo Design Foundation, Fund for the City of New York, The Durst Foundation, The Charina Endowment Fund, The Murray Goodgold Foundation, CITYLAND ADVISORY BOARD Jerry Gottesman, The Marc Haas Foundation and Kent Barwick Howard Goldman Frank Munger The Prospect Hill Foundation. Andrew Berman Jerry Gottesman Carol E. Rosenthal Molly Brennan David Karnovsky Michael T. Sillerman (ISSN 1551-711X) is published by the Albert K. Butzel Ross Moskowitz ’84 Paul D. Selver CITYLAND Center for New York City Law at New York Law School, 185 West Broadway, New York City, New CENTER FOR NEW YORK CITY LAW ADVISORY COUNCIL York 10013, tel. (212) 431-2115, fax (212) 941-4735, Stanley S. Shuman, Michael D. Hess Ernst H. Rosenberger ’58 e-mail: [email protected], website: www.citylaw. Chair Lawrence S. Huntington ’64 Frederick P. Schaffer org © Center for New York City Law, 2012. All Arthur N. Abbey ’59 William F. Kuntz II Frederick A.O. Schwarz, Jr. rights reserved. Printed on recycled paper. Maps Sheila Aresty ’94 presented in CITYLAND are from Map-PLUTO Eric Lane O. Peter Sherwood Harold Baer, Jr. copyrighted by the New York City Department of Randy M. Mastro Edward Wallace David R. Baker City Planning. City Landmarks and Historic Dis- Robert J. McGuire Michael A. Cardozo Richard M. Weinberg tricts printed with permission of New York City Francis McArdle Anthony Coles Peter L. Zimroth Landmarks Preservation Commission. Paul A. Crotty John D. McMahon ’76 James D. Zirin Richard J. Davis Thomas L. McMahon ’83 POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Michael B. Gerrard Gary P. Naftalis CITYLAND , 185 West Broadway, New York, New Judah Gribetz Steven M. Polan York 10013-2921. Periodicals postage paid at New York, New York. Kathleen Grimm ’80 Gail S. Port ’76 Eric Hatzimemos ’92 Joseph B. Rose

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 92 Point District. Much of the site is ture a new public school and more velopment must come in planned currently occupied by junkyards than six acres of publicly accessible phases. First, environmental clean- and automotive repair businesses. open space. up is needed, then, the retail and The contamination of the site in- The applicants seek a zon- hotel development will be the first cludes ash, which was historically ing text amendment to the Special economic drivers for the area. Only dumped there, petroleum, and Willets Point District regulations after an income stream is gener- various vehicle fluids. The district that would allow for the planned ated can the residential component lacks sanitary sewers and adequate recreational, hotel, and retail uses be developed. He also testified that storm sewers. The district is also in the parking areas via the use of although the area is parkland, all of on a 100-year flood plain and is ad- special permits. the uses in the proposal are allowed jacent to the Flushing Bay, which Queens Borough President, by the Special Willets Point District. makes grade changes a necessary Helen M. Marshall recommended The proposal awaits a decision component of redevelopment. After approval of the proposal with con- by the City Planning Commission, remediation is complete, in approx- ditions, asking for regular progress and then will be sent to the City imately 2015, the Queens Develop- meetings between the community Council for approval. ment Group would develop 30,000 boards, borough president, and sq.ft. of ground floor retail and a the developer, and various com- CPC: Willets Point Development Proj- ect (N 130220 ZRQ – text amendment); 200-room hotel on 126th Street, on mitments to affordable housing, (C 130222 ZSQ – special permit); (C the eastern side of Citi Field. Tem- ramp work, and local hiring prac- 130223 ZSQ – special permit); (C 130224 porary surface parking with approx- tices. Queens Community Board ZSQ – special permit); (C 130225 ZSQ – imately 2,833 spaces for Citi Field 7 approved the application with special permit) (July 10, 2013). attendants would surround the conditions as well, requesting wa- development. During the baseball ter testing, traffic mitigation, and off-season, the parking area would a sooner construction time for CITY PLANNING COMMISSION be used for active recreational space the ramps. Queens Community such as basketball courts and a driv- Board 3 disapproved the applica- Rezoning/UDAAP ing range. By 2016, Phase 1A would tion because it disagreed with the Kips Bay, Manhattan continue with development of a 1.4 use of parkland for a mall and de- City Planning Commission million square foot entertainment layed construction of the affordable Hears AdAPT NYC Micro- and retail structure on a Citi Field housing component. Unit Proposal parking lot west of the stadium. The At the City Planning Commis- existing spaces would be relocated sion hearing on July 10, 2013, Robert City’s proposed micro-unit pilot to areas south of the stadium. Phase F. Goldrich, Senior Policy Advisor program criticized for lack of per- 1A would be completed in 2018. to Deputy Mayor Robert K. Steel manently affordable housing . On In the interim between Phase answered questions from the com- July 24, 2013, the City Planning 1A and 1B and beginning in 2021, missioners concerning the reloca- Commission held a hearing on the the City has committed to fund con- tion of existing businesses. Goldrich City’s first micro-unit building, part struction of new Van Wyck Express- testified that the City is working with of the Mayor’s adAPT NYC pro- way ramps where the expressway local Council Member Julissa Ferre- gram. The development will serve crosses Northern Boulevard to be ras, the EDC, and the City’s Depart- as a pilot program to test the vi- completed in 2024. ment of Housing Preservation and ability and marketability of 250- to Phase 1B would begin in 2025 Development to plan for relocation. 360-square-foot units in a single and completed by 2028. The Queens He said that the City has successful- building. The City’s Department of Development Group would expand ly acquired about 95 percent of the Housing Preservation and Develop- the development along 126th Street properties on the 23-acre portion to ment proposed the plan to be built to form a mixed-use neighborhood, be developed during Phase 1, which at 335 East 27th Street in Manhattan roughly bordered by 126th Street, includes approximately 100 busi- by Monadnock Construction and 35th Avenue, 127th Street, and Roo- nesses that will have to relocate. He nARCHITECTS. The ten-story de- sevelt Avenue. The development said the City hopes to reach agree- velopment will contain 55 pre-fab- would include 2,490 units of hous- ments with the remaining five per- ricated one- to two-person residen- ing, 35 percent of which would be cent of properties and not acquire tial units; 22 units will be affordable affordable, 905,000 sq.ft. of retail, the properties through the use of for a period of 30 years and the rest 500,000 sq.ft. of office space, 25,000 eminent domain. David Quart, Se- will be available at market rates. The sq.ft. of community facility space, nior Vice President of Development micro-units will have a studio-style and an additional 290 hotel rooms. at the EDC testified that in order for design with a toolbox zone (kitchen, The neighborhood would also fea- Willets Point to be successful, de- bathroom, and storage space) and a

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 93 Rendering of micro-unit interior. On the left, the canvas space, and on the right, the toolbox space. Image Credit: Office of the Mayor . canvas zone, which will be an open ments from the commercial space space for eating and sleeping. (Read because of Manhattan Community LANDMARKS PRESERVATION CityLand’s past coverage here.) Board 6’s concerns. In response COMMISSION At the City Planning Commis- to the Commissioner’s questions sion’s hearing on July 24, 2013, Jenni- about permanent affordability, Go- Designation fer Gardner, representing Manhattan odrich testified that Monadnock will SoHo, Manhattan Borough President Scott M. Stringer, continue to work with the City to Jacques Ely Kahn-Designed testified as to the borough president’s find subsidies or tax abatements that Manufacturing Building overall approval of the proposal. could help the development achieve City’s Newest Individual However, the borough president more than 30 years of affordabil- Landmark called for permanent or longer-term ity or affordability in perpetuity. He affordability and requested that the also testified that the company was Modern classical structure, com- applicants and HPD develop an ap- developing success measurements, pleted in 1930, was built as part of propriate set of metrics and surveys one of which would be exit surveys an industrial development of the for measuring the success of the pro- of tenants. area following the opening of the gram in terms of marketability, liv- Moses Gates of the Association Holland Tunnel . On August 6, 2013, ability, and quality. for Neighborhood Housing and De- the Landmarks Preservation Com- Kirk Goodrich, Director of De- velopment testified concerning the mission voted to designate the velopment at Monadnock, testified affordability of the units. Though Holland Plaza Building, at 75 Var- that the building’s foundation and he found the proposal interesting, ick Street in Manhattan, as an indi- facade will be constructed on the he testified that the level and length vidual landmark. The 1930 building development site, while the modu- of affordability could be improved was designed by Jacques Ely Kahn, lar units will be built by Capsys at to serve the poorer households of a prolific New York-based architect the Brooklyn Navy Yard. He ex- New York City. He called the pro- who was also responsible for the pects the entire building to be built posed rent levels a slight discount Municipal Asphalt Plant, and the in 13 months from start to finish. off the market rate in one of NYC’s interior of the Film Center Building, Goodrich discussed some minor most expensive rental markets. He both designated as City landmarks. modifications to the building’s lay- suggested that the building’s market The structure occupies an irregular, out — instead of common areas on rate units and the market rate com- triangle-shaped block bounded by every floor as previously proposed, mercial space in such a lucrative Varick, Canal and Watts Streets. the eighth floor will have both an area could cross-subsidize perma- The building stands at 18 sto- outdoor terrace and an indoor sa- nent affordable units. ries tall, and is characterized by its lon space open to all tenants. He The City Planning Commission stark structural grid. testified that the ground floor will closed the hearing and will have 60 Developer Abe Adelson, a fre- have 670 sq.ft. of commercial space, days to vote on the proposal. quent patron of Kahn’s, commis- which Monadnock expects will be CPC: adAPT NYC – 335 East 27th Street sioned the building. The neigh- occupied by a cafe. Monadnock (130235 ZMM – rezoning); (130236 borhood underwent a period of is committed to prohibiting bars HAM – UDAAP and disposition) rapid industrial growth when the or other alcohol-related establish- (July 24, 2013). Holland Tunnel, which opened in

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 94 were LEED gold-certified. The His- toric Districts Council’s Nadezhda Williams called the building one of Kahn’s “great works,” and “an important chapter in 20th century New York City architecture.” At the August 6, 2013 Land- marks meeting, Commissioners were unanimous in voting to designate the building. Vice Chair Pablo Vengoechea called the structure “a great building by a great architect,” while Commissioner Michael Dev- onshire said its “architectonics are just remarkable.” Commissioner Michael Goldblum found that the building managed to merge Euro- pean and American architecture of its era, drawing on both Viennese decorative precedents and Ameri- can engineering. Chair Robert B. Tierney called the building a “mas- terpiece,” thanked Trinity for its cooperation, and said the designation was the product of a “constructive partnership” with the organization.

LPC: Holland Plaza Building, 75 Var- ick Street, Manhattan (LP-2537) (Aug. 6, 2013).

LANDMARKS PRESERVATION The Holland Plaza Building, 75 Varick Street, Manhattan. Image Credit: LPC . COMMISSION

1929, made the area a transporta- Certificate of Appropriateness tion hub. The early Modern build- Greenwich Village, Manhattan ing clearly reads as industrial, with little external ornamentation. The Proposal for New Seven-Sto- building’s style comes from em- ry Building Stirs Controversy phasis on its structural grid with its Application seeks to replace one- interplay of masonry vertical piers story structure with new residential, and horizontal textured spandrels, ground-floor retail building . On July projecting rusticated piers at the 9, 2013, the Landmarks Preserva- pedestrian entrances. tion Commission held a hearing At the June 11, 2013 public on a proposal to demolish a build- hearing, Jason Pizer, President of ing at 130 Seventh Avenue South in Trinity Real Estate, which owns the the Greenwich Village Historic Dis- property, testified in support of des- trict, and build a new seven-story ignation of building. He called the building at the site. According to building the “flagship” of Trinity’s Landmarks’ district designation re- commercial property. Pizer noted port, the existing building was con- that the area had recently been re- structed in 1937 after the southern zoned at Trinity’s impetus, which extension of Seventh Avenue, to the imposed height restrictions in the designs of the firm Scacchetti & Sie- area. He also noted that their of- gel. The subject lot is triangular in Holland Plaza entrance. Image Credit: LPC . fices in the Holland Plaza Building shape, created by the construction

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 95 Santos said that it had been altered repeatedly since its construction. Santos added that the building was anomalous in an area largely characterized by three- and five-story residential structures. The proposed building would rise to five stories at the streetwall, with the overall height in line with historic tenement buildings in the district. A two-story penthouse, set back slightly from the front facade, would be faced by a glass curtain wall. The masonry portion would possess large casement windows, adding an industrial component to the building’s design. The lower five stories would be primarily clad in red brick, a material common to the district. The western edge of the building would be faced in glass; a design element Samton said was intended to recall the impact of Sev- enth Avenue South on the street grid of Greenwich Village. The building would have projecting balconies on the north facade, and Juliet balconies on the south. The building would rise to a total height of 75 feet. Landmarks heard numerous residents and others testify both in support of and in opposition to the plan. The Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation’s Amanda Davis argued that the proposal “attempts to fit too much onto such a small, irregular lot,” and that the project should be scaled down and redesigned in a manner more har- monious to the district. Preserva- tion consultant Gregory Dietrich, retained by the Compact for Urban Renderings of proposed mixed-use building at 130 Seventh Avenue South, Manhattan. Site Preservation, testified that the Image Credit: Gruzen Samton Architects . existing building possessed historic of Seventh Avenue. The building She said the building would serve and architectural interest, as an example of “vernacular Moderne would be residential, with ground- to restore the residential charac- style,” and should be protected. floor retail. ter of Seventh Avenue South, and Dietrich further testified that the Jane Gol, president of Con- the building would meld with the proposal would have “an adverse tinental Ventures Realty, which is neighboring townhouses. visual effect” on the historic district. developing the site in conjunction The plan was presented by Resident Henry Landau called the with the Keystone Group, testified Gruzen Samton’s Peter Samton, proposed building an “out-of-scale, that the plan was as-of-right and and architect Robert Santos. Sam- out-of-style monolith,” while neigh- would be “sensitive to the distinc- ton characterized the existing bor Alan Fried said the design would tive nature and character of the structure as “taxpayer” without an be more appropriate to DUMBO, Greenwich Village neighborhood.” identifiable architectural style, and and that the proposal’s size threat-

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 96 GUEST COMMENTARY Building a New Pennsylvania Station for the 21st Century The decision to demolish Penn employment and spending totals $527.9 million Station nearly 50 years ago haunts each year. But these benefits cannot overshadow the New York City today as we grapple physical constraints it places on a crucial part of the with the need to expand our rail city’s infrastructure. transit capacity in the 21st century. Plans to expand mass transit along the Northeast The current version of Penn Station, Corridor with new trans-Hudson connections and in pinned beneath Madison Square the upgrading of high-speed rail will directly affect Garden, is not merely an unsightly Penn Station. To facilitate that growth we need to ex- and unwelcoming entrance to our City, it is an over- pand the station’s 21 tracks and 11 platforms, which burdened facility that is incapable of being expanded have an average width of 21 feet, to accommodate with Madison Square Garden at its current location. additional traffic from New Jersey, Long Island, West- That is why I am convinced that Madison Square Gar- chester, and the entire Eastern Seaboard. den must move. But the tracks cannot be expanded without re- Ensuring that Penn Station could be modern- moving the support pillars and columns of Madison ized to meet future transit demands was the key issue Square Garden, which extend all the way down to the facing my office when we recently reviewed Madison Square Garden’s request for a permit in perpetuity to track level. The Garden is literally an obstacle to the re- continue operating in its present location. After an in- alization of a 21st century Penn Station. tensive review, I endorsed a 10-year permit and also For all these reasons, it is time to move Madison recommended that we begin steps to relocate Madi- Square Garden and build a station that will further en- son Square Garden to a nearby site to pave the way for courage rail transit use, reduce driving into the city, a badly-needed expansion of Penn Station. Fifty years create thousands of jobs and spur business growth. ago, the station accommodated 200,000 daily passen- This is hardly a new idea: Over the past decade there gers. Today it serves over 650,000—and the total will have been several plans to move Madison Square Gar- swell in future years. den to another Midtown site—plans in which the Gar- There is a growing consensus that we must den was a willing participant. With the expansion of launch a city, state and federal effort to implement Penn Station more important than ever, we must find a Moynihan-Penn Station Master Plan that will spur a new location for the arena. economic development in Midtown and clear the way We will pave the way for transit-oriented devel- for rail transit improvements in the nation’s busiest opment that will revitalize West Midtown, and im- rail hub. prove the lives of hundreds of thousands of tri-state No one disputes the economic contributions commuters and the millions more who visit New York which Madison Square Garden makes to New York City every year. City. Its more than 400 annual events draw 3.6 million guests each year and it employs 5,800 people. — Scott M. Stringer The Garden’s total direct and indirect impact from Scott M . Stringer is Manhattan Borough President . ened the low-rise character of the the project’s height. Resident Ken alterations. Jane Gol said the pro- district. One neighbor said the glass Brandman said the existing build- posal was “modest” in the context of penthouse would look like “a flying ing had hosted a series of failed Seventh Avenue South. She thanked saucer” when illuminated at night. businesses, remained vacant for residents for commenting, and said Other speakers expressed concern long periods of time, and done the owners would seek to address about the development’s impact on nothing beneficial for the commu- their concerns at a later meeting. trees growing on the lot, the loss of nity. Several other residents echoed Since the hearing extended light and air to nearby apartments, these testimonies. past the Landmarks meeting’s and the increase in traffic that Samton responded to the testi- scheduled end time, Chair Robert the development would bring to mony by saying existing trees would B. Tierney closed the hearing with- the area. be protected and incorporated into out commissioner comments. Chair Resident Evan Hollander said the plan, and reiterated that what- Tierney said a meeting to revisit the the proposal, if built, “will bring ever architectural distinction the ex- proposal would be scheduled soon. vibrancy to that corner,” and that isting building may have once had, the avenue location could sustain was already lost through repeated LPC: 130 Seventh Avenue South, Man-

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 97 hattan (13-5467) (July 9, 2013) (Archi- tect: Gruzen Samton Architects).

LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION

Certificate of Appropriateness Upper West Side, Manhattan Proposed Two-Story Addition to UWS Building Criticized by Commissioners Applicants testified that seven-story building was originally conceived as rising to nine stories, and that a two- story addition was approved in the 1890s . The Landmarks Preservation Commission considered an application to construct a two-story plus bulkhead addition atop the Evelyn, an apartment building at 101 West 78th Street in the Upper West Side/ Central Park West Historic District, on July 23, 2013. The 1886 seven- story Renaissance Revival apartment building stands at the corner of Columbus Avenue, across the street from the American Museum of Natural History. The proposal also included the installation of an access lift at the main residential entrance, which would necessitate the Rendering of the proposed two-story addition at 101 West 78th Street, Manhattan. removal of some historic fabric. Image Credit: Montroy Andersen DeMarco . The proposed addition would be clad in zinc, while a brick bulk- staff, Higgins said that the owners ceiling heights of ten feet, six inches head would rise an additional story. also intend to restore the building. The first added story would have a Glass railings would surround the The restoration would refurbish the floor area of 7,500 square feet, while accessible rooftop areas. Portions of facade and restore decorative ele- the second added floor would be the addition would be visible from ments at the roof level, including a 2,800 square feet. multiple viewpoints from public cornice and columns, which have A representative of Manhattan thoroughfares. been lost over time. Higgins con- Community Board 7 recommend- Preservation consultant Bill cluded that the building was always ed denial of the addition, calling it Higgins of Higgins Quasebarth & meant to be taller, and the addition “overbearing and out of scale,” and Partners, speaking for the appli- was in the “context of history.” objected to the planned materi- cants, testified that the building was Margaret Streicker Porres, als. Council Member Gale Brewer originally planned to be eight stories President of Newcastle Realty Ser- echoed the Community Board’s as- with a mansard, but the developers vices, which recently purchased sessment by a letter to the commis- “ran out of money.” A two-story ad- the property, further emphasized sion. A representative of Assembly dition later received permits but was that the addition “mimics the origi- Member Linda Rosenthal testified never realized. In 1893 a one-story nal intention” for the building. She that her office had been “inundated addition received a building permit, said the addition would be used for with concerns,” that the proposed and was apparently commenced, a residential apartment. Architect addition “sharply clashed” with the but there are no photographs, or ex- Richard DeMarco of the firm Mon- existing architecture, and did not isting remains. In a separate appli- troy Andersen Demarco said the ad- conform to the “essential charac- cation to be approved by Landmarks ditional stories would have floor-to- ter” of the neighborhood. An Evelyn

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 98 GUEST COMMENTARY Public Access to Public Open Space New York City routinely permits private property bulky bollards. As a result, when the subways are not owners to acquire public land without paying for it. in service (as happened during super storm Sandy), it Does that shock you? It should! Let me explain how becomes difficult for the increased numbers of pedes- this happened. trians to pass through supposedly public space quick- In 1961 the Board of Estimate approved a new ly and conveniently. Zoning Resolution in which the public obtained access I do not wish to get into an argument over the to and use of privately-owned open space in exchange need to provide building security or the effectiveness for permitting certain owners to build additional floor of means property owners have chosen to provide that area inside their building. For four decades people security. My solution is simple. Property owners have routinely used what became public open space. That appropriated public property for private use. In ex- changed quite dramatically after foreign terrorists change for taking this property, they should pay rent crashed two airplanes into the World Trade Center. to the City of New York. The amount of rent should be In the aftermath of Septem- ber 11th property owners began to wor- ry about protecting their build-

ings from Public plaza at 140 Broadway in 2005. Image Credit: Alexander Garvin . possible terrorist calculated by determining the amount of floor area this attacks. If open space permitted them to build (based on the Floor they were Area Ratio of the zoning district in which the property Public plaza at 140 Broadway, Manhattan in 1997. is located). The payment to the city for that floor area not wor- Image Credit: Alexander Garvin . ried, their should be equal to the average price per square foot insurance companies were and demanded that they that they are charging in rent to building occupants. provide protection. In some cases the request for ad- Once private owners have to pay for using public ditional security came from the NYC Police Depart- property, I believe they will begin to eliminate plant- ment. In no case, however, could anybody specify the ers and bollards that are not needed to provide secu- form of that attack. Nor did they devise actions that rity to building occupants. More important, the public protected against airplanes penetrating their proper- will either regain the benefit of the open space it paid ty. The unspecified attack was expected to come from for by allowing added noise, traffic, and density to city individuals or vehicles. streets and sidewalks or enjoy the cash payments they Owners began to believe that property protection have earned by allowing private use of public space by could be purchased by erecting planters, bollards, and building owners. other obstructions to easy access to their buildings. — Alexander Garvin Those obstructions were erected on property, which they had agreed to open to the public in exchange for Alexander Garvin is an Adjunct Professor of Urban Planning being permitted to build additional revenue-produc- and Management at Yale University and is the President & ing floor area inside their buildings. Thus, without CEO of Alex Garvin & Associates, Inc . government permission or scrutiny, property owners have reduced and continue to reduce the amount of public space they are required to provide. Worse yet, property owners are making it increas- ingly difficult to gain access to public space by taking possession of substantial amounts of public sidewalk (which they do not own) on which they have erected further obstructions in the form of heavy planters and

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 99 tenant said the building would be “desecrated” by the addition, and likened the design to “a rooftop bus terminal.” Numerous other area residents decried the addition’s bulk and visibility, and other neighbors said the addition would nega- tively affect the reach of light and air to their dwellings. Landmark West! submitted testimony that asked Landmarks to consider the addition’s visibility in context with its neighbors, the Theodore Roosevelt Park and the American Museum of Natural History, “We urge the Com- mission to reject the rooftop addition, as this building has a roofplate large enough to build without being visible.” Higgins responded to testimo- Current vacant lot at 74 Grand Street, Manhattan. Image Credit: Google . ny objecting to the design by saying ing’s glass curtain wall, attached that sheet metal was common ma- LANDMARKS PRESERVATION terial for the facades of additions in by a steel armature. The historic the late 19th century. COMMISSION facade’s window opening would Commissioner Michael Gold- not align with the floors of the new blum said the Evelyn was a “very im- Certificate of Appropriateness structure. Representatives of Man- portant building to the district,” and SoHo, Manhattan hattan Community Board 2 and preservationist organizations spoke that the proposal was a long way New SoHo Building with in strong opposition to the propos- from being approvable. Goldblum Salvaged Facade Approved criticized the presentation for fail- al. Commissioners also determined ing to show all sightlines from which New seven-story building in vacant that the historic facade needed to the addition would be visible, and SoHo lot approved after changes be better integrated into the new found the second story of the addi- in architect and height . On August building, and asked the appli- tion and the prominent bulkhead 6, 2013, Landmarks approved the cants to return at a later date with a problematic. Commissioner Rober- issuance of a certificate of appro- revised proposal. ta Washington found the visibility priateness for the construction of At Landmarks’ June 11 meet- of the proposal needed to be greatly a new residential building at 74 ing, a new proposal was presented reduced, and that the plan would Grand Street in the SoHo-Cast Iron by a new design team from C3D probably need to discard the second Historic District. The site was previ- Architecture. Principal Paul Freitas story of the addition and the bulk- ously the location of a six-story 1886 presented the plan, in which the his- head. Commissioner Fred Bland neo-Grec store-and-loft building. toric facade would be fully attached also determined that any addition The building was demolished with to the new structure, and windows needed to be less visible and fur- Landmarks’ approval in 2009 after and doors would be installed in the ther set back from the front facade. it was destabilized by nearby con- openings of the cast iron facade. The Bland suggested that a mansard struction work. The owners agreed top two stories of the new eight-sto- roof might be a more appropriate to dismantle, catalogue, and store ry building would be set back twelve form for an addition to the Evelyn. the building’s original cast-iron fa- feet from the front facade; addition- Chair Robert B. Tierney con- cade for its eventual reinstallation in al stories would be faced in zinc with curred with the commissioners’ a new structure at the site. glass fiber reinforced sidewalls. The statements, and asked the applicants At a March 2013 public hear- sidewalls of the lower floors would to substantially rethink the plan being, applicants proposed a plan by be clad in red brick, and metal bal- fore returning to Landmarks with a Bone/Levine Architects for a new conies would be installed on the revised proposal at a later date. eight-story-plus-penthouse build- rear facade. LPC: 101 West 78th Street, Manhat- ing. The restored cast-iron facade Commissioners found the new tan (14-4161) (July 23, 2013) (Architect: would be installed approximately plan generally appropriate, though Montroy Andersen DeMarco). eight feet in front of the new build- some lamented the loss of architec-

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 100 tural ambition from the initial pro- Landmarks Preservation Commis- gorical paintings, by Swiss-Austrian posal. Commissioner Margery Perl- sion held a hearing on the potential painter Angelica Kauffman, adorn mutter found the building slightly designation of the reception room the domed ceiling. The room is vis- too tall, though otherwise approv- and adjoining rooms and hallways ible from the street through large able, but expressed regret that the of the Steinway & Sons retail space display windows. A foyer on the 57th designers felt they “had to retreat at 109 West 57th Street in Manhat- Street entrance possesses white to something conventional.” Com- tan. The neo-Renaissance interior marble arches on Ionic columns on missioners Roberta Washington was completed in 1928 to designs by its four walls. Though some rooms and Michael Devonshire said the the firm of Warren & Wetmore. War- are separated by glass or glazed building should be reduced by one ren & Wetmore was the architec- infill, the interior reads as one story. Commissioner Michael Gold- ture firm behind several other City continuous space. blum agreed that the project was landmarks, including the interior of Michael Stern, Managing Part- “appropriate, if uninspiring.” Com- Grand Central Terminal. ner of JDS Development Group, tes- missioner Fred Bland said he would The primary interior space is tified that the ownership enthusias- not oppose the plan, but found it an an octagonal double-height rotun- tically supported designation. JDS “opportunity lost” to “interpret an da, in which customers were met by purchased the property in 2013, and extraordinary story.” Commissioner Diana Chapin found the proposal sales representatives before enter- intends to build a tower at the site. “attractive” and supported approval. ing the showrooms. The room fea- Stern said that JDS “look forward Commissioner Libby Ryan, tures a crystal chandelier and alle- to integrating the rotunda into a who chaired the meeting, asked the applicants to work to reduce the project’s height and return once more to Landmarks. At the Commission’s August 6 meeting, the revisions were presented by Landmarks staff. The building’s design remained the same, but with one of the set back stories removed. A bulkhead would be partially visible from street viewpoints. Chair Rob- ert B. Tierney said the project had “come a long way” and that the applicants had successfully addressed the issue of height. Landmarks voted unanimously to award the plan a certificate of appropriateness.

LPC: 74 Grand Street, Manhattan (14-0893) (Aug. 6, 2013) (Architect: C3D Architecture).

LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION

Designation Hearing Midtown, Manhattan Opulent Piano Retail Space Considered as a Potential Interior Landmark Owner’s representative expressed support for designation; testified that landmark would be preserved in context of planned larger de- The rotunda inside Steinway & Sons retail space at 109 West 57th Street in Manhattan. velopment . On July 23, 2013, the Image Credit: LPC .

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 101 larger development.” The Historic Districts Coun- cil’s Nadezhda Williams, speaking in support of designation, said that “seeing an elegant Steinway piano in such sumptuous surroundings is rather like seeing an animal in their natural habitat.” Christabel Gough, of the Society for the Architecture of the City, said the “iconic New York institution” served to “express the grandeur and importance of the concert piano” in the City’s culture. Chair Robert B. Tierney closed the hearing after thanking JDS for their “cooperation and participa- tion.” A date for a vote on designation has not yet been scheduled.

LPC: Steinway & Sons Reception Room and Hallway, First Floor Interior, 109 West 57th Street, Manhattan (LP-2551) (July 23, 2013).

LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION

Designation Modification Upper West Side, Manhattan Church of St. Paul the Apostle, 8 Columbus Avenue, Manhattan. Image Credit: LPC . Recent Church Designation Historic Districts Council’s Nadezh- the designation. Modified to Exclude da Williams noted that the church LPC: Church of St. Paul the Apostle, had already sold its air rights, and Convent Building 8 Columbus Avenue, Manhattan that “landmarking the convent No opposition to Pastor’s request to (LP-2260) (July 23, 2013). would not contribute towards the alter the footprint of the newly land- preservation of the church.” marked Catholic Church . On July Chair Robert B. Tierney read 23, 2013, the Landmarks Preserva- into the record a letter from Father tion Commission voted to modify Gilbert Martinez, Pastor of St. Paul the recently landmarked Church of the Apostle, which requested that St. Paul the Apostle site to exclude Landmarks limit the designation a convent, at 120 West 60th Street, from the designation at the request to the footprint of the church, and of the church leadership. The five- said he looked forward to work- story convent building was built in ing together with Landmarks in 1949, and according to the designa- the future. tion report, “does not contribute to Chair Tierney said the preser- the architectural or historical char- vation of the convent was not the in- acter of the church.” (Read City- tention of the designation, but was Land’s past coverage here.) included because it shared the tax The site modification required lot the church was on. He charac- a hearing, which did not garner any terized the amendment as “a minor opposition to modification. Man- adjustment,” and said Landmarks hattan Community Board 7 repre- would “continue in partnership sentative Mark Diller testified that with the archdiocese.” modifying the designation “does no Commissioners voted unani- violence” to the landmark, while the mously to approve the revision of

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 102 CENTER FOR NEW YORK CITY LAW

2013 UPCOMING EVENTS NEW! Procurement CLE Wednesday, November 6, 2013 (details coming soon)

CITY LAW BREAKFAST SERIES 2013 Friday, September 27, 2013 Friday, October 18, 2013 Thursday, November 21, 2013

FOLLOW CITYLAND FOR FREE! Previously a subscription-only, printed journal, CityLand — the Center for NYC Law’s award-winning land use publication — is now a totally free resource available to the general public! This new web-based format enables us to pass along breaking New York City land use news in a much timelier manner. Sign up to receive e-mail notifications when new articles are posted! All you have to do is go to the new CityLand homepage — www.CityLandNYC.org — and enter your email address into the sidebar box. This is a simple procedure which asks only for your email address. Social media users, take note: CityLand is now on Twitter and Facebook! If you’re a Twitter or Facebook user, it’s now simpler than ever to stay informed of breaking NYC land use developments. Follow us today: https://twitter.com/CityLandNYC & https://www.facebook.com/citylandnyc

THANKS TO OUR SUPPORTERS CityLand would like to thank all of our generous sponsors that help support this free publication.

TO MAKE A DONATION TO SUPPORT CITYLAND: 1: Please make out your check to: “New York Law School.” 2: Please remember to write “The Center for New York City Law” on the Memo line. 3: Checks can be mailed to: The Center for NYC Law C/O New York Law School 185 West Broadway NY, NY 10013

The Center for New York City Law • New York Law School 185 West Broadway New York NY 10013-2921

CITYLAND Volume 10 • August 2013 www.CityLandNYC.org 103

Table of Contents