Manhattan Community Board 2's Landmarks meeting on Sept. 1, 2025 reviewed an application for 19 West 12th Street to remove a deteriorated lower cornice and replace the surviving upper cornice with a fiberglass (GFRC) assembly.

The applicant, Ron Eng, architect of record, said the property dates to 1845 and that the two existing wood cornices are "fairly deteriorated." He and David Crandall, project manager at Form Active, proposed removing the lower cornice and installing a GFRC replacement for the upper cornice. Andrew Barber identified himself as the expediter on the project.

The committee framed the issue as a preservation and visual-context question. "We were encouraged to propose that we remove the lower cornice altogether," Eng said, describing prior staff-level reviews and historical photographs that showed the lower element was not original. He added that the proposed cornice would be assembled from three GFRC products and painted.

Board members supported demolition of the lower cornice as part of the application but emphasized several conditions before final approval. Brian, a board member, said he supported removal but warned that "there are gonna be problems" with the brick where the cornice is removed and urged the applicant to present a plan for masonry repair and tuckpointing. Another board member said the applicant should be prepared that the condition beneath the cornice "isn't gonna be great" and requested a plan B if the revealed brick needs substantial repair.

Members also expressed a preference for design changes to make the new cornice read as more substantial and to relate better to neighboring houses. One board member said a darker finish would "make it just a lot more coherent" with adjoining facades and asked the applicant to consider a finish and texture that would not read as shiny or "glistening" (a concern raised about some fiberglass installations). Several members preferred a cornice with returns at the ends rather than simple caps, saying a return would give a more substantial appearance along the exposed corner.

The applicant noted windows are an unrelated issue: the owner has tenants and a window-replacement program requiring interior access is not in the near term, so the application before the committee is limited to the front facade cornices.

No formal roll-call vote was recorded in the transcript. The committee's remarks constituted a clear set of recommendations: allow removal of the lower cornice, permit a GFRC replacement for the upper cornice only after presentation of a masonry repair/tuckpointing plan and detail-level assurances about finish and texture, and favor returns and a darker color to reduce visual prominence. The committee also asked staff and the applicant to consider how the new treatment will visually relate to adjacent buildings and to document the condition discovered when the lower cornice is removed.

A final administrative determination and any staff-level approvals were not recorded in the meeting transcript.

Ending: The applicant will return to staff/committee review with details addressing masonry repair, paint/texture samples for the GFRC, and details showing whether the proposed cornice will have returns or end caps. The transcript does not show a recorded motion or formal vote.