LPC approves as-built penthouse changes at 1143 Fifth Avenue after criticism of late notice to staff

The Landmarks Preservation Commission approved an application to amend certificate of appropriateness for 1143 Fifth Avenue (expanded Carnegie Hill Historic District) by accepting several as-built changes to a previously approved penthouse—while sharply criticizing the applicant and contractor for not notifying staff before making those changes.

The applicant, represented by Sarah Murray of Dominic Pilla Associates, presented a list of as-built differences from the earlier approval, including: black-finished window frames installed at the seventh- and eighth-floor penthouse instead of an off-white finish on the approved drawings; glass safety guards in front of some eighth-floor openings instead of the approved metal pickets; a frameless glass guardrail at the main roof that sits approximately 7 inches closer to the facade and about 7 inches taller than originally approved; and upper-story window sills raised roughly 12 inches above the originally approved elevations.

Process concerns: multiple commissioners and staff said they were not notified before the work was installed and called the oversight unacceptable for a project in a landmark district. The contractor said the project produced multiple drawing iterations and that field decisions were made during a difficult, complex construction sequence; he acknowledged that staff should have been consulted earlier. Commissioners urged the applicant to contact staff during construction on future changes and asked for detailed installation drawings for the glass guardrail and related elements.

Substantive evaluation: staff recommended approval after concluding the altered elements would not call undue attention to the penthouse because the rooftop addition remains minimally visible from public ways and is seen mostly against the background of taller nearby bulkheads. Commissioners said the dark window frames and glass railings were acceptable if appropriate details and materials are provided to staff for review. Several commissioners nevertheless recommended that the base materials for rooftop details be clarified and that the applicant submit full installation details showing the guardrail shoe and coping details.

Outcome: the commission approved the as-built amendments with instructions that the applicant provide detailed shop drawings to staff for review. The motion passed with eight votes in favor and none opposed.