Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rear Facade Cladding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Landmarks legalizes stucco cladding and parapet extension at 128–130 East 70th Street despite preservation objections
Summary
The commission approved after‑the‑fact installation of a three‑coat stucco cladding and a raised parapet at the rear of 128–130 East 70th Street, finding the work reversible and noting the rear facade’s prior alterations; preservation groups and the community board had urged brick restoration or more textured treatment.
The Landmarks Preservation Commission voted to legalize three‑coat stucco cladding applied to the rear façade of 128–130 East 70th Street and to approve a modest parapet extension, despite objections from preservation groups and Manhattan Community Board 8, which had recommended denial.
Trimble Architecture project manager Ryan Bemberg told the commission that unforeseen masonry deterioration — including interior‑grade brick exposed after removal of an old chimney and extensive cracked mortar and mixed brick types — led the project team during construction to install a ventilated, three‑coat stucco system over a drainage plane rather than attempt full brick restoration. The stucco was applied in a thin (about 1-inch) metal-lath assembly and left the corbeled cornice exposed above the stucco line; the finishes were chosen to match other painted or stuccoed rear facades on the block.
Friends of the Upper East Side and the Historic Districts Council opposed the cladding as inappropriate, arguing brick repair and reinstatement of lintels would have been preferable and that the applied stucco risks future moisture problems. Both organizations urged either restoring exposed brick where possible or using a textured treatment to better match neighboring rear facades. Community Board 8 also recommended denial.
Commissioners weighed the technical justification from the applicant that some existing bricks were interior grade and in poor condition, and noted the applicant used a reversible installation and preserved the historic corbelled cornice. The commission concluded the light-colored stucco and parapet change could be permitted on this rear, minimally visible elevation because the work preserved underlying fabric and was reversible; the motion passed 6–0. Commissioners recorded concerns and encouraged care in detailing to avoid long-term water infiltration risks.
