Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adaptive Reuse Residential Conversion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Landmarks approves entry restoration, rooftop addition and rear-yard rebuild at 232 West End Avenue
Summary
The Landmarks Preservation Commission approved plans to replace the front vestibule, add a rooftop penthouse largely set back from the facade, remove a nonconforming two-story rear addition and rebuild the rear elevation to meet zoning for a return to residential use.
The Landmarks Preservation Commission approved a proposal to modify the main entry, construct a set-back rooftop addition, demolish a two-story rear addition and reconstruct the rear façade at 232 West End Avenue in the West End Collegiate Historic District.
The work supports the building’s return from institutional use to residential occupancy. Jackie Puduvallen of JPD Preservation Consulting and architect Nelson Cordero described a front entry infill designed to approximate a historic 1940s tax photograph — a wood-paneled assembly with a central pilaster, transoms and paneled bulkheads — and a simplified black-painted iron railing to replace nonhistoric gold and black finishes. The applicant also proposed an approximately 11-foot-high rooftop addition set back 15 feet from the front facade and set back two feet from the rear, intended to be minimally visible from oblique angles through narrow alleyways flanking the building.
At the rear, the owner will demolish a full-height two-story addition that currently extends to the lot line in order to meet zoning requirements for rear-yard depth for residential reuse. The reconstructed rear façade will feature punched openings in common red brick, a metal deck and an upper balcony sized to comply with zoning limits (balcony width limited to 50 percent of the masonry opening). The applicant said removal of the rear addition will create a stone-paved rear yard.
Commissioners praised restorative aspects of the entrance work and noted the rooftop addition’s limited visibility. Preservation groups provided mixed comments: Landmark West recommended using brick rather than stucco on the rooftop addition; the Historic Districts Council requested refinement of the rear façade composition and alignment between doors and deck; the Victorian Society generally supported the package, noting the rear façade was already altered. The commission approved the application and asked the applicant to work with staff on the possibility of removing a post-applied coating on the front façade.
