Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves repainting of 81 Spring Street storefront but recommends denying a new flag on Crosby Street
Summary
The committee reviewed a proposal from the owner/architect for 81 Spring Street (a MoMA tenant site) to repaint storefront metal elements and install a second matching flag on Crosby Street. Members recommended approval of the repaint but widespread comments opposed adding a new flagpole on Crosby Street.
Manhattan Community Board 2—s Landmarks Committee reviewed an application for 81 Spring Street that proposed repainting the ground-level metal infill of a cast-iron building and installing a second, matching MoMA flag on the Crosby Street facade.
Nathan Rich, architect for the project, said the work is limited to repainting the metal storefront base a darker historic black and adding a fabric flag to match the existing MoMA flag on Spring Street; all attachments would be anchored to existing wood window frames and would not penetrate historic brick.
Committee members and multiple public commenters voiced strong reservations about adding another flag on Crosby Street. Several residents noted Crosby Street—s quieter, tree-lined west side and said the proposed flag would be the only visible banner on that stretch, making it a visible precedent for future retail banners. Pete Davies, representing the Broadway Residents Coalition and speaking as a nearby resident of more than 45 years, urged the committee to recommend denial of the new flag, calling it a potential slippery slope that would invite more retail banners on smaller side streets.
The committee—s deliberation separated the two elements of the application. Members said the repainting of the cast-iron and metal elements on the store base is consistent with established precedents in the district and generally acceptable; that portion of the proposal drew no substantive opposition. On the flag, committee members noted a high volume of written testimony opposing a Crosby Street banner and concluded that the proposed second flag was out of character with the west side of Crosby near the site.
The committee—s recommendation: approve repainting of the ground-level metal infill in the proposed historic black; recommend denial of the new flagpole/banner on Crosby Street. The committee asked that any future tenant signage for the building follow the normal LPC staff-review process.
