Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Art topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Landmarks committee advises against oversized Basquiat portrait mural proposed for 344 Bowery
Summary
Manhattan Community Board 2Landmarks Committee reviewed an application for a large painted portrait of Jean-Michel Basquiat at 344 Bowery and recommended denial after members and public commenters raised aesthetic, contextual and legal concerns.
The Manhattan Community Board 2 Landmarks Committee on the application at 344 Bowery recommended denial of a proposed large painted portrait mural of artist Jean-Michel Basquiat by New Zealand muralist Owen Dippie.
The recommendation follows a presentation by the applicant—s representatives, who described the proposal as an "homage to Basquiat" to be painted on the building—s north facade. The presenters said the piece would take about two to three weeks to complete, would be painted with aerosol/acrylic over an existing oil-based finish and would cover roughly half of the north wall, though committee members questioned that calculation.
Committee members and dozens of public commenters raised objections on several grounds. Committee members said the portrait-style imagery feels more like branding or a photographic appropriation than an interpretation of Basquiat—s work and that the piece risks erasing the neighborhood—s cultural context. The committee vice chair said the work "feels more like a Calvin Klein ad" than an homage and asked how the image connects to Basquiat—s artistic legacy beyond proximity to his former workshop.
Other committee questions centered on technical and legal matters. One member, who said in her own experience acrylic typically does not adhere to oil-based paints, asked for technical assurances; another pressed the applicant about the mural—s actual percentage coverage of the facade, noting the presentation alternately described the work as about 50 percent of the wall and as significantly larger. Public commenters including Pete Davies of the Broadway Residents Coalition urged the committee to deny the proposal because of the mural—s scale and because, they said, it would set a precedent inviting more banners or large murals on side streets.
The presenters said the mural was inspired by a Polaroid of Basquiat taken at the nearby former studio and that the artist Owen Dippie would finance the work; the owner—s representative said the building owner had authorized the application. The presenters said they had not sought formal image rights for the Polaroid and treated the proposal as a painted interpretation inspired by the photograph.
Committee members also asked about long-term maintenance and the risk that the site could be redeveloped in the future (for example, if a new building were built on the adjacent parking lot) and whether an image of Basquiat—s face is the most appropriate way to honor his legacy. Public testimony urged maintenance plans and clarity about who would be responsible should the work be tagged or vandalized.
After discussion, the committee—s recommendation was to deny the application, citing concerns about scale, the appropriateness of a large portrait-style image in the historic district, unresolved rights and maintenance questions, and uncertainty about how the work relates to Basquiat—s artistic legacy.
The application will proceed to the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) for formal review; the committee—s recommendation will be part of the record.
Background: the site at 344 Bowery sits adjacent to the former workshop associated with Jean-Michel Basquiat. The Landmarks Preservation Commission regulates painted wall signs and mural treatments in designated historic districts; the committee said any approval would amount to a waiver from the usual sign regulations for painted wall signage.
