Neighbors press architects over sub‑cellar excavation at 3 East 10th Street; committee asks for monitoring and neighbor outreach

Joseph Vance of Joseph Vance Architects presented a plan to excavate a new sub‑cellar beneath 3 East 10th Street, an altered Greek Revival row house. The scope presented to the Landmarks committee focused on a roughly 12‑foot excavation below the existing cellar to create a sub‑cellar under the rear yard; previously approved rooftop bulkheads and some rear‑opening work were not part of this specific application, the presenter said.

Why it matters: the work requires extensive underpinning, ledging and supportive excavation because adjacent properties have existing foundations and the building abuts a larger neighboring structure. Vance named the structural and geotechnical firms engaged (Sillman for structural, Langan for supportive excavation) and said the general contractor and underpinning contractors were being vetted. He described planned underpinning under the rear garden wall and a liner wall and noted the underpinning stops at five feet from the property line, per the commission’s rules.

Public comment and concerns: a nearby resident representing 12 East 11th Street testified at length about three concerns: unpredictable settlement and structural damage to surrounding buildings; groundwater disruption causing seepage or mold; and skepticism about monitoring systems and potential conflicts of interest if contractors monitor their own work. She cited a recent high‑profile Fifth Avenue excavation that caused serious damage despite monitoring. Committee members and the project team discussed the standard protections: independent monitoring, Department of Buildings oversight, license agreements if work is to extend under adjoining property, and use of an independent testing agency for automated vibration and settlement monitors.

Committee direction and next steps: Joseph Vance said license agreements with adjacent owners are being prepared and that the project will employ independent monitoring firms; he named Langan and Sillman and indicated peer review and DOB scrutiny will occur. Committee members asked the applicant to provide the list of monitoring locations, to confirm that monitors will include properties on Eleventh Street (the commenter’s building), and to add neighbor outreach and a communication protocol to the record. The committee also requested the applicant provide comparable precedent projects and documentation of underpinning/ledge and monitoring procedures.

Ending: The committee did not take a formal vote during the presentation. Members said the concerns raised by adjacent neighbors are legitimate and that the resolution or recommendation should include requirements for independent monitoring, a documented neighbor outreach plan, and submission of comparable precedent underpinning projects for the committee’s review.