Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Large Scale Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ARB urges redesign and stronger preservation case for 76 North Broadway mixed-use proposal in Irvington
Summary
The Architectural Review Board and members of the public criticized the scale, massing and the proposed demolition of a historic building at 76 North Broadway, asked for complete elevations and garage/retaining-wall details, and recommended the applicant restudy the building footprint and attempt to retain the existing historic structure.
Christopher Mahatsak of PRF Gate Associates and Paul DeVito of Stonefield Engineering presented a substantial mixed-use project for 76 North Broadway that would add residential units, an on-site school portion, underground parking and extensive retaining walls and landscaping.
Throughout a lengthy review, board members and local preservationists pressed the design team for a far more complete drawing set, stacked elevations and renderings that show the garage entrance and retaining walls in context, and clearer roof details. Chair and other members repeatedly told the applicant the ARB cannot advise the planning board without consistent plan/elevation alignment and asked for explicit documentation of retaining-wall fencing, parapet heights and HVAC equipment so the board can assess visual impacts.
Multiple board members and preservationists objected to the proposal’s footprint, scale and massing and urged the applicant to revisit earlier schemes that retained the existing building on the site. Architect and preservationist Peter Baderi said the proposal to demolish the Woodcliff Mansion appears contrary to the MFO district’s direction to retain historic buildings where practicable: "It really and also just appears to be contrary to the MFO zoning…that historic, buildings of historic importance…shall be maintained or adaptively reused to the greatest extent practicable," he told the board.
The applicant responded that the design team explored earlier alternatives to preserve the existing house but concluded those options did not meet current accessibility, circulation, grading, parking and program requirements; Christopher Mahatsak said the team can provide analysis documenting that process.
Board members argued that the project should be restudied to reduce apparent massing, break up the building scale and better integrate materials with Irvington’s character. One board member said the current scheme looks like "a big building" and urged the team to "make the building look smaller" rather than relying on trees to screen it. Several members also expressed concern about an occupied rooftop terrace and its acoustical and visual impact in a residential neighborhood.
Public commenters reiterated objections about scale, roof type and loss of historic character; the ARB agreed the submission is incomplete for advisory purposes and recommended the applicant return with revised materials — including stacked elevations, detailed sections of the garage and retaining walls, parapet and HVAC details, documentation of alternatives that considered retaining the existing building, and additional visibility studies and renderings — before the ARB forwards advice to the planning board.
No formal ARB approval of the design was issued; the board closed its review and asked the applicant to return with a revised submission addressing the points raised.
