On Cushman Row, a Win for Preservationists and Historic Districts

The LPC listened to testimony, then delivered a decision that pleased preservationists. | Photo by Sally Greenspan

BY SALLY GREENSPAN (Member of the Board, Save Chelsea)| On Tuesday, May 14, the New York Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) held a hearing on the proposal submitted by real estate investor David Lesser for 418 West 20th Street, a Cushman Row house in the heart of the Chelsea Historic District. Number 418 anchors the west end of a magnificent group of seven matching houses built in 1840.

Concerned individuals, members of preservationist groups from throughout the city, and representatives of elected officials attended the meeting to speak in opposition to the plans, as submitted. As Chelsea Community News previously reported, the proposal called for the demolition of everything but the house’s street facade, sidewalls, and front roof slope.

The rear roof and wall of the building, with its wood-framed tea porch, would have been demolished. A new, lower cellar would have been constructed to extend beyond the existing cellar, over 29 feet from the main rear wall of the house—and new basement, first, second, and third floors would have extended out at various distances into the rear yard, breaking with the ensemble look of Cushman Row from the back.

Had these plans been approved, it would have continued the slippery slope toward facadism which has been spreading throughout the city, threatening our historic districts and the preservationist community’s commitment to preserve the integrity of our architectural history. But the LPC, led by Chair Sarah Carroll, patiently listened to testimony by elected officials, preservationist groups, and individuals—and came down on the side of genuine protection, by rejecting the most destructive part of the proposal.

These red brick historic houses of Cushman Row (W. 20th St. btw. 9th & 10th Aves.) have survived intact since 1840. | Photo by Scott Stiffler

According to Hilda Reiger (of Victorian Society New York), “LPC approved the front area which are mostly repairs, the owner’s proposal for the downstep from the street, but required repairs/restoration of other parts of the building. Most importantly, they denied the rear expansion. The tenor of the commissioners’ remarks following the hearing was that all were opposed to the rear façade destruction. Now, they are even requiring that the owner redo the extension granted in 2006 to conform to what was permitted. Apparently, this was not done. This is the first time I’ve ever seen a ‘split’ decision about a proposal—but a solid vote by the Commission. It’s a new day!”

Among those appearing before the LPC in opposition to the 418 plans:

Elected Officials

–Carl Wilson, from New York City Council Speaker Corey Johnson’s District Office, accompanied by Asher Baumrin, from NY State Senator Brad Hoylman’s office, read a joint statement from Speaker Johnson, Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer, Congressmember Jerrold Nadler, Senator Hoylman, and Assemblymember Dick Gottfried.

Preservationist Groups

Save Chelsea

Historic Districts Council

Village Preservation (aka Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation)

Victorian Society New York

Laurence Frommer, President, Save Chelsea, testified on behalf of the group. | Sally Greenspan

Civic Groups

Community Board 4

–CCBA, aka the Council of Chelsea Block Associations (letter in support of CB4 and Save Chelsea position)

Louisa Winchell, a research and preservation intern at Village Preservation, represented the group’s perspective. | Photo by Sally Greenspan

Individuals:

–Sean Morrison

–Wendy Solem

–Andrew S. Dolkart

–David Hemingway, on behalf of Carol Ott

Save Chelsea board member and CB4 member David Holowka, at the May 14 LPC hearing. | Photo by Sally Greenspan

NOTE: Contributions to our Community Voices section do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Chelsea Community News.

Chelsea Community News is made possible with the help of our awesome advertisers, and the support of our readers. If you like what you see, please consider taking part in our GoFundMe campaign (click here). To make a direct donation, give feedback about the site, or send a Letter to The Editor, email us at Scott@chelseacommunitynews.com.

128 Responses to "On Cushman Row, a Win for Preservationists and Historic Districts"

  1. Pingback: delhi cg

  2. Pingback: lkcnw

  3. Pingback: velevt

  4. Pingback: udai

  5. Pingback: ud

  6. Pingback: mem

  7. Pingback: forms

  8. Pingback: psnttion

  9. Pingback: desdb

  10. Pingback: dcdep

  11. Pingback: mapss

  12. Pingback: collab

  13. Pingback: jaipur

  14. Pingback: miley

  15. Pingback: ottawa

  16. Pingback: wixxxx

  17. Pingback: nairobi

  18. Pingback: tumblr blog

  19. Pingback: health world

  20. Pingback: health blog

  21. Pingback: bangalore escorts

  22. Pingback: blog escorts

  23. Pingback: dehradun call girl

  24. Pingback: mumbai call girl

  25. Pingback: delhi call girl

  26. Pingback: bangalore call girl

  27. Pingback: manali call girl

  28. Pingback: escorts

  29. Pingback: mumbai

  30. Pingback: udaipr

  31. Pingback: jpdhr

  32. Pingback: almbo

  33. Pingback: udp

  34. Pingback: jpr

  35. Pingback: blogs

  36. Pingback: dcg

  37. Pingback: mcg

  38. Pingback: mum

  39. Pingback: mbi

  40. Pingback: wbflw

  41. Pingback: siteme

  42. Pingback: cgmum

  43. Pingback: mumcg

  44. Pingback: dxb

  45. Pingback: dxbe

  46. Pingback: gxcbe

  47. Pingback: blrcg

  48. Pingback: cghrde

  49. Pingback: gdye

  50. Pingback: rkshes

  51. Pingback: gdjend

  52. Pingback: ghti

  53. Pingback: cgdun

  54. Pingback: duncg

  55. Pingback: doon

  56. Pingback: rsde

  57. Pingback: lkcn

  58. Pingback: indr

  59. Pingback: cgdel

  60. Pingback: nesd

  61. Pingback: blr escorts

  62. Pingback: del escorts

  63. Pingback: rishkesh

  64. Pingback: rjprrd

  65. Pingback: kol

  66. Pingback: dehradun call girls

  67. Pingback: dehradun escorts

  68. Pingback: cg mussrie

  69. Pingback: rkishe

  70. Pingback: cgrwle

  71. Pingback: dwdrg

  72. Pingback: hadrwe

  73. Pingback: hrdwr

  74. Pingback: rkshish

  75. Pingback: cgls

  76. Pingback: cgles

  77. Pingback: chd

  78. Pingback: cgd

  79. Pingback: cgs

  80. Pingback: cg

  81. Pingback: call girls in dehradun

  82. Pingback: russian

  83. Pingback: jaipur girl

  84. Pingback: noida escorts

  85. Pingback: crtlnk

  86. Pingback: onpge

  87. Pingback: wrdprs

  88. Pingback: webflw

  89. Pingback: wbnva

  90. Pingback: almbro

  91. Pingback: crter

  92. Pingback: lcknw

  93. Pingback: indre

  94. Pingback: cgl

  95. Pingback: del

  96. Pingback: escrrr

  97. Pingback: esc

  98. Pingback: casino online

  99. Pingback: hazratganj call girl

  100. Pingback: gomti nagar call girl

  101. Pingback: height increasing elevator shoes

  102. Pingback: ghaziabad escorts

  103. Pingback: ghaziabad escorts

  104. Pingback: indore escorts nidhi nagar

  105. Pingback: visit site

  106. Pingback: buy Malabar coast mushrooms online

  107. Pingback: เด็กเอ็น

  108. Pingback: แทงบอลออนไลน์

  109. Pingback: find out this here

  110. Pingback: Spy cam Porn

  111. Pingback: sbobet

  112. Pingback: dumps shop legit 2022

  113. Pingback: สล็อตวอเลท ไม่มีขั้นต่ำ

  114. Pingback: legit vendor track1,2

  115. Pingback: Sobha Apartments

  116. Pingback: jetsadabet

  117. Pingback: sex chat kostenlos via whatsapp

  118. Pingback: Chat Croute Sang Sexe

  119. Pingback: rent scooters in st pete beach

  120. Pingback: sbo

  121. Pingback: ccv shop

  122. Pingback: wow slot

  123. Pingback: How do dogs react to CBD dog treats? - Quora

  124. Pingback: บาคาร่า1688

  125. Pingback: kardinal stick

  126. Pingback: Alrasheed University College |rasheed|alrasheed college

  127. Pingback: ccv dumps

  128. Pingback: canik tp9 sc

You must be logged in to post a comment Login