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.

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

  1. Pingback: ritika

  2. Pingback: callgirls

  3. Pingback: duncgs

  4. Pingback: delhi cg

  5. Pingback: lkcnw

  6. Pingback: velevt

  7. Pingback: udai

  8. Pingback: ud

  9. Pingback: mem

  10. Pingback: forms

  11. Pingback: psnttion

  12. Pingback: desdb

  13. Pingback: dcdep

  14. Pingback: mapss

  15. Pingback: collab

  16. Pingback: jaipur

  17. Pingback: miley

  18. Pingback: ottawa

  19. Pingback: wixxxx

  20. Pingback: nairobi

  21. Pingback: tumblr blog

  22. Pingback: health world

  23. Pingback: health blog

  24. Pingback: bangalore escorts

  25. Pingback: blog escorts

  26. Pingback: dehradun call girl

  27. Pingback: mumbai call girl

  28. Pingback: delhi call girl

  29. Pingback: bangalore call girl

  30. Pingback: manali call girl

  31. Pingback: escorts

  32. Pingback: mumbai

  33. Pingback: udaipr

  34. Pingback: jpdhr

  35. Pingback: almbo

  36. Pingback: udp

  37. Pingback: jpr

  38. Pingback: blogs

  39. Pingback: dcg

  40. Pingback: mcg

  41. Pingback: mum

  42. Pingback: mbi

  43. Pingback: wbflw

  44. Pingback: siteme

  45. Pingback: cgmum

  46. Pingback: mumcg

  47. Pingback: dxb

  48. Pingback: dxbe

  49. Pingback: gxcbe

  50. Pingback: blrcg

  51. Pingback: cghrde

  52. Pingback: gdye

  53. Pingback: rkshes

  54. Pingback: gdjend

  55. Pingback: ghti

  56. Pingback: cgdun

  57. Pingback: duncg

  58. Pingback: doon

  59. Pingback: rsde

  60. Pingback: lkcn

  61. Pingback: indr

  62. Pingback: cgdel

  63. Pingback: nesd

  64. Pingback: blr escorts

  65. Pingback: del escorts

  66. Pingback: rishkesh

  67. Pingback: rjprrd

  68. Pingback: kol

  69. Pingback: dehradun call girls

  70. Pingback: dehradun escorts

  71. Pingback: cg mussrie

  72. Pingback: rkishe

  73. Pingback: cgrwle

  74. Pingback: dwdrg

  75. Pingback: hadrwe

  76. Pingback: hrdwr

  77. Pingback: rkshish

  78. Pingback: cgls

  79. Pingback: cgles

  80. Pingback: chd

  81. Pingback: cgd

  82. Pingback: cgs

  83. Pingback: cg

  84. Pingback: call girls in dehradun

  85. Pingback: russian

  86. Pingback: jaipur girl

  87. Pingback: noida escorts

  88. Pingback: crtlnk

  89. Pingback: onpge

  90. Pingback: wrdprs

  91. Pingback: webflw

  92. Pingback: wbnva

  93. Pingback: almbro

  94. Pingback: crter

  95. Pingback: lcknw

  96. Pingback: indre

  97. Pingback: cgl

  98. Pingback: del

  99. Pingback: escrrr

  100. Pingback: esc

  101. Pingback: casino online

  102. Pingback: hazratganj call girl

  103. Pingback: gomti nagar call girl

  104. Pingback: height increasing elevator shoes

  105. Pingback: ghaziabad escorts

  106. Pingback: ghaziabad escorts

  107. Pingback: indore escorts nidhi nagar

  108. Pingback: visit site

  109. Pingback: buy Malabar coast mushrooms online

  110. Pingback: เด็กเอ็น

  111. Pingback: แทงบอลออนไลน์

  112. Pingback: find out this here

  113. Pingback: Spy cam Porn

  114. Pingback: sbobet

  115. Pingback: dumps shop legit 2022

  116. Pingback: สล็อตวอเลท ไม่มีขั้นต่ำ

  117. Pingback: legit vendor track1,2

  118. Pingback: Sobha Apartments

  119. Pingback: jetsadabet

  120. Pingback: sex chat kostenlos via whatsapp

  121. Pingback: Chat Croute Sang Sexe

  122. Pingback: rent scooters in st pete beach

  123. Pingback: sbo

  124. Pingback: ccv shop

  125. Pingback: wow slot

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

  127. Pingback: บาคาร่า1688

  128. Pingback: kardinal stick

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

  130. Pingback: ccv dumps

  131. Pingback: canik tp9 sc

You must be logged in to post a comment Login