DEFEND the proposed Riverside-West End Avenue Historic District Extension II

Even as LPC Chair Srinivasan plans to eliminate buildings from the proposed Riverside-West End Historic District Extension II, she has backed off another misguided initiative to “de-calendar” proposed landmarks en masse.  The Wall Street Journal reports, “The new chairwoman of the Landmarks Preservation Commission proposed six months ago to summarily wipe out a backlog of 95 pending landmark designations.”  But, in the face of united opposition from preservationists and elected officials, “Public hearings are now to be held this fall, and final decisions on most of the historic properties are due by the end of next year.”

Hon. Meenakshi Srinivasan

Chair

New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission

1 Centre Street, 9th Floor

New York, NY  10007

RE:  Riverside-West End Avenue Historic District Extension II

Dear Chair Srinivasan:

It is our understanding that, on Tuesday, June 23, 2015, the Landmarks Preservation Commission will hold a public meeting and vote on the designation of the Riverside-West End Historic District Extension II (heard on October 25, 2011).  It is also our understanding, however, that the district boundaries to be voted on will be substantially different from those considered at the October 2011 public hearing.  Specifically (although a map of the changes has not been publicly distributed) we understand that the boundaries of the new district extension will exclude buildings along the west side of Broadway, West 109th Street, and the entire block from 95th to 96th Street, between Riverside Drive and West End Avenue (the site of P.S. 75 and its playground). 

We question the basis of this decision on the merits since, for example, a number of the buildings along Broadway were designed by the same architects – Neville & Bagge, George & Edward Blum, etc. – in the same era as many of the buildings elsewhere in the rest of the proposed district extension.  They are “of a piece” and contribute to the character and historical narrative of the area.

We also challenge the Commission’s process – namely, its failure to provide the public with a detailed map of the changes it proposes and the lack of a public hearing on those changes. The execution of such extensive changes without a public hearing is at odds with NYC Administrative Code §25-303 (“Establishment of landmarks, landmark sites, interior landmarks, scenic landmarks and historic districts”), which states:

For the purpose of effecting and furthering the protection, preservation, enhancement, perpetuation and use of landmarks, interior landmarks, scenic landmarks and historic districts, the commission shall have power, after a public hearing…(4) to designate historic districts and the location and boundaries thereof, and…to designate changes in such locations and boundaries… [emphasis added]

The district extension to be designated on June 23, 2015 will be significantly different from the district extension heard on October 25, 2011, and therefore requires a new public hearing.  Holding a public hearing on the revised historic district extension with redrawn boundaries imposes minimal burden on the Commission while providing a forum for the community input required before the Commission is authorized to designate the revised extension.  We strongly object to this decision to change the configuration of the proposed historic district being made by the LPC at a “public meeting” where the public will not be heard. 

Furthermore, for the Commission to assume the general authority to redraw proposed historic districts after they are heard without first following rulemaking procedures would violate the City Administrative Procedures Act and recent Court of Appeals precedent.  See Matter of Council of the City of N.Y. v. Dep’t of Homeless Services of the City of N.Y., 22 N.Y. 3d 150, 153-54 (2013); City Charter §§ 1041 et seq.

Together with elected officials, colleague preservation organizations, and many property owners, neighbors and other stakeholders in this area, we reiterate our strong support for the Riverside-West End Historic District Extension II as originally proposed on October 25, 2011, and urge the Commission to designate it in its entirety.  Now that the Commission intends to vote on a revised extension with changed boundaries, we are entitled by law to register that support and voice our opposition in the strongest of terms to the exclusion of significant buildings from the district on the record at a public hearing.

Sincerely,

President

        New York State Senator Adriano Espaillat

        Executive Director Robert J. Freeman, NYS Committee on Open Government,

                        Department of State