The longtime owners of the former Provident Loan Society building at 225 East Houston St. say they love the 1912 property and want to preserve it, while building a 12-story addition on top of the neo-classical structure. But in a passionate plea last night before Community Board 3’s landmarks committee, they argued against designation of the building as a New York City landmark.
After hearing from the owners and a preservationist who started an online petition, the committee voted to support a Request for Evaluation that was submitted to the Landmarks Preservation Commission on October 29.
Christian Emanuel, a real estate broker for Sotheby’s International, told board members he just happened to be walking past the building one day when it occurred to him to launch a preservation campaign. In his submission to the Landmarks Commission, Emanuel wrote:
I believe that the building’s general condition, style, location, historical significance, and its current context make it a perfect candidate for protection under the Landmarks Law… The Provident Loan Society branch building on Essex and Houston sits vacant; a vulnerable building on a prized corner lot. A commercial lease could lead to a quick and irreversible façade modification, endangering it’s mostly-intact details. A residential development requiring a tear down could be filed for, erasing a century of contribution to the streetscape and community. A case should be made for the evaluation of this building, as it is our obligation to effectively triage our developing neighborhoods.
Last night, Emanuel highlighted the Provident Loan Society’s legacy in New York, as well as the building’s cultural significance. From 1967-1988, it was owned by Jasper Johns and served as the artist’s studio (in recent years it was home to Element night club). While he would like to see the city, local community and building owners work together to preserve the property, Emanuel said he’s not personally opposed to historically-sensitive redevelopment. “It just takes one person,” Emanuel said, to start a dialogue. “I just happen to be that person this time.”
As it happened, the owners filed their plans for redevelopment with the Department of Buildings on Nov. 30.
Their architect, Rob Rogers, plans is to keep the facades intact on Houston Street and Essex Street, while constructing a residential tower with 38 units above the historic structure. In August of 2014, the owners acquired air rights from a neighboring building, 217 East Houston St., to make the expansion possible. The new building would encompass 41,000 sq. ft.
A handout provided to board members included a rendering similar to the one you see posted above plus the following explanation of the project:
The development currently underway at 225 East Houston St. will remain in keeping with the multi-story, mixed-use character of the neighborhood. The project involves both the preservation of the existing building and the addition of a new residential expansion above it, using environmentally responsible building practices… The design respects the original structure while it mirrors the dynamic nature of the current architecture and lifestyle of the area… The owners have been longstanding members of the Lower East Side and East Village communities for over 40 years and have owned the property for over 25 years. They are conscious of the social and cultural roles that prior uses of the structure have played in the community. They have chosen to retain the individuality of the current structure while transforming the site into a modern, mixed-use building that will be a continuing contribution to the neighborhood now and into the future.
One of the owners, Brook Jones, said it would be a major imposition to delay construction while the Landmarks Preservation Commission weighs the Request for Evaluation. “To derail our process,” he argued, “would be devastating.” Jones said the family “loves this building” and has been working for four years on their development plan. Several experts, Jones indicated, recommended demolition. “Three architects told us to tear it down,” he noted. “We’re asking you to trust us (as longtime members of this community). We care about this building as much as anyone could.”
Fred Becker, the family’s attorney, called the structure “a pleasant neo-classical building,” but suggested it is not worthy of historic preservation by the city. After so much work has already gone into the project, he added, going through the landmarking process would be “unfair and unnecessary.”
Committee Chairperson Linda Jones acknowledged the current owners’ commitment to preserving the building, but noted that landmark designation would ensure that the exterior is protected in the future, no matter who owns it. In the end, the panel voted to support the Request for Evaluation, but also the owners’ expansion plan. The Landmarks Commission has not yet responded to Christian Emanuel’s application.
The full board will decide whether to support the landmarks committee’s recommendation next week.
