Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 23 May 2000 20:55:50 -0700 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" |
Comments: |
SoVerNet Verification (on garnet.sover.net) [209.198.117.85] from
arc5a275.bf.sover.net [209.198.117.85] 209.198.117.85 Tue, 23 May
2000 22:08:51 -0400 (EDT) |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Why do you city folks wantuh paint yer winders, don't ya wantuh see
owt? Or do yu mean just the sash? Ruth
At 1:45 PM -0400 5/23/00, Mary Dierickx wrote:
>Regarding Landmarks policy on sash colors:
>
>In my recent experience, Landmarks staff has been asking for original or
>similar paint colors. On an Upper West Side rowhouse, the staff asked for a
>light color, closer to the color of the limestone, rather than black. I
>agree with Eric, if we insisted on the existing black, they would have
>accepted it.
>
>We didn't need to do a paint analysis in this case and I don't believe
>Landmarks will require paint investigation unless you want something from
>them. We did it to get aluminum windows in a tenement in Greenwich Village
>(it already had aluminum windows). The sash was brownstone color.
>
>I think it's interesting and a good idea to move away from basic black. For
>years everyone just said "paint it black," it was easy and understandable to
>owners and contractors. Many of windows on those classical, early 20th
>century buildings were light colored. This will bring the way these
>buildings look closer to the original designs. It will also allow for more
>variety in historic districts, which need more variety.
>
>In this vein, I don't see why upper floor awnings on the Haughwout building
>in SoHo are so bad (NYT Real Estate page article last Sunday). Broadway was
>a messier street in 1900, with signs and awnings everywhere. Preservationists
>shouldn't be neat freaks.
>
>Mary Dierickx, NYC
--
Ruth Barton
[log in to unmask]
Westminster, VT
|
|
|