Feature

What New York City Landmarks Were Designated In 2015?

Comments (7)
  1. Jonathan says:

    I feel buildings without any real historical significance shouldn’t be landmarked.

  2. biff33 says:

    No buildings should be landmarked. “Protecting” property from its owners violates their property rights; it’s no different from stealing.

  3. Bob Marvin says:

    Best feature I’ve seen on YIMBY!

  4. Anthony Gonzalez says:

    Fantastic feature. Please do more reports on the LPC! Hopefully they move faster on landmarking next year!

  5. pgk says:

    The United States Supreme Court has already ruled in 1978 that the landmarks law is constitutional

  6. Justin says:

    We live in a society in which we are responsible to one another, to some degree. That is the nature of a society. Don’t like it? Go move to the middle of nowhere, make your own clothes, buildings, and equipment, etc. Bye.

  7. Mike says:

    I urge the LPC and readers of this article to consider the importance of preserving the consistent historical character of more examples of early 20th century low density single family outer borough suburban enclaves, especially those examples in which the area character and sense of place was created before zoning existed by the great foresight of the original subdivider/developer’s use of comprehensive private deed restrictions containing specific directions regarding yards, walls, et al. The finest examples still extant are in northeastern Queens and are in areas of a few hundred homes all built between 1900 and 1930 in accordance with the Rikert Finlay Covenants. The modern courts have found these hundred years old covenants worthy of protection because of the consistent character they created and yet LPC sits on its hands while appropriate older homes are lost each year to McMansions that erode these exceptional subdivisions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *