Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-1
Chapter 10. Historic Resources
Introduction
The Proposed Project is being reviewed under the provisions of SEQRA for purposes of
environmental review. The Proposed Project was also reviewed in conformance with the New York State
Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (“SHPA”), especially the implementing regulations of section 14.09 of the
Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law (“PRHPL”), as well as with the requirements of the
Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”), dated March 18, 1998, between the Dormitory Authority and
the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (“OPRHP”). As part of this
process, a Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment has been prepared in order to determine the Proposed
Project’s potential to encounter (and potentially affect) known and previously-unrecorded cultural
resources — both aboveground historic architectural resources and below-ground archaeological
resources.1 The Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment complies with the SHPA, SEQR and CEQR
processes for historic properties.
Overview
Two areas of potential effect (“APEs”) for the Proposed Project were delineated for the purposes
of the Phase IA. The APEs represent the area or areas where the Proposed Project may directly or
indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of cultural resources, if any such properties exist,
including both archaeological and historic architectural resource. Within the APEs, known or previouslyinventoried cultural resources2 and those that require evaluation to determine their potential for inclusion
on the New York State and/or National Registers of Historic Places (“S/NR”), which may be affected by
the Proposed Project, were both identified. As detailed in this chapter, the Proposed Project would not
create a significant adverse effect on identified historic properties within the historic architectural APE
since measures would be taken to protect such resources, as detailed below. A portion of the
archaeological APE holds the potential to contain human remains related to a nineteenth-century
vault/crypt associated with the Convent of the Sacred Heart that once occupied a portion of the subject
property. The Proposed Project would create ground disturbance to this location during construction of
the proposed ASRC I Building. The Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment recommended that
excavation activities in this area be archaeologically monitored. OPRHP concurred with the
recommendation that an archaeologist be present to monitor excavation activity in this vicinity to help
ensure that if any remains were left behind, they will be treated appropriately. If any in-situ remains are
identified, the Dormitory Authority would contact OPRHP. Upon completion of the field monitoring
activity, the Dormitory Authority would prepare and submit a report on the monitoring work.
1
The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment, The City College of New York Campus,
Manhattan, New York, 2006. Prepared for DASNY.
2
Previously-inventoried resources include properties or districts listed on the State or National Registers of Historic
Places (“S/NR”) or determined eligible for such listing; National Historic Landmarks (“NHLs”); New York City Landmarks
(“NYCLs”) and Historic Districts (“NYCHDs”); and properties that have been found by the New York City Landmarks
Preservation Commission to appear eligible for landmark designation, considered for designation by LPC at a public hearing, or
calendared for consideration at such a hearing.
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-2
Methodology
The Phase IA report was prepared in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards
and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation,3 the Cultural Resource Standards Handbook
prepared by the New York Archaeological Council Standards Committee, and the New York City
Landmark Preservation Commission (“LPC”) Landmarks Preservation Commission Guidelines for
Archaeological Work in New York City.4 The Proposed Project would physically affect an area generally
bound by West 131st and West 135th Streets, Convent Avenue and St. Nicholas Terrace. The
archaeological APE, illustrated in Figure 10-1, corresponds to the limits of excavation for the proposed
buildings, shared ground-floor level (underground connector), and utilities.
The historic architectural APE was determined using the suggested CEQR Technical Manual
guidance that recommend a 400-foot radius from the borders of the Development Parcel as the study area
limits for historic architectural resources combined with a 90-foot radius around the area where blasting
may be used for utility excavations. The 400-foot APE represents the area where either physical or
contextual effects might occur. The 90-foot APE reflects the area where accidental damage could occur,
using the methodology stipulated in the New York City Department of Buildings (“NYCDOB”)
Technical Policy and Procedure Notice #10/88, Procedures for the Avoidance of Damage to Historic
Structures (“TPPN #10/88”).5 Therefore, the historic architectural APE was calculated by creating 400foot buffer around the boundary of the Development Parcel and merging this with a 90-foot buffer around
the area of proposed utility excavation, as exhibited in Figure 10-2. The CCNY North Campus is listed
on the S/NR and contains several New York City Landmarks (“NYCLs”), including Shepard Hall,
Townsend Harris Hall, Baskerville Hall, Compton Hall, Wingate Hall and Goethals Hall. The North
Campus is not within the historic architectural APE because the Proposed Project would not be visible
from the North Campus due to the presence of the 6-story-tall A. Philip Randolph Campus High School at
West 135th Street.
Existing Conditions
This section describes the results of the documentary, cartographic, and field research conducted
for the Proposed Project. The background history of the Development Parcel and vicinity is described
first, followed by a description of the potential archaeological and known and previously-unrecorded
historic architectural resources within each APE.
Background History. The first European settler to own land that included the Development
Parcel was Peter van Oblienis, who owned a large tract of land on the western shore of Manhattan Island
in 1691. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the Common Council formed a three-member
commission to plot out the land of Manhattan up to 155th Street. Called the Randel Plan after the chief
engineer John Randel, Jr., this plan created a regularized street grid across the land north of 14th Street.
This process of surveying added a total of 11,400 acres to the Island of Manhattan’s limits.6 Following
the development of the street grid across Manhattan, Jacob Schieffelin and John B. Lawrence formed the
3
Federal Register, 1983, Volume 18, Number 1990, pp. 44716-44742.
New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission. Landmarks Preservation Commission Guidelines for
Archaeological Work in New York City. April, 2002.
5
CEQR Technical Manual, p. 3F-7.
6
Cohen, P.E., and R.T. Augustyn. Manhattan in Maps: 1527-1995. Rizzoli International Publications, Inc. New
York. 1997
4
Legend
Archaeological APE
Proposed Buildings
Outside Limits of
Utility Excavation
°
W
E
HS
TR
NU
4T
EE
MA
VE
13
T
13
5T
H
ST
RE
ET
TR
EE
T
S AV
E NU
E
DS
E
3R
NU
13
TE
ET
AS
RE
OL
ST
IC H
130
TH
ST
.N
W
RR
AC
E
CO
S T.
NV
EN
N IC H
TA
O LA
VE
W
AM
ST
ER
DA
W
CCNY Science Building/
CUNY ASRC Project
0
0
100
25
200
50
75
SOURCE: NYCMap GIS
300
400
Feet
100
Meters
Archaeological Area of
Potential Effect (APE)
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
Figure 10-1
Legend
Historic Architectural APE
Proposed Buildings
Outside Limits of Utility Excavation
°
W
E
HS
TR
NU
4T
EE
MA
VE
13
T
13
5T
H
ST
RE
ET
TR
EE
T
S AV
E NU
E
DS
E
3R
NU
13
TE
ET
AS
RE
OL
ST
IC H
130
TH
ST
.N
W
RR
AC
E
CO
S T.
NV
EN
N IC H
TA
O LA
VE
W
AM
ST
ER
DA
W
0
0
100
25
200
50
SOURCE: NYCMap GIS
300
75
400
Feet
100
Meters
CCNY Science Building/
CUNY ASRC Project
Historic Architectural Area of
Potential Effect (APE)
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
Figure 10-2
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-5
community of Manhattanville in 1806. This neighborhood was centered in the valley bordered by what is
now West 123rd Street to the south, West 140th Street to the north, the Hudson River to the west and
Convent Avenue on the east. The Development Parcel is located just to the east of the original
Manhattanville neighborhood.
In 1847, the Academy of the Sacred Heart relocated its boarding school for girls from a threestory house on Houston Street in the Lower East Side to the Development Parcel. The Academy was
located on the prominent ridge overlooking the village of Manhattanville to the south and Harlem to the
east. Founded in 1841 by Mother Aloysia Hardy, the Academy purchased property from Jacob Lorillard
in 1847; by 1852, the Academy was known as the Sacred Heart Convent. By the 1860s (Figure 10-3), the
Convent began to expand their campus and the surrounding area had now been incorporated into the
Manhattan street grid. The convent was now referred to as the Convent of the Sacred Heart and down the
slope from the convent, St. Nicholas Avenue was now established, forming the eastern boundary of the
convent’s property (which included the future location of St. Nicholas Park).
There are two maps of the Development Parcel and vicinity in the 1880s: Robinson’s map of
1885 and Robinson’s map of 1883-88. Both maps indicate the Convent of the Sacred Heart had expanded
slightly on the northwestern corner and a small structure was constructed about 200 feet north of the main
building. South of the Convent, three residential structures had been constructed at the northwest corner
of West 129th Street and Cliff Avenue, the precursor to St. Nicholas Terrace. The area surrounding the
Convent was now becoming much more developed, primarily driven by the presence of train and elevated
subway lines at Tenth and Eighth Avenues. In August 1888 the Convent of the Sacred Heart was almost
entirely destroyed by a devastating fire. However, by February 1889 the Convent had been completely
reconstructed. The 1890 map of the Development Parcel indicates the Convent was reconstructed within
the same footprint of the original building.7
Sanborn Insurance Maps are among the most detailed and informative cartographic resources
available. The earliest Sanborn map consulted is the 1893 map, which provides much more detail than
the Robinson maps from the same time period. This map describes the components of the Convent
complex, including a chapel at the southeast corner, and depicts several paths that traverse the campus.
There is a small one-story structure shown to the north of the main building and chapel that is located at
the end of one of these paths. However, the function of this structure is not described on this map. The
1909 Sanborn map illustrates the Convent complex had expanded at the beginning of the twentieth
century with the addition of a gymnasium and Hall of Science to the west and north of the previouslyexisting building. The small one-story structure located to the north of the chapel is shown on the map as
a “Vault.” It is likely that this vault is the burial crypt described in other sources as located behind the
Grotto of Our Lady of Lourdes. This grotto was likely located to the north of the chapel and was built
into the slight mound that is present on the site today. The vault may have been formed from a natural
fissure in the bedrock here, as there are many locations today where bedrock outcrops on the surface. It is
known that the crypt was located underneath a stone cross that represented the historic location of a
chapel to St. Joseph, which was destroyed some time in the 1940s. This vault/crypt was used for the
committal of nuns from the Convent; previously the nuns were interred in two cemeteries within the
limits of the Convent’s property. The remains of the nuns were disinterred from these cemeteries and
reinterred at this crypt, located behind the Grotto of Our Lady of Lourdes.
7
The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment, City College of New York Campus,
Manhattan, New York, 2006. Prepared for DASNY.
Legend
Archaeological APE
Proposed Buildings
°
137th Street
8th Avenue
138th Street
Outside Limits of
Utility Excavation
Amsterdam Avenue
136th Street
Archaeological
Area of Potential Effect
135th Street
ho
St. N ic
134th Street
nue
las Ave
133rd Street
132nd Street
131st Street
130th Street
129th Street
CCNY Science Building/
CUNY ASRC Project
128th Street
0
0
100
25
200
50
75
SOURCE: Dripps 1867
300
400
100
Meters
500
Feet
1867 View of the Project Area
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
Figure 10-3
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-7
The 1939 Sanborn map of the Development Parcel shows that a residence hall was constructed on
the east side of the Convent, still referred to as the Convent of the Sacred Heart, but the complex was
officially called the College of the Sacred Heart as it had been chartered by the New York State Board of
Regents in 1917. A portion of the CCNY campus (now referred to as the CCNY North Campus) is also
shown on the 1939 Sanborn map north of the Convent property (and north of West 135th Street). By the
middle of the twentieth century, the College of the Sacred Heart remained relatively unchanged from
1939. One new structure was now present within the southeastern portion of the historic architectural
APE, the building now known as Eisner Hall (constructed in 1941 as a library for the College of the
Sacred Heart). Additionally, a new CCNY hall (called South Hall) was constructed in the northern
portion of the historic architectural APE between West 135th and West 136th Streets and west of Convent
Avenue.
When the College of the Sacred Heart moved to Westchester County in 1952, The City College
of New York purchased the property vacated by the College of the Sacred Heart to allow an expansion to
address overcrowding on the CCNY campus to north. CCNY classes were first held in the new buildings
by the fall of 1955. The main portion of the Sacred Heart Convent was now used as the Finley Student
Center and the old chapel was converted into an auditorium. The acquisition of the Sacred Heart Convent
buildings gave CCNY a North Campus and a South Campus. By the late 1960s, the South Campus of
CCNY had fully integrated the old College of the Sacred Heart buildings into a campus environment, and
additional buildings appeared within the South Campus while older buildings began to have their function
change to fit CCNY uses.
Archaeology. Research was conducted at several repositories to collect information on recorded
archaeological resources and the possible presence of unrecorded archaeological resources in the
Development Parcel and vicinity. The purpose of the research was to determine on a preliminary basis
whether construction activities could disturb any significant or potentially-significant archaeological
resources. Sources for background research included the New York State Museum (“NYSM”) and
OPRHP files for information on previously-recorded archaeological sites in the Development Parcel and
vicinity; LPC for information on recorded historic properties in the Development Parcel and vicinity; and
recent cultural resource studies for map data and historical documentation on historical use of the
Development Parcel and vicinity. A search of the archaeological site records on file at the New York
State Museum and the OPRHP revealed a total of four recorded archaeological sites within a one-mile
radius of the archaeological APE (Table 10-1). Of these previously-identified archaeological sites, three
represent evidence of prehistoric occupation of the APE and vicinity, while the fourth archaeological site
is a historic/industrial site located in the Bronx.
Table 10-1: Known Archaeological Sites within One Mile of the Archaeological APE
Site Number
Description
Source
4065
Prehistoric village site
Parker 1922
7249
Traces of prehistoric occupation
Parker 1922
7248
Traces of prehistoric occupation
Parker 1922
00501.000014
Mott Haven Canal – historic/industrial archaeological site from 1860-80
NYSM
Source: The Louis Berger Group, Inc., Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment, The City College of New York Campus,
Manhattan, New York, 2006.
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-8
Review of historical maps indicates that the Development Parcel was undeveloped until the 1840s
when the Convent of the Sacred Heart constructed their residences at the top of the prominent ridge
overlooking the village of Manhattanville. All historic maps were scanned and georeferenced using the
geographic information system (“GIS”) software program ArcView 9.1 to allow for the superimposition
of the maps and the Proposed Project’s archaeological APE. Within each map, historic structures within
or adjacent to the APE were digitized, creating a summary of the APE’s disturbance due to prior
construction (Figure 10-4).
The summary of existing building construction within and adjacent to the APE indicated a large
portion of the archaeological APE has been significantly disturbed. The area of the College of the Sacred
Heart (see Figure 10-3) has disturbed the majority of the Development Parcel; the extensive fire in 1888,
in turn, disturbed the early Convent buildings. Additionally, the western limits of the APE for the utility
installation have also been disturbed by the history of building activities. When a former building (Finley
Student Center) was demolished in 1985, the present-day athletic track and field was expanded
northward, further disturbing the area previously occupied by the College of the Sacred Heart/Convent of
the Sacred Heart. The northern end of the modern athletic track and field corresponds roughly with the
historic location of the College of the Sacred Heart’s main building. Additionally, the area surrounding
the location of the athletic track and field’s scoreboard has been extensively excavated, creating further
disturbance to the APE.
North of the modern athletic track and field, in the portion of the APE that would be disturbed by
construction of the ASRC I Building is a small grassy area enclosed by a pedestrian footpath. Based upon
the historic map analysis, this area appears to have been the location of the historic vault/crypt that
appeared on the Sanborn maps. Outside of this vault, no other structures are known to have been located
within this area. A visit to the Development Parcel confirmed the lack of evidence of previous structures
on the surface and the relatively undisturbed nature of the historic vault’s location within the
archaeological APE.
The eastern portion of the APE associated with Eisner Hall and the historic location of Wagner
Hall has also been disturbed during the construction (and in the case of Wagner Hall, the demolition) of
these buildings.
Additional information on the archaeological potential of the Development Parcel comes from the
soil borings excavated for the Proposed Project. The majority of the soil borings encountered bedrock at
a very shallow depth, in the range of four to eight feet below the surface. Only one soil boring (M-2P)
recovered soil deposits to a depth greater than eight feet. The shallow soil deposits across the
Development Parcel suggest that any potential archaeological resources would not represent deep shaft
features associated with the historic occupation of the Development Parcel, but rather, thin refuse
deposits. However, given the extensive disturbance throughout the majority of the APE, it is unlikely that
significant historic (nineteenth or twentieth century) archaeological deposits would be located within the
archaeological APE. Additionally, the shallow depth of soil across the Development Parcel indicates a
very low potential to encounter prehistoric archaeological resources. Lastly, using a predictive model
developed by Berger primarily based on cartographic evidence for steep slopes (greater than 15 percent)
CCNY Science Building/
CUNY ASRC Project
Disturbed Areas within/
adjacent to the Development Parcel
Source: Dripps 1851, 1867; Robinson 1879, 1883-33, 1890,
1890-93; Sanborn 1893, 1909, 1939, 1950, 1969, 1976, 1981, 1989, 1993, 1996.
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
Figure 10-4
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-10
and distance to surface potable water, it was determined that the Proposed Project is located greater than
1,000 feet from surface potable water, thereby possessing no prehistoric archaeological potential.8
Based upon the historic map and photograph analysis, site visit and interpretation of the soil
borings, there is one area of archaeological potential within the Proposed Project’s APE — the grassy
mound area north of the athletic track and field. This grassy mound area once contained a vault/crypt
referred to in historic maps and photographs of the Convent of the Sacred Heart campus. This vault was
located north of the chapel and was presumably built into the exposed bedrock outcrop within this portion
of the APE. When CCNY demolished the Finley Student Center in 1985, the vault remained depicted on
the historic Sanborn maps until dismantled some time between 1993 and 1996. When the College of the
Sacred Heart moved the school to its new home in Purchase, New York, it is assumed that the school took
with them any remains in the crypt, since its Purchase campus is known to include a cemetery with the
remains of many nuns from the early days of the school’s history. However, it is possible that not all
remains were removed from the vault and the crypt within the grassy mound may contain the remains of
nuns or others from the school’s nineteenth century occupation of Manhattanville.9
Historic Architecture. An inventory of officially recognized historic resources in the
architectural APE was compiled. These historic architectural properties include properties or districts
listed on the State or National Registers of Historic Places (“S/NR”) or determined eligible for such
listing; National Historic Landmarks (“NHLs”); NYCLs and New York City Historic Districts
(“NYCHDs”); and properties that have been found by LPC to appear eligible for landmark designation,
considered for designation by LPC at a public hearing, or calendared for consideration at such a hearing
(these are pending NYCLs).
Criteria for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (“NRHP”) are in the Code of
Federal Regulations(“CFR”), Title 36, Part 63, and these criteria are used for identifying architectural
resources for SEQR/CEQR review. Following these criteria, districts, sites, buildings, structures, and
objects are eligible for listing on the NRHP if they possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association, and: (1) are associated with events that have made a significant
contribution to the broad patterns of history (“Criterion A”); (2) are associated with significant people
(“Criterion B”); (3) embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction,
represent the work of a master, possess high artistic value, or represent a significant and distinguishable
entity whose components may lack individual distinction (“Criterion C”); or (4) may yield
[archaeological] information important in prehistory or history. Properties that are younger than 50 years
of age are ordinarily not eligible, unless they have achieved exceptional significance. Determinations of
eligibility are made by OPRHP.
The LPC designates historically-significant properties in New York City as NYCLs and/or
NYCHDs, following the criteria provided in the Local Laws of The City of New York, New York City
Charter, Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 3. Buildings, properties, or objects are eligible for
landmark status when a part is at least 30 years old. Landmarks have a special character or special
historical or aesthetic interest or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of
8
The Louis Berger Group, Inc. New Jersey Turnpike Widening, Interchange 6 – 9, Burlington, Mercer, and Middlesex
Counties, New Jersey, Phase I Cultural Resource Survey. Prepared for The New Jersey Turnpike Authority, New Brunswick,
New Jersey. 2006.
9
The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment, The City College of New York Campus,
Manhattan, New York, 2006. Prepared for DASNY.
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-11
the city, state, or nation. There are four types of landmarks: individual landmark, interior landmark,
scenic landmark, and historic district.
In addition to identifying architectural resources officially recognized in the architectural APE, an
inventory was compiled of other buildings that could warrant recognition as architectural resources (i.e.,
properties that could be eligible for listing on the S/NR) in compliance with SEQR guidelines. For the
Proposed Project, potential architectural resources were those that appeared to meet one or more of the
NRHP criteria (described above), and were identified based on a field survey of the architectural APE and
by using historical sources such as documents at the New York Public Library, the Municipal Archives
and the New York City Department of Buildings archives. An inventory of these potential resources is
presented below. After the historic resources in the architectural APE were identified, the Proposed
Project was assessed for both direct physical impacts and indirect contextual impacts (as described above)
on the architectural resources.
Previously-Listed or Eligible Historic Properties in and/or adjacent to the Architectural APE.
An examination of the historic architectural resource files at OPRHP and LPC indicates that there is one
previously-identified historic architectural resource within the architectural APE: the New York Training
School for Teachers and New York Model School (now the A. Philip Randolph Campus High School) at
443-465 West 135th Street.10 This school, a NYCL, is located at the northern portion of the historic
architectural APE, within the portion of the APE that is within 90 feet of the proposed utility installations.
In addition to A. Philip Randolph Campus High School, there is one historic property situated
immediately adjacent to the historic architectural APE — the Croton Aqueduct, 135th Street Gatehouse.
Furthermore, CCNY’s North Campus is a listed NYCL, comprised of the following buildings: Shepard
Hall (the Main Building), Townsend Harris Hall, Baskerville Hall (the Chemistry Building), Compton
Hall (the Mechanic Arts Building), Wingate Hall (the Gymnasium) and Goethals Hall (the Technology
Building). The North Campus was not included in the historic architectural APE as the Proposed Project
would not be visible from the northern portion of the campus due to the presence of the A. Philip
Randolph Campus High School at West 135th Street. Lastly, there are four historic properties in the
surrounding area but outside the historic architectural APE that were identified by LPC in its
environmental review letter of the Proposed Project, dated March 22, 2006 (see Appendix A, Agency
Correspondence). The previously-inventoried historic properties are listed in Table 10-2.
Table 10-2: Previously-Inventoried Historic Architectural Resources
Resource Name
Address
Status
New York Training School for Teachers and
New York Model School (A. Philip Randolph
Campus High School)
443-465 West 135th Street
S/NR
NYCL
Croton Aqueduct Gatehouse
West 135th Street at Convent Avenue
S/NR
NYCL
City College – North Campus
Convent Avenue between West 138th
and West 140th Streets
NYCL
Dorrance Brooks Square Historic District
Bound by West 136th and West 140th Streets
and Edgecombe and Eighth Avenues
10
S/NR and
NYCL eligible
Dolkart, A. S. and M. A. Postal, Guide to New York City Landmarks, Third Edition. Hoboken, New Jersey. John A.
Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2004.
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-12
Resource Name
Address
Status
Convent Gardens Historic District
Convent Avenue between West 128th and
129th Streets
S/NR and
NYCL eligible
D.G. Yuengling & Co. Brewery Complex
Buildings
423-451 West 127th Streets
S/NR eligible;
LPC heard
Hamilton Place Historic District
Bound by Broadway, Hamilton Place, West
141st and West 142nd Streets
S/NR and
NYCL eligible
Source: The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment, The City College of New York Campus,
Manhattan, New York, 2006.
Previously-Undocumented Historic Properties within the Architectural APE. The following
structures within the architectural APE were reviewed to assess their potential as possible historic
architectural resources (Table 10-3 and Figure 10-5). The 22 properties described below were evaluated
for their potential for listing on the S/NR using the criteria outlined above. Information on these
buildings compiled as part of the Phase IA report was submitted to OPRHP, which found eight of the
resources to be eligible for the S/NR in a letter dated July 19, 2006 (see Appendix A, Agency
Correspondence). As indicated in Table 10-3, when combined, six of the eight properties were
determined eligible as a single historic district.
Table 10-3: Buildings Surveyed for the Proposed Project
Map
No.
1
Address
Block/Lot
426 St. Nicholas Avenue
1958/57
1958/56 &
1958/55
1958/54, 1958/53,
1958/52, 1958/51
1958/49 &
1958/47
1958/43
1958/41,
1958,5701,
1958/38
1957/140
1957/1
1957/10
1957/1
2
428-430 St. Nicholas Avenue
3
432-438 St. Nicholas Avenue
4
440-446 St. Nicholas Avenue
5
448-450 St. Nicholas Avenue
6
452-456 St. Nicholas Avenue
7
8
9
10
St. Nicholas Park Comfort Station
Eisner Hall/161 St. Nicholas Terrace
P.S. 129/415-425 West 130th Street
Mott Hall/71 Convent Avenue
Structural Biology Center/101 Convent
Avenue
11
Construction
Date
ca. 1890
Determination
ca. 1890
ca. 1890
ca. 1885
ca. 1901
S/NR eligible
historic district –
St. Nicholas Avenue
Historic District
ca. 1890
ca. 1940
1941
1957
1938
Not Significant
Not Significant
S/NR eligible
Not Significant
1957/1
1930
Not Significant
Not Significant
12
Schiff House (Early Childhood
Development Center)/119 Convent Avenue
1957/1
1912
13
Boiler Plant/117 Convent Avenue
1957/1
ca. 1888
14
Aaron Davis Hall/129 Convent Avenue
1957/1
1979
15
SAUDLA Buildng/141 Convent Avenue
1957/1
1957
16
P.S. 161/1481 Amsterdam Avenue
1971/1
1962
17
110 Convent Avenue
1970/60
ca. 1910
Not Significant
Does not meet 50-year
criteria
Not Significant
Does not meet 50-year
criteria
Not Significant
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Map
No.
18
19
20
21
22
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-13
Address
Block/Lot
106-108 Convent Avenue
102-104 Convent Avenue
96-100 Convent Avenue
90-94 Convent Avenue
Annunciation Church and Rectory/80-88
Convent Avenue;
Annunciation School/461 West 131st St.
1970/58
1970/55
1970/51
1970/48
1970/42
Construction
Date
ca. 1910
ca. 1910
ca. 1910
ca. 1910
1906
ca. 1939
Determination
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
Not Significant
S/NR eligible
Source: The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment, The City College of New York Campus,
Manhattan, New York, 2006.
As noted in Table 10-3, the buildings on the Development Parcel — Eisner Hall and the Boiler
Plant — were determined to be not eligible for listing on the S/NR during this review. The historic
architectural resources in the architectural APE are described below.
New York Training School for Teachers and New York Model School (A. Philip Randolph
Campus High School). Now the A. Philip Randolph Campus High School, the New York Training
School for Teachers and New York Model School is located just outside the boundary of the CCNY
campus on the north side of West 135th Street, between Convent Avenue and St. Nicholas Terrace. The
Training School was established in 1898 to provide the New York City Board of Education with an
adequate supply of elementary school teachers. The school operated out of several locations before this
collegiate gothic structure, designed by William H. Gompert, was completed in 1926 as the first building
constructed specifically to house the training school. The training school was discontinued during the
Depression when there was a surplus of teachers, and from 1933 to 1984 the High School of Music and
Art (a public school that was considered the first of its kind) occupied this building. This historic
structure was designated as a NYCL in 1997.11
426, 428-430, 432-438, 440-446, 448-450, 452-456 St. Nicholas Avenue (St. Nicholas Avenue
Historic District). A collection of six buildings comprising a late nineteenth century row of brick
residential buildings, meeting National Register criteria for listing as a potential historic district retaining
a high degree of setting, design, materials and workmanship. The buildings were constructed in the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and form a continuous and minimally-altered series of residences
dating to the early urbanization of the Manhattanville area.
P.S. 129 – John H. Finley School. P.S. 129, also known as the John H. Finley School, occupies
most of the north side of West 130th Street between Convent Avenue and St. Nicholas Terrace. The
building stands three stories tall with cream-colored, five-to-one, common-bond brick walls topped by a
cast-stone coping. The building’s southern or main elevation facing West 130th Street features three
distinct sections. The eastern two-thirds of the southern elevation consists of three continuous horizontal
bands composed primarily of two-over-two, metal-framed windows set above continuous cast-stone sills.
Except for the westernmost three window units, vertical turquoise piers divide the horizontal bands into
sections of eight window units. Paired metal doors with wire-glass surrounds open onto a concrete ramp
in the third bay from the west.
11
Ibid.
Legend
Historic Architectural APE
Known Landmark in the Historic Architectural APE
(A. Philip Randolph Campus High School)
Surveyed Buildings
Determined S/NR Eligible
Determined to be not Elgible for Listing on the S/NR
AV
EN
UE
W
EE
T
13
5T
H
ST
R
AM
13
4T
HS
TR
EE
T
18
15
14
12
CO
17
ST.
N IC
H OL
AS A
VEN
UE
16
ET
E
ST
RE
TA
VE
NU
13
3R
D
NV
EN
W
AM
S
TE
RD
W
13
19
20
21
22
22
11
10
RA
CE
7
9
°
0
0
100
25
5
4
I CH
TR
EE
T
ST
.N
13
0T
HS
6
OL
AS
TE
R
8
W
3
2
1
CCNY Science Building/
CUNY ASRC Project
200
50
75
SOURCE: NYCMap GIS
300
400
Feet
100
Meters
Buildings within the
Historic Architectural APE
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
Figure 10-5
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-15
P.S. 129 is an excellent example of Art Moderne architecture and possesses very good integrity of
style, workmanship and materials. Designed by the architectural firm of Wechsler and Schimenti, and
erected by the C. W. C. Construction Corp. in 1957, the school exhibits the noteworthy characteristics of
Art Moderne architecture including horizontal bands of windows, smooth wall surfaces, a flat roof, metal
panels with low relief, a curved canopy, and stylized decorative metal railings. The building possesses
special character, aesthetic interest and value as part of New York City’s development and culture.
Annunciation Church & Rectory, 80-88 Convent Avenue; Annunciation School, 431 West 131st
Street. The Annunciation Church and Rectory stand at the northwestern corner of Convent Avenue’s
intersection with West 131st Street at 80-88 Convent Avenue. The church building occupies the corner lot
and consists of a five-story, three-bay-wide by five-bay-deep structure with sandstone veneer walling,
large lancet-arched stained glass windows penetrating its upper stories, and segmental-arched windows on
its first story. One-story, shed-roofed side aisles flank the church building on its north and south sides. A
one-bay deep projecting transept occupies the church’s westernmost bay. A four-bay-wide, three-story
wing extends northward along Convent Avenue from the parapet gable roofed church. The church’s
northern elevation, mostly hidden from view by the northern wing, exhibits five-to-one, common-bond
brick construction. Piers dividing the church’s upper story bays are reminiscent of gothic buttresses.
Large, symmetrically placed double-leaf wood doors topped by a panel and glass transom occupy the
eastern elevation’s three lancet-arched bays. A statute of the Virgin Mary occupies a recessed niche in
the eastern elevation’s gable peak crowned by a cross. Arched terra cotta moldings occupy the peak and
the wall surfaces above the east elevation’s doors. A 1906 date stone is located on the southeastern
corner of the building. This religious complex was designed by the architectural firm of Lynch and
Orchard, based at 1 West 34th Street in the early twentieth century.
The Annunciation Church, the rectory building at 88 Convent Street, and the school building on
West 131st Street were probably erected simultaneously in 1906, the year the church was erected
according to its date stone. All three structures appear on a 1909 insurance map of the area. Construction
of the church’s wing linking the original rectory with the church occurred between 1909 and 1939, the
link appearing on a 1939 insurance map.
The religious complex appears to meet Criterion C as a representative examples of Late Gothic
revival design and it may also meet Criterion A in the areas of community development and social
history.
Future No Build Condition
As presented in Chapter 2, Regulatory and Analytical Framework, the Future No Build Condition
considers that the existing uses in the APEs will remain the same in 2013 with following exceptions: the
SAUDLA Project will be completed in 2008, the CCNY Utility Project will be completed in 2009, and
the NYSBC Phase IV Project will be completed by 2012. (See Figure 2-1 for the locations of these
planned projects, and Figure 2-2 preliminary utility routing for the CCNY Utility Project.)
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-16
Archaeology. The SAUDLA Project is a renovation of an existing building within the same
footprint. The northern portion of the CCNY Utility Project will disturb areas of the NAC parking lot that
have been previously disturbed by the construction of the later residential structures, the CCNY halls, and
presumably from underground utilities within the streetbed and sidewalk of Convent Avenue. The
portion of the CCNY Utility Project situated between West 135th Street and Aaron Davis Hall does not
possess potential for archaeological resources because this part of the campus was not utilized for
historical occupation in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The CCNY Utility Project also will
disturb areas directly adjacent to the existing SAUDLA Building that have had prior disturbance and/or
areas with very shallow bedrock characterized by a low potential for intact archaeological resources.
Consultation with OPRHP and LPC indicates that the CCNY Utility Project no impact on cultural
resources in or eligible for inclusion in the S/NR.12, 13 The NYSBC Phase IV Project will be located
directly north of the existing NYSBC facility and is expected to cause minimal ground disturbance where
the building expansion will occur.14
Historic Architecture. Excavation for the CCNY Utility Project would occur within 90 feet of
the A. Philip Randolph Campus High School (the former New York Training School for Teachers and
New York Model School), a designated NYCL. Accordingly, the CCNY Utility Project will incorporate
special measures set forth by LPC and NYCDOB to protect this historic resource from increased vibration
levels associated with project construction activities (refer to NYCDOB TPPN #10/88). Special measures
will include pre-construction condition surveying, landmark protection planning and vibration monitoring
during construction.
The Future No Build Condition assumes that the construction of one new structure will occur at
the NYSBC site. Given the relatively small scale of the NYSBC Phase IV Project, visual or contextual
impacts to historic architectural resources are not anticipated to occur as a result of that project.
Additionally, the CCNY Utility Project includes the installation of fenced-in, exterior-mounted
transformers adjacent to the incoming electrical service on St. Nicholas Terrace, southeast of the
SAUDLA Building. Since the transformers will not represent substantial aboveground development,
their installation will not result in visual or contextual effects to historic architectural resources.
Future Build Condition
Archaeology. A Phase IA Cultural Resource Assessment commissioned by the Dormitory
Authority was completed for the Proposed Project. Based on the documentary and cartographic research,
soil boring data and field inspections, it was determined that within a small grassy mound overlooking the
athletic track and field east of the Boiler Plant and south of the SAUDLA Building, the potential exists for
the presence of human remains associated with a nineteenth-century vault/crypt connected with the
Convent of the Sacred Heart (later the College of the Sacred Heart and now Manhattanville College). It is
believed that these remains were removed when the use of the property changed and then reburied when
Manhattanville College moved the campus to its then-new location in Westchester County. The Phase IA
12
Letter from Ruth L. Pierpont, Director, Historic Preservation Field Services Bureau, New York State Office of Parks,
Recreation and Historic Preservation to Joanna Oliver, AICP, Environmental Manager, Dormitory Authority of the State of New
York, October 12, 2007.
13
Letter from New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission to Joanna Oliver, AICP, Environmental Manager,
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York,, September 5, 2007.
14
Willa Appel, PhD., Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, New York Structural Biology Center.
Letter to Joanna Oliver, AICP, Environmental Manager, Dormitory Authority of the State of New York, March 26, 2007 (and
email correspondence dated September 25, 2007).
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-17
Cultural Resource Assessment recommended that excavation activities in this area be archaeologically
monitored. OPRHP concurred with the recommendation that an archaeologist be present to monitor
excavation activity in this vicinity to help ensure that if any remains were left behind, they will be treated
appropriately.15
LPC similarly concurred with the archaeological-monitoring recommendation.
Accordingly, a qualified monitor would be present while such excavation is ongoing, in accordance with
OPRHP’s recommended action. If any in-situ remains are identified, the Dormitory Authority would
contact OPRHP. Upon completion of the field monitoring activity, the Dormitory Authority would
prepare and submit a report on the monitoring work for OPRHP’s and LPC’s files.
Historic Architecture. Because vibration from blasting, hoe ramming and the use of other
machinery has the potential to damage structures, the contractor responsible for excavation would develop
a building protection plan (“Building Protection Plan”). The Building Protection Plan, as part of the
contract documents for the construction firm undertaking the work, would require the contractor to
demonstrate that all excavation activities are conducted in strict accordance with the provisions contained
in New York City Department of Buildings (“NYCDOB”) Technical Policy and Procedure Notice #10/88
(“TPPN” #10/88”) and the requirements of the LPC. The contractor would submit, with its bid, a plan to
ensure that all rock excavation activities do not result in vibration that would exceed 0.5 inch per second
PPV at any LPC historic structures (e.g., A. Philip Randolph High School and the Croton Aqueduct, 135th
Street Gatehouse). The Building Protection Plan would be reviewed and approved by a licensed
structural engineer, and would be a condition for award of contract.
To ensure compliance, the Building Protection Plan would require the monitoring of vibration at
the relevant buildings adjacent to construction activity, and would include provisions that construction
activity must cease if structural or architectural damage were determined to be imminent. If warranted on
the basis of monitoring results, construction techniques would be modified in order to ensure that no
damage to proximate buildings results from construction of the Proposed Project. If warranted, vibrationreduction measures or alternate technologies would be employed. Such measures could include: use of
hoe rams, drilling or rock splitting techniques in place of blasting; routing of heavily-loaded trucks away
from vibration-sensitive structures; operation of construction equipment as far away from vibrationsensitive sites as practicable; and phasing multiple ground-impacting operations so that they would not
occur during the same time period.
If not implemented as part of the CCNY Utility Project, excavation for the Design Alternate
utility work located north and east of the SAUDLA Building would be conducted concurrently with that
for the Phase I Buildings. Limited blasting would be required for the portion of the utility trench
excavation at the northeast corner of the SAUDLA Building. Blasting at the northeast corner of the
SAUDLA Building would proceed in a fashion similar to that described above, and because this segment
of the utility trench would be within 90 feet of the A. Philip Randolph High School, a designated New
York City Landmark (“NYCL”), the Building Protection Plan would incorporate special measures set
forth by LPC and NYCDOB’s TPPN #10/88 to protect this historic resource from damage due to
proximate construction activities. The Building Protection Plan would require a survey of the
preconstruction building condition, landmark protection planning and vibration monitoring during
construction.
15
Correspondence between Douglas P. Mackey, Historic Preservation Program Analyst, Archaeology, New York State
Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation and Joanna Oliver, AICP, Environmental Manager, Dormitory Authority of
the State of New York, July 19, 2006 (06PR01862).
Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
CCNY Science Building/CUNY ASRC Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10-18
In addition, the Proposed Project would add new structures within the vicinity of the historic
architectural resources in the architectural APE. However, the effect of the Proposed Project would not
be adverse (following 36 CFR 800.5 – Assessment of adverse effect), since the introduction of the
proposed buildings to the viewshed of the historic properties would not alter, directly or indirectly, any of
the characteristics of those historic properties that qualify the properties as S/NR-listed or eligible or
NYCL-eligible resources. Nor would the Proposed Project diminish the integrity of each property's
location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association, as the historic properties already
exist within an urban educational context consisting of several academic structures. With respect to the
buildings that comprise the eligible historic district on St. Nicholas Avenue, the expansive St. Nicholas
Park and the existing topography (abrupt grade change) serve as physical and visual buffers between this
historic architectural resource and the proposed buildings.
Conclusion
Archaeology. Based on the documentary and cartographic research, soil boring data and field
inspections, it was determined that a portion of the archaeology APE holds the potential to contain human
remains associated with a nineteenth-century vault/crypt. The specific location with the potential to
contain archaeological resources is located north of the athletic track and field, east of the Boiler Plant
and south of the SAUDLA Building on a small grassy mound over looking the athletic track and field.
The Proposed Project would create ground disturbance to this location during construction of the ASRC I
Building. During construction, an archaeologist would be present to monitor excavation activity in this
vicinity to help ensure that if any remains were left behind, they will be treated appropriately. If any insitu remains are identified, DASNY would contact OPRHP. Upon completion of the field monitoring
activity, DASNY would prepare and submit a report on the monitoring work for OPRHP’s and LPC’s
files.
Historic Architecture. Since excavation for the utilities associated with the Proposed Project
would occur within 90 feet of a designated NYCL (the New York Training School for Teachers and New
York Model School), the Proposed Project would incorporate special measures set forth by LPC and
NYCDOB (in NYCDOB TPPN #10/88) to protect this historic resource from increased vibration levels
associated with construction activities. The Proposed Project also would result in the development of
new structures within the vicinity of the historic architectural resources in the APE. However, the
introduction of the proposed buildings to the viewshed of the historic properties would not alter, directly
or indirectly, any of the characteristics of those properties that qualify the properties as S/NR-listed or
eligible or NYCL-eligible resources. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have no significant adverse
effect on identified historic properties within the historic architectural APE.