Letter to Vice Chair Master Re: Final Letter Report on the Processing of Permit Applications by the Landmarks Preservation Commission

By Electronic Mail

Angie Master
Vice Chair
Landmarks Preservation Commission
253 Broadway, 11th Floor
New York, NY 10007

Re: Final Letter Report on the Processing of Permit Applications by the Landmarks Preservation Commission, FL25-058A

Dear Vice Chair Master:

This Final Letter Report concerns the New York City Comptroller’s audit of the Processing of Permits by the Landmarks Preservation Commission.

Background

The Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) is responsible for protecting and preserving New York City’s architecturally, historically, and culturally significant buildings and sites by granting them landmark status and regulating them after designation. Since its inception in 1965, LPC has granted landmark status to more than 38,000 properties, including 1,470 individual landmarks, 125 interior landmarks, and 12 scenic landmarks within 157 historic districts and historic district extensions across the five boroughs.

In accordance with Chapter 74 of the City Charter, LPC regulates City landmark properties and districts. LPC helps protect the City’s landmark properties by regulating changes made to these landmark buildings and sites. It reviews permit applications for work on designated properties, issues permits, provides technical guidance and preservation education to owners of landmark properties, investigates complaints of illegal work, and initiates action to ensure compliance with the Landmarks Law.[1]

LPC’s rules are set forth in Title 63 of the Rules of the City of New York and may be modified by LPC as needed following a public hearing process. In July 2023, LPC approved amendments to Title 63 that streamlined the application process for business owners and individual homeowners seeking agency approval for certain types of work, such as building updates that would improve the climate resiliency and sustainability of landmarked properties. Effective August 21, 2023, the new rules expedited the permit application and review process by expanding the range of applications eligible for preservationist staff-level review (if all rules are met), rather than requiring a more in-depth review by the full Commission at a public hearing.

LPC uses a computer system called AppTrak that was implemented in April 2017 to manage, track, and process permit applications, violations, and complaints, and to enforce rules related to landmark properties throughout New York City.

On March 19, 2024, LPC launched Portico, a public-facing, web-based portal that enables owners of landmarked buildings and their representatives to electronically apply for permits to perform work on their designated properties, upload supporting documents, access application status updates, and receive final permits. The system directs applicants through a series of questions to help identify the proper permit type needed and whether their application qualifies for one of LPC’s expedited review services.

The four primary types of permits LPC issues include: Expedited Certificate of No Effect (XCNE), Certificate of No Effect (CNE), Permit for Minor Work (PMW), and Certificate of Appropriateness (COFA). Together, these make up approximately 87% of all permits issued during the audit scope period of Fiscal Years 2023 to 2025. Three of these permit types (XCNE, CNE, and PMW) are reviewed by preservationist staff only, whereas COFAs must also undergo a hearing before the Commission (Commission Review) for approval.

LPC reported receiving permit applications totaling 12,211 in FY2023, 11,436 in FY2024, and 11,748 in FY2025.

The objective of this audit was to assess the processing of permit applications by LPC.

Findings

The audit found that LPC generally complied with its procedures for processing and issuing permits and generally issued permits within established timeframes. In addition, subsequent to the August 21, 2023 changes to Title 63 rules and the launch of Portico in 2024, the percentage of permit applications that were processed, approved, and issued within established timeframes increased.

LPC Compliance with Procedures for Processing Permits

Based on a review of 50 sampled permit applications, 47 were issued permits and three were not because of open violations, the application was withdrawn, or the applicant failed to submit required documents.

Overall, auditors concluded that LPC satisfactorily complied with its protocols when processing permit applications and issuing permits. LPC has reasonable controls in place to ensure that new permit applications are received, assigned for review, and reviewed by a supervisor, if required. In addition, LPC appropriately emailed applicants notifying of updates on the applications. These emails instruct applicants to sign-in to Portico to view the status of their applications. In instances where documentation submissions were incomplete, a materials checklist noting outstanding materials required to be submitted by the applicant was generated.

Further, audit results showed that, when applicable, submitted blueprints or plans had required architect seals, violations were cleared before permit issuance, and permit applications were reviewed by supervisors.[2] The audit also found that all but two of the 47 sampled applications that were issued permits had LPC’s Approval Stamp—”Landmarks Preservation Commission Electronic Approval – [Date] – RC”––printed on the permit.

Permits Generally Issued within Established Timeframes

LPC generally issued permits within established timeframes. For the audit scope period, the average timeframes and specific targets, when applicable, for the four primary permit types are as follows:

• 88% of CNE permits were issued within 10 business days (target percentage specified – 85%)
• 98% of XCNE permits were issued within two business days (target percentage specified – 100%)
• 88% of PMWs were issued within 10 business days (no target percentage specified)
• 55% of COFAs were issued within 10 business days (no target percentage specified)

Although LPC came close, it did not meet its target for issuing 100% of XCNEs within two business days. In addition, only 55% of COFAs were issued within 10 days.

As demonstrated in Table 1 below, audit results indicate that since Portico’s implementation on March 19, 2024, LPC’s permit application processing times have improved. The time to process CNE and PMW permit applications dropped by 33% and 17%, respectively, while the time to issue XCNE permits remained the same. As for COFA applications, the decrease of 14% indicates a probable effect, in part, of LPC’s changes to Title 63 on August 21, 2023, as fewer permit applications required a full Commission Review, making it possible for those permits to be issued earlier.

Table 1: Average Days to Process Permits Pre- and Post-Portico Implementation (July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2025)*

* Measured from Application Complete Date to Permit Issue Date

Launch of Portico Increased Efficiency

Portico has increased efficiency and transparency through the automation of permit application submissions, directing applicants to correct permit types, and electronic issuance of permits.  Prior to the rollout of Portico on March 19, 2024, permit applications were submitted in hardcopy and data was manually entered into AppTrak, and hardcopy document submissions were reviewed by LPC preservationists. With the implementation of Portico, all documents are submitted electronically by applicants and reviewed online by LPC preservationists. Moreover, applicants and their representatives are able to view the detailed status and any updates on their applications throughout the application process.

Since the implementation of Portico, the percentage of permits issued within established timeframes for the four permit types reviewed has increased, as shown in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Percentage of Permits Issued within Timeframes Pre and Post Portico Implementation

Recommendations

The audit recommends that LPC should:

1. Ensure that all permits have the LPC approval stamp before being issued.

LPC’s Response: LPC agreed with this recommendation.

2. Make efforts to ensure that COFAs are issued within 10 business days.

LPC’s Response: LPC agreed with this recommendation.

3. Consider establishing percentage goals for the number of PMWs to be issued within established timeframes.

LPC’s Response: LPC agreed with this recommendation.

Recommendations Follow-up

Follow-up will be conducted periodically to determine the implementation status of each recommendation contained in this report. Agency reported status updates are included in the Audit Recommendations Tracker available here: https://comptroller.nyc.gov/services/for-the-public/audit/audit-recommendations-tracker/

Scope and Methodology

We conducted this performance audit in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS). GAGAS requires that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions within the context of our audit objectives. This audit was conducted in accordance with the audit responsibilities of the City Comptroller as set forth in Chapter 5, §93 of the New York City Charter.

The scope of this audit was from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2025.

The methodology for this audit included the following steps; specifically, the auditors:

• Conducted interviews with LPC officials to gain an understanding of the permit issuance process and the roles and responsibilities of relevant staff.
• Reviewed and evaluated applicable criteria, including Title 63 of RCNY– LPC Rules, LPC’s Permit Application Guide, agency policies and procedures, and other applicable materials.
• Conducted walkthroughs of AppTrak and Portico, and reviewed related informational and training documents and systems documentation.
• Obtained permit data from AppTrak for the scope period, evaluated the data, and ran various queries as part of the assessment of data reliability and timing of permit processes.
• Reviewed complaint data for FYs 2023–2025 to assess whether complaints were made regarding LPC’s permit processing.
• Randomly selected a composite sample of 50 permit applications comprised of 13 XCNE, 24 CNE, 11 PMW and 2 COFA permit types from FY2025, and reviewed and analyzed the details associated with each to evaluate compliance with stated regulations and to ensure the timeliness of actions taken in the processing of those permits.
• Conducted time studies of permit application data for the audit scope period and evaluated outliers (permits issued beyond established timeframes).
• Reviewed information about LPC’s pre-permit audits of XCNE applications for permits issued (those not requiring supervisory review).

Preliminary results of this audit were discussed with LPC officials during and at the conclusion of this audit. LPC agreed to waive the need for an Exit Conference Summary and an Exit Conference. On November 20, 2025, a Draft Letter Report was submitted to LPC with a request for written comments. Our office received a written response from LPC on November 28, 2025. In its response, LPC agreed with the audit findings and recommendations. The full response is attached to this report as an addendum.

Sincerely,

Maura Hayes-Chaffe

c: Lisa Kersavage, Executive Director, Landmarks Preservation Commission
Steven Thomson, Director of Community and Intergovernmental Affairs, Landmarks Preservation Commission
Jean-Claude Lebec, Director, Mayor’s Office of Risk Management and Compliance
Douglas Giuliano, Deputy Director, Mayor’s Office of Risk Management and Compliance

Addendum

See attachment.

Footnotes

[1] New York City Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 3, §§ 301–322.

[2] In instances where there were open violations, LPC did not issue permits.