CB2 hearing: 07/14/2016
LPC hearing: 07/26/2016 – no action

Greenwich Village Historic District
Between West 4th Street and Waverly Place


1) From the CB2 agenda: Application is to amend original LPC application for renovation work at the rear façade.

2) View the application: Available in PDF.

3) View CB2 Resolution: Available in PDF.

4) View the video: A curated list of LPC videos of these presentations from March 2014 onward can be found on our YouTube page.  Click HERE for the video from 07/26/2016.  Please note that the LPC posts these videos about a week after the presentation. Videos include the applicant’s presentation, public testimony (for hearings only), and deliberation by the LPC commissioners.

5) View LPC Notice of Withdrawal/Violation: Available in PDF.

6) LPC designation report: Read this property’s architectural/historical description.

7) Receive updates by email: Please click here if you would like Village Preservation to email you when there are updates to the status of this application.


This section provides updates if there are changes to the hearing dates listed above, which includes instances when an application has been laid over (aka postponed). If applicable, LPC public meeting dates for this application will also be tracked here. Please note that public testimony is taken at public hearings, but not at public meetings.

Please note: All LPC public hearings and public meetings are held at the Municipal Building, 1 Centre Street, 9th floor north, public hearing room (unless otherwise noted).

STAY UPDATED! Click here for our e-alerts to be updated on this application as soon as we find out more.

01/08/2018: the LPC issued a notice of withdrawal of the application due to failure on the applicant’s part to submit materials in support of the application. Violaitons remain in place on this property.

07/26/2016: At today’s public hearing the LPC took no action on this application.  The applicant will need to return at a future public meeting to re-present based on the Commission’s comments.  Some of the commissioners felt that the applicant should build what was originally approved.  Others felt that the changes at the second floor and below could be maintained but that the changes at the two upper stories (including the new penthouse) should be changed to what was originally approved.