APPROVED with modifications 12/10/2019
CB2 hearing: 11/15/2018 – laidover
CB2 hearing: 12/13/2018 – laidover
CB2 hearing: 01/22/2019
LPC hearing: 11/27/2018 – laidover
LPC hearing: 02/12/2019 – laidover
LPC hearing: 03/05/2019 – laidover
LPC hearing: 05/07/2019
LPC meeting: 12/10/2019
Greenwich Village Historic District
Between Perry Street and Greenwich Avenue
Image courtesy of Google Street View
—- APPLICATION INFORMATION —-
1) From the CB2 agenda: Application is to legalize the installation of signage, painting of the façade, installation and alterations to new awning, mechanical equipment on the roof and an art wall.
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 to see the video from 11/27/2018. Click HERE to see the video from 02/12/2019. Click HERE to see the video from 03/05/2019. To see the video from 05/07/2019, click HERE. To see the video from 12/10/2020, click HERE. 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) LPC designation report: Read this property’s architectural/historical description.
6) Receive updates by email: Please click here if you would like GVSHP to email you when there are updates to the status of this application.
—- 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.
12/10/2019 – At today’s public meeting, the Commission approved the revised application with the modification that exterior be re-painted an off-white color instead of the current bright white and that the art wall exclude the word “baby” from its verbage since that would be advertising.
05/07/2019 – At today’s LPC public hearing, the Commission took no action on this application. The applicant was asked to make revisions and re-present at a future public meeting. Below are the notes from the hearing:
Adi Shamir-Baron said that she was convinced by the owner’s comments. John Gustafsson said that everything needed to be reduced.
White paint: Fred Bland stated that he would not have approved the white paint originally, but that he could get on board if none of the other commissioners objected. Michael Devonshire and Jeanne Lutfy agreed that the white was drastic. Diana Chapin said that the white was acceptable. Michael Goldblum suggested that the storefront be painted a darker color, and Anne Holford-Smith agreed.
South-facing signage: Diana Chapin said the south-facing signage was acceptable but could be smaller. Michael Goldblum and Jeanne Lutfy said this signage was not acceptable nor necessary.
Signage facing 7th Avenue South: Kim Vaus, Diana Chapin, Michael Goldblum, and Anne Holford-Smith found this signage acceptable. Michael Devonshire stated that it was too much.
Art wall and awning above art wall: Kim Vauss, Diana Chapin, and Anne Holford-Smith were conflicted about the appropriateness of the art wall. Chapin said it may be appropriate if it were not advertising the restaurant; however, Michael Devonshire did not think this wall appeared more as advertising than as art. Vauss emphasized that the awning above the art wall was not appropriate, and Fred Bland, Michael Devonshire, and Anne Holford-Smith agreed. Fred Bland stated that the art wall was not appropriate, and while Jeanne Lufty applauded the concept of incorporating art into the restaurant, she said that she found this particular example inappropriate.