Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rear Addition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Landmarks approves rear‑yard reduction and penthouse for 36 West 11th Street with suggestions on materiality
Summary
The Landmarks Preservation Commission approved a plan to reduce a full‑height rear extension and add a setback penthouse at 36 West 11th Street in the Greenwich Village Historic District, asking the applicant to soften glassiness at the rear and to reduce rooftop mechanical visibility where possible.
The Landmarks Preservation Commission on June 24 approved a proposal at 36 West 11th Street to reduce a deep, full‑height rear extension, restore a more typical rear-yard profile and use the saved floor area to add a setback penthouse. Commissioners asked the applicant to explore reducing the visual glassiness of the rear elevation and to lower or better conceal rooftop mechanical screening.
Jason Allen of Workshop Design & Architecture presented a plan to remove the existing deep rear extension in part, creating a legal 30‑foot rear yard and relocating permitted floor area into a penthouse set back 20 feet from the front facade with a planted five‑foot buffer and modest glass railing. The application shifts mass from the back yard into a rooftop penthouse clad in zinc panels with a glass‑forward composition above a red‑brick base.
Village Preservation supported reducing the rear extension but urged less glazed treatment at the rear; Community Board 2 recommended mixed approval — endorsing the reduced depth but objecting to the penthouse’s glass railing and modern rear‑façade design. Several neighbors asked the commission to limit upper terraces and protect privacy and light for the row‑house rear yards.
Commissioners agreed the reduced rear massing improves light and air in the central rear green space and noted the block contains a range of prior rooftop and rear additions, some with visible railings. The commission approved the application with a directive for staff review to reduce the height and visibility of rooftop mechanical screening where feasible and encouraged the applicant to work with staff on reducing perceived rear elevation glassiness where consistent with the approved massing.
The motion passed by recorded vote (6–1), with one commissioner opposed.
