Owners propose rear-facade restoration, window reconfiguration for 96 Bank Street in Greenwich Village Historic District

Owners’ representatives presented proposed changes to the rear facade of 96 Bank Street, a three-story row house within the Greenwich Village Historic District, asking the Landmarks Committee to modify a previously approved plan.

The applicants said the current rear facade has no historic elements, that exposed steel and lintels are showing early corrosion and that some lot-line windows are noncompliant with Department of Buildings separation requirements. The proposal calls for infilling portions of the rear facade to create a three-window row-house rhythm, adding a lightweight partition and a thin brick veneer cladding (approximately 0.5 inch brick on a metal grid) to provide a continuous brick surface, and removing all nonconforming lot-line windows except one third-floor east-side window to preserve natural light for a primary bathroom vanity area.

The applicants said the new windows will match the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC)–approved front facade windows, metal sills would be replaced with similar sandstone sills, and the thin brick veneer color will match the front facade brick. They explained that the partition work is intended to limit added load on the existing structure and that the veneer adds roughly three-quarters of an inch of depth.

Committee members expressed support for restoring a more historic appearance on the rear and for addressing exposed structural steel. One committee member asked why parlor-level windows are shorter than typical and the applicant replied the shorter height is to avoid conflict with kitchen cabinetry; the committee asked the applicant to explore alternatives such as freestanding cabinets so taller, more historic window proportions could be retained. Committee member Brian said he was “appreciative of the direction” toward historic appearance and that the applicant “might have done our work for us.”

Business session: the committee recorded a recommendation that the rear facade adopt conventional parlor-floor window proportions (taller parlor-level windows) and that the interior kitchen/cabinet layout be revised or an alternative be found so taller windows can be employed where feasible. The committee noted the previously approved rooftop addition and other prior approvals remain in effect and unchanged by this modification request.

The committee did not record a roll-call vote in the transcript; recommendations were made by consensus in the business session.

Ending: The applicant will return with revised drawings addressing the committee’s request about parlor window proportions and interior cabinet solutions; no formal commission vote was recorded in the transcript at this meeting.