Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landmarks Restoration Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CB2 endorses Landmarks Committee recommendation for 142 Green St.; debate centers on conversion of live-work units to single-family residence
Summary
Manhattan Community Board 2 voted to endorse its Landmarks Committee's recommendations on a renovation at 142 Green Street: approve facade restoration and certain additions, deny the penthouse design. Several board members said the application accelerates loss of multiunit/artist housing; others praised the restoration work.
Manhattan Community Board 2 on Wednesday voted to endorse a Landmarks Committee recommendation concerning work at 142 Green Street in SoHo, approving a careful cast-iron facade restoration, removal of external fire escapes and ground-floor infill while recommending denial of the proposed penthouse design.
Chenault Spence, reporting the Landmarks Committee's findings, said the committee approved the rear addition provided it preserves adequate light and air and recommended denial of a rooftop penthouse as incompatible with the historic fabric.
Several full-board members said they opposed the recommendation not because of the exterior restoration but because the project converts five joint live-work units for artists into a single-family dwelling, a change they said removes existing housing supply. Janine Kiley noted the lot size (roughly 50 feet by 100 feet) and expressed concern about the scale of the finished building.
"The building can and should continue to serve the neighborhood, but this conversion will displace multiple homes," Janine Kiley said during the discussion.
Other speakers defended the committee's narrow landmarks role. A committee representative noted the Landmarks Committee's charge is to review the design and level of restoration, not to adjudicate broader zoning or use policy, and said the restoration meets the technical standards the committee applies.
After debate, the board voted to carry the Landmarks Committee recommendation. Recorded opposition included several named board members who said they would oppose on principle because the project reduces multiple units of housing to one. The meeting minutes show three abstentions.
Next steps: The Landmarks Committee recommendation will be transmitted as part of the community board's report on the application; additional review will occur through the city's landmark review processes as appropriate.
