Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee opposes retroactive neon for Little Ruby's at 225 West 4th Street; says install must follow LPC approvals
Summary
The committee reviewed a request to legalize an illuminated accessory wall sign installed without permits at Little Ruby's Cafe, 225 West 4th Street, and signaled opposition to approving neon illumination where the earlier renovation process had indicated no lighting.
Get email alerts on the Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Landmarks Committee considered a retroactive application to legalize an illuminated accessory wall sign installed at Little Ruby's Cafe, 225 West 4th Street in the Greenwich Village Historic District. The applicant—s consultant said the sign is a 13-square-foot neon-like tubing installation at the building apex previously used by an earlier tenant and that the cafe—s sign complies with zoning dimensional limits.
Committee members noted the earlier renovation approval had specified painted signage and that the prior resolution had included an assurance there would be no illuminated signage. Committee members asked why neon tubing was installed without permitting and sought confirmation that the cafe has since been made aware of the proper LPC process. The applicant representative said the tenant and consultant were now aware of the permitting requirements and had brought the matter before the committee for review.
No members of the public spoke in favor of an illuminated sign. Committee discussion emphasized that prior assurances in LPC approvals weighed against retroactive authorization of illumination, and members said neon or tubing-based illumination should not be considered a routine substitute for painted signs without clear precedent.
The committee advised that the sign not be approved as an illuminated neon installation at this time and urged the applicant to follow the LPC—s formal review channels and, if appropriate, submit documentation supporting a prior history of illumination. The committee also noted that if the earlier approval had expressly disallowed illumination, that fact should weigh against retrospective approval.
The matter will be carried forward to LPC staff and commissioners with the committee—s recommendation.

