Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Street Dining Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors, board raise enforcement concerns after DOT approves 194–196 Spring Street roadway seating
Summary
Residents and committee members told the SLA committee that roadway/sidewalk seating at 194–196 Spring Street was installed or used before community and building approvals were complete; residents asked for enforcement and clearer documentation from the applicant.
The SLA committee discussed an application related to roadway and sidewalk seating connected to premises at 194–196 Spring Street. Neighbors and residents told the committee they had evidence that seats and other furnishings were being placed in the curb and sidewalk area without required approvals; one longtime resident presented photos she said showed the structure under construction while approvals were still pending.
Those opposing the application said the property has a long history of code and noise complaints and that prior promises to the community were not kept. A long-time resident, Paula Nadian, and others said DOT had approved a roadway cafe application and that the operator had nevertheless continued to alter the curb and sidewalk areas without further permits or clear community notice. Neighbors said staff and police showed differing responses when they attempted to report violations.
Why it matters: Sidewalk and roadway cafes require coordination among the property owner, DOT and the Community Board, and residents said the recent sequence of approvals and on-the-ground construction did not follow the expected process. Committee members expressed concern about compliance and enforcement and the impression that some operators are not following CB2 stipulations.
Committee guidance: Committee members asked the applicant to provide written evidence of DOT approvals, details of the curb-line layout, proof that the license holder or operator has authority to place chairs in the furnishing zone and a timetable for remediation where unauthorized furnishings were installed. Several residents urged the board to recommend denial of any SLA expansion until the operator demonstrates consistent compliance with sidewalk, roadbed and building permits.
Outcome at meeting: The committee recorded residents’ concerns and requested documentation from the applicant and DOT before advancing any SLA application. Members emphasized enforcement of existing stipulations and urged staff to coordinate with DOT inspectors and the SLA.
