Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Outdoor Dining Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee defers final decision on Andre at 35 W. 13th sidewalk after questions about raised platform and ADA clearance
Summary
Manhattan City committee discussed Andreas WV LLCdba Andre at 35 West 13th Streets application for roadway and sidewalk seating. DOT has conditionally approved the roadbed; committee raised questions about a raised platform, deed/property limits and ADA clearance and deferred a final resolution pending documentation and follow-up.
The Manhattan City Community Board licensing committee deferred action Tuesday on an alteration application from Andreas WV LLC doing business as Andre at 35 West 13th Street after members raised questions about a raised platform and whether the sidewalk seating is within private property lines.
The application seeks roadway seating (12 tables, 24 seats) that the meeting record shows "has already been conditionally approved by DOT," and sidewalk seating with five tables and 10 seats. Committee members flagged a 10-foot clear-path requirement and said the applicant's layout left only about a one-inch shortfall from ADA clearance.
Committee member (identified in the transcript as Speaker 1) said the layout left "youre one inch off from being ADA compliant." That member also pressed on how wait staff would serve tables that sit beyond a doorway and whether the raised platform sits within the applicant's deeded property. The applicant said some tables could be configured to allow access but acknowledged tight clearances.
Mark Fiedler, resident chair of BAMRA (the local business and merchant residents association), spoke for the block and noted the group had voted in favor of the application. Fiedler said a resolution prepared by his group had a clerical error referring to a "new liquor license" rather than a transfer; he told the committee he would provide a corrected text.
Committee members told the applicant they would not resolve the platform/property questions that night and asked the applicant to provide a survey or other evidence showing whether the raised platform is within the property line. The transcript records the chair as saying they would "have to have discussions" and that the committee could approve or disapprove after that documentation.
The committee did not record a formal vote on the sidewalk portion and left the roadbed portion under the DOT conditional approval. Members asked the applicant to consult DOT and, if necessary, DOT or roadway permits and to confirm whether a DCA or other agency permit is required.
If the applicant supplies a property survey and documentation of any DOT/agency permits, the committee said it will revisit the sidewalk question and the platform's status at a future meeting.
