Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Liquor License 30 Jane topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Community Board 2 recommends denying Una Pizza’s beer-and-wine license at 30 Jane Street after heavy neighborhood opposition
Summary
Residents of Jane Street told the Manhattan Community Board 2 that Una Pizza’s reservation‑only beer-and-wine plan would still create sidewalk crowds, Uber drop‑off congestion and repeated enforcement headaches; the committee recommended denial after extended public comment.
At its December meeting, Manhattan Community Board 2 heard an application from Mangieri Enterprises (doing business as Una Pizza Napolitano) for a beer-and-wine license at 30 Jane Street. Applicant representatives Adriana Galovatti and operator Christina said the venue would be small, reservation-only, service-focused and beer-and-wine only, with roughly 30 seats including bar seating and a policy to limit private buyouts to about 10–20 per year.
The community response was sharp. Kate Bostock, speaking for the Jane Street Block Association, said the block is “a residential mid‑block with no restaurants” and warned that Una’s Instagram following and its Orchard Street crowds made “it unreasonable to expect limited to no activity on the sidewalk.” Other neighbors raised similar worries about narrow 11‑foot sidewalks, the risk that for‑hire vehicles would double‑park and block emergency access, and the operator’s track record at its other location. Ellen Barkin, who attended a block meeting, acknowledged concessions from the Mangieri family but urged strict enforceable conditions if the board were to consider approval.
Committee members pressed the applicants on hours, certificate of occupancy and how the reservation system would prevent queuing. The board reiterated that any promises not included in stipulations are difficult to enforce through the State Liquor Authority and advised residents to file SLA complaints if license conditions are not met.
After more than an hour of public testimony — including explicit concerns that prior stipulations at the operator’s Orchard Street location had not always been followed — the committee coalesced around recommending denial. Board members cited the narrow sidewalk, the predictable pattern of social‑media‑driven lines, and the practical limits of local enforcement as reasons to oppose granting the license in this mid‑block residential location.
The committee’s recommendation is advisory; the State Liquor Authority makes final licensing decisions. The applicants may reapply or pursue stipulations with the SLA; residents said they will monitor enforcement closely and would return to the board or SLA if problems arise.
