Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CB2 reaffirms opposition to BSA variance at 51 Little West 12th after split debate
Summary
Community Board 2 voted 19–13–3 to reiterate opposition to a Board of Standards and Appeals variance request for 51 Little West 12th, citing shortcomings in the applicant’s economic comparables, neighborhood‑character impacts and failure to demonstrate a minimum variance.
Manhattan Community Board 2 voted on April 1 to reaffirm its opposition to a zoning variance application for 51 Little West 12th Street, saying the applicant failed to meet required Board of Standards and Appeals findings on economic hardship, neighborhood character and minimum‑required relief.
The land‑use committee had reviewed a revised submission and again concluded the applicant did not satisfy the five legal findings required under ZR72‑21. CB2’s resolution cited concerns about the applicant’s rate‑of‑return analysis and restaurant comparables, questioned whether the building’s revised base and height were still out of character with the surrounding area, and said the applicant had not shown the variance requested was the minimum necessary to achieve a comparable outcome. The committee and full board also discussed whether variances are an appropriate tool or whether a broader rezoning would be preferable.
Debate at the full board was split: proponents of opposing the application argued the record did not meet the BSA standards, while supporters said the developer had substantially reduced the project from earlier proposals and that even a small number of new housing units would be beneficial in a tight market. After discussion and a roll call, the board recorded 19 votes in favor of the resolution (opposing the variance), 13 opposed and 3 abstentions; the chair announced the resolution passed.
Why it matters: The BSA’s decision on a variance determines whether a non‑conforming use or dimensional relief can proceed. CB2’s formal opposition becomes part of the public record and may be presented to the BSA and the city’s review process.
What’s next: The applicant remains scheduled to appear before the Board of Standards and Appeals; CB2 members indicated they may submit written testimony and attend BSA hearings, and the community will continue to monitor any subsequent submissions or proposed design changes.
