It’s been vacant for six decades, but a Glendale lot may soon see a shovel in the ground.
Community Board 5 (CB 5) voted to approve variance requests to build a mixed-use building on the empty lot on the corner of Myrtle Avenue and 74th Street in Glendale.
The owner of the lot, located at 73-45 Myrtle Ave., is seeking a variance from the NYC Board of Standards and Appeals (BSA) to allow for the development of a two-story plus cellar mixed-use building on the oddly shaped lot. The property is 100 feet long along Myrtle Avenue, 30 feet wide on 74th Street and 17 feet wide in back.
The variance is needed because the proposed building would be contrary to the current residential floor area, front yard, side yard and parking and use regulations within the R4-1 zone. Also, part of the property lies within the right-of-way for Myrtle Avenue on the city’s official map, so the owner is seeking a waiver from the city to permit development of the lot within the bed of a mapped street.
“They want to put a 1,400-square-foot commercial on the first floor, the doors will open towards Myrtle Avenue, and a basement,” explained Walter Sanchez, chairperson of CB 5’s Land Use Committee. “They want to go 35 feet high with two residentials upstairs, and the entrance to that will be on 74th Street.”
The committee reviewed the requests and recommended to vote in favor of them, bringing them to the full board for a vote during the CB 5 monthly meeting on April 13 at Christ the King High School in Middle Village.
“We really felt that the site was unsightly and the neighbors didn’t come out to complain during the public hearing, and they were notified, or at the committee report,” Sanchez said. “So we recommended in favor. We had no objection to the variance on the condition that the applicant build three tree pits … along Myrtle Avenue and one tree along 74th Street in the front of the property.”
The board voted almost unanimously to approve the variance requests, with the only holdout being CB 5 chairperson Vincent Arcuri. He voted against the proposals “on principle” because he claimed the shape of the lot is a self-imposed hardship, adding that the owner knows they would not be able to build on the oddly shaped property.
The BSA makes the final determination on building variances.