Developer argued City inadequately considered rezoning’s economic impact. In May 2008, the Department of City Planning proposed rezoning 111 blocks in Manhattan’s East Village and Lower East Side neighborhoods. Planning proposed the contextual rezoning in order to preserve the area’s low- and midrise character and channel new construction to blocks suitable for development. The plan included rezoning large mid-block portions above Houston Street from R7-2 to R8B to establish height limits while providing an increase in total floor area. The plan also included applying a more restrictive R7B zoning district to three mid-blocks located between East 4th and 7th Streets and Avenues A and B.

After three years of public review, the City Planning Commission prepared a final environmental impact statement which concluded that the rezoning would have no significant impact on the environment. The City Council approved the proposal. 5 CityLand 165 (Dec. 2008). (more…)

Residents and community groups unsuccessfully challenged the City’s 111-block rezoning. In May 2008, the Department of City Planning proposed a 111-block rezoning in the East Village and Lower East Side neighborhoods of Manhattan. The rezoning sought to preserve the area’s low- and mid-rise character by applying contextual zoning districts establishing maximum building heights and channeling new construction to areas suitable for development. The proposal included applying the City’s Inclusionary Housing Program provisions to certain zoning districts to promote the development of affordable housing.

The City Planning Commission prepared a final environmental impact statement, which concluded that the rezoning would not result in any significant adverse socioeconomic impacts, and the City Council approved the rezoning. 5 CityLand 165 (Dec. 2008). (more…)

Development Rendering Image Credit: City Planning

Two Bridges development gets Appellate Division ruling but two lawsuits remain pending. On August 27, 2020, the First Department’s Appellate Division unanimously ruled in favor of a Lower East Side development that would consist of four towers, 11,000 square feet of retail, and over 2,700 residential units. Of the 2,700 residential units, approximately 700 units will be dedicated to affordable housing and 200 units will be set aside for senior housing. The project’s development group includes JDS Development Group, L+M Development Partners, CIM Group, and Starrett Development. The development’s challengers are the New York City Council and Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer.

(more…)

Neighbors opposed the reopening of Chumley’s, a former speakeasy located on a residential block of the West Village. Chumley’s, a famous former speakeasy and literary hangout located at 86 Bedford Street in Greenwich Village, closed temporarily in 2007 in order to repair structural defects in its landmark-designated building. Chumley’s is part of the Greenwich Village Historic District. In May 2012 Chumley’s began the process to regain its liquor license and reopen. The reopened Chumley’s would be a 2,000-square-foot restaurant with 58 table seats, a standing bar, no sidewalk café, and it would play only recorded music as background. It would also close at 1:00 a.m. Sunday through Wednesday, and at 2:00 a.m. Thursday through Saturday. (more…)

Long View Rendering of 126th Street and Citi Field. Image Credit: NYC EDC.

Public trust doctrine did not apply to Willets Point West development project.  On August 15, 2014, the New York Supreme Court in Manhattan denied petitions for declarative and injunctive relief against the Willets Point Development Project in Queens.  The petitions were brought by a coalition led by New York State Senator Tony Avella, The City Club of New York, and New York City Park Advocates.  The petitioners argued that constructing a shopping mall and hotel was an improper use of the Willets Point West parkland, and that it should remain open for public events including circus performances and concerts.

(more…)