New residential tower will be nine feet from adjacent co-op building. On September 28, 2005, the City Council approved a text amendment and special permit to allow construction of a 26-story, mixed-use building at 1129-1133 York Avenue in Manhattan. The proposal called for a zoning map amendment to change the site from C8-4 to C1-9 and a special permit to build a 100-space parking garage.

The developer, the Witkoff Group, plans to use HPD’s Inclusionary Housing Program to develop inclusionary units off-site on East 76th Street between First and York in exchange for a bonus to develop the proposed project as-of-right with a total of 138,576 sq.ft., 120 dwelling units and 6,171 sq.ft. of retail space. (more…)

Residents of Manhattan’s Upper East Side and Bensonhurst vigorously opposed Sanitation’s proposed sites. Sanitation sought site selection approval to construct four 90,000- square-foot, three-story marine transfer stations on sites formerly used as waste transfer stations or garbage incinerators. In Manhattan, Sanitation sought to reuse the site at East 91st Street and the East River, which had contained a waste transfer station until 1999. In Brooklyn, sites at Shore Parkway in Bensonhurst and at Hamilton Avenue in Sunset Park were proposed; both had incinerators or transfer stations that closed in the past five years. The fourth site in College Point Queens, at the foot of 31st Avenue, has a vacant marine transfer station.

At the March 2, 2005 Commission hearing, Sanitation Commissioner John J. Doherty testified that since the Fresh Kills Landfill closed in 2001 Sanitation has been operating on interim contracts for the export of residential solid waste by truck. He stated that the four transfer stations would allow Sanitation to comply with state environmental laws, decrease reliance on truck transport and make each borough self-sufficient in the transfer of its waste. Each new structure would incorporate state-of-the-art ventilation and odor control systems that would remove 90 to 99 percent of the odorous compounds. (more…)

Owner built glass-enclosed stairwell after receiving approval from Buildings and Landmarks. In 1999, George Pantelidis, owner of a four-story townhouse at 116 East 73rd Street in Manhattan’s Upper East Side Historic District, obtained a Buildings permit to build a glass-enclosed stairwell in the rear yard of the townhouse. The stairwell allowed the Pantelidis family, who resided on the first two floors, to go from one floor to another without using the public stairs. Prior to construction, Pantelidis also obtained the required approvals from Community Board 8 and Landmarks. In 2001, eighteen months after the $200,000 stairwell was completed, neighbors challenged the issuance of the permit by asking Buildings to update the permit, which is common practice. Although Buildings updated without any changes and affirmed the permit, the update allowed the neighbors to appeal to BSA.

BSA granted the neighbor’s appeal and revoked the permit, finding that the glass-enclosed stairwell was taller than the 14-foot limit in the zoning resolution for “greenhouses” and, although the permit referred to it as a greenhouse, it did not meet the definition for one. BSA also found that the stairwell further decreased the building’s compliance with the rear yard limits. (more…)

Owner, without a permit, had installed a row of planters and pergola on mansard roof. 34 West 74th Street is located in the Central Park West Historic District and the Central Park West-West 73rd-74th Street Historic District. The structure is one of a row of eighteen Georgian Revival style rowhouses with Beaux-Arts style elements, designed by Percy Griffin and built in 1902. In 2002, after the Landmarks Preservation Commission issued a notice of violation to 34 West 74th Street for installing a row of planters and a pergola on the roof without a permit, the items were removed and Landmarks rescinded the warning. In 2004, the building owners applied to Landmarks for a permit to re-install both. On September 7, 2004, Landmarks granted the permit to re-install the wood pergola, but denied the application to re-install the planters.

Landmarks found that the natural-finish wood pergola, which would be secured to a chimney on the eastern side of the roof, would not detract from the appearance of the building, its mansard roof, or the row of houses on the block. The pergola, an arbor or trellis framework that supports climbing plants, is a feature often seen on rooftops within the two Historic Districts. The row of planters extending the full length of the building, however, significantly changed the appearance of the mansard roof. Landmarks found it stood out against the skyline in a way that drew undue attention. (more…)