Tribeca Trust sought to extend the Tribeca Historic District. In 2016, the Tribeca Trust filed a Request for Evaluation with the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission which proposed that the Commission extend the borders of three historic districts in the Tribeca neighborhood.
The Commission denied Tribeca Trust’s Request and refused to advance the Request. The Commission reasoned that much of the area did not merit designation and there was already a preexisting high level of landmark protection in Tribeca.
Tribeca Trust sued, demanding that the court overturn the Commission’s refusal to advance their Request. Tribeca Trust argued that the Commission’s decision was arbitrary and capricious because the Commission lacked established guidelines or procedures to guide its decision making. The Supreme Court, New York County, upheld the Commission and ruled against Tribeca Trust.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the lower court’s ruling and rejected Tribeca Trust’s argument that the Commission’s decision was arbitrary and capricious. The court reasoned that the Commission’s decision not to advance Tribeca Trust’s Request was within its discretion, and that compelling the Commission to establish new procedures was not an available remedy.
(CIT) Tribeca Tr., Inc. v City of New York, 93 N.Y.S.3d 842 (1st Dep’t. 2019).
By: Benjamin Remy (Benjamin is a New York Law School graduate, Class of 2019).