3 surprising anti-development decisions

[David Goldsmith]

Judge ruled 200 Amsterdam couldn't use partial tax lots to get FAR and orders already DOB approved and constructed floors removed:

New York judge orders developer to cut floors from residential tower | CNN

A Manhattan developer must cut floors from its building, a New York Supreme Court judge ruled Thursday.

www.cnn.com

Another judge rules against developers of 4 projects in Two Bridges neighborhood:

Judge Sides With LES Groups In Fight Against High-Rise Towers In Two Bridges

Community groups are using the latest rulings to push for efforts to rezone the neighborhood altogether.

gothamist.com

City Council subcommittee rejects infill towers in East Harlem:

Harlem’s Lenox Terrace redevelopment rejected by City Council committee

The vote foreshadows the project’s rejection by the full City Council.

ny.curbed.com

We have already heard grumblings from some major New York developers about pulling up stakes and going elsewhere:

Fed up: Major landlords consider exiting New York – USA Posts

www.usposts.net

After these recent events which direction are we headed?

 

[Noah Rosenblatt]

hmm, add this on top of the current new dev environment and seems like new permits figures will be way down for the foreseeable future. Wonder where that leaves us in 2023-2024 if we happen to pull out of this cycle and dare I say, start rising again by then?

 

[John Walkup]

Don't forget about the Inwood slapdown from December...

Inwood rezoning struck down following community challenge

A judge called the city’s review of the contested rezoning "superficial."

ny.curbed.com

 

[David Goldsmith]

There is also a lot of talk in a number of Brooklyn neighborhoods about community input to potential zoning changes.

Bushwick Stakeholders Demand City Assess Their Rezoning Plan

Two Councilmembers and other players want the city to include the Bushwick Community Plan in the environmental impact study, so it can be weighed as an option alongside the mayor's rezoning plan.

citylimits.org

Gowanus Groups Pressing for Specifics as Rezoning Review Nears

As large real-estate deals continue to close, neighborhood stakeholders have raised some unresolved concerns.

citylimits.org

 

[John Walkup]

Who exactly counts as a 'stakeholder' and who gets to decide that? Problematic

 

[David Goldsmith]

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm................................................. Stake

 

[David Goldsmith]

Politicians Blast City’s Backing of 200 Amsterdam Developers

A number of New York politicians have condemned the city’s decision to back developers in the 200 Amsterdam Avenue case.

therealdeal.com

"
New York politicians angry at the city’s decision to support a controversial Upper West Side tower say the position is “shocking” and “defies reason.”


In a statement Thursday, state legislators Linda Rosenthal and Brad Hoylman and others condemned the city’s decision to side with SJP Properties and Mitsui Fudosan America in appealing a court ruling that revoked the permit for 200 Amsterdam Avenue."

 

[David Goldsmith]

Howard Hughes Back to Drawing Board on Seaport Project

The Landmarks Preservation Commission told the Howard Hughes Corporation that its planned residential towers at 250 Water Street are too tall.

therealdeal.com

Howard Hughes’ Seaport project dealt major blow
Landmarks Preservation Commission calls proposed towers at 250 Water Street too tall

It’s back to the drawing board — or perhaps the garbage bin — for proposed towers at 250 Water Street.

Over the years the Howard Hughes Corporation has faced extensive community pushback for its plans to build two mixed-use towers at the site. And this week, the Landmarks Preservation Commission — dismissing pleas from a slew of influential New Yorkers at a Jan. 5 hearing — said the project was simply too tall.
According to the Tribeca Trib, the commission told the Texas-based developer at a meeting Tuesday that the towers would “invade the district’s sky space.”

The panel took no official action, but made clear it would not approve the project. The setback means Howard Hughes will have to revisit plans for the site with architects Skidmore, Owings & Merrill.
“We appreciate the LPC’s thoughtful feedback and look forward to returning soon to the commission,” a spokesperson for the developer told the newspaper in a statement.

Some have speculated that redevelopment of the giant parking lot would not be economically viable if limited to the historic district’s typical scale of five stories. A low-scale project would certainly not generate enough profit to endow the historic district’s long-struggling South Street Seaport Museum with $50 million, as Howard Hughes’ 40-story towers promised to do.

Howard Hughes bought the site for $180 million in 2018 from the Milstein family. Its current plan, scaled back from an earlier proposal, includes two 470-foot towers with 260 condo units and 100 affordable rental units.

At that height, the towers would be well over the existing 120-foot zoning height limit in the area, the local paper noted. Beyond approval from Landmarks, the developer needs a zoning modification from the City Council; it has support for that lined up from the local member, Margaret Chin.
Critics of the proposal argue that Landmarks can only consider its architecture and scale, not the $50 million that Howard Hughes said the project would allow it to contribute to the Seaport Museum.

The commission’s chair, Sarah Carroll, agreed, saying at Tuesday’s meeting that the benefits for the museum, “while laudable, are not factors that we can consider or rely on in determining whether the proposed designs for the 250 Water Street site” are appropriate.
Commissioners were unswayed by arguments that the site has been undeveloped for decades, has no historic significance, and is at the edge of the historic district with much taller buildings immediately behind it.

 

[John Walkup]

I dig the Seaport area but, like the entire eastern side of Manhattan, the FDR kinda ruins it.

 

[David Goldsmith]

Corey Johnson Trashes Eichner Project Near Botanic Garden

New York City Council Speaker Corey Johnson and Majority Leader Laurie Cumbo jointly denounced towers planned for Crown Heights.

therealdeal.com

Council speaker, member trash Eichner project near Botanic Garden​

Unusual move follows Mayor de Blasio’s opposition, certification by planning agency​

City Council leaders just put another nail in the coffin of Bruce Eichner’s big Crown Heights project.
City Council Speaker Corey Johnson and Crown Heights Council member Laurie Cumbo issued a joint statement denouncing the rezoning Eichner requested to build his two 35-story tower project at 960 Franklin Avenue.

At the crux of the issue are concerns that the apartment towers’ shadows would damage horticulture at the Botanic Garden, Brooklyn’s top tourist attraction.

“The Brooklyn Botanic Garden is a priceless public asset that must be preserved for generations to come and we will not support any proposal that will harm the Garden,” the joint statement said.
The announcement came just after the City Planning Commission voted on Monday to certify the rezoning proposal, which is not an approval but starts the seven-month public review that leads to a City Planning Commission vote, a Council vote and a mayoral sign-off.

Development proposals often face opposition at the outset of the process and are altered substantially during negotiations. But the early objections to Eichner’s Continuum project have been unusual: Not only did the Council speaker savage it, but last month Mayor Bill De Blasio came out against it.
The backlash raises the possibility that the elected officials will demand height reductions so severe as to make the project uneconomical, given Eichner’s plan to make half of its apartments affordable.

Eichner has expressed a willingness to go back to the drawing board. But withdrawing the application would compel him to start from scratch, costing the project substantial time and money.
De Blasio’s opposition to the development shocked opponents and supporters alike, as de Blasio had endorsed the project in February 2020 when a critic of it called him on Brian Lehrer’s radio show. Although his office later said he was confusing the project with another one nearby, his sentiments about housing affordability being more important than shadows seemed to bode well for Eichner.

“I don’t think it ruins the garden forever. I just don’t. I don’t take that position,” the mayor said at the time. “I would love it if we could have a city that could be a city for everyone and affordable and we could keep some of the exact scale and aesthetics we had previously. I would love it if we could achieve those things, but we’re in this new world.”

But in a later statement, de Blasio said the project was “grossly out of scale with the neighborhood” and would inhibit plant growth at the garden.
Eichner had said the project would have helped reduce the city’s need for affordable housing. About half of the 1,578 units of housing would be below market rate, according to the developer.

The mayor’s reversal was also a blow to unions, who were in line to build, finance and work in the project.
De Blasio said that the Franklin Avenue development “would harm the research and educational work carried out by one of this city’s prized cultural institutions.”

 

[John Walkup]

would inhibit plant growth at the garden.

Finally some real priorities we can build a recovery on!