HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #161  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2017, 1:44 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Bring it on.


http://www.thelodownny.com/leslog/20...ga-towers.html


Chin, Brewer Threaten Lawsuit Over Two Bridges Mega-Towers














Quote:
At a rally held on Friday morning, City Council member Margaret Chin and Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer threatened legal action if the City Planning Commission approves three large-scale development projects in the Two Bridges area.

A joint environmental review is now underway for the towers, which would range in height from 62-79 stories and add around 2,000 mostly market rate apartments in the historically low-income area. Residents have been fighting the projects for months. Since the buildings would all be located in the Two Bridges Large Scale Residential Development (LSRD) area, the Planning Commission must give its approval. Last summer, city officials rejected a request from Council member Chin for a full land use review (ULURP) in the Two Bridges neighborhood. A ULURP would have given the City Council leverage over the proposals.

.....Chin and Brewer gathered with other elected officials, including Public Advocate Letitia James and State Assembly member Yuh-Line Niou, as well as tenant leaders and local tenant advocates. In her remarks, the Council member said, “These monstrosities will threaten the very character of this neighborhood… We are here to remind the administration and the developers that these projects are not a done deal.”

“To the members of the City Planning Commission,” Chin added, “we have a simple message: If you rule against this community, we will use every tool at our disposal to make sure the voices of the people are heard.” While she did not specifically mention a lawsuit in her remarks, a press release from Chin’s office threatened, “legal action against the Administration” if the projects are approved in their current form.


Quote:
On Friday, Brewer explained, “We gave it a chance, we worked with the wonderful tenant leaders, we worked with the task force. It broke down when the developers refused to meet with the task force following a difficult community meeting.”

“We are now calling on City Planning to get this right, to reconsider the incorrect decision they made,” said Brewer. “We’re both stating, for the record, we’re willing to do what it takes, to support legal action if we have to. This is not an outrageous request.”

Assembly member Niou said, “Our message is clear. These luxury towers do not belong on the Lower East Side. The community has long opposed them and the city must reject plans to develop them.” In a statement, State Sen. Daniel Squadron added, “The massive development proposals in the Two Bridges neighborhood would come with massive impact on the community — and yet the community’s role is massively insufficient.”

When it was her turn at the podium, Public Advocate Letitia James urged unity. “All of us should be of one accord,” said James. “There should not be any space between us, because if they see space, they will take advantage of that… I’ve been to too many events where the community has been divided and the developers win.”


Quote:
A City Council candidate, Dashia Imperiale, then interjected, asking why the threat of a lawsuit against the city is only being mentioned now. As City Council aides brought the rally to an abrupt end, Imperiale shouted, “This is a sham!… Shame on you!” A few hours earlier, Christopher Marte, another candidate for the District 1 seat released a statement that read, in part, “Margaret Chin’s attempt to take a stand against the waterfront developments is too little, too late.”

Imperiale, Marte and a third candidate, Aaron Foldenauer, stood should-to-shoulder on the sidewalk to make their case against the incumbent. “If Margaret Chin really wanted to do something about this,” said Foledenauer, “she would have acted years ago, not just two months prior to a hotly contested election.”


Quote:
It should be noted that Mayor de Blasio heard a direct appeal from community members about the mega-towers during a June 21 town hall meeting on the Lower East Side. During that event, Two Bridges tenant leader Trever Holland asked why the city would forego a ULURP, given the massive size and impact of the proposed projects.

In his answer, the mayor contended that previous administrations were to blame for approving land use plans in the Two Bridges area long ago. Referring to the new projects, de Blasio said, “We do not believe… we can just turn it off. I’m just being real with you. We believe it is legally moving forward.”

Council member Chin, who moderated the town hall, chimed in, telling the mayor, “I really disagree with the administration. Every time I look at those proposed towers, it really makes me sick to my stomach.” She added, “We can not allow it to happen. We’ve got to find a way (to stop or change the projects), and I’m looking for a way to push back.”

The mayor responded, “Once a development plan is locked in place by law, it’s not easy to undo it. I’ve got to be clear about this.” He said the city hoped to address the concerns about over-development in the Two Bridges area by “maximizing the affordability” of the new buildings. His administration announced that 25% of the apartments in the three developments would be made available to families earning 60% of Area Median Income (AMI). Another 10% will be set aside for families earning 40% of AMI.

The City Planning Commission will likely not vote on the Two Bridges projects until close to the end of this year.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #162  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2017, 12:51 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
Two Bridges residents try to empower their councilwoman to downsize three new apartment towers



Quote:
Residents opposed to a trio of residential towers planned for the Two Bridges area of Manhattan rallied in front of the Department of City Planning Tuesday for a public review of the projects, a procedure that would effectively hand veto power to City Councilwoman Margaret Chin.

The rally pits community groups, including Good Old Lower East Side and CAAAV Organizing Asian Communities, against JDS Development Group, Starrett Corporation and a partnership between L&M Development Partners and CIM Group. The allowed heights of the three proposed towers range from 724 to roughly 1,000 feet, and altogether they would house nearly 2,800 new units, with a quarter being affordable.

The developers are asking the city to update a 1970s-era special plan for the sites, something they and city planning officials say requires a simple vote from the City Planning Commission. Chin and Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer have argued that the modifications merit a full-blown public review, a seven-month process that culminates in a vote in the city council, and have threatened to sue.
==========================
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article...ge-to-downsize
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #163  
Old Posted Aug 16, 2017, 10:53 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
I think down the line, Midtown and Lower MH along with Greenwich and LES on the riverfront will be a wall of towers. Soho/Greenwich will be the new hells kitchen. Surrounded by towers as the Garment district slowly grows South.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #164  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2017, 3:05 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
They'll be opposing and trying to stop these towers long after they've already started construction. They should focus their energies elsewhere. There are other problems in the city that could use this effort.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #165  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2017, 4:14 PM
DCReid DCReid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
They'll be opposing and trying to stop these towers long after they've already started construction. They should focus their energies elsewhere. There are other problems in the city that could use this effort.
They are in a tough spot. I tend to agree with them that those towers are out of scale in that neighborhood. The first tower well under construction seems totally out of place, especially since it is so close to the bridge. But, they cannot expect the developer to meet all of their wishes, including offering many low rate market units.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #166  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2017, 4:52 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCReid View Post
They are in a tough spot. I tend to agree with them that those towers are out of scale in that neighborhood. The first tower well under construction seems totally out of place, especially since it is so close to the bridge. But, they cannot expect the developer to meet all of their wishes, including offering many low rate market units.
It only seems out of place to you because there is no tower of similar scale there. New York hasn't always been a city covered in towers. Long Island City hasn't always had the number of skyscrapers that it has now, neither did Jersey City. There is always a first, and these towers are being built where the zoning allows for it. It could be argued that the towers going up on the west side are out of place, but likewise, there was a first (Coach), and others will follow. It would not matter if all of these towers were only 10 to 20 stories, these same people would be against it simply because its what they do. They're not just against the height, they're against what they see as new (more affluent) people coming into the neighborhood, regardless of whatever increased affordable housing that would bring.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #167  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2017, 7:13 AM
JSsocal JSsocal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 714
As a further point why not here. I'm not sure if many people have walked down cherry street here but it feels like central queens and not a 20 minute walk to the financial district. This is a neighborhood that's historically been the most densely populated in the city. Now all that's left are (relatively speaking) sparsely populated housing projects.

New York's center of gravity is downtown now, and most of it is either historic or zoned very strictly- which makes this underutilized and virtually charmless stretch of projects & coops the prime place to park lots of housing units.

The MTA (I think) floated a proposal for a light rail line along the east river here from 14th street to downtown, and would be a great compliment to these buildings- or better yet if developers could foot the bill for it then it would be a further justification for these projects.

On top of everything else this stretch of projects is simply the ugliest thing to look at when one stands in dumbo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #168  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2017, 5:11 PM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCReid View Post
They are in a tough spot. I tend to agree with them that those towers are out of scale in that neighborhood. The first tower well under construction seems totally out of place, especially since it is so close to the bridge. But, they cannot expect the developer to meet all of their wishes, including offering many low rate market units.
Using that same logic, there'd be no towers anywhere as any place that have towers now, Midtown, Downtown, Chicago, LA, SF, Toronto, Vancouver, HK, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Beijing, Manila, Bangkok, Mumbai, Singapore, Sydney, Melbourne, Dubai, Miami, Atlanta, Houston, Dallas, Mexico City, London, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Calgary, Seattle, Panama City, São Paulo, Shanghai, Seoul, Tokyo, Kuala Lumpur, Taipei, Buenos Aires, Montreal, Minneapolis, Paris, Las Vegas and hundreds of other cities were all originally low rise and before that uninhabited.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #169  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2017, 12:50 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
Just a comparison. 1st photo from Tectonic. Comparing current 1 MSquare status to what will rise.


Credit: Tectonic


Dramatic alteration of the area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #170  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2017, 3:31 PM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,098
^ Assuming NIMBYs don't get their way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #171  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2017, 3:40 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
Meh. I don't care either way. I'm just happy the thousands of units will likely be coming online. I hope they get the street level right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #172  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2017, 10:10 PM
canucklehead2 canucklehead2 is offline
Sex Marxist of Notleygrad
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: YEG
Posts: 6,847
Build it! The designs are decent and the locations are prime...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #173  
Old Posted Aug 21, 2017, 1:25 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
Meh. I don't care either way. I'm just happy the thousands of units will likely be coming online. I hope they get the street level right.
The steet level is also key, and there are plans to at least activate the bases with retail. More than anything else, that gives Manhattan it's streetlife.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #174  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2017, 1:19 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
Proposed bill would give officials more authority to block projects



Quote:
Elected officials will have more power to stop new residential developments under a proposed new law introduced to City Council Thursday.

Council member Margaret Chin’s proposed law would shake up the way city government deals with rezoning proposals, Crain’s reported. If it goes ahead, the bill would allow the mayor, borough presidents and the City Council’s Committee on Land Use to bypass the “pre-application’” process that rezoning requests currently go through. That would mean politicians would have a greater power over developers, according to the publication.

The new laws could seriously hamper JDS Development Group, Starrett Corporation and L+M Development Partners and CIM Group’s three projects in the Two Bridges area. The laws could give Chin the ability to stop the projects going ahead unless they meet demands, Crain’s reported, which may mean they will need to be scaled back in size.

Michael Stern’s JDS is planning a 79-story tower at 247 Cherry Street, while L+M and CIM are working toward 62-story and 26-story towers at 260 South Street. Starrett wants to build a 62-story building at 259 Clinton Street.
===================
TRD
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #175  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2017, 2:17 AM
yankeesfan1000 yankeesfan1000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: 10014
Posts: 1,617
What are the chances something this asinine passes, or is even realistically considered?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #176  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2017, 1:02 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000 View Post
What are the chances something this asinine passes, or is even realistically considered?
It will be considered, but doubt it would pass. Besides, these developments are already legally underway, and changing the rules would just throw this thing back in court.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #177  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2017, 4:18 PM
Zerton's Avatar
Zerton Zerton is offline
Ω
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,551
It would be one thing if all these towers were butting right up to a neighborhood of rowhouses, but they're not. There are 20 story post-war housing projects directly north of these towers.
__________________
If all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed, if all records told the same tale, then the lie passed into history and became truth. -Orwell
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #178  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2017, 4:54 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
These pandering politicians will drive you nuts.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #179  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2017, 1:41 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
https://citylimits.org/2017/09/07/al...wer-east-side/

All Hands On Deck to Stop Two Bridges Towers in Lower East Side





By Abigail Savitch-Lew


Quote:
It’s been over a year since Councilmember Margaret Chin and Borough President Gale Brewer wrote to the De Blasio administration expressing their concern about the four skyscrapers planned by three private developers in the Two Bridges area of the Lower East Side waterfront. After months of special community engagement meetings, community advocates and residents are not placated; Their concerns have only grown, and they’re making a variety of efforts to prevent the projects’ potentially approaching approval.

As earlier reported by City Limits, the four towers would each rise to roughly between 700 and 1,000 feet and sit directly next to a fifth tower already nearing completion. While the developers have said their project will bring a portion of income-targeted housing with the 421-a tax credit (now known as “Affordable New York”), as well as desirable community amenities, most residents are terrified that the development will alter the entire character of the area, cause the displacement of local residents and stores, strain local infrastructure and cast shadows on nearby buildings and parks.

The developers’ plans do not require a rezoning, but do hinge on the city amending a set of special regulations that govern those parcels of land. In June 2016, Chin and Brewer asked the Department of City Planning (DCP) to require the developers’ request for those regulation changes to go through the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure, the seven-month process through which the community board and local electeds each have an opportunity to weigh in on a land-use change—with the City Council having the ultimate decision.

But DCP said requiring ULURP in the case of the four Two Bridges buildings was legally impossible: according to DCP, the developers were only asking for “minor modifications” to existing regulations that don’t require ULURP. Instead DCP asked the developers to participate in an extended community engagement process: they voluntarily agreed to four extra meetings to discuss the developments with the community.


Quote:
Some community members blamed Chin for failing to prod the de Blasio administration to accept the Chinatown Working Group plan, a comprehensive rezoning proposal for Chinatown and the Lower East Side which would have set height limits and higher affordability requirements in the Two Bridges area, preempting projects of the scale now under consideration.

Several actions are now underway. Chin is seeking to deploy a variety of means to require more public input on the towers. One set of community groups, with Chin’s backing, has threatened the Department of City Planning with a lawsuit if the department doesn’t change the process through which the skyscrapers are approved. Another coalition insists they have a means to scrap the towers altogether, and accuse Chin and other groups of only fighting for community benefits and of being willing to accept the new skyscrapers—an accusation Chin and those other groups take issue with.


Quote:
The context: a special area with its own rules

Everything would be simpler if the blocks between Cherry Street and South Street, just north of the Manhattan Bridge, were simply governed by a zoning district, like most areas of the city. The zoning in that area is C6-4, permitting large commercial and residential buildings with no height limit, making it a nice spot for developers.

But the situation is more complicated. Two Bridges used to be an Urban Renewal Area, where the city sought to remove blight and create mixed-income housing and employment opportunities. Pursuant to that goal, in 1972, the area was designated as a Large-Scale Residential Development (LSRD) area, a district in which the city allows flexibility to the normal land use regulations in order to facilitate the most space-efficient and beneficial site plans for large apartment buildings that span multiple property lots. Chapter 8 of the city’s zoning text says the City Planning Commission is allowed to modify the normal regulations using two, slightly different types of actions: “authorizations” or “special permits.”


Quote:
Peddle back to the summer of 2016. The developers had bought land in Two Bridges, which was already zoned for high densities, but they needed to make some changes to the LSRD—changes like increasing allowable floor area and lot coverage, reconfiguring buildings to allow for ground-floor retail and relocating parking spaces from one part of the property to underground.

That’s when Chin and Brewer wrote to the Department of City Planning. They argued that the city needed to issue the developers new special permits, which required both that the City Planning Commission evaluate whether the projects would meet the necessary “findings,” and also that the entire process go through ULURP, giving Chin, Brewer, and the local community board a chance to weigh in.

In August 2016, Carl Weisbrod, then director of the Department, basically responded as follows: the projects themselves might be big, but the changes the developers are asking for don’t require special permits. And they don’t even require authorizations. All they require is “minor modifications” to the existing special permit, which need approval by the City Planning Commission, but do not require a determination of whether they meet certain “findings” and certainly not ULURP.


Quote:
Chin’s struggle

In addition to throwing her weight behind UJC’s lawsuit, Chin also introduced a bill last week that would allow elected officials to fast-track certain changes to the zoning text (excluding rezonings). The bill would allow elected officials to skip the “pre-application” phase of paperwork and meetings that proceed the start of environmental review and ULURP. Chin hopes that with such legislation passed, she’ll be able to immediately make a change to the zoning text to make it absolute that any development in an LSRD requires a special permit and must go through ULURP.

This is in addition to legislation she introduced in April which would require the Department of Housing, Preservation and Development (HPD) to notify the public if an Urban Renewal Area were about to expire—a measure aimed primarily at ensuring other communities are more prepared next time in the event that URA regulations expire, liberalizing what can be built.


Quote:
Is it too late to rezone the neighborhood to preempt the Two Bridges developments? It’s theoretically still possible, but challenging. According to the Department of City Planning, developers are allowed to build under the prior zoning if they construct their building foundations before the zoning is changed (and they can only begin construction after getting the regulatory modifications they need), and if they actually build the building and acquire Temporary Certificates of Occupancy within two years of the zoning change. There are also specific rules governing how these timelines shift if the projects are held up by a court challenge.

A spokesperson for Chin views rezoning the waterfront to prevent the towers as still possible, though difficult, and she mentioned Chin’s support for an effort lead by Community Board 3 to move forward with such a rezoning. She hasn’t said much at press conferences about a rezoning of the waterfront, instead prioritizing calling for ULURP in the case of the Two Bridges developments—which, in any case, could buy time for a rezoning.

Community Board 3 actually isn’t currently working on any rezoning proposal waterfront at this time, but in the past has supported it and says it’s open to collaborations with groups that do want to push forward with such an idea.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #180  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2017, 3:08 AM
Prezrezc Prezrezc is offline
A.F.K.A. JayPro
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 851
Quite the anti-Orwellian description of the NIMBY position:

"We're hooped; but if we grease the right number of palms at City Hall, the chances of keeping our unencumbered views escalate modestly to about 50 per cent..."
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:32 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.