Proposed Developments In Two Bridges Hit A Hurdle

TWO BRIDGES, NY — A campaign against four proposed towers in Two Bridges scored a preliminary win Wednesday as state Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron continued an order preventing the towers from moving ahead as they face a trio of lawsuits.

Borough President Gale Brewer tweeted that Judge Engoron said "it's hard to see how these projects can continue without public review. Totally agree!"

Some 100 people packed into a courtroom with standing room only for the hearing Wednesday morning. Following more than a year of heated debate, activists and politicians alike slammed the four proposed developments at two rallies ahead of the hearing Wednesday morning — saying the towers would block light and air, bring in too many luxury apartments, and exacerbate displacement at nearby buildings.

"It's just going to destroy the neighborhood, and we cannot allow that," said Councilwoman Margaret Chin.

In December, the City Planning Commission gave the green light for the towers, which would rise between 62- and 80-stories on the waterfront between the Brooklyn and Manhattan bridges.

The towers would bring some 2,700 apartments to Two Bridges — with about 700 earmarked as below-market-rate. Developers JDS Development Group, L+M Development Partners, CIM Group and Starrett Group are also kicking in tens of millions of dollars in upgrades to nearby playgrounds, a subway station, and repairs at a nearby New York City Housing Authority building.

But for the City Council and Brewer, the givebacks aren't enough.

The pols' lawsuit on Wednesday asked the state judge to stop development on the site while the case continues.

"I have been fighting for a simple right for years: the right for New Yorkers to have a say in how their neighborhoods are developed," Brewer said in a statement. She likened the towers to a neighborhood rezoning — which go through a review process known as the uniform land use review procedure, or ULURP.

The City Council and Brewer's lawsuit, filed in December, alleges developers are required to obtain a special permit through ULURP to build the developments — which would give City Council more power over the plan.

Speaker Corey Johnson, joining Chin and Brewer in their battle for more review, said in a statement Wednesday such a project is a "dramatic reshaping" of a neighborhood that should not be approved by the executive branch of the city alone.

Debbie Greenberg, a lawyer for City Council, told Judge Engoron that the project "makes a mockery of the whole special permit system." Greenberg added a deed restriction requiring one site to have low-income senior housing has yet to be addressed.

The city's Law Department lawyer Rachel Moston said the projects went through an "extensive" and "robust" hearing process — drawing sneers from the crowded courtroom.

Judge Engoron quipped about the towering height of the buildings — but the crux of the developers' argument is that the height of the towers alone is irrelevant to whether it requires a special permit.

"Size is not a category," developers' lawyer Janice MacAvoy said. "The category is: do you comply with the underlying zoning or do you not."

A spokesman for the developers said the lawsuits "are wholly without merit and we are confident that they will be dismissed."

"These projects were approved after extensive community consultation, public review and environmental analysis, and are in compliance with the underlying zoning that’s been in place for more than 30 years," the spokesman said — emphasizing a need to build more housing to alleviate the city's housing crisis.

Following the judge's decision, the spokesman said extending the order for two months doesn't impact the projects "because construction was not planned to start imminently."

"We are disappointed with this ruling," said the city's Law Department spokesman Nicholas Paolucci. "We respectfully disagree with the court’s preliminary findings. The approvals made by the City were appropriate and we will continue to defend against the claims challenging these important projects."

Two other lawsuits filed by two separate coalitions of neighborhood groups — the Lower East Side Organized Neighbors and Tenants United Fighting for the Lower East Side — also went before the judge Wednesday. Both suits, filed in March, allege the project had flaws in the environmental review process as well as zoning issues.

Before the hearing, dozens rallied on Centre Street in front of the courthouse. One rally, led by the Lower East Side Organized Neighbors — which opposes any towers being built — sang their rallying cry, "We don't want no luxury towers." A few hundred feet away, Chin, Brewer and others called for more public review, ensuring the community board and Council have more say.

One neighbor, Felicia Cruikshanks, said, "What the people need are affordable, low-income housing — not luxury apartments that displace the current residents."

"We demand a public review in that there be no more large-scale buildings built in the Two Bridges community," Cruikshanks of LaGuardia Houses on the Lower East Side said.