Air rights transfer does not necessarily have to be from contiguous lots. There are many examples of air rights transfer from theaters, landmarks, parks, piers, etc.that are on separate blocks or even outside their immediate neighborhoods.
This is just a bullshit argument from NIMBYs, who are looking to fight development using whichever dubious premise they can find. And you know they are because almost always, the NIMBY lawsuits always end up losing in the courts, from Atlantic Yards to Sutton Place to NYU and so on.
The main problem here is not air rights transfer. It’s the size and configuration of the zoning lot. You are certainly correct that ART can happen in lots of ways only some of which involve contiguous parcels.
I didn’t know that zoning lots now have to be under a certain size and be a certain configuration?
Also, just based on my casual following of this project (meaning I did not study the exact details) isn’t the current complex configuration the way it is because the NIMBYs originally complained and the developer then had to do it this way to get the DOB’s approval?
A major determinant of building size is floor area ratio (FAR). A lot is zoned with an as of right FAR number. FAR is ratio of the floor area of the building to lot size. A hypothetical example ratio of 10 might (depending on the rule at issue) allow ten square feet for each square foot of lot size. The bigger the lot, therefore, the bigger the building can be. That is the issue here. The litigation is about whether the lot was artificially made bigger.
As for your second point the answer is no. The prior very complex deals between the original Lincoln Square synagogue site (where the development is under construction), certain parts of the Lincoln Square apartment complex, and the developers were designed to maximize lot size. Litigation over those deals, should the developers lose this case, is possible I guess. And there also is the possibility that even if the plaintiffs don’t have to pay the developers if they win, the city might. This whole thing is very messy to say the least—mostly the consequence of pushing the zoning envelope in edgy ways.
Lots cannot be made bigger artifically. There’s no such thing.
The lots can be made bigger by merging. That is what was done here and its all legal or otherwise the DOB wouldn’t have approved their building permit.
All the NIMBYs are doing now are playing obstructionists.They know they have no legal foot to stand on and are just trying to tie this up in the courts, the very defintion of frivolous lawsuits.
Upper West Side vs. Sutton Place. Battle for the most selfish and best funded NIMBYs in the city. I think Sutton Place has higher average wealth, but many fewer individual NIMBYs.
These people aren’t fighting for a noble cause like a larger affordable housing component or a park. They’re fighting to do away with those who aren’t uniform, as if the UWS is central Paris and anything taller than 12 stories is sacrilege. You mess with a portion of my views and I’m going to spend millions to make your life hell.
The developers of 200 Amsterdam aren’t saints, but as no one (as far as I’ve heard) has been accused of bribery as far as I’m concerned they’ve done their part. Any lot gerrymandering they did was legal enough to get approval so it seems like a better use of NIMBYs money and efforts would be to get zoning changed as it would apply to future projects.
You may be correct but you may not be too. Lot merging is fine and it’s common. 432 Park was done that way by merging adjoining parcels into a single zoning lot. But there are some rules about merging that MAY have been violated here about contiguity and access. While I appreciate your passion the certainty with which you make statements may be misplaced. Issues are not always as clear cut as you suggest. Not all of those concerned about this building oppose all large developments. They are not all NIMBYs. And I am not in that camp either. Large scale, intensive development makes sense in many areas of a city like New York. But the rules should be followed rationally. If the rules aren’t good then change them. But if a developer cuts corners as MAY have happened here then they run the risk of being stopped. That’s the nature of the 200 Amsterdam dispute.
The pictures of the lot you posted above looks pretty contiguous (no borders). I’m not sure about “access” and that’s gonna be the huge senseless semantic argument in court.
If I’m correct, isn’t this the second or possibly the third time they’ve challenged this in the courts and have been rebuffed each time? This is not even counting the times the NIMBYs appealed to the DOB and had the DOB re-examined their permits.
That tells me that they’ve done nothing illegal or broke any rules so your argument that they MAY be breaking some kind of rule is baseless. I mean, after appealing to the DOB a certain number of times and it shows no rules being broken, when are you going to admit that no rules have been broken?
Right streetscaper, it is contiguous in the sense of having contact with the main lot. But most of these cases involve previous zoning lots with existing buildings or development potential rather than the maze-like creature taking parts of lots that was used at 200. That’s one of the issues—can a crazy quilt work? I guess we’ll find out. 432 Park merged several preecisting building sites to increase the amount of square feet they could build. And note that the FAR rules typically say little or nothing about height. That is why high ceilings often don’t matter for zoning purposes. That is what has led to the other gambit of building huge “utility” spaces that raise the apartments above higher up. That is also under legal attack and got shot down in round 1 for the 65th street building. (Though its worth noting that these rules already are under regulatory review and likely to bar future projects like these.)
If there were no regulatory statutes specifically prohibiting the gerrymandering, and the DOB approved it… then, in principle, it should work. There should be no legal recourse for the NIMBYs with regards to this specific project.
The NIMBYs wouldn’t receive nearly half the amount of vitriol they’re receiving if they simply spent their efforts trying to change the zoning regulations to ban gerrymandering rather than going after a project that seemed to merely take advantage of a hole in the zoning code (and which was approved because it was indeed within regulations set forth by the DOB)
I only wish GBW. The law often is not clear. One of the main conceptions I have to teach out of my students is that they think legal rules are always clear cut and all they have to do is learn them and apply them. Taint so. Much about learning law is nuance.
Construction at 200 Amsterdam Avenue is quickly rising above the surrounding rooftops. When topped out, the 668-foot-tall residential development will hold the title of tallest skyscraper on the Upper West Side until Extell‘s 775-foot tall tower at 50 West 66th Street tops out. The building is designed by Elkus Manfredi Architects, which was responsible for The Shops & Restaurants at Hudson Yards. SJP Properties is the developer while CetraRuddy is the lead interior designer. The 283,000-square-foot project, which sits at the southwestern corner of Amsterdam Avenue and West 70th Street, will yield 112 residential units.
Work is presently reaching a couple of mechanical floors. This section of the building is where the first of seven setbacks on the eastern elevation begins.
The height of the crown will be accentuated and visually integrated with the rest of the building by the number of thin panel strips between the glass windows. They will extend beyond the residential floors and continue up all sides of the tower’s stepped profile. Floodlights will shine upward on the indented crown panels and give off different plays of light, shadow, and depth. Two duplex penthouses will occupy the top four floors and provide the best views of Central Park, the Midtown skyline, the George Washington Bridge, and the Hudson River.
Each setback will feature a landscaped outdoor terrace, accessible by certain units. Other amenities will include an indoor swimming pool, a fitness center with a yoga space, a sauna room, a conservatory, a virtual golf room, a children’s playroom, and a residential lounge.
The site sits among a number of old and new apartment buildings. These include Handel Architect’s 20-story, 236-unit diagrid tower at 170 Amsterdam Avenue, which is less than 200 feet away to the south. The closest subways are the 1, 2, and 3 train at the 72nd Street station at Broadway. The B and C trains are also not far away at the 72nd Street station on Central Park West. Riverside Park is about a ten-minute walk to the west.
200 Amsterdam Avenue is estimated to be completed sometime in 2020.
