Challenge to NYC Rezoning Fails as Judge Dismisses Objection Over Gentrification Impact
The residents claimed in a lawsuit against the city last year that the city's environmental review of the rezoning projects was unlawful because it failed to consider how rent-stabilized tenants would be affected, particularly through gentrification.
July 13, 2018 at 12:29 PM
3 minute read
Manhattan Supreme Court and the Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse at Foley Square. Photo by Rick Kopstein/ALM Two rezoning and redevelopment projects in New York City will proceed after a state Supreme Court justice in Manhattan on Thursday ruled against a legal challenge from residents in Manhattan and Brooklyn. The residents claimed in a lawsuit against the city last year that the city's environmental review of the rezoning projects was unlawful because it failed to consider how rent-stabilized tenants would be affected, particularly through gentrification. Those projects are a 96-block redevelopment plan in Manhattan's East Harlem neighborhood and the redevelopment of the Bedford-Union Armory in Crown Heights, Brooklyn. The plaintiffs, who live in rent-stabilized apartments, were represented by the Legal Aid Society, which said they are considering appealing the decision. “We are deeply disappointed with the court's decision today ruling against the best interests of the East Harlem and Crown Heights communities. We still maintain that the methodology the city employs to measure tenant displacement is fundamentally flawed, and that it ignores obvious realities and the consequences of land use decisions on rents and livelihoods,” said Kat Meyers, a staff attorney with the organization's law reform unit. “We are currently weighing all of our options—including appellate litigation and legislation—that will finally resolve this issue for our clients and other low-income New Yorkers.” Justice Carmen Victoria St. George said in her decision that the city followed the law in its reviews, even if residents didn't favor the outcome. “The court is sympathetic to petitioners, who aim to protect those who are not members of community boards, are not elected officials, and often do not express their positions at public hearings,” St. George said. “The goal of the city, and of the projects at hand, is to balance the interests of the communities. … The court's role, in turn, is not to question the way in which the city, entrusted with these projects, draws the balance.” The city's Law Department celebrated the decision in a statement Thursday, saying it will clear the way for more affordable housing in East Harlem and Crown Heights. “We are pleased that the court recognized that the city conducted very thorough and proper environmental reviews for these initiatives. The Bedford Union Armory redevelopment project and the East Harlem Rezoning mean thousands of permanently affordable homes for neighborhood families, jobs for local residents, and more community spaces, investments in parks, schools, and roads,” the department said in a statement.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMayor's Advisory Committee To Hold Hearing on Fitness of Judicial Candidates
2 minute readMayor's Advisory Committee To Hold Hearing on Fitness of Judicial Candidates
1 minute readMayor's Advisory Committee To Hold Hearing on Fitness of Judicial Candidates
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250