UWS Tower Ruling Puts 30 NYC Buildings In Limbo, Developers Say

NEW YORK, NY — Developers who were ordered to chop floors off their already-built Upper West Side tower by a recent court decision contend that the ruling will create a logistical mess for at least 30 other buildings across New York City.

Attorneys with SJP Properties, developers of the controversial 200 Amsterdam Ave. tower, have compiled a list of dozens of properties that they say are now in legal limbo because, like their building, they combined "partial tax lots" to create a larger zoning lot.

A judge ruled last week to revoke 200 Amsterdam Ave.'s building permit, siding with community groups who said the development's "gerrymandered" zoning lot — which stretches far beyond the building site — violates the city's zoning codes.

"It's a real conundrum for the city here," Paul Selver, one of the project's attorneys, said. "They have [at least] 20 buildings, including seven others on our block, that have zoning lots that the judge says are illegal zoning lots."

Selver argues that should the ruling against using partial tax lots stand, the Department of Buildings will need to either vacate or amend the certificate of occupancy for all of those buildings.

But the real conundrum, he said, will be for buildings that can't adjust to fit zoning laws without the partial tax lots.

SJP's attorneys have used the list of buildings throughout their battle to keep 200 Amsterdam's permit. The Board of Standards and Appeals even referred to the potential problems revoking 200 Amsterdam's permit could create for other properties when they re-approved the building plans last year, Selver said.

(Map of buildings based on a list compiled by Paul Slever)

But not everyone is convinced SJP's predictions will come to pass.

Richard Emery, the lawyer who represented groups challenging 200 Amsterdam, said SJP's claims seem to be a red herring in their quest to push the controversial tower onto the neighborhood.

"We’d have to look at these carefully, but these seem absurd," Emery said when sent the list of buildings. "That seems to be a parade of nonexistent terribles."

Emery contended that the buildings wouldn't be under threat in part because the statute of limitations for an Article 78 legal challenge, like the one he filed against 200 Amsterdam, has expired for all of them.

But even if that wasn't the case, Emery, who agrees partial tax lots should never be used, quipped that "maybe we’ll take some of those buildings down, too."

The Department of Buildings did not immediately respond to a request for comment on SJP's analysis.

For Selver, though, the threat to other buildings in the city isn't the only dangerous precedent set by the 200 Amsterdam ruling.

He contends that it could create "a chilling effect on real estate investment" since it revoked a permit the Department of Buildings once said was okay.

"If somebody in the community doesn’t like your building, if judge happens to agree, your permit could be invalidated," he said. "If I were that person and looking to invest, I may take my money and go to Houston or somewhere else."

But Emery has little sympathy for this reasoning, and the $300 million spent on 200 Amsterdam that might now be in jeopardy. SJP shouldn't have continued to build their 52-story tower as a legal battle and fierce community opposition dragged on, he said.

"The real message here is a message to developers to get the community on their side before they go ahead," Emery said. "Financial lenders will be scared now unless community approval is dealt with at the outset— which is obviously the only way to develop appropriately in New York."