A Win In Court

BROOKLYN COURT ISSUES TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER STOPPING ULURP REVIEW OF ARROW LINEN’S CONTROVERSIAL REZONING PROPOSAL 

Members of Housing Not High Rises Claimed Public Review of Arrow’s Rezoning Proposal Should Await Final Action on City of Yes for Housing Opportunity 

Appellate Division grants NYC Department of City Planning Stay Until Four-Justice Panel Decides After September 16, 2024 

September 6th, 2024 Brooklyn, New York – 

A controversial rezoning and development proposal in Brooklyn is now at the center of a heated court battle pitting a grassroots community group seeking to build affordable housing versus the New York Department of City Planning (“DCP”) and Arrow Linen Supply, an industrial laundry company planning to build twin luxury towers on its commercial site in South Slope / Windsor Terrace. 

On Wednesday, Kings County Supreme Court Judge Hon. Lisa Ottley issued a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) in response to a petition from the pro-housing community group called Housing Not Highrises which argued the community’s right to meaningful participation in the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (“ULURP”) was compromised given the contradictory information in Arrow’s application, which describes two 13-story towers, or a suggestion that two 19-story towers might be allowed if City Of Yes Housing Opportunity is also approved in ULURP. Judge Ottley ruled in favor of Housing Not Highrises issuing the TRO to pause Arrow’s rezoning proposal for predominantly luxury apartments in a neighborhood currently zoned for 3-stories and in need of affordable housing. 

But today, lawyers for the NYC Department of City Planning won a stay in Judge Ottley’s TRO granted by the Appellate Division. A four-Justice panel will review additional written arguments and make a decision on the status of the original TRO sometime after September 16, 2024. In the meantime, Arrow Linen’s rezoning proposal will continue its path through the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (“ULURP”) process with a Community Board 7 hearing this Monday, September 9, 6:30PM at Holy Name Shepherd’s Hall, 245 Prospect Park West, Brooklyn, N.Y. 

If the Appellate Division decides to leave the TRO in place, a hearing on the preliminary injunction motion is scheduled to occur sometime after November 7, 2024. 

Judge Ottley’s ruling was seen as a major victory for Housing Not Highrises, a pro-housing non-profit with more than 2,000 members across South Slope, Windsor Terrace and adjacent neighborhoods which is proposing to build a project of seven to nine stories with 100% affordable housing as an alternative to the Arrow Linen plan. 

Four members of Housing Not Highrises filed a petition in Kings County Supreme Court (in a CPLR article 78 proceeding) and presented their case before Judge Ottley to challenge a decision by the New York City Department of City Planning (“DCP”) to put Arrow’s proposal into the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (“ULURP”) review process. The petition claims that meaningful public review of the proposal cannot occur until after final action on the Mayor’s City of Yes for Housing initiative, since that initiative would significantly increase the zoning that Arrow seeks for its properties, and thus the scope and size of the Arrow project cannot be known until after City of Yes. Judge Ottley’s ruling temporarily stopped the ULURP process for Arrow’s application until the court reaches a final decision which may come in early November. The Appellate Division’s stay today allows ULURP to continue until its decision sometime after September 16. 

“The TRO is a huge victory for our community and for anyone who believes that the community has a right to participate in land use decisions in a meaningful way,” said Velma McKenzie, one of the petitioners named in the proceeding. “While the Mayor’s City of Yes initiative is pending, there’s no concrete way for the community to know what’s at stake with Arrow’s proposal. We hope the Appellate Division sees the logic in this and decides to reinstate the TRO.” 

The legal argument in the petition–which was filed in Kings County Supreme Court and is available on the Housing Not High Rises website–is straightforward. The ULURP proceeding for a rezoning application begins when DCP certifies that the application is complete. And under DCP’s regulations, to be complete, a land use application must fully and accurately describe the parameters of the zoning designation that the applicant is seeking to obtain. 

But Arrow’s land use application is incomplete, the petition asserts, because Arrow cannot provide that information about the zoning designation it requests: due to the intervening City of Yes initiative, the zoning designation that Arrow is seeking will change materially between now and the end of the ULURP process for Arrow’s application as currently scheduled. “Arrow’s land use application is incomplete,” the petition explains, “because it cannot provide a concrete answer to the most basic question posed by a rezoning application—if the rezoning application is granted, what will Arrow be permitted to build on its properties?” According to the petition, ULURP review of Arrow’s proposal should wait until after final action on the Mayor’s City of Yes initiative.

“We hope to be able to preserve the ability of our community to meaningfully participate in Arrow’s monumental rezoning proposal” said Jay Goldberg, one of the petitioners in the case. “If Arrow’s ULURP process is paused until after City of Yes for Housing Opportunity is complete, it will allow the community to comment on what can actually be built, and not on speculation. This is what we had asked our Council Member Shahana Hanif to do for us, but instead, we had to take our own action in court.” 

Together with their challenge, the group of petitioners sought a temporary restraining order halting the ULURP review of Arrow’s proposal until the Court issues a decision on the petitioners’ claims. As the petitioners explained, meaningful public participation in land use decisions is one of the core principles of ULURP: 

“In the decades before the ULURP procedure was adopted, land use decisions in New York City were handled by a central authority run by Robert Moses, whose well known history of pushing controversial projects in so-called blighted neighborhoods without any public input had devastating effects on the City and its communities and residents. In 1975, ULURP was established in the City’s Charter to fix that problem and to address the “perceived need for informed local community involvement in land-use planning, for adequate technical and professional review of land-use decisions and for final decision-making by a politically accountable body.” Meaningful public participation in land-use decisions is thus one of the main reasons that ULURP exists, and actions that interfere with that participation undermine the core concerns that prompted ULURP’s creation in the first place.” 

While the community would be irreparably harmed if public review of Arrow’s proposal proceeded while City of Yes was pending, neither DCP nor Arrow would be harmed by a brief delay to await final action on City of Yes. DCP’s mission is to ensure that the public has a meaningful opportunity to participate in land use decisions. And as the petitioners explained, Arrow had no credible interest in frustrating the community’s opportunity to participate in the review of its rezoning proposal. To the contrary, “a responsible developer should welcome the opportunity to safeguard that important public right.” 

The Honorable Lisa S. Ottley agreed and issued the temporary restraining order halting the ULURP process until the Court can determine whether to issue a more formal preliminary injunction during the pendency of the proceeding. If the Appellate Division reinstates the TRO, a hearing on the preliminary injunction motion is scheduled to occur sometime after November 7, 2024. In the meantime, the Appellate Division’s stay of the restraining order means that the community will have to review a rezoning proposal at Monday’s CB7 hearing without knowing for sure what the proposal will mean if it is granted. 

“It’s hard to overstate the hope that the court has given us,” said Luz Torres, one of the named petitioners in the proceeding. “I own one of the buildings that Arrow wants to rezone and I’ve felt helpless that a private company and a government agency could conspire to do something to my property that I don’t want. I’ve been shut out of this process entirely; it’s incredibly disempowering. The Court’s decision, should it hold, is truly a moment of justice for the people.” 

Julia Melzer, whose home sits near the Arrow Linen property and who presented the petitioners’ case in Court, said: “We just laid out the evidence that Arrow Linen’s proposed upzoning to 13 stories from the current three-story zoning does not adequately account for what could be added if the Mayor’s City of Yes for Housing plan is approved. That could boost the Arrow buildings up to 19 stories plus another 55 feet of roof-top mechanicals. And the vast majority of those apartments would be market-rate luxury units. We have an alternative plan to build more apartments that are 100% affordable in buildings that are seven to nine stories and fit in with the surrounding community. We want affordable housing, not luxury highrises that will displace existing tenants.” 

Community Board 7 Meetings about Arrow’s Proposal

We said will let you know when Arrow Linen’s application officially starts the Land Use Review (ULURP) Process. THAT TIME IS NOW!

THE COMMUNITY BOARD NEEDS YOUR WRITTEN TESTIMONY! PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR EMAILS YOU CAN SEND WITH ONE CLICK. Only some of us can speak at these meetings, but all of us can be heard!

See the links below for details about these meetings and a link to add the meeting to your calendar:

There are no upcoming events.

Read more

19 Stories? How Did That Happen?

While Arrow Linen’s rezoning application was being reviewed by the Department of City Planning (DCP), the Adams administration was busy pushing the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity which purports to provide “a little more housing in every neighborhood.” If and when passed, this initiative will increase zoing across the board in NYC between 20% and 60%. Rezoning applications currently under review had to amend their applications to show the effect that passing this initiative will have on their application.

On their first pass, Arrow Linen’s owners updated their application to show that the 13 stories they’ve applied to build could be as much as 15 stories after City of Yes for Housing Opportunity. But at about the time their application entered the ULURP process, we latest amended filing for Arrow Linen’s application now shows that their 13 story application could be as high as 19 stories after City of Yes for Housing Opportunity. This means that the buildings could be 250 feet tall.

Read more

Renter Displacement

The owners of Arrow Linen have filed an application with the City of New York to be able to build 13 stories of luxury high-rises on Prospect Avenue in Brooklyn. They have recently updated their application to show that this could be 19 stories following the city-wide zoning changes underway with City of Yes for Housing Opportunity.

Click the squares to copy the following text:

Our neighbors who rent have told us of their concerns at our community meeting. One family who moved to Prospect Ave from Greenpoint was displaced as their rent was dramatically increased following rezoning in their neighborhood. Another family who moved to Prospect Ave from Crown Heights shared stories of their landlord withholding services and not making repairs to force tenants out so that their rent-stabilized building could be sold to developers.

We strongly support adding more housing in our neighborhood, but that housing must be contextual for the neighborhood to avoid this sort of displacement of renters that massive rezoning and luxury development inevitably brings. Many studies have found that for-profit housing development leads to renter displacement in affordable neighborhoods.

Churches Unified for Fair Housing published research on the consequences of rezonings in Greenpoint, Williamsburg, and Park Slope. The most significant findings for Park Slope and the influx of high-rises on 4th Ave include losing nearly 1500 units of rent-stabilized housing, and massive displacement of Black and Hispanic residents from the area.

Please see “Zoning & Racialized Displacement in NYC” below; the 4th Ave rezoning is specifically discussed starting on p.13:

Update: In our July Newsletter, we updated our community about our work with non-profit developers who could make attractive market-rate offers for Arrow Linen’s property, and deliver over 200 units of 100% affordable housing at only 7 stories. We believe that this strikes the right balance of creating more housing in our community, ensuring that housing is affordable, and avoiding displacement of existing tenants.

April 16th Community Meeting

Our latest Housing Not High-Rises Community Meeting was held on Tuesday, April 16 @ 7:00 pm at Holy Name Church on Prospect Park West. About 300 members of our community came to learn about and discuss Arrow Linen’s spot rezoning proposal.

We were privileged to host the following speakers:

  • Brooklyn Community Board 7’s Land Use Committee Chair, Diana Gonzalez:
    • Diana encouraged participation in the process, and acknowledged that CB7 is going to need a much bigger room when Arrow Linen’s proposal comes up for community review.
  • New York State Assembly Member for the 44th District, Bobby Carroll:
    • Bobby is a strong supporter of a compromise position that focuses on affordability and the needs of the community, and has consistently called Arrow Linen’s proposal “inappropriate.”
    • While serving at the state level and not directly involved in the zoning process, Bobby is a tireless advocate for the community he represents and has been very supportive of our efforts.
  • New York City Council Member for the 39th District, Shahana Hanif:
    • The rezoning to 13 stories is not an issue for Shahana, despite the concerns of the community.
    • Council Member Hanif acknowledged that we are not even negotiating in good faith with an actual developer, but rather with a landowner who wants to maximize profits as they sell their property, leaving the city and eliminating local jobs.
    • Please visit our How To Help page and click the link to send Council Member Hanif an email to let her know that you oppose this 13-story cash grab and her lack of consideration for the people who have elected her to represent them.

The agenda of the meeting (view the slide presentation):

  • Background & an overview of Arrow Linen’s proposal
  • Updates since our last community meeting
  • Information about the process and how new city-wide initiatives will affect it – City of Yes, a plan to add “a little more housing in every neighborhood”
  • Guest speakers – our elected officials
  • Q&A

Please see the press coverage:

Many thanks to the hundreds of community members who came to this event, and to Father Ryan and the Holy Name community for making this meeting possible!

Urgent Community Meeting April 16, 2024

Our next meeting is Tuesday, April 16. We need you to come, to demonstrate to our elected officials that we care about housing and keeping it consistent with our neighborhood.

Our elected officials have been invited.  Shahana Hanif’s office has confirmed their attendance, and her support is pivotal in this issue.

The only way our elected officials can help us get what we want is for us to let them know what we want. Your attendance is important to deliver this message.

Please join us on April 16 at 7:00pm at Shepherd’s Hall in the Holy Name of Jesus Church (enter by way of the parking lot at 245 Prospect Park West).

Agenda:

  • Welcome and thanks to our community
  • Background on Housing Not High-Rises (formerly Arrow Action)
  • Updates on city-wide zoning efforts via the City of Yes initiative
  • Reports from subcommittees, including recent meetings with our representatives
  • Neighborhood outreach and request for more signatures on our petition
  • Q&A
  • Post-meeting committee sign-up

We are looking forward to seeing you on April 16!

Thanks,

  – Chris, Jack, Jay, Julia, Kate, Marty, Phil and Steph

Add this event to your calendar or use the event link on our Calendar page.