Chapter 2: Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy A. INTRODUCTION As described in Chapter 1, “Project Description,” the proposed actions would result in an approximately 1.7 million gross-square-foot1 (gsf) (1.648 million zoning-square-foot) mixed-use development on 10 City-owned sites (of which nine are proposed development sites), the mapping of sections of Broome and Suffolk Streets, and the demapping of sections of Clinton and Delancey Streets, on the Lower East Side of Manhattan (see Figure 2-1). As set forth in Chapter 1, the reasonable worst-case development scenario (RWCDS) for the proposed actions envisions the development of 900 dwelling units (of which half would be affordable), approximately 632,300 gsf of commercial space, approximately 114,000 gsf of community facility or cultural uses, up to 500 parking spaces, and an approximately 10,000-square-foot publicly accessible open space. This chapter considers the proposed actions’ potential impacts on land use, zoning, and public land use policies. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS Overall, this analysis concludes that the proposed actions would not have any significant adverse impacts on land use, zoning, or public policy. LAND USE The proposed actions would have a positive effect on land use by creating an active new mixed- use development with publicly accessible open space on underutilized sites. The new housing, retail, publicly accessible open space, and community facility uses would bring activity to the proposed development sites and would serve both residents of the surrounding area and the larger community. The new uses introduced by the proposed actions would be compatible with the existing and anticipated future mix of residential, retail, and commercial uses in the surrounding area. The height and bulk of the proposed development would complement the existing built fabric and help to knit together surrounding neighborhoods. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in any significant adverse land use impacts. ZONING The proposed actions would include a Large Scale General Development (LSGD) special permit, which would allow the proposed development to better integrate the programming of its proposed uses, and would provide flexibility in design and massing. The proposed actions would not change the underlying zoning of the project site, except to map new C2-5 commercial overlay zones on Sites 3, 4, 5, and 6. The proposed commercial overlay zones would be compatible with existing commercial zoning in adjacent areas. The retail uses that could be introduced as a result of the zoning change would be compatible with existing retail uses and the 1 This number does not include below-grade parking space or space in the existing parking garage on Site 7. 2-1 E 5 ST E 4 ST 2.21.12 E 5 ST 1 AV 2 AV E 3 ST AV A AV B AV C AV D E 1 ST E 2 ST E HOUSTON ST E HOUSTON ST SUFFOLK ST PITT ST PITT SHERIFF ST SHERIFF ATTORNEY ST STANTON ST STANTON ST RIDGE ST RIDGE NORFOLK ST NORFOLK 10 FREEMAN AL 8 CLINTON ST COLUMBIA ST COLUMBIA ESSEX ST ESSEX RIVINGTON ST RIVINGTON ST 9 7 ATTORNEY ST FORSYTH ST FORSYTH CHRYSTIE ST CHRYSTIE DELANCEY ST WILLIAMSBURG BR APPR 2 LUDLOW ST LUDLOW 3 1 4 6 ORCHARD ST ORCHARD BROOME ST CANNON ST ALLEN ST ALLEN 5 BIALYSTOKER PL PITT ST GRAND ST ABRAHAM KAZAN ST HESTER ST HESTER ST SAMUEL DICKSTEIN PLZ ELDRIDGE ST ELDRIDGE GOUVERNEUR ST CANAL ST BOWERY JEFFERSON ST MONTGOMERY ST RUTGERS ST MONROE ST MN BR APPR FORSYTH ST CLINTON ST PIKE ST HENRY ST PIKE ST PIKE ST WATER ST MN BR APPR MADISON ST E BROADWAY MARKET ST F D R DR CHERRY ST F D R DR F D R DR DIVISION ST 0 400 800 FEET Former Seward Park Urban Renewal Area (URA) Commercial and Office Buildings Former Seward Park Extension URA Industrial and Manufacturing SCALE Proposed Development Sites Transportation and Utility Public Facilities and Institutions Site 7 Would Not Be Redeveloped Under the Proposed Actions Open Space and Outdoor Recreation Study Area Boundary (1/4-Mile Perimeter) Parking Facilities Residential Vacant Land Residential with Commercial Below Vacant Building Hotels Under Construction Land Use SEWARD PARK MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Figure 2-1 Seward Park Mixed-Use Development Project mixed-use character of the study area. The zoning relief (such as height and setback waivers) being sought would facilitate a superior site plan that is responsive to the context of the project site and would complement the surrounding study area. Therefore, the proposed actions would not result in significant adverse zoning impacts. PUBLIC POLICY The proposed actions would support and further the objectives of applicable public policies, including the Mayor’s New Housing Marketplace Plan, nearby business improvement districts, and PlaNYC 2030. The proposed actions would not result in any significant adverse public policy impacts. In addition, the proposed actions and RWCDS would be in broad accordance with Manhattan Community Board 3’s (CB3) redevelopment guidelines in terms of its mixed- use character, affordable and market housing development, commercial development, urban design plan, parking, and potential for community facility development. B. METHODOLOGY The purpose of this chapter is to examine the effects of the proposed land use and zoning changes and determine whether they would result in any significant adverse impacts on land use, zoning, or public policy. The analysis methodology is based on the guidelines of the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Technical Manual (January 2012 edition) and examines the consistency of the proposed actions and RWCDS with land use patterns and development trends, zoning regulations and other applicable public policies. According to the CEQR Technical Manual, a detailed assessment of land use, zoning and public policy may be appropriate when needed to sufficiently inform other technical reviews and determine whether changes in land use could affect conditions analyzed in those technical areas. Therefore, this chapter includes a detailed analysis that involves a thorough description of existing land uses within the project site and the broader study area. Following the guidelines of the CEQR Technical Manual, the detailed analysis describes existing and anticipated future conditions for the 2022 analysis year to a level necessary to understand the relationship of the proposed actions and RWCDS to such conditions, assesses the nature of any changes on these conditions that would be created by the proposed actions, and identifies those changes, if any, that could be significant or adverse. The analysis of the impacts of the proposed actions in 2022 considers the full development of the RWCDS. The study area for this analysis has been defined as being within a ¼-mile radius of the project site, where the proposed actions have the greatest potential to affect land use trends (see Figure 2-1). Various sources were used to comprehensively analyze the land use, zoning, and public policy characteristics of the study area, including field surveys, land use and zoning maps, and online sources from the New York City Department of City Planning (DCP), the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC), the City of New York Department of Housing Preservation & Development (HPD), and the New York City Department of Buildings (DOB). C. BACKGROUND AND DEVELOPMENT HISTORY The project site is located in the historically economically and ethnically diverse Lower East Side. By the turn of the 20th century, the Lower East Side was an immigrant neighborhood known for its bustling street-level commercial activity and its overcrowded tenement buildings. While the population on the Lower East Side grew through the middle of the 20th century, the housing—much of which had been built 60 years prior—remained overcrowded. In the mid- 1950s through the 1970s, portions of the Lower East Side were deemed as appropriate for urban 2-2 Chapter 2: Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy renewal under the City’s Urban Renewal Law. Development in these urban renewal areas typically took the form of multi-tower residential buildings on large superblocks along the East River from East 14th Street to as far south as the Manhattan Bridge. Urban renewal is the legal authority granted to municipalities to redevelop entire neighborhoods through planned and coordinated actions, provided by Section 504 of Article 15 (“Urban Renewal Law”) of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York. There have been approximately 150 urban renewal areas (URAs) in New York City, which are planned and administered by HPD, the agency designated to carry out the provisions of the Urban Renewal Law pursuant to Section 502(5) of the Urban Renewal Law and Section 1802(6)(e) of the City Charter. In the project area, the area bounded by Essex Street on the west, Grand Street on the north, and East Broadway on the south was designated in 1955 as the Seward Park Urban Renewal Area (SPURA), and it was cleared for redevelopment. In 1957, the federal government provided funding for the Seward Park Co-ops, which were completed in 1962. This development included approximately 1,728 affordable non-profit cooperative housing units, a bank, health center, and local retail stores. Although the units were price-restricted for more than 30 years, the co-op board voted to go private in 2000, which allowed the tenants to sell their units at market prices. Established in 1965 and expired in 2005, the Seward Park Extension URA (SPEURA), which is directly north of the original SPURA, is bordered by Essex Street, Grand Street, Bialystoker Place, and Delancey Street. Sites 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are located within the former SPEURA boundaries. In 1967, demolition began in the SPEURA to clear land for new housing and commercial buildings.