Manhattan Valley Neighbors for Permanent Housing for the Homeless v. Koch

Decision Date06 December 1990
Citation562 N.Y.S.2d 621,168 A.D.2d 262
PartiesMANHATTAN VALLEY NEIGHBORS FOR PERMANENT HOUSING FOR THE HOMELESS, et al., Petitioners-Appellants, v. Edward I. KOCH, etc., et al., Respondents-Respondents.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and MILONAS, ROSENBERGER, ELLERIN and RUBIN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered February 26, 1990, dismissing the Article 78 petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioners seek to annul a Board of Estimate decision approving a plan to rehabilitate city-owned buildings in the vicinity of 109th Street in Manhattan, the Manhattan Valley area. Petitioners also seek to substitute their own proposal which would convert all of the City's in rem housing in the neighborhood into permanent housing for the homeless. Petitioners' position is unusual in that they contend that, rather than contesting the establishment of erstwhile homeless families in the neighborhood, they would welcome the families, but on a permanent basis. The subject housing under the City's plan would provide transitional residences for some 71 families who would be moved out of shelters and hotels into the subject housing, for up to 13 months, after which these families would be rotated out and into permanent housing, as other transitional families are rotated in. Petitioners contend that the proposed action requires an environmental impact statement. The purported significant adverse environmental impact arises, according to petitioners' arguments, not from the mere addition of families to the neighborhood, but from the transitional nature of their residency.

We note that the City will not be constructing new buildings, and the only significant alteration will be for purposes of setting aside portions of the existing premises, so as to provide facilities for social services relative to the transitional nature of residences. As such, the City properly has classed the project as a Type II action (6 NYCRR 617.13[d][1] since it represents a replacement of a facility, in kind, on the same site, rather than one of the Type I (Id. § 617.12) listed actions. Unlike Type I actions, Type II actions are deemed to present no significant adverse environmental consequences and are exempt from SEQRA and SEQR requirements, mandating the filing of environmental impact statements.

We do not agree with petitioners that the current project, in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Mattia v. Vill. of Pittsford Planning & Zoning Bd. of Appeals
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • December 5, 2017
    ...Co. Sup. Ct. 2016) (project was a replacement in kind) (emphasis added). See also Manhattan Val. Neighbors for Permanent Hous. for the Homeless v. Koch , 168 A.D.2d 262, 263, 562 N.Y.S.2d 621 (1st Dept. 1990) (housing conversion project was a Type II replacement in kind).Under Levine , Peti......
  • New York City Coalition for the Preservation of Gardens v. Giuliani
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • October 15, 1997
    ...to suggest that the sites in question must have existing structures on them at the time of the project (See Manhattan Valley Neighbors v. Koch, 168 A.D.2d 262, 562 N.Y.S.2d 621; Rivera v. H.P.D., Index No. 10483/90 [Sup.Ct., N.Y. Cty., December 8, 1993]; Fishman v. N.Y.C. School Constr. Aut......
  • Chatham Towers Inc. v. N.Y. City Police Dept.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • July 1, 2010
    ...exempt from SEQRA and CEQR (6 NYCRR 617.3[f]; 617.5[a]; 43 RCNY 6-15[b] ); see Manhattan Val. Neighbors for Permanent Hous. for Homeless v. Koch, 168 A.D.2d 262, 263, 562 N.Y.S.2d 621 [1990], lv. denied 77 N.Y.2d 806, 568 N.Y.S.2d 913, 571 N.E.2d 83 [1991]. The record establishes that the s......
  • Comm. to Pres. the Historic Chautauqua Amphitheater v. Bd. of Trs. of the Chautauqua Inst.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • February 19, 2016
    ...in kind will be effected if a new facility has a substantially similar use as the old facility (see, Manhattan Valley Neighbors v. Koch, 168 A.D.2d 262, 263, 562 N.Y.S.2d 621 ; Matter of Anderberg v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 141 Misc.2d 594, 533 N.Y.S.2d 828 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT