By Tatiana Baez

The city is facing costly criticism for its recent approval of New York University’s expansion plan, dubbed NYU 2031. Eleven groups and several individuals opposing the development filed a lawsuit against the City Planning Commission and the City Council. The lawsuit was filed Sept. 24 in the State Supreme Court in Manhattan.
Here are the basics of what you need to know about the expansion plan and the lawsuit:

1. The plaintiffs on the lawsuit include NYU Faculty Against the Sexton Plan; the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation; the Historic Districts Council; the Washington Square Village Tenants’ Association; the East Village Community Coalition; Friends of Petrosino Square; LaGuardia Corner Gardens Inc.; the Lower Manhattan Neighbors Organization; SoHo Alliance; the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors; and the NoHo Neighborhood Association; as well as 11 individuals.

2. The lawsuit states that the plan involves an illegal use of public land.

3. The lawsuit also claims that city residents were not given an opportunity to voice their concerns in a public forum until after the plan was finalized and approved.

4. “GVSHP is a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit because we believe that the NYU plan would have a profoundly negative impact upon our neighborhood, eliminating much-needed open space, shoehorning 2 million square feet of facilities into an area already oversaturated with NYU facilities, and turning a residential neighborhood into a 20-year construction zone,” said Andrew Berman, executive director for the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation.

5. GVSHP believes that NYU is overturning the terms under which NYU was given the public land in the 1960s.

6. According to NYU spokesperson John Beckman, NYU 2031 seeks to construct new academic facilities, student dormitories and faculty housing.

7. Several professors are opposed to the plan and have united against NYU 2031. In a previous statement, Tejaswini Ganti, a professor at NYU, said that the Department of Anthropology “has voted unanimously to express [their] concerns regarding the NYU 2031 plan for expansion on the ‘superblocks’ between West Third and Houston streets.”
8. According to Ganti, one of the problems with NYU 2031 is the lack of “adequate or genuine consultation with the faculty regarding the rationale for the plan, the logic of expansion, its location and design, and the health and environmental consequences of an anticipated 20 years of construction.”

9. Opponents of the plan worry about the creation of an “irreparable rift with [the NYU] community neighbors given the plan’s anticipated rezoning for commercial development and the reduction of public green space in this high-density residential area,” said Ganti.

10. NYU and the plan’s organizers responded to claims made in the lawsuit by saying that public concerns were taken into consideration before designing the plan. “The City Planning Commission and City Council overwhelmingly approved NYU’s proposal after holding extensive public hearings and engaging in a thorough and rigorous public review process as required by law,” said Beckman.

Andrew Berman of the GVSHP. Photo by James Kelleher.

University makes modifications to plan, likely to be approved by full Council

By Alissa Fleck
NYU’s modified expansion plan is one step closer to fruition, much to the disappointment of staunchly opposed community members. The City Council’s Zoning Subcommittee and Land Use Committee voted back-to-back on Tuesday in overwhelming support of NYU’s expansion plan, with certain mutually agreed upon modifications.

All nine members of the Zoning Subcommittee voted in favor of the project, while the Land Use Committee voted 19 in favor and one opposed. Councilman Charles Barron was the sole holdout.

“We will regret this,” said Barron, urging his colleagues to have the courage to vote no and “send it back to the drawing board.”
Council members who defended their votes in support expressed immense respect for Councilwoman Margaret Chin’s efforts. They applauded her attempts to negotiate all sides, while maintaining their displeasure with the plan despite the modifications.

Chin, whose district covers Greenwich Village, stated she had not originally supported the proposal, but tried to keep an open mind and find a way to achieve a tolerable medium for all groups involved.

“I’m confident this proposal strikes the appropriate balance,” said Chin. “It holds NYU to its responsibility as a good neighbor.” Chin explained that NYU had made significant concessions and no one got everything they wanted.

“I wholeheartedly believe NYU’s growth will occur at a sustainable pace and not overwhelm the Village,” she said, adding that the school’s willingness to cooperate in the process had been encouraging.

Council members acknowledged continuing chasms between the community and the University. Councilman Vincent Ignizio urged NYU, “Now the real work begins for you. The community has issues with you…Start the rebuilding process today.”

The primary modifications to the original plan include a 20 percent (70,000 square feet) reduction in overall density for an approximate 1.93 million-square-foot expansion, space dedicated to community use, an increase in publicly accessible space and NYU taking responsibility for the maintenance of these open spaces.

“I have put in place strong checks and balances to ensure that NYU holds up its end of the bargain,” said Chin. “If NYU fails to do so, there will be consequences.”

These “checks and balances” include funds set aside to make sure the school adheres to its promises. The university will create a yearly endowment of $150,000 toward open space maintenance, proving they want to move beyond questions of trust to tangible verification.
Brown, when questioned by Councilwoman Jessica Lappin on how the school would fund the project, said financial support would come largely from philanthropy, working capital and fundraising, adding that a certain amount of debt is to be expected. With regard to tuition, she said: “There is always upward pressure on tuition.”

Before the plan went to vote, community member Georgina Bedrosian, who lives in the area in question and opposes the plan, said she was afraid council members would accept some version of the plan.

“It lies primarily on Chin,” said Bedrosian. “We little people can make a lot of noise, but [We’ve] lost out to big real estate.”
Throughout the presentation process, disparaging gestures and outcry from audience members revealed there is still significant tension among community members who feel NYU is not being honest and forthcoming, particularly with regard to public space accessibility and conversion.

Following the vote in favor of the plan, Andrew Berman, executive director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, called the plan’s passage a violation of public trust.

“The changes are less bad,” said Berman, “but not less bad enough.” Berman explained that the Council has a strong tendency to defer to local council members, in this case Chin.

NYU Vice President Alicia Hurley said to the press of the Council’s decision: “It’s so important for us to have these opportunities.”
As the session concluded, several audience members were escorted out, chanting: “Shame on you, Chin, you’ve killed the Village!”
The full City Council will convene Tuesday, July 24, to provide the final vote on the plan.

President John Sexton defends plan to the community, and city council members

By Alissa Fleck
City Council members struggled to quell boos, hisses, applause and chants at a hearing on the NYU expansion on Friday, June 29. Even Greenwich Village resident and actor Matthew Broderick showed up to voice an opinion on the controversial proposal; Broderick said NYU 2031 would “destroy the village” by hurting the “quirkiness and humanness” for which it’s known.

Council members largely agreed with Broderick, expressing concern over the plan, which would add 2 million square feet for academic and residential uses. One of the greatest sources of debate was how much community green space the plan would ultimately allow.

The hearing, the last expected before the City Council votes on the expansion proposal in July, incorporated presentations and testimony from opposition and proponents alike. Elected officials, NYU faculty members, community advocates and others came together to debate the highly contentious NYU 2031 plan also known as the “Sexton Plan.”

Two morning rallies proceeded the hearing outside City Hall, with plan opponents having a significantly larger turnout than supporters as people scrambled for space inside to attend a pre-hearing. Opponents held colorful banners that read “NYU 2031 is Wrong for NYC, Wrong for the Village and Wrong for NYU” and appeared to fill the majority of seats in the chambers. Security struggled to allow an even number from both camps to enter as people flooded into chambers.

The proposal, which was announced publicly in 2010, was approved by the City Planning Commission (CPC) on June 6 of this year after receiving feedback from Community Board 2 and Borough President Scott Stringer. The CPC passed the plan along to the City Council with several modifications, including the elimination of a hotel and commercial space.

The hearing opened with a presentation from supporters affiliated with NYU, including university President John Sexton, Tisch Dean Mary Schmidt Campbell, Senior Vice President Lynne Brown and Vice President Alicia Hurley. Council members then thoroughly questioned aspects of the NYU 2031 plan.

Councilwoman Margaret Chin, representing the area contained in the proposal, roused excitement from plan opponents by calling the expansion “unacceptable” and urging for greater balance.

“This plan tries to shoehorn too much into too small a space,” said Chin to wide applause and jazz hands.

The issue of scale was a hot topic. Councilwoman Jessica Lappin, representing parts of the Upper East Side and Roosevelt Island, agreed with Chin, calling the plan “too dense, too big, too tall and too much.” She added it could be made significantly more contextual with its surroundings, agreeing with many dissenters’ arguments against the plan. Lappin also pointed to the contradiction in the university’s choice to grow the undergraduate student population in the past and its current insistence on resource expansion to meet those needs.
Lappin said community members’ wariness about the plan was evident in the overwhelming contact she has received, even as a representative outside the relevant district.

Supporters affiliated with the university said there is a direct correlation between space and the ability to stay competitive with peer universities, while community supporters added that the plan will create jobs and benefit the local economy. NYU representatives have stated the plan will create 18,200 construction jobs and 2,600 opportunities for long-term employment.

Sexton, a lifelong New Yorker, said the university is desperately in need of space, which “translates into talent.” He pointed to the growth of new disciplines—the study of genomes, for instance—and the resulting need to attract the fields’ top researchers.

Currently, according to evidence the school put forth, NYU’s science facilities are outdated and not adequately sophisticated to keep pace with other top research institutes. Up-to-date science labs require additional space and flexibility over the average classroom. Without the necessary facilities, attracting top experts would be near impossible, said Sexton.

Sexton and other supporters continually reiterated that the school has no intention of growing the student body or viewing this as a real estate or corporate development project; it’s about academic necessity and meeting current needs and demands. The students themselves are “the loudest voices” calling for more space, explained Sexton.

Opponents of the plan granted that NYU may be in need of additional space, but encouraged the university to consider development elsewhere, like the Financial District, which would welcome the development, according to downtown District Leader Jenifer Rajkumar. Plan opponents overwhelmingly argued the proposal would change the character and ambiance of the Village, including decreasing green space, and some say it would force residents to live in a construction zone for at least 20 years.

It’s essential for facilities to be developed near the school’s core for many reasons, explained Brown, including efficiently delivering curriculum to undergraduates, creating community, decreasing university costs and not having to duplicate crucial facilities. Proposed changes, NYU claimed, will be built entirely on the school’s existing footprint or space currently owned by the institution.

Hurley responded to accusations against the school by providing a breakdown of space allocation, saying the university is dedicated to transforming current private space into public open space, including increasing open green space.

The debate over whether the plan will increase or decrease public green space is still highly contested on both sides. Council Member Robert Jackson put Sexton on the spot, asking whether he and his other representatives, were being as honest and forthcoming as they possibly could. Audience members’ hisses indicated their opinion as Sexton affirmed he was being truthful.

Some opponents believe the university is being deceptive about its motivations for the project. Many say the school is acting as a corporation rather than a university, with an eye toward taking over its “backyard.” Protesters pointed to a law firm hired by NYU to advocate for the plan, construction worker union members in the crowd who had little understanding of what the plan entailed and the many faculty members against the plan choosing who chose to remain anonymous as evidence of the school’s deceptive tactics.

NYU maintained it has tried to engage the community and remain transparent about the plan for the past five years. While the plan is projected to cost from $3 to $4 billion in total, Sexton asserted it would have no financial impact on NYU students. The City Council is expected to reach a decision by the end of July.