Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Northern Blvd 15806 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mixed responses to proposals on Northern Boulevard: developers tout transit‑oriented housing; neighbors call for scaled‑back projects
Summary
Two related rezoning proposals along Northern Boulevard would enable mixed‑use buildings (one three‑story, one up to 10 stories with about 73 units and 18 affordable units under MIH option 1). Presenters said the corridor suits commercial and residential uses; residents asked for smaller scale, deed‑restriction checks and more community benefit.
Frank St. Jacques and other applicant representatives described two related land‑use actions to add and expand R7A/C2‑4 mapping on Northern Boulevard to facilitate mixed‑use development. One proposal would authorize a modest three‑story commercial/community facility building at 189–18901 Northern Boulevard; the other would permit a larger 10‑story mixed‑use building at 15806 Northern Boulevard with about 73 dwelling units (18 permanently affordable under MIH option 1), ground‑floor retail, and a cellar garage.
Presenters emphasized Northern Boulevard’s commercial character, wide street section and transit access as justification for a commercial overlay and higher residential density. The 15806 proposal described a building envelope with setbacks, an FAR near 5 and a design that steps down to adjacent lower‑rise blocks; the team said the scheme includes sustainability measures and a distribution of affordable units at 40%/60%/80% AMI per MIH option 1 breakdown.
Public reaction was mixed. Maria Becci, a 40‑year homeowner in the area, said a 10‑story building would overwhelm the Murray Hill business strip and raised deed‑restriction concerns on the site; she recommended a four‑story compromise. Henry Euler and other civic leaders likewise urged greater community consultation. By contrast, Terrence Park, a long‑time resident, supported the 15806 proposal for the housing and economic benefits and praised the developer for offering more than code‑required parking.
The applicant acknowledged community concerns and offered to convene more focused meetings with neighborhood stakeholders. The borough president’s office closed testimony on the items.
