Sedgwick Avenue community raises concerns over new apartment development

As construction continues on Sedgwick Avenue at 3870 and 3874, the community’s concern grows over the fate of its neighborhood. 

Innovative Development purchased the two lots almost a year ago and only recently filed permits to build an eight-story apartment building with 42 units on the combined lots.

To date, despite previously mentioning they would present any further progress on the lots to the community, no further information has been given to the neighborhood on plans. 

Residents said trees have already been cut down while they raise issues over whether the site has completed an environmental impact study, or plans to, before commencing with further labor that could disrupt the neighborhood. 

According to the department of city planning, an environmental impact study is not necessary for this site as the location was last rezoned in 2004 to make it habitable for an apartment building. 

The State Environmental Quality Review Act is enforced in instances when a local, regional or state government agency is involved in the approval, funding or direct oversight of a project. Other instances when the state’s environmental act qualifies for a review are projects that include a permit or license coming from a state or local agency. 

For New York City, the construction of a new building would require an environmental review in the case of governmental agency involvement, but recently one exception has been granted. 

In March, the city’s planning commission approved the Green Fast Track, which it said cuts “red tape” that would allow for certain housing developments to skip past the environmental review process. 

The fast track applies to small and medium-sized residential developments, where projects in residential-zoned areas must add 175 or fewer units, and in commercial or manufacturing districts, where projects must add 250 or fewer units.

Other requirements include buildings must operate on all-electric heating with no fossil fuels involved, they must be in locations outside of vulnerable coastal areas and away from major roadways, and they must meet industry standards for hazardous material use, industrial emissions and ambient noise. 

This change follows the planning department’s study of 1,000 environmental reviews from the last decade that found modest housing projects were deemed to have no negative effect on the environment.

By changing the rules, city planning believes it can eliminate up to two years of environmental review from projects and buildings can go up quicker. 

Recently, when the School Construction Authority moved forward with the plan to build a public school at the site of the old Van Cortlandt Motel, an environmental assessment was completed determining the project would not negatively affect the neighborhood.

This study does not necessarily mean the project would avoid disruptive harm to the surrounding human environment but instead informs the community of the potential harm to the environment that could occur with the planned construction. The study is also required to detail any potential alternatives to the planned construction that could avoid environmental impact. 

Typically, an environmental impact study is completed if the lot is disturbed at all, to better assess how the project can be completed in the most effective way for the sake of the surrounding community. But since the Sedgwick project has begun with no study in place, the community has felt left out of the decision making. 

Gary Axelbank is a member of the Sedgwick community and one of many advocates for maintaining the Van Cortlandt Jewish Center as is. He feels a personal connection to the other properties Innovative has snatched up on the Sedgwick strip. 

“The community needs to be informed,” Axelbank said. 

Another community member, Abba Leffler, who has been quietly studying Innovative’s movements in the changes occurring on Sedgwick, said she will present to Community Board 8’s land use committee at its Oct. 7 meeting about the site’s lack of environmental review.