Proposed - Dormitory Authority

Dormitory Authority of the State of New York Page 2-1 

Staten Island Supreme Courthouse Project Draft EIS 

Section 2. Land Use, Zoning and Public Policy 

Introduction 

Land use refers to the activity that is occurring on land and within the structures that 

occupy it. Types of uses include residential, retail, commercial, industrial, vacant land and 

parks. 11 Under CEQR, an analysis of land use patterns characterizes the uses and development 

trends in the area in addition to considering zoning regulations and public policy initiatives that 

may be affected by the Proposed Project. Based on this analysis of existing land use patterns, it is 

then determined whether the Proposed Project would be compatible with the existing land use 

conditions or if it would adversely impact these patterns. 

Zoning and other regulatory controls such as master plans and rezoning plans are also 

major determinants of land use. The Zoning Resolution of the City of New York has established 

zoning districts, standards and requirements used to regulate and guide development in New York 

City. 12 Zoning regulations define permitted uses, lot coverage, building density, setbacks and 

building heights, open space coverage and parking requirements. 

According to the CEQR Technical Manual, a land use assessment is appropriate if a 

Proposed Project would result in a significant change in land use or would substantially affect 

regulations or policies governing land use. Examples of actions that may affect land use or land 

use policy include zoning special permits, site selection for public facilities, land dispositions or 

acquisitions and zoning map or text changes. 13 The Proposed Project represents a significant 

intensification of land use on the Project Site and also includes several ULURP-related actions, 

including a zoning special permit for construction of a public parking garage with open rooftop 

parking, site selection for a public facility for the proposed courthouse and parking garage, as 

well as property acquisition and site selection actions for the Interim Construction Parking Lot 

planned for the vacant lot adjacent to the St. George Theatre on Hyatt Street (refer to Zoning 

subsection). Accordingly, pursuant to CEQR, a detailed land use assessment is warranted to 

examine the Proposed Project’s effects on existing land use, zoning, and public policy in the 

project study area. 

The primary and secondary study areas of this study extend one-quarter mile and one-half 

mile from the boundaries of the Project Site. These study areas represent the basis for all 

analyses conducted in this section. Land use patterns, zoning and public policy are discussed 

generally within the secondary study area, approximately one-half mile from the Project Site. A 

more detailed examination is made of existing land use, zoning and development within the 

primary study area, extending approximately one-quarter mile from the Project Site. 

Representative photographs 1 to 16, located at the end of this section, present views of the study 

area and Project Site. 

11 

The City of New York. City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Technical Manual. October 2001. p. 

3A-1. 

12 

The City of New York City Planning Commission. Zoning Resolution of the City of New York, June 29, 

2006. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/zone/zonetext.shtml (July 27, 2006). 

13 

The City of New York. CEQR Technical Manual. October 2001. p. 3A-5.

Hudson County 

Richmond County 

Webster Avenue 

Jersey Street 

York Avenue 

Ely Street 

Jersey Street 

Stanley Avenue 

Westervelt Avenue 

Castleton Avenue 

Staten Island 

Victory Boulevard 

Project Site 

Cleveland 

Street 

Beechwood Avenue 

Cebra Avenue 

Egmont Place 

Layton Avenue 

Taft Avenue 

Hendricks Avenue 

Bismark Avenue 

Manhattan 

St. Marks Place 

Curtis Place 

Crescent Avenue 

Benzinger Avenue 

Winter Avenue 

Scribner Avenue 

Brooklyn 

Interim Construction-Period 

Parking 

Hamilton Avenue Academy Pl. 

Sherman Avenue 

New York City Boundary 

Richmond Terrace 

Corson Avenue 

Brook Street 

Queens 

Fort Hill Circle 


0 0.25 0.5 

Miles 

Source: NYC Department of City Planning 

Vine Street 

Ward Avenue 

Fort Place 

Low Terrace 

Nixon Avenue 

Borough 

Boundary 

Area Lots 

Belmont Place 

Monroe Avenue 


Tompkins Circle 

Wall Street 

Montgomery Avenue 

Hyatt Street 


Stuyvesant Place 


Central Avenue 

Hannah Street 

Swan Street 

Grant Street 

St. Pauls Street Van Duzer Street 

Clinton Street 

Brewster Street 

Bay Street 

Borough Place 

Slosson Terr. 

Van Duzer Street 

Bay Street 

Primary Study Area 

(Quarter-Mile Radius) 

Secondary Study Area 

(Half-Mile Radius) 

Figure 2-1: 

Study Area Map 

Staten Island Supreme Courthouse Project

Hudson County 

Richmond County 

Webster Avenue 

Jersey Street 

York Avenue 

Ely Street 

Jersey Street 

Stanley Avenue 


Castleton Avenue 


Project Site 

Cleveland 

Street 

Beechwood Avenue 

Cebra Avenue 

Interim 

Construction-Period 

Parking 

Borough 

Boundary 

Egmont Place 

Layton Avenue 

Taft Avenue 


Hendricks Avenue 

Bismark Avenue 

Curtis Place 

Crescent Avenue 

Benzinger Avenue 

Winter Avenue 

Scribner Avenue 

Corson Avenue 

Brook Street 

Hamilton Avenue Academy Pl. 

Sherman Avenue 

New York City Boundary 


Area Lots 

Fort Hill Circle Vine Street 

Primary 

Study Area 

Secondary 

Study Area 

0 0.25 0.5 

Miles 

Source: NYC Department of City Planning; Field Inspection 


Ward Avenue 

Fort Place 

Low Terrace 

Nixon Avenue 

Belmont Place 

Monroe Avenue 


Tompkins Circle 

Residential 

Commercial 

Wall Street 

Montgomery Avenue 

Industrial/ 

Manufacturing 

Public Facilities/ 

Institutions 

Hyatt Street 


Stuyvesant Place 


Central Avenue 

Hannah Street 

Swan Street 

Grant Street 

St. Pauls Street Van Duzer Street 

Clinton Street 

Brewster Street 

Bay Street 

Slosson Terr. 

Van Duzer Street 

Borough Place 

Bay Street 

Open Space/ 

Recreation 

Parking 

Facilities 

Transportation/ 

Utility 

Vacant Land 

Figure 2-2: 

Land Use 




Existing Conditions 

As seen in Figure 2-2, land uses surrounding the Project Site are characterized as 

primarily residential especially to the north and west. However, there are some commercial uses 

to the north on Hyatt Street and St. Marks Place to the west, which contains older houses 

converted to offices and service commercial uses. In general, land uses within the Proposed 

Project’s study area limits consist of primarily residential buildings, interspersed with commercial 

storefronts, community facilities, recreational open space and civic uses. The following survey of 

existing conditions includes a parcel-by-parcel land use survey of the lots contained within the 

Project Site, the primary study area and the secondary study area. 

Project Site. The Project Site (Richmond County Tax Block 6, Lot 21) occupies 

approximately 3.47 acres of a 4.04-acre, city-owned 578-space surface parking lot. The 

municipal surface parking lot, known as St. George Municipal Parking Field, consists of two 

separate city-owned tax lots identified as Richmond County Tax Block 6, Lot 21 and Richmond 

County Tax Block 6, Lot 20. For the purposes of the Proposed Project, the project site comprises 

501 parking spaces and is limited to Richmond County Tax Block 6, Lot 21 bounded by Hyatt 

Street to the north, Central Avenue to the east and St. Marks Place to the west. The Project Site is 

bounded to the immediate south by Richmond County Tax Block 6, Lot 20, an approximately 

0.57-acre parcel which contains the remaining 77 surface parking spaces of the municipal lot. The 

St. George Municipal Parking Field is operated under the jurisdiction of the New York City 

Department of Transportation (“NYCDOT”) and provides 578 parking spaces for both daily and 

hourly public parking. This parking facility is usually well utilized by Staten Island Ferry 

commuters and civic employees and also serves as a location for a weekend greenmarket. 

Interim Construction Parking Lot. As previously mentioned, the Proposed Project also 

includes the use of a surface lot across from the Project Site immediately adjacent to the St. 

George Theatre on Hyatt Street for interim construction-period parking. This lot would be 

utilized for the duration of construction of the parking garage located on the Project Site. For the 

purposes of this analysis, this surface lot will be referred to throughout this DEIS as the “Interim 

Construction Parking Lot.” More specifically, the surface lot is situated on the east side of St. 

Marks Place between Fort Place and Hyatt Street. The approximately 0.92-acre, L-shaped 

surface lot encompasses three separate tax parcels formally identified as Richmond County Tax 

Block 8, Lots 1, 11 and 14. The lot is bounded by the St. George Theatre and a surface parking 

lot for the Staten Island Judicial Center to the east, Hyatt Street to the south, St. Marks Place to 

the west and the Skylight Center, a two-story vocational training center to the north. The existing 

lot is currently vacant and is held under private ownership. An existing signalized intersection is 

located where Fort Place terminates at St. Marks Place, located at the approximate mid-point of 

the St. Marks Place frontage. The surface lot contains two existing curb cuts located to the north 

and south of the Fort Place intersection. 14 

Land use immediately surrounding the Project Site and Interim Construction Parking Lot 

are comprised of a mix of residential, municipal services and commercial uses. These uses are 

described below. 

1. 

14 Polshek Partnership Architects. Corner Lot Swing Parking Study Memorandum. Revised March 2, 2007. p.



Primary Study Area. The primary study area, defined by a one-quarter-mile boundary 

extending from the perimeter of the Project Site, is bounded by Hamilton Avenue to the north, 

Westervelt Avenue to the west, Hannah Street to the south and the waterfront to the east. The 

land uses in the western portion of the primary study area are characterized as predominantly 

residential interspersed with some institutional uses as illustrated by Figure 2-2. Commercial 

uses are located in the eastern portion of the primary study area along Stuyvesant Place and Bay 

Street. 

Land use immediately adjacent to the Project Site is dense and diverse encompassing a 

mix of residential, commercial, and community facility uses. Hyatt Street, at the northern 

boundary of the Project Site, contains an existing vacant surface lot intended for constructionperiod 

parking, and a small cluster of ground floor commercial uses consisting of the St. George 

Theatre, a florist, pastry shop, community facility, as well as two banks and restaurants. As Hyatt 

Street slopes down towards the water, the neighborhood shifts to accommodate Staten Island’s 

municipal core. The beginning of this core is marked by the St. George Library Center of the 

New York Public Library at 5 Central Avenue and Staten Island Borough Hall, located at 10 

Richmond Terrace, which backs up to the intersection of Hyatt Street and Stuyvesant Place. 

Central Avenue is a north-south roadway that frames the eastern portion of the Project 

Site. Five- and six-story apartment buildings are located across from the site along this roadway, 

where older buildings are situated between the public library on the corner of Hyatt Street and a 

three-story hotel near Slosson Terrace. A three-level public parking deck and day-care facility 

are located to the north of the hotel on Central Avenue. 

The Brighton Heights Reformed Church and the Forever Young Senior Center are two 

community facilities located to the west, near the intersection of Hyatt Street and St. Marks Place. 

These uses are located to the west of the proposed surface parking lot adjacent to the St. George 

Theatre. A building housing several borough offices of city agencies and a cosmetology and hair 

design school is located at 350 St. Marks Place, just south of the aforementioned uses. St. Marks 

Place, adjacent to the western edge of the Project Site, consists of commercial office buildings 

and a row of houses, some of which have been converted into professional offices housing 

lawyers, architects and dentists. Hospitality House, a six-story Tier II homeless family shelter 

and its small playground are situated to the south of the municipal surface parking lot. This 

facility has the capacity to house 46 homeless women and up to 105 children at any given time. 15 

Several vacant parcels, which have been cleared, are located south of Hospitality House. Lowrise 

structures at the southern terminus of St. Marks Place contain neighborhood service uses 

consisting of a restaurant, market and pre-school facility. 

Additional land uses located in the immediate vicinity of the proposed Interim 

Construction Parking Lot include two six-story residential apartment buildings located to the 

north of St. Marks Place and several walk-up apartment buildings at the corner of St. Marks Place 

and Wall Street. Residential uses consisting of walk-up apartments and single- and two-family 

homes and a delicatessen are located at the corner of Fort Place and St. Marks Place. The Ralph 

McKee Career and Technical High School at 290 St. Marks Place is situated to the north and west 

of the lot and Lt. Nicholas Lia Playground is a recreational use located approximately one block 

north from the proposed surface lot. 

15 Project Hospitality, Programs and Services: Family Services. 

http://www.projecthospitality.org/index.php?id=27 (June 19, 2007).



Staten Island’s civic center is located in the eastern quadrant of the primary study area. 

St. George, located on Staten Island’s north shore, contains the St. George Ferry Terminal, which 

is one of the island’s two principal gateways to the other four boroughs of the City, the other 

being the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge located in Fort Wadsworth. Marine infrastructure and the 

St. George Ferry Terminal, which offers daily ferry service to Whitehall Ferry Terminal in Lower 

Manhattan, dominate St. George’s waterfront. 16 Municipal facilities and transportation utilities 

that compose the borough’s civic center are oriented to the harbor. 

Beyond the ferry terminal, activity in St. George is centered on the Richmond County 

Bank Ballpark located at the intersection of Wall Street and Richmond Terrace in the northeast 

fringe of the primary study area. The North Shore Esplanade extends north from the stadium and 

provides open space along the waterfront. A four-block area encompassing two prominent 

governmental uses including Borough Hall and the Richmond County Courthouse is also a hub of 

activity. The 120 th Precinct House and Staten Island Family Courthouse lie further north along 

Richmond Terrace off of Wall Street. A small, single-story commercial plaza featuring a 

laundromat and fast food establishments is located across Wall Street from the 120 th Precinct. 

The Staten Island Judicial Center housing the Staten Island County Clerk, District Attorney and 

other court-related offices is located behind Borough Hall and the Courthouse along Stuyvesant 

Place. 17 The Staten Island Campus of Metropolitan College of New York (formerly Audrey 

Cohen College) is located to the north of the judicial center. 

Residential uses consisting of walk-up apartments and multi-family residences primarily 

occupy the western half of the primary study area as well as much of the secondary study area. 

These areas also feature various large single-family, two-family and multi-family homes and 

apartment buildings in generally quiet, green settings. Another notable educational use within the 

primary study area includes Public School (“P.S.”) 16 John Driscoll School located on Monroe 

Avenue. Open space uses providing passive and active recreational opportunities within the 

primary study area include a small private playground associated with Project Hospitality’s 

Hospitality House, Tompkinsville Park, Ft. Hill Park, and Cromwell Recreation Center – Lyons 

Pool. 

Secondary Study Area. The secondary study area is defined by a one-half mile radius 

from the Project Site perimeter and is bounded by Richmond Terrace to the north, Jersey Street to 

the west, Baltic Street to the south and the Upper New York Bay to the east. As seen in Figure 2- 

2, the secondary study area is characterized by dense residential development with some 

institutional and recreational uses. Similar to the western portion of the primary study area, 

single- and two-family one- and two-story detached homes as well as walk-up apartments 

compose the residential neighborhood in the western portion of the secondary study area. 

Neighborhood commercial uses are also scattered throughout the southern portion of the 

secondary study area. 

Two community facilities that segment the predominantly residential uses north and west 

of the Project Site are P.S. 31 William T. Davis School and Mahoney Playground. P.S. 31, 

16 New York City Department of Transportation, Staten Island Ferry: Route Information, 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/masstran/ferries/statfery.html#route (June 19, 2007). 

17 The City of New York Department of Citywide Administrative Services. DCAS Managed Public 

Buildings. http://home2.nyc.gov/html/dcas/html/resources/si_130stuyvesant.shtml (September 13, 2006).



named after William T. Davis, a native Staten Islander and prominent naturalist, is an elementary 

school, located at the terminus of Bismark Avenue between Layton and Crescent Avenues. The 

school is surrounded on three sides by private residential housing and is adjacent to Davis 

Playground. The school fragments a largely residential neighborhood comprising single- or twofamily, 

one-and two-story detached homes and some apartments, extending from Brook Street 

north to Crescent Avenue between Westervelt Avenue to the east and the secondary study area’s 

western boundary at Jersey Street. Mahoney Playground is located to the north of P.S. 31 

William T. Davis School between Beechwood and Crescent Avenues and Jersey and Cleveland 

Streets. This popular open space/recreational use breaks up the residential street wall that frames 

the park and provides the community with both passive and active recreational amenities. 

Curtis High School is a prominent community facility that is located in the northwest 

portion of the secondary study area at the convergence of Hamilton Avenue and St. Marks Place. 

This parcel contains the high school facility in addition to a multi-use athletic field. While 

remaining residential in nature, the neighborhood to the east of the high school consists of 

condominium and apartment-style housing which transitions to commercial and institutional uses 

further south along Richmond Terrace. 

Another major activity center within the southern extent of the secondary study area lies 

to the south along Victory Boulevard, from Bay Street to St. Paul Avenue. Along this stretch, 

Victory Boulevard is lined with three-and four-story apartment buildings with ground-floor local 

commercial convenience establishments consisting of several restaurants, a deli, a hardware store, 

pizzeria, two pharmacies, and a ninety-nine-cent store and discount center. Sparse light 

industrial/manufacturing uses consisting of a warehouse and lumber company are located on 

Clinton Street and Van Duzer Street respectively. An MTA/Staten Island Rapid Transit 

Operating Authority (“SIRTOA”) property, located at the southeastern fringe of the secondary 

study area, spans the eastern edge of Bay Street to the public facilities and transportation utilities 

along the waterfront. A commercial retail strip mall, anchored by a supermarket, is sited to the 

south of this property. 

The eastern portion of the secondary study area consists of the Upper New York Bay. 

Although no significant land uses extend into these waters, recreational open space, transportation 

utilities and public facilities are located interior to the bay along St. George’s waterfront. (Refer 

to Figure 2-2) These land uses, some of which are also present within the primary study area, 

include the North Shore Esplanade, St. George Ferry Terminal MTA/SIRTOA property, 

NYCDOT facilities as well as city-owned piers. 

Land Use Analysis 

Introduction. Land use conditions within the primary and secondary study area are 

characterized by the dense land development patterns that are prevalent throughout the five 

boroughs of New York City. In general, land uses within the Proposed Project’s study area 

consist of primarily residential buildings to the west, interspersed with commercial storefronts, 

community facilities, recreational open space and civic uses throughout. Land use immediately 

adjacent to the Project Site is dense and diverse encompassing a blend of residential, commercial 

and community facility uses. In addition, industrial maritime and transit uses near the waterfront 

typify other major land use types in the study area. Due to the scarcity of underdeveloped 

property, future development within the study area is anticipated to consist of the demolition of 

existing structures or infill strategies.



No-Build Condition 

Under the No-Build Condition, the implementation of the Staten Island Courthouse 

Project would not occur. In addition, the Interim Construction Parking Lot would not be 

developed on the existing vacant lot adjacent to the St. George Theatre as the Proposed Project 

would not be undertaken. It is anticipated that land use conditions would not be substantially 

different from those described as existing conditions. 

In order to establish a baseline with which to evaluate the potential impacts of the 

Proposed Project, other future proposed developments within the primary and secondary study 

areas were examined. General information regarding proposed development projects in St. 

George, Staten Island Community Board 1 and in the surrounding area of the Project Site was 

verified by the Staten Island Borough Office of the New York City Department of City Planning. 

Additional information pertaining to planned developments within the study area was collected 

from the District Manager of Staten Island Community Board 1. Developments scheduled for 

completion after the Build Year of 2012 for the Proposed Project were omitted from the analysis. 

Under the No-Build Condition, ongoing economic development within the project study area 

limits is expected to continue based on market conditions. Future development independent of 

the Proposed Project would continue as part of infill strategies or through the redevelopment of 

underutilized properties which would result in the replacement of vacant land and older structures 

with new buildings or the adaptive reuse of structures with modifications to the interior space and 

potential use of existing buildings. 

Refer to Table 2-1 for descriptions of current or future proposed developments that are 

beyond a preliminary stage which have been identified within a one-half mile radius of the 

Project Site.



Table 2-1. Proposed Developments within Study Area 

Residential Commercial Other Expected 

Number Project Name Location Types of Use Units (sq. ft.) (sq.ft.) Completion Status 

1 The Pointe 155 Bay Street Residential 58 15,000 sq. ft. - Early 2008 

2 

3 

Bay Street 

Landing 

Canal Lumber 

Site 

4 The View 

5 Central Avenue 

130 Bay Street 

Landing 

St. Julian Place 

btwn Bay & 

Van Duzer 

Residential 101 - - Mid 2008 

Streets Commercial - 44,000 sq. ft. - N/A * 

Corner of 

Richmond 

Terrace & 

Nicholas Street Residential 42 - - Early 2008 

118-124 Central 

Avenue Commercial - 73,000 sq. ft. - 2011 

6 Central Avenue 

118-124 Central 

Avenue 

Hamilton Ave 

btwn Academy 

Pl. & Stuvesant 

Mixed Use 116 30,468 sq. ft. - 2011 

Muss Pl./Richmond 

7 Development 

Fishes Eddy 

Terrace Residential 220 - - N/A 

8 Warehouse 139 Bay Street Mixed Use 18 - - N/A 

9 

Montgomery 

Avenue 

Condominiums 

10 Liberty Towers 

Note: * N/A=Not available 

Montgomery 

Avenue at Fort 

Place Residential 12 - - Early 2008 

Application filed with NYCDCP to construct 8-story 

commercial tower 

Application filed with NYCDCP to construct mixed use 

development consisting of two residential buildings with a 

commercial base 

Quality Housing Program mandates 70 ft. residential height 

limit in C4-2 zoning district. Seeking authorization from 

NYCDCP to construct project as high rise building. 

Richmond 

Terrace and 

Corner of 

Hamilton 

158 total (84 

Avenue Residential & 74) - - 2010 Draft applications filed with NYCDCP 

Total 725 162,468 sq. ft. -



The Pointe. The Pointe is a 58-unit residential development located at 155 Bay Street off 

of Victory Boulevard. The proposed development also contains approximately 15,000 gsf of 

ground-floor retail space. The expected completion of this development is early 2008. 

Bay Street Landing. This residential development consisting of 101 condominium units 

is located in a nine-story former warehouse at 130 Bay Street Landing. This project is scheduled 

to be completed in mid 2008. 

Canal Lumber Site. A private developer is planning a commercial retail shopping center 

on the site of this lumberyard located on St. Julian Place between Bay and Van Duzer Streets. 

This shopping center would have 44,000 square feet of commercial development consisting of 

smaller retail uses and a supermarket. An underground parking structure would provide 

approximately 141 parking spaces. 

The View. The View is a 42-unit residential building located on the corner of Richmond 

Terrace and Nicholas Street. This 8-story development would total approximately 64,330 square 

feet. The expected date of completion is early 2008. 

Central Avenue. A tentative plan to construct an as-of-right, mixed-use development is 

proposed for 118-124 Central Avenue. This development would consist of two residential 

buildings of 5 and 7 stories with a total of 116 residential units. The proposed development also 

contains approximately 30,468 gsf of commercial space. In addition, an 8-story commercial 

tower consisting of approximately 73,000 gsf is proposed on a lot adjacent to the residential 

development. The expected date of completion for these projects is 2011. 

Muss Development. This development, located where Stuyvesant Place meets Richmond 

Terrace, is expected to consist of two residential towers with approximately 110 units each. The 

developer is currently awaiting the results of a New York City Department of City Planning 

(“NYCDCP”) zoning study due in 2008 and subsequent agency authorization to construct the 

project as twin high rise buildings. While the former C4-2 General Commercial District in which 

this parcel is located would have permitted a 16-story residential building, this area was rezoned 

to mandate the Quality Housing Program for residential development in C4-2 zoning districts in 

St. George. This would limit the height to 70 feet which would allow for up to 7 stories. While 

the FAR remains the same, it is not known at this time if this project would be pursued under the 

Quality Housing Program which would implement a height limit resulting in bulkier buildings. 

Fishes Eddy Warehouse. This proposed development abutting the Pointe parcel is 

expected to consist of approximately 18 residential units with a possible ground-floor restaurant 

in this former warehouse space. The expected date of completion for this project is not available 

as construction has not yet commenced. 

Montgomery Avenue Condominiums. This 10,713-square-foot, three-story development 

consisting of 12 residential units is located on Montgomery Avenue at Fort Place. The expected 

date of completion is early 2008. 

Liberty Towers. Draft applications have been filed with NYCDCP for two residential 

developments in the vicinity of Richmond Terrace and the corner of Hamilton Avenue consisting 

of 84 and 74 units respectively. Construction is anticipated to be completed in 2010.



National Lighthouse Museum Site / Pier One 18 . This site, located south of the St. George 

Ferry Terminal on the grounds of a former Coast Guard depot, has been selected to house the 

National Lighthouse Museum. The New York City Economic Development Corporation (EDC) 

has spent $6.5 million renovating the two buildings designated for museum use on this parcel. 

The EDC is currently reviewing bids for the mixed-use redevelopment of four buildings totaling 

35,000 gsf on approximately 3 acres of this 10-acre former Coast Guard depot. Development for 

this site is also anticipated to incorporate 200 residential units and 225 parking spaces in addition 

to plans for the museum. The expected build year for this site is 2015. 

Pier One is an 845-foot public pier situated to the south of the ferry terminal and adjacent 

to the Lighthouse Depot site. The New York City Economic Development Corporation (“EDC”) 

has been awarded a series of Environmental Protection Fund (“EPF”) grants by the State as part 

of the ongoing development of this 55,000-gsf site as a public waterfront facility. Construction 

would include additional recreational amenities and accommodations for the Lightship Nantucket 

LV-112. This light vessel, built in 1936, marked the Nantucket Shoals in Massachusetts and 

would act as the centerpiece of the adjacent National Lighthouse Museum. This development 

would coincide with the redevelopment of the National Lighthouse Museum site. 

Homeport 19 . The Homeport represents a large project just outside of the boundary of the 

secondary study area for the Proposed Project. As such, it is described below. In addition, a 

portion of the approved Stapleton Rezoning (refer to Zoning subsection) and Front Street 

reconstruction, described below, fall within the study area limits for the Proposed Project. 

Pursuant to the City’s New Stapleton Waterfront Development Plan, the Homeport 

project involves the redevelopment of six parcels with a mix of residential, commercial and 

recreational uses on this former naval installation. The development is expected to consist of 350 

residential units, a 60,000-gsf restaurant, 30,000 gsf of retail space, 75,000 gsf of commercial 

office space, 12 acres of open space and a 10,000–square-foot farmers market. Parking spaces for 

1,285 vehicles would also be provided as part of the development. Further development 

associated with the Stapleton Rezoning adjacent to the Homeport site between Front Street and 

the SIRTOA right of way is anticipated to consist of an additional 288 residential units and 

approximately 43,700 gsf of retail space. 

In addition, the City of New York has allocated $66 million to facilitate public 

improvements at Front Street and a proposed waterfront esplanade running the length of the 

Homeport site. Front Street, which extends from Hannah Street at the fringe of the primary study 

area to its intersection with Edgewater and Bay Streets outside of the study area limits in the 

south, would be realigned to improve roadway design and safety. This realignment would 

include two driving lanes, two parking lanes, sidewalks, lighting, landscaping and a bike lane. 

Sewer infrastructure would also be upgraded to address drainage problems. Site work on Front 

Street and the esplanade are scheduled to begin in 2008. The Build Year for the Homeport 

project is 2015. 

18 The National Lighthouse Museum and Homeport projects were not incorporated into the baseline projects 

identified in Table 2-1 or in the projected population calculations described in this section, as the Build Year for both of 

these projects is 2015, well after the 2012 Build Year for the Proposed Project. However, these projects are mentioned 

as they represent important large-scale development projects within or in the vicinity of the project study area. In 

addition, these projects are viewed as catalysts to the revitalization of St. George, Stapleton, and the North Shore as a 

whole. 

19 Ibid.



Staten Island Supreme Courthouse and the Downtown St. George Renaissance 20 . The 

Staten Island Borough President’s Staten Island Supreme Courthouse and the Downtown St. 

George Renaissance plan details several conceptual recommendations for the revitalization of St. 

George (see Public Policy subsection of this section). This initiative includes streetscape 

improvements consisting of landscaping and decorative paving along Hyatt Street and Central 

Avenue, increasing parking within St. George, the creation of a Special Downtown St. George 

Zoning District and the evaluation of traffic patterns, proposed direction changes on local streets 

and weekend street closures as required. 21 

Analysis. As previously stated, proposed development projects planned for construction 

consist of the redevelopment of underutilized properties, infill strategies resulting in the 

replacement of vacant land with new structures or the adaptive reuse of structures with 

modifications to the interior space or use of existing buildings. Within the study area, these 

projects, which reflect the aforementioned development patterns, consist predominantly of 

residential projects as well as some commercial and mixed-use development. By the Build Year, 

it is anticipated that approximately 725 residential units and 162,468 gsf of commercial space 

would be constructed within the study area limits for the Proposed Project. 

A series of multipliers were used in order to estimate the projected residential population 

generated by the proposed residential developments within the project study area. The New 

Practitioner’s Guide to Fiscal Impact Analysis identifies regional demographic multipliers for 

total household size for common standard housing types based on Census data from the U.S. 

Census of Population and Housing (Public Use Sample, 1980). 22 Two multipliers, specific to the 

Mid-Atlantic region of the northeastern United States for garden and high rise apartments, were 

utilized to calculate the estimated population as a result of new residential development. 

Multipliers of 1.417 and 1.904 were employed for high rise and garden apartments respectively, 

as these multipliers generally match the criteria for the majority of new residential development 

to be constructed within the project study area. 

The construction of 725 new residences would increase the residential population within 

the project study area by an estimated 1,224 residents. The population of Staten Island as of 

2005, as estimated by NYCDCP and adopted by the Census Bureau in September 2006 was 

475,014. 23 According to statistics generated by the NYCDCP the projected population of Staten 

20 The SIBP’s Staten Island Supreme Courthouse and the Downtown St. George Renaissance plan was not 

incorporated into the baseline projects identified in Table 2-1 or in the projected population calculations described in 

this section, as a Build Year for this project has not been proposed. However, this project is referenced in the Land Use 

No-Build and Public Policy subsections of this section as this plan represents a potential future project in the immediate 

vicinity of the Project Site. In addition, this effort is viewed as a potential future project that is important to the 

revitalization of St. George. The plan’s various recommendations would include the establishment of a master plan and 

adoption of a special zoning district, are part of a more comprehensive proposal for the St. George neighborhood and 

are therefore independent actions beyond the scope of the Proposed Project. Any potential implementation of any 

component of this plan should be viewed as a separate, but related, action requiring other approvals and/or 

environmental review as appropriate independent of those secured for the Proposed Project. 

21 Staten Island Supreme Courthouse and the Downtown St. George Renaissance presented by Staten Island 

Borough President James P. Molinaro, May 7, 2007. 

22 Burchell, Robert, David Listokin and William R. Dolphin, The New Practitioner’s Guide to Fiscal Impact 

Analysis, Center for Urban Policy Research: Brunswick, NJ, 1985. p. 64. 

23 The City of New York Department of City Planning. The “Current” Population of New York City (2005). 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/census/popcur.shtml (November 10, 2006).



Island (Richmond County) would be 491,808 by the year 2010. 24 The additional 1,224 residents 

found in the study area for the baseline residential projects represent an insignificant increase of 

approximately 0.25 percent, less than 1 percent of the overall borough-wide population predicted 

for 2010. 

Build Condition 

The purpose of implementing the Proposed Project is to replace existing outdated and 

inadequate courthouse and court-related facilities for the Supreme Civil Court, Supreme Criminal 

Court, the Lower Criminal Court and other court-related agencies located elsewhere in the 

borough of Staten Island with a more contemporary facility and associated parking structure that 

accommodates the operational requirements of these judicial functions pursuant to the New York 

City Courts Capital Program Master Plan as amended. The new state-of-the-art courthouse 

would allow for the consolidation of court parts and court-related agencies from several locations 

into a single structure. The new courthouse facility would provide space for approximately 350 

employees. Existing Supreme Court functions located at 18 Richmond Terrace, Borough Hall, 

and the Homeport as well as Lower Criminal Court functions from 67 Targee Street would be 

relocated to the new facility. 25 In addition, jury assembly would be transferred to the proposed 

courthouse from 126 Stuyvesant Place. Once these court parts and court-related agencies have 

been moved into the new Staten Island Supreme Courthouse, 18 Richmond Terrace is expected to 

be renovated and utilized by other court parts that would be relocated from outdated space. 26 

(Refer to Figures 2-3 and 2-4 for existing and proposed Staten Island court locations). 

The Proposed Project would involve the construction of a new 5-story courthouse facility 

with enclosed mechanical penthouse, not to exceed approximately 183,300 gsf for the Staten 

Island Supreme Civil Court, Supreme Criminal Court, Lower Criminal Court and other courtrelated 

agencies currently located elsewhere in the borough of Staten Island. Public access to the 

courthouse would be gained from an entrance located at the northeast quadrant of the building off 

of a public entry plaza at the convergence of Hyatt Street and Central Avenue. A separate 

entrance for the judiciary would be located mid-building and accessed from St. Marks Place. 

Upon completion of the Proposed Project, a total of 14 court sets comprised of 6 Supreme 

Civil, 5 Supreme Criminal and 3 Lower Criminal sets would be contained in the approximately 

183,300-gsf facility. More specifically, each court set is comprised of a courtroom, jury 

deliberation room, attorney client conference room and a judge’s chamber suites/robing room. 

Certain court parts would include secure prisoner holding space. In addition, the new facility 

would contain hearing rooms for judicial hearing officers and court attorney/referees, office space 

for court administrative, jury office and probation office personnel, the Richmond County District 

Attorney’s office and Battiste, Aronowsky & Suchow for the provision of indigent defense as 

24 The City of New York Department of City Planning, New York City Population Projections by Age/Sex & 

Borough, December 2006. p. 13. Many of the residential projects within the study area are anticipated to be 

operational by 2010. 

25 Due to the City’s planned redevelopment of the Homeport, court-related space currently located within an 

annex at the Homeport would be displaced to temporary facilities until the new court facility is completed in 2012. 

26 At this time, the proposed renovation of 18 Richmond Terrace is slated to accommodate the Staten Island 

Family Court located at 100 Richmond Terrace and the Lower Civil Court located at 927 Castleton Avenue. Surrogate 

Court will remain at 18 Richmond Terrace. No plans have currently been identified for the future use of 100 Richmond 

Terrace or 67 Targee Street.

Legend 

Staten Island Court Facilities 

Civil Courthouse, 927 Castleton 

Criminal Courthouse, 67 Targee St 

Family Courthouse, 100 Richmond Terrace 

Judicial Center, 130 Stuyvesant 

Supreme Court, Borough Hall, 10 Richmond Terrace 

Supreme Court, Homeport, 355 Front St 

Supreme Courthouse, 18 Richmond Terrace 

Supreme 

Criminal 

Lower Civil Supreme Civil 

Lower Criminal 

Family 

Judicial Center, 

Jury Assembly 

Borough Hall, 

Supreme Civil 

1

Supreme Criminal and Civil, Lower Criminal, 

Jury Assembly, New Courthouse 

Family, Surrogate, Lower Civil, 18 Richmond 

Terrace 

Judicial Center, 130 Stuyvesant 

Proposed 

Judicial Center 

Supreme and Lower 

Criminal, Supreme 

Civil, Jury Assembly 

Family, Surrogate, 

Lower Civil 

2



well as clerks and support staff. The structure would also contain facilities for arrestee 

processing, courts security, New York City Department of Correction holding cells, court 

reporters and maintenance staff. 

The Proposed Project would also include an approximately 227,832-gsf, 665-space, fivefloor, 

split-level parking structure with open rooftop parking adjacent to the courthouse facility to 

accommodate the parking needs of court personnel and to replace public parking that would be 

displaced with the construction of the Proposed Project. The proposed parking garage would 

contain approximately 515 public spaces (self-park) and approximately 150 secured parking 

spaces located in three designated areas dedicated for court use. These secured parking areas 

would contain approximately 123 spaces (self-park) and 27 attended parking spaces. The 

courthouse and parking structure would be separated by a service driveway running between St. 

Marks Place and Central Avenue, which would allow access to loading docks, a sallyport and 

designated judicial staff parking. Two additional segregated parking areas for court use would be 

located on the second and third floors of the proposed garage. Additional points of ingress and 

egress for the proposed garage include St. Marks Place and Central Avenue. 

An Interim Construction Parking Lot, consisting of approximately 96 parking spaces, 

would be located in a surface lot adjacent to the St. George Theatre on Hyatt Street for use as 

interim construction-period parking. 

The northern portion of the Project Site would be developed as a landscaped Memorial 

Green. This area, located adjacent to Hyatt Street and St. Mark’s Place, is what remains of an 

historical burial ground of the Quarantine Grounds. Archeological investigation of this area has 

located the boundaries of the burial ground and established a 20-foot buffer zone to protect the 

archaeological resources below. A memorial landscape would be created to permanently 

recognize those who were interred there. The Memorial Green would be constructed on top of 

the existing asphalt to avoid impact to the archaeological resources located below (see Section 6, 

Historic and Archaeological Resources). Adjacent to the burial grounds a more active public 

landscape would be developed to include a plaza along Central Avenue, as well as perimeter 

landscaping throughout the overall site. 

The Proposed Project would result in a significant intensification of land use both on and 

within the immediate vicinity of the Project Site by altering the parcel’s existing surface parking 

use to a court use and parking facility. Typically, if a Proposed Project is expected to alter land 

uses in the surrounding area and the anticipated change is substantial, that change is usually 

considered significant, but not necessarily adverse under CEQR. 27 Land use change may be 

considered adverse under the following conditions: 

• The use changes would not be compatible with other uses in the area. 

• The use changes would not be compatible with public land use policy. 

• The new development would increase density in the area and such density does not 

conform to public policy and plans for the area. 

• The new development would increase density in the area such that it would overtax the 

capacity of the study area to support it. 

• The use changes would accelerate existing and anticipated trends in development for the 

area that lead to adverse socioeconomic impacts. 

27 CEQR Technical Manual, pp. 3A-12-13.



The implementation of the Proposed Project would constitute a significant development 

due to the building’s function, scale, and central location within the St. George neighborhood. 

Although the proposed courthouse and related parking garage would represent a different land 

use than that which presently exists onsite, the land use changes associated with the Proposed 

Project would be compatible with the surrounding uses within St. George. Civic land uses 

composing the governmental core of St. George in the vicinity of the Project Site date back to as 

early as 1906 with the construction of the New York City-landmarked Borough Hall and are thus 

well-established uses. Subsequent civic development including the Richmond County 

Courthouse, Family Court and St. George Library Center has also reinforced the municipal nature 

of the area. The new land use associated with the Proposed Project would support and extend the 

existing government center in St. George and would enhance the ongoing revitalization of St. 

George as a re-emerging town center. This revitalization effort is both a City and Borough 

initiative and has been articulated in the Staten Island Borough President’s Staten Island Supreme 

Courthouse and the Downtown St. George Renaissance Plan described above and in the Public 

Policy subsection of this section. The development of the new courthouse would help to solidify 

this endeavor and would therefore be consistent with public policy and local land use plans for 

the St. George area. 

The new courthouse would accommodate approximately 350 employees, thus increasing 

density in the neighborhood. Of these employees, approximately 212 currently operate out of 

existing court facilities within the study area. Approximately 138 of the projected employees at 

the new court facility (consisting of approximately 12 new jobs, 56 Supreme Civil staff from the 

Homeport and 70 Lower Criminal Court staff relocated from 67 Targee Street) would be new to 

the project study area. The presence of these employees would be beneficial to local businesses 

and commercial uses along both Hyatt Street and Stuyvesant Place and would not conflict with 

public policy and plans for the area, nor would it overtax the capacity of the study area. Land use 

changes and streetscape improvements associated with the Proposed Project would also help to 

reactivate Hyatt Street, Central Avenue and St. Marks Place. 

The land use changes associated with the Proposed Project would accelerate existing and 

anticipated trends in development, however, it is not expected that this would lead to adverse 

socioeconomic impacts (see Section 8, Socioeconomic Conditions). The Proposed Project would 

not result in the displacement of local residents, businesses or employees, typical indicators of an 

adverse socioeconomic impact. 

Under the Build Condition, the specific land use of the Project Site would be modified 

from a parking facility to a civic use and parking facility but would be consistent with the general 

land use patterns and overall character of the surrounding area. The Proposed Project would 

represent an intensification of use over the existing use on the site than would otherwise occur 

without the Proposed Project. However, the Proposed Project would be consistent and 

compatible with the longstanding civic, commercial, community facilities and residential land 

uses that comprise the primary and secondary study areas, and would not represent an adverse 

land use impact. 

Mitigation 

As no significant adverse impacts to land use are expected to result from the 

implementation of the Proposed Project, no mitigation is required.



Photo 1. View of Proposed Project site facing St. 

Marks Place. 

Photo 3. View of commercial uses on Hyatt 

Street looking west. 

Photo 5. Representative commercial office uses 

on St. Marks Place. 

Photo 2. View from Proposed Project site 

looking north toward surface parking lot adjacent 

to St. George Theatre. 

Photo 4. View of residential neighborhood 

looking south toward Proposed Project site. 

Photo 6. View of community facilities and 

commercial uses south of Proposed Project site.



Photo 7. Elementary School located within 


Photo 9. Waterfront open space plaza on former 

Coast Guard parcel. 

Photo 11. High rise apartments located within 


Photo 8. Detached residential homes within 


Photo 10. Representative ground floor 

commercial uses on Bay Street. 

Photo 12. View looking south down Richmond 

Terrace.



Photo 13. View of Richmond County Bank 

Ballpark. St. George Ferry Terminal visible in 

distance. 

Photo 15. View of Borough Hall from St. George 

Ferry Terminal. 

Photo 14. View of North Shore Esplanade and 

residential apartment buildings in secondary study 

area. 

Photo 16. View of parking facility and SIR rail 

alignment looking north from ferry terminal. 

Richmond Terrace visible at left.



Zoning 


As illustrated in Figure 2-5, New York City Zoning Map № 21c, the zoning districts 

immediately surrounding the Project Site are commercial, with residential districts chiefly to the 

west. The waterfront is largely zoned as manufacturing with the exception of some commercial 

districts in the vicinity of the ferry terminal and one waterfront recreation parcel. The Special 

Stapleton Waterfront District (“SW”) and Special Hillsides Preservation District (“HS”) are two 

special zoning districts also present in the project vicinity. 

Project Site. The Project Site is zoned as a C4-2 General Commercial District. The C4 

designation is typically mapped in regional commercial centers that are situated outside of the 

central business district. The C4 designation typically features commercial and office uses 

including theaters and department stores that serve a larger area and generate more traffic than 

neighborhood shopping areas. 28 The C4-2 zoning district is mapped in densely-developed areas 

like St. George or Fordham Road in the Bronx. 

Use Groups 1 through 6, 8 through 10 and 12 are permitted under the existing C4-2 

zoning. Permitted uses include single-family detached residential uses (Use Group 1), apartments 

and non-profit residences for the elderly (Use Group 2), community facilities including libraries, 

museums, health related facilities, and community centers (Use Groups 3 & 4), transient hotels 

(Use Group 5), retail and service establishments (Use Group 6), movie theaters and appliance 

repair shops (Use Group 8), printers (Use Group 9), and large retail and entertainment 

establishments (Use Groups 10 &12). 

The C4-2 designation has a maximum commercial Floor Area Ratio (“FAR”) of 3.4 and a 

maximum residential FAR ranging from 0.78 to 2.43. Its residential district equivalent is the R6 

General Residence District, which allows medium-density housing. In St. George’s C4-2 

districts, ground floor residential uses are prohibited in an effort to enhance the existing character 

of ground floor community facilities and commercial uses that are prevalent within the district. 

Residential uses are permissible above either ground floor community facilities or ground floor 

commercial development within the C4-2 district. Rear yard or rear yard equivalents are not 

required for through lots in C4-2 districts. 29 In St. George, any residential development within 

C4-2 zoning districts is subject to the Quality Housing Program for Residential Development 

which limits the height of residential developments to 70 feet within 100 feet of a wide street. 30 

Interim Construction Parking Lot. The existing lot adjacent to the St. George Theatre is 

also zoned as a C4-2 General Commercial District. Zoning designations including FAR and 

permitted uses within this district are specified above under existing conditions for the Project 

Site. 

28 The City of New York Department of City Planning. Zoning Handbook. January 2006. p.58. 

29 The City of New York Department of City Planning. “Article III - Commercial District Regulations, 

Chapter 3 Bulk Regulations for Commercial or Community Facility Buildings in Commercial District Section 33-28, 

Zoning Resolution of the City of New York, October 29, 2007 http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/zone/art03c03.pdf 

(December 31, 2007). 

30 The City of New York Department of City Planning. “Staten Island Commercial Development Commercial 

Rule Changes” http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/sigrowth/si_comm_1.shtml (October 5, 2006).

Proposed Project Site 

Interim Construction-Period 

Parking 

Source: NYC Zoning Resolution Map No: 21c 

Figure 2-5: 

Zoning 




Primary Study Area. The primary study area contains industrial, community facility and 

transportation uses, zoned M1-1 Light Manufacturing District (High Performance) near the 

waterfront. A multi-block area that encompasses the Project Site and Interim Construction 

Parking Lot is zoned C4-2 General Commercial District. This area runs from the northern 

boundary of the primary study area at Hamilton Avenue to Victory Boulevard to the south and is 

bounded by Montgomery Avenue to the west and Bay Street to the east. An R3A Single- and 

Two-Family Detached Residence District fronting the western street side of St. Marks Place is 

located across from the Interim Construction Parking Lot. A residential neighborhood running 

from the western side of Montgomery Avenue to the western extent of the primary study area at 

Westervelt Avenue bounded by Van Duzer Street to the south contains a mix of residential 

zoning districts including R2 Single-Family Detached Residence District, R3-1 Single- and Two- 

Family Detached and Semi-Detached Residence District, R3A Single- and Two-Family Detached 

Residence District, R3-2 Low-Density General Residence District, R4 Low-Density General 

Residence District, and R5 Low-Density General Residence District. 

The M1-1 zoning designation is a light manufacturing (high performance) zoning district 

with a FAR of 1.0. The M1-1 zoning district, found along most of the waterfront, is interrupted 

by a C3 Waterfront Recreation District in the vicinity of Bay Street Landing. This district 

permits waterfront recreation and uses related to fishing and boating (Use Group 14). The 

maximum commercial FAR of this district is 0.5 with residential development guided by R3-2 

district specifications. A C8-1 General Services District is located south of the C3 zoning district 

on the eastern fringe of the primary study area, extending into the secondary study area. The C8- 

1 zoning designation allows for a commercial FAR of 1.0. Permitted uses include heavy 

commercial services, automotive and semi-industrial uses. 

The C4-2 zoning designation, located to the west, has a maximum commercial FAR of 

3.4 and a maximum residential FAR ranging from 0.78 to 2.43. The residential zoning present 

within the primary study area varies in density from R2 to R5. These residential zoning districts 

permit an array of residential uses varying from single-family detached structures with a FAR of 

0.5 to small apartment houses with a FAR of 1.25. 

In the southern portion of the primary study area along the north and south sides of 

Victory Boulevard is an R5 zoning district with a C2-1 Local Service Commercial Overlay 

District that enables mixed-use buildings. A C1-2 Local Retail Commercial Overlay District 

mapped in a R3-2 General Residence District also allows for mixed-use development south of 

Victory Boulevard between Van Duzer and Bay Streets. C1 zoning districts accommodate local 

retail districts in residential neighborhoods and are limited to uses such as drug stores or groceries 

(Use Group 6). C2 zoning districts permit a broader array of commercial uses including retail 

and service establishments (Use Group 6), printers (Use Group 9) and waterfront facilities (Use 

Group 10). When C1-1 to C1-5 and C2-1 to C2-5 are mapped as overlays in R1 through R5 

zoning districts, the maximum commercial FAR is 1.0. The residence districts within which the 

overlays are mapped regulate residential bulk. 

The western portion of the primary study area west of St. Marks Place and Montgomery 

Avenue is located within the Special Hillsides Preservation District (HS). This district was 

created to regulate development in the district and preserve the area’s vegetation and hilly terrain. 

Refer to the Special Hillsides Preservation subsection located within this section. 

Refer to Table 2-2, listed below, for a description of residential zoning districts and Table 

2-3 for commercial and manufacturing zones within both the primary and secondary study areas.

Residential 

Zoning Districts 

Name 

Description 

Minimum Lot 

Area 

Maximum 

Residential FAR 

Maximum 

Community 

Facility FAR 

Maximum 

Building Height 

Minimum Side 

Yard Lots 

Parking Required 



Table 2-2. Residential Zoning Districts of Study Area 

R1-2 R2 R3A R3-1 R3-2 R3X R4 R5 R6 

Single-Family 

Detached 

Residence District 

Single-family 

detached residences 

Single-Family 

Detached Residence 

District 

Single-family 

detached residences 

Detached 


Single-or twofamily 

detached 

residences 

5,700 sf 3,800 sf 2,375 sf 

0.5 0.5 

0.5 or up to 1.0 by 

special permit 

Governed by sky 

exposure plane 1 

20 ft 

1 space per 

dwelling unit 

0.5 or up to 1.0 by 

special permit 

0.5 plus 0.1 attic 

allowance 

Single-and Two- 

Family Detached and 

Semi-Detached 


Single-or two-family 

detached and semidetached 

residences 

Detached: 3,800 sf 

Other: 1,700 sf 


allowance 

General Residence 

District 

General residential 




allowance 

Detached 


Single-or twofamily 

detached 

residences 

3,325 sf 


allowance 


District 


District 

General residential General residential 




allowance 



Moderate Density 


Height Factor 

(non-contextual) 

district 

1.25 0.78-2.43 

1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 4.8 


exposure plane 1 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft 35 ft 35ft 40 ft 

Detached: (2) 13 ft 

total; 5 ft minimum 

1 space per dwelling 

unit 


total; Zero lot line 

buildings (1) 8ft 

minimum 

1 space per 

dwelling unit 

Notes: 

1 Height controlled by sky exposure plane, a sloping line that begins at a height of 25 feet 

2 

50 percent if zoning lot is 10,000 square feet or less; waived if 5 or fewer spaces required 

Source: New York City Zoning Resolution 



Other: (1) 8 ft 

minimum 


unit 




minimum 


unit 


total; minimum of 

8 ft between 

buildings on 

adjacent lots 

1 space per 

dwelling unit 




minimum 


unit 




minimum 

85% of dwelling 

units 

- 


exposure plane 1 

- 

70% of dwelling 

units 2

Zoning 

Districts 

C3 

C4-2 

C4-2A 



Table 2-3. Commercial & Manufacturing Zoning Districts of Study Area 

Name Description 

Waterfront 

Recreation 

District 

General 

Commercial 

District 

General 

Commercial 

Contextual 

District 

Waterfront 

Recreation 

Regional 

Commercial 

Regional 

Commercial 

Maximum 

Commercial 

FAR 

Commercial Zoning Districts 

Maximum 

Manufacturing 

FAR 

Maximum 

Community 

Facility 

FAR 

0.5 - 1.0 

Maximum 

Residential 

FAR 

0.5 plus 0.1 

attic 

allowance 

3.4 - 4.8 0.78-2.43 

3.0 - 3.0 3.0 

C8-1 

General 

Commercial 

District 

General Services 1.0 - 2.4 - 

Manufacturing Zoning Districts 

M1-1 

Light 

Manufacturing 

District 

Light Industrial 2.0 1.0 2.4 - 

M2-1 

Manufacturing 

District 

Industrial 2.0 1.0 - - 

Source: New York City Zoning Resolution 

Parking requirements for commercial and manufacturing zoning districts fluctuate based 

on use and the size of establishment pursuant to Sections 36-21 and 44-21 of the Zoning 

Resolution of the City of New York. Table 2-4, found below, details the parking requirements of a 

range of uses for commercial and manufacturing zoning districts found within the project study 

area.

Zoning 

Districts 

C3 

C4-2A 

C4-2 

C8-1 

M1-1 

M2-1 

C4-2A 



Table 2-4. Parking Requirements for Commercial and Manufacturing Zoning Districts of 

Study Area 

Name Description Uses & Parking Requirements 

Waterfront 

Recreation 

District 

General 

Commercial 

Contextual 

District 

General 

Commercial 

District 

General 

Commercial 

District 

Light 

Manufacturing 

District 

Manufacturing 

District 

General 

Commercial 

Contextual 

District 

Waterfront 

Recreation 

Regional 

Commercial 

Regional 

Commercial 

General 

Services 

Light 

Industrial 

Industrial 

Regional 

Commercial 

Notes: 

1 Applicable to C4-2 and C8-1 zoning districts 

2 Excludes M2-1 zoning district 

Source: Sections 44-21 & 36-21 New York City Zoning Resolution 

General retail or service uses: 1 per 150 sf 

Low traffic generating uses: 1 per 400 sf 

Places of assembly: 1 per 4 persons 

Boatels: 1 per 2 guest rooms 

Camps (overnight or day) with 10,000 sf or 10 employees: 1 per 2,000 sf or 1 per 3 

employees 

Post offices: 1 per 800 sf 

Health care facilities: 1 per 150 sf 

Hospitals: 1 per 5 beds 

Outdoor tennis courts: 1 per 2 courts 




Hotels: 1 per 12 guest rooms 

Post offices: 1 per 1,500 sf 

Museums: 1 per 2,000 sf 

Court Houses 1 : 1 per 800 sf 

Manufacturing or semi-industrial uses: 1 per 1,000 sf or 1 per 3 employees whichever 

will require a larger number of spaces 

Storage or miscellaneous uses: 1 per 2,000 sf or 1 per 3 employees whichever will 

require a lesser number of spaces 

Food stores 2,000 sf or larger: 1 per 200 sf 

Low traffic-generating uses: 1 per 600 sf 


Open commercial amusements: 1 per 500 sf 


employees 


Prisons: 1 per 10 beds 

Refreshment stands: 1 per 50 sf 

Agricultural uses: 1 per 1,000 sf 

Hotels 2 : 1 per 8 guest rooms 

Health care facilities 2 : 1 per 300 sf 

Community centers 2 : 1 per 10 persons-rated capacity 

Hospitals 2 : 1 per 5 beds 

Houses of worship 2 : 1 per 15 persons-rated capacity 




Hotels: 1 per 12 guest rooms 


employees 


Museums: 1 per 2,000 sf



Secondary Study Area. The secondary study area primarily comprises several different 

residential zoning districts including R2 Single-Family Detached Residence District, R3A Single- 

and Two-Family Detached Residence District, R3-2 Low-Density General Residence District, R4 

Low-Density Residence District, R5 Low-Density General Residence District and R6 Moderate- 

Density Residence District. Minimal portions of a R1-2 Single-Family Detached Residence 

District and R3X Single- and Two-Family Detached Residence District are located at the extreme 

southern boundary of the secondary study area. Permitted residential uses found in these districts 

range from single-family residential development (Use Group 1) with a FAR of 0.5 to large-scale 

residential towers (Use Group 2) with a FAR of up to 2.43. Community facilities consisting of 

schools, libraries and museums (Use Group 3) as well as religious institutions and community 

centers (Use Group 4) are permitted within these residential zoning districts. 

At the northern fringe of the secondary study area, high-rise apartments, located between 

Richmond Terrace and St. Marks Place, zoned R6, constitute one of the more densely-developed 

areas within the secondary study area. The western portion of the secondary study area from 

Crescent Avenue south to Winter Avenue between Westervelt and Bismark Avenues is mapped 

predominantly as R4 residential zoning. This zoning designation allows all types of housing at a 

FAR of 0.75, which may be increased up to 20 percent for an attic allowance. 31 Higher density 

R5 residential zoning districts with a FAR of 1.25 are found along the eastern side of Jersey 

Street at the western extent of the secondary study area. 

A light manufacturing M1-1 zoning district with a FAR of 1.0, encompasses much of St. 

George’s waterfront and the eastern portion of the secondary study area. The M1-1 designation 

marks a clear delineation from industrial areas located proximate to the waterfront, commercial 

zoning districts just off the waterfront to the east and residential zoning districts located further 

inland. 

An M2-1 Manufacturing District with a FAR of 2.0 is mapped along the waterfront, east 

of Hannah Street, continuing to the eastern extension of St. Julian Place. The minimum base 

height of this existing zoning district is the lesser of 60 feet or 4 stories. Permitted uses include 

Use Groups 6-14 and 16-17. No new community facilities or residential uses are permitted in M2 

zoning districts. 

A C4-2A General Commercial Contextual District is located to the south of the eastern 

extension of St. Julian Place extending through the southern boundary of the secondary study area 

at Baltic Street. This zoning district has a minimum base height of 40 feet. Permitted uses 

include Use Groups 1-6, 8-10 and 12. This C4-2A zoning district serves as the underlying zoning 

for the Special Stapleton Waterfront District described below. 

There are several commercial overlays mapped within residential neighborhoods of the 

secondary study area, which are designed to serve local retail needs. A C2-2 Local Service 

Commercial Overlay District is mapped in an R5 zoning district between Brook Street and 

Victory Boulevard, which extends north along Jersey Street, the western perimeter of the 

secondary study area. A C1-2 Local Retail Commercial Overlay, also in an R5 zoning district, 

lies further north on Jersey Street between Benziger and Winter Avenues. On the west side of 

Van Duzer Street between Swan and Grant Streets lies a C2-1 Local Service Commercial Overlay 

31 The City of New York Department of City Planning. Zoning Handbook. January 2006. p. 19.



mapped within an R3-2 zoning district. The maximum commercial FAR is 1.0 in the 

aforementioned commercial overlays as they are located in R1 through R5 zoning districts. There 

is a C2-2 Local Service Commercial Overlay District in an R6 zoning district along the eastern 

edge of Richmond Terrace in the northwestern quadrant of the secondary study area. When 

commercial overlays are mapped in R6 through R10 zoning districts, the maximum commercial 

FAR is 2.0. As such, the C2-2 commercial overlay allows for a commercial FAR of 2.0. 

Similar to the primary study area, the majority of the western portion of the secondary 

study area, running from Richmond Terrace in the north to St. Pauls Avenue in the south, is 

located within the Special Hillsides Preservation District (HS), described below. 

Special Stapleton Waterfront District (SW). This area, recently rezoned as part of the 

Stapleton Rezoning, has been identified at the southeastern quadrant of the secondary study area. 

Although this area extends outside of the Proposed Project’s study area limits, a portion of land 

located along the waterfront in the vicinity of the approximate eastern extension of St. Julian 

Place continuing to the southern boundary of the secondary study area at Baltic Street, which was 

previously zoned M2-1 Manufacturing District, would be affected by this recently-approved 

rezoning action. The rezoning consisted of the 35-acre Homeport site and the area west of Front 

Street and east of the SIRTOA right of way. The purpose of this special district is to facilitate the 

transformation of the industrial character of the Stapleton waterfront by permitting the 

redevelopment of the Homeport and its adjacent parcels to better match the surrounding character 

of the area. As previously mentioned, the eastern extension of St. Julian Place represents the 

northern portion of a rezoning that established a Special Stapleton Waterfront District (“SW”) 

and changed the previously-existing M2-1 Manufacturing District and M3-1 Heavy 

Manufacturing District zoning districts to a contextual C4-2A General Commercial District 

modified by special district controls. The special district allows a FAR of 2.0 with a maximum 

building height of 50 feet for most uses and a residential parking requirement of one space for 70 

percent of dwelling units. Permitted uses in the SW district generally include Use Groups 1-6, 8- 

12 and 14. 32 The formal review process for this proposal began in May 2006 with NYCDCP’s 

certification of the ULURP application for proposed zoning map changes (C 060471 ZMR) and 

zoning text amendment application (N 060468 ZRR). 33 The Stapleton Rezoning was adopted by 

the City Council on October 25, 2006. 

Special Hillsides Preservation District (HS). While the Project Site is located outside of 

the Special Hillsides Preservation District (“HS”), the western half of both the primary and 

secondary study areas fall within the HS boundary. 

The Special Hillsides Preservation District, encompassing approximately 1,900 acres in 

northeastern Staten Island, was established in 1987 with the purpose of reducing hillside erosion, 

landslides and excessive stormwater runoff by preserving the area’s natural landscape and 

terrain. 34 This special overlay district regulates development through the percentage of lot 

32 The City of New York Department of City Planning, Special Stapleton Waterfront District Zoning 

Comparison Table, http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/stapleton/special_dist_comp_table.pdf (September 6, 2006). 

33 The City of New York Department of City Planning, Stapleton Waterfront Public Review, 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/stapleton/stapleton_4.shtml (September 25, 2006). 

34 The City of New York Department of City Planning. “Article XI: Special Purpose Districts Chapter 9: 

Special Hillsides Preservation District,” Zoning Resolution of the City of New York, September 09, 2004. 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/zone/art11c09.pdf p. 2 (August 10,2006).



coverage on a zoning lot. Any development, enlargement, or site alteration on the buildable area 

of a zoning lot where the slope is less than 10 percent is classified as Tier I development 

regulated by provisions set forth in Section 119-10 of the Zoning Resolution of the City of New 

York. Zoning lots with a slope of equal to or greater than 10 percent are subject to Tier II 

development regulations in Section 119-20. 35 For example, as the permitted lot coverage 

decreases, the slope of the parcel becomes steeper resulting in a taller building with less impact 

on the natural terrain. The removal of existing trees, landscaping and grading are also regulated 

within this district. 

Lower-Density Growth Management Areas. The borough of Staten Island is designated as a 

Lower-Density Growth Management Area (“LDGMA”). As such, it is subject to special zoning 

regulations that are intended to regulate new development and ensure its capacity to provide 

supporting services and functioning infrastructure to areas of the borough experiencing rapid 

growth. LDGMA regulations are applicable to R1, R2, R3, R4-1 and R4A zoning districts and 

any development accessed by a private road in an R1 through R5 district. Future developments 

must provide more off-street parking, larger yards and more open space than would otherwise be 

required in the applicable zoning districts. Following is a summary of guidelines from the 

LDGMA Text Amendment to the City of New York Zoning Resolution: 36 

• Parking Requirements. In order to accommodate higher rates of automobile ownership, a 

new single-family home requires two off-street parking spaces increased from one, and a 

two-family home requires three spaces increased from two. 

• Bulk and Lot Size Requirements. Street level garages are encouraged by permitting higher 

perimeter walls, increasing minimum lot widths, prohibiting steeply pitched driveways, and a 

floor area exemption of up to 300 square feet for a one-car garage and up to 500 square feet 

for a two-car garage. 

• Yard, Open Space and Landscaping. LDGMA rules ensure that buildings are sufficiently 

spaced and that full 30-foot rear yards are provided. The number of homes that can be built 

behind other homes is limited and an increase in open space is required between new and 

existing neighboring homes. Landscaped buffers are mandatory between an adjacent zoning 

lot and any group parking lot. 

• Private Road Developments. New residential development on private roads are governed by 

the same public yard and setback requirements as those on public streets. Sidewalks are 

required and private roads are expected to meet NYCDOT standards related to public street 

crosswalks, lighting and signage. 

• Commercial Development. Ground-floor residences are prohibited in any C1 or C2 

commercial overlay district or within C4-2 districts. In C4-1 sites, a CPC special permit is 

required for mixed-use or residential development. 

35 The City of New York Department of City Planning. “Article XI: Special Purpose Districts Chapter 9: 

Special Hillsides Preservation District,” Zoning Resolution of the City of New York, September 09, 2004. 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/zone/art11c09.pdf p. 8 (August 10,2006). 

36 The City of New York Department of City Planning “Staten Island Growth Management” 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/sigrowth/sigrowth1.shtml. August 14, 2006.



Refer to Staten Island Growth Management in the Public Policy subheading of this 

section for background information regarding this initiative. 


Under the No-Build Condition, without the project, no zoning changes are anticipated in 

the vicinity of the Project Site or Interim Construction Parking Lot. Under the No-Build 

Condition, it is expected that the primary and secondary study areas would reflect the existing 

zoning. 


The Project Site and Interim Construction Parking Lot are located in a C4-2 zoning 

district. Courthouses are an allowable use under the existing C4-2 zoning (Use Group 6). 

Courthouses are considered a commercial/public service use and have a maximum floor area ratio 

(“FAR”) of 3.4 under the C4-2 designation, which is sufficient to accommodate the Proposed 

Project. 37 Allowable square footage on the site under the 3.4 FAR is approximately 513,339 gsf; 

the proposed courthouse and parking garage would total approximately 406,900 gsf. In addition, 

as a court facility, the Proposed Project is not subject to the Quality Housing Program mandate 

for residential development in the C4-2 zoning district. No rezoning, special permit or other 

zoning approval other than the site selection-public facility ULURP action would be required to 

facilitate the proposed courthouse. 

Public parking garages with up to 150 spaces are an allowable use under the existing C4- 

2 zoning (Use Groups 8 and 12). In a C4-2 General Commercial District, parking requirements 

for courthouses call for 1 parking space per 800 square feet of floor area. As the Proposed 

Project would involve the construction of a building with a maximum of approximately 183,300 

gsf, approximately 229 parking spaces are required per the zoning guidelines mandated in Section 

36-21 of the New York City Zoning Resolution. Construction of the new court facility would 

require the replacement of public parking spaces displaced from the Project Site. Under the 

Proposed Project, an approximately 227,832-gsf, 665-space parking structure would be 

constructed to the south of the courthouse, a substantial portion of which would be available for 

public use. A special permit pursuant to Section 74-512 of the Zoning Resolution for 

construction of a public parking garage in excess of 150 spaces with rooftop parking would be 

required to facilitate the proposed garage (see below). 

The development of the Interim Construction Parking Lot for public parking is an 

allowable use under the C4-2 designation as public parking lots with a capacity of up to 150 

spaces are permitted as of right under Use Groups 8 and 12 provided that applicable regulations 

set forth in Sections 36-53, 36-55 and 36-56 are met. 38 These regulations pertain to surfacing, 

screening and the location of access to the street. 

37 The City of New York Department of City Planning. “Appendix A: Index of Uses,” Zoning Resolution of 

the City of New York, May 14, 2005. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/zone/appendixa.pdf (August 11, 2006). 

38 The City of New York Department of City Planning, “Article VII: Administration-Chapter 4 Special 

Permits by the City Planning Commission, Section 74-512,” Zoning Resolution of the City of New York, May 22, 1969. 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/zone/art07c04.pdf (May 9, 2007).



The existing surface lot adjacent to the St. George Theatre contains two existing curb cuts 

located to the north and south of the intersection of Fort Place and St. Marks Place. Section 36- 

53 (Location of Access to the Street) of the Zoning Resolution requires that the entrances and 

exits of all permitted public parking lots with 10 or more spaces be located not less than 50 feet 

from the intersection of any two street lines. Both existing curb cuts are located within 50 feet of 

the Fort Place intersection. 39 According to the specifications outlined in Section 36-53, access 

located within 50 feet of an intersection may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of 

Article VII, Chapter 4, if the City Planning Commission, certifies that such a location is not 

hazardous to traffic safety and not likely to create traffic congestion. 40 

The environmental review associated with the Proposed Project would require 

coordination with two other city procedures including the ULURP and Fair Share Criteria, 

described below: 41 

Uniform Land Use Review Procedure. The Proposed Project would require several 

discretionary actions by the City of New York City Planning Commission (the “City Planning 

Commission” or “CPC”). These actions are subject to review pursuant to the City of New York’s 

ULURP including review and approval by the CPC. Under ULURP, the Proposed Project would 

be reviewed by Staten Island Community Board 1 and the Staten Island Borough President’s 

Office as well. 42 ULURP, mandated by Sections 197-c and 197-d of the New York City Charter, 

established a standardized procedure whereby applications affecting land use in the City of New 

York are publicly reviewed. The ULURP-related actions required for the Proposed Project have 

been previously detailed in Section 1 of this document and are included below: 

� Site Selection-Public Facility for the proposed courthouse and related 

parking garage; 

� Special Permit pursuant to Section 74-512 of the Zoning Resolution for 

construction of a public parking garage in excess of 150 spaces with 

rooftop parking; 

� Site Selection-Public Facility and Property Acquisition for the City’s 

acquisition and use of the surface lot adjacent to the St. George Theatre on 

Hyatt Street for use as parking during the construction period. 43 

39 

Polshek Partnership Architects. Corner Lot Swing Parking Study Memorandum. Revised March 2, 2007. p. 

1. 

40 

The City of New York Department of City Planning. “Article III - Commercial District Regulations, 

Chapter 6: Accessory Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations 

Off-Street Parking Regulations Section 36-53, Zoning Resolution of the City of New York, October 29, 2007 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/zone/art03c06.pdf (January 1, 2008). 

41 

The City of New York. CEQR Technical Manual. October 2001. p. 1-14. 

42 

ULURP actions are also reviewable by the City Council and Mayor under certain circumstances. For 

further information, refer to the City Planning Commission’s ULURP website: 

www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/luproc/ulpro.shtml 

43 

In the context of ULURP, “acquisition” by the City of real property includes acquisition by purchase, lease, 

condemnation or exchange. This ULURP action, if approved, would give the City the means necessary to pursue the 

acquisition of the subject property by purchase, lease, condemnation, or exchange, with terms to be determined later. 

This ULURP action would be required if the City pursues the acquisition of the subject real property. Other possible 

scenarios would include a lease or other arrangement with the respective property owner by DASNY, in which case



The Proposed Project would require the adoption of a special permit in order to facilitate 

the construction of the proposed approximately 665-space public parking garage with open 

rooftop parking. Pursuant to Section 74-512 of the Zoning Resolution of the City of New York, in 

C4-2 districts the CPC may permit public parking garages or public parking lots with more than 

150 spaces provided that applicable regulations set forth in Sections 36-53, 36-55 and 36-56 are 

met. 44 The adoption of the special permit is considered a site-specific discretionary action of the 

Zoning Resolution and represents a zoning action required to implement the Proposed Project. 

As previously mentioned, parking capacity at the Interim Construction Parking Lot would consist 

of approximately 96 at-grade parking spaces. No special permit would be required to facilitate 

the Interim Construction Parking Lot. 

The CPC is empowered under Section 74-01 of the Zoning Resolution of the City of New 

York to grant special permits in specific districts for uses whose location or control requires 

special consideration or major planning factors, or for specified modifications of use or bulk 

regulations, provided that in each specific case the requirement for findings as set forth in Article 

VII, Chapter 4 of the Zoning Resolution shall constitute a condition precedent to the granting of 

the special permit. 45 The CPC may also prescribe certain safeguards and conditions in granting a 

special permit, provided that in each specific case as it may deem necessary in order to minimize 

the adverse effects of the special permit upon other property and the community at large. The 

CPC weighs the following factors when considering a special permit: 

• Consideration of the hazards or disadvantages to the community at large through 

the location of such use at a particular site against the advantages to be derived by 

the community from a special permit use. 

• Determination if the adverse effects, if any, on the privacy, quiet, light and air in 

the neighborhood of such use will be minimized by appropriate conditions 

governing the location of the site, design and method of operation. 

• Determination as to whether the special permit use is appropriately located in 

relation to the street system and the anticipated traffic congestion resulting from a 

special permit use 

The CPC may permit rooftop parking or may permit floor space on one or more stories 

and up to a height of 23 feet above curb level to be exempted from the definition of floor area as 

set forth in Section 12-10. In addition, as a condition of permitting, the CPC must determine if 

the special permit adheres to the following: 46 

• That the principal vehicular access for such use is located on an arterial highway, a 

major street or a secondary street within one-quarter mile of an arterial highway or 

major street; 

DASNY would have to approve of such an arrangement prior to the execution of any agreement. It would not include 

any condemnation action by DASNY. 



p.15. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/zone/art07c04.pdf (May 9, 2007). 

45 Ibid p.2. 



p.15. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/zone/art07c04.pdf (May 9, 2007).



• That such use is so located as to draw a minimum of vehicular traffic to and 

through local streets in nearby areas; 

• That such use has adequate reservoir space at the vehicular entrances to 

accommodate either 10 automobiles or five percent of the total parking spaces 

provided by the use, whichever amount is greater, but reservoir space shall not be 

required for more than 50 vehicles; 

• That streets provided access to such use will be adequate to handle the traffic 

generated thereby; 

• That, where roof parking is permitted, such roof parking is not located as to impair 

the essential character or future use or development of adjacent areas; and 

• That, where any floor space is exempted from the definition of floor area, such 

additional floor space is needed in order to prevent excessive on-street parking 

demand and relieve traffic congestion. 

Section 197-c of the New York City Charter mandates that applications by any individual 

or agency pertaining to the use, development, or improvement of real property subject to city 

regulation shall be reviewed pursuant to a uniform review procedure. 47 The City Charter’s intent 

in requiring ULURP was to establish a standardized procedure whereby applications affecting the 

land use of the City would be publicly reviewed. While the requested ULURP-related actions for 

the Proposed Project are site specific, the ULURP review process also considers these actions 

within the larger context of citywide land use trends. If the CPC determines that the use 

associated with the Proposed Project meets the conditions outlined above, then the special permit 

is granted. As outlined in Section 74-01, the power of the CPC to grant special permits is in 

harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Resolution. The granting of the 

special permit is a mechanism established within the Zoning Resolution that is designed to 

account for an array of special uses as outlined in Chapter 4 of the Zoning Resolution. 

Conclusion. The proposed courthouse would be an allowable use under the existing C4-2 

zoning. No rezoning, special permit or other zoning approval other than the site selection-public 

facility ULURP action would be required to facilitate the proposed courthouse. Development of 

the courthouse would not engender additional zoning actions in the project vicinity. Hence, the 

development of the courthouse would not result in significant adverse zoning impacts. The 

parking garage special permit, site selection, and site selection and property acquisition are sitespecific 

actions, valid only for the Project Site and the site of the Interim Construction Parking 

Lot. The granting of these actions would allow the development of the courthouse, parking 

garage and Interim Construction Parking Lot only; no other development would be facilitated by 

these actions. The granting of these actions would not alter the zoning, development densities or 

allowable uses on adjacent sites and, therefore, does not represent a significant adverse zoning 

impact. 

Fair Share Criteria. The CPC adopted criteria pursuant to Section 203 of the New York 

City Charter to guide the siting of City facilities so as to further the fair distribution of the 

burdens and benefits associated with such facilities among communities within New York City. 

The CPC considers these criteria, formally referred to as the “Criteria for the Location of City 

47 The City of New York, Department of City Planning. The Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP), 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/luproc/ulpro.shtml (December 21, 2007).



Facilities” and also known as the “Fair Share Criteria” in acting on site selection and acquisition 

proposals subject to ULURP and in the review of City office sites. 48 

Two Fair Share analyses were submitted in support of the ULURP application for site 

selection and acquisition actions related to the Proposed Project, per the requirements of Section 

203 of the New York City Charter. The siting of the proposed courthouse would be subject to the 

Fair Share Criteria as it has been listed in the Citywide Statement of Needs (“SON”) for City 

Facilities for Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008. In addition, a separate Fair Share analysis was 

prepared for the site selection and acquisition of the Interim Construction Parking Lot. The use 

of this lot would offset the loss of parking at the existing municipal parking lot due to the 

construction of the Proposed Project. The Interim Construction Parking Lot was not listed in the 

SON. However, pursuant to Section 204(g) of the New York City Charter, the Mayor’s Office of 

the Criminal Justice Coordinator (“OCJC”) formally submitted the project to Staten Island 

Borough President James P. Molinaro in a letter dated March 21, 2008 (refer to Appendix A, 

Correspondence). 

The Fair Share analysis for the site selection of the proposed courthouse site concluded 

that the Proposed Project would be compatible with both existing city and non-city facilities and 

programs in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site, and would reinforce and extend the 

concentration of governmental uses within St. George. The Proposed Project would not represent 

an undue burden on the St. George community and would be in keeping with the stated needs and 

of Staten Island Community Board 1. The Proposed Project would also be consistent with the 

SON. In addition, this city-owned site meets the programmatic requirements of the Supreme 

Criminal, Supreme Civil, and Lower Criminal courts as well as associated court support functions 

that would be relocated to the new court facility. The Project Site also meets the required 

locational criteria considered under the Fair Share analysis since it is proximate to the existing 

concentration of court facilities and court-related agencies already located in St. George and is 

accessible via mass transit. Accordingly, the Fair Share Analysis concluded that the Project Site 

is suitable to provide the cost effective delivery of court and court-related services to the residents 

of Richmond County. 

The Fair Share analysis for the site selection and acquisition of the Interim Construction 

Parking Lot (Richmond Tax Block 8, Lots 1, 11, and 14) concluded that this property would be 

an ideal location for temporary construction-period parking due to its adjacency to the existing St. 

George Municipal Parking Field. The surface lot adjacent to the St. George Theatre is also 

proximate to a concentration of existing court, municipal, community facility, and transportation 

uses that compose the government center of St. George. This initiative is a direct response to the 

local community’s desire for the provision of additional parking during the construction of the 

Proposed Project. Pursuant to Section 204(g) of the New York City Charter, the SIBP has 

formally waived his right to propose an alternative location for the Interim Construction Parking 

Lot. 

48 CEQR Technical Manual, p. 1-15.



Mitigation 

As no significant adverse impacts to zoning are anticipated from the implementation of 

the Proposed Project, no mitigation is required.



Public Policy 


The following section summarizes public policy initiatives on both a borough-wide level 

in addition to the primary and secondary study areas relating to development, community 

consistency and transportation policy. 

New York City Courts Capital Program Master Plan. The OCA, the City and the 

Dormitory Authority have agreed to a citywide program of court facility construction and 

renovation. The New York City Court Capital Program Master Plan (the “Master Plan”) 

provides a framework for the development of court facilities in New York City. The Master Plan 

identifies improvements that would be required to replace aging and inadequate facilities and to 

relieve existing and projected shortfalls in space. Pursuant to a 1999 amendment to the Master 

Plan, the City of New York authorized the construction and renovation of court buildings 

throughout the five boroughs of the City. The amendment was the realization of the State and 

City goal to restore and preserve the dignity of court facilities throughout the City as older and 

less efficient buildings hinder court operations and threaten to erode the public respect for the 

judicial system. As such, the City proposed to construct the new Staten Island Criminal Court 

and Family Court Complex, an early incarnation of the Proposed Project, as one improvement 

pursuant to the 1999 amendment to the Master Plan. 

During initial site investigations in 2001, an archaeologically-sensitive resource (an 

abandoned cemetery) was discovered on the Project Site (see Section 6, Historic and 

Archaeological Resources). This led to a disruption in the planned design and construction of the 

court complex while the City searched for a new location. Although several potential sites were 

evaluated (see Section 22, Alternatives to the Proposed Project), the City and OCA eventually 

decided to develop the new facility on its original site, pursuant to a 2005 amendment to the 

Master Plan. 

The court program for the new facility was updated in the 2005 Master Plan amendment. 

Under the 2005 amendment, the program included both Civil and Criminal Terms of the Supreme 

Court as well as the Surrogate's Court. During recent programming efforts the City proposed that 

Surrogate's Court be removed from the program and replaced by Lower Criminal Court to reflect 

current court facilities priorities. At this time, a ministerial amendment to the City's Master Plan 

reflecting this program change is in preparation and would be presented to the Court Facilities 

Capital Review Board for approval. The OCA fully supports this program change and expects 

that the Court Facilities Capital Review Board would approve this amendment. Accordingly, this 

DEIS includes Lower Criminal Court as a program element of the new facility. 

The Proposed Project would accommodate three court parts including one Supreme 

Criminal term, one Supreme Civil term and one Lower Criminal term comprised of 14 court sets. 

It is estimated that the Proposed Project would be a maximum of approximately 183,300 gsf, 

providing improved conditions and additional capacity for the respective court operations. 

Additional projects specified in the Master Plan include the renovation of the Richmond 

County Courthouse at 18 Richmond Terrace to accommodate the Family, Surrogate’s and Lower 

Civil Courts and associated court functions. The relocation of Supreme Court functions from the 

former United States Navy Homeport site to interim space which has yet to be determined is also



referenced in the Master Plan. This relocation is due to the planned development of the 

Homeport site and would occur prior to the completion of the Proposed Project. 

Completed projects under the Master Plan include the Queens Family Courthouse, 

Brooklyn Supreme and Family Courthouse, and the Bronx Criminal Court Complex. 

Citywide Statement of Needs for City Facilities for Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008. The 

Citywide Statement of Needs for City Facilities for Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008 (“SON”) is part 

of the planning process which informs communities of the city’s needs for facilities as well as the 

specific criteria for selecting the location of these facilities. 49 The SON includes the Proposed 

Project. Specifically, the SON indicates that the Mayor’s Office of the Criminal Justice 

Coordinator proposes that a portion of the St. George Municipal Parking Field on Hyatt Street 

between Central Avenue and St. Marks Place be utilized for the development of a new Richmond 

County Courthouse that would be a regional facility servicing the entire borough. This project 

was initially reported in the Citywide Statement of Needs for Fiscal Years 2000 and 2001, an 

earlier edition of the SON. The SON indicates that the approximate size of the facility would be 

154,000 gross square feet (gsf) and that the size of the parking garage is to be determined. 50 It 

should be noted that as currently proposed the Proposed Project involves the construction of a 

new approximately 183,300 gsf facility with an approximately 227,832-gsf, 665-space parking 

structure. An additional 77 parking spaces would remain as surface parking at the southern end 

of the existing parking lot. Additionally, the following siting criteria are presented for the 

Proposed Project in the SON for 2007 and 2008: 

• Central location in relation to existing courthouses, and; 

• Access to public transportation. 

The proposed site in the SON is formally identified as Block 6, Lot 21, Richmond 

County, bounded by Hyatt Street to the north, Central Avenue to the east and St. Marks Place to 

the west. 

Staten Island Community Board 1 Statement of Community District Needs Fiscal Year 

2007. Each fiscal year, Community Boards throughout the City of New York issue statements of 

community district needs. These statements describe each Community Boards’ respective needs 

which provide a context for development and an assessment of their budget priorities. 51 

Statements of community district needs are also considered by city agencies in the preparation of 

their departmental budget estimates. The Statement of Community Board Needs for Staten Island 

Community Board 1 Fiscal Year 2007 is specific to waterfront issues due to the district’s 

proximity to the North Shore waterfront. Economic development, improved transportation 

infrastructure and enhanced social and educational services are also outlined as consensus issues 

pertinent to the district’s neighborhoods. The construction of the Proposed Project in St. George 

49 

The City of New York, Department of City Planning, Department of Citywide Administrative Services, 

Department of Design and Construction. Citywide Statement of Needs For City Facilities/Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008. 

November 2005. p. 1. 

50 

Ibid. p. 43. 

51 

The City of New York, Department of City Planning, Office of Management and Budget, Community 

District Needs Fiscal Year 2007. December 2005. p.1.



is explicitly referenced as a main economic development initiative for Staten Island Community 

Board 1. 52 

New Stapleton Waterfront Development Plan / Special Stapleton Waterfront District. 

The NYCDCP in conjunction with the New York City Economic Development Corporation 

initiated the creation of the Special Stapleton Waterfront District to facilitate the redevelopment 

of the former United States Navy Homeport site and adjacent parcels. The establishment of the 

Special Stapleton Waterfront District (“SW”) was derived from guidelines set forth in the New 

Stapleton Waterfront Development Plan. Historically, the Stapleton section of Staten Island has 

been subject to a declining economy and demographic shifts. The development plan is aimed at 

addressing these concerns by providing a mixed-use waterfront development that would function 

as a community destination. The area surrounding Homeport, a portion of which is located at the 

southeastern extent of the secondary study area of the Proposed Project, has been subject to 

previously unsuccessful plans for redevelopment since the closure of the former Homeport site 

and its ensuing transfer to the City of New York in 1994. 

In 2003, Mayor Bloomberg created a Task Force on Homeport Redevelopment (the 

“Homeport Task Force”), consisting of local elected officials, business owners and community 

organizations, to recommend development strategies for this site. The Homeport Task Force’s 

recommendations include development of an almost mile-long waterfront esplanade running the 

length of the site, residential units, a waterfront restaurant, ground-floor retail, a farmers market 

and open space. 53 

In order to implement the Homeport Task Force’s recommendations, several actions, 

incorporated as part of the aforementioned proposal, were required including a zoning text 

amendment change to create the special district, a zoning map amendment to rezone to an 

underlying contextual C4-2A General Commercial District and mapping and demapping of city 

streets. These changes were adopted by the CPC in October 2006 with a Build Year of 2015. 

Staten Island Growth Management. The population of Staten Island (Richmond County) 

has grown by almost 20 percent since 1990 making Richmond one of the fastest growing counties 

in New York State during this time span. This population increase coupled with increased 

housing growth raised concerns regarding infrastructure capabilities and overdevelopment on 

Staten Island. In response, Mayor Bloomberg created the Staten Island Growth Management 

Task Force (the “Growth Management Task Force”) in July 2003 and charged it with addressing 

quality of life issues and overdevelopment. In December 2003, the Growth Management Task 

Force published the Staten Island Growth Management Task Force Final Report, which offered 

recommendations for residential development on Staten Island. In August 2004, the City Council 

approved the Lower Density Growth Management Text Amendments, as suggested by the 

Growth Management Task Force. These new regulations, summarized above under Lower 

Density Growth Management Areas are intended to manage future growth without hindering the 

function of the borough’s infrastructure. 54 

52 

The City of New York Department of City Planning, Community District Needs Staten Island Fiscal Year 

2007. New York, NY. December 2005. Page 21. 

53 

The City of New York Department of City Planning, “Stapleton Waterfront” 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/stapleton/index.shtml (August 11, 2006).



Coastal Zone Management / Waterfront Revitalization Program. The Coastal Zone 

Management Act (“CZMA”) was enacted on October 27, 1972, in order to “preserve, protect, 

develop and where possible to restore or enhance the resources of the Nation’s coastal zones for 

succeeding generations.” (16 USC § 1452) The National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (“NOAA”), who partnered with coastal states to provide management of the 

nation’s coastal resources, administers this act. The CZMA balances economic development with 

environmental conservation in coastal areas. The CZMA also provides national guidelines while 

recognizing the unique needs and characteristics that are specific to each coastal state. 

The New York State Department of State’s (“NYSDOS”) Division of Coastal Resources 

administers the coastal zone management program for New York State. Pursuant to the 

requirements of the CZMA, the State has identified its coastal zone boundaries and guidelines to 

assess development within its coastal zones. 

Subsequently, the City of New York developed its own coastal zone management plan 

for development and use of its waterfront called the New York City Waterfront Revitalization 

Program (“WRP”), originally adopted in 1982 and later revised in 1999. Discretionary actions 

within the coastal zone including those subject to ULURP and CEQR are reviewed for 

consistency with WRP policies. For local actions requiring approval by the City Planning 

Commission, the CPC acting as the City Coastal Commission makes the consistency 

determination. For federal and state actions within the City’s coastal zone, NYCDCP, acting on 

behalf of the City Coastal Commission, forwards its comments to the state agency making the 

consistency determination. 55 

The coastal zone boundary in St. George generally runs from the U.S. pierhead line 

landward along Richmond Terrace and Bay Street. Although the Proposed Project is located 

outside of the coastal zone boundary, the eastern portion of the primary and secondary study areas 

falls within the coastal zone boundary. 

New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan / Plan for the Staten Island Waterfront. 

Issued in 1992 by the NYCDCP, the New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan (“CWP”) 

presents a long-range vision and a set of practical strategies to guide the shoreline’s future 

development and investment. The plan seeks to balance issues associated with the different 

functions of the waterfront including the natural waterfront, the public waterfront, the working 

waterfront and the redeveloping waterfront. In response to the CWP, the Plan for the Staten 

Island Waterfront was issued in 1994 by the NYCDCP. This document presents studies of Staten 

Island’s five reaches, or waterfront study areas. 56 

St. George’s waterfront is located within Reach 18 on Staten Island’s north shore. Reach 

18 extends from Sailors Snug Harbor to the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge and includes the St. 

54 

The City of New York Department of City Planning “Staten Island Growth Management” 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/sigrowth/sigrowth1.shtml (August 14, 2006). 

55 

The City of New York Department of City Planning, “Waterfront Revitalization Program” 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/wrp/wrp.shtml (August 17, 2006). 

56 

The City of New York Department of City Planning, New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan. 

Summer 1992. p. i.



George Ferry Terminal. 57 The Plan for the Staten Island Waterfront makes several 

recommendations for Reach 18, many of which focus on the economic benefits of shorefront 

development to North Shore communities and increasing public access to the waterfront. 

North Shore Empire Zone. The New York State Empire Zones Program (“EZ”) offers 

special incentives to expanding or new companies in order to stimulate business investment, job 

growth, and community and economic development in designated areas throughout the state. 

There are two Empire Zones encompassing approximately 1,900 acres in the North Shore and 

West Shore of Staten Island. The Project Site is located within the boundaries of Staten Island’s 

North Shore Empire Zone, which sustains maritime, industrial and commercial sites extending 

from the waterside of Edgewater Street in Clifton to Howland Hook in Port Ivory. Businesses 

situated within Empire Zones are eligible for real property, employment, investment, and wage 

tax credits in addition to sales tax credits and utility discounts. A local Zone Administrative 

Board, comprised of representatives from city agencies as well as local community, government 

and business officials, is charged with monitoring and coordinating the incentives granted under 

the EZ program. 58 

Staten Island Supreme Courthouse and the Downtown St. George Renaissance. The 

Staten Island Supreme Courthouse and the Downtown St. George Renaissance plan, presented by 

Staten Island Borough President James P. Molinaro in May 2007, places the Proposed Project 

within the context of the ongoing revitalization of St. George. While the Borough President is 

supportive of the Proposed Project, several recommendations related to the Proposed Project and 

the immediate area of St. George are contained within the renaissance plan. This initiative 

comprises various elements, some of which are described below: 59 

• Investigate alterations along Hyatt Street and Central Avenue adjacent to the Project 

Site required to accommodate the construction of streetscape improvements, 

landscaping and decorative paving. 

• Increasing the capacity of the proposed parking structure. 

• Advocate for a Special Downtown St. George Zoning District to ensure the 

revitalization of St. George. 

• Evaluate travel directions around the downtown hub area and propose direction 

changes and weekend closures as required. 

This plan represents a potential future project in the immediate vicinity of the Project 

Site. The plan’s various recommendations, including the establishment of a master plan and 

adoption of a special zoning district, are part of a more comprehensive proposal for the St. 

George neighborhood and are therefore independent actions beyond the scope of the Proposed 

Project. Any potential implementation of any component of this plan should be viewed as a 

separate but related action requiring other approvals and/or environmental review as appropriate 

independent of those secured for the Proposed Project. 

57 

The City of New York Department of City Planning, Plan for the Staten Island Waterfront. Fall 1994. p. 

11. 

58 

Staten Island Economic Development Corporation. North & West Shore Empire Zones. 

http://www.siedc.net/services_edz.html (August 15, 2006). 

59 

Staten Island Supreme Courthouse and the Downtown St. George Renaissance presented by Staten Island 

Borough President James P. Molinaro. May 7, 2007.



DASNY’s Green Construction Policy. The Dormitory Authority promotes and supports 

sustainable design approaches and construction practices. The Dormitory Authority’s internal 

processes facilitate integrated design and recognition of sustainable opportunities in every 

DASNY construction project regardless of its size or complexity. As of January 1, 2008, all 

DASNY projects that involve new construction, new additions, or significant renovation will 

include submission to the U.S. Green Building Council (“USGBC”) for a Leadership in Energy 

and Environmental Design (“LEED”) Silver rating. The LEED rating system aims to promote the 

design and construction of environmentally responsible buildings. In accordance with DASNY’s 

Green Construction Policy, each DASNY project would register for LEED at the start of the 

project, require energy modeling in schematic design, require a commissioning authority to be 

part of the design process during design development, and track, measure and prepare all LEED 

documentation. 60 A building attains LEED status by amassing sustainability points for various 

design elements in the following five areas of sustainability: sustainable site development, water 

efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources and indoor environmental quality. 

PlaNYC A Greener, Greater New York. PlaNYC A Greener, Greater New York is a plan 

geared toward preparing the city, in a sustainable way, for the anticipated 2030 population of over 

nine million people. According to PlaNYC, this new population is expected to result in 750,000 

new jobs and the need for an additional 60 million square feet of commercial space. In 

expectation of the 2030 population increase and the resulted increases in the need for commercial, 

residential, and open space, the PlaNYC proposes primarily two solutions; maintain what New 

York currently has and seek sustainable solutions or green solutions for future needs. 

Maintenance of what New York currently has includes ensuring that the existing infrastructure is 

brought up to date and can be depended upon. Key infrastructure that must be maintained 

includes the subways, water tunnels and water mains, the road and highway network including 

bridges and tunnels, and electric, gas, and steam distribution systems. Green solutions to future 

development primarily include consideration of land, open space, water, transportation, energy, 

and air quality. Given how vast the subject of sustainable solutions is, a majority of the report 

focuses on these categories. Below is a summary of the land, open space, energy and air quality 

considerations, the four sustainable solutions subjects of this plan that are most relevant to the 

Proposed Project. 

Land. Despite the increasing population of New York City, the land available is fixed 

and will not increase along with the population. Because of this, PlaNYC recognizes the need to 

utilize the existing land more efficiently in order to provide housing and open space for future 

generations. Achieving this goal will include the following: 

• Creating new housing opportunities in areas with access to mass transit. 

• Reclaim underutilized waterfronts by restoring underused and vacant land. 

• Cleaning up and utilizing Brownfield sites; 

• Increasing transit options to spur development in lower-density areas; 

• Reuse of outdated buildings for new uses (i.e., conversion of an old hospital into new 

housing); and 

60 Dormitory Authority of the State of New York. DASNY’s Green Construction Policy. 

http://www.dasny.org/green/greenconstrucpolicy.php (January 15, 2008).



• Exploring the possibility of decking over rail yards, rail lines and highways in an 

effort to increase the supply of developable land. 

Open Space. While ensuring that the future population has adequate housing available it 

is also a goal of PlaNYC that adequate open space is made available. The overall open space 

goal of the plan is that every New Yorker lives within a ten-minute walk of a park. In achieving 

this goal the following is necessary: 

• Making existing open spaces available to more residents. This includes opening 

school yards across the city as public playgrounds. 

• Completing underdeveloped destination parks; 

• Increasing the usable hours at existing parks by installing new lighting; 

• Creating or enhancing public plazas in every community; and 

• Greening the cityscape through expansion of the Greenstreets program and the 

planting of street trees. 

Energy. An increase in population will result in an increase in energy consumption. In 

light of recent blackouts in Queens neighborhoods, it is apparent the city’s energy infrastructure 

is in desperate need of repair and that updates are required. The city’s aging infrastructure, old 

inefficient buildings and the increasing demands for energy require the city to plan for the future 

and seek investments in clean energy solutions and energy saving technologies. The energy goal 

for PlaNYC is to provide clean and reliable energy to every New Yorker. This goal will be 

achieved through the following: 

• Establishing a New York City energy board that will be responsible for looking at the 

city’s demand and supply of energy in a comprehensive way, allowing the city to better 

plan for needed updates to the energy infrastructure. 

• Reducing energy consumption of the city as a whole through energy awareness 

campaigns. 

• Expand the city’s clean power supply by repowering/constructing power plants and 

transmission lines; expanding Clean Distribution Generation, and supporting the 

expansion of the natural gas infrastructure. 

Air Quality. For decades New York has worked on improving its air quality. Despite all 

this work, the city still fails to meet federal air quality standards. As a result of this and given the 

anticipated population increase, PlaNYC proposes that New York improve its air quality to 

achieve the cleanest air of any large American city. This will require the following: 

• Reducing vehicle emissions by improving fuel efficiency of private cars, retrofitting and 

refueling diesel trucks, and decreasing emissions from school buses by decommissioning 

old buses; 

• Reducing emissions from buildings by utilizing cleaner burning heating fuels; and 

• Pursuing natural solutions to improving air quality, including reforesting portions of our 

parklands and encouraging tree planting on public and private lots and city-owned land.




Under the No-Build Condition, no major changes in public policy are contemplated. In 

addition, the PlaNYC A Greener, Greater New York is a citywide plan aimed at preparing the city 

in a sustainable way for future populations. Without the Proposed Project it is anticipated that the 

sustainable initiatives suggested in this plan would continue to become a part of standard practice. 


Implementation of the Proposed Project would be consistent with the relevant and 

proposed public policy initiatives which guide development both within the primary and 

secondary study areas and throughout the borough. 

Under the Proposed Project, the construction of the courthouse facility would allow for 

the efficient operation of the judicial system within Staten Island by allowing for the 

consolidation of court parts and court-related agencies from various locations into a single 

modern structure capable of accommodating future growth. As a result, the Proposed Project 

would support the objectives identified in the New York City Courts Capital Program Master 

Plan and the ministerial amendment to the Master Plan. 61 The Staten Island Courthouse Project 

has been designed to be compatible with both the existing civic setting as well as with the scale, 

architecture, density and use of the commercial office space and low-density residential in the 

surrounding community (see Section 9, Urban Design and Visual Resources). 

Refer to Section 1, Description of the Proposed Action and Proposed Project for state 

and local discretionary approvals that would be required prior to the construction of the Proposed 

Project. Additional permits related to the physical construction of the courthouse facility are 

detailed in Section 19, Construction Impacts. 

Implementation of the Proposed Project would also be consistent with the economic 

development initiatives that were identified in Community Board 1’s Statement of Community 

District Needs for Fiscal Year 2007. The North Shore Empire Zone program is intended to 

stimulate local business growth in designated areas. The Proposed Project is anticipated to 

expand and revitalize the governmental center of St. George, thereby providing local businesses 

with an additional consumer base. Accordingly, the construction of the Proposed Project would 

be compatible with the objectives of the North Shore Empire Zone program. 

The City’s applicable waterfront regulations as mandated under the Local Waterfront 

Revitalization Program and the State’s coastal policies are not applicable as the Project Site is 

located outside of the designated coastal zone. No determination of consistency with State or 

City waterfront revitalization policies is required. The Proposed Project would not conflict with 

the principles identified in the New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan or the Plan for the 

Staten Island Waterfront. Although Lower Density Growth Management Area regulations 

pertain primarily to residential development within the borough, implementation of the Proposed 

Project would not be contradictory to the goals of the program. Infrastructure improvements to 

61 

State of New York, Office of Court Administration. New York City Courts Capital Program Master Plan, 

2005 Amendment (Excerpt). Albany, NY, 2005



limit demands placed on infrastructure would be consistent with the LDGMA program. 

Infrastructure to support the Proposed Project is anticipated to be present via utility lines and 

structures in buildings and beneath adjacent roadways (see Section 15, Infrastructure and Section 

17, Use and Conservation of Energy). 

The Staten Island Supreme Courthouse and the Downtown St. George Renaissance plan 

presented by the Staten Island Borough President (“SIBP”) on May 7, 2007 envisions a 

continuous street wall along Hyatt Street anchored by a mixed-use development on the site of the 

proposed Interim Construction Parking Lot. The interim use of this lot for public parking during 

construction would not create a continuous street wall or a mixed-use development along Hyatt 

Street, as outlined in the SIBP’s renaissance plan. However, the plan also stresses the importance 

of the availability of public parking within the St. George governmental core. As such, the 

proposed interim use of the surface lot adjacent to the St. George Theatre would be at a minimum 

consistent with the public parking goals outlined in the SIBP’s plan. In addition, the proposed 

use of this lot for parking would be temporary, lasting only through the duration of the 

construction of the proposed parking garage. Once the parking garage is operational, the use of 

the surface lot as public parking would be discontinued and the property would be available for 

future development (see Section 19, Construction Impacts). Accordingly, the use of the Interim 

Construction Parking Lot would not conflict with the SIBP’s long-term goals of a continuous 

street wall and mixed-use development along Hyatt Street. 

The Proposed Project would be designed to incorporate green building design criteria 

such as those equivalent to Silver standards under the LEED Green Building Rating System in 

compliance with DASNY’s Green Construction Policy. In addition, the Proposed Project would 

comply with PlaNYC. Since the Proposed Project would incorporate New York State-mandated 

sustainable design performance standards that require improvements in the energy efficiency of 

new construction, it would further support PlaNYC’s energy-related goals. The Proposed Project 

also would be supportive of PlaNYC’s goal to utilize existing land more effectively, since it 

would increase the density of development on the Project Site. Additionally, the Proposed 

Project would be consistent with the open space goals of PlaNYC in that it would include 

increased landscaping on the Project Site through the creation of the public landscape and 

Memorial Green. According to PlaNYC, this is not only a goal of the plan, but also would aid in 

improving air quality and minimizing the urban heat island effect. 

Given that the proposed Staten Island Courthouse Project would have no effect on the 

implementation of relevant public policy initiatives and would be in substantial compliance with 

the guidelines and objectives of the New York City Courts Capital Program Master Plan, no 

significant impacts upon public policy are anticipated. 

Mitigation 

As no adverse impacts to policy and regulatory controls in the primary or secondary areas 

would result from the implementation of the Proposed Project, no mitigation is required.

Proposed - Dormitory Authority

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?