In Order for a 34-Story, 450-Apartment Development worth 9-Figures to be Built, the Developer Turned to Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. to Locate Elusive Neighbor and Secures Critical Development Consents to Preserve More Than $75 Million Hudson Yards Project
In Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s latest victory, the firm helped save the development of one of the last major undeveloped sites in Hudson Yards by locating an elusive neighboring property owner and securing execution of critical zoning and development documents necessary to preserve a project placing more than $75,000,000 at stake.
Our client, a well-established real estate investment and development company with a substantial New York portfolio, owned one of the final large undeveloped parcels in Hudson Yards and had spent nearly two decades planning and designing a major mixed-use residential and commercial tower on the site. The property, currently operating as a surface parking lot, had long been viewed as one of the area’s most valuable remaining development opportunities.
For years, the client had assembled the approvals, entitlements, and development rights necessary to unlock the project. Among those rights were agreements with the neighboring property owner that merged the properties into a combined zoning lot, transferred development rights, and obligated the neighbor to cooperate with future development approvals.
As the project advanced, the client sought to obtain a District Improvement Bonus Certification (“DIB Certification”) from the New York City Planning Commission, an approval necessary to increase allowable floor area and realize the full value of the development. Under the governing Zoning Lot and Development Agreement (“ZLDA”), the neighboring owner was obligated to cooperate by executing building applications, zoning applications, variance applications, and all related documents reasonably required to obtain governmental approvals for the project.
But there was a problem.
After almost a year of attempting to identify the current owner and obtain the required signatures, the client had reached a dead end. The neighboring property was owned through a limited liability company, ownership records were unclear, and repeated outreach attempts failed.
That is when Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was retained.
The firm immediately got to work.
First, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. searched court records and investigated prior litigation involving the apparent owner to determine whether there was counsel who could help open a line of communication. The firm identified several lawsuits involving individuals connected to the property and reached out to attorneys in an effort to establish contact. One attorney confirmed prior involvement with the owner but explained that he had not been retained to handle this matter.
It soon became clear that outreach efforts alone were not producing results quickly enough. Given the time pressure and what was at stake, the Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. team began preparing for litigation and drafted a comprehensive summons and complaint so that litigation could be commenced immediately if the required documents were not signed.
The complaint thoroughly set forth the parties’ decades-long agreements, the transferred development rights, the merged zoning lot structure, and the neighboring owner’s obligations under the ZLDA to execute the required approvals and cooperate in obtaining the DIB Certification. The complaint sought injunctive relief compelling execution of the required documents and damages arising from breach of contract.
The stakes were extraordinary as the cost of delay was staggering.
Every passing day threatened not only substantial increases in certification costs, but also jeopardized a pending transaction and exposed the project to damages exceeding $75,000,000 if the DIB Certification could not be obtained within the required timeline.
Then the breakthrough came.
Following an extensive investigation, the team identified an obscure business address connected to the neighboring ownership entity. Rather than continue exchanging unanswered calls and correspondence, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. appeared in person.
What initially appeared to be a routine office visit quickly became the turning point.
After sitting down and carefully explaining the required documents, the development timeline, and the consequences of delay, the team realized that the individual helping coordinate the meeting was not merely a receptionist – she was the daughter of the owner and confirmed that ownership had remained unchanged for decades.
Rather than immediately pushing for a meeting with the owner, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. focused on making sure the decision-makers understood exactly what was being requested and why.
That approach opened the door.
The discussion led directly to involvement by the neighboring owner’s counsel. Through cooperative but persistent advocacy, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. walked counsel through the existing agreements, the obligations imposed by the ZLDA, and the consequences of continued refusal.
But Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. also made clear that this was not simply another request.
The litigation papers had already been drafted.
Counsel was provided with and walked through the summons and complaint. The message was straightforward: if the signed documents were not returned, the lawsuit would be filed immediately.
Faced with a thoroughly prepared complaint, clear contractual obligations, significant damages exposure, and imminent litigation, the neighboring owner backed down and agreed to execute the required documents.
A few days later, the call finally came.
The documents were ready.
The neighboring owner executed the required building, zoning, and certification documents, preserving the client’s ability to pursue the DIB Certification and maintain the development timeline.
The client’s reaction captured the moment:
“Adam – We received the docs! Fantastic!” “WOW! This is AMAZING news. Thank you!!”
What had stalled for nearly a year – and threatened decades of planning and more than $75,000,000 in damages – was resolved without filing suit because the other side understood that Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. had already done the work and was fully prepared to go to court.
Adam Leitman Bailey, Karen Chau, and Nurie Metodieva of Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., represented the client in this matter.