Twist In Upper East Side Townhouse Saga As Owner Drops Expansion Plan

UPPER EAST SIDE, NY — The owner of an Upper East Side townhouse who has roiled neighbors for years with an unpermitted expansion project added a new twist to the saga this week — by dropping an effort to legalize the work he had already done.

Controversy has raged at 210 East 62nd St. since around 2016, when the new owner of the four-story townhouse won approval from the city's Landmarks Preservation Commission to enlarge it with a rooftop addition and a rear extension jutting into its backyard. Built in 1870, the townhouse sits on a quiet, upscale block between Second and Third avenues.

Within months, however, neighbors realized that the townhouse's interior floors had all been built several inches higher than expected, resulting in a rooftop addition that was about two feet taller and far bulkier than what the city had approved — a cardinal sin in New York's tightly-regulated landmarks world.

On Tuesday, weeks after getting a hostile reception at an Upper East Side community board, representatives for the townhouse owner were expected to speak at a Landmarks Commission meeting, seeking approval for a new application that would legalize much of the existing work while reducing the height of the addition, which the owner now admits was too big.

The night before Tuesday's meeting, however, neighbors who had signed up to testify against the latest plan received an update from the Landmarks Commission: the application had been withdrawn.

"The applicant sent LPC a letter yesterday stating that he is no longer proposing to legalize what they have built," commission spokesperson Zodet Negron said in a statement, adding that the owner "will instead opt to build what was previously approved by LPC."

"Grossly out of compliance"

The townhouse owner's name appears in almost no documents associated with the building, except for one: the initial certificate of appropriateness issued by Landmarks in 2017 for the expansion project. That certificate names the applicant as Mohammed Elayyan, a Staten Island resident.

Elayyan has come under fire for other mishandled construction projects, including a Staten Island home whose decade-long renovation overstepped its initial footprint, suffered from years of decay and led to environmental damage, according to a 2014 lawsuit. A state Supreme Court justice ultimately ordered significant changes to the property, the Staten Island Advance reported in 2018.

"This is so grossly out of compliance," Staten Island Borough President James Oddo told the Advance at the time. "It wasn't missing the rule by a few inches. There should be the harshest penalty possible."

Meanwhile, Elayyan was sued last year by the buyer of a Brooklyn townhouse formerly owned by Elayyan and several other people. According to the suit, Elayyan's ownership group carried out repairs before the sale that damaged the building, then refused to release $750,000 that was being held in escrow pending the sale.

Attempts to reach Elayyan by phone and email were unsuccessful on Wednesday. An attorney representing him in the Brooklyn case declined to comment on the East Side townhouse saga.

At this month's contentious community board meeting, fellow residents of the 62nd Street block described woeful conditions that have plagued the townhouse since work began, including gaping holes in the facade, flooding, rats, and garbage accumulation. Indeed, city records show more than $660,000 in penalties issued for the building since its 2015 purchase, for offenses ranging from missing windows to faulty scaffolding.

"After around 40 happy years there, I felt I had to move," said Carter Pottash, a former resident who sold his home at 208 East 62nd St. after work began at the townhouse next door.

"Really appalling"

With the latest application withdrawn, Elayyan will be forced to undo all the unpermitted work and finally build what had been approved by the city more than five years ago.

Rachel Levy, executive director of the preservation group Friends of the Upper East Side, said she had received assurances from the Landmarks Commission that the city will amend the existing permit to make it more stringent, and regularly visit the block to ensure compliance.

Still, Levy's group is unsatisfied, saying Landmarks should schedule another public hearing to ensure full transparency.

"The level of disregard for the building and the community and the landmarks law is really appalling," she told Patch. "We believe that in light of all that history, the project deserves the level of scrutiny of a public hearing — the input and oversight from the LPC commissioners, and the ability for the public to weigh in."

Negron, the LPC spokesperson, responded that scheduling yet another meeting was unnecessary, given the withdrawn plans.

"There is no hearing because there is no application to hear," she said.

"What they are planning to build now has already been reviewed and approved at a public hearing. LPC staff will be meeting with the applicant to review the process going forward and safeguards that will be required, including removal of all work built in violation of the approved permit and additional drawings to ensure what was previously approved is built."

Related coverage: Illicit Work At Landmarked UES Home 'Makes Life Hell' For Neighbors