Trump's East Side tower faces growing opposition.

It's not easy building a high-rise in New York City even in the best of times, and Donald Trump's projected East Side World Tower - which if completed will become the world's tallest residential building - is no exception to this rule.

The 861-foot tower, originally to go up in 2001 at 845 First Avenue between 47th and 48th streets next to the United Nations Secretariat, has come under heavy fire recently from high-profile opponents and neighborhood groups, all seeking to block completion of the project.

Donald Elliott, counsel for the Beekman Hill Association, a neighborhood group that has led the charge against Trump and his building, last Thursday filed a motion with the Commissioner of the Department of Buildings, Gaston Silva, to stop construction at the site.

The motion, which states that the building violates zoning laws and was improperly approved by the Department of Buildings, outlines a series of regulations that the controversial building allegedly violates, and asks the commissioner to review and revoke the building permit issued to Trump on September 25th of last year.

Representatives at Trump's office declined to comment until they had a chance to further review the contents of the letter with their lawyers, though Trump told the press last Thursday that he remained confident that construction would proceed as planned.

In the last few weeks, Trump's opponents have launched a full-scale battle against him, raising $150,000 to pay for legal fees and the public relations team they are using in the hopes of preventing the building's shadow from falling on them.

Opponents of the project object to its size and complain that it will dwarf the nearby United Nations Secretariat building and cast a daily shadow on the area, including the apartments in exclusive Beekman Place.

"The [Trump World Tower] is offensive to us, as are the procedures used and the ends that he seeks," said Seymour Flug, president of the Beckman Hill Association, which has pushed opposition to the building. "He's demolishing a decent building to build something that will cast a shadow on the area and create a vicious wind tunnel."

Trump, however, has made it clear throughout that the recent ire of his project will not prevent him from ultimately constructing the building. "The building is fully designed, fully financed, and fully under construction," he told the press recently. "This will be the great landmark of the neighborhood."

Flug and his group have been quick to note throughout that they are not "anti-development or anti-Trump," they are just seeking responsible development for the area. "This is not a bunch of rich people against Trump. We are a community grassroots organization who are offended and trying to save the neighborhood," Flug said. "We are sophisticated business people who understand development, but this falls under the heading of irresponsible development."

Flug's association had stated that Trump's purchasing of the as-of-right building flouted the intention of city planners, who had not intended, they said, this sort of development to rise from the ashes of older buildings.

For those within Trump's organization, however, the argument holds little weight. "It's an interesting theory," said Charlie Riess, senior vice president at the Trump Organization, of Flug's assertion that they have flouted the intentions of as-of-right laws. "If there's a 65 mile-per-hour speed limit, and you go 64, is that an abuse of the law?"

The issue received considerable press attention, in part at least because of the notoriety of some of the people fighting the construction, not to mention the notoriety of the developer. Opponents of Trump's building count among their ranks such prominent individuals as Walter Cronkite, petroleum billionaire David Koch, film-maker James Ivory and banking magnate William Donaldson.

The fight is destined to continue in the weeks and months to come, and until Thursday, the cards seemed to be stacked in Trump's favor. Workers, for one, have already demolished the building on the site and are on the brink of setting the foundation.

"We're a high profile firm, and we're used to opposition, but we're confident of our position here because this development is within the parameters of the law," Riess said of the opposition they have faced.

Elliott, in his letter to Silva, asserted that the lot on which the building is being constructed incorporates two different zoning districts and would therefore be subject to a Department of Buildings directive that states that in order to treat the two as a single lot, "the tower regulations for the two portions of the lot must be identical." As of now, they are not, Elliot's letter states. "The site cannot be treated as a single lot, but instead must be treated as a split lot. This prohibits the proposed development."

It remains to be seen whether Elliot's petition effectively blocks the development. Phone calls to Commissioner Silva's office seeking comment were not returned by the time this paper went to press.

Though he is likely to prevail in his efforts to construct the tower at 845 First Avenue, the difficulty Trump has faced in carrying out the high profile project is symptomatic of the difficulty that many developers and businesses face in trying to build or expand in and around New York City.

One Westchester County manufacturer who tried to add a wing to his building recently was blocked from doing so by the municipality's planning board who, according to the manufacturer, bowed to pressure from a minority group - the 20 or so families who live around his building.

These families had complained that the extra traffic and noise the expanded building was likely to create would adversely affect their quality of life. "But in the end, you have 20 families who made a decision that affected 10,000 people," the businessman said.

The revenue from extra taxes generated from the addition, the manufacturer argued, would have benefitted a town in desperate need of it. Yet because of the way that the planning board is set up, "a minority was able to make a decision that didn't favor a majority [of those living in the town]."

Cases like these are common, several real estate developers told this paper, and digging trenches and preparing for a fight have become part of the routine attached to developing new properties, they asserted.

"Certainly it is something that we have to take into consideration [whenever we build a new development]," Riess says. Trump has had other buildings blocked before, and those in his organization say that the recent problems with the tower on First Avenue are familiar territory.

Tenant/landlord lawyer Jack Lester, though not directly involved with the case, said that there was another potential avenue for blocking the project, pursuant to the recently passed State Implementation Plan, part of which forces the city to check if as-of-right projects are within the guidelines laid down by the Federal Clean Air Act.

"The city has been told that they must evaluate as-of-right projects, which the Trump Tower is, and I think that there is ample opportunity to block this project, at least for the time being," Lester said.

In the end, opponents would have to prove that the construction of the project would adversely affect carbon monoxide levels in the environment. For the moment though, all remains quiet on the eastern front, as both sides entrench and wait to hear from Commissioner Silva.

Construction thus continues for now, and most likely until early 2001, when the first tenants will begin unloading their furniture and other personal possessions into their new luxury apartments hovering over the East River.

According to a sales representative at Trump's office, about 70 units of the 376 total have already been sold - ranging in price from $700,000 to $10 million. "We're happy with the pace," the representative said. "It's more than we imagined we would sell by this time."