Community Board Spars With Developers Over 900-Foot Tower
The first public disclosure by the development team behind a plan to erect a 90-story residential tower in Tribeca sparked a contentious discussion at the Monday evening meeting of the Land Use, Zoning & Economic Development Committee of Community Board 1 (CB1).
The dialog began when Fred Harris, a vice president with Vornado Realty (along with Steller Management, one of two firms partnering on the project) noted that Independence Plaza, the legacy middle-income affordable housing complex on Greenwich Street (where rent protection lapsed and reverted to market rates in the early 2010s), “has an unused 97,000 square foot parcel.” This refers to a courtyard at the top of a staircase, located at Greenwich and Jay Streets, which was once the front of P.S. 150, before that school moved to the Financial District in 2021. “Under the zoning that exists today,” he continued “it has a floor area ratio of ten, which translates into a building of 974,810 square feet.” (Floor area ratio, or FAR, is a regulatory limit that caps the allowable space within a building as a multiple of the size of the lot on which it is built.)
“There is also a voluntary inclusionary housing bonus is available,” Mr. Harris noted, in a reference to extra building space allotted to developers in exchange for adding affordable housing to their plans. “This adds another two FAR, which would increase the size to 1,110,943 square feet. But there is 544,617 square feet of development currently on the site. So we propose to build an additional an additional 652,000 square feet.” This math will result in a tower more than 900 feet (or roughly 90 stories) tall.
Morgan Mann, Vornado’s development director, said, “over the next few months, there will be other community input meetings, while we draft an environmental impact statement. All the ways in which this project will have impact will be studied, and have public comment periods. After that, we will come to Community Board 1 again, and then go before the Department of City Planning for an approval.” Ms. Mann projected that this process would take approximately 18 months.
Benjamin Rubenstein, an executive with Stellar Realty, said the developer’s design strategy is “to enhance the ground plane and the pedestrian experience, while also enhancing the skyline of Lower Manhattan with all this height.” This remark drew a chorus of skeptical laughter from the attendees, prompting CB1 chair Tammy Meltzer to restore order.
“The reason the tower is taller,” Mr. Rubenstein continued, “is because the architects feel a smaller floor plate, which means a taller building, provides more benefits at the ground level, from more open space to casting a thinner shadow, to keeping distance between buildings greater.”
Mr. Harris said, “one reason we think the project should be supported is that it will produce a lot of new housing, and the City is desperately short of housing. It will also produce some affordable housing. We will definitely build or preserve the affordable housing required under the inclusionary program, and the development team hopes that before the project moves any closer to completion, there will be a replacement for the expired tax incentive program, which would make it possible to include greater amounts of affordability.” (This was a reference to the controversial 421-a incentive program, which lapsed in 2022.) “Under the old program, we would have built between 150,000 and 200,000 square feet of affordable housing.”
Karen Hernandez, the director of communications and outreach at Stellar, said, “we are looking to improve streetscape on Greenwich. We want to enhance and revamp the experience of Greenwich Street, so that it can put the people and the community first.” This provoked another round of cynical laughter.
City Council member Christopher Marte, noting the packed room and the 100-plus people attending online, observed, “this is an amazing showing. People really care.”
“Right now, I’m against this development,” he continued. “My first question is about commitment. It is typical for a developer, when drafting an environmental impact statement, to say that studies are not necessary for subjects like displacement, shadows, pollution, and traffic. Will you promise not to do this?”
“Absolutely,” Mr. Harris answered.
Mr. Marte pressed, “is there an affordable housing number you are going to commit to publicly?”
Mr. Harris said it was too early in the process to make a precise commitment.
CB1’s vice chair, Alice Blank pushed on this point, noting, “you’re talking about 700 to 900 apartments, and the bonus requires 10 percent of these to be affordable. So this means a maximum of 90 units.”
CB1 member Richard Corman took up this point, saying “ten percent is a joke. And what do you mean by ‘preserving’ affordable units? This is a new building.”
Mr. Harris said that the developer would be permitted to meet the affordable housing obligations with apartments elsewhere in the Independence Plaza complex, or at a separate location entirely.
“So you many not be creating any affordable housing at all in Tribeca?” Mr. Corman pressed.
“That is correct,” Mr. Harris answered.
“Then don’t tout yourselves as creating affordable housing in Tribeca, when you’re not,” Mr. Corman insisted.
Ms. Meltzer said, “we have already seen the deleterious effects of 421-a. No offense, but 421-a sucks in terms of long-term permanent affordability and stability within a community, because it wears off. It’s nothing more than a Band-Aid.”
“You’re building 900 units,” she continued. “When you come back for our next meeting, please find a way to talk about affordable housing in terms of ‘and’ instead of ‘or.’”