Leaders Oppose Hochul Plan to Lift Development Cap
A coalition of elected officials representing Lower Manhattan is pushing back against a proposal by Governor Kathy Hochul to repeal a longstanding limit on the density of residential real estate development in New York City.
Since 1961, the City’s zoning code has prohibited residential buildings with a “floor area ratio” (FAR) greater than 12 times the size of the lot on which a building is constructed. Theoretically, this means that a lot of 10,000 square feet cannot host a residential building with more than 120,000 square feet of internal space. Although this might sound like a straightforward ban on apartment towers taller than 12 stories in a lot of that size, in practice residential structures are permitted to reach much greater heights—in part because the footprint of such towers is often much smaller than the lots on which they are built, and in part because a range of technical exceptions (such as internal mechanical spaces) and givebacks (such as public plazas, or set-asides for affordable units) allow for significantly greater elevation.
Governor Hochul has proposed repealing this cap, as a means of addressing New York’s chronic housing shortage, and also an indirect way of easing affordability concerns, based on the assumption that a greater supply of dwellings would bring down prices. This noted, the Governor’s proposal does not include any requirement for affordable housing in the larger buildings that would likely result from this change.
On Friday, State Assembly members Grace Lee and Deborah Glick, along with City Council member Christopher Marte, gathered across the street from City Hall to decry the Governor’s proposal, along with a phalanx of community leaders.
Ms. Lee said, “to address New York’s housing crisis, we need to ask ourselves what kind of housing needs to be built and for whom. The proposal to lift New York City’s FAR cap is woefully inadequate if it does not include any guarantees to create truly affordable housing and job opportunities for New York’s union labor workforce. Without these assurances, a higher FAR cap risks green-lighting the production of more luxury high rises that will not serve the needs of low-income and working-class New Yorkers.”
Ms. Glick said, “under the current FAR cap, supertall towers are being built to give the wealthy views from 1,500 feet above. Rather than letting developers build ever higher, we should be looking at the large stock of un-utilized office, hotel, and commercial space that can be converted into new affordable housing.”
Mr. Marte said, “lifting the FAR cap will only allow for more luxury supertall developments and do nothing to address the affordable housing crisis. Density restrictions are not the issue; there is plenty of developable area across the City. The issue is that developers choose to build luxury condominiums over truly affordable housing, and lifting the FAR cap will only exacerbate this. We need policies that demand housing that our communities can afford, not giveaways to the real estate industry.”
The State legislature has answered the Governor’s proposal with a response that omits the FAR cap rollback. Whether this policy is restored in the final budget that the Governor and the legislature eventually agree upon remains a matter of negotiation.