Towering Ambitions

Seventeenth Tallest Building in America Proposed for Tribeca’s Independence Plaza

A development team led by Vornado Realty Trust and Stellar Management has filed plans with the City to build a 72-story, 1,090-foot residential tower in Tribeca’s Independence Plaza complex (near the intersection of Greenwich and Jay Streets). The proposed building, which would be the tenth tallest building in New York City and the 17th tallest in the United States, is slated to include 976 apartments.

This plan was discussed at the June 8 meeting of the Land Use, Zoning & Economic Development Committee of Community Board 1. Stephanie Kelemen, president of the Community First Development Coalition (CFDC), a Tribeca-based grassroots organization, said, “the developer has filed plans for a project that would add more than 700,000 gross square feet of new construction, demolish existing homes, and build a 1,090-foot tower on the site of a former Mitchell-Lama affordable housing complex.” This was a reference to the origins of Independence Plaza, which opened in 1975 as a 100-percent affordable development, under a State program that provided developers with tax abatements and low-interest financing in exchange for caps on both tenant incomes and rent increases. But in 2003, when Stellar Management acquired the complex, the company chose to exit Mitchell-Lama and begin transitioning Independence Plaza’s 1,328 apartments to market-rate rents.

Ms. Kelemen noted that plans filed with the City by the developers seek to avoid the rigorous oversight of the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP), instead treating the proposal as a “modification” of Independence Plaza’s status as a “large-scale residential development” (LRSD), a legal category that includes any complex encompassing at least 1.5 acres, with three or more buildings, and 500 or more apartments. (LSRDs are used in cases in which multiple, separate zoning lots are consolidated into a single unit for the purpose of erecting a project that will span the borders several such plots.) In what may prove to be a crucial distinction, an LRSD modification can be approved by City Hall, while a ULURP review would require a vote in the City Council. This may determine the fate of the developer’s proposal, because City Council member Christopher Marte, who represents Lower Manhattan, has vowed to oppose the plan. And the Council observes a tradition known as “member deference,” under which each member retains an effective veto over projects in his or her district, with the entire municipal legislature voting in support of the local representative.
In exchange for approval, the Independence Plaza development team proposes to create the minimum number of affordable units legally required under the City of Yes program enacted in 2024—in this case, 251 apartments—but has so far declined to say whether these homes will be included within Independence Plaza, or (as is permitted under City of Yes) situated elsewhere.

“The reality is that this project would permanently transform the scale, character, and future of this part of Tribeca,” Ms. Kelemen continued. “This community is being asked to accept an enormous project based on vague promises, incomplete disclosures, and an affordability story that does not withstand scrutiny. Independence Plaza was once a major source of affordable housing in Tribeca. Over time, that affordability has dwindled. The developer now wants credit for potentially creating 251 affordable units, even though those units may not be on-site and even though that number does not meaningfully account for the affordable housing that has already been lost. We do not support treating one of the tallest towers in New York City as a technical modification that can avoid the full public review this project plainly deserves.”

Even without a ULURP review, however, the Independence Plaza proposal will legally require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), because a preliminary review by the Department of City Planning has found that the plan “may have a significant effect on the quality of the environment” in more than a dozen areas, including socioeconomic conditions, community facilities and services, neighborhood character, open space, shadows, air quality, noise, public health, and effects on disadvantaged communities.

The scope of this EIS (which will likely take more than a year to compile) is now being debated. At its June 25 monthly meeting, CB1 enacted a resolution saying, “given the significant scale and impacts of the proposed development, and regardless of the project’s regulatory compliance, [CB1] believes that the project warrants stronger public review than may be legally mandated.” The resolution went on raise concerns about the “lack of clarity on location, quantity, and affordability range of proposed affordable housing units,” and urge the developer to “increase the total number of affordable housing units such that at least half of new dwelling units are affordable (i.e., 464 units).”

CB1 enumerated more than dozen other concerns and priorities related to the Independence Plaza plan, including “changes in scale, density, socioeconomic composition, open space, pedestrian experience, historic context, and visual character” of the surrounding neighborhood.

Representatives of Vornado Realty Trust and Stellar Management did not attend either the June 8 or June 25 CB1 meetings, but did respond to the Broadsheet’s request for comment. “At a time when housing of all types is critically needed to address the city’s affordability crisis, this project will provide new homes for a range of incomes while also creating hundreds of jobs, enhancing the surrounding streetscape and expanding essential social services at the property,” said a spokesperson for the development team. “We look forward to continuing to work with residents, neighbors and businesses to ensure this project reflects the needs of the community.”