Seeking to Prevent Billionaires’ Row 2.0
A new analysis from the Community First Development Coalition (CFDC), a Tribeca-based grassroots organization, documents that gentrification is driving middle-class families from the area and concludes that current affordable housing policies are unlikely to yield any significant local benefit.
The CFDC first coalesced in response to a developer’s plan announced in November 2023 to erect a 90-story residential tower amid a courtyard within the Independence Plaza complex, on Greenwich Street. But while this plan (about which no official updates have been issued for more than a year) remains a central concern, the coalition’s remit has grown over the last several years to include all of Tribeca. This was driven, in part, by the realization that current zoning would allow multiple “supertalls” (defined as buildings greater than 1,000 feet in height) to be erected throughout the community.
The CFDC report, “Beyond Trickle-Down: Building Real Affordability In Tribeca & NYC,” observes, “in recent years, Tribeca has become one of the most sought-after and expensive neighborhoods in New York City. While this growth has brought attention and investment, it has also fueled displacement, deepened inequality, and threatened the diverse, vibrant social fabric of the neighborhood.” It documents that in the four decades ending in 2010, “over 1,500 subsidized, affordable rental apartments were built,” in Tribeca, but goes on to note, “from 2010 to 2025, only 22 of the 2,627 apartments provided through new construction and conversions were subsidized affordable apartments.” Those 22 apartments were all located within a single rental building, while 41 other developments were all luxury condominiums, with no affordability provisions whatsoever.
Many of the new, high-end condos were authorized under what the CFDC describes as Tribeca’s Jekyll and Hyde zoning. “While most blocks require new construction to be modest and contextual,” the report notes, “other blocks allow supertall buildings with no height limits.”
“If the current zoning remains in place, up to seven additional towers can be built,” the CFDC says. “We believe towers this tall in a low to mid-rise residential neighborhood are inappropriate.”
“Tribeca is the least affordable neighborhood in New York City, with a median asking rent of over $8,000 per month—far above the second most expensive neighborhood, SoHo, at $6,100 per month,” CFDC president and Tribeca resident Stephanie Kelemen says. The median home purchase price in Tribeca, as of the third quarter of 2025, was $3.8 million, the highest of any New York City neighborhood.
“If simply adding high-end units helps overall affordability,” Ms. Kelemen says, “one might expect that the 10 percent increase in new housing in Tribeca since 2018 might have tempered prices in the neighborhood by now.”
ALTERNATIVE ZONING IDEAS
The CFDC asserts that there are zoning solutions for Tribeca that don’t involve supertall towers, yet maintain current densities and include affordable housing.
For height limits, the coalition proposes caps of eight to nine stories in central Tribeca, to be roughly commensurate with the preponderance of pre-war architecture there, which ranges from five to seven stories. At the outer edges of the neighborhood (Broadway on the east and Independence Plaza on the west), the CFDC advocates for higher limits, no more than 20 percent above the existing towers at Independence Plaza and the existing buildings along Broadway and Church Street.
A dilemma about affordability in fashionable neighborhoods such as Tribeca, the report notes, is that “current New York City policy is to only require affordable housing… in areas simultaneously upzoned to increase allowed density.” This means that under current regulations, Tribeca cannot expect more affordability, unless it consents to taller, bulkier buildings. But CFDC and other local advocates want precisely the opposite: greater affordability accompanied by downzoning, to restrict the height and mass of new developments.
This predicament is driven by a form of housing policy known as “trickle-down” affordability, or “filtering,” which posits that new luxury development eventually creates affordable housing because better-off occupants move to more expensive units and free up their apartments for lower-income occupants. But, as the CFDC report notes, “‘downward’ filtering has largely stalled in expensive cities. In the last decade, many high-growth markets actually experienced upward filtering—homes became less affordable as they aged. In Tribeca each new high-rise condo or luxury loft made the neighborhood even more attractive to affluent residents, which reinforced high pricing for even older units.”
“Excess supply in one segment doesn’t automatically translate into relief in another within the same neighborhood,” Ms. Kelemen contends. “Without policy intervention, the private market’s new supply in Tribeca serves affluent demand and will not reach middle- or low-income households in Tribeca.”
City Council member Christopher Marte, who has partnered with CFDC in the group’s opposition to the supertall proposed for the Independence Plaza courtyard, said the report “highlights how fed-up New Yorkers are with the City’s ‘answer’ to our affordability crisis. Neighborhoods like Tribeca are excited to welcome affordable housing, but recognize through intuition and direct experience that luxury housing does not bring down rents. This report rejects the reductive supply-demand argument through sound research and a refreshingly nuanced perspective, encouraging readers to demand more of local government in the fight for affordability. Cases like the proposed luxury tower at Independence Plaza are wolves in sheep’s clothing, and CFDC reminds us that we can build affordable housing without handing over our neighborhoods to a real estate industry that has only benefitted from this crisis.”
For more information, please browse cfdcoalition.org.