UPPER EAST SIDE, NY — A proposed nearly 500-foot-tall tower on East 94th Street which looks to bring over 100 affordable apartments to Yorkville received an overwhelming approval vote from Community Board 8 this week, allowing the project to move forward to the next stage of the city’s land use review process.
That approval vote, which is merely an advisory opinion and has no official weight or enforcement, came with a long list of conditions and recommendations for the project, including increasing the share of affordable housing, reducing the height by over 100 feet, adding underground parking and others.
“I’d vote for this twice if I could,” said board member Paul Krikler. “We’re in a housing crisis. And this is the only way you address the crisis.”
The 46-story tower proposed by Friedland Properties and the Chapman Group at 231 East 94th St., between Second and Third avenues, looks to rezone the block’s current industrial zoning code to one that allows for dense residential and commercial use.
Inside the proposed nearly 500-foot-tall building would be 452 total apartments, including 113 affordable units, build atop a current vacant building, a parking garage and an auto mechanic shop in a zoning lot that currently only allows manufacturing uses as-of-right.
During Wednesday night’s Community Board Land Use Committee Meeting, most of the arguments against and in support of the proposed project from last month’s Zoning Committee meeting were re-hashed, pitting some neighbors concerned about construction, parking, out-of-context sizing and loss of sunlight against those who say the project is desperately needed for not only the affordable units, but for also the hundreds of new, market rate apartments as well.
“The cost of parking has become more exorbitant since COVID,” said David, a neighbor on East 94th Street. “And taking away several 100 units of parking on 94th Street is going to exacerbate a really bad situation.”
David, and others, also complained about shadows cast by the proposed tall tower.
One neighbor, Josh, said that he’s lived on the adjacent East 95th Street block since the 1980’s and that he would be directly impacted by the building in his ground floor unit, condemned to “living in utter and total darkness, noise pollution, air pollution and light pollution.”
Pete from East 95th Street said he felt like the neighborhood — the densest area in America — had already contributed plenty of housing for the city.
“Don’t touch the village — you don’t do this in the village,” he said, “but the Upper East Side seems to be up for grabs.”
For some supporters, the complaints were “absolute nonsense.”
“It’s easy tio care about shadows cast on parks by new affordable housing when you’re not paying 40 percent of your take-home income on housing,” said Aiden, a public school teacher who said he lives on East 95th Street.
“If that’s your biggest concern, you shouldn’t be the one determining whether new or affordable housing gets built, you’ve clearly got life figured out,” he added.
Neighbor Ravi Dholakia said he lives right behind the proposed site on East 95th Street and to him the trade was more than worth it.
“Rent is driving out longtime residents,” Dholakia said.
“For me, it’s 452 units and more affordable housing versus 390 car parking spaces,” Krikler said. “It seems like there’s nothing more important than car parking spaces for some people. I think that’s wrong. We’re in a housing crisis and this is the only way you address the crisis.”
Other questions were asked of the developers at the meeting, including if the proposed site would ever sit empty — or worse, as a demolished vacant lot. The developer’s land use lawyer confirmed that the garage and mechanic’s shop would remain active until the project had secured funding.
That funding, he added, was also pending the passage of new legislation to replace the expired 421-a tax break, without which, he said, the rental project would not be viable.
Ultimately the board voted 32-4 to approve the proposal with a long list of conditions in an attempt to compile the community concerns as the project moves forward.
Those conditions included an increase from 25 percent to 30 percent of affordable units at an average of 60 percent of the AMI — or restricted to those making less than about $60,000 per year, an open space component, 200 parking spaces, a commitment to using union labor, a 15-year commitment to the building being solely rentals and a height limit of 355 feet.
And the developers noted that they had already sought to incorporate a suggestion from the October presentation and said the building will now include a to-be-determined number of three-bedroom units to provide spaces for families.
The next stage of the ULURP process sends the proposal to Borough President Mark Levine’s office for review and approval. After that, it heads to the City Planning Commission, City Council and ultimately, the mayor’s office.
Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.