|
At a Wednesday evening meeting of the Quality of Life, Health, Housing, and Human Services Committee of Community Board 1 (CB1), a representative of the Port Authority declined to reaffirm that agency’s commitment to creating hundreds of affordable housing units at Five World Trade Center.
The Port Authority is the crucial stakeholder in these plans, because the agency owns the entire World Trade Center complex. In 2023, Governor Kathy Hochul announced, amid much fanfare, that she had signed off on a deal to boost the share of affordable apartments in the 80-story, 910-foot building planned for the site (which is bounded by Greenwich, Albany, and Washington Streets, and Liberty Park) to 400 homes. When the plan was first announced in February 2021, planners envisioned 300 affordable apartments in the 1,200-unit building.
But at the March 18 CB1 meeting, Hersh K. Parekh, the Port Authority’s Deputy Chief of Intergovernmental Affairs, reviewed the agency’s ten-year capital plan for the World Trade Center complex. About the proposal for Five World Trade Center, he said, “that deal is currently on pause. It was a joint venture” with a development team led by Larry Silverstein, who leases the World Trade Center complex from the Port Authority, “and we are still working through with them exactly what may be possible.”
Committee chair Pat Moore pressed Mr. Parekh, “what do you mean, ‘what may be possible?’”
Mr. Parekh replied, “what may be possible based on the deal that was announced, and if there needs to be some modifications to that.”
Ms. Moore continued, “what may be possible, as in how many affordable units?”
“The type of units that will be part of the project, and the mix of market-rate and affordable,” Mr. Parekh said. “The cost of everything is going up right now. Whatever the budget was a few years ago, we’ve seen increases of 50 percent on certain construction costs. And the situation in Iran is not helping at all. So, there are a lot of factors that need to go into what can be built, when it can be built, and what will be the mix of affordable and market-rate apartments.”
Committee member Jill Goodkind argued, “that was all determined when you presented a plan. It sounds like it’s being scrapped now that you guys own the property.” (This was a reference to years of negotiations that allowed the Port Authority to acquire the site, which lies outside the boundaries of the original World Trade Center complex.)
Mr. Parekh answered, “it’s not being scrapped. We’ve made a commitment to build Five World Trade Center. But things change. Conditions change. Costs go up. So, what was done at that time is not something that could move forward in the same way. We have to make sure that the project can actually be financed and built.”
Committee member Mitch Froman insisted, “if there was a deal, then you can’t just change it because now it’s not advantageous.”
“If you base a deal on a certain set of conditions,” Mr. Parekh said, “but then those conditions change...”
Mr. Froman interjected, “so if I sign a lease with my landlord and then my job cuts my salary in half, I can say my conditions changed?”
CB1’s District Manager, Zach Bommer asked, “the 33-percent affordable housing fees – is that still set or are you saying that specifically is now flexible?”
Mr. Parekh replied, “it depends on what the deal is and who the deal is with.”
Lower Manhattan community leaders and elected officials were swift to denounce any ambiguity about the Port Authority’s commitment to building 400 units of affordable housing at Five World Trade Center.
State Assembly member Grace Lee said, “I am deeply concerned by reports that the agreement to dedicate one-third of the apartments at Five World Trade Center to affordable housing is being reevaluated. I urge the Port Authority to clarify its plans. I will work with my colleagues and all stakeholders to ensure Lower Manhattan residents see the affordable housing they were promised.”
CB1 member Mariama James, a co-founder of the Coalition for 100 Percent Affordable Housing at Five World Trade Center (a grassroots community organization that has pushed for maximum affordability at the site) said, “to hear the Port Authority describe our hard-won agreement for 400 deeply affordable units as ‘on pause’ is unacceptable. Lower Manhattan cannot wait a decade for housing that was promised today. This agreement, which includes area median income levels as low as 40 percent, and a 20-percent preference for September 11 survivors, first responders and our families, was a commitment to the public. A ten-year plan is not a shovel in the ground; it is a delay that risks the very diversity of the neighborhood we fought to save.”
Vittoria Fariello, also a co-founder of the coalition, said, “the idea that the Port Authority, or any agency involved, would stall the building of affordable housing units at Five World Trade Center is an insult to all the community leaders who worked so hard to obtain them, to the elected officials who fought hard for them and to September 11 survivors and first responders who need and deserve to afford to live in the neighborhood they helped rebuild. I am sure that Governor Hochul would not let this happen and we look forward to learning that Five World Trade Center will break ground soon.”
State Senator Brian Kavanagh said, “I understand that the Port, the State, and the developers are having ongoing discussions about how to close the deal to finance and build this important residential project in a challenging environment, and I strongly support that goal. I think all parties understand that the mix of affordable homes in the building – which we included in written, binding agreements as a condition for public approval of the project – is not subject to any change that would reduce affordability, and is not one of the unanticipated obstacles that have delayed the project from proceeding.”
Asked to respond, a spokesman for the Port Authority said the agency “remains fully committed to delivering a world-class tower, including the affordable housing component, at one of the most iconic sites in the nation. We look forward to working with our public and private partners to move this important project forward.”
Matthew Fenton
| 
