Council Member Marte raises concerns about 100 Gold and 30 FAR text amendment

Thank you for being here, and thank you, Chair Riley, for hosting this hearing.

In the block-by-block plan, 100 gold is mentioned.

However, what's not mentioned, a part of the plan, is the zoning tax amendment that's associated with the ULERP, which will allow 30 FAR in the whole special Lower Manhattan district.

My fear is that you guys are allowing unprecedented development, and I'll give my colleagues here, most people don't even have R8 in their district, but a 30 FAR will allow,

like what's being proposed at 100 gold, which will allow 4,000 units in probably the biggest building in lower Manhattan.

And so allowing that to be mapped all throughout lower Manhattan with

having a proper discourse with other stakeholders in the community makes it seem like two things.

One, you're using 100 gold as a Trojan horse to map the rest of the neighborhood.

And B,

there's not going to be an adequate discussion of infrastructure, school seats, or anything else because you're using it as a segmentation, right?

You're trying to do one thing at a time so then it doesn't seem like a big proposal.

And I know the response is going to say, well, the developers, whether it's the city or private, will still have to go individual rezoning because nothing is mapped.

R12 in this community, but if you put the cart before the horse, then it might allow you to say, oh, there's not going to be an adverse damage to this community because you're going to be looking at as isolated individuals.

And so, one, my recommendation is to separate that whole text amendment from 100 Gold.

We can have that discussion and figure out a plan for that site.

But what I fear is that you guys are actually not doing planning for my community.

You're not thinking about the infrastructure for my community by going down this route.