Striking, but affordable? (Durst Fetner)

Durst Fetner is at work on arguably the most dynamic, certainly the least square, apartment building in New York City. Jean-Daniel Noland, chair of Community Board 4’s land-use committee, even cautioned his fellow committee members against overwrought superlatives when they considered the project last night as it entered the first phase of public review.

“We are in a house of worship, so no talk of icons tonight,” he said from behind a long table inside the Actor’s Temple synagogue on West 47th Street. “Only Jehovah can do that.”

Still, his colleagues on the committee could not resist, referring to the building as beautiful, interesting, celebrated, stunning, beautiful, attractive, singular, impressive, beautiful and destination architecture. At the end of the meeting, when a resolution was being drafted to make recommendations to the full board on what conditions it should support the project, James Wallace said, “I think we should go out of our to note the spectacular beauty of this design."

“Now, now, that’s a value judgment, and we just can’t do that,” Mr. Noland said.

“How about striking,” Lee Compton said. “Whatever your opinion, you have to admit it’s a striking building.”

Yet no matter how striking, beautiful or iconic the design, the committee could not surmount one serious issue. Despite effusive praise for Durst Fetner’s legacy, the inclusion of a grocery store, a commitment to public art, and yes, that incomparable design, the fact that the developers had committed to only 35 years of affordability for the below-market-rate apartments it was setting aside within the 740-unit pyramid-shaped struck the committee as an unconscionable act.

“The high-end architecture doesn’t do anything to keep the neighborhood diverse,” Joe Restuccia said. In other words, a façade is just a façade. Permanent affordability is forever.

Durst representatives claimed they could not, for financial and fiduciary reasons, pursue a project with unlimited affordability to it. Much of this has to do with an unusual ground lease on the development site, which belongs to the Smiley family, once one of the city's largest landlords. Now comprised of some 100 trustees, the Smileys present complex, almost impossible negotiation, according to the Dursts, and it would be difficult to go back and negotiate a deal that would facilitate additional affordability. "In a way, it's 150 units of affordable housing or none," Jonathan Drescher, director of major projects, said.

This comment particularly set the committee members off. "We've heard that so many times before, and we just don't buy it," Mr. Restuccia said. "You're going to get what you're going to get, so we have to do what we can to ensure this project serves the community, too."

Mr. Noland emphasized that this was a matter of precedent. "I think our concern is, affordable housing is an important component of this community," he said. "If you only give it a certain number of years, and you change it, we don't think that's good for the community, we don't think that's good for New York." He later emphasized that this could set a precedent whereby other developers would come in and say, well, the Dursts only had 35 years, so why should we do more.

In a way, the firm's reputation was as much of a hindrance as a help. People just expected more.

But it was also a difficult community to be operating in. On the one hand, Hell's Kitchen had benefited from a great deal of affordable housing development in recent decades, but much of it had been built with a sunset similar to the one being discussed by the developer now. "Look at Trump, many of those units aren't affordable anymore, and that is a problem we have to confront," local councilwoman Gail Brewer told The Observer after the meeting.

"What are we creating up here?" Mr. Wallace said. "Trump, Extell, now this. It's turning into an island of luxury."

The only other major concern for the community besides affordable housing was a desire to see more retail along 58th Street, where the developer has place most of its mechanical systems. Questions were also raised specifically about what might occupy a 16,000 square-foot community facility building the Dursts want to build on the street. They have proposed childcare of some sort but have no firm commitments, which the committee said it would like to see by the time the project reaches the full board in September.

Whatever the concerns, there was genuine excitement about the project on both sides. "As many of you know, we have tried to get many projects off the ground here," Helena Durst said before presenting the plan. "In fact, this is the fourth time I've come before you."

Within the BIG surprise was hidden a smaller one, revealed in planning documents filed when the project was approved two weeks ago, dubbed Development Site 2. Plans call for a 110-unit apartment building that backs onto the pyramid apartments, though it is unlikely it will be built in that form, if at all. Instead, it is a zoning technicality.

“That building is in the same zoning lot, so it has to get rezoned with everything else,” Jordan Barowitz, a Durst spokesman, explained. “For technical reasons, we have to keep it in there, so we decided to make it a residential building, to study the impacts.”

Currently, the building, at the corner of 11th Avenue and 58th Street, is a self-storage facility—a Manhattan Mini Storage, to be exact—with a few years left on its lease. It is one of those former industrial buildings that has been totally bricked up. When the lease comes due, the Durst Organization may extend it or look for an alternative commercial use, but the firm is unlikely to redevelop the plot for housing, according to Mr, Barowitz, at least in the form currently outlined in the rezoning.

This is in part because the proposed nine-story building, which would be built around the existing six-story structure, would block views from the new building as well as one Durst Fetner built five years ago, the Helena, which is in the southeastern corner of the lot, on 57th Street.

“We don’t know what we’re doing with that building yet,” Mr. Barowitz said.

Instead, the firm is proposing the 110-unit structure simply because the city's environmental review requires some accounting of what could go on the site, because both are on the same zoning lot. For technical reasons, Durst Fetner chose an apartment building even though they may or may not actually build one.

As for the rest of the block, the ULURP application reveals an unusually shaped building—called not a pyramid but a hexahedron. It measures 1.1 million square feet, with with 867 apartments, 151 of which are set aside for affordable for families making roughly $40,000 a year. Of the building’s remaining area, 80,000 square feet will be set aside for commercial uses, likely doctor’s offices and other community-focused space, while there will be 62,000 feet of ground floor retail.

A community facilities building of 28,000 square feet is proposed behind the storage facility and next to the Helena, and between those and the BIG building will run a driveway serving the two residential buildings. The project will have 285 parking spaces, more necessary than in some buildings, no doubt, given the nearest subway station is Columbus Circle, four avenues away.

More will be revealed tonight at the land-use hearing of Community Board 4, the fist public meeting for the project as it heads into the grueling seven-month public review process. Previously, the board had expressed mild support for the project, celebrating its design, but there may be some issues surrounding the affordable housing component.

In a statement, Douglas Durst mentioned the potential for the project to play a role in the continued transformation of the west side. "We are pleased that we have reached this important benchmark," he said, "and we look forward to working with the CB 4, City Planning and the City Council on this exciting project."