Is Freedom Plaza bringing real change to New York’s housing landscape?

What does affordable housing or low-income housing look like in the United States in 2024? It is a question that’s more pressing than ever as cities grapple with the challenges of housing affordability. In New York City, where the cost of living continues to skyrocket, the demand for housing outweighs the supply of many individuals and families struggling to find homes that are within their means. In the midst of this crisis, development plans like the Freedom Plaza promises to address the need for affordable housing while also catering to other urban challenges. But amidst its grand promises, we must reflect on whether this development will truly be a catalyst for positive change within the community it aspires to uplift.

Freedom Plaza slated to become a new civic and cultural hub along Manhattan’s East River aims to tackle several issues at once. With its commitment to providing a 4.77-acre public waterfront open space to an area historically lacking greenery, the project also plans to house a Museum of Freedom and Democracy within the park. Additionally, the project also claims that it will deliver much-needed affordable housing, two hotels, retail stores and restaurants. Situated on the largest underdeveloped plot of land in Manhattan, this 6.7-acre site, south of the United Nations headquarters in Manhattan’s Midtown East neighbourhood, will be transformed by Danish architectural firm Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG). Collaborating with OJB Landscape Architecture, who will be designing the public green space, BIG will be overseeing the museum, podium and four towers that encircle the area. Among the towers, two 51-story buildings will host NYC’s first five-star Banyan Tree Hotel and a Mohegan hotel, along with a conference and entertainment centre. This project developed by Soloviev Group and Mohegan, seems ambitious and quite comprehensive.

“Our plan is to develop this site in a way that delivers benefits for the local neighbourhood and the city as a whole, worthy of its skyline and waterfront location, and befitting NYC’s key role as a leader in the global cultural economy. We value the community input that we have received throughout the planning process and are proud to help meet the need for residential and affordable housing and open public spaces", shares Micheal Hershman, CEO, Soloviev Group.

While the project pledges a significant portion of its residential architecture to this category, the definition of ‘affordable’ can vary and may not always align with the financial needs of individuals or families. Despite the promising facets of the project, particularly in its emphasis on public space, cultural amenities and hospitality, it is essential to scrutinise the term “affordable housing”. With two residential buildings planned, rising 50 and 60 stories and nearly 40 per cent of 1,325 apartments to be designated as permanently affordable housing, the question arises: Do these units proposed adequately meet the needs of low to mid-income individuals and families?

The other concerning aspect of the proposal is its tie to a gaming license. The project is vying for three downstate gaming licenses in and around NYC. While the inclusion of below-grade gaming areas connected to the hotels may provide additional revenue for the development, it prompts reflection on the social and economic implications of introducing a casino to the area. Is leveraging a casino as a bargaining chip truly the most appropriate way to address the urgent need for affordable housing and public spaces?

The Freedom Plaza tower aligns with the orthogonal grid of Manhattan to extend its view corridors. The residential design respects the celebrated UN complex while also adding playful and sculptural elements to the waterfront. The two residential towers pay homage to modernist NYC buildings of the 1950s and 1960s, with striped glass facades and aluminium facades connected at the base by a podium that will house a food market and retail outlets. The two hotel towers clad in a warm metal finish connect at the roof, creating visual unity between the buildings.

Bjarke Ingels, founder and creative director of BIG Group, illustrates an engaging vision for this urban development, which integrates with Manhattan’s grid while introducing artistic features along the waterfront. The Danish architect shares, “When Le Corbusier, Oscar Niemeyer and Wallace Harrison designed the UN Secretariat building, they grafted an oasis of international modernism onto the dense urban grid of Manhattan, creating a public park on the river framed by towers and pavilions. Due to the nature of the work of the UN, access to the park; although open to all nations, remains restricted. With our public space design for the plaza, we continue to build on the architectural principles by uniting three city blocks to form a green space reaching from 1st Avenue to the East River, creating a green connection all the way to the water’s edge. Bookending the park are two pairs of towers, joined at base or top and each framing a corner plaza; one showcasing the life of the city and the other forming an urban gate from the city”.

Ingels’ depiction of the development project reflects a thoughtful blend of contemporary design and reverence for Manhattan’s urban context. Yet, as the project advances, it is essential to reaffirm the centrality of affordable housing in its objectives. BIG has a track record of creating innovative and visually captivating projects. This leads to a natural inquiry into how these large-scale mixed-use architecture projects are marketed and how have they approached inclusivity and accessibility? The promise of a vibrant cultural hub with public green spaces and amenities may sound exciting, but questions linger about whether these developments cater to the diverse needs of the community or prioritise profit over people.

For the proposed Freedom Plaza, nature, culture and community converge seamlessly. Buildings encircle the perimeter maximising multilevel green pockets. These accessible spaces boast amenities like a children’s playscape, a dog run and an event lawn with a performance area for gatherings. Sustainable landscaping, including native botanicals and climate-adaptive species, will nurture local wildlife-year around. Cultural experiences can happen with sculptures and an amphitheatre which is set to host events beneath the museum. Educational programmes will emphasise the importance of flora and sustainability. Alongside, restaurants, a food market, community design spaces and other amenities will enrich the park, shaping it into a dynamic neighbourhood hub where nature and city life thrive in harmony. 

Martin Voelkle, partner at BIG, sheds light on the project’s architectural ethos and its tribute to iconic NYC structures. He explains, “Our design strives to craft a shared green oasis which fosters unity and accessibility. Incorporating all podium facilities like parking, retail, ballroom, gaming and entertainment underground allows us to maximise greenery, offering a promising urban development approach”. By prioritising public amenities over private ones, the mixed-use development aims to nurture a lively and inclusive atmosphere. Yet, the true testament of success lies in how well the project addresses issues of rental disconnect and whether these overreaching aspirations ensure financial inclusion and translate into real benefits for the community, especially the ones seeking affordable housing and public access.

The project aims to be an operational net-carbon development and focuses on sustainability. The site is designed to use the East River as a heat sink and source to supplement the building’s heating, cooling and domestic hot water systems, which will reduce potable water demand by 24.5 million gallons annually. Stormwater capture and retention, as well as the park’s mature trees, will help minimise the urban heat island effect. The plaza will also utilise a minimum of 20 per cent electric vehicle charging stations for its onsite parking with a capacity to scale to 60 per cent.

As the project moves forward to construction, stakeholders must remain vigilant and hold developers accountable for their promises. Affordable housing should not be merely an afterthought but a genuine commitment to addressing the housing crisis faced by many cities today, including New York. Reflecting on the impact of such developments prompts us to ask, what does genuine affordability entail in our urban landscape? Is it merely about providing shelter?

In the fabric of New York City, projects like the Freedom Plaza offer promises of progress, hope and revitalisation. But beyond the gleaming facades and cultural offerings, there is a simple question that arises: Who truly benefits? As we imagine the future of a city, let us not forget the real essence of affordability, which is about more than just numbers on a rent cheque. It is about creating homes that resonate with people who live there, that reflect their stories and aspirations. So amidst the excitement of ambitious urban plans, we must ensure that our cities remain grounded in the principles of fairness and inclusivity. For what kind of city are we shaping, if not one where every individual feels a genuine sense of belonging?

Project Details

Size: 4,100,000 sq ft
Location: New York City, United States
Client: Soloviev Group and Mohegan
Collaborators: Adamson Associates Architects, OJB Landscape Architecture, The Friedmutter Group, HBA, Thornton Tomasetti, WSP, Langan, RizzoBrookbridge, Herrick Feinstein, Kilograph
Partners-in-Charge: Bjarke Ingels, Martin Voelkle
Project Manager: Andreas Buettner
Project Designer: Kristian Hindsberg
Architects: Ahmad Tabbakh, Alejandro Guadarrama, Alvaro Velosa, Bernardo Schuhmacher, Brendan Murphy, Cheng Zhong, Hudson Parris, Jan Klaska,
Jeff Tao, Joanne Zheng, Johannes Alexander Hackl, Omer Khan, Otilia Pupezeanu, Paul Heberle, Rafael Alvarez, SangHa Jung, Sparsh Gandhi, SungHwan Um, Will Chuanrui Yu, Youjin Rhee, Beat Schenk, Margaret Tyrpa

(Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position of STIR or its Editors.)