Community Board 2’s Land Use & Housing Committee heard a presentation Sept. 10 from High Street Residential and its design and legal team on a proposed mixed‑use building at 126 Lafayette Street that would contain 99 residential units, including 25 mandatory inclusionary housing (MIH) units. The presenters described the project as a 25‑story building that rises to 275 feet, with retail at street level and a mix of market‑rate and affordable units distributed through the tower.

The developer and design team framed the MIH portion as MIH Option 1, saying the affordable set would include 40%, 60% and 100% AMI bands and a weighted average of 60% AMI. Architect Paul Healy said, “The development will be MIH option 1,” and walked the committee through floorplans that show 25 affordable units distributed across 18 of the 23 residential floors. Presenters said the affordable units are a mix of studios, one‑bedrooms and two‑bedrooms, and that the two‑bedroom requirement is being used to meet MIH distribution rules.

Committee members pressed the team for details the presentation had shown too quickly: specific floor‑by‑floor AMI placements, where terraces are located and who may use amenity spaces. The project team said there are three private terraces (one reserved for an MIH unit) plus two tenant‑accessible terraces tied to building amenities: a ground‑floor terrace adjacent to a coworking lounge and a top‑floor terrace for residents. The team said finishes in affordable units are “comparable” to market units and that affordable tenants will not be charged an amenity fee; presenters said ownership may charge some market tenants for amenity use but affordable households would have the same access without a fee. A member asked for a guarantee that finishes are “identical”; the team responded that appliance brands and core finishes would match and that unit sizes and layouts vary by floor and unit type.

On subsidy and construction questions, the team said the project is not receiving direct public subsidies but plans to apply for a 485x tax abatement program; presenters described 485x as a separate incentive distinct from MIH that the project will pursue. The development team said they have solicited bids from both union and non‑union general contractors and have not finalized contracts, and that some trades may be paid prevailing wages while others may not. The presenters also said the building will be all‑electric and submetered, and that tenants will pay apartment electricity (heat, hot water, cooking). On unit count and massing, the architect said the 99‑unit total reflects a fit for the building footprint, setbacks and desired unit sizes rather than an arbitrary cap.

Several members of the public who live nearby asked about the north (lot‑line) façade, terraces, roof use and whether any commercial or liquor licenses are expected; the team said the north façade is largely a lot‑line condition with limited openings, that the roof high‑roof areas are mechanical and the top terrace is resident use only, and that there is no plan for a liquor license connected to the resident dining room and demo kitchen. The committee asked the team to circulate clearer, larger plans and MIH tables after the meeting.

The committee did not take a final advisory vote on the project during the Sept. 10 session. Presenters were asked to provide clearer, zoomed floor plans, the MIH unit‑by‑floor table, and document thumbnails for distribution to committee members.