Two Trees Management Company presented a modification to the Domino master plan for Site B on July 16 that would alter the previously approved envelope and design to eliminate sky bridges, add continuous undulating balconies to give private outdoor space to most units, reduce the number of loading berths and remove one podium setback. The applicant said the changes are intended to improve the architecture and increase the quantity and quality of housing on the final Domino parcel.

Using new zoning deductions introduced by the City of Yes, the applicant proposed to transfer certain zoning deductions across the Domino zoning lot and absorb them at Site B, which the team said would yield roughly 100 additional units of housing across the Domino lot, including approximately 20 additional units affordable at 60% of area median income (AMI) or below. Two Trees said the voluntary inclusionary requirements from the 2014 approvals remain unchanged and that the additional units derived from the text amendment would be subject to regulatory affordability levels and recorded restrictions.

Two Trees also explained that an earlier commitment to a school podium within the original 2014 CEQR program had been declined by the School Construction Authority (SCA) after a re-analysis of school seat impacts and SCA site needs. The developer said it had offered the site and that the SCA formally declined to locate a school at Site B; Two Trees said it would continue to work with elected officials and the community to pursue a school location within the River Ring development north of Domino.

Design changes include a ribbon of seven-foot-deep balconies across the façade to create private outdoor space for a broad range of units, a massing that steps down toward adjacent streets and a commitment to preserve or enhance sidewalks, wayfinding and storefronts. Two Trees said there are no new significant environmental impacts identified in the review and highlighted that the project remains below a FAR of 6. The team said they remain committed to previously agreed voluntary inclusionary and design commitments and plan to continue working with the councilmember and community board.

No public testimony was offered at the borough president hearing. The borough president will file a recommendation to the City Planning Commission and the review continues under ULURP.