![\"1042](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/20260508CityLimitsAtlanticAve-6069-1.jpg\")
A view of 1042 Atlantic Ave., aka Prosper Brooklyn, the tallest building in the frame, seen from Pacific Street. (Adi Talwar\/City Limits)<\/p>\nIn 2022, developers behind two Atlantic Avenue projects committed to making a \u201crecord-setting\u201d 35 percent of the apartments affordable. But after interest rates shot up and the owner cited cost pressures, nonprofit partners recruited by Councilmember Hudson agreed to renegotiate, rather than pursue enforcement.<\/p>\n
A view of 1042 Atlantic Ave., aka Prosper Brooklyn, the tallest building in the frame, seen from Pacific Street. (Adi Talwar\/City Limits)<\/p>\n
It looked like dramatic progress. In April 2022, 35th District Councilmember Crystal Hudson announced<\/a> that, after the Council approved two spot rezonings along under-built Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn, it showed that \u201cdevelopers can and must offer more\u201d affordable housing than what the city usually requires under its Mandatory Inclusionary Housing<\/a> (MIH) program.\u00a0<\/p>\n Hudson, who had earlier told the applicants to wait for an area-wide rezoning, got the developers to commit to a \u201crecord-setting\u201d 35 percent low-income affordable units. Projected as 153 apartments\u2014out of 438 total\u2014the units would be set aside for tenants at a range of incomes, averaging 54 percent of Area Median Income (AMI)<\/a>. She earned praise from numerous stakeholders, including affordable housing advocates like ANHD.<\/p>\n \u201cFor too long, developers have driven the land use and planning process in this city. They\u2019ve convinced New Yorkers that affordability quotas and community demands will stifle development in a time when we need to build more to confront the growing affordability and housing shortage we\u2019re facing,\u201d Hudson said in a statement at the time. \u201cHowever, the truth is developers can stand to do much more.\u201d<\/p>\n But four years later, after a sharp rise in interest rates and closed-door negotiations excluding Hudson that were never formally revealed, the buildings have opened with only 25 percent affordability, plus a gift of nearby property that might\u2014assuming government agencies offer future funding\u2014help make up for part of the shortfall.\u00a0<\/p>\n The deal also gave the developers a head start on competitors also looking to build in the area. As part of that 2022 statement, Hudson also announced that the city would pursue a comprehensive rezoning along the Atlantic Avenue corridor in Prospect Heights and Crown Heights, from Vanderbilt Avenue to Nostrand Avenue, involving capital, infrastructure, and programmatic commitments.\u00a0<\/p>\n So the two buildings, then known as 870-888 Atlantic Ave. and 1034-1042 Atlantic Ave., were the last one-off upzonings\u2014allowing an enormous boost in valuable square footage\u2014before the Atlantic Avenue Mixed-Use Plan<\/a> (AAMUP), which was approved<\/a> three years later.<\/p>\n Developers had long eyed the blocks, shackled by low-rise industrial zoning but near gentrifying areas and just east of the long-gestating Atlantic Yards\/Pacific Park project. That had prompted Brooklyn Community Board 8 to pursue a plan, known as M-CROWN and a precursor to AAMUP, to encourage housing while retaining job-creating space.<\/p>\n Not what was promised<\/p>\n The two 19-story buildings, today dubbed Eight80<\/a> and Prosper Brooklyn<\/a> and for now looming over neighbors, come with taglines like \u201csophisticated design meets effortless luxury\u201d and \u201cwhere Brooklyn\u2019s energy meets modern luxury.\u201d<\/p>\n They do not, however, offer the promised 35 percent affordability: 15 percent of units for households earning 40 percent AMI\u2014$58,320 for a family of three, as of 2025\u201415 percent at 60 percent AMI, and 5 percent at 80 percent AMI.<\/p>\n Among the 517 apartments now renting across the two buildings, 130 are below-market, with 97 (about 20 percent) at 40 percent AMI, such as 50 one-bedrooms averaging less than $1,000 in rent, for two-person households earning roughly between $37,000 and $54,000. (That\u2019s well below the city\u2019s $1,215 benchmark<\/a> for that income category, but tenants must pay for all utilities.)<\/p>\n The buildings reflect both the \u201cdeep affordability<\/a>\u201d option under MIH, with 20 percent \u201cvery low-income units<\/a>,\u201d and Option A of the state\u2019s 421-a tax break<\/a>, which allows middle-income units as part of 25 percent affordability. There are 26 units (5 percent) at 130 percent AMI, plus seven studios at 60 percent AMI.\u00a0<\/p>\n So the Housing Connect lotteries for 880 Atlantic<\/a> and 1042 Atlantic<\/a>, which launched this winter, prompted no celebration from Hudson nor from the two veteran non-profit housing groups, the Fifth Avenue Committee (FAC) and IMPACCT Brooklyn, that she recruited to enforce promises outside of the city\u2019s zoning framework.\u00a0<\/p>\n Their groups did not help manage, as initially planned, the intake from those affordable housing lotteries. Nor will the developer give each $100,000 in anti-displacement funds\u2014intended<\/a> for things like tenant organizing and eviction prevention\u2014as promised in the agreements they signed.\u00a0<\/p>\n What happened?<\/p>\n Last year, the nonprofits involved in the original deal agreed to less demanding terms sought by developer Elie Pariente of EMP Capital. (Initially, Pariente was to develop just one parcel, but he bought out the other developer, Yoel Teitelbaum, who had pursued the rezoning. Both shared the same land-use lawyer and architect.)<\/p>\n On Feb. 10, 2025, the signatories modified the agreements, with FAC<\/a> and IMPACCT<\/a> accepting\u2014in place of the original affordability pledge\u2014a nearby development site donated by Pariente to FAC and IMPACCT. The revised agreement directs the $200,000 in pledged anti-displacement funds to pre-development costs at the new site, where the nonprofits say they intend to construct at least 46 affordable apartments<\/a>.<\/p>\n Michelle de la Uz, executive director of FAC, told City Limits that Pariente had called the original promise negotiated with Hudson untenable, citing rising construction costs and \u201cwhere the lending community was.\u201d Jamal Robinson, who joined IMPACCT as executive director in September 2024 after the original agreement, said he was told that, from an investor perspective, the projects couldn\u2019t be financed.<\/p>\n Indeed, the industry faced a dramatically changing financing market. When the agreement was reached in April 2022, interest rates<\/a> were just .33 percent. The Federal Reserve, aiming to stem inflation<\/a>, hiked rates sharply, to 5.33 percent in 15 months.<\/p>\n \u201cI think that 35 percent might have always been a high goal to make it work financially,\u201d added de la Uz, who hadn\u2019t negotiated the initial terms. Still, it\u2019s unclear how closely they could vet Pariente\u2019s case; neither de la Uz nor Robinson could specify the financial gaps the developer cited. Pariente didn\u2019t respond to multiple queries.<\/p>\n Though Hudson helped facilitate what some called a Community Benefits Agreement, or CBA<\/a>, only the signatories could enforce it, leaving her frustrated. \u201cIt was up to them to determine whether it was worth the legal fight with the developer to enforce the CBA rather than come to an alternative agreement\u2014a decision I was neither involved in, nor informed of, in real time,\u201d the councilmember said in a statement to City Limits.\u00a0<\/p>\n Nor did Pariente contact Hudson about the revised terms, short-circuiting any opportunity to address the barriers he claimed, the councilmember observed. (In de la Uz\u2019s recollection, Hudson\u2019s reaction, paraphrased, was \u201cI wish it were different, but I understand why this is happening, essentially.\u201d)<\/p>\n Despite significant progress with the city\u2019s wider rezoning of the area, Hudson said that \u201cthe news of a breached agreement is a disappointing development that shows the limitations of existing legal mechanisms to secure additional affordable housing beyond current requirements.\u201d<\/p>\n Did Pariente make a promise he didn\u2019t intend to keep, or were good intentions whipsawed by circumstances? Either way, he got the rezonings on acceptable terms, ahead of rival projects\u2014which under the AAMUP must deliver 25 percent affordable units averaging 60 percent of AMI, via MIH.<\/p>\n So that reflects his strategy, articulated in a quote on his EMP Capital website<\/a> at the time of the agreements: \u201cBuy Real Estate in areas where the path exists and buy more real estate where there is no path, but you can create your own.\u201d<\/p>\n That path can be questioned. When he bought the Prosper Brooklyn site, Pariente kept his land purchase under wraps until Hudson unveiled the compromise, apparently seeking<\/a> to avoid scrutiny of his cost basis. EMP also locates<\/a> Prosper Brooklyn, as hinted by its name, as \u201cin the heart of Prospect Heights,\u201d though it\u2019s clearly in Crown Heights<\/a>.<\/p>\n A partial solution<\/p>\n Because Pariente \u201cwanted to make good on the commitment in some way,\u201d as de la Uz put it, they discussed finding a nearby site that he could buy and donate for 100 percent affordable housing that would \u201cget to the 35 percent.\u201d<\/p>\n That site, 1001 Pacific St., on the same block as the rear entrance to block-through Prosper Brooklyn, should \u201cinclude 46 or more affordable units, exceeding the 24 units required under EMP Capital\u2019s commitment,\u201d according to<\/a> the Fifth Avenue Committee\u2019s project page.\u00a0<\/p>\n That plan, however, requires new funding, with no timetable, even as AMI, the baseline to calculate affordability, inevitably rises. Pariente\u2019s cost: $3.6 million<\/a> for the site, far less than the cost to fulfill the 24-unit obligation calculated by FAC, as of the original pledge.<\/p>\n That number, which approximates the difference between the total affordable units delivered\u2014including middle-income ones\u2014and those promised in 2022, may even be an underestimate.\u00a0<\/p>\n While Pariente has built 104 apartments at 60 percent AMI and below, Hudson had expected 131 such units in the two buildings, or 27 more. Also missing from the initial pledge are 22 apartments at 80 percent AMI. That suggests a 49-unit gap.<\/p>\n That earlier calculation, however, reflected 438 total apartments. As of the renegotiation, the buildings were to contain 483 units. Today, they have 517 apartments. A 35 percent share would require 181 units at 80 percent AMI or below. That suggests a deficit of 77 low-income units. (de la Uz did not respond to a query about that revised math.)<\/p>\n Hudson, said de la Uz, was informed \u201cafter we\u2019d identified a site that could be purchased.\u201d To de la Uz, the lesson is that \u201ceverybody involved in that process should be thinking about: how is this feasible and is this enforceable for the long term?\u201d<\/p>\n For her part, Hudson said the city \u201cneeds stronger tools to monitor and enforce private application commitments beyond those clearly required by law.\u201d<\/p>\n A city-initiated neighborhood rezoning, she noted, holds the city accountable for community benefits, so commitments in the AAMUP\u2014including neighborhood investments\u2014can be monitored via its rezoning commitment tracker<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n The city also has more enforcement resources than relatively small nonprofits. It\u2019s \u201cvery difficult,\u201d IMPACCT\u2019s Robinson acknowledged, to enforce a CBA.<\/p>\n Also, noted de la Uz, the city\u2019s MIH regulatory agreement can be modified to include deeper affordability but not a larger percentage of units, thus limiting enforceability.<\/p>\n Community outreach?<\/p>\n Local community boards, Hudson said, will hear from administration officials in the next\u00a0 months to discuss AAMUP progress.<\/p>\n When it came to the spot rezonings, however, transparency has been scarce. As City Limits reported<\/a> on Dec. 8, 2022, it took Hudson\u2019s office seven months to release a summary of the agreements, which revealed the involvement of FAC and IMPACCT.<\/p>\n It took several months more, as reported<\/a> in City Limits, to obtain the Cooperation and Development Agreements via FAC, as the developers had not filed them \u201cpromptly\u201d as required.<\/p>\n At a contentious April 6, 2023 meeting<\/a> of Community Board 8\u2019s Land Use Committee, some members criticized a lack of transparency and potential self-dealing by the nonprofits, given that they were slated to receive the anti-displacement funds, and warned against using the term \u201cCommunity Benefits Agreement.\u201d<\/p>\n Jay Marcus, then the FAC\u2019s director of real estate, acknowledged that other agreements they\u2019d negotiated had had more community involvement.\u00a0<\/p>\n FAC and IMPACCT, slated to be hired as administering and marketing agents for the affordable housing, would partner with the community board to recruit potential tenants, to ensure they contacted the \u201chardest-to-reach people,\u201d Marcus predicted at the time.<\/p>\n The nonprofits also wanted CB 8 to review how anti-displacement funds would be used to protect vulnerable tenants. After Marcus pledged that FAC and IMPACCT would return to CB 8 \u201cbefore 50 percent construction completion,\u201d committee member Mimi Mitchell, also a Crown Heights Tenant Union member, pushed him to do so earlier, citing ongoing displacement, especially of Black and brown tenants.<\/p>\n Neither of those things happened. (Marcus left FAC at the end of 2023.) In the 2025 renegotiation, FAC and IMPACCT agreed to let Pariente use a different company, Williamsburg-based Reside New York, to market the affordable units, as long as the cost was lower and they could not match it.<\/p>\n Reside New York<\/a> operates citywide and, while it markets units at various income tiers, states that \u201cour goal is to assist middle income earners.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cI think partly it\u2019s an acknowledgment that things have gotten harder and more expensive to do,\u201d said de la Uz regarding the switch, noting that FAC had both hired Reside New York and worked with it in the past. As to anti-displacement funding, she noted, \u201cThe city\u2019s doing more on that front.\u201d<\/p>\n Asked to comment, CB 8 member Mitchell said, \u201cNot only did that [promised] follow-up never happen, but an entirely new deal was renegotiated without our input! Regardless of assumed benefits or drawbacks of this new deal, this undermines trust.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe need for anti-displacement resources\u2014especially tenant representation in housing court\u2014is extremely urgent and far exceeds what\u2019s available,\u201d she observed.<\/p>\n Curious reticence at CB 8<\/p>\n Pariente has had a good relationship with Community Board 8, signing an agreement, which has been honored, with the board\u2019s nonprofit affiliate for an earlier spot rezoning in the district. A joint press release<\/a> in August 2020 listed both Pariente and Gib Veconi, head of the board\u2019s M-CROWN subcommittee, as contacts.<\/p>\n Since the revision of terms with FAC and IMPACCT, Pariente and his land-use counsel, Richard Lobel, have returned to Community Board 8, gaining support for applications under the city\u2019s FRESH program to house supermarkets at the two Atlantic Avenue developments, allowing for a residential bonus and enabling 19-story buildings rather than 17-story ones, as initially planned.<\/p>\n They, however, did not inform CB 8 of the change in affordability. Nor did the nonprofits. With neither CB 8 nor city housing officials responsible for enforcement, neither apparently pressed for clarity. (This reporter was alerted after counting the number of units published in the city\u2019s Housing Connect listings, which advertise affordable housing lotteries.)<\/p>\n In June 2024, seven months before the agreements were formally renegotiated, Pariente\u2019s lawyer, Lobel, asked CB 8 to support the FRESH bonus at Prosper Brooklyn. Asked about affordability numbers, Lobel said there\u2019d be 47 affordable units at 40 percent AMI, under MIH Option 3. (While that was more apartments at that income band than Hudson had negotiated, Lobel didn\u2019t mention units at the other required income bands.)<\/p>\n Veconi, according to board minutes<\/a>, \u201creminds the board that this applicant is delivering more than is required under MIH.\u201d Queried by City Limits, Veconi said, \u201cI believe I assumed at the time that the terms CM Hudson had negotiated were still in effect, and that the comment about MIH 3 was not accurate.\u201d<\/p>\n CB 8\u2019s June 2025 board minutes<\/a> cite member concerns about the supermarket\u2019s affordability at Eight80, as well as questions about how deliveries might work. The FRESH residential bonus, they were told, would create three more affordable units, but there\u2019s no mention of the 35 percent requirement. CB 8 Land Use Chair Sharon Wedderburn didn\u2019t respond to requests for comment.<\/p>\n \u201cHad CB 8 had been a party to the CBA for these buildings, I assume the developer would have brought the issue to it,\u201d Veconi observed in response to City Limits\u2019 query. \u201cA modification of terms would have been voted on by the general membership, providing transparency missing from the process you\u2019ve described.\u201d<\/p>\n The bottom line<\/p>\n To Hudson, the overall package\u2014including the AAMUP, these buildings, and the planned 100 percent affordable project FAC and IMPACCT are planning\u2014is \u201ca major success for Brooklynites and a meaningful commitment beyond MIH.\u201d<\/p>\n She noted that she\u2019d secured $1.2 million to fund tenant and legal assistance in her district office and millions in funding for District 35 residents in city programs to support tenant organizing, homeownership support, and anti-harassment tenant protections.<\/p>\n Hudson, de la Uz, and Robinson all cite a commitment to deep affordability in a district where displacement, especially of Black residents, has accelerated.<\/p>\n In private negotiations, though, assessing the balance between project viability and public resources remains a challenge. No one compared Pariente\u2019s provision of affordable housing, the additional $3.6 million he committed, and the rising cost of financing to the value of his upzoning.<\/p>\n Similar questions plague the far larger Atlantic Yards project nearby, where a much-promoted Community Benefits Agree\u2014supposed to guarantee community commitments but signed by mostly fledgling nonprofits\u2014ran aground<\/a>. So did a seemingly enforceable affordable housing commitment<\/a> signed by New York State with BrooklynSpeaks, a coalition led by de la Uz and Veconi.<\/p>\n Today, Empire State Development, the state authority that oversees\/shepherds the project, is negotiating subsidies and project contours with the new Atlantic Yards development team. Also awaited: a credible structure to oversee new public promises.<\/p>\n To reach the editor, contact [email\u00a0protected]<\/a><\/p>\n![\"Atlantic](\"https:\/\/citylimits.org\/wp-content\/plugins\/trx_addons\/components\/lazy-load\/images\/placeholder.png\")
The two buildings recently constructed by Elie Pariente, with Eight80 in the foreground and Prosper Brooklyn in the background, for now dwarf their neighbors on the south side of Atlantic Avenue in Prospect Heights and Crown Heights. (Norman Oder)<\/p>\n<\/p>\nA description of the affordable project on FAC\u2019s website. (Screenshot)<\/p>\nOne of the rental projects at 880 Atlantic Ave., dubbed Eight80. (City Limits\/Adi Talwar)<\/p>\n