Rivington Co. Plans 99 Units in FiDi Conversion

31 October 2025

Rivington Company is eyeing a new apartment building at its new Financial District development site.

At its newly acquired 140 Fulton St, Rivington is planning 99 apartment units and 12,300 square feet of commercial space on the site, according to its website. The finished building is slated to span 136,800 square feet.

Developments of just under 100 units have become more common as city tax incentives make smaller buildings more attractive. The city’s 485-x program offers a tax abatement for multifamily construction, but buildings with 100 or more units need to pay higher construction wages to take part in the program. Those wages, at $40 per hour, are high enough to affect how projects pencil out. Rivington did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The firm paid $26.4 million through a shell company for the lot at 140 Fulton Street. The entity also borrowed $17.4 million from G4 Capital Partners. The seller was Bank Hapoalim. The Commercial Observer was the first to report the trade.

The transaction is the latest in a saga over the property.

In 2018, an entity connected to Hidrock Properties purchased the site from Raymond Gindi. Hidrock paid $19.8 million for No. 140, along with $21.2 million for the adjacent No. 142, which is a five-unit rental building.

The next year, the developer borrowed $32.8 million from Bank Hapoalim, hoping to construct a hotel. Hidrock, which is connected to the Hidary family, filed building permits for the lot.

But the hotel was never built. In 2022, the bank filed a foreclosure suit, alleging the borrower failed to meet the loan’s maturity deadline despite three extensions. The total on the loan was now $35 million, according to Bank Hapoalim. The borrower countersued a few months later, claiming it was wrongly placed in default. The bank was successful, winning a $39.2 million judgement.

An auction was scheduled, but Bank Hapoalim agreed to wait another year for Hidrock to market the property. When no buyer presented themselves, the deed transferred to the bank this January. In June, Bank Hapaolim sued, claiming the Hidarys refused to sign transfer documents. It withdrew the suit a few weeks later when the documents were executed.

Neither Hidrock nor Bank Hapoalim immediately responded to a request for comment.