St. Vincent's on 7th Ave.: To be demolished?

[londonlawyer]

A rumor was posted on curbed.com that this hideous eyesore will be razed. Let's hope so!

http://www.curbed.com/2006_11_vinnie%27s-thumb.jpg

From curbed.com (Dec. 5,2006):

"Rumor going around among residents in surrounding buildings that this St. Vincent's Hospital building (above) at 36 7th Avenue in Greenwich Village completed in the late 80's is about to be taken down and redeveloped." Prime location. Anybody know if the hospital's giving it up?

[lofter1]

That building sits inside the Landmarked (http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/downloads/pdf/maps/greenwich_village.pdf) Greenwich Village Historic District.

Seems to be Zoned (http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/zone/map12c.pdf) C2-6 (upper left corner of the map -- west side of 7th Avenue between 12th & 13th)

[londonlawyer]

That building sits inside the Landmarked (http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/downloads/pdf/maps/greenwich_village.pdf) Greenwich Village Historic District.

Seems to be Zoned (http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/zone/map12c.pdf) C2-6 (upper left corner of the map -- west sdie of 7th Avenue between 12th & 13th)

What does the zoning to which you refer mean? There's a nice, post-1980 brick building with a Victorian turret near this. I'd like to see something like that rise on this site. To borrow your term, Lofter, this building is a true POS.

[MidtownGuy]

No it isn't. I like this building. It's distinctive and interesting, and it's been around long enough to become part of the fabric of that area. That ugly photo is a poor and unflattering representation.
When your walking up seventh avenue and see it you know exactly where you are. A landmark. I have many fond memories of hanging out in that area and it's part of the place.
But, I suppose with the imminent (and shameful) closing of St. Vincents, you are probably right that this will be redeveloped. I'm not saying it's gorgeous, but it's better than a lot of monstrosities from that time. I just wouldn't call it a POS and call for it's razing.

[ASchwarz]

St. Vincents in the Village isn't closing. The Midtown site might be consolidated.

Condos and street-level retail on this site would be fantastic. Selling the site could help St. Vincents improve its Greenwich Village campus.

This monstrosity needs to go.

[londonlawyer]

No it isn't. I like this building. It's distinctive and interesting....

To each his own. I find it horrific.

[ManhattanKnight]

completed in the late 80's is about to be taken down and redeveloped."

Actually, this went up in 1964, as the headquarters of the National Maritime Union, AFL-CIO (hence the porthole motif), designed by the same architects who were responsible for the union's similarly-fenestrated Joseph Curran Annex at 8th Avenue/16-17th Streets (now the Maritime Hotel). Since St. Vinnie's is in Chapter 11, I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's trying to raise some cash.

[londonlawyer]

Actually, this went up in 1964....

That makes sense. This does not look like a building from the 80's.

[MidtownGuy]

I agree about retail being nice, but if it's another cookie-cutter-condo-tower-POS like the ones that mushroomed along sixth in the 20's or in every other nabe of this city, no thanks. I'll take this interesting period piece which lends its own point of visual singularity to the urban fabric. Plus, I would bet $100 bucks we just get another bank branch or the same chain store that exists 3 blocks away somewhere if they replace it. Big deal. I'd rather keep suffering the ordeal of one less Duane Reade or Wachovia along that stretch and keep a piece of 60's architecture in the stew.

[ManhattanKnight]

http://www.agnosticaanyc.org/otoole.jpg

I rather like this quirky building and, given Landmark's record at the intersection at which it sits, hope that it isn't destroyed. The Commission permitted the Loew's Sheridan theater, immediately to the south, to be demolished in 1970 and, many years later, to be replaced by St. Vinnie's characterless Materials Handling Center. Across 7th Avenue, it allowed the hospital to raze the stately Elizabeth Bayley Seton Building and replace with the hulking brick box that's spoiled the intersection ever since. If there is a POS in this immediate neighborhood (other than those owned by the hospital), I'd nominate Londonlawyer's favorite with the "Victorian turret."

In its Greenwich Village Historic District Designation Report (1969), Landmarks says of this building:

The large five-story building of the National Maritime Union of America is a striking contemporary structure. . . . The main portion of this building fronting on the Avenue is a glistening white, built above two curving glass-block walls. It has two overhangs at the top floors which are dramatized by their scalloped edge profiles. Those overhangs produce an interesting play of light and shade. The rectangularized pattern of the jointing of the stone veneer lends a new dimension to the building, making us double aware of the various wall planes. Bubble-shaped covers of plexiglas serve to display ship models around the base, outside the glass block walls. Behind this main mass a six-story section rises up, extending through from street to street.

[ryan]

There will come a time when people regret all the mid-century architecture we're losing right now. Just like we love the Victorian buildings our parents and grandparents hated, later generations will value your hideous eyesore.

[krulltime]

St. Vincent's considers building sales


By Tim Moran
December 5, 2006

Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers is considering selling off parts of its Manhattan campus, hospital officials have said.

According to Michael Fagan, spokesperson for the beleaguered hospital system that last year filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, St. Vincent's has retained the service of real estate advisory firm CIT to help them evaluate all options at their Downtown campus, anchored on West 12th Street and Seventh Avenue in Greenwich Village.

"Currently, we're keeping all of the options on the table as we look to modernize our facilities," Fagan said. "As part of our plan to update, we've retained CIT to help us consider the whole hospital in Greenwich Village, how to best utilize space and how to best make infrastructure improvements."

Fagan said that St. Vincent would consult with area residents and city officials before making final decisions on whether to sell or refit any of its buildings.

The news comes a week after a state panel recommended that St. Vincent's consider selling off real estate assets at its Midtown campus in Hell's Kitchen.


Copyright © 2003-2005 The Real Deal.

[londonlawyer]

I have always hated this building with a passion. I really hope that it's razed and replaced with a lowrise, brick structure.

[Fabrizio]

Its just soooo ugly.

But it IS 1964. Doesnt anyone see an asthetic similarity to 2 Columbus? It was the year of the Worlds Fair... a sea of white architecture...and a time of white futuristic fashion:

Compare this P. Cardin dress with the building (Couregges sunglasses and 1964 cut-out boots follow):

[londonlawyer]

...Doesnt anyone see an asthetic similarity to 2 Columbus?...

I thought that, but Two Columbus Circle is much more elegant. This is a squat box.

[ablarc]

There will come a time when people regret all the mid-century architecture we're losing right now. Just like we love the Victorian buildings our parents and grandparents hated, later generations will value your hideous eyesore.
That's right; this building shows the same stylistic tendencies (questioning of Bauhaus Modernism) as its exact contmporary, 2 Columbus Circle, now lost.

When I lived in the Village, I saw it in the same light as MidtownGuy.

[londonlawyer]

There will come a time when people regret all the mid-century architecture we're losing right now. Just like we love the Victorian buildings our parents and grandparents hated, later generations will value your hideous eyesore.

I don't think so. There are buildings from every period that are simply mistakes. This is one of them in my opinion. Nevertheless, while I am not a fan of 50's and 60's architecture, they're obviously are some very nice white brick buildings from that period. From my perspective, however, this is not one of them.

[infoshare]

My sister was working in this building last year: I used to visit here there once in awile. See told me her co-workers refered to this building as the "Teeth Building".

Very appropriate metaphor .... because that building really (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=134246&postcount=6) BITES! (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=134244&postcount=5):cool:

http://img466.imageshack.us/img466/6954/sthumbbi5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[pianoman11686]

There are buildings from every period that are simply mistakes.

And to think...most of them were probably designed by architects who "knew what they were doing." Makes you wonder how today's buildings will be judged 50 years from now.

[krulltime]

So hopefully they destroy that horrible building across the street and half a block south...



http://wtc911.online.fr/photos/LowRes/IMG_2140.jpg

http://www.cbcooke.com/cb_wtc_vigils/images/09-15-01_a-wtc_vigils022.jpg

[infoshare]

And to think...most of them were probably designed by architects who "knew what they were doing." Makes you wonder how today's buildings will be judged 50 years from now.


Possible (http://www.constructingexcellence.org.uk/) solution? (http://www.salford.gov.uk/council/corporate/urbanvision/ds-rethinking.htm):confused:

Excerpt from website - "Move away from traditional ways of doing business, which are restrictive and confrontational" This is just one of many good ideas that I found in this report!

[krulltime]

Ok here is the whole building...

http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/sixwm/2003/08/208572.jpg

http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2001/06/107613.jpg


Here is a big shot of the emergency entrance...

http://www.savedmemories.com/photo/250/DSCN1512b.jpg


I always hated this building. Hopefully this one will go!

[Fabrizio]

There is art to the white building, so like it or not, there are valid reasons for saving it. But no ones going to get sentimental over the brick thing across the street...although I did pass out one day and had to be taken there. (back in the late 70s it was pretty normal to pass out now and then.)

[stache]

My Dr. is in the tooth building.

[MidtownGuy]

The brown brick one truly is a POS.

[lofter1]

^^^ methinks it defines POS

[antinimby]

So which one are they talking about here?

Is it the white one or the red brick one?

The article on Real Deal (http://www.therealdeal.net/) seems to indicate that it's the brick one.

[lofter1]

Sounds like they are considering any and all of the SV Hospital buildings in the Village ...

St. Vincent's has retained the service of real estate advisory firm CIT to help them evaluate all options at their Downtown campus, anchored on West 12th Street and Seventh Avenue in Greenwich Village.

"Currently, we're keeping all of the options on the table as we look to modernize our facilities," Fagan said. "As part of our plan to update, we've retained CIT to help us consider the whole hospital in Greenwich Village, how to best utilize space and how to best make infrastructure improvements."

Fagan said that St. Vincent's would consult with area residents and city officials before making final decisions on whether to sell or refit any of its buildings.

[BrooklynRider]

The brown one on the corner of 11th & 7th Ave (the one containing the emergency room) has had major renovations inside and serves a major trauma center in the city (which I think is due to be renovated as the "Rudolph Giuliani Trauma Center"). I doubt it is going anywhere. It is ugly, but I've had a few stays there and some floors are actually very nice.

[stache]

It was the main triage building on 9/11. I think they will keep it open just in case.

[ASchwarz]

That newish brown bldg is the main hospital and will obviously stay open. The issue is the lowrise 60's crap across the street.

[Front_Porch]

Isn't the squatness a function of the fact that it's a hospital, though? Do you really want to be hauling sick people up and down a high-rise?

[lofter1]

St. Vincent's out-patient services also operates out of a low-rise building on the NW corner of 8th Avenue / W. 23rd Street -- not sure if they own that property, though.

[londonlawyer]

Isn't St. Vincents in the Village where Woody Allen went for a "minah surgical proceduh" and woke up 100 "yeaahs latah" (in Sleeper)?

[stache]

St. Vincent's out-patient services also operates out of a low-rise building on the NW corner of 8th Avenue / W. 23rd Street -- not sure if they own that property, though.

I doubt if they own it. That space used to be a café.

[krulltime]

Greenwich Village Hospital Opts for Smaller but More Efficient


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/02/10/nyregion/10vincents_600_span.gif
St. Vincent’s plans to demolish the O’Toole Building, build a new facility there and sell most of its old
buildings across Seventh Avenue.


By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA
Published: February 10, 2007

St. Vincent’s Hospital in Greenwich Village plans to build an entirely new hospital, probably across the street from its current site, and then sell most of its valuable real estate on Seventh Avenue to a developer.

The plan, outlined in papers filed last night with a federal bankruptcy court and in interviews with hospital officials, would create a rare opening for redevelopment of a large chunk of property in the Village, some of the priciest real estate in the country.

The hospital, which filed for bankruptcy in 2005, said the move would be part of an effort to create a smaller, more efficient facility. Like many struggling hospitals in New York City, St. Vincent’s has found that its most valuable asset — the land it sits on — could be the key to its recovery.

St. Vincent’s strategy, which would consolidate several outmoded buildings into a single, more compact one, reflects the transformation of New York’s shrinking hospital industry. Financial problems have prevented needed modernization, and state officials and some hospital executives want to replace aging structures with ones that are more efficient and more attractive to patients and doctors.

Proposing to build a completely new hospital, for an estimated $600 million, is a bold, confident stroke for St. Vincent’s, which has lost money for several years. The company’s plan for emerging from bankruptcy over the next few months, filed with the court yesterday, contained the first public disclosure of its real estate plans.

The hospital would start building its new home before parting with the old one, which could be a calculated risk. It could mean having to spend heavily on construction before cashing in on the real estate.

But Alfred E. Smith IV, who became the St. Vincent’s chairman last fall, said, “I don’t think it’s a stretch in any way.” The greater gamble, he said, would be to keep the existing hospital and try to modernize it. The project, which is only in the preliminary planning stage, will take at least five years to complete.

There is likely to be neighborhood opposition to the new hospital and to replacing the old one with residential or commercial buildings. Both sites are in a landmark district, and the new hospital would be much bigger than what is allowed under current zoning, so special permissions would be required from multiple city agencies.

“The last three years have been really hard on this institution in a negative way,” said Guy Sansone, chief executive officer of St. Vincent Catholic Medical Centers, the nonprofit company that owns the hospital. “The next three will also be hard on this institution, but in a positive way.”

St. Vincent’s has sold or closed the money-losing hospitals it owned in other boroughs, reduced its administrative staff and renegotiated contracts with health insurers and vendors on more favorable terms. It has operated in the black in recent months, and officials hope to turn a modest profit in the coming years.

The bulk of the hospital, with more than 800,000 square feet of space, occupies much of the block between Seventh and Sixth Avenues and 11th and 12th Streets. It consists of many connected buildings, some dating to the 1930s, with a mazelike layout that is far more expensive to heat, light and cool than newer buildings are.

St. Vincent’s once operated more than 700 inpatient beds, but today it has about 450. Its low ceilings, narrow halls, odd floor plans and outdated building materials, hospital officials say, make it hard to accommodate some new equipment, or to convert wards to new uses. Few patients get private rooms, a common feature in newer hospitals that is seen as essential to drawing patients.

In November, a state commission drafted a plan, which has since become law, to downsize New York’s hospital industry, with orders to close, merge or shrink dozens of hospitals and nursing homes. None of those plans directly involve St. Vincent’s Hospital, but most of them point in the direction St. Vincent’s wants to go — toward fewer, newer, more efficient hospital buildings.

Across Seventh Avenue from the main hospital complex, between 12th and 13th Streets, sits the O’Toole Building, an old union hall that St. Vincent’s acquired in 1973, which now contains more than 180,000 square feet of outpatient clinics and offices. The most likely proposal, St. Vincent’s officials say, would be to demolish the O’Toole Building, and build a hospital on the site with 500,000 or more square feet of space.

The hospital would sell most of the main complex east of Seventh Avenue, Mr. Sansone said, but probably not all of it.

“To have big sites like that come available in the West Village, where there would be a tremendous demand for residential, it’s extremely rare,” said Daniel F. Sciannameo, president of the Albert Valuation Group, a major Manhattan real estate appraiser.

“In this market, even as shells that someone would knock down, I think they could get $250 or $300 million, at least,” he said.


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/02/09/nyregion/0210-met-webX-VINCENT.gif


Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

[Derek2k3]

Prepare to hear Berman blathering on in an article soon...

[lofter1]

IMO this is an instance where the interests of the community (via a viable, working and sustainable medical facility) should be given great consideration over the desire to save one building -- in this case the O'Toole building which is admittedly an interesting structure but apparently doesn't serve the purpose for which it is being used.

The horrid brown brick abomination that St. Vincent's built across the street in the '80s would hardly be missed by anyone -- especially if a better medical facility was the result of that eyesore coming down. Anyone who has had the misfortune of being inside that hospital knows what a mess this group of mis-matched buildings has become.

Hopefully SV will come up with a terrific design for the O'Toole site -- and whoever buys the site across 7th Avenue will find a way to develop that plot so that it honors the spirit of the GV Historic District.

Currently that intersection above Greenwich / 7th is a fairly gnarly visual experience.

[ablarc]

... New York’s shrinking hospital industry...
Population's not declining.

Are folks ailing less?

Do they go to Jersey to get sick?

Shorter hospital stays?

[ZippyTheChimp]

Fear of the medical profession.

[lofter1]

Insurance companies.

[ablarc]

Insurance companies.
That's why U.S. is #47 in life expectancy.

Think about it: folks live longer in 46 other countries.

[londonlawyer]

Although 15 to 20% of Americans don't have health care, the US still pays a greater percentage of its GDP on health care than EU countries do.

[MidtownGuy]

Our health care system is a disgrace, a shame upon our nation. People in other countries that I speak with think it's barbaric, the lack of coverage, the drug prices jacked up for us, and sold at lower prices to others. People going to Emegency rooms because they have a sore throat or cough, it's just terrible.

[ablarc]

Although 15 to 20% of Americans don't have health care, the US still pays a greater percentage of its GDP on health care than EU countries do.
True.

Change the first word and your statement grows truer still:

"Because 15 to 20% of Americans don't have health care, the US still pays a greater percentage of its GDP on health care than EU countries do."

[pianoman11686]

Manhattan Developer for Hospital Site

By MANHATTAN: DEVELOPER FOR HOSPITAL SITE
Published: May 17, 2007

The Rudin family has been selected as the developer for a site on Seventh Avenue owned and occupied by St. Vincent’s Hospital, which is relocating, hospital officials announced yesterday. Under the plan, the hospital will move from its current location, on Seventh Avenue between 11th and 12th Streets, to Seventh Avenue between 12th and 13th Streets, said Michael Fagan, a hospital spokesman. He said a modern hospital would replace the current collection of buildings. Once the new building is open, the current site will be redeveloped and the Rudins will pay St. Vincent’s an amount to be determined in part by the type of project approved by the city, Mr. Fagan said. He said the money would go toward the cost of the new hospital, estimated at $650 million.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

[antinimby]

Here's some more coverage from cityrealty.com on the subject.

But you really need to check out what GVSHP has to say with respect to the hospital's plans:

St. Vincent's Hospital selects Rudin family for redevelopment

16-MAY-07

The Saint Vincent Medical Centers announced today that they had selected the Rudin family as a development partner for a new hospital facility on the site of the Edward and Theresa O'Toole Medical Services Building on the northwest corner of 12th Street and Seventh Avenue.

When the new facility is built, the hospital will vacate its properties on the east side of Seventh Avenue between 11th and 12th Streets and those sites will be developed by the Rudin family "primarily for residential use."
The announcement said that the hospital will submit its plans for the Landmarks Preservation Commission and the City Planning Commission.

Saint Vincent is the academic medical center of the New York Medical College and it is sponsored by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Brooklyn and the president of the Sisters of Charity of New York.

The O'Toole building was built in 1964 as the National Maritime Union of America Building and was designed by Albert C. Ledner & Associates. It was described by Norval White and Elliot Willensky in their book, "The A. I. A. Guide to New York City, Third Edition," as a "double-dentured monument" and is notable for its nautical motif.

In 1984, the hospital demolished its very handsome, Georgian-style Elizabeth Bayley Seton Building that had been designed by Schikel & Ditmars and replaced it with a brutalist structure designed by Ferrenz, Taylor, Clark & Associates. It also replaced the Loew's Sheridan movie theater, the major movie house in Greenwich Village, with a truck facility at the intersection of Seventh and Greenwich Avenues.

William C. Rudin, a managing partner in the Rudin family holdings, said in the hospital's announcement that "Together we will help St. Vincent's Hospital build a new, 21st Street, environmentally friendly, state of the art, health care facility," adding that "This partnership allows the hospital to serve its ever-growing community and continue to fulfill its mission for the next 150 years."

The announcement said the hospital "anticipates emerging from Bankruptcy court protection this summer with a healthy balance sheet and up-to-date financial systems and controls," adding that it "is filing a motion today that seeks authority from the Bankruptcy Court to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Rudin family."

The Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation sent the hospital a letter May 10 urging that there "should be no increase in overall density on the properties currently occupied by St. Vincents, and in fact a decrease in density would be desirable." It also said that the design of new developments should "be compatible in design and scale with the Greenwich Village Historic District," adding tht the "triangle bounded by Greenwich Avenue, West 12th Street and 7th Avenue should not be built upon."

Copyright © 1994-2007 CITY REALTY.COM INC.

[pianoman11686]

^Sweet.

[antinimby]

Now I know you are just being sarcastic pianoman, right?

[pianoman11686]

Let me put it this way: I wouldn't shed a tear if Andrew Berman and his crew at the society altogether packed up their bags and vacated the city.

[antinimby]

Whew! For moment there, I thought we had lost you over to the dark side...:D

[eddhead]

I stayed at st vincent's a few years back.. nothing serious i had foot reconstruction surgey and as a result of some minor post-op complications wound up staying there for about a week. I must say, the care was very good.

Regardless of what happens to the buildings, I hope the medical needs of the community are not compromised as a result of moving to a "smaller more effifient" operation and tearing down the existing facility. Afterall the building'rs primary purpose is function not aesthetics.

[pianoman11686]

Critics have 2nd opinion on hospital’s building plan

By Lincoln Anderson
The Villager (http://thevillager.com/villager_213/criticshave2nd.html)
Volume 76, Number 53 | May 30 - June 5, 2007

http://thevillager.com/villager_213/coleman.gif
The 300,000-square-foot Coleman Pavilion,
built in 1982, is part of the existing St.
Vincent’s Hospital campus on Seventh
Ave. S. that would be demolished under
the hospital’s rebuilding plan. This
property would be slated for private
residential development by the Rudin
Management Company.

St. Vincent’s Hospital sees in its future a sleek, state-of-the-art hospital building with operating rooms spacious enough to accommodate robots and imaging machines and with wireless communications to automatically transmit patient information written on clipboards to central computers.

But neighbors anxiously envision an enormous new hospital tower and private mega-development project that will dramatically transform Greenwich Village. In short, neighbors have a second opinion: They want St. Vincent’s to reconsider its plan.

Two weeks ago, St. Vincent’s announced that it has selected Rudin Management Company as a development partner for its new hospital project.

“St. Vincent’s chose the Rudin family because of its longstanding commitment to New York City,” said Alfred E. Smith, IV, chairperson of the board of directors of St. Vincent’s Catholic Medical Centers. “They are recognized as a responsible developer and outstanding corporate citizen. The partnership will provide us some of the needed resources to build a new St. Vincent’s for the next century.”

St. Vincent’s hopes to emerge from bankruptcy this summer. While the development plan would help St. Vincent’s construct a new building and ensure the hospital’s long-term viability, it has no connection to the hospital’s emergence from bankruptcy, according to Michael Fagan, a hospital spokesperson.

St. Vincent’s wants to build a new $600 million building on the site of its existing O’Toole Building — which would be demolished — on Seventh Ave. S. between 12th and 13th Sts. After the new facility is completed, St. Vincent’s would vacate its roughly 10 current hospital buildings on the east side of Seventh Ave. S. between 12th and 11th Sts. and the south side of 12th St. between Seventh Ave. S. and Sixth Ave. Then, in a demolition project of major proportions, these buildings all would be razed, after which the sites would be developed primarily for residential use. The plan allows the hospital to remain fully operational at all times.

Renovating the existing buildings just isn’t feasible, according to the hospital.

St. Vincent’s says the need for a new “hospital of the future” is made even more pressing by population growth in its West Side catchment area: Residential development is booming in West Chelsea, the far West Village and the Hudson Yards, meaning more patient visits.

St. Vincent’s projects 10,000 more annual emergency-room patient visits in just a couple of years.

Also, the possible loss of Cabrini Hospital on E. 19th St. and St. Vincent’s Midtown Hospital (the former St. Clare’s) on W. 51st St. has St. Vincent’s anticipating having to pick up the slack. At the end of last year, the Berger Commission — a state panel charged with making recommendations on hospital closures — recommended pulling the plug on both Cabrini and St. Vincent’s Midtown. That would make St. Vincent’s the only hospital on the West Side between Greenwich Village and W. 59th St.

“We’re really at the very early stages of this project in determining how best to meet the healthcare needs of the people we serve Downtown and on the Lower West Side,” said Fagan. “We haven’t even engaged an architecture firm yet. This is a project where we’ve come to the community early. Being in the Village for 150 years, we’re really mindful about building a hospital that is consistent with the fabric of our historic neighborhood.”

A St. Vincent’s Community Working Group has been meeting since January to discuss the project and make recommendations. The group includes representatives of neighboring residents, local politicians and the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, as well as other local healthcare organizations, like Village Care of New York and the L.G.B.T. Community Center.

Too tall on O’Toole

The sentiment in the working group’s first four meetings has been concern over what would happen if St. Vincent’s tries to mass all its hospital facilities on one small site, while opening up the area east of Seventh Ave. S. for private development.

Although the hospital would be reducing its total space by about 200,000 square feet, the new main hospital building would be significantly bigger than the existing O’Toole Building. A former maritime union hall with nautical-style porthole windows, O’Toole is only six stories tall, with about 175,000 square feet of space.

Andrew Berman, director of G.V.S.H.P., said that if, as St. Vincent’s has stated at the working group meetings, it wants the new building to be 600,000 to 650,000 square feet, it would be an overly large tower that would stick out like a sore thumb.

“In order to put 600,000 to 650,000 square feet on that [O’Toole] site, it would either have to be a 17-story building that rises straight up — which is huge — or, if it had setbacks, it would be even taller,” Berman said.

Berman and residents of nearby buildings have organized a coalition on the St. Vincent’s project.

“This coalition says that is too big,” the G.V.S.H.P. director said of the planned hospital tower.

“We aren’t at the point where we can say it’s going to be a 17-story building going straight up on the O’Toole site,” Fagan said. “I think it would be premature for us to say exactly how tall the building would be. We need to do a bed-need analysis as well as programs and service analysis.”

Fagan said there’s the possibility of putting some of the new building underground. But he said, at this point, he couldn’t specify how much of the building that might include.

Berman and neighbors are also concerned about the new hospital building’s aesthetics in terms of fitting into the area, which is part of the landmarked Greenwich Village Historic District.

“I am confident that they know that an undulating glass tower would not fly in this neighborhood,” Berman noted.

Prescribing contextuality

In fact, Fagan said, St. Vincent’s recently started meeting with architecture firms about the project, all of whom have shown sensitivity to the neighborhood and have stressed that the new building must be contextual with its surroundings.

“We will choose, ultimately, a firm that is most sensitive to the community,” Fagan assured. “This is what we’ve conveyed to them.”

The project would have to undergo a review by the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission.

St. Vincent’s also would need to rezone the O’Toole site and do a large-scale development plan for the sites east of Seventh Ave. S. A large-scale development plan allows zoning bulk to be shifted among nonadjacent lots within the development site. All these changes would need to be approved by the Department of City Planning and undergo the city’s uniform land-use review procedure, which would include a public review by Community Board 2.

As for why a brand-new hospital building is needed, Dr. George Neuman, St. Vincent’s medical director of perioperative services and chief of anesthesiology, said changes in healthcare demand it.

“There have been tremendous advances in technology and in how a hospital should operate and in the actual environment of a hospital,” said Neuman, who oversees all St. Vincent’s operating rooms.

For example, he said, new surgical techniques — like robots and imaging machines — have been introduced in the last 25 to 30 years, requiring 50 percent larger operating rooms.

The hospital also wants to make all its patient rooms single bed as opposed to double bed. It would try to put in as many so-called universal rooms as possible; these rooms have special equipment that folds out and folds away, allowing a patient to spend his or her whole stay in one room, rather than being shuffled about. Keeping stays to one room improves efficiency, cuts down on length of stays and makes it less confusing for family visitors, Neuman said.

Also, there are stricter standards on the number of air changes per minute throughout the whole hospital, which the new building would meet, Neuman added. Water quality also would be improved, enhancing the ability to quickly heat up water to where bacteria is killed. The building would have more natural light. Materials — furniture, fixtures, new flooring and wall treatments — that prevent growth of bacteria would be installed, Neuman said.

In addition, the new hospital building would have wireless communications, linking doctors’ and nurses’ clipboards to a central data bank.

“The public deserves this,” Neuman said. “They deserve state-of-the-art care and to have this in their neighborhood.”

Keep hospital healthy

Maria Passannante Derr, C.B. 2 chairperson, agreed better hospital facilities are needed. She noted that Coleman, St. Vincent’s main building on Seventh Ave. S., was built in 1982.

“The city is in desperate need of a state-of-the-art hospital,” Derr said. “This facility, as a Level 1 trauma facility, is critical to the rest of the city.” St. Vincent’s is one of only two Level 1 trauma facilities in the city, Derr said.

On a personal note, Derr said the hospital should also upgrade another one of its facilities.

“I would like to see as a giveback to the community the St. Vincent’s Garden,” she said. “It should really be an A-1 community-friendly community garden for people to enjoy. Right now, it’s a hill with a fence around it.”

At C.B. 2’s meeting last Thursday night, Bernadette Kingham, the hospital’s senior vice president, acknowledged the garden has been part of the working group’s discussions.

Also at last Thursday’s C.B. 2 meeting, John Gilbert, Rudin’s chief operations officer, pledged the developer will work with the community.

“To do it with a conversation — that’s the beginning — and to do it with the community,” he said of their intentions. In response to a C.B. 2 member’s question on whether the St. Vincent’s Nurses’ Residence on 12th St. would be knocked down, Gilbert said he couldn’t say yet.

Brad Hoylman, who will succeed Derr as C.B. 2 chairperson in June, said: “There seems to be widespread agreement that the hospital’s mission is very important to the local community. While it is still very early in the planning process, I think the new community board administration anticipates helping find a way that the reorganization plans will benefit both St. Vincent’s and the neighborhood.”

The new hospital building would also be a green building.

Said St. Vincent’s Fagan: “We’re looking at ways we can better conserve water and energy and reduce carbon emissions. It’s something we can give back to the Village.”

Best Rx for community

But Berman and the hospital’s neighbors think the best giveback to the community would be for St. Vincent’s to promise not to increase the overall bulk on its current sites and not to put all its hospital facilities on the O’Toole site, but instead to keep some of its hospital uses on the east side of Seventh Ave. S.

Michael Anastasio, a board member of The Cambridge apartment building, at 175 W. 13th St., is one of the residents working to build a coalition to address St. Vincent’s plans. He admitted it was buildings like his own — 20 stories tall and built in the 1960s — that helped create the Greenwich Village Historic District in 1969.

Anastasio said he not only fears a too-tall new hospital tower but “two walls” — one on the south side of 12th St. and the other on the east side of Seventh Ave. S. — if the development plan goes through. He thinks the hospital just should renovate its existing buildings.

“What they propose to do is entirely to their own benefit,” said Anastasio, who has been attending the working group meetings. “They said they couldn’t sell O’Toole to a developer — it wouldn’t yield enough. It’s all about money. They said they need $350 million to renovate the hospital.”

Anastasio said neighbors watched with interest what happened with the General Theological Seminary’s plans on Ninth Ave., where staunch community opposition recently led the seminary to reduce a planned 17-story tower to seven stories.

“The Theological Seminary in Chelsea — it gave us hope,” he said.

G.V.S.H.P.’s Berman stressed this is a project the likes of which the Greenwich Village Historic District never has seen before.

“Whatever the results are, we’re going to be living with them the rest of our lifetimes and our children will be living with them the rest of their lifetimes, as well,” he said. “Two city blocks in the heart of Greenwich Village. I don’t think any of us contemplated seeing that kind of development in Greenwich Village. This is huge in every respect.”

Fagan agreed the project’s impact will be far-reaching.

“We’re talking about creating a healthcare facility that will treat us and our children — for two generations at least,” he said.

© 2007 Community Media, LLC

[Derek2k3]

These doomsday arguments are getting so tired and the press just seems to love reporting this garbage.

[ASchwarz]

Berman is obviously in bed with the owners of the Villager. Why are his opinions presented as the "community" opinions? His organization (GVSHP) is a one-man organization, except for some paid interns. It doesn't represent the West Village any more then any other group. Berman has no connection with mainstream preservation organizations (Municipal Arts Society, etc.) In fact, he is a joke to some in the preservation community (at least to friends of mine with Masters in Historic Preservation).

Why does nobody have the courage to ignore his rantings? I think it's because of money. GHVSP is a very wealthy organization, as they are funded by some of the wealthiest residents of the West Village. Essentially Berman is a paid attack-dog against those that "threaten" the interests of his benefactors.

I would like to know who owns the Villager and whether they have links to Berman and his benefactors. I would guess that they are very closely linked, as he is front-and-center in at least one article in basically every weekly edition.

The West Village will be a much better place when Berman and his supporters tire of these games and retire to wherever bitter NIMBYs eventually go. Hopefully far from NYC!

[ASchwarz]

I think I'm going to contact the author (Lincoln Anderson) and ask him why this one individual is the focus of every weekly issue. I would like to hear an honest response, though I'm likely dreaming. If he has any journalistic integrity, Anderson will at least acknowledge the connections between Berman and the Villager.

[ManhattanKnight]

^^Attempted character assassination, consisting of gossip, hearsay accusations and guesses, and, probably, outright lies, floating on a sea of bile. No one has to like the GVSHP or Andrew Berman, but feces throwing is no substitute for reasoned analysis and criticism.

[lofter1]

As you describe Berman (if your assertion is indeed correct): How is he any different than any other well financed PR person / lawyer or other mouthpiece hired by the wealthy of NYC and who are quoted in the press ad infinitum (Howard Rubinstein (http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2004/07/15/2/a-conversation-about-public-relations-with-howard-rubinstein) would be Exhibit #1)?

[ASchwarz]

^^Attempted character assassination, consisting of gossip, hearsay accusations and guesses, and, probably, outright lies, floating on a sea of bile. No one has to like the GVSHP or Andrew Berman, but feces throwing is no substitute for reasoned analysis and criticism.

Where exactly is your "reasoned analysis and criticism"? Pot, meet kettle!

I think you're just angry that your fellow forumers actually have opinions that differ from yours. The horror! Maybe next time I will blindly accept everything in the media so you won't be so offended.

One of our current interns at my job worked under Berman two years ago. I know all about the man and his "organization". Please explain how he represents the West Village, or general citywide historical preservation interests? He has no background in historic preservation and his "organization" has no other workers besides interns.

Moreover, I am professionally and personally aquainted with one of his benefactors, who lives (quite well) on Jane Street, near the river. A wonderful and successful man, though he and his partner help fund the GVSHP. Their original reasoning was to keep their water views. So far, their "investment" has been a roaring success. No matter that their relatively new building is exactly the type of building they are attempting to prevent others from constructing.

Now that I have disproven your claims of "hearsay, lies and bile" (well, I'll give you the bile. I love this town and I don't want Berman to do more damage to one of its most special corners), please explain how Berman represents the opinions of West Villager moreso than any other resident??

As an aside, many of their lawsuits are funded by big-time players with different axes to grind. They have even enlisted the United Auto Workers to sue NYU (the suit was immediately thrown out). The UAW wanted to "punish" NYU for refusing to recognize their union on campus. Of course, I'm sure you will ignore all this and just consider this "hearsay, lies and bile". Carry on, no sense in questioning what you're told. I'm sure the UAW really just cares about historic preservation, just like Berman, his "society" and his peerless supporters.

[ASchwarz]

As you describe Berman (if your assertion is indeed correct): How is he any different than any other well financed PR person / lawyer or other mouthpiece hired by the wealthy of NYC and who are quoted in the press ad infinitum (Howard Rubinstein (http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2004/07/15/2/a-conversation-about-public-relations-with-howard-rubinstein) would be Exhibit #1)?

Well, yes, given what I have been told (and I certainly don't know everything about the man) Berman is no different than any other hired gun.

I'm not claiming he's engaging in criminal, or even necessarily unethical, behavior. I just wonder why 1. He is front and center in every issue of the Villager and 2. He is considered the public "voice" of the West Village on all matters relating to development.

After all, there are many prominent and media-savvy people in the Village. Why does Berman dominate every issue and why is he always portrayed as the voice of the "community"? The fact that he is smart, well-funded and media savvy isn't enough. Certainly nobody claims that Donald Trump is the voice of the community. Why does the Villager consistently annoint Berman as the community's voice? Why not at least go to an elected head, such as the city councilperson? Wouldn't that be closer to a community representative?

Similarly, there are many Manhattan organizations that are active in land-use planning issues. Why are downtown planning issues always ending up with commentary or involvement from Berman, rather than commentary or involvement from more established groups? When's the last time MAS was quoted in the Villager?

I will contact the Villager and see if I get a response.

[ZippyTheChimp]

I don't know much about Berman and the G.V.S.H.P., but just reading through some of these remarks:

Please explain how he represents the West Village, or general citywide historical preservation interests? He has no background in historic preservation and his "organization" has no other workers besides interns.

please explain how Berman represents the opinions of West Villager moreso than any other resident??

Well, yes, given what I have been told (and I certainly don't know everything about the man) Berman is no different than any other hired gun.

I'm not claiming he's engaging in criminal, or even necessarily unethical, behavior. I just wonder why 1. He is front and center in every issue of the Villager and 2. He is considered the public "voice" of the West Village on all matters relating to development.

After all, there are many prominent and media-savvy people in the Village. Why does Berman dominate every issue and why is he always portrayed as the voice of the "community"?

Why not at least go to an elected head, such as the city councilperson? Wouldn't that be closer to a community representative?

Similarly, there are many Manhattan organizations that are active in land-use planning issues. Why are downtown planning issues always ending up with commentary or involvement from Berman, rather than commentary or involvement from more established groups? When's the last time MAS was quoted in the Villager?

No one anywhere represents everyone. But if you don't speak, you either agree or don't care. You can't assume otherwise. I refer you to the proposal (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12240) to landmark the "South Village."

The three year study was undertaken by G.V.S.H.P. These reports are expensive. since they involve private property and law, you can't just throw something together and submit it.

The group commissioned Andrew S. Dolkart, associate professor of historic preservation at Columbia University’s School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation.

"The Soho Alliance has signed on as a supporter of the proposed historic district, along with the Central Village, Carmine St., Bedford-Downing, West Houston, Morton St., Vandam St. and Charlton St. block associations."

The Historic Districts Council (http://www.hdc.org/neighborhoodatrisksouthvillage.htm) has included this proposal on their website.

As for enlisting elected officials, where is Tierney and the LPC? It's their job to determine worthy neighborhoods and conduct the research; it seems like G.V.S.H.P. has done the work for them.

So who else speaks for Greenwich Village, NYU?

[ManhattanKnight]

^^You haven't disproven or proven anything. Just more gossip, venom, unsubstantiated factual assertions and a fetid swamp of jealousies and hidden agendas. You've repeatedly said, for example, that only "paid interns" and no staff work for GVSHP. No proof of that then and none now. There couldn't be -- it's not true.

You've been waging a long, sad and often comical campaign against Berman and the GVSHP. Not so long ago, you wrote:

Organizational funding and Berman's salary are provided by wealthy West Villagers/Downtowners intent on controlling neighborhood conditions. Despite the organizational name, he has weak links to traditional historical preservation groups and almost no links to academics/practitioners (such as at Columbia's highly regarded Historic Preservation Program).http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=111247&postcount=219You still haven't named even one of these shadowy "wealthy" benefactors. In reality, GVSHP's financial supporters are numerous and diverse and include the State of New York and groups of unimpeachable integrity and reputation. You've argued that the Society lacks recognition in established historic preservation circles. That's manifestly untrue:

http://www.gvshp.org/honors.htm

Unless you like the look of egg on your face, you shouldn't have mentioned "weak links" to "Columbia's highly regarded Historic Preservation Program." The Society's single largest mission today is advocating for the creation of a South Village Historic District, based largely upon a survey and report commissioned by the Society (and funded by the New York State Council on the Arts and Preservation League of New York State) and prepared by Columbia's Andrew S. Dolkart:

http://gvshp.org/documents/SouthVillageDolkartReportPDF.pdf

Given the LPC's chronic underfunding and current sloth, it falls to groups like the Society to fill the gap. The recent designations of the Gansevoort Market Historic District and the GV HD Extension would never have happened without the Society's dogged and scholarly work, including its commissioning of the neighborhood surveys and reports that were the bases of the LPC's own historic district designation reports.

Like Lofter1, by the way, whom you once accused of being one of "Andrew Berman's acoyltes," a Berman "parrot," and a liar (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?p=111197&highlight=andrew+berman#post111197), I have never met Andrew Berman. I disagree with him as often as I agree (and sure wish that he'd never again denounce "undulating glass" buildings). But your slander-rich, fact-starved tirades against the man and his employer contribute nothing to enlightened discourse or reasoned advocacy.

[stache]

Plus he doesn't do any kind of genuine research.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Who?

[ManhattanKnight]

^Wondering about that myself!

[ASchwarz]

^^You haven't disproven or proven anything. Just more gossip, venom, unsubstantiated factual assertions and a fetid swamp of jealousies and hidden agendas. You've repeatedly said, for example, that only "paid interns" and no staff work for GVSHP. No proof of that then and none now. There couldn't be -- it's not true.

You've been waging a long, sad and often comical campaign against Berman and the GVSHP. Not so long ago, you wrote:

Organizational funding and Berman's salary are provided by wealthy West Villagers/Downtowners intent on controlling neighborhood conditions. Despite the organizational name, he has weak links to traditional historical preservation groups and almost no links to academics/practitioners (such as at Columbia's highly regarded Historic Preservation Program).http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=111247&postcount=219You still haven't named even one of these shadowy "wealthy" benefactors. In reality, GVSHP's financial supporters are numerous and diverse and include the State of New York and groups of unimpeachable integrity and reputation. You've argued that the Society lacks recognition in established historic preservation circles. That's manifestly untrue:

http://www.gvshp.org/honors.htm

You probably shouldn't have mentioned "weak links" to "Columbia's highly regarded Historic Preservation Program." The Society's single largest mission today is advocating for the creation of a South Village Historic District, based largely upon a survey and report commissioned by the Society (and funded by the New York State Council on the Arts and Preservation League of New York State) and prepared by Columbia's Andrew S. Dolkart:

http://gvshp.org/documents/SouthVillageDolkartReportPDF.pdf

Like Lofter1, by the way, whom you once accused of being one of "Andrew Berman's acoyltes," a Berman "parrot," and a liar (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?p=111197&highlight=andrew+berman#post111197), I have never met Andrew Berman. I disagree with him as often as I agree (and sure wish that he'd never again denounce "undulating glass" buildings). But your slander-rich, fact-starved tirades against the man and his employer contribute nothing to enlightened discourse or reasoned advocacy.

Utter nonsense, ManhattanKnight. If you worship at the altar of Berman, say so and be done with it. Don't go off disparaging any forumers who might have opinions different from yours.

You are basically saying that I am unable to comment on any public figure unless I have essentially written an award-winning and independently-verified PhD dissertation on the man and his mission. I fully expect that, going forward, all comments on Wired New York will be limited to fabulously-informed experts who have done years of exhaustive research on the subject matter. Any aesthetic criticism of Sam Chang's hotels, for instance, may only be made by Pritzker Prize winners. Any criticism by any other parties is automatically invalid and must necessarily be motivated by "bile and venom".

My comments on the Columbia School of Historic Preservation are absolutely on-target. I was fortunate to take two classes in the Preservation school in '04 and '05, which is where I learned about Berman's M.O. from real preservationists. The fact that a member of the Columbia faculty is being paid to examine a Berman initiative does not validate his aims in the historic preservation community. Does the fact that Sam Chang has a number of paid architects mean that he is well-regarded in the architectural community?

The South Village landmark initiative is yet another example of Berman's attempts to stop developers and NYU. It has nothing to do with historic preservation. The reason Berman and his supporters are funding the initiative is to stop NYU and private developers from developing sites they already own. I used to live in West 3rd/Thompson and know every building in the area. The neighborhood, as a whole, is not remotely landmark-worthy. It's like every other tenement neighborhood in the city. The reason it is being considered for landmarking is because Berman and his benefactors have a great deal of power, and have cultivated allies on the City Council. Granted, there are individual buildings or clusters of buildings that may be landmark-worthy, but on the whole, there is nothing different in the South Village from every other tenement neighborhood in the city.

NYU is the main target. Berman hopes the previous downzoning + the landmarking will halt any southward growth. I hope Landmarks and Bloomberg stand up to Berman, but it hasn't happened in the past. One can hope.

As for your claims that the GVSHP is not a one man operation funded by wealthy benefactors (along with paid interns), I am not revealing contacts on the Wired New York page. I can email or message you verification, provided I can stay anonymous and you will not distribute or publicly comment on the info. Granted, it is entirely possible that Berman's group has evolved, but I am 100% confident in my contacts regarding his "society" as of a few years back.

[ASchwarz]

Plus he doesn't do any kind of genuine research.


Stache, I fully expect that all your future Wired New York comments will include full academic citations of any claims made.

[pianoman11686]

My problem with Berman is that he's always saying the same thing, no matter what the development. His reach has extended well beyond just Greenwich Village, and beyond the nominal goal of his society for preservation. He now speaks for several different communities, about all kinds of developments that have nothing to do with structures that either are or deserve to be preserved.

Whether his credentials as a preservationist are legitimate, and whether he's viewed by others in the preservationists' community as a good leader, is irrelevant for me. I find it hard to believe that, given the breadth of his involvement, and the level of wealth among the community he's representing, that Berman is functioning solely as a preservationist. What upsets me personally is when he claims to know what's best for the community in situations (like this one) where he has no right to. The hospital has been around for a long time, doubtless longer than the current makeup of the community. The allusion in the article to the Chelsea Seminary preservation battle only upsets me more, because the preservationists there managed to prevent the seminary - a presence in the community for nearly 200 years - from capitalizing on its property in such a way to shore up its finances and carry out necessary renovations. Berman's calling for something similar here, and in my view, it's painfully obvious the hospital's needs should be put above the community's interests.

[Derek2k3]

My issue with Berman and other preservationists is that they often don't come out of the woodwork until new developments surface, costing developers millions. If these structures were so landmark-worthy why not seek to get them designated before a developer comes along to tear it down?

I can understand the average-Joe not knowing what's landmarked and what's not until the scaffolding goes up, but if you have this alleged society dedicated to preserving the architectural merits of a building or area, what the hell were you doing before development plans were drawn up? Apparently Berman's organization is incompetent if they only realize the merits when it's slated for demolition...makes one question their motives.

On their website it states the society was founded to "preserve the architectural heritage and cultural history of the Village." What history will be lost preserving the parking lot at 122 Greenwich? What heritage will be wiped away demolishing St. Vincent Hospital buildings? Apparently anything modern and larger than townhouse will decimate the Village's architectural heritage. His tired arguments always come down to size and the use of glass vs. brick, not even the LPC is so black and white. Can't modern architecture co-exist beautifully with the historic, adding to the area's heritage?

I find it funny that now GVSHP desperately wants to landmark the Silver Towers along with the nondescript supermarket that's part of the complex. Coincidentally NYU is looking at the supermarket site for a new building. Of course we all know that the Silver Towers represent the architectural heritage Berman wants to preserve, right? Please. There's no way in hell they would allow those towers to be built now and are just abusing landmark designation.


Kudos to him for actually getting in early with the St. Vincent's plans, though his no development stance is ill conceived. Why not look at this as an opportunity to create something nice. I'd also commend him on some things like fighting illegal ads and driving for the South Village historic district, but even that seems Nimby driven. Landmark designation shouldn't be a reaction to the real estate market. Fortunately, the Village is already a great place and the new crap that is thrown up often does more harm than good. I guess there's no better place to have an obstructionist...err "preservationist." All in all Berman is an ass and LPC is incompetent.

[stache]

Schwarz figured it out.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Utter nonsense, ManhattanKnight. If you worship at the altar of Berman, say so and be done with it. Don't go off disparaging any forumers who might have opinions different from yours.The way I read his point is that you're advancing opinions as facts. Your comment:
The fact that a member of the Columbia faculty is being paid to examine a Berman initiative does not validate his aims in the historic preservation community. Does the fact that Sam Chang has a number of paid architects mean that he is well-regarded in the architectural community?is based on your OPINION of the proposal to designate the south Village. The FACT is Dalton was hired to produce, not "examine" (your factual error), the report. That you don't like the result is merely your opinion; others may differ.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Schwarz figured it out.I wasn't sure, but i would have guessed ASchwarz.

It seemed to fit.

[BrooklynRider]

My problem with Berman is that he's always saying the same thing, no matter what the development.

Got to agree with that point.

[sfenn1117]

Architect not chosen yet for St. Vincent's rebuilding plans 14-JUN-07

The Greenwich Village Block Associations held a meeting last night at St. Vincent's Hospital to hear a presentation by the hospital on its plans to develop a new hospital facility on the site of the Edward and Theresa O'Toole Medical Services building on the northwest corner of 12th Street and Seventh Avenue and to have the Rudin family redevelop its existing buildings on the east side of Seventh Avenue between 11th and 12th Streets.

Benedette Kingham-Bez, a senior vice president at the hospital, told the meeting that an architect for the building will be chosen in the next four to six weeks and that a strategic planning consultant will be retained in about a month.

The hospital, which was created 149 years ago, now serves as the only trauma center on the West Side from the Battery to 59th Street and that that area is undergoing very significant population growth that requires a 21st Century medical facility..

Most of the speakers at the meeting spoke in opposition to the hospital's plans, questioning whether it had considered other locations, whether it could simply renovate its existing buildings, and whether it could not demolish the O'Toole building, which was built in 1964 as the National Maritime Union of America Building and was designed by Albert C. Ledner & Associates. It was described by Norval White and Elliot Willensky in their book, "The A. I. A. Guide to New York City, Third Edition," as a "double-dentured monument" and is notable for its nautical motif.

A couple of speakers criticized the hospital for not creating a community garden on the site of the Loew's Sheridan movie theater it demolished on the triangular block to the south of the O'Toole Building that is used now as a loading facility by the hospital.

On June 5, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order approving the hospital's plan of reorganization and approving its "memorandum of understanding' with the Rudin family as its development partner.

Dr. George Neuman, the head of the hospital's anesthesiology department, said that a new facility will enable the hospital to have single- rather than double-bedded rooms that are flexible to serve as intensive care, urgent care and regular hospital rooms, and operating rooms that can perform "Advanced Image Guided Surgery." He also emphasized that technology has changed substantially and that the new facility will enable the hospital to have "negative pressure" rooms and greatly improved air exchange systems.
Ms. Kingham-Bez told the meeting that 40 percent of the O'Toole building

was "not useable" and that it was the hospital's "intent to stay in Greenwich Village." She said that its present room count of 723 would be reduced in the new plans.

Andrew Berman, the executive director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, urged that the hospital not to increase its "overall density, and said his organization feels "strongly that the triangle bounded by Greenwich Avenue, West 12th Street, and 7th Avenue should not be built upon, and should serve as more of a public amenity and green space than it currently does, and as had always been promised."

Marlene Nadel challenged the hospital to avoid "greedification" and to include "affordable housing" in its plans, "not Bloomberg style with $60,000 to $100,000 incomes," and "thirty percent" of the units. John Gilbert, the chief operating officer of the Rudin organization, responded that "it is very difficult to create any affordable housing with the amount of money we will pay."
Ms. Kingham-Bez said that the hospital created a community working group and that its plans will have to be approved by the Landmarks Preservation Commission and the City Planning Commission.

http://www.cityrealty.com/new_developments/

[antinimby]

St. Vincent's Unveils Big Building Plans


By ELIZABETH SOLOMONT
Staff Reporter of the Sun
October 11, 2007 (http://www.nysun.com/article/64338)

St. Vincent's Hospital Manhattan disclosed detailed plans yesterday for the $700 million "green" facility it hopes to build that would replace its aging medical center in Greenwich Village.

Ending months of speculation, St. Vincent's outlined plans to construct a 21-story hospital across the street from its facility on Seventh Avenue, on a site between 12th and 13th streets that is occupied by the O'Toole Building.

Together with a plan to raze the old facility and build luxury housing on that site, the 625,000-square-foot hospital would be part of the largest development project in Greenwich Village in 50 years, a phenomenon — and a concern — not lost on nearby residents.

Unlike the public outcry over condominium and hotel developments in recent years, however, this project pits neighbors against a hospital where many have received care.

Concern over a new medical facility also follows an uncertain period for hospitals citywide, after the New York State Commission on Health Care Facilities in the 21st Century last year recommended closure for nine New York hospitals, five in the city.

The construction is also part of a larger reorganization plan conceived by the operator of St. Vincent's, Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers, which emerged from bankruptcy in August.

At the crux of the community's concern, therefore, is not whether St. Vincent's should stay in the neighborhood and update its facility, but rather how the proposed construction would change the neighborhood's historic landscape.

"We're all in agreement that St. Vincent's needs to stay on and modernize," the executive director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, Andrew Berman, said yesterday. "The big concern is that it is going to be very big. It's the size of the new hospital, plus the hundreds of thousands of square feet of luxury housing."

Last night, the president and chief executive officer of Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers, Henry Amoroso, reiterated the hospital's position that its current facility cannot physically accommodate the necessary upgrades. The current hospital comprises seven separate buildings, with the oldest, the Nurses Residence, dating back to 1924. "Our floor plates are really too small to accommodate the high-tech equipment needed today," Mr. Amoroso said.

The new plans, with fewer square feet than the current hospital, would offer increased floor space. It would also house 365 beds, 18 operating rooms, and a state-of-the-art emergency room and trauma center.

Officials said financing would come from a fund-raising campaign and the sale of its old facility to the Rudin family for an undisclosed amount. For their part, the Rudins plan to raze the old hospital to make room for 650,000 square feet of high-end housing, or an estimated 450 units.

According to preliminary plans, the development includes 19 mid-block townhouses, a mid-rise building, and a 21-story building fronting Seventh Avenue. There would also be 15,000 square feet of street-level retail space, underground parking, and 22,500 square feet of medical office space.

For months, residents of Greenwich Village have expressed reservations about the project, and last night they aired concerns about a lack of affordable housing. Others were pleased, however, with apparent changes made to the hospital plans that were a product of conversations between hospital officials and a community working group.

Prior to last night's presentation, Mayor Koch — who was recently named co-chairman of a group supporting the redevelopment plans, Friends of the New St. Vincent's — emphasized that the hospital is trying to be transparent in its plans moving forward.

"Community opposition is to be expected particularly in Greenwich Village, to any structure where it is a large structure," he said. "I think that the community needs them," he also said, referring to the hospital.

Last month, a hospital-commissioned survey of 600 people living inside its service area indicated that 60% of Greenwich Village residents supported the redevelopment plans.

To be sure, the hospital faces a lengthy approval process.

Complicating the typical development considerations is the fact that the neighborhood is a designated historic district. As such, the plans must receive approval from the Landmarks Preservation Commission before the hospital seeks zoning approval from the Department of City Planning.

The City Council has final say over whether the plans may go forward, and Community Board 2 is expected to hold public hearings and to weigh in on the plans as they move through city agencies.

Yesterday, hospital officials said they expect to file plans with the Landmarks Commission by January, and that final approval is not anticipated until the middle of 2009.

Despite such complexities, St. Vincent's has navigated similar hurdles before, in the late 1970s and early 1980s when the hospital built the Coleman and Link buildings.

In 1979, the hospital received a large-scale community facility designation, a zoning tool that accommodates multi-block campuses such as hospitals and universities. Hospital officials said yesterday that under the new plans, that designation must be removed.

"I think in the end, if you look at this plan and what's there now, I don't know how anyone can say this isn't an improvement," the president of the Real Estate Board of New York, Steven Spinola, who is familiar with the plans, said. "It's a design that better relates to the community than the current one, and it gives the hospital something that they can use to continue to service the neighborhood."

© 2007 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC

[antinimby]

St. Vincent's shows plans for new hospital and residential complex


http://www.cityrealty.com/graphics/uploads/1192130699_stvinc2.jpg


11-OCT-07 (http://www.cityrealty.com/new_developments/news.cr?noteid=20562)

St. Vincent's Hospital held a public meeting last night to unveil its plans for a new hospital building to rise on the site of its O'Toole Building on the northwest corner of Seventh Avenue and 12th Street and the plans of Rudin Family Holdings to redevelop 8 of the hospital's buildings on the western portion of the block bounded by 11th and 12th Streets and Sixth and Seventh Avenues.

The proposed 21-story hospital building, which has been designed by Ian Bader of Pei Cobb Freed & Partners, would have a 4-story base and a setback curved tower. The tower would be about 300 feet tall.

Across the avenue, the residential development would consist of a 21-story building on the avenue that would be about 260 feet high including roof-top mechanical spaces and townhouses with stoops on the two side-streets. Dan Kaplan of FXFowle is the architect for the Rudin project.

In addition to these two sites, the hospital owns the triangular block that used to be occupied by the Loew's Sheridan movie theater just south of the O'Toole Building. That block is now used by the hospital mostly as a "loading dock."

The planned buildings are in the Greenwich Village Historic District, but the hospital has not yet submitted a formal application for a certificate of appropriateness from the Landmarks Preservation Commission. The proposed projects will also require numerous other public approvals relating to zoning.

At the meeting in the hospital's auditorium, Bill Rudin, the CEO of the Rudin organization, said that his company has agreed to pay the hospital about $500 a buildable square feet for its residential development, or about $300 million, under the current building plans. The hospital's building is anticipated to cost about $700 million. It will contain 365 beds, one to a room, a substantial reduction from its present size of about 635 beds.

The plan calls for the demolition of the four-story O'Toole Building, which was erected in 1961 and was designed by Albert Ledner and is notable for its white-ceramic-tile facades and its nautical motif. Once the new hospital is built and opened on this site, eight of the hospital's 9 buildings across the avenue will be demolished to make way for the Rudin's residential development.

Mr. Rudin said that although his company's residential projects have always been rental, the more than 400 apartments will be built as condominiums. In addition to the 21-story building on the avenue and 19 townhouses, the Rudin project includes a mid-rise, mid-block building, 15,000-square feet of retail space, 22,500 square feet of medical office space and a garage.

The design of the new hospital building's tower, shown at the left in the illustration at the right, resembles in its elliptical lenticular shape with "cutting edges" the famous "Boat Building" designed by Max Abramovitz in 1963 for the Phoenix Mutual Life Insurance Company in Hartford, Conn. Mr. Bader indicated that the new building would be masonry- rather than glass-clad and probably of a reddish color.

Mr. Kaplan also indicated that a similar palette was likely to be employed in the residential buildings, emphasizing that the new townhouses will be set-back about 10 feet from the building line to permit owners to have front-yard gardens that will add to the "green" component of project.

In answer to a question from the audience about past promises from the hospital to create an attractive open space on the triangle block, Mr. Bader also emphasized that plans call for landscaping improvements to the "triangle" block.

No one in the audience asked why the new hospital could not be erected on the triangle block and the very unusual, interesting and idiosyncratic O'Toole Building saved, or used as a base for a new tower similar to what the Hearst Corporation did recently on the southwest corner of 57th Street and Eighth Avenue.

Copyright © 1994-2007 CITY REALTY.COM INC.

[londonlawyer]

The curved building looks potentially nice, and the one across the street could be nice too.

PS: Does anyone know who owns the horrible empty lot on the east side of 7th just south of Greenwich Avenue?

[lofter1]

This is an important proposal for NYC. Medical facilities in downtown Manhattan are forlorn and in need of modernization. While this plan will need refinement it would be a real shame on all NYers if it is blocked.

The horrid brown brick block that St. V's up in the 80s is a true nightmare. And the 1961 O'Toole building, while idiosyncratic, is dispensible to make this project a reality. The new medical center will serve NYC for the next 50 + years -- something that the current center is not able to do in any adequate way.

[ManhattanKnight]

^The need for an adequate facility is obvious, but I have to question whether erecting a new hospital with all single-bed rooms will meet it. Will your HMO pay for one of those? Mine sure won't.

[MidtownGuy]

I thought about that too...what is this gonna be, a hospital for rich folks only?:mad:

[sfenn1117]

I'm sure a 300 foot curved brick tower will look great and fit right in the neighborhood :rolleyes:

It could be 500 feet for all I care, just make a statement with the hospital tower please. Pei Cobb Freed shelling out the same design over and over, just brick this time, even greater.

[JMGarcia]

The curved building looks potentially nice, and the one across the street could be nice too.

PS: Does anyone know who owns the horrible empty lot on the east side of 7th just south of Greenwich Avenue?

The Transit Authority.

[londonlawyer]

The Transit Authority.

Thanks. It would be nice if they sell it to a developer. It looks horrible.

[JMGarcia]

Thanks. It would be nice if they sell it to a developer. It looks horrible.

Its been tied up for ages by the neighborhood, the CB and Tommy Duane. The TA needs to do a ventilation project for the 1/2/3 and A/C/E lines and the lot is right where the 2 of them cross at Greenwich and 7th possibly killing 2 birds with 1 stone. Unfortunately Tommy is forcing the TA into possibly more expensive and disruptive options because he wants the TA to develop the lot as a park.

The lot is really too small to make development on it economically feasible for residential or commercial purposes.

[londonlawyer]

Its been tied up for ages by the neighborhood, the CB and Tommy Duane. The TA needs to do a ventilation project for the 1/2/3 and A/C/E lines and the lot is right where the 2 of them cross at Greenwich and 7th possibly killing 2 birds with 1 stone. Unfortunately Tommy is forcing the TA into possibly more expensive and disruptive options because he wants the TA to develop the lot as a park.

The lot is really too small to make development on it economically feasible for residential or commercial purposes.

Thanks for the information. Who is Tommy Duane? I assume he's with the local community board. I agree with his idea re: the park. The city should buy the property from the MTA and build a plaza there.

[lofter1]

Tom Duane (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Duane) is the NY State Senator (5 terms) representing the West Side

[ASchwarz]

The lot is really too small to make development on it economically feasible for residential or commercial purposes.

I would be shocked if this were true. There are many equally small or smaller sites that have been bought for millions and developed into condos.

I don't see why you couldn't develop residential with ground-level retail on such a prominent and valuable site.

[JMGarcia]

The lots is way too angular and there's a height restriction.

[ASchwarz]

The lots is way too angular and there's a height restriction.

I don't understand your point. Many Village lots are angular, yet they are developed with some of the most valuable real estate in the city. Huge chunks of downtown have been height-restricted or otherwise NIMBYized. There is a smaller lot that is landmarked, height-restricted, angular, and SMALLER than this site, a few blocks south on Seventh Avenue and it contains a beautiful new boutique condo selling for millions. There are many other such sites in the W. VIllage. I can think of a newish modernist townhouse near the Meatpacking on a smaller site. The West Village is so valuable you could probably build condos or a house on a 500 square foot site, or perhaps even smaller. If you build condos, just build a couple of triplexes with unusual layouts. They will sell, obviously not at 3,000 a foot or whatever new construction goes for in the neighborhood, but still for millions.

This site is obviously much bigger than my hypotethical 500 square feet building, and will sell with ease.

I have a feeling that whomever is publicly claiming the lots "can't be developed" is an Andrew Berman-type, meaning they would rather preserve a junky lot and chain-link fencing than have anything nice, productive or useful built on this prime site.

If it's so worthless, put it on the market, and watch it get scooped up by a residential developer for a couple million.

[JMGarcia]

Buying land from the TA is much more expensive because of the politcal/public review process etc. etc. etc. A small time developer who would put up at max 4 condos on the site is highly unlikely to have the funding to do this never mind make a profit on it.

In any case, the TA wants to use the land for the ventilation system I mentioned above and/or possibly a neede substation. They don't want to sell it.

[ASchwarz]

I never understand the MTA. Why can't they build a substation, ventilation, whatever, AND get something for the public, like apartments, retail, museum, park, etc.? They have those ugly, low-rise substations on prime sites all over the city.

Why not sell the air rights over these substations to raise cash for transit?

[stache]

Not sure, but I think I read something about the courts looking into how the Post office is selling air rights to developers.

[londonlawyer]

I never understand the MTA. Why can't they build a substation, ventilation, whatever, AND get something for the public, like apartments, retail, museum, park, etc.? They have those ugly, low-rise substations on prime sites all over the city.

Why not sell the air rights over these substations to raise cash for transit?

I really hate the substation on W B'Way across the street from the new NY Law School Condo tower, and there's a horrible one on 7th in the low 20's.

[ASchwarz]

Not sure, but I think I read something about the courts looking into how the Post office is selling air rights to developers.

LOL, that was another one of Andrew Berman's benefactors' failed lawsuits. It was thrown out immediately. He argued that the feds (USPS) couldn't sell their air rights without public review.

I'm sure they knew it would be thrown out but the objective is to get headlines and maybe they get lucky and tie up the project for a few months on a technicality.

[ASchwarz]

I really hate the substation on W B'Way across the street from the new NY Law School Condo tower, and there's a horrible one on 7th in the low 20's.

Yeah, and another one on Avenue A. I wonder why the MTA hasn't yet sold these air rights. Everyone benefits.

[JMGarcia]

Don't confuse MTA sub stations with Con Edison sub stations. For instance, the one on 7th in Chelsea is Con Ed. It has nothing to do with the TA.

[antinimby]

Here's a link (http://www.gvshp.org/StVincentsPlans.htm) to the webpage created by GVSHP that has some new images and models of the proposal.

[antinimby]

Alternative hospital plan cuts height and a building


http://thevillager.com/villager_243/rudin.gif
A rendering of the Rudin Organization’s proposed residential
development on the east side of Seventh Ave., the site of
most of St. Vincent’s Hospital’s current campus. An alternative
scheme eliminates this residential component from St. Vincent’s
rebuilding plans.


By Albert Amateau
Dec. 27 - Jan.2, 2007 (http://thevillager.com/villager_243/alternativehospital.html)

Neighborhood groups involved in the Greenwich Village Community Task Force on the redevelopment of St. Vincent’s Hospital have drafted an alternative to the current plan that would reduce the height of the new hospital from the proposed 321 feet down to 190 feet.

The community alternative, which is not yet final, would also eliminate the 230-foot-tall residential tower on the east side of Seventh Ave. proposed by the Rudin Organization in partnership with the hospital.

While the alternative was not presented to St. Vincent’s and Rudin at the packed Dec. 19 task force meeting, drafts are being circulated among members of the task force and elected officials.

To accommodate the dramatic height reduction proposed for the new hospital on St. Vincent’s current O’Toole Building site on the west side of Seventh Ave., the alternative calls for any facilities that cannot fit into a hospital of reduced size to be located in a second, smaller hospital building on the east side of the avenue.

Rather than demolish all the hospital’s current buildings on the east side of the avenue for residential development, the alternative draft calls for adapting four of the buildings for residential reuse. The alternative plan considers those four buildings — Smith-Raskob, the Nurses Residence and the Reiss Pavilion on W. 12th St. and the Spellman Pavilion on W. 11th St. — all 10-stories or more, to be historic.

A limit of 930,000 square feet of aboveground developed area — St. Vincent’s total current area on both sides of the avenue — is also included in the alternative plan. However, the 150,000 square feet of space belowground that is in St. Vincent’s current hospital plan, would not count in the 930,000 square feet limit in the alternative plan.

The alternative also proposes a size limit for new development no larger than the three largest hospital buildings — Link, Coleman and Cronin — now located on the east side of Seventh Ave.

The St. Vincent’s/Rudin plan calls for 1.13 million square feet of aboveground development, 200,000 square feet more that the alternative plan limit. Moreover, the alternative plan would bring the new hospital building in line with the tallest buildings currently on both sides of the avenue.

The alternative draft also calls for St. Vincent’s to come up with a public-space design acceptable to neighbors for the triangle on the west side of the avenue. The alternative also calls for ambulance and garage entrances to be on Seventh Ave. with below-grade or indoor entrances and queuing areas for ambulances.

But the St. Vincent’s plan calls for the ambulance entrance to the new hospital to be on W. 12th St. between Seventh Ave. and Greenwich Ave., according to a presentation of traffic issues made at the Dec. 19 task force meeting by Dan Plottner, of Sam Schwartz Associates traffic consultants.

To accommodate the ambulance entrance, W. 12th St., now one-way eastbound, would become two-way between Seventh and Greenwich Aves.; the sidewalk on that block would be narrowed on the north side to create a parking lane.

Also at the Dec. 19 meeting, Ray Quartararo, of Jones Lang LaSalle, construction managers, outlined a plan for the estimated four-year construction period for the hospital side of the project. The plan is intended to minimize disruption to both the neighborhood and hospital operation.

“Most of that disruption would occur within the first two years until the core and shell of the hospital is completed,” Quartararo said. Following the completion of the new hospital and the transfer of operations from the old to the new hospital, the three-year demolition and construction on Rudin’s residential project on the east side would begin.

Jones Lange LaSalle will issue protocols for public safety and construction site safety and environmental controls for dust, dirt and debris, as well as noise and vibration. The firm will also work with city agencies on auto and foot traffic patterns and public transportation modifications during the construction period, Quartararo said.

Most neighbors at the Dec. 19th task force meeting continued their anxious objections to the size and height of both the proposed new hospital and the residential tower. But Henry Amoroso, St. Vincent’s chief executive officer, said of the proposed hospital height, “We’ve taken everything out of the hospital that we could.” The only way to finance a state-of-the-art hospital is to sell the property on the west side of the avenue, he added.

“How about schools?” asked Irene Kaufman, a member of the Parents Association of P.S. 41, the elementary school on W. 11th St. “P.S. 41 is at 112 percent of capacity and P.S. 3 [on Hudson St.] is full. Private schools are full, too. At least some of the people who will move into the residential project will have children,” she added.

The current plan, however, received support from some neighbors and several St. Vincent’s staff members at the meeting.

“In the real world you have to accept what’s happening,” said Miguel Acevedo, a resident of the Fulton Houses on Ninth Ave. between 16th and 19th Sts.

“We’re being overshadowed where we live by 30-story buildings,” Acevedo said. “Look at the Hudson Yards [the proposed project between 29th and 42nd Sts.] — no schools, no hospital. We don’t want the density but what we really need is affordable housing. I’m trying to get affordable housing from this development,” he said of the St. Vincent’s/Rudin project.

http://thevillager.com/villager.jpg
© 2007 Community Media, LLC

[pianoman11686]

Where do these people pull these random numbers out of?

[lofter1]

Beloved Hospital’s Plans Cause Furor in the Village

NY TIMES (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/nyregion/01historic.html?ref=nyregion)
By GLENN COLLINS
April 1, 2008

At a highly anticipated public landmarks hearing on Tuesday, preservationists are expected to battle a controversial development proposal for St. Vincent’s Hospital Manhattan in Greenwich Village.

Opponents fear that the city will sanction the destruction of nine buildings in a historic district and allow the construction of two enormous towers that they say would blight their low-rise neighborhood and undermine the value of landmark protection throughout the city.

But the hospital says that 3,000 people have joined a group supporting its plan, Friends of the New St. Vincent’s.

Passions have run so high that the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission has abandoned its 50-seat hearing room in the Municipal Building for a 913-seat hall at the Borough of Manhattan Community College at 199 Chambers Street.

Both sides say the controversy is more than just a major preservation battle, since it pits historic-district protection against the hospital’s goal of providing a top-level trauma center and advanced teaching hospital to serve more than a million people living, working or visiting in the hospital’s treatment area.

St. Vincent’s has teamed with the developer William C. Rudin in a deal to remedy what it says is a dire situation that has left a vast swath of Manhattan from Wall Street to the Upper West Side under the auspices of St. Vincent’s — an outmoded, cramped and until recently bankrupt private nonprofit hospital — at a time when the city is closing many public hospitals.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/04/01/nyregion/20080401_VINCENT_GRAPHIC.jpg

Greenwich Village, when aroused, has humbled invaders as formidable as Robert Moses, who was prevented a half-century ago from blasting an expressway through the neighborhood. But this struggle involves a hospital founded there in 1849 that not only has helped the neighborhood to flourish, but also is beloved by many — even some of the plan’s fiercest opponents.

There are five Level 1 trauma centers in Manhattan, but aside from St. Vincent’s, the only one on the West Side is at St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital Center, five miles north at 114th Street and Amsterdam Avenue.

“The lack of a world-class hospital will not only jeopardize the West Side population, but also threaten New York’s future competitiveness as a city, since medical care is crucial to quality of life,” said Mr. Rudin, president of Rudin Management Company.

Under the proposal, the hospital would move from its current buildings on Seventh Avenue between 11th and 12th Streets across the street, to Seventh Avenue between 12th and 13th Streets, occupying a new $800 million, 21-story, 329-foot-tall building. That is 65 feet taller than the hospital’s tallest structure. The plan would require the demolition of the modernistic O’Toole Building, once derided by neighbors as the “overbite building” but now admired by many preservationists.

The current buildings and the land they occupy would be sold to Rudin Management for $301 million. St. Vincent’s would use that money to reduce debt and partly pay for the new hospital.

The Rudin company would then raze eight other hospital buildings and construct an $800 million complex that includes a 21-story, 265-foot-high luxury condominium tower on Seventh Avenue and new residential town houses on West 11th and 12th Streets, as well as a smaller, midblock apartment building. The hospital would need approval not only from Landmarks, but also then from the City Planning Commission and the City Council.

If approved, the plan would be “a blow to the distinctive historic character of Greenwich Village,” said Andrew Berman, executive director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation.

The Greenwich Village Historic District is roughly bounded by West 13th and West 4th Streets, and University Place and Greenwich Street.

“St. Vincent’s is a great institution and deservedly beloved,” said Kent L. Barwick, president of the Municipal Art Society of New York, a civic group. He said that his wife and his three children had been born there. But at the hearing, the society will oppose demolition of three of the nine buildings.

Peg Breen, president of the New York Landmarks Conservancy, said her organization would testify that it favored the adaptive reuse of the buildings on the side streets, as well as a reduction in the size of the planned condominium tower.

“There is genuine concern about the large number of buildings that could come down, and the precedent that this would set for historic districts,” she said.

Henry J. Amoroso, president of St. Vincent Catholic Medical Centers, the entity that includes the Greenwich Village hospital, countered that “the word ‘precedent’ assumes that there is a similar circumstance that could be applied to future applicants.”

Mr. Amoroso said, “But there is none, since no other hospital in the city is wholly in a landmark preservation district.”

Neither the Landmarks Conservancy nor the Municipal Art Society has a veto over construction, but both groups’ recommendations sometimes carry weight with the Landmarks and Planning Commissions.

St. Vincent’s, the city’s only remaining Catholic hospital operating as an acute care facility, came out of two years of bankruptcy protection last August.

“We take our civic responsibility seriously,” said Mr. Rudin, who is chairman of the Association for a Better New York.

But to some, the hospital development is “the 800-pound gorilla of inappropriate development projects,” said Mr. Berman.

The request to demolish nine buildings is rare but not unprecedented, said Lisi de Bourbon, a spokeswoman for the Landmarks Commission. Last year the parks department sought and received permission to raze 19 buildings in the Fort Totten Historic District, in Queens.

City zoning provisions permit hospitals, schools, nursing homes and other facilities to build larger structures than commercial developers may.

At the time the city’s zoning map was introduced in 1961, however, St. Vincent’s was bigger than the permissible size, according to Shelly S. Friedman, a lawyer advising the hospital. The hospital was grandfathered in, and then was permitted to build two large medical buildings in the 1980s after the Planning Commission allowed St. Vincent’s to transfer extra floor area to the new buildings from a triangular lot it owns at West 11th Street.

A new hospital would require another designation by the Planning Commission, Mr. Friedman said. And Mr. Rudin would need separate rezoning to build the new apartment complex at the planned size.

Mr. Amoroso, the St. Vincent’s executive, said that “only the value of the real estate we have today will fund the ability to build a new hospital.”

And Mr. Rudin said that “the only way to achieve the raising of capital sufficient to build a new hospital is to enable us to build a larger building.” He added that only condominiums could defray construction costs. His company will argue that the proposed residential buildings total 175,000 square feet less than the current hospital buildings.

If approved by the city, the new hospital is scheduled to be completed in late 2015; the hospital would move across the street before the residential tower could be built.

Despite the current downturn in real estate, Mr. Rudin expressed confidence that “the credit markets will have readjusted themselves by the time we can build.”

A renovation of the existing buildings “would cost a billion dollars and take 15 years,” Mr. Amoroso said, adding that it would be “cheaper, faster and more efficient to build one cutting-edge, energy-efficient, green hospital.”

Some of those who live on side streets would arguably benefit from the smaller scale of the proposed town houses but nevertheless oppose the plan. “The hospital thinks I would be happier to face town houses,” said Richard Davis, who owns a house on 12th Street across from a hospital building. “But the question is, how can they take down half of a landmarked city block, right across from my house?”

Mr. Berman’s group mocks the proposed low-rise houses as “generic pseudo town houses.”

Other residents are concerned about the impact of the residential project on Public School 41, at 116 West 11th Street. “The school is at 110 percent of capacity, kids are being tutored in the hallways, and where are kids from the new apartment block going to fit?” said Irene Kaufman, who has children in the first and third grades at the school.

But others in the neighborhood support the hospital.

“You can’t consider the landmarks issue in a vacuum; there are public health issues as well,” said Maria Passannante Derr, a third-generation resident of West 11th Street who was born at St. Vincent’s. “Our task is not just to preserve bricks and neighborhoods, but to provide 21st-century health care in the event of a mass trauma event, an accident, an epidemic. This is an issue of medical infrastructure.”

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

[lofter1]

In Village, a Proposal That Erases History

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/04/01/arts/presspan.jpg
Hiroko Masuike for The New York Times

NY TIMES (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/arts/design/01pres.html?ref=nyregion)
By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF
April 1, 2008

Architecture

The passionate battles surrounding the birth of New York’s preservation movement nearly a half-century ago seem like distant memories now. For some New Yorkers the main threat to architecture in the city is no longer the demolition of its great landmarks, but a trite nostalgia that disdains the new.

Well, think again. Over the last few years the growing clout of developers has gradually chipped away at the city’s resolve to protect its architectural legacy. The agency most responsible for defending that legacy, the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission, has sometimes been accused of putting developers’ interests above the well-being of the city’s inhabitants.

A proposal before the commission to tear down several buildings in the Greenwich Village Historic District is shaping up as a crucial test of whether those critics are right. A hearing on the issue is scheduled for Tuesday morning, and New Yorkers would do well to follow the proceedings if they care about the city’s future.

The application by the St. Vincent Catholic Medical Center calls for the demolition of eight structures on West 11th and 12th Streets, near Seventh Avenue, to make way for a towering new co-op building and a hospital. The threatened buildings range from the 1924 Student Nurses Residence Building to the 1963 O’Toole Building, one of the first buildings in the city to break with the Modernist mainstream as it was congealing into formulaic dogma.

The question facing the commission is which, if any, of these buildings contribute to the character of the neighborhood, a protected historic district. (If the agency sides with preservationists, the battle is not necessarily won; St. Vincent’s, which is financially troubled, still has the option of pleading economic hardship.)

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/04/01/arts/propbig.jpg
Saint Vincent Catholic Medical Centers
A rendering of a plan for St. Vincent’s Medical Center in Greenwich Village.
The lines indicate the elevation of existing hospital buildings.
A hearing on the project is scheduled for Tuesday.

Sadly, the hospital’s application reflects the pernicious but prevalent notion that any single building that is not a major historical landmark — or stands outside the historical mainstream — is unworthy of our protection. Pursue that logic to its conclusion, and you replace genuine urban history with a watered-down substitute. It’s historical censorship.

St. Vincent’s board would like you to believe that this is a purely practical decision. The project, planned in partnership with the Rudin Organization, a local developer, would be built in two phases. In the first the five-story O’Toole Building would be demolished to make room for a 21-story tower that would house the entire hospital. (Because of the floors’ unusual height, this is roughly equivalent to a 30-story building.) A 21-story residential tower, flanked by rows of town houses, would replace the hospital’s seven other buildings between 11th and 12th Streets.

The hospital expects to get $310 million from the sale of that land, which would go toward the construction of its new $830 million tower. (It would raise the remainder through private donations and other sources.)

In patronizing fashion, hospital officials have suggested that preservationists are choosing buildings over lives, as if the two were in direct opposition. This is the kind of developer’s cant that is ruining our city. The addition of up to 400 co-op apartments is about money, not saving lives. There are plenty of other ways that the hospital could upgrade its facilities.

The existing buildings that make up the hospital’s main campus east of Seventh Avenue do not rank as major historic landmarks. Even preservationists concede that the George Link Jr. Memorial Building, a bland brick box dating from the mid-1980s, is not worth saving.

But it is not their status as individual objects that makes these buildings important; it’s their relationship to the historic fabric of the neighborhood. The designation of the neighborhood as a landmark district in 1969 was intended to protect humble structures like these. Established after local activists brought attention to the destruction wreaked by urban renewal projects, the designation was an affirmation that the city’s character is rooted in the small grain of everyday life.

The threatened demolition of the O’Toole Building is most troubling of all. Designed by the New Orleans architect Albert C. Ledner, it is significant both as a work of architecture and as a repository of cultural memory.

It was built to house the National Maritime Union, as the era of longshoremen and merchant sailors was nearing an end. Its glistening white facade and scalloped overhangs, boldly cantilevered over the lower floors, were meant to conjure an ocean voyage and a bright new face for the union. (Think of “On the Waterfront.”) Its glass brick base, once the site of union halls, suggests an urban aquarium.

In short, you don’t need to love the building to grasp its historical value. Like Ledner’s Maritime dormitory building on Ninth Avenue or Edward Durell Stone’s 2 Columbus Circle, the O’Toole represents a moment when some architects rebelled against Modernism’s glass-box aesthetic in favor of ornamental facades.

Viewed in that context, the O’Toole Building is part of a complex historical narrative in which competing values are always jostling for attention. This is not simply a question of losing a building; it’s about masking those complexities and reducing New York history to a caricature. Ultimately, it’s a form of collective amnesia.

At St. Vincent’s, the damage is likely to be only compounded by the design of these new co-op buildings, a sentimental faux version of the past.

If we continue down this path, we’ll end up with the urban equivalent of a patient on meds: safe, numb, soulless. Is this choosing lives?

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

[pianoman11686]

This actually has the look of a sensibly-scaled development. Go figure.

[lofter1]

That image from the Times only shows the eastern part of the plan,
and does NOT show the actual bigger hospital structure set to rise on
the O'Toole site west of Seventh Avenue (seen at right, below).

From today at CURBED (http://curbed.com/archives/2008/04/01/the_war_over_greenwich_village_begins_today.php):

The War Over Greenwich Village Begins Today

Tuesday, April 1, 2008
by Joey

http://curbed.com/uploads/2008_3_stvincent.jpg

As you may have heard, St. Vincent's Hospital is planning a little expansion (http://curbed.com/archives/2007/10/11/battle_of_st_vincents_ready_to_start_in_earnest.ph p).
OK, a huge one. The details are messy, but here's the gist: St. Vincent's has
partnered with developer William Rudin to build a new, 21-story facility on