The New Seaport

[londonlawyer]

According to the Feb. 23, 2007 edition of AM NY, the current structure on Pier 17 likely will be razed, and it's possible that a tall, iconic structure may rise on the site. It would be nice if the South Ferry Terminal building proposed by Frank Williams would be built there.

"Plan would raze South Street Seaport mall"
By Michael Clancy, amNewYork City Editor
mclancy@am-ny.com


February 23, 2007

South Street Seaport's Pier 17 will most likely be razed to make way for a mixed-use retail, residential and open space development, a spokeswoman for the property's leaseholder said Thursday.

Though the company is exploring a range of options, the three-story shopping mall named for the pier it was built on will likely be demolished, said Cheri Fein, a spokeswoman for General Growth Properties, a Chicago-based real estate company that owns and operates more than 200 malls nationwide. Fein did not elaborate on the specific plans.




Asked how high a new structure might go, Fein, of the public relations firm Rubenstein Associates, said: "The lower you go, the less open space there is -- but nothing has been decided."
"There is also the recognition that it is not just a land-bound place," she said. "We want to make it 360 [degrees], so that it can be reached by the ferry as well."

But according to one person familiar with the developer's initial plan, General Growth is considering a tall iconic building for the site, and would also build a ferry landing and relocate the landmark "Tin Building" of the former Fulton Fish Market. The rest of the pier would be left as open space.

Preliminary concepts for the pier and the former fish market will be discussed publicly for the first time on Monday, when General Growth, which acquired the East River site in 2004, meets with Community Board 1 to get feedback on its nascent plans.

Waterfront advocates said General Growth should be given a fair chance to articulate a vision for reviving the site.

"We look at the Seaport as emblematic of every waterfront neighborhood today -- caught in the middle of looking back at the past and looking forward to the future," said Carter Craft, director of the Metropolitan Waterfront Alliance. "The synergy between commerce and maritime history has always been the vision but it has just eluded everybody thus far."

On Monday, the company will reveal some basic mapping for the site to begin a dialogue about the project, which does not have a timetable, Fein said.

"The ideas are for a mixed-use place that will provide services to the residential community, to the business community, to New Yorkers as a whole, and to visitors to the city -- in that order, whereas the plan by \[prior owners\] went in the reverse order," said Fein.

It's too soon to say what kind of zoning approval, if any, General Growth would need to build, because the site lies within a number of special zoning, national, local, historic and landmark districts, said Jennifer Torres, a spokeswoman for the Department of City Planning.

Most waterfront advocates would not shed any tears over the loss of the Pier 17 mall, a mix of chain stores, restaurants and specialty shops completed in 1983.

The mall obstructs the view of the Brooklyn Bridge and is a cumbersome structure, said Lee Gruzen, of SeaportSpeaks, a group of local stakeholders.

Thus far, she said, General Growth has done a great job of working with the community.

"The future of the Seaport is grounded in bringing its maritime history to life in a way that benefits those who work, live and visit there," Gruzen said.

[Deimos]

Asked how high a new structure might go, Fein, of the public relations firm Rubenstein Associates, said: "The lower you go, the less open space there is -- but nothing has been decided."

It's nice to see that somebody "gets" it. Of course it's from the developer's side. Since they get FAR bonuses for open space and charge more for higher floors it is of course capitalism speaking. Hopefully the community will see it the same way!

[ablarc]

Asked how high a new structure might go, Fein, of the public relations firm Rubenstein Associates, said: "The lower you go, the less open space there is -- but nothing has been decided."

It's nice to see that somebody "gets" it. Of course it's from the developer's side. Since they get FAR bonuses for open space and charge more for higher floors it is of course capitalism speaking. Hopefully the community will see it the same way!
It's probably the right approach for this site, but it's also the formula for "towers in a park."

"We look at the Seaport as emblematic of every waterfront neighborhood today -- caught in the middle of looking back at the past and looking forward to the future," said Carter Craft, director of the Metropolitan Waterfront Alliance. "The synergy between commerce and maritime history has always been the vision but it has just eluded everybody thus far."

"The ideas are for a mixed-use place that will provide services to the residential community, to the business community, to New Yorkers as a whole, and to visitors to the city -- in that order, whereas the plan by \[prior owners\] went in the reverse order," said Fein.

Most waterfront advocates would not shed any tears over the loss of the Pier 17 mall, a mix of chain stores, restaurants and specialty shops completed in 1983.

"The future of the Seaport is grounded in bringing its maritime history to life in a way that benefits those who work, live and visit there," Gruzen said.
Sounds like they think it's a unicorn. How do you accomplish this without turning it into a theme park like Mystic Seaport?

Or is that actually hte answer?

[BrooklynRider]

Pier 17 is an odd thing as is the Seaport. It does draw tourists, but they arrive and are challenged to find anything worthwhile to do. It was a faulty plan. I have enjoyed cocktails on Pier 17 now and then, but cocktails can be had anywhere - including in a new iconic building. It sounds encouraging, but I think the word "iconic" is becoming one of those real estate terms like "sun-drenched." Show the public the design. We'll tell you if it is iconic or not.

[krulltime]

South Street Seaport plans studied


http://www.cityrealty.com/graphics/uploads/1172606174_pier17c.jpg


27-FEB-07

Community Board 1 held a public meeting last night for a presentation of plans by General Growth Properties, a real estate investment trust based in Chicago, to redevelop the South Street Seaport properties it acquired in 2004 from The Rouse Company as part of what was then the nation's largest retail real estate transaction.

Gennell Vaughn of General Growth told the meeting that the company had no definite plan and was only "at the beginning of the process," which, she continued, "will take years" to finish and is "very complicated" as it falls into seven zoning, planning, preservation and urban renewal districts.

In his presentation for General Growth, Gregg Pasquarelli, a partner with SHoP Architects, said that the company wanted to "provide amenities for the increasing residential population of the district and of Lower Manhattan, build on the positive momentum of the East River and Fulton Street corridor projects, preserve the authenticity of the seaport and its history, and create an experience of local, regional and international appeal," not just for tourists.

He also said that the company hoped to improve waterfront views, and make South Street narrower to improve pedestrian access.

He presented several possible scenarios included demolition of the existing Pier 17, and relocation of the "Tin" Building that formerly housed the Fulton Fish Market, either slightly to the south to open up waterfront vistas on Beekman Street, or to the north, or to east.

One scenario, shown at the right, would create 506,000 square feet of commercial space and 2,530,000 square feet of residential space with a maximum buildable height on piers of 40 feet and on platforms of 350 feet.

Such a building would permit the creation of about 100,000 square feet of "open space" whereas smaller buildings would allow less open space. The standing-room-only meeting was held in the community room of Southbridge Towers, the extremely handsome residential development that clusters high-rise towers about attractive plazas across Water Street from the Seaport.

Several speakers questioned General Growth's representatives about the fate of commercial tenants still in operation at Pier 17, the future of the South Street Seaport Museum, whether its plans would include a ballfield for the community, whether an aquatic center could be included, what would be its impact on traffic and how could it accommodate another OpSail.

The representatives said that the community board "had assisted GGP in identifying the core needs: school, playing field, community center, affordable housing, improved neighborhood retail," adding that the company has been trying to enhance the site with art and cultural events.

They said that the city, which owns the site, had separated the museum, which a speaker at the meeting said was in financial trouble and relocating much of its collection, from the seaport prior to its acquisition of the seaport, adding, however, that it considered the museum to be extremely important for the future of the South Street Seaport, which was created in the early 1980s. The representatives also said that the configuration of the property did not lay out well for the creation of a ballfield.

Julie Menin, the chairperson of the board, said that the community was facing "a real crisis" and was extremely interested in amenities such as a school and a community center. "Before we can even get to the issue of height, this community would have to see significant infrastructure improvement," she said.

SHoP is designing the East River Waterfront Plan for the city and has designed the very handsome Rector Street Bridge at Battery Park City, the stunning Porter House on Ninth Avenue at 15th Street.


Copyright © 1994-2007 CITY REALTY.COM INC.

[stache]

Southbridge Towers = extremely handsome?

[lofter1]

I hope this is some VERY early preliminary massing study -- and has nothing to do with what might be intended for the Pier adjacent to the South Street Seaport Historic District:

http://www.cityrealty.com/graphics/uploads/1172606174_pier17c.jpg

That ^^^ would essentially create a wall on the opposite side of the FDR for what appears to be ~ one-half the width of the core portion of the Seaport district.

Why create avisual barrier between the streets of SSS and the East River?

A tall one here should be on half the footprint -- and twice as high.

[macreator]

Southbridge Towers = extremely handsome?

I too don't exactly think that "extremely handsome" is an apt description of Southbridge Towers.

http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/sixwm/2006/08/484007.jpg

Link to image (http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/sixwm/2006/08/484007.jpg)

[stache]

Your link came up "forbidden" for me.

[ablarc]

I hope this is some VERY early preliminary massing study -- and has nothing to do with what might be intended for the Pier adjacent to the South Street Seaport Historic District...

That ^^^ would essentially create a wall on the opposite side of the FDR for what appears to be ~ one-half the width of the core portion of the Seaport district.

Why create avisual barrier between the streets of SSS and the East River?
Already pandering to NIMBY height obsession.

A tall one here should be on half the footprint -- and twice as high.
One third the footprint and three times as high.

[macreator]

Your link came up "forbidden" for me.

Sorry, I guess Emporis doesn't allow image linking.

I was just attaching an of the images from this Emporis page (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=southbridgetowersii-newyorkcity-ny-usa) about the Southbridge towers

[londonlawyer]

This would be an awesome site for a new New York City Opera House!!!

[ablarc]

^ Nice idea.

But the developers want to make money.

[londonlawyer]

^ Nice idea.

But the developers want to make money.

I know. It sucks.

[lofter1]

The closest subway stations are blocks away from the Seaport.

Ergo: A terrible site for NYC Opera or any other high volume arts center.

Maybe after the 2nd Avenue line is built it would work, but now?

[stache]

The new artistic director for the NY City Opera has absolutely no interest in moving the theater to a different location.

[antinimby]

New Look Is Planned for South Street Seaport


By DAVID W. DUNLAP
Published: June 18, 2008 (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/18/nyregion/18seaport.html)

Conceding the failure of the South Street Seaport pier as a “festival marketplace” — these days, it is not much more than a waterfront mall — its owners plan to replace it with a mixed-use project including a 42-story, 495-foot apartment and hotel tower, wrapped in a terra-cotta exoskeleton and rising from new pilings in the East River.

Though other high-profile developments along the East River have foundered, most notably Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum and Santiago Calatrava’s apartment tower of stacked cubes, the seaport plan speaks to the undiminished allure of riverfront sites and of developers’ faith that megaprojects can inject new life into, and create profit out of, areas where other visions have failed.

The project also amounts to an abandonment of the original vision for Pier 17, which the Rouse Company opened to much fanfare in 1985. It now feels like a run-down, sometimes eerily unpopulated attraction to which its neighbors seldom venture.

“We need to change what the South Street Seaport means in New Yorkers’ minds,” said Michael H. McNaughton, vice president of asset management at General Growth Properties, which bought the Rouse Company in 2004 and now controls the seaport retail space. “It is going to change dramatically from a place where people in tourist buses buy Yankee T-shirts and bonsai trees.”

There are those who say that General Growth, and Rouse before it, brought on their own troubles at Pier 17. A lawsuit against the developers by 18 retail tenants — stores and restaurants — is now working its way through State Supreme Court in Manhattan. “We’re sort of in their way,” said a lawyer for the tenants, Richard B. Feldman, of Rosenberg Feldman Smith.

The tenants have charged Rouse and General Growth with failing to market, promote and maintain the seaport; with allowing the Pier 17 building to fall into disrepair through lack of maintenance; and with cutting back on the security staff.

“They were, it seems, deliberately allowing the seaport and Pier 17 to deteriorate in order to move out the tenants so as to have a clear field to redevelop the pier,” said John O’Kelly, the lawyer who represented tenants in earlier cases.

Mr. McNaughton responded: “In this rent dispute, dating back to the days of Rouse, this group of tenants has had significant claims dismissed by the courts. We believe all of their claims are baseless.”

General Growth, based in Chicago, would build the 42-story tower at the foot of Pier 17, on the site of two buildings once occupied by the Fulton Fish Market: the Tin Building, from the 19th century, which would be moved to the end of Pier 17, and a more recent market building, which would be razed.

On Pier 17, in place of the three-level shopping center that now covers almost the entire pier, General Growth would build a cluster of two-story retail buildings and a four- and six-story hotel, wrapped in an esplanade and crisscrossed by a grid of walkways, many of the paths meeting at a plaza in the middle of the pier, in front of the restored and relocated Tin Building.

“Even though we’re known as a mall company, this is unquestionably a site that is a candidate for de-malling,” Mr. McNaughton said. “With the Fulton Fish Market moving away, it gave us a wonderful opportunity for a blank canvas. When the project was built, there wasn’t a community to connect to. There is now.”

It remains to be seen how receptive that community will be to a project that includes a tower over water, dominating many vistas of the East River waterfront. There are numerous regulatory hurdles for the project to clear at the federal, state and city levels. General Growth is attempting a Manhattan debut in an unsteady economy, with a complex project that would tax even the most experienced New York developer. Mr. McNaughton declined to estimate the cost.

Deputy Mayor Robert C. Lieber said the Bloomberg administration strongly supported the project as an extension of its own efforts to revitalize Lower Manhattan, to link downtown’s East and West Sides along Fulton Street and to invigorate the underused East River waterfront.

“The South Street Seaport represents a great location to accommodate and capture that kind of growth,” Mr. Lieber said.

The city leases the pier and the inland portion of the South Street Seaport retail complex to General Growth.

Allowing that there would be “a lot of conversations” and probably some modifications before the project could be approved by all the regulatory bodies involved, Mr. Lieber said, “We’re optimistic it’s going to get done.”

The president of the Alliance for Downtown New York, Elizabeth H. Berger, praised the project for the views it would open from inland blocks, especially along Beekman Street; the creation of both open space and retail space; and the contemporary quality of the architecture — “not some Disneyfied version of what South Street may have looked like at one time.”

Maggie Boepple, the president of the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council, applauded the creation of spaces that would be available for dance performances and other artistic programs. (She was also quick to note that a General Growth executive was about to join the council’s board.)

Ms. Boepple allowed that the tower would be big and that building it directly over the river was not necessarily in the best interest of overall planning. But, she said: “From their perspective, they have to make money. From my perspective — in moving the Tin Building to the end of the pier, creating the piazzas and respecting the historic district, I think that mitigates that.”

The project is designed by SHoP Architects, which is also working on the overall plan to redevelop the East River waterfront. Gregg Pasquarelli, a principal, said that approval would be needed for the tower, which would otherwise be limited by the city’s zoning rules to 350 feet.

“We felt the important thing was to make it as slender as possible,” Mr. Pasquarelli said, adding that the tower would not block views of the Brooklyn Bridge for any current downtown residents.

Mr. Pasquarelli said the design of the buildings was inspired by ships’ rigging, cables, wharves, dry docks, sails, masts and spars. The intent of the exoskeleton and of the alternating building volumes within it, he said, was to lessen the sense of bulk.

Mr. McNaughton said the project would essentially take the bulk of the Pier 17 mall and stand it upright, thereby freeing a good deal of space on the pier and “giving it back to the community.”

Scott M. Stringer, the Manhattan borough president, predicted a “very challenging land-use process.” He declined to take a position one way or another before hearing from constituents.

But speaking of the seaport, he added, “I do think it’s time that we took something that is right out of the ’80s and bring it into the 21st century.”

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

[Derek2k3]

Sounds very promising.

[antinimby]

This rendering came with the article I just posted above (the Times has an inexplicable habit of delaying the posting of images until after the article comes out first).


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/06/18/nyregion/seaport650.jpg
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SHoP Architects
A rendering of part of the mixed-use development that would replace the current mall on Pier 17.

[brianac]

This is what Curbed said in 2007



Pier 17 Update: 'No Way in Hell GGP Gets a Tower'

Friday, February 23, 2007, by Joshua




Article and previous design HERE (http://curbed.com/archives/2007/02/23/pier_17_update_no_way_in_hell_ggp_gets_a_tower.php )

[econ_tim]

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/06/17/nyregion/18moth_seaport.jpg

here's a tiny render of the tower

[antinimby]

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/Nav/ss_seaport.jpg
www.thenewseaport.com (http://www.thenewseaport.com)

[econ_tim]

nice. what is the building directly behind the seaport tower? i know i have seen that rendering before.

and what about the one behind and to the left?

[Derek2k3]

80 South I think. More here

http://www.archpaper.com/e-board_rev.asp?News_ID=1820

[econ_tim]

http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/Seaport2.jpg

i hope beekman looks that good at night

[antinimby]

^ Let's post that here.

Shop-ing at the Seaport
SHoP's proposal for South Street Seaport would reintegrate the historic district into its surrounding neighborhood

http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/image/Seaport.jpg

Anne Guiney
06.18.2008

Though it has one of the city’s iconic postcard views, the South Street Seaport falls into that category of attractions that many New Yorkers confess they rarely visit, much like the top of the Empire State Building or the Statue of Liberty.

Yet Lower Manhattan is undergoing enormous changes, from the growth of the residential district around Wall Street, the planned transit hub at Fulton Street, to, of course, the World Trade Center site, so the Seaport’s leaseholder, General Growth Properties (GGP), has just announced a proposal to transform the area.

The plan involves rebuilding much of the 19th-century structure of Pier 17 and replacing the 1982 enclosed mall with a series of smaller retail, hotel, and event buildings arranged around several public open spaces and promenades.

According to Gregg Pasqarelli of SHoP, the firm hired to design the project, SHoP and GGP wanted to conceive of the new Seaport not as a distinct megaproject but as the extension of a neighborhood.

“The festival marketplace was just right for its time, and was the cutting edge of preservationist thinking,” he explained.

“Today, the city as a whole is a festival marketplace, and you don’t need to seal off parts anymore. If [original developer] Rouse were to approach the city today with the same project, I’m not sure they’d get approval.”


GGP approached SHoP after seeing its work on the surrounding city-commissioned East River Waterfront plan, which was initially released in February of last year.

One feature of that plan is the construction of retail and community buildings underneath the FDR drive, currently not much more than a dark parking lot for buses. These are in turn incorporated into the thinking and design for the GGP Seaport project, in order to create a more coherent and integrated approach to the waterfront.


http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/Seaport2.jpg

http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/Seaport3.jpg

SHoP's proposal for the South Street Seaport includes a 42-story, 495-foot tower (Top) and a public plaza (Above) approximately the size of Bryant Park.


The scope of SHoP’s design is significant, and includes both new—and very contemporary—construction, as well as the restoration and move of the Tin Building, the last remaining structure with historical interest on the site of the Fulton Fish Market.

Though it has been mostly gutted and incorporated into the 1983 shopping mall, the structure would be restored to the extent possible on the exterior, then moved into the historic district on Pier 17. A 286-room hotel and 78-unit residential building would go up on its site. While the tower’s floor-area-ratio of 17 is as-of-right, it rises 495 feet instead of the permissible 350.

Pasquarelli explained that they decided to build taller to maximize surrounding open space and to reduce bulk and maintain views. There is also likely to be some affordable housing in the mix: Project manager Thorsten Kiefer said that one possibility would be to create a mix of affordable and market-rate housing in the restored buildings on Schermerhorn Row, though that plan is still in the germinal phase.

The tower’s design is striking. Three stacked glass volumes are enclosed in an open, lattice-like exoskeletal mesh. (Note to would-be climbers: Each diamond-shaped opening in the structure spans several floors, so it won’t be easy to clamber up.) Pasquarelli described the exoskeleton as loosely inspired by the patterns of the old fishing nets once so prevalent there, but more than that, as a contemporary reinterpretation of the waterfront technologies of pier, cable, and mast.

Like any major project, the GGP/SHoP proposal will face a series of regulatory hurdles, including the Uniform Land Use Review Process, or ULURP, approval by the Landmarks Preservation Commission, the New York City Arts Commission, Community Board 1, and the Department of City Planning.

David Vermillion, a spokesperson for GGP, explained that the company is well aware of the enormous efforts of various city agencies to improve the quality of and access to the waterfront, and decided that the time was right to reimagine their stake in it, approaching SHoP specifically in order to coordinate efforts.

Vermillion and GGP may be on to something, because for the last several years, now- former deputy mayor Dan Doctoroff staunchly advocated the development of a harbor district, which would include Ellis Island, Governors Island, the revitalized East River Waterfront, Battery Park City, and Brooklyn Bridge Park, and be connected via ferry service.

That vision of the waterfront as an integrated and accessible whole is a compelling one, but will need the support and participation from the private sector as well. Pasquarelli, for one, is cautiously hopeful: “It is really extraordinary to see a situation like this, where the city is putting energy and money into reconnecting people to the waterfront, and a private company has decided to join in.”

Copyright © 2003-2008 | The Architect's Newspaper, LLC.

[antinimby]

I, too at first thought that tall mystery tower was 80 South St. but in this rendering, it looks to be in the interior and behind the waterfront towers, which of course deepens the mystery even more.

http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/Seaport2.jpg

By the way, check out the FT and 3WTC in the background as well.

[antinimby]

More images from the project's website (http://www.thenewseaport.com/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=cmpImages&show=map&s=sss).

The pier:
http://www.thenewseaport.com/images/FE/chain233siteType8/site202/client/photoGallery/218/NewEsp_big.jpg

The Site Plan:
http://www.thenewseaport.com/images/FE/chain233siteType8/site202/client/photoGallery/220/Seaport%20Siteplan_big.jpg

Uses:
http://www.thenewseaport.com/images/FE/chain233siteType8/site202/client/photoGallery/220/New%20Elements_big.jpg

History Boundary of the Seaport District:
http://www.thenewseaport.com/images/FE/chain233siteType8/site202/client/photoGallery/220/Historic%20District%20Boundary_Map_big.jpg

Before/After:
http://www.thenewseaport.com/images/FE/chain233siteType8/site202/client/photoGallery/220/Before_After_big.jpg

[antinimby]

More renderings and images...

http://www.thenewseaport.com/images/FE/chain233siteType8/site202/design/skyline.jpg

http://www.thenewseaport.com/images/FE/chain233siteType8/site202/neighborhood.jpg

http://www.thenewseaport.com/images/FE/chain233siteType8/site202/fulton.jpg

[pianoman11686]

Curbed has posted more images, but I can't get them to post here in the large format.

This looks very good. I especially like the way they handle the boutique hotel "addition". It seems to float effortlessly above the shopping area, and the color blends in almost perfectly with the historic buildings to the west. I hope they give this the green light pronto.

[pianoman11686]

A few printscreens from the website:

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r260/pianoman11686/Seaport3.jpg

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r260/pianoman11686/Seaport8.jpg

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r260/pianoman11686/Seaport2.jpg

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r260/pianoman11686/seaport1.jpg

http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r260/pianoman11686/Seaport5.jpg

[ablarc]

Wow, that tower sure is beautiful.

But do I spy ... a PARKING LOT ??




Suburbia just will not depart this place.



("Open Space" is what they mendaciously call it on the site plan.)

[scumonkey]

How long before this plan gets filed in the round bin?
(you know the building looks way too interesting for present day activists to allow it to be built as is).
From curbed:
"The Times failed to mention massive standing-room-only opposition when the project was presented to the Seaport Committee of Community Board 1." Prepare the battleships!

[NYC4Life]

Latest Article from the NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/18/nyregion/18seaport.html?_r=2&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

New Look Planned for Pier at South Street Seaport

By DAVID W. DUNLAP (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/d/david_w_dunlap/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
Published: June 18, 2008

Conceding the failure of the South Street Seaport pier as a “festival marketplace” — these days, it is not much more than a waterfront mall — its owners plan to replace it with a mixed-use project including a 42-story, 495-foot apartment and hotel tower, wrapped in a terra-cotta exoskeleton and rising from new pilings in the East River.

Skip to next paragraph (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/18/nyregion/18seaport.html?_r=2&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin&oref=slogin#secondParagraph)

Enlarge This Image (http://javascript<b></b>:pop_me_up2('http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/06/18/nyregion/18seaport_CA0.ready.html', '18seaport_CA0_ready', 'width=720,height=414,scrollbars=yes,toolbars=no,r esizable=yes'))
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/06/18/nyregion/seaport190.jpg
SHoP Architects

A rendering of part of the mixed-use development that would replace the current mall on Pier 17.


Though other high-profile developments along the East River have foundered, most notably Frank Gehry (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/frank_gehry/index.html?inline=nyt-per)’s Guggenheim Museum (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/g/guggenheim_solomon_r_museum/index.html?inline=nyt-org) and Santiago Calatrava (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/santiago_calatrava/index.html?inline=nyt-per)’s apartment tower of stacked cubes, the seaport plan speaks to the undiminished allure of riverfront sites and of developers’ faith that megaprojects can inject new life into, and create profit out of, areas where other visions have failed.

The project also amounts to an abandonment of the original vision for Pier 17, which the Rouse Company opened to much fanfare in 1985. It now feels like a run-down, sometimes eerily unpopulated attraction to which its neighbors seldom venture. “We need to change what the South Street Seaport means in New Yorkers’ minds,” said Michael H. McNaughton, vice president of asset management at General Growth Properties, which bought the Rouse Company in 2004 and now controls the seaport retail space. “It is going to change dramatically from a place where people in tourist buses buy Yankee T-shirts and bonsai trees.”

There are those who say that General Growth, and Rouse before it, brought on their own troubles at Pier 17. A lawsuit against the developers by 18 retail tenants — stores and restaurants — is now working its way through State Supreme Court in Manhattan. “We’re sort of in their way,” said a lawyer for the tenants, Richard B. Feldman, of Rosenberg Feldman Smith.

The tenants have charged Rouse and General Growth with failing to market, promote and maintain the seaport; with allowing the Pier 17 building to fall into disrepair through lack of maintenance; and with cutting back on the security staff. “They were, it seems, deliberately allowing the seaport and Pier 17 to deteriorate in order to move out the tenants so as to have a clear field to redevelop the pier,” said John O’Kelly, the lawyer who represented tenants in earlier cases. Mr. McNaughton responded: “In this rent dispute, dating back to the days of Rouse, this group of tenants has had significant claims dismissed by the courts. We believe all of their claims are baseless.”

General Growth, based in Chicago, would build the 42-story tower at the foot of Pier 17, on the site of two buildings once occupied by the Fulton Fish Market: the Tin Building, from the 19th century, which would be moved to the end of Pier 17, and a more recent market building, which would be razed. On Pier 17, in place of the three-level shopping center that now covers almost the entire pier, General Growth would build a cluster of two-story retail buildings and a four- and six-story hotel, wrapped in an esplanade and crisscrossed by a grid of walkways, many of the paths meeting at a plaza in the middle of the pier, in front of the restored and relocated Tin Building. “Even though we’re known as a mall company, this is unquestionably a site that is a candidate for de-malling,” Mr. McNaughton said. “With the Fulton Fish Market moving away, it gave us a wonderful opportunity for a blank canvas. When the project was built, there wasn’t a community to connect to. There is now.”

It remains to be seen how receptive that community will be to a project that includes a tower over water, dominating many vistas of the East River waterfront. There are numerous regulatory hurdles for the project to clear at the federal, state and city levels. General Growth is attempting a Manhattan debut in an unsteady economy, with a complex project that would tax even the most experienced New York developer. Mr. McNaughton declined to estimate the cost.

Deputy Mayor Robert C. Lieber said the Bloomberg administration strongly supported the project as an extension of its own efforts to revitalize Lower Manhattan, to link downtown’s East and West Sides along Fulton Street and to invigorate the underused East River waterfront. “The South Street Seaport represents a great location to accommodate and capture that kind of growth,” Mr. Lieber said. The city leases the pier and the inland portion of the South Street Seaport retail complex to General Growth.

Allowing that there would be “a lot of conversations” and probably some modifications before the project could be approved by all the regulatory bodies involved, Mr. Lieber said, “We’re optimistic it’s going to get done.” The president of the Alliance for Downtown New York (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/a/alliance_for_downtown_new_york/index.html?inline=nyt-org), Elizabeth H. Berger, praised the project for the views it would open from inland blocks, especially along Beekman Street; the creation of both open space and retail space; and the contemporary quality of the architecture — “not some Disneyfied version of what South Street may have looked like at one time.”

Maggie Boepple, the president of the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council, applauded the creation of spaces that would be available for dance performances and other artistic programs. (She was also quick to note that a General Growth executive was about to join the council’s board.)
Ms. Boepple allowed that the tower would be big and that building it directly over the river was not necessarily in the best interest of overall planning. But, she said: “From their perspective, they have to make money. From my perspective — in moving the Tin Building to the end of the pier, creating the piazzas and respecting the historic district, I think that mitigates that.”

The project is designed by SHoP Architects, which is also working on the overall plan to redevelop the East River waterfront. Gregg Pasquarelli, a principal, said that approval would be needed for the tower, which would otherwise be limited by the city’s zoning rules to 350 feet. “We felt the important thing was to make it as slender as possible,” Mr. Pasquarelli said, adding that the tower would not block views of the Brooklyn Bridge for any current downtown residents.

Mr. Pasquarelli said the design of the buildings was inspired by ships’ rigging, cables, wharves, dry docks, sails, masts and spars. The intent of the exoskeleton and of the alternating building volumes within it, he said, was to lessen the sense of bulk. Mr. McNaughton said the project would essentially take the bulk of the Pier 17 mall and stand it upright, thereby freeing a good deal of space on the pier and “giving it back to the community.”

Scott M. Stringer (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/scott_m_stringer/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the Manhattan borough president, predicted a “very challenging land-use process.” He declined to take a position one way or another before hearing from constituents. But speaking of the seaport, he added, “I do think it’s time that we took something that is right out of the ’80s and bring it into the 21st century.”

[Stern]

This looks great. Architecturally it shares alot with Silvercup West.

[Stroika]

But do I spy ... a PARKING LOT ??

("Open Space" is what they mendaciously call it on the site plan.)

is there an actual parking lot? i don't see it...

re. the building, i do like how the exoskeleton pattern moves from diamonds to hexagons to circles, and fairly seamlessly. i'm really not sure if i like the design as a whole, including the 4- and 6-story hotel buildings. nonetheless, i'm sure this is too interesting and groundbreaking a design to get built, especially when compared with the ugly international-style highrises it would have as neighbors going down the water's edge.

[ramvid01]

Wow, that tower sure is beautiful.

But do I spy ... a PARKING LOT ??



You mean first picture just to the right of the building but just to the left of teh Brooklyn Bridge Arches? That sort of looks like a Plaza, although eerily empty in that rendering.

Otherwise this is quite the interesting design. Which means that there will be NIMBYs crawling everywhere.

[londonlawyer]

I guess I'm the only one here who hates it. I hope that it does not get approved.

[lbjefferies]

I think it's fantastic. I'd say the chances of it getting past the nimby's unscathed is 10%. And at that point I'd put the chances of financing coming through and not having to dumb down the design at 10%.

Come oooooooonnn 1%

[MidtownGuy]

That tower is beautiful, especially at night. I just hope they do a good job with the pedestrian areas. At ground level they should put in a zillion cafés with tables and flowers. It's the waterfront for crying out loud.

[Derek2k3]

There was a nice rendering of the development looking from the south. What happened to it, did anyone get a chance to save it?

As expected here are the Nimby's.

New York Times
June 18, 2008, 1:19 pm
Seaport Plan Faces a Major Roadblock

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/18/seaport-plan-faces-a-major-roadblock/

[pianoman11686]

Issue No. 1, Mr. Gerson said, was the height of the 42-story, 495-foot hotel and apartment tower that General Growth proposes to build at the foot of Pier 17. “Is the seaport area going to become another part of high-rise Manhattan?” Mr. Gerson asked.

Is that a joke? No, really, I'd like to know.

[Ebola]

QUESTIONs
This rendering renders a lot of them...
May be silly, but I'll shoot, guys:

What is that new supertall to the right of the AIB (American International Building)? It seems that it just may be taller than the Freedom Tower considering its place in the skyline, but who knows. And Is the tower in front of the AIB a new 80SS plan? Does Beekman seem too big?

http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/Seaport2.jpg

Do you think the WTC, even with a 1,300'+ Tower 3, will look that small or did they mess up the WTC's scale, along with the scales of other towers, in the rendering?

[NYC4Life]

The hell with the NIMBY's. This plan will vastly improve the current seaport while adding more amenities. The proposed tower would rise over the East River. I suppose none of these NIMBY's live in the river itself.

[alonzo-ny]

Looks good from what ive seen, why f*** it up with half ass attempts at showing the future skyline?

[212]

This is the best site plan by any NYC developer in decades.
The microblocks look terrific. The Hudson Yards people could learn a thing or two here.

Still, I'm getting that "doomed from the start" feeling about this project.

[antinimby]

Wow, that tower sure is beautiful.And it also happens to be the part of the proposal that is most vulnerable.

[GVNY]

Quite an extraordinary proposal.

What are the chances of its undisturbed approval? Pretty limited, I assume.

[BrooklynLove]

i hate that an extraordinary and sensible approach like this can be stopped by such a largely minority interest. the fact that .0000001% of those in nyc impacted by this could stop this project is just plain ridiculous when it's overall impact on the city would be overwhelmingly positive.

[ablarc]

the fact that .0000001% of those in nyc impacted by this could stop this project is just plain ridiculous when it's overall impact on the city would be overwhelmingly positive.
And are we even sure that the impact on that .0000001% would actually be negative? Is the present setup better for anybody?

[212]

^ The current Pier 17 could use some sprucing up, but I think it's basically pretty good. It has the essential tourist services: views, places to sit by the water, food, public restrooms, water taxi.

I like the new plan. But knowing NYC developments, if Pier 17 is bulldozed, we're likely to be stuck with a vacant lot for 20 years.

[ablarc]

^ A fair assessment.

[Fabrizio]

Thank God, Phyllis Diller Scofidio + Renfro are not the architects here. We would be seeing 10 story LCD screens, and a park with reclining chairs and hammocks.

[lofter1]

Interesting that my city councilman, Alan Gerson -- who was so friendly to NYU's development / privitization plans for Washington Square Park (it's reported that Gerson will be employed by NYU when he is term-limited out of office, and one should expect a public servant to kiss the butt of those who fill his pockets, no?) -- is now squawking about plans to open up Pier 17 and free it from the deadliness of the out-dated shopping mall structure that takes up almost the entire pier area. Maybe he's fishing for potential employment at General Growth :confused: (who it seems, from this report, is willing to pay the piper) ...

South Street Seaport Building Plan Faces Council Roadblock

NY TIMES (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/nyregion/19seaport.html?ref=nyregion)
By DAVID W. DUNLAP
June 19, 2008

A significant figure in the review and approval process facing the proposal to redevelop Pier 17 at the South Street Seaport, Councilman Alan J. Gerson, said on Wednesday that the plan was “certainly not going to pass in its present form.”

“I’m not a soothsayer,” he added, “but I’m confident in that.” He said comments from his constituents were strongly negative.

General Growth Properties of Chicago, which has controlled the seaport retail complex since buying the Rouse Company in 2004, has started a Web site, thenewseaport.com, dedicated to its redevelopment proposal.

Mr. Gerson represents Lower Manhattan and will have an influential voice in the uniform land-use review procedure. His director of communications, Paul Nagle, said that General Growth had told Mr. Gerson of its “willingness to work with him” in refining the plan.

Julie Menin, the chairwoman of Community Board 1, said that General Growth’s project “needs to be contextual” and must also take into account “a dearth of parks, community centers and schools” for the growing residential population downtown.

The property is city-owned. The Bloomberg administration strongly favors the General Growth plan.

Issue No. 1, Mr. Gerson said, was the height of the 42-story, 495-foot hotel and apartment tower that General Growth proposes to build at the foot of Pier 17. “Is the seaport area going to become another part of high-rise Manhattan?” Mr. Gerson asked.

General Growth and its architect, Gregg Pasquarelli of SHoP Architects, have said that the tower has been designed to lessen its visual impact and that by stacking floor area vertically, open spaces would be created along the pier.

But Mr. Gerson said that the plaza on Pier 17 would have a luxury hotel on one side and a restaurant and event space on the other, in the relocated Tin Building that once served the Fulton Fish Market.

“Essentially, it’s a hotel complex that other people will be able to walk around,” he said, adding that this was “inconsistent with our efforts to open up the waterfront.”

Other downtown civic leaders greeted the open space proposal enthusiastically.

General Growth’s program calls for 423,815 square feet of retail space, 375,140 square feet of hotel space, 247,950 square feet of open space, 176,575 square feet of residential space and 32,000 square feet of space for a community center.

Mr. Gerson cited some things he liked about the General Growth plan: that it would reclaim the north side of Pier 17, which is now not much more than a waterfront service alley, and that it would provide greenmarket stalls and a “desperately needed” community center in the market block on the inland side of the seaport.

But over all, he said he was left with “a sense that it’s creating a private enclave and, in between, the public will have a few crumbs.”

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

[antinimby]

Here is a pic of what the pier currently looks like.

The tower will be built on where the cruddy-looking warehouse now stands (at the rear of the boat) :

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3251/2467837106_9221550ffe_o.jpg

[lofter1]

For comparison ...

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/Nav/ss_seaport.jpg

[antinimby]

Seaport promises fresh food now, hopes for hotel tower later

http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_268/retail.gif
Downtown Express schematic of General Growth Properties’ plans for the Seaport, above. The firm plans to
set up a fresh food market in August and hopes to build two hotels and move the Tin Building to the east
end of the pier near a new amphitheater. New retail spaces would be built on a rebuilt Pier 17.
General Growth’s image, below, shows a restored Tin Building and the hotel tower.


By Julie Shapiro
June 20 - 26, 2008 (http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_268/seaportpromisesfresh.html)
http://www.downtownexpress.com/inside_dt_logo.gif


A permament 16-stall, fresh food market will open this summer on South St., General Growth Properties executives said Wednesday after unveiling longterm redevelopment plans for Pier 17 and the rest of the Seaport mall.

The market is the first piece of General Growth’s plans, which include a 495-foot tower the developer hopes to build north of Pier 17.

Vendors for the market will sell locally grown produce and prepared food from the same stalls where fishmongers once hawked their wares, on South St. between Beekman and Fulton Sts., in the base of the building that now contains the Bodies exhibit. The market, which General Growth is building now, will be open seven days a week, year-round, starting sometime in August.

The market is just one small piece of General Growth’s larger plans, which include a 42-story condo and hotel tower; a separate boutique hotel; half a dozen low-rise retail buildings; and the relocation of the landmark-protected Tin Building to the tip of the pier. To draw residents to a waterfront now dominated by tourists, and perhaps to win local support, General Growth also plans to build a community center and a public plaza the size of Bryant Park.

General Growth hopes to start construction in 2010 and finish by 2014, although the 32,000-square-foot community center could open as soon as 2011 on the second floor of the building containing the Bodies exhibit.

Julie Menin, chairperson of C.B. 1, praised the fresh foods market as a good first step for the project, but she said the market does not detract from the serious questions she has about how General Growth will mitigate the impact of the rest of their plans.

She is suspending judgment on the project until General Growth makes a presentation to the Seaport/Civic Center Committee on July 8, but she did not sound happy about the height of the tower.

“We’re going to take a very critical look in terms of what we think is acceptable and not acceptable,” Menin said.

In addition to the proffered park space and community center, Menin also wants to see General Growth add a school to the plan to help alleviate the overcrowding Downtown.

“We need to make sure we have something contextual for the Seaport area that takes into account some of these infrastructure needs,” Menin said.

For now, a large mall blankets Pier 17, an outdated relic of the 1980s, said Michael McNaughton, a vice president at General Growth. The firm acquired Pier 17 when purchasing The Rouse Company in 2004.

“That project has just lost its relevance in the local neighborhood,” McNaughton said during a presentation to Downtown Express Wednesday. “An enclosed mall isn’t right for these times and for the future.”

Lower Manhattan’s exploding residential growth means a whole new potential market for the Seaport, but only if General Growth switches the pier’s focus.

“We want to get the community to think the Seaport is for them,” McNaughton said.

In contrast to the mall, General Growth would break the retail into smaller blocks with outdoor connections, more like the cobblestone shopping district on the west side of F.D.R. Drive.

The most controversial aspect of the plan is a new condo and hotel tower on the site of the New Market building just north of Pier 17, which would be demolished and rebuilt under the plan. The tower would house retail on lower levels and then a 25-story hotel topped with 12 stories containing 78 condos.

The proposed tower sits just outside the historic district that covers the rest of the Seaport. That omission gives the developers more license, but since zoning regulations cap the height of a new building at 350 feet, General Growth will have to apply for a variance and prove financial hardship in order to build the additional150 feet.

General Growth chose to build a taller building so they could make the tower slimmer and less obtrusive, McNaughton said. If the city does not agree to the tower’s height, the whole project could be in jeopardy, he added.

Robert Lieber, deputy mayor for economic development, expressed strong support for the project, but he also noted in a statement that the public review process still lies ahead and could alter the project to make sure it fits in with the community.

To the south of the tower, a smaller boutique hotel would rise four to six stories on top of two stories of retail. The boutique hotel would have a rooftop pool but would not have the meeting rooms and ballroom that are slated for the larger hotel in the tower.

Moving toward the water, several more low-rise retail buildings would dot the new Pier 17 and then will open up into a large plaza. Renderings show trees, benches and space for events and performances. Including smaller pieces of open space between the buildings and along the water, the project will create 4.2 acres of public space, McNaughton said.

To the east of the plaza, General Growth hopes to place the Tin Building, which now sits on the west end of the pier, partly wedged beneath the elevated F.D.R. McNaughton sees the Tin Building, which was part of the Fulton Fish Market, as a dark, hulking barrier to the city’s East River Waterfront project, which would create an esplanade running along the river. To maintain the style of the city’s plan for the East River waterfront, General Growth hired SHoP Architects, the same firm the city is using.

To the east of the relocated Tin Building, the pier would drop down amphitheater-style to the water, providing a quiet place for people to read or take in the views, or perhaps providing seating for a concert. McNaughton envisions the Brooklyn Philharmonic Orchestra serenading the pier from a boat docked at its end.

Back on mainland, General Growth also plans to build 24 apartments above the buildings along Schermerhorn Row. McNaughton said General Growth has not decided whether the apartments and the condos in the tower will be market-rate.

General Growth presented a series of images to Downtown Express, including a schematic of the entire site, but would only release two renderings for publication. The rest of the images can be found at TheNewSeaport.com.

The project will go before the Landmarks Preservation Commission in September or October and then will go through the city’s Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) next March, McNaughton said. The project lies within six overlapping special zoning and historic districts, which complicates the city, state and federal approval process.

The biggest landmarking hurdle is the move of the Tin Building, which is in the city and national historic district. When it was built around the turn of the 20th century, the building was right on the water, unencumbered by the as-yet-unbuilt F.D.R. The Tin Building was heavily damaged in the mid-1990s by a fire, and the city only partly repaired it, McNaughton said.

General Growth wants to rebuild the building as originally designed, restoring its original three stories. In moving the Tin Building to the tip of the pier, McNaughton wants to put it back in the sunlight and at the water’s edge, as it was 100 years ago. General Growth developed this plan in consultation with the Landmarks Preservation Commission, so he is optimistic that they will approve it.

If the project gains all of the government approvals it needs, General Growth will vacate the pier in 2010 to demolish and rebuild it. Part of the pier was built from wood, and it is eroding and would have to be replaced eventually anyway. The Army Corps of Engineers, which withheld approval of the Hudson River Park for years, would have to sign off on the plan.

McNaughton would not say how much the project will cost.

General Growth has been working with a C.B. 1 taskforce for several months to flesh out plans for the community center space. Contrary to General Growth’s initial statements, McNaughton said this week that the community center is contingent on the rest of the project being approved by C.B. 1 and the city.

“It would be difficult for us to build the community center if the project is not approved,” McNaughton said.

John Fratta, chairperson of C.B. 1’s Seaport Committee, denounced the reversal and said the East Side needs a community center regardless of what happens with General Growth’s plans. Either way, he and the community are not sure the 32,000-square-foot space will be large enough.

While Fratta was not surprised by the content of General Growth’s plans, he was surprised that the board did not get the first look at them.

“It’s just unfortunate that they refused to meet with committee before they went public on the plans,” Fratta said. “It’s like they snubbed the community board and usurped our process.”

General Growth offered to present the plan to select C.B. 1 members in a private meeting, but Menin, chairperson of the board, refused, saying the meeting should be public.

Frank Sciame, a Seaport developer and chairperson of the South Street Seaport Museum, got a preview of the plans earlier this month and liked what he saw.

“We think it’ll be a great addition to the neighborhood,” said Sciame, who worked closely with C.B. 1 to help protect and restore the historic district. “Something different was needed.”

Sciame sees the tower as a way of anchoring the development and he said it will be the key piece that makes the rest of the project economically viable. Since the tower is not in a historic district, Sciame does not mind seeing it rise along the waterfront.

Liz Berger, president of the Downtown Alliance, likes that the configuration of the buildings would open up view corridors down Beekman St., extending the feeling of the waterfront westward. She also likes that the architectural designs, inspired by fishing nets and ship rigging, do not try to recreate a faux-historic 19th-century pier, but rather reinterpret the past for the future. Berger, a Downtown resident and former C.B.1 member, wants General Growth to restore “bustling vitality” to the Pier 17 section of the East River waterfront.

“What’s there now doesn’t work,” she said. “This is beginning of a very exciting idea…. I think it’s about time that we get it right at the Seaport.”

© 2008 Community Media, LLC

[Luca]

Architecturally: not my sort of thing (londonlawyer, you are not alone!!! ;)). I dislike the crunchy 'boutique' hotel thing more than the tower.

Urbanistically: it looks like they are really trying to re-value that area. While the Fulton-St area is nice (I love the old fihermen's buildings...), the pier itself is kinda meh. I have seen frome xperience that even emdiocre architecture with good urbanism is transformative (in a positive way).

And while I am a bit of a champion NIMBY myself (or rather, let's not build unless we have re-upped the better, existing stock first, etc.), I think objecting to the concept of high-rises in lower Manhattan is a bit odd :eek:

[Marlowe]

I like this plan...:cool:

[Optimus Prime]

I like the plan, too. I think it breaks up the mass pretty well. The scale is nice. The tower could of course be taller and thinner but odds are it will go in the opposite direction.

The only thing I would worry about is SHoP's facade treatments often turn out worse than rendered.

[BrooklynRider]

The more I look at it the more I would prefer the skyline to be maintained behind the FDR boundary. Wrong place for a tower, however nice it might be.

[Troyeth]

I possess a differing opinion with regards to the location of this tower. I feel its placement outside of the ring highway deemphasizes the bulky skyscrapers further up the East River and thus introduces a very needed focus point within Lower Manhattan.

Combined with the neatly broken up blocks and decent, distinct architecture, this seaport plan is a winner. Hopefully it is approved.

[lofter1]

I agree ^

The stretch of the FDR from the Sseaport south could use some great development on the river side -- towers and open spaces and all.

Gehry's unbuilt design (http://www.thecityreview.com/gehry.html) for the Guggenheim Downtown (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3487) attempted to address this area -- which is now a very narrow sidewalk and a no-go-zone -- it really offers nothing as it currently exists.

http://www.npl.org/Media/Features/ao/Image11.gif

http://greg.org/archive/guggenheim_east_river.jpg

http://www.thecityreview.com/gugehry4.gif

http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=19517&stc=1&d=1153322815

[Zephyr]

That ship may have sailed ... but it continues to be a conversation starter off this forum, so why not on it.

[STEAMWORKSNYC]

It's alright. If they are going to revamp the seaport ,why not do something like what Baltimore has at its harbor.

[BrooklynLove]

^ specifically?

[Optimus Prime]

What is currently there at the Seaport isn't far off from Baltimore's Inner Harbor. It's even owned by the same company that built Harborplace (Rouse). It isn't working. It's not a concept that works everywhere. Actually even Baltimore is tinkering with the formula, trying to add more resident-friendly retail as more people move back to downtown Baltimore.

The Harborplace formula is basically 100% tourist driven, and that is why it doesn't work in today's New York. There are too many other destinations, and there are more and more people living downtown now (who don't use this space at all). The goal of redeveloping the Seaport (other than making money) is to provide an amenity not just for tourists but for people who live and work downtown as well.

[ablarc]

Wow, the more I see of this building the more I like it:

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/seaportnyc/010.jpg

I think it's absolutely beautiful in a feminine sort of way:

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/seaportnyc/020.jpg

It's white, it's based on the idea of filigree, and it has roughly the proportions of a slender human figure. That puts it in the lovely company of the original 2 Columbus Circle and Sullivan's Bayard Building at Crosby Street. It also puts it in the company of this:

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/seaportnyc/030.bmp
Absolutely beautiful!

[Fabrizio]

wonderful post.

[BrooklynLove]

i like how the building seemingly rises from the water, and i find its breaking of the FDR wall somewhat inviting

[ablarc]

Oh sure, it's like Pelli's building right at the water's edge in Hong Kong, and makes it seem bigger. Troyeth is right when he says it mitigates those fat, ugly blockbusters' impact. For this reason, this building is such a credit to its setting, I think it actually works better urbanistically than Calatrava's stack of cubes. Mostly what that did was exclaim, "Look at me!"

Also, stepping across the FDR's "setback" provides depth to the skyline. This occurs again further uptown towards NYU's medical center. Works well there, too.

[lofter1]

The tower's external skin with the filigree and interconnected diagonals correspond and
relate to the cables (http://www.inetours.com/New_York/Pages/Brooklyn_Bridge.html) & arches of the Brooklyn Bridge ...

http://www.inetours.com/New_York/Images/Brklyn/Brkln-Brg_Cbls_8839.jpg

[lofter1]

And notice the change in dimensions / design of the filigree in each of the tower's three sections (top / middle / bottom).

It also appears that the middle internal mass is off-set from the sections above and below it.

The building has terrific rhythm and movement.

[Zephyr]

I am half-expecting that building to walk across the water, jump up on the bridge, and begin dancing. :)

[antinimby]

And all that mentioned above, without having to destroy anything worthy, displace people and come out of the taxpayer's pockets.

Projects like this is such a no-brainer, it should fast tracked.

Instead, we get the same knee-jerk reactions against height.

[pianoman11686]

It's almost too good to pass through unscathed.

Instead, we get the same knee-jerk reactions against height.

They're not knee-jerk, though. The height exceeds what's allowed under current zoning, thus the anti-height crowd instantly feels justified in calling for its reduction.

That's the problem with zoning in general. It's inflexible, and it shows at precisely the most crucial times: when doing something that directly contradicts it is the most sensible option.

Put another way: the person who, years ago, somewhat arbitrarily decided the height limit for the area couldn't possibly have known Pier 17 would be begging for redevelopment. And he couldn't possibly have known that ShOP architects would create an almost perfect addition to the area. He'd probably even agree with us, and want it to be approved.

But rules are rules.

[alonzo-ny]

Exactly AN. I dont get it. If NY was being born now it would be nothing.

[TREPYE]

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/seaportnyc/020.jpg
The proposal as a whole is so-so, but the tower portion is indeed a great design. The detail that the facade has makes this a great waterfront building. It has a wondeful struturalism flair to it that I enjoy so much (ala NY Times tower), nice job ShOP. While they got the tower right the low rises suck. Especially that white little dinky box in front of it is the antithesis of it. Boring which in turn makes it obstrusive it anchors the plans appeal.

I know its a pipedream now but I cannot help to imagine what 80 south st being built next to this beauty would have looked like, it could have been the best architectural one two punch since:

ESB, Chrystler
http://wirednewyork.com/landmarks/esb/images/empire_59th_bridge_night.jpg

Metlife, New York Life buildings
http://www.pa-chouvy.org/Photos/US2006/NewYork/NewYorkLife-Building2.jpg

70 Pine st, 40 Wall street
http://www.startsandfits.com/images/70_pine.jpg

Two fabulous contextual towers next to each other.
But like most things that are too good to be true, 80 ss with this sssp tower is one of those. In the mean time enjoy the ones we have.

[Zephyr]

But rules are rules.

Hold your horses, aren't rules made to be broken? (two clichés no less ...)

I have sat there and watched Vancouver and later Chicago break their zoning rules to enable one or several highrise structures to be built, despite protestations around them. That is not normal for Vancouver, and commonplace in Chicago, but it does happen.

New York of late might be more procedure bound than in the past, but things can happen suddenly and surprisingly if properly pursued.

[scumonkey]

I like it a whole lot better than that eighties tourist blight
that's there now.
Reminds me of something you'd see in a Gerry Anderson
Captain Scarlet episode!
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb276/scumonkey/cpt-scarlet.jpg



Unfortunately it's too nice for modern, short, fat, glass boxed NY, and is destined to get the http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/spezial/jasons_smilie/behead.gif

[JCMAN320]

I would really like to see this built, but it does seem way to good to be true to get built. I hate that stupid mall. It's so out of place there. It needs to go, I just hope this project surivies the guantlet. The urban planner that worked with SHoP should be get a raise in pay. :)

[pianoman11686]

Hold your horses, aren't rules made to be broken? (two clichés no less ...)

I have sat there and watched Vancouver and later Chicago break their zoning rules to enable one or several highrise structures to be built, despite protestations around them. That is not normal for Vancouver, and commonplace in Chicago, but it does happen.

New York of late might be more procedure bound than in the past, but things can happen suddenly and surprisingly if properly pursued.

What's to suggest that anything will change in the near future? I can't think of one example in the past 5 years of heady construction in which a project was granted a height variance.

Instead, Solow's had to repeatedly pare down his heights at the ConEd site. Foster's (somewhat modest, in my opinion) proposal for upper Madison Avenue got shot down in a heartbeat. Robert DeNiro might have to remove a penthouse from his very contextual new downtown hotel because it's an astounding 12 feet higher than allowed under code. The list goes on and on.

The rules that were made to be broken are those that you can get away with if nobody sees your wrongdoing. You can't get away with putting up a building in New York that's "too tall."

[lofter1]

DeNiro's problem is that his hotel was built in a way that did not comply with approved plans, and because of what is visible from the street below -- and NOT because of height.

[ablarc]

Architecture should be invisible.

[Jasonik]

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/seaportnyc/020.jpg

You guys need to bone up on your "fishnet" terminology.

http://www.cmsflavorseal.com/products/images/netting_knitted_back.jpg

Not really Fulton Fish Market, more "Hey sailor..." ;)

[pianoman11686]

DeNiro's problem is that his hotel was built in a way that did not comply with approved plans, and because of what is visible from the street below -- and NOT because of height.

I must have confused the exact details with another penthouse problem in Tribeca. Still, the point being, rules can't be broken, even if the violations are barely noticeable and consequential.

[lofter1]

Trying to Find the Right Balance for the Seaport

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/06/27/nyregion/27bigcity.600.jpg
Ruby Washington / The New York Times
The South Street Seaport in Lower Manhattan; many New Yorkers have never adopted
the location as a destination of choice.

NY TIMES (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/nyregion/27bigcity.html?ref=nyregion)
By SUSAN DOMINUS
June 27, 2008

Big City

For a relatively long moment in the late 1970s and early ’80s, Boston was pretty hot. Between the Preppy Handbook (which came out in 1980), the hit television series “Cheers “ (which premiered in 1982) and Steve’s Ice Cream (which originated in Boston and helped begin the national craze for fancy ice cream), all things Brahmin and baked-beany felt of-the-moment, if not exactly chic. Possibly the country was enjoying some kind of a post-bicentennial afterglow, leaving behind the messiness of the ’70s (and all that cinematic urban decay) for the kind of wholesome Americana vibe that Boston always captured so well.

All of that might explain why the City of New York seemed to think that essentially trying to replicate a successful Boston market, the Faneuil Hall Marketplace, in Lower Manhattan would be a good idea. Faneuil Hall was, and is, what its developers, the Rouse Corporation, called a festival marketplace. Take some historical charm, some wide-ranging retail, add some beer-battered shrimp, a few jugglers and mimes, put it all by the water — that’s a festival marketplace. How could it go wrong?

Indeed, the South Street Seaport, New York’s answer to Faneuil Hall, ranks as a big tourist attraction even now. But among actual New Yorkers thinking about fun things to do and where to do it, it ranks pretty close to zero. All of that tastefully enough refurbished architecture, that priceless waterfront property, has been put to the dubious service of retail chains like Express and Mrs. Fields. Exactly what sort of a festival is that?

So it should have come as no great surprise — more like a great relief — when the Seaport area’s current developers, General Growth Properties, last week announced their plans to abandon the current development on Pier 17, which is at this point little more than a mall full of T-shirt shops and mediocre food.

Some major logistical problems probably deterred New Yorkers from ever adopting the location as a destination of their own: no direct subway line, competition from the development of the World Trade Center area and the perfectly upscale shopping areas that New York already had (a challenge that Faneuil Hall and its counterpart in Baltimore, Harborplace, didn’t really face).

The Seaport Museum, which might have anchored the area with some salty New York maritime history, never got the financing it was supposed to get in a complicated deal with the developers (and it’s unclear how much of a draw maritime history would ever be). The development’s identity crisis didn’t help: Even in the dark days of the city’s history, New Yorkers weren’t likely to embrace a district that looked and felt like a watered-down version of some other city’s success story.

Finding the right, mysterious balance of grit and vitality, authenticity and innovation — that’s the elusive goal chased by all developers in New York, who’ve come close in, say, Red Hook, but are still struggling to hit it at 125th Street.

Before the South Street Seaport was developed, the harbor area was one of those funny, forgotten corners most New Yorkers never visited. But those who did found urban treasure: It was a neighborhood that still reeked of New York’s maritime past, a place where you could imagine some old Tammany Hall boss out working the wards, a place where rope and tackle shops operated even as personal computers were being sold not too many blocks north.

Until it moved to the Bronx a few years ago, the Fulton Fish Market might have been expected to provide a connection to some of the authenticity of that old historic neighborhood; instead, the market never felt connected to the new development, except in the smells, mostly unwelcome, that wafted through the air.

What’s to come at the Seaport, according to Michael H. McNaughton, vice president of asset management at General Growth Properties, is a new retail area on the pier that better serves downtown residents, an open space the size of Bryant Park, and a new luxury high-rise hotel. Another gigantic luxury development shooting out of the ground — just when the country seems to be sobering up about real estate — seems like just the kind of maneuver that could feel dated within five minutes of its being built, just as the festival marketplace was by the late ’80s.

But there are also promising signs that the neighborhood might be returning to its original roots as a great market, if not in old-timey look or feel, then in function. This Sunday, not one but two green markets will be competing for foodies’ attention at the South Street Seaport. The New Amsterdam Market, run by Robert LaValva, will be operating out of the parking lot of the New Market Building (expect a lot of local cheese and high-quality bread, among other delicacies) and in the now-vacant fish stalls of the Fulton Market, General Growth Properties will be offering locally grown produce and artisanal foods.

Food markets seem like a good place to start for the Seaport — it makes sense for what’s new about the area (a lot of families who want and have the money to spend on artisanal sausage) and yet it ties the location to its past as a great nexus for food distribution. A thriving, high-quality food market there would feel, at this moment, in the old-fashioned sense of the word, organic.

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

[pianoman11686]

Good article. Required reading for Gerson?

[lofter1]

Except the author seems to hate the tower -- and will be no help in getting it approved ...


... Another gigantic luxury development shooting out of the ground — just when the country seems to be sobering up about real estate — seems like just the kind of maneuver that could feel dated within five minutes of its being built, just as the festival marketplace was by the late ’80s.

[ablarc]

Indeed, the South Street Seaport, New York’s answer to Faneuil Hall, ranks as a big tourist attraction even now.
It's packed most of the time.

So it should have come as no great surprise — more like a great relief — when the Seaport area’s current developers, General Growth Properties, last week announced their plans to abandon the current development on Pier 17, which is at this point little more than a mall full of T-shirt shops and mediocre food.
Must be the tourists don't spend enough money there.

Some major logistical problems probably deterred New Yorkers from ever adopting the location as a destination of their own: no direct subway line
Unless they re-route the Second Ave subway, this problem will persist. Isn't it time to re-align it eastward? (And while at it, run it under Tompkins Square further uptown, and put in a stop.)

Until it moved to the Bronx a few years ago, the Fulton Fish Market might have been expected to provide a connection to some of the authenticity of that old historic neighborhood
An unrealized opportunity now lost.

Food markets seem like a good place to start for the Seaport — it makes sense for what’s new about the area (a lot of families who want and have the money to spend on artisanal sausage) and yet it ties the location to its past as a great nexus for food distribution. A thriving, high-quality food market there would feel, at this moment, in the old-fashioned sense of the word, organic.
Exactly.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Unless they re-route the Second Ave subway, this problem will persist. Isn't it time to re-align it eastward? (And while at it, run it under Tompkins Square further uptown, and put in a stop.)There will be a station at Fulton and Water.

They should add a station between 14th and Houston.

[Dynamicdezzy]

http://curbed.com/archives/2008/07/02/south_street_seaports_hot_model_revealed.php?o=0

[antinimby]

Let's post them here...

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3069/2631805398_3f0c6b5b0c_o.jpg

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3121/2630982925_1054259b77_o.jpg

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3193/2630982815_8666439063_o.jpg

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3136/2631804826_6a45f903f3_o.jpg

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3033/2630982491_66a31b1678_o.jpg

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3138/2631805488_6c13d64c94_o.jpg http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/2263/2631804994_ec2d7d09a1_o.jpg

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3006/2631805102_3fbc326f40_o.jpg

[Dynamicdezzy]

Thanks Antinimby!

[NYC4Life]

The propolsal looks even better on these models :rolleyes:

[antinimby]

CB1 members demand a new school, parks for revamped Pier 17



By Matt Dunning
POSTED JULY 9, 2008 (http://www.tribecatrib.com/news/newsjuly08/pier17react.html)

After seeing designs for the mega-redevelopment of the South Street Seaport, Community Board 1 members told the developers that they will have to include a school in their plans if they hope to get construction off the ground.

Representatives from General Growth Properties, who leased Pier 17 and surrounding property from the city four years ago and currently manages the Pier 17 mall, rolled out plans for a 495-foot hotel and apartment tower, a boutique hotel, and swath of retail shops, restaurants, food markets and more to a standing-room-only crowd attending CB1’s Seaport/Civic Center Committee on July 8.

General Growth will have to come back before CB1 in the spring, one of many hurtles it faces in a lengthy approval process known as ULURP (Uniform Land Use Review Procedure).

Following the company’s presentation, several CB1 members were unequivocal in their response: either come back with plans that include a school and parks, or don’t expect the board’s advisory approval.

“To even think about new residents coming into this district, when we have a massive school shortage, it is going to be very difficult for this community board to even begin to assess this [development] in any fashion unless there is some element of a school on the site, as well as a park and a community center,” CB1 chairwoman Julie Menin said. “These are amenities that we absolutely need in our district.”


http://www.tribecatrib.com/photos/news/july08/Pier%2017-Menin-w.jpg
http://www.tribecatrib.com/photos/news/july08/captions/pier17-menin.gif


“This is a very ambitious plan, one that may not sit well with everybody at first,” said Matt Viggiano, an aide to City Councilman Alan Gerson, who will be key to the plan’s approval. Viggiano added that it would be incumbent upon the city council to ensure that the project meets the needs of the community.

Under the General Growth proposal, which is strongly supported by the Bloomberg administration, the landmark Tin Building would be relocated at the end of Pier 17 and the former market building next to it demolished. In their place, the hotel and apartment tower would rise. Four two-story retail buildings and a cantilevered 120-foot-high “boutique” hotel are proposed to stand in place of the current Pier 17 mall, creating a pedestrian thoroughfare that continues the upland street grid. Food and other shops would operate seven days a week in former fish market stalls.

General Growth, the biggest shopping mall builder in the country, has already included in its plans an amenity sought by CB1: a 30,000 square foot community space that would occupy the second floor of the Fulton Market Building at Fulton and Front Streets. CB1 member and Seaport/Civic Center Committee chairman John Fratta said while the proposed community center is a nice gesture, it falls well short of the neighborhood’s mounting infrastructure needs.

“That’s fine, that’s the first step,” Fratta said, “but a school is going to be imperative. If we’re going to create [a development] like this in our district, there is going to have to be a school component attached to it, as far as I’m concerned.”

Michael McNaughton, General Growth’s vice president of asset management, assured the committee and local residents that the company was open to discussions on the possibility of including a school and park space in the project, which would add 78 residential units to the district under the current design.

“It’s a dialogue we look forward to continuing,” McNaughton said. “We haven’t made any final conclusions, but this is certainly something we hear loud and clear from the community.”

Schools and other infrastructure amenities aside, CB1 members and residents also took issue with several design elements of the project, paramount among which was the size of the hotel/apartment tower.
“It stands out like a sore thumb,” CB1 member Paul Hovitz said. At 495 feet tall, the proposed tower is almost 150 feet taller than current zoning laws allow.

Architect Greg Pasquarelli of SHoP Architects, the firm that is designing the development, said the building is made tall to diminish its width, allowing residents in the area to keep their views of the Brooklyn Bridge. Still, many CB1 members and residents panned the idea of erecting a tower at the Seaport, calling it a bad fit for the historical context of the neighborhood.

“This community fought very, very hard to make sure that the Seaport remained contextual,” Menin said. “It really strikes me that [the tower] is absolutely not contextual.”

Water Street resident Andrea Katz told developers that if she had desired to live in or around skyscrapers and tall buildings, she’d have moved to Battery Park City.

“The human scale of this neighborhood needs to be protected,” Katz said.

Mark Ameruso, who chairs the board’s Waterfront Committee, said the idea of putting a hotel of any size, let alone a 42-story tower, on the pier was a betrayal of its history and intended use.

“Whether it’s a hotel or residential, it’s just wrong,” Ameruso said. “It should be water-dependent uses, period. That’s what the waterfront is for.”

Not everyone in the audience of more than 100 lashed out at the proposed design. Rrepresentatives of the Manhattan chapters of the carpenters’ and electrical workers’ unions heralded the project for the thousands of union jobs its construction it would create. Several neighborhood residents lauded the design, tower and all. Coenties Slip resident Tom Brown said New Yorkers, particularly Lower Manhattan residents, ought to be used to the idea of towers popping up in their neighborhood.

“We live in New York City, and they build skyscrapers here,” Brown said. “If you don’t like the skyscrapers or the heights of the buildings, then perhaps this is not the place for you to live.”


http://www.tribecatrib.com/photos/news/july08/Pier%2017-chmiel.jpg
http://www.tribecatrib.com/photos/news/july08/captions/pier17-chmiel.gif

General Growth is set to run a gauntlet of regulatory reviews in the coming months, beginning with the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission sometime this fall.

The Tribeca Trib

[STEAMWORKSNYC]

LMAO did you catch Andrea Katz's statement.I'm mean did she forget she lives Manhattan. These people are unbelievable with their reasoning and demands...:rolleyes:

[NYC4Life]

“We live in New York City, and they build skyscrapers here,” Brown said. “If you don’t like the skyscrapers or the heights of the buildings, then perhaps this is not the place for you to live.”


At least someone in this audience of pure NIMBYISM has the right state of mind.

[BrooklynRider]

I'm officially "over" CB1. For them to demand buildings of scale and further demand a new school after their complete sell out for Ratner's Tower is the utmost is gall. Screw 'em. I can't read an article that mentions them without remembering their tax revenue giveaway to the next lot of whiny people in their neighborhood.

[NYC4Life]

Crain's New York

Updated On 07/29/08 at 05:09AM
Council leaning toward South Street Seaport redevelopment

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trd_three/images/42470/seaport_articlebox.jpg (http://ny.therealdeal.com/assets/42470) South Street Seaport



There's friction in the city council over the South Street Seaport (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/union-slams-seaport-plan) redevelopment plan, but most council members want to see the project passed before the end of the Bloomberg administration in 2009. Council Member Alan Gerson objects to a 495-foot tower with condos and a luxury hotel, saying the area should be a public space. But he agrees the current indoor mall needs to go. The developer, General Growth Properties, says the tower is needed to generate revenue for a community center, public market and possibly a school.

[ablarc]

The developer, General Growth Properties, says the tower is needed to generate revenue for a community center, public market and possibly a school.
Obviously the developer is motivated by purely charitable considerations; and he deeply regrets that those goals necessitate some revenue generation to accomplish.

[BPC]

It's a good plan. Much better than what is there now. It should be built as is. Certainly no need to lower the tower -- this is (on the edge of, at least) a skyscraper neighborhood. But if CB1 can extract/extort some community amenities out of the developer in exchange for their approval, God bless them.

[futurecity]

This development is great! I hope they include waterside cafes, etc, it would be a good draw - less tacky tourist retail please.

Actually, this could end up similar to barcelona's olympic waterfront develoment- the tower reminds me a little of it.

[brianac]

In Pushing Seaport Redo, Developer General Growth Goes Retail

by Eliot Brown (http://www.observer.com/2007/author/eliot-brown) | July 31, 2008

http://www.observer.com/files/imagecache/article/files/model-web.jpg
Eliot Brown.
General Growth VP Michael McNaughton with the South Street redo model.

Facing a lengthy approval process and a wary community board, developer General Growth Properties is bringing its campaign to redevelop South Street Seaport (http://www.thenewseaport.com/main.cfm?s=sss) to the streets, as it unveiled a storefront exhibit on the seaport this morning.

For the exhibit, "Seaport Past & Future," General Growth brought on architect and writer James Sanders (http://www.celluloidskyline.com/general/author.html) to trace the area's rich, dynamic history through five separate displays of the seaport at different time periods. The suggestion seemed to be that the seaport has always been marked by change, and the developer's plan is only part of an evolution, as opposed to a strong break from the past.

Developers needing City Council approval for their plans often court the community with presentations and frequent meetings, but this is the only one we know of to open a storefront aimed, at least in part, at wooing the community pre-approval (the exhibit, 191 Front Street, is in a General Growth building by the seaport).

With plans to raze the existing James Rouse (http://www.newsweek.com/id/102023?tid=relatedcl)-built shopping center at Pier 17 (http://www.southstreetseaport.com/html/) and replace it with an apartment/hotel tower, new retail complex and boutique hotel, the company faces many hurdles--most notably trepidations about the height of the tower by much of the community board and the local councilman, Alan Gerson.

First stop before the Council, however, is a needed approval from the city's Landmarks Preservation Commission. General Growth plans to seek that approval this fall and start the city's seven-month rezoning process in early 2009.

The exhibit is open from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and noon to 5 p.m. on Sundays.

http://www.observer.com/2008/real-estate/pushing-seaport-redo-developer-general-growth-goes-retail

© 2008 Observer Media Group,

[brianac]

8/ 1/08

5:45 PM

Planned South Street Seaport Redevelopment Looks Kinda Cool

http://images.nymag.com/images/2/daily/intel/08/07/29_seaport2_lg.jpg Photo courtesy General Growth Properties

Earlier this week we visited a just-opened storefront installation showing nifty models of the new South Street Seaport being planned, and we’re thinking it could persuade locals, mistrustful of any proposals to overhaul the waterfront, that developer General Growth Properties might not actually destroy the very fabric of their lives. The idea, basically, is to cut away the schlock, drop all the retail to street level, and make the water easier to reach. This will involve moving a seventies-era fish-market building from Fulton Street to the pier so that it opens water views, putting a 42-story hotel-condo at South Street's edge to line up with the Brooklyn Bridge on the skyline, and using this hotel and a smaller “boutique hotel” to raise money for landscaping to create three plazas facing the water under the FDR. The tower will be 70 feet wide — “Nobody should confuse this with a Trump,” says architect Gregg Pasquarelli of SHoP Architects, which is also designing adjacent city-owned piers for recreational use. Instead of a typical glass skin, SHoP proposes a bronze-colored series of hexagons to give the building weight and light. A smaller hotel below will have shutter windows on each floor-through suite. And Pasquarelli talks about creating a “cool and romantic discovery” with passageways from upland streets under the tower. Or, as we prefer to think of them, tunnels of love. —Alec Appelbaum

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/08/planned_south_street_seaport_r.html#hp

Copyright © 2008, New York Media LLC.

[philvia]

bronze?
so much for "light and airy"

should be white or something.

[lofter1]

http://images.nymag.com/images/2/daily/intel/08/07/29_seaport2_lg.jpg

... The tower will be 70 feet wide — “Nobody should confuse this with a Trump,”

says architect Gregg Pasquarelli of SHoP Architects ...


The tower appears to be a rectangle, the longer side seemingly ~ twice the length of the shorter ...

So that 70' measurement mentioned by architect Pasquarelli is along which side?

[brianac]

Has anyone been down there to have a look at the model?

[ablarc]

bronze?
so much for "light and airy"

should be white or something.
Exactly.

[antinimby]

Seaport firm talks tower, school and greenmarket



By Julie Shapiro
Sept. 12 -18, 2008 (http://downtownexpress.com/de_280/seaportfirm.html)

General Growth Properties may combine a school with a community center in the redevelopment of Pier 17.

G.G.P. has already offered the community a 30,000-square-foot community center in the building where the “Bodies” exhibit sits and is examining population projections to decide if a new school is necessary.

On Tuesday, Michael McNaughton, a vice president at G.G.P., floated the idea of combining the two community amenities in a space that would be a school during the day and a community center at night. But he quickly added that was only one option and he recognized the need for a 24/7 community center. He said that keeping the amenities separate was also possible.

McNaughton spoke to two reporters after a meeting of Community Board 1’s Seaport Committee, where board members discussed General Growth’s proposed development but did not ask much about the school. General Growth wants to build a 495-foot condo and hotel tower just north of the pier, move the landmarked Tin Building to Pier 17’s tip and build lower-rise retail and a boutique hotel on the pier.

General Growth is planning to expand the greenmarket in the Fulton Market building. The market, one of the uses desired by many residents, opened briefly earlier this summer and is scheduled to reopen with more stalls soon. McNaughton said the community should support the produce vendors to show General Growth that the market is a good idea.

“If this thing flops, it’ll be Yankee T-shirts and bonsai trees,” McNaughton said after the meeting.

Earlier, when board members asked about news reports questioning General Growth’s finances, McNaughton said the firm’s ability to build it is so certain that it is a moot point. He later said G.G.P. has shuttered other retail projects around the country because the markets in those towns “experienced tremendous slowdowns.” He said General Growth would not build the Seaport project without having some tenants in place.

McNaughton spent much of the Seaport Committee meeting defending the project to several skeptical committee members, who were particularly concerned about the height of the tower. The tower will not block views of the Brooklyn Bridge from 117 Beekman St., St. Margaret’s House or Southbridge Towers, but those buildings will lose a slice of their view of the waterfront and Brooklyn.

When the committee members asked McNaughton to shrink the tower without making it any wider, McNaughton said a change like that would come with a tradeoff.

“If the project gets smaller, my wallet gets smaller,” he said, meaning that General Growth would have fewer community amenities to offer.

McNaughton will have plenty more chances to debate these points with the community, as he estimates that the project is six to seven years away from opening.

General Growth’s next presentation to C.B. 1 will be at the Landmarks Committee on Sept. 17. G.G.P. needs Landmarks approval to demolish the Pier 17 mall, move the Tin Building and erect new structures on Pier 17.

The project will go to the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission in October.

http://downtownexpress.com/inside_dt_logo.gif
© 2008 Community Media, LLC

[brooklynheights]

http://www.nysun.com/new-york/changes-sought-in-plans-for-south-street-seaport/85812/ (http://www.nysun.com/new-york/changes-sought-in-plans-for-south-street-seaport/85812/)

Changes Sought in Plans For South Street Seaport

By PETER KIEFER, Staff Reporter of the Sun | September 15, 2008


Plans by the developer General Growth Properties to transform the South Street Seaport into a mixed-use retail, residential, and hotel destination are being targeted today by area residents and the local City Council member, Alan Gerson.

"I guess, fundamentally, we want to get a sense of how flexible they are in working with us to make changes to better enhance the historic character of the seaport. And come up with a more financially viable model," Mr. Gerson said in an interview.

Mr. Gerson — who said he will not support the plan in its current form — is holding a hearing today on General Growth Properties's plans to replace the James Rouse-built Pier 17 marketplace pavilion, as well as two Fulton Fish Market structures between Fulton and Beekman streets, with a mixed-use complex that would include a 42-story hotel and apartment tower.

"My concern is that the plan does not accentuate or enhance the unique flavor and historic character of the seaport. Specifically, I have problems with the height of the tower, and the lack of sufficient public space."
General Growth has been trying to court public opinion for the project by sponsoring a free exhibit, "Seaport Past & Future," at a building on Front Street.

General Growth will be seeking approval from the Landmarks Preservation Commission this fall before entering into the city's land use review process.

The developer's plan does include a community center and it has said it would consider offering to build a school as a cultural amenity to help win support.

"General Growth Properties looks forward to sharing its vision with the community," a spokesman for the company said.

[NYC4Life]

NY1

09/16/2008 11:18 AM

City Discusses Future Of South Street Seaport

http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/8338/95607864gp0.jpg

The City Council held a hearing Monday to discuss plans to make South Street Seaport a more appealing destination for tourists and New Yorkers alike. NY1's Rebecca Spitz filed the following report.

What if there was a GreenMarket where the Fulton Fish Market used to be? What about a hotel and new apartments where Pier 17 is?
Those are some of the highlights of a major redevelopment plan in the works to revitalize South Street Seaport.

"Unless it's built, merchandised, and activated in a way that makes it compelling for them, there are plenty of other choices in New York for the residents to congregate, eat, and recreate," said Michael McNaughton of General Growth Properties, a group that presented its designs to the City Council.

The complex of restaurants and mall-like shops at the seaport has always attracted more tourists than locals.

General Growth Properties presented its vision for a new seaport to a City Council committee Monday.

First released in June, the plan calls for more than two acres of open space, besides new shops and restaurants. Its signature building would house retail, as well as a hotel and residential units. But the main building would tower 42 stories above the East River, a fact community activists will not willingly accept.

"We have concerns, certainly about the height of the building," said Community Board 1 Chair Julie Menin. "We engaged in a battle a number of years ago to try to keep the seaport low-rise, and we really want to make sure whatever is built is contextual."

"We tried dozens and dozens of configurations, and in fact, even though it's a little counterintuitive, the taller we made the building, the more slender it became, and therefore the fewer views it blocked," explained Greg Pascarelli of SHoP Architects.

And for any number of reasons, this is a project the city is squarely behind.

"By expanding retail opportunities and creating new hotel rooms and housing units, it's estimated that the project will create 5,750 construction jobs and more than 2,000 permanent jobs over the next decade, while also generating over one-billion dollars in total economic output over the next 20 years," said Seth Pinsky of the city's Economic Development Corporation.

So do New Yorkers who either live or work in this area think it's time for a change?

"I don't think they have enough community activities down here, so it doesn't invite the people who live here to come down more frequently," said one local resident.

"I think it's outdated and it needs to be modernized a little bit," said another.

"Ro tell you the truth, I like it the way it is," said a third.

The proposal has to go through a number of reviews, but developers are optimistic that they can have shovels in the ground by 2010.

[brianac]

Seaport Developer General Growth Looking for Billions

by Eliot Brown (http://www.observer.com/2007/author/eliot-brown)
October 20, 2008

http://www.observer.com/files/imagecache/article/files/seaportmodel.jpg Eliot Brown.
General Growth VP Michael McNaughton with the South Street redo model back in July.

The Journal has an interesting story today (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122446611373749101.html) about REIT General Growth Properties, which wants to redevelop South Street Seaport (http://www.thenewseaport.com/), and its scramble to come up with a few billion dollars as it refinances debt. Its stock price has tanked recently, from $21 a share a month ago to under $6 today, as investors worry about the company's ability to refinance.

From the article:
Mall owner General Growth Properties Inc. is canvassing private-equity firms, hedge funds and other investors in a bid to sell $1.5 billion to $2 billion in preferred shares as it races to refinance or pay off billions of dollars in debt due in the coming months.
The company's bankers at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. have in recent weeks made the rounds of potential investors including Blackstone Group LP, Colony Capital LLC and Vornado Realty Trust, according to people familiar with the situation. The effort is led by Byron Trott, the Goldman banker who recently brokered similar sales of preferred shares for Goldman and General Electric Co. to Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc., these people say.


http://www.observer.com/2008/real-estate/seaport-developer-general-growth-looking-billions

© 2008 Observer Media Group,

[brianac]

CurbedWire

Seaport Fight Goes to Landmarks Commission.
Monday, October 20, 2008, by Robert

http://curbed.com/uploads/2008_7_seaportrender.jpg
FiDi—The South Street Seaport redevelopment fight (http://curbed.com/archives/2008/07/10/another_jab_thrown_in_first_round_of_seaport_fight .php) enters a new phase tomorrow with a hearing before the Landmarks Preservation Commission. It will be preceded by the kind of fun we would expect from such a session: a press conference by the Municipal Art Society (http://www.mas.org/) denouncing the General Growth and SHoP Archtitects plan. Per a release, "MAS President Kent Barwick will state that the entire concept of the General Growth Properties project is flawed and misguided, and that it should be entirely re-conceptualized. Specifically, MAS will state that "the project overwhelms the historic buildings of the district, further severs the Seaport from its history and destroys the sanctity of views from and of the Brooklyn Bridge." The presser is at two at the Municipal Building, but no one is saying anything about the fact that General Growth may go bankrupt (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122446611373749101.html) and render it all an empty discourse. [CurbedWire]

http://curbed.com/archives/2008/10/20/curbedwire_seaport_fight_goes_to_landmarks_commiss ion_empty_fingers_in_burg.php

Copyright © 2008 Curbed

[Sherpa]

I bet $5 to anyone that this project never happens..not even in a revised form.

[infoshare]

I bet $5 to anyone that this project never happens..

After reading through this thread: I tend to agree with your call on this project - particularly after seeing the WSJ article (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122446611373749101.html) about the possibility of developer 'General Growth' going bankrupt.

Paul

Link to Article - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122446611373749101.html

[Sherpa]

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MI-AT004_GENERA_NS_20081019212417.gif