Page 9 of 18 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 260

Thread: Proposed - The New South Street Seaport - by SHoP Architects

  1. #121
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Park Slope, Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    8,113

    Default

    My understanding is that The Seaport development is dead.

  2. #122

    Default

    Thanks. Do you know what reason? financial problems?

  3. #123

    Post News post at Curbed.com

    News posted today on the Curbed.com website -

    Yesterday, the Landmarks Preservation Commission began its look into the proposal put forth by South Street Seaport leaseholder General Growth Properties to replace the tourist-friendly shopping mall on Pier 17 with new shops, boutique hotels, public plazas and, oh yeah, a 42-story waterfront condo/hotel tower. (A refresher of the SHoP Architects' plan appears above, and here's the model). The proposal—a major piece of which is moving the historic Tin Building to the edge of the pier—is a controversial one, and preservation groups such as the Municipal Arts Society have already made their feelings known. The LPC didn't immediately rule on the redevelopment plan, but the three-hour discussion had plenty of fireworks. Curbed Correspondent Noah Adler was in attendance, and his report follows:

    http://curbed.com/archives/2008/10/2...issed.php#more

  4. #124

    Default

    an architect from SHoP is here lecturing my class. he's showing us the revit file and i'm seeing all of the floorplans and every details :P

  5. #125

    Exclamation SHop: ss seaport

    Quote Originally Posted by philvia View Post
    ...........i'm seeing all of the floorplans and every details :P

    Not sure what a revit file is, but if you can post some graphics on the details and/or floorplans: please do so, here on this thread or at the Shop thread.

    Thanks for posting the news.

    Paul

  6. #126
    Random Personality
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Woodside, Queens
    Posts
    950

    Default

    I really like the tower portion of the plan however the base of the building seems a bit blah. It may be too uniform for my tastes, however I have serious doubts this will see the light of day with all the NIMBYism that abounds in the area.

  7. #127

    Default

    NY1

    10/23/2008 09:46 AM

    Plan To Restore Tin Building Divides Manhattan Neighborhood



    To build or not to build and just how much to build, those are some of the questions swirling around South Street Seaport these days. As ideas to revamp the entire area are refined, disagreement over plans for a single building there illustrates a neighborhood divided. NY1's Rebecca Spitz filed the following report.

    Nestled in the shadow of the FDR Drive and the shopping mall at Pier 17, the so-called Tin Building is almost impossible to see – but maybe not for long.

    Plans are in the works to restore the former fish market building to its original glory.

    "The Tin Building is important because it's really the only historic building on the water side of the FDR Drive," said architect Gregg Pasquarelli. "It's an incredibly important thing for us to save as a marker of what happened in this neighborhood with the fish market and the shipping and the water-dependent uses that were always here."

    Developer General Growth Properties wants to move the entire building to its original location at the pier's edge and restore it; the structure was gutted by fire in 1995.

    "We would like to actually recreate and rebuild all the pieces in the authentic materials, so when you do that, it's probably better to take it apart in pieces and rebuild the building from scratch," said Pasquarelli.
    But the Tin Building's restoration is part of a larger plan to revitalize all of South Street Seaport.

    First released in June, the design calls for more than two acres of open space, besides new shops and restaurants. The signature building would house retail, as well as a hotel and residential units.

    The developer has already invested a lot of time and money and says it wants to make the space more welcoming for both residents of the area and the city at large.

    "I think we've done a lot of work to engage the community and really feel we've made connections with people and gotten input all along the way," said Laurel Blatchford of General Growth Properties.

    But there are critics of the plan to renovate the seaport and within that, the plan to move the Tin Building. Among the more vocal opponents: the Municipal Arts Society.

    "Market buildings weren't necessarily out on the end of a pier," said Lisa Kersavage of the Municipal Arts Society. "They were on the streets where they could move goods in and out of the building rapidly. So the history here is important and it should be the guiding vision for this development."

    In fact, opponents say the entire project as envisioned would be out of scale with the rest of the neighborhood.

    Like it or not, the approval process is underway. Developers say they hope to start construction in two years and be finished by 2014.


    Copyright © 2008 NY1 News. All rights reserved.

  8. #128

    Default

    I think the opposition to move the Tin Building is a ploy to stop the tower from rising, and obviously, the developers only want to renovate and relocate it to get a tower built.

    Where were these developers/preservationists in the past decade when the building was falling apart, being vandalized and set on fire? I've heard no heartfelt outcries to restore it. It's sad that only now when profits can be reaped and the "threat" of a skyscraper looms does a "landmark" become relevant.

    Lastly, who's going to restore the building if the development plan falls through? Do the preservationist really prefer the building falling apart, empty, next to the F.D.R, in a back alley type-environment, rather than being restored, reused, and placed at the forefront of a pier?
    If not, perhaps they should come up with a plan for restoring it before shouting down everything.

  9. #129
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Not to worrry. With this economy this project is going nowhere. Neither is the tin building. Not now anyway.

  10. #130

    Default

    Other than the possible bankruptcy of the developer, the current economy is kinda irrelevant to the project. It was suppose to be started in 2010 and completed in 2015

  11. #131

    Default

    Municipal Art Society Presents: An Anti-Seaport Tower Slideshow


    by Eliot Brown
    October 23, 2008

    MASNYC Slide Show and Article HERE

    As part of its effort to oppose the plan to redevelop South Street Seaport, the Municipal Art Society put up a slideshow yesterday on its Web site intended to illustrate how a residential tower at the site would overwhelm the historic district.
    The society has come out strongly against the development, planned by General Growth Properties, which is currently being reviewed by the city's Landmarks Preservation Commission.
    From MAS President Kent Barwick, in a statement:
    “General Growth has certainly put forward an ambitious plan together with skilled architects. But we are concerned that the proposed tower overwhelms the historic buildings of the district, further severs the Seaport from its history and disrupts the views from and of the Brooklyn Bridge. ... In the end, this proposal will provide little additional vitality and we will have failed in our effort to put the ‘SEA back in the Seaport.’”



    http://www.observer.com/2008/real-es...ower-slideshow

    © 2008 Observer Media Group,

  12. #132

    Thumbs up

    Posted by NYGUy on SP.

    Downtown Express
    http://downtownexpress.com/de_287/cb1.html

    C.B. 1 backs Landmarks approval for Seaport development

    By Julie Shapiro

    After hearing hours of public testimony, Community Board 1 gave its support to part of a major Seaport development Tuesday night.

    The board voted 23 to 16 with two abstentions to back the portions of General Growth’s project that lie within the South Street Seaport Historic District. That helps open the door for General Growth to demolish the Pier 17 mall, move the historic Tin Building from the pier’s base to its tip and build new retail and a boutique hotel up to 120 feet tall on the pier.

    “The community board is pleased with the overall design,” said Roger Byrom, chairperson of C.B. 1’s Landmarks Committee. The board did not recommend any changes to the plan.

    The community board’s opinion is advisory, and the Landmarks Preservation Commission has the final say. The L.P.C. held its first hearing on the project last week but has given no hint of a reaction.

    Simeon Bankoff, director of the Historic Districts Council, called the community board’s approval vote a mistake.

    “That was a foolish move on their part,” Bankoff told Downtown Express after the meeting. “I’m disappointed with their decision.”

    Bankoff disagrees with moving the Tin Building and thinks the new 120-foot Pier 17 buildings are not in context with the rest of the historic district. Historically, pier buildings are low-scale and broad, Bankoff said, while G.G.P.’s boutique hotel is 120 feet tall. Bankoff also criticized the glass facade of some of the pier buildings.

    City Councilmember Alan Gerson spoke before the board’s vote and urged General Growth to withdraw the landmarks application and go back to the drawing board. Gerson thinks the 500-foot condo and hotel tower General Growth hopes to build just north of Pier 17 is too tall for the neighborhood.

    “It should not be an extension of high-rise Lower Manhattan,” he said of General Growth’s plan. “It should be an exception to high-rise Lower Manhattan.”

    Barry Skolnick, a C.B. 1 member, voted against the resolution after he described recently visiting Toronto, a city that walled off its waterfront with buildings.

    “I want to keep our waterfront open,” he said.

    The tower was not on the agenda Tuesday night, since it sits outside of the historic district that encompasses the rest of the project.

    The amenities G.G.P. has offered — including open space, a community center and a potential school — were not on the table either, since Landmarks only considers aesthetics, not uses. The tradeoff and tower discussions will happen next spring, when the project goes through the city’s Uniform Land Use Review Procedure.


    More than 100 people turned out to Tuesday’s community board meeting, and nearly 40 of them spoke about General Growth’s plans, roughly half in favor and half against. Many people were angry about being silenced at a community board meeting about General Growth two weeks earlier, when time ran out before everyone could speak. At this week’s meeting, all those who arrived in the first few hours were heard. The move of the 1907 Tin Building was one of the hottest topics, with some saying they supported the project because of the move and others saying it was a deal breaker.

    “Moving the Tin Building is a fantastic idea,” said Tom Brown, who has lived in the Seaport for four years. The move would put the building “in a place where you can see it, instead of under the eyesore of the F.D.R.,” he said.

    Roger Bentley, who lives on Beekman St. between Front and Water Sts., agreed with Brown.

    “The Tin Building is nothing but a haven for rats and garbage,” Bentley said. “It’s sad what it’s become.”

    Bentley has lived near the water in Tokyo, San Francisco and Portland, Ore., and he said New York is lagging behind those cities in utilizing its waterfront.

    “This is nothing more than an attempt to upgrade,” he said. As for the tower, “I don’t fear it at all.”

    Although the board will not consider the tower until the spring, it got lots of attention at the hearing. Several people said the tower would diminish the stature of the Brooklyn Bridge and ruin views from the Brooklyn promenade.

    “It just doesn’t fit,” said Margaret Chin, a City Council candidate who lives near the Seaport in the Financial District. “It just doesn’t look right…. People come down to the Seaport because of its history. A 40-story tower has no place in the Seaport.”

    Learan Kahanov, president of the Seaport Parents Association, said he supports the project in his backyard because General Growth has shown a willingness to work with residents on a school.

    “It’s the first time a major company that I’m aware of reached out directly and said, ‘What can I do?’” Kahanov said.

    Several people, including Seaport residents with young children, praised the open space General Growth has pledged to include, but others said it would not feel like public space since it will be sandwiched between a private hotel and a private catering hall in the Tin Building. Both of those buildings will have retail space on the lower floors.

    Ruth Porter, a 35-year Southbridge resident, noted that many of those who spoke in favor of General Growth’s project either received free space from the company or had received the promise of a future contract or amenity. Most Southbridge residents oppose the project, she said.

    “How can the community board then be approving such a proposal?” she asked.

    Plummeting stock

    The community board’s approval was good news for Michael McNaughton, vice president of General Growth’s northeast region, but he and his crew of consultants weren’t heading out afterwards to celebrate.

    “I’m beat,” McNaughton said as he left the meeting after 8 p.m. “It’s been a rough few months. But I feel more enthusiastic today than I have.”

    Asked if G.G.P.’s tumbling stock price might have something to do with his exhaustion, McNaughton shook his head no. He pointed out that the company’s stock, which reached a low of $1.97 on Monday, had jumped above $4 Tuesday and closed at $3.39.

    “The markets have spoken,” McNaughton said triumphantly.

    Still, for a stock that traded comfortably above $30 for much of the last year and peaked at nearly $55, the modest rise isn’t likely to quash rumors that the company will be sold. (The stock also dropped again on Wednesday, to close at $2.99.)

    General Growth has $27 billion of debt and this week put its Las Vegas properties on the market. Bernard Freibaum, the company’s C.F.O., resigned several weeks ago, and this week C.E.O. John Bucksbaum, whose family founded General Growth, also stepped down, along with President Robert Michaels. General Growth disclosed this week that Michaels and Freibaum had taken improper loans from a Bucksbaum family affiliate to cover their personal margin debts from the falling stock. The loans were reportedly against company policy, but not against the law.

    Regarding the company’s stock difficulties, McNaughton said Tuesday “It is not a G.G.P. issue,” since the economy is suffering worldwide. “We are a viable organization,” he said.

    McNaughton previously told Downtown Express that the Seaport redevelopment is General Growth’s first priority. Asked Tuesday if that means the Seaport would be the last property G.G.P. would ever put up for sale, McNaughton said, “I would like to believe that.”

    At Tuesday’s community board meeting, many people raised the question of G.G.P.’s finances.

    Margaret Cooney, a 32-year Southbridge Towers resident, said G.G.P.’s assurances of viability didn’t mean anything. Cooney worked at Bear Stearns before its collapse and sale to JPMorgan Chase earlier this year. She recalled watching the stock go “down and down and down” on her computer monitor and listening to executives reassure the staff that the company was fine even as they dragged boxes out of the building.

    Now, Cooney said, “I’m watching General Growth’s stock go down and down and down…. This does have a bearing on General Growth and what they will be able to do for our community.”

    The community board agreed, and the resolution they passed includes many references to “G.G.P. or any subsequent developer.”

    “There is a strong likelihood we will be negotiating with other owners,” said Byrom, chairperson of the Landmarks Committee. Byrom wants to make sure General Growth’s commitments about amenities would apply to any future owner. “We don’t want them to say, ‘Oh, I’m sorry, I can’t afford that,’” Byrom said.

    Extend the district?

    Two weeks ago, the community board met to pass a resolution on General Growth’s plans, but the board could not come to a consensus and seemed close to rejecting at least part of the proposal. At that meeting, the board tried to pass several resolutions that included a controversial suggestion: The board wanted to extend the Seaport Historic District to encompass the New Market site, where General Growth wants to build the tower. If the city went along with that proposal, which is unlikely and would take years to implement, General Growth’s tower would become all but impossible.

    The community board omitted the historic district extension from Tuesday night’s resolution, but Paul Hovitz, a board member and Southbridge resident, proposed it from the floor as an amendment.

    “I think it’s only proper that the entire pier be in the historic district,” Hovitz said. “I have a big problem that the loophole is not closed…. This is something the city should have done a long time ago.”

    During the public session, several other Southbridge residents agreed. The Southbridge Towers board helped pay for studies that led to the 2003 rezoning of the Seaport Historic District with a 120-foot height limit. Many people thought the rezoning, combined with waterfront zoning, would prevent a new tower along the water. But the loophole Hovitz referred to is the fact that the platform where General Growth wants to build the tower has a much higher height limit of 350 feet. The firm hopes to get a special permit in order to build 500 feet.

    Diane Harris Brown, a Southbridge resident, said the community board, which fought for the rezoning, was flip-flopping now in its support of the project.

    “It is short-sighted and rather unbelievable,” she said. “It would be an outrage to have a luxury high-rise [on the water].”

    Byrom, Landmarks chairperson, disagreed with Hovitz’s amendment. Byrom said putting the tower site in a historic district could make the entire project unviable.

    Julie Menin, chairperson of the board, agreed. “The time to oppose the tower is at ULURP,” she said, but several people in the audience called out “No!”

    Bruce Ehrmann, co-chairperson of the Landmarks Committee, concurred that Hovitz’s resolution would destroy the project, which he said would ignore the wishes of many residents who want it to move forward.

    Hovitz replied that the residents of Southbridge Towers are firmly against the project, and he doesn’t want to ignore them either.

    Ehrmann gestured around the Southbridge community room, where the meeting was held, and asked rhetorically, “How many towers are here?”

    The board then voted Hovitz’s amendment down by a roughly 2-to-1 margin, leaving the original resolution to pass unchanged.




    Simeon Bankoff and Alan Gerson need to jump in the East River.

  13. #133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Derek2k3 View Post
    Simeon Bankoff and Alan Gerson need to jump in the East River.


    Or simply be pushed in.

  14. #134

    Default

    Now let's get approval for the tower.

  15. #135

    Default

    After going to a few of CB 1's "community" meetings I've noticed that the sweet old ladies in Southbridge Towers are the dominant whiners and seem to think they represent all of Downtown.

    They must be furious about the tower since it will block all their views to the water.

Page 9 of 18 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Is the South Bronx Hip?
    By ASchwarz in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: March 16th, 2015, 09:58 PM
  2. Riverside Park South
    By Kris in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: September 8th, 2012, 03:53 PM
  3. Barretto Point Park in the South Bronx
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 4th, 2008, 01:02 AM
  4. South Bronx Musical Tour
    By Kris in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 20th, 2003, 04:43 PM
  5. Peking to Sail Away - Seaport museum to sell tall ship
    By ZippyTheChimp in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 22nd, 2003, 10:26 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software