Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 137

Thread: Battery Maritime Building - by Walker & Morris

  1. #61
    Forum Veteran macreator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    East Midtown
    Posts
    1,398

    Default

    The new design is still very overwhelming. For once I agree with a Community Board -- this addition is very clumsy.

  2. #62
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Park Slope, Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    8,113

    Default

    I just don't get it. Why infuse this building with public money to restore it only to turn the whole thing into a foundation for a private developer? All that work and all that time expended for no real public good.

  3. #63
    Forum Veteran TREPYE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    2,200

    Default



    Umm...No.

    Gee, can the developer at least have enough taste to use a glass color that matches the rest of the building.
    Whats wrong with this guy??
    Last edited by TREPYE; January 4th, 2008 at 07:44 PM. Reason: typo

  4. #64

    Default

    Almost identical, the only improvement is the continuation of the massing to a small degree.

  5. #65

    Default



    I think this side looks fine, which is all that really counts to me. Agreed that the river facing side still looks clunky, but frankly I've never noticed this building from the water since it's already overwhelmed by the behemoths behind it.

  6. #66

    Default

    The new design is much worse. The first design while entirely unnecessary was simple and understated. The new design is trying to fit in, entirely missing the mark and in turn overwhelming the original structure.

  7. #67

    Default

    Good, I thought I was the only one.
    The new design attracts even more unwanted attention to itself.

  8. #68
    Forum Veteran Tectonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,673

    Default

    I found this rendering of the South Ferry Plaza proposal:



    The views would have bee great I think.

  9. #69
    Kings County Loyal BrooklynLove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, planet Earth
    Posts
    2,757

    Default

    this would be a great spot for a stunning building. kind of reminds me of the jersey city goldman sachs site. definitely in favor of incorporating the existing structure into whatever ends up there, of course. hopefully this ^ dated concept comes back into fashion as plans for this site contune to languish.

  10. #70
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    The Martime Building is Landmarked, so nothing like what is shown will go up on that site. Besides, that tower was proposed for the Staten Island Ferry Building site, where a new terminal building has recently been constructed.

    This is one we'll only see on paper.

  11. #71
    Kings County Loyal BrooklynLove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn, planet Earth
    Posts
    2,757

    Default

    ^ yeah, you're right, but then why add anything at all on top? i think that the proposed stunted glass addition looks silly.

  12. #72
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    agreed. seems we are currently in a period where anything that is old has to find a way to pay for itself. otherwise it will be altered to improve it's ability to generate cash.

    everything nowadays exists only as a cash register

  13. #73
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Park Slope, Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    8,113

    Default

    That's very true. This city has not figured out how to appreciate its history and make it a viable attraction on its own merits.

    So much history has taken place here and so many histirical novels written about the city, there seems to be a void in the leadership here in this area.

    The way that Hamilton Grange languished for years is a great case in point.

  14. #74

    Default

    Battery design adds historic tops; wins some support


    Developer Dermot Company and its architects, Rogers Marvel, have added
    four historic cupolas to their plan for the Battery Maritime Building, left, in
    an effort to win Landmarks approval for its glass hotel addition.
    Right, is an earlier version of the plan, which was opposed by many
    preservation groups.

    By Julie Shapiro

    The Battery Maritime Building moved a little closer to receiving a four-story glass hotel addition when Community Board 1 approved changes to the building 30 - 6 Tuesday night.

    But board members were deeply conflicted about the boxy glass hotel atop the landmark building just east of Battery Park. Nearly unanimously, they felt the addition was too big, too modern and too visible from the waterfront. At the same time, the board was hesitant to reject the proposal, which would restore the interior of the building and create public space.

    “It’s an extremely complicated building and issue,” said Bruce Ehrmann, co-chairperson of the Landmarks Committee. “This team is so good I don’t know if anyone could do better.”

    The board’s vote is only advisory. The city Landmarks Preservation Commission, whose approval is required, has not seen the latest version of the designs and there is no hearing date scheduled for the project yet.

    The Dermot Company will lease the building long-term from the city Economic Development Corporation and is working with Rogers Marvel Architects and the Poulakakos family, which owns several neighborhood restaurants and will open a restaurant and bar in the Maritime Building.

    The $110-million plan was supposed to include a gourmet food market, but Steve Benjamin, Dermot’s principal, said those plans are moving slowly because of the difficulty of getting delivery trucks in and out of the building. He said it will likely be retail food spaces, but it won’t be akin to Pike Place Market in Seattle, and shoppers won’t be able to buy things like fresh produce.

    In response to preservationist and C.B. 1 concerns, the architects have already revised the designs several times, shrinking the addition and pushing it back 9 feet from the waterfront. The latest rendering restores four historic cupolas to the water-facing facade.

    Still, the addition “looks like it’s crushing the building,” Ehrmann said.

    The C.B. 1 resolution, which originated in the Landmarks Committee, represented the committee’s conflict so well that board members were confused about whether the resolution supported or rejected the application.

    “You’re sidestepping the issue,” board member Paul Hovitz said at the full board meeting. “How can you be in strong opposition to the bulk and say you approve the project?”

    Another board member said the intentions of the developer don’t matter as much as the final product. “They’re saving the building by destroying it,” he said. “You can’t have it both ways.”

    In an effort to make the addition more palatable, Rogers Marvel reached deep into the building’s past. After examining drawings of the building’s original 1907 facade, the architects decided to restore four cupolas with aerials that stretch skyward.

    “We want to integrate the new and the old in a very deliberate and powerful way,” said Jonathan Marvel, principal at Rogers Marvel Architects, at the Landmarks Committee meeting last week. “The new addition is now screened by historic elements of the old building.”

    The cupolas were removed about 70 years ago to make way for a Department of Transportation addition. The four restored cupolas, coated in historic paint, will cost $1 million apiece and the developers will remove the D.O.T. addition.

    Board members unanimously supported the cupolas, but said they failed to mask the glass hotel’s obtrusiveness. The 140-room hotel will increase the overall height of the building roughly by half, tacking 48 feet onto the original building, which translates to 30 feet on top of what is there today.
    “It looks so forced,” said Roger Byrom, chairperson of the Landmarks Committee, at the committee meeting last week. “It’s not beautiful.” He supported the resolution in committee to ensure C.B. 1’s full board made a recommendation to the Preservation Commission, but he was one of the six to oppose approval.

    Noel Jefferson, a committee member, also was troubled over the decision. “My heart is bleeding,” she said.

    “We respect the anguish people are going through,” replied Dermot’s Benjamin. “We’ll try to listen to all the comments, but we have no more moves — none.”

    The architects already removed 5,000 square feet from the design based on the community’s comments, and there are no corners left to cut, Benjamin said. The building, which lacks systems and has asbestos, needs up to $35 million in improvements. The hotel, which will bring in the revenue to make the rest of the project possible, is small already.

    “We’ve studied the economics over and over again,” Benjamin said, and this proposal is the best option the team could find.

    Harry Poulakakos, who owns Harry’s Café and other restaurants in the Stone Street Historic District, said he and many others tried to open a catering hall in another nearby historic building, Pier A in Battery Park, only to be denied. He warned board members that the Maritime Building could suffer the same fate as Pier A — sitting empty for many years — if this plan is not approved.

    At the full board meeting, Marvel had a new spin to put on the confluence of glass hotel and historic cupolas. In the early 20th century, before Lower Manhattan sprouted skyscrapers, the Battery Maritime Building’s cupolas stood out against the sky. Without the glass hotel reflecting the sky, the cupolas would get lost in today’s busy cityscape, he said.

    “The glass will act as the sky that was once there,” Marvel told the board. “It will act as a background to see cupolas. The building needs the cupolas, and the cupolas need a glass background.”

    Board members did not appear convinced by this vision of interdependence, but the comments began to take on a less negative tone.

    “I don’t think this really looks all that hideous,” Laura Braddock said.

    Board member Allan Tannenbaum, who recalled New York’s homogenous architecture in the 1950s, said he is seeing more and more historic buildings topped by modern additions.

    “At first it was jarring,” Tannenbaum said. “But now I’ve gotten used to the idea. Now it’s not so bad.”

    After making several changes to the wording of the resolution, the board agreed to approve the project while including a “strong objection to the bulk of the new addition.”

    The strong wording is necessary, Ehrmann said, because there is a good chance that the Landmarks Preservation Commission will approve the project.

    The American Institute of Architects recommended in October that the Landmarks Preservation Commission approve the redevelopment with some small adjustments, calling the hotel a “relatively small mass.” The A.I.A. has not seen the latest version of the plans.

    The Municipal Art Society, however, and other preservation groups were much more critical of the design. The society also has not seen the newly unveiled renderings, but it mentioned the historic cupolas in testimony to the Landmarks Preservation Commission in October, long before they had been added back into the design.

    The cupolas “served as vertical elements emphasizing the verticality of the three piers and the symmetry of the facade,” testified Benika Morokuma, of the Municipal Art Society. “Some sort of vertical gesture rising above the piers, not necessarily replicated cupolas, would better knit the addition to the landmark.”

    Julie@DowntownExpress.com

  15. #75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrooklynRider View Post
    That's very true. This city has not figured out how to appreciate its history and make it a viable attraction on its own merits.

    So much history has taken place here and so many histirical novels written about the city, there seems to be a void in the leadership here in this area.

    The way that Hamilton Grange languished for years is a great case in point.
    Very true. There could definetly be a better way to do this if the city doesn't want to foot the bill. For instance in return for renovating the terminal a developer could win rights to develop a small part of the East River next to it, ala Trumps NYSE Tower, Manhattan Landing, Bloomberg's early housing proposal, the Guggenheim proposals.

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. WTC Memorial - by Michael Arad (Architect) and Peter Walker (Landscape)
    By Jasonik in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 5102
    Last Post: June 1st, 2017, 09:17 PM
  2. 30 Rockefeller Center - GE Building / former RCA Building - by Raymond Hood
    By ddny in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: July 23rd, 2015, 10:04 PM
  3. Herculean Effort to Restore Verizon Building - 140 West Street - by Ralph Walker
    By Fabb in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: April 28th, 2015, 02:25 PM
  4. The Fuller Building renovation - 42-story Art Deco trophy - by Walker & Gillette
    By Edward in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 25th, 2010, 10:37 PM
  5. Replies: 16
    Last Post: February 9th, 2008, 03:55 PM

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