Dubai Debt Issues Push Stocks Down
GMA: Adam Lambert, No; Chris Brown, Yes
Report: Wife Scratched Tiger Woods' Face, Chased His SUV; Update: Police Unable To Interview Couple Today
Family Gets Early Christmas Gift From Ellen DeGeneres
Street Artist Proposes on Subway Signage
Never mind that mall owner General Growth Properties—the current leaseholder of the South Street Seaport, as well other retail outlets nationwide—has been scrambling recently to refinance massive debt by selling off $2 billion in rapidly devaluing stock. The company is still pushing forward with an ambitious plan (rendered above) to turn the underwhelming Seaport tourist trap into a more vibrant destination, by razing the existing Pier 17 mall, relocating the landmark Tin Building, and throwing up a 42-story waterfront condo/hotel tower, as well as a wood-based boutique hotel and two-story retail structures designed by SHoP Architects.
But first there's the little matter of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, the Community Board, local residents and the formidable Municipal Art Society, which is urging the Commission to reject the proposal because "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." (MAS provided this graphic, left, showing relative heights of the proposed hotel and other structures in the area)
Curbed sat in on the Commission meeting last night, and reports "the three-hour discussion had plenty of fireworks." During the public testimony, representatives from the Municipal Arts Society strongly objected to relocating the Tin Building because that "would set a troublesome precedent for the preservation movement."
Others called for the preservation of the Pier 17 building—which houses the shopping mall—because it was designed by Ben Thompson, co-founder of The Architects Collaborative. "The quote of the night, however, went to a woman who curtly stated in reference to the mixed-use tower, 'The pseudo-fishnet brings kitsch to a new level.'" Supporters of the project included documentary filmmaker Ric Burns; a woman read his testimony hailing the proposal's "impressive level of imagination and integrity." The Commission will hear more on the plan at a date T.B.D. For now, at least, Pizzeria Uno is safe.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I like that MAS graphic--it's helpful to show the scale.
Wtf is that? I don't mind architects designing ambitious projects but at least make it look good.
Don't be different just to be different. That building looks terrible.
Yeah that building looks far worse than what they have now. I'd rather see another basic glass box than this.
That MAS graphic is totally dishonest and irrelevant at best. What does the height of the tower have to do with the Statue of Liberty or the Brooklyn Bridge, much less the mast of the boat docked at the seaport. The context is undoubtedly downtown Manhattan and you can see in the rendering that the tower is not unreasonable compared to the 40+ buildings behind it that are comparable in height or taller.
Ric Burns is responsible for this great big spectacular documentary about New York City's history, and then he goes and supports this thing, which swallows up the only COOL part of the Seaport left, and screws up everyone's view of the most beautiful bridge.
Shut up, Ric Burns, this thing is a nightmare. Look how ugly it is! It looks like it's...like it's made of yarn or something! Seriously, developers and architects: if, in the modern era, we lack the know-how to build beautiful things like the Jefferson Market Courthouse, or the Custom House at Battery Park, or the Farley Post Office, or the Woolworth Building, or Grand Central Terminal, or even the freaking Municipal Building, then A) it's probably your fault, and B) quit building things that look like they were assembled by my grandma, in your attempt to make an impact on the skyline. The only thing you're really doing is building cheap-looking crap that obscures everyone's view of the things that are actually pretty and make a historic city worth living in. We'll take a nice, normal building please. Smaller. Made of brick, or something equally non-stupid. With individual windows. And throw in some reason for actual New Yorkers to go there. And make it at least look like it won't fall over in a stiff breeze.
Ric Burns lives in SoHo, in an entirely different community board.
What$ in it for his, do you $uppose? $orry is my que$tion bother$ you, Ric.
Architecture is getting uglier and uglier in this city. It's like we are living in the 70s again.
Let's take something that is small and famous, and COVER IT UP WITH SOME GIANT TINKER TOY STRUCTURE!
Good idea, dipshits.
They need to reject this and stop the developer now before it pulls a Ratner by leveling the place then leaving a hole in the waterfront when it can't get the financing together.
Just have some water pouring offthe big building and call it water fall part 2. Better yet don't build this pile of sht.
This is monumentally dumb ...hope it gets shit canned by noon.
someone should have told the architect that he can't build real buildings with his k'nex system.
Norman Foster double-helix impression: ur doin it wrong.
This is just so "Proposed,never built".
you're right, short version is: that shit ain't happening.
Yeh I agree with #9.
This is ooogly!
its ugly and too visually jarring to match the buildings behind it.
Don't get all worked up. This GGP gang (from Chicago no less) will most likely be in bankruptcy Court by Monday begging for a meal.