CLOSE AD ×

Op-ed: The City Club of New York opposes a tower in the South Street Seaport

From All Sides

Op-ed: The City Club of New York opposes a tower in the South Street Seaport

The South Street Seaport section of Beekman Street in May of 2020 (Billie Grace Ward/Flickr, accessed under CC BY 2.0)

The following testimony from the City Club of New York was submitted to the Landmarks Preservation Commission on January 5, 2021.

The City Club of New York opposes the architecturally inappropriate, out of scale, and quite likely illegal 470-foot towers proposed by the Howard Hughes Corporation for the South Street Seaport Historic District. The design has nothing to do with the area’s historic architecture or scale, and the minimal gestures made in that direction hit a sour note.

First, the fate of the South Street Seaport Museum, now on life-support, while a serious matter, is irrelevant to the question facing the Landmarks Preservation Commission. In matters of appropriateness, the commission cannot consider questions of use. We all want the museum to thrive, but we must point out that it is the City of New York which has starved it. In any event, the $50 million pledged to the museum will not fund the construction of the new building, so its inclusion in this application is rather premature, to say the least. As to the museum’s plan to relocate its entrance and galleries, yes.

The real question is 250 Water Street. It was included within the boundaries of the historic district designated in 1977; it was vacant even then, which meant that the Landmarks Commission intended to regulate whatever new construction was proposed. Second, the lot was rezoned in 2003 specifically to prevent the out-of-scale development now proposed. Clearly, the city intended to limit height and bulk there. It is outrageous that Howard Hughes is requesting approval from the Landmarks Commission for the design of a building that cannot be built without a zoning variance, which has not been granted.

We are particularly troubled that this proposal calls for the unprecedented transfer of development rights from within the historic district to another site in the district. The legality of this maneuver is doubtful. Where, and under what circumstances, has such a maneuver been done before? The intent, surely, is that unused development rights be transferred beyond the boundaries to safeguard the scale, character, and sense of place of the historic district.

The Hughes Corporation is misleading in comparing its proposed building with towers outside the historic district. The fact is, there is nothing in the district remotely similar to what is being proposed. They are misleading in their invocation of the 1972 special district. Then, Pier 17 was not a granting site, nor was 250 Water Street a receiving site, and in any event, the creation of the historic district certainly gave the LPC authority to regulate such transfers. Originally, the city made development rights transferrable from the historic blocks in the district to save those historic structures. Pier 17, the proposed granting site, is in no way historic. So where do those 400,000 square feet come from?

To approve this building, which design-wise could be built anywhere as there is no connection to Seaport, would drive a stake through the heart of the landmarks law, threaten the zoning protections in other historic districts, and betray the previous commissioners who protected this site from bad, inappropriate design over the years.

Jeffrey Kroessler is president of the nonprofit City Club of New York.

CLOSE AD ×