Excellent editorial. I whole-heartedly agree with almost all of it. Preserving individual landmarks is great. But what is actually being “preserved” here, other than NIMBY property values? And how can the LPC legitimately consider property values at all? How does that relate to their mission? (And are property values really going to tank when a waterfront view goes from zero obstruction to 30% obstructed? It’s still a condo with a great view of the water and the Brooklyn Bridge!)
The seaport is already surrounded by high-rises. This project won’t change that one bit.
But that surface parking lot is a blight on the whole neighborhood. I lived there until recently. It’s run down even by parking lot standards. Anything to make better use of that land will be a huge benefit to the whole area.
For years I kept wondering how it existed blocks from the financial district. I think it’s a great mixed use location.
There was a CB1 hearing on this project today. NIMBYs were out in full force. This Twitter thread covers it blow-by-blow:
If I were HHC i’d rent the lot as a parking lot for garbage trucks if the LPC rules against it.
I’m mildly amused that all the NIMBY nonsense from people in Southbridge Towers looks like it will result in a shorter, fatter design that blocks their water views much more completely than the original design of two skinny towers.
the model I made in Sketchup of 250 Water street, I’m still missing some little things and soon I’ll upload it to my account where I upload the city in Sketchup
Jeez another design change?
From the NYpost article mackensen posted
I like it.
I hope that it obscures that Mitchell Lama garbage.
Eh. Looks fine. Above-average, even.
It just blows my mind that the Southbridge Towers people raised all that stink only to end up with something that will block their water views even more than the original proposal.
It’s sleek, but looks pretty boring honestly.
Downtown, or at least the east side, needs to get some real showstoppers. This building feels like filler which doesn’t help since almost every moderately tall building on this side of the city has zero architectural merit on its own aside from being skyline filler. But I guess the real benefit is that it blocks out what is probably the worst development over here.
Like, I don’t remember a time before right now that I’ve ever really singled out anything in this area and looked at it on its own. Take these for example, some of them I’ve never even noticed before now.
latest in the saga
In my personal Architectural Aesthetics classification scheme of good/better/best; this rates a solid BETTER.
I particularly like the brick work, the color variations, and subtle variations of the surfaces on the facade.
I agree. I’m ok with it not being tall. The tower is ok, but the base is very nice.