I agree. Lower Manhattan needs more supertalls and highrises. Too many ugly mid-century boxes which make the skyline look pretty dated. Some fresh new towers would be nice.
2 Likes
It’s just wild to me that NIMBYs across the street forced this, and yet the new design will actually block more of their views compared to the skinnier tower.
4 Likes
Well, at least this site will be easy to tear down later when things change.
1 Like
I love it
So they shortened the tower into two small towers, and now they don’t want the parking lot to be replaced with the tower in general. Seriously, wtf is wrong with these people?
It reads
Lower Manhattan groups have filed a lawsuit in a last-ditch effort to block the construction of a new tower in the South Street Seaport Historic District.
Development company Howard Hughes Corp. in May gained approval from the city Landmark Preservation Commission to construct the building, which is slated to be erected on the site of a 60-year old parking lot at 250 Water St.
The company plans a 26-story, 324-foot-tall tower that includes offices and 270 apartments — at least 70 of which would be affordable units with average rents that are 40% of the area’s median income.
But the South Street Seaport Coalition and other downtown residents seek a Manhattan Supreme Court judge to issue an injunction halting the development, arguing the LPC held closed-door meetings with Howard Hughes Corp. to coordinate the building’s approval. The lawsuit filed Friday references previous failed attempts by previous owners of the parking lot to erect a building in its place.
The parking lot is on the edge of the historic district, which was established by the city in 1977. Any construction within the area requires approval from the LPC.
“Landmarks Preservation Commission had no rational basis to conclude that it would be appropriate for and consistent with the effectuation of the Landmarks Preservation Law to permit a developer to build a 324-foot tower inside the district, and it was legally erroneous, arbitrary and capricious, and an abuse of discretion for the Landmarks Preservation Commission to do so,” the lawsuit states.
Representatives from Howard Hughes last year said the building would cost $850 million to build, and that the company would invest $50 million as a funding boost for the South Street Seaport Museum.
The building would neighbor other high rises on the southern end of Manhattan — and would block the waterfront views of some nearby residents and property owners.
The South Street Seaport Coalition also filed a lawsuit against the LPC last year in an effort to block the project before it gained City Council and LPC approval. Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron in October dismissed the lawsuit, stating the LPC had not approved the project at the time.
2 Likes
But it’s a historic parking lot!! lol
Also wonder why was an empty lot included in the district in the first place…
5 Likes
2 Likes
Jesus they never stop. They reduced the building height, added affordability. What more wtf? Why is this brownfield parking lot so important to them. For their water views? Smh, they got nothin else to do but nag
3 Likes
1 Like
Its been halted by a judge.
3 Likes
The dumb***ks are back at it again!
At this point they should go back to the original plan and completely destroy the seaport and the tin building. Like F em.
3 Likes
Oh would you look at that. The first time I’ve seen the post, actually post something that isn’t pure garbage.
1 Like
I haven’t read the opinion. I assume that the developer is appealing.
What can be built as of right?
I believe what was being proposed is the as of right extent. Instead of being tall and narrow it’s area was just short and wide. Someone feel free to correct me if im wrong.
there may be some more affordable units and donations to the seaport museum still on the table but the tower itself would not change much if it becomes totally as of right. Just less affordable units and probably nothing to improve the community.
2 Likes
If that was as of right, how was it blocked?
court injunction for proceedings.