Meet Your New Neighbors

The recent intel on the new building coming to 460 Washington made me think we were due for a recap of the 13 new buildings coming to Tribeca—five of which architect Morris Adjmi has a hand in—which will bring around 450 new apartments online. (And if you think that’s a lot, just wait till the follow-up post on all the buildings being converted to condos.) Here they are from north to south….

290 WEST STREET
Location: Southeast corner of West and Canal (most recently site of a gas station).
Architect / Developer: Adjmi & Andreoli / VE Equities.
Size: Eleven stories; thirteen units.
Ground floor retail: No.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

460 WASHINGTON
Location: At the northwest corner of Watts, and going through to West Street (site of a former parking lot and two decrepit buildings).
Architect / Developer: Ismael Leyva Architects / Related.
Size: Ten stories; 107 units.
Ground floor retail: Yes.
Notes: No rendering yet. Everything we know about the rental building is here.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

71 LAIGHT
Location: Southwest corner of Greenwich and Laight (combining the lot where a parking garage is now and the building to the west).
Architect / Developer: Morris Adjmi Architects / Taconic Investment Partners.
Size: Seven stories (there’s a penthouse level not visible in the rendering); 32 units.
Ground floor retail: Yes.
Notes: From Adjmi’s website: “The existing 1905 coffee and tea warehouse on Washington Street will be converted to loft condominium units. A new adjoining structure on Greenwich Street will be a mirror image of the existing building. Every detail of the historic facade will be recreated in the new building but rendered in an aluminum panel skin with a plasma finish. The effect of the new building is like a ‘photographic negative’ of the existing building.”

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

403 GREENWICH
Location: On the east side of Greenwich, between Hubert and Beach (currently the site of a two-story brick building).
Architect / Developer: Adjmi & Andreoli / Colonnade Group and Olympic Real Estate.
Size: Eight stories; four units.
Ground floor retail: No.
Notes: They’ll be starting demo in two weeks, and they hope to be completed in 12 months.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

11 N. MOORE
Location: East side of Varick, from Beach to N. Moore (formerly a parking lot).
Architect / Developer: Adjmi & Andreoli / VE Equities.
Size: Eleven stories; 22 units.
Ground floor retail: No.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

83 WALKER
Location: South side of Walker, between Cortlandt Alley and Lafayette.
Architect / Developer: Morris Adjmi Architects / Abra.
Size: Nine stories; nine units.
Ground floor retail: No.
Notes: The New York Observer on what Adjmi calls an “inversion of a cast iron building”: “Mr. Adjmi creates his unusual inversion by casting a glass-reinforced concrete that is the opposite of the typical Tribeca facade. Instead of columns curving out from the building, they are indented into it. The windows, typically recessed, jut out from facade. It is as though the building across the street had been pressed against this one while it was still drying.”

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

84 WHITE
Location: North side of White, between Cortlandt Alley and Lafayette (formerly a parking lot).
Architect / Developer: Manuel Glas Architects / Unknown.
Size: Thirteen stories; 32 units.
Ground floor retail: No.
Notes: No rendering available. 

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

137 FRANKLIN
Location: Southwest corner of Franklin and Varick.
Architect / Developer: StudioMDA / Real Estate Equities Corp.
Size: Six stories; three units.
Ground floor retail: No.
Notes: The façade work recently began.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

56 LEONARD
Location: Southwest corner of Leonard and Church (currently a vacant lot).
Architect / Developer: Herzog & De Meuron / Hines, Alexico Group, Dune Capital Management, and Goldman Sachs.
Size: Fifty-seven stories; 145 units.
Ground floor retail: It doesn’t appear so.
Notes: Sales are expected to begin later this year.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

11-15 LEONARD
Location: North side of Leonard, between Varick and Hudson (currently two garages).
Architect / Developer: Turett Collaborative Architects / Steven Schnall.
Size: Undetermined.
Ground floor retail: Unlikely. Yes (see below).
Notes: Schnall’s plan for a seven-story, six-residence building (pictured) on the two lots was met with resistance, both from neighbors and the Landmarks Preservation Commission. It’s unknown exactly how Schnall will revise the design, or whether Turett is still involved. UPDATE 7/18: The Landmarks Preservation Commission approved a new design for 15 Leonard. From Curbed: “One of the specific complaints from the commissioners and neighbors last time around was the height of the penthouse, planned to encompass about a third of the entire structure. Developer Steven Schnall […] addressed that concern by scaling down the penthouse. Schnall didn’t do anything about what one commissioner called the ‘tiresome’ fenestration, but the brick has been changed from gray to red.” Also, one of the four garages was turned into a storefront.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

87 CHAMBERS / 69-71 READE
Location: On the north side of Chambers (and the south side of Reade—it goes through) between Church and Broadway (currently a vacant lot).
Architect / Developer: Goldstein, Hill & West / Fishman Holdings North America.
Size: Eight stories; 24 units.
Ground floor retail: Yes (on the Chambers side only).

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

12-14 WARREN
Location: On the north side of Warren (between Church and Broadway).
Architect / Developer: DDG Design (which is an affiliate of…) / DDG Partners.
Size: 15 stories; undetermined number of units (but they’ll be “large”).
Ground floor retail: Presumably.
Notes: This news just broke last week, so the details are hazy. DDG is trying to buy the air rights to expand the current five-story building to 15 stories, but it hasn’t decided whether it’ll convert what’s there now (and build on it) or tear it down and start over.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

19 PARK PLACE
Location: A sliver of a lot that runs from Park to Murray, between Church and Broadway (currently a vacant lot).
Architect / Developer: Ismael Leyva Architects / ABN Realty.
Size: Twenty-one stories; 24 units.
Ground floor retail: Yes (only on the Murray side).

15 Comments

  1. These are just the new developments,how many new units in the building at Broadway and Worth and the other conversions. I can’t believe these developers are again adding new units to the neighborhood without addressing the lack of school space. Has anyone been able to identify any school space in North Tribeca since the majority of the development seems to be located in that direction. This just seems like adding insult to injury and the people who are allowing it to happen should be ashamed of themselves. Hopefully this column will be an eye opener.

  2. The richer it gets, the more boring the neighborhood gets. This was once such an interesting place.

  3. Although I empathize with your sentiments, it really is the city’s job to provide adequate schooling, not the developers.

    TriBeCa is rapidly going from good schools (let’s face it due in large part to a relatively small student body) to something quite different.

    Families are moving here for large spaces, and good schools, but project the trend outwards and one of two things could happen… Schools become overcrowded and standards fall, or more schools are built to handle the demand.

    I hope it will be the second road that is taken… Perhaps each new condo should have 5% allocated to school space? (kidding!)

    I’ll say it again.. Why not pier 40? Surely we need school space more than a cheesy NJ style mall?

  4. What about a Stroller Ownership District?! Where how much you would pay depends on the size of your stroller, the size of your nanny, and how many of your children are named Madison, Jackson, Kaitlin or Wolverine. Don’t worry, if you don’t have any of those you would still be subject to a Stroller Envy Special Assessment determined by your individual condo or co-op boards, and could only be assessed if said board can unanimously agree on what color to paint the lobby. All funds collected would go towards fighting any reasonable proposal that would reassign our precious angels from PS 234 to PS 1.

  5. I want to elect Jim Smithers for Mayor, he has all the answers with nothing behind it. Sounds like the perfect politician. He is so lucky to have a sounding board here because his comments are truly for entertainment purposes only. One of these days he might actually have something relevant to say but by then it will be too late because no one will care! Waiting for the next nonsensical post because if nothing else, they are amusing and I truly do enjoy them.

  6. Now to be serious, when they built the Gehry Building a school was part of the plan. If the developers are reaping the benefits and selling the neighborhood on the reputation of great schools, they should have to allot some space for amenities or work with the city to ensure that there are good schools to support all the new families. At this point, pretty sure new families are not coming below Canal. It is in everyone’s best interest to provide schools to support a neighborhood. But then again, how ironic if all those units remain empty because of the lack of good schools.

  7. to clarify, that including all spellings of Kaitlin = Caitlin, Kate Lynn, Catelyn, etc. and Wolverine includes the Wolf and Wolfy variations.

  8. I have never understood this process. Don’t community boards approve new developments in the neighborhood? Since space is finite, we need to ask developers to include schools, dog runs, community centers or whatever the community needs into their development plans. New residential buildings get built and then after the over crowding is already a problem, everyone scrambles for locations for new schools (surprise, there aren’t any) and then everyone sits around scratching their heads wondering how we got here. I understand the drive for new developments from an economic perspective but why can’t we have some strategic planning where the community is concerned?

  9. Forget schools – where are we supposed to park our BMWs, Mercedes, Range Rovers and Lamborghinis???????

  10. @Cami: I’m not expert on this, but from what I understand, the community boards don’t approve new developments—that sort of thing is regulated by zoning (and when developers want variances on zoning, they often need CB approval). Landmarked districts are an exception, but even then, community boards are only advisory, and I think it’s unlikely that the purpose of a building is in their purview. Obviously people who know more should correct me if I’m wrong.

  11. For me the biggest issue with all of this development is the issue of contextual design. Many of the projects listed here fit into the neighborhood – the buildings match the height of the ones next to them, they look like they fit in, they’re not adding that many units to an overcrowded neighborhood…

    But those towers are just overstepping bounds.

    I get that development is a business, and the goal is to make money on the investment. But the zoning for this neighborhood is outdated and needs to be reconsidered. I know at one point the neighborhood was struggling and zoning allowances were very liberal to encourage people to develop here.

    I feel like the time for that is well past and the overall infrastructure of the neighborhood needs to be taken into consideration before more large projects are given the go-ahead.

  12. @Erik: I am the Co-Chair of the Landmarks Committee of Community Board #1, Manhattan, which covers lower Manhattan, including TriBeCa. I’ve lived in TriBeCa for 24 years. You are exactly right. We are a recommending body, which the Landmarks Preservation Commission and the City Planning Commission take very seriously. But we cannot decide the USE of private property, and we do not write law. Most of TriBeCa is landmarked. And the Board does look into and make recommendations regarding general land use policy.

  13. Either the City Planning Commission isn’t taking CB1’s recommendations very seriously or CB1 isn’t very seriously making recommendations about their community’s concern over the disorderly growth and over-development of TrIbeca.

  14. 19 Park Place. Ugh. Ismael Leyva is such a hack.

  15. Mr. Ehrmann has been quoted calling the Herzog and de Meuron residential high-rise at 56 Leonard “a meteor that’s landing in absolutely the lowest-rise section of Tribeca.”

    There is the AT&T Long Lines building near enough to throw a rock from one to the other. There is a 50-something story residential tower adjacent to it to the southeast. Across both corners from the proposed high-rise are 20-something story buildings. What in the world is he talking about? There are low-rise areas of Tribeca, but that corner is not part of them. (Disclosure: I live diagonally across the street from 56 Leonard, and though it will likely play havoc with my life, I favor it).

    I have to take him at his word that he’s lived here more than two decades, and I don’t wish to attack him personally. But that quote left me perplexed and frustrated.