Left rectangle ads redesigned
Robert Ripps book
History of Tribeca Buildings
Seen & Heard: Seaport Petitioners
••• “Good riddance!” emailed a reader. “The city just towed away the traffic sign that’s been in front of Morgan’s for years!” It was remarkably useless.
••• Cheryl Hazan‘s annual “Red Show” opens tonight. Below: “Lorenzo St Catherine of Alexandria” by Jeff Muhs.
••• From T.: “Just curious if any of your readers were accosted at Whole Foods Yesterday by the very aggressive petition people? You could not walk into the Greenwich St. entrance without being stopped at 6 p.m. They asked me to sign the petition and said it was to save the ‘Historic Seaport District.’ I asked for more information and they had a brochure which he handed me and I asked if this was from Howard Hughes Corporation supporting the tower, based on what I saw on the cover. The man grabbed the brochure out of my hand and walked away. When I asked again, he said he didn’t know and refused to provide any more details. They were clearly attempting to deceive people by asking people to ‘sign the petition and save the historic Seaport.’ My family met me a half an hour later and they were also approached with the same information. My husband was savvy enough to ask if they were supporting the new tower or the historic area and the man said the Seaport is historic so it’s supporting the Seaport. I wonder how many people realized it was a petition sponsored by Howard Hughes Corporation to support their plans and not necessarily in support of the ‘Historic Seaport.'”
••• Something appears to be happening at the 74 Leonard storefront. Tips? tribecacitizen@gmail.com or 917-209-6473.
••• We haven’t checked in on 30 Park Place in a while….
Update: Comments have been turned off due to spam. To have them turned back on, email tribecacitizen@gmail.com.
15 Comments
Medium rectangle #1 (top)
Right column rectangle ads
Mega rectangle
Restaurant guide icon
Shopping Guide icon
I walk past 74 Leonard almost every day and haven’t noticed anything new. I’d say about a month or two ago, I realized they had painted all of the doors and facade on the ground floor black. But there’s always a metal shutter that’s pulled down so it’s hard to see behind the glass doors. The shutter’s not always completely down and it looks to be some construction going on inside but nothing close to being finished.
They weren’t the least bit aggressive. I asked if if was in favor of the changes or against. They said in favor and I signed. Very polite and professional.
They’re from/paid by Howard Hughes, absolutely. They politely said so when I asked. They shouldn’t misrepresent themselves, though. Not a “community” petition at all. I told them I’d sign it for $100, since Hughes wants to use my signature to make a load more money. I figured that was fair. Still waiting to hear back.
Who cares who they’re paid by! The point is to get people who support it to sign it and have their voices heard. I want a new school, I want more affordable Housing, I want Community Space, I want support (financial & physical) for the South Street Seaport Museum, I want a rebuilt Tin Building and to have it we must have a fully rebuilt Pier! I understand that in order to get those things HHC must be given something back in return. If you don’t want these things than just say you want the pier demolished with just an extended esplanade. But don’t whine that you want all those things, but are unwilling to give anything back in return. The neighborhood wants and needs these things and we understand something must be given in return. It would be great if the tower could be built off site, but if the only option is to build it on the pier, then so be it.
Personally, what I don’t like are telephone surveys and petitions that purport to be representative of the community when they’re basically rigged and/or fudged. HHC’s plan may be the best reasonable solution for the Seaport, but whoever they’ve hired to handle this outreach is pretty bush league.
And HHC, PLEASE DO NOT robocall us!
Forgive me if everyone knows this, but I’ve seen a couple of comments that seem to indicate people are confused about the intersection at Reade and Hudson.
The traffic sign in front of Morgan’s was there because it used to be one of the only intersections where drivers could turn right on red. When they made the Bogardus area pedestrian, they didn’t get rid of the traffic lights (which would have made the most sense), they just stopped right turn on red and put up the sign to announce the change. Instead of traffic from Chambers onto Hudson taking turns with traffic from Reade, now pedestrians and drivers take turns. So you aren’t supposed to cross Hudson when there is a green light on Reade. You are only supposed to cross the street there when there when traffic has a red light. Likewise, traffic is supposed to respect the walk light.
The sign was ineffectual for at least the first year, partly because it was covered by trees. But I rarely see anyone turning right on red now so it somehow did its job.
Right. Sure. The seaport needs something. (Doesn’t need a residential tower, although that debate is probably over. The mall will fail too, like all malls. WTC tourists won’t choose a distant seaport mall over Brookfield & Century 21. Never have.) But hiring non-resident or part-time-resident marketing consultants (yes, they are) could backfire in a community with enough savvy to be insulted and annoyed. Instead of gathering potential voter signatures aimed to sway the Manh borough prez, HH could offer a real neighborhood investment by ponying up rent for already-existing space for an DOE school, since we all know a school in said tower is at least 5, 6 years away. You’d get your tower approved in an afternoon.
Once again Frank you don’t know what you are talking about. The old mall at the WTC was among the highest grossing malls in the country. The mall at Columbus Circle does extremely well. The mall at the Seaport will be a huge success as will the movie theater. As for “ponying up” please tell us your plan. Exactly how is it financially feasible for HHC to invest $150MM+ to rebuild a pier and the Tin Building (not to mention providing a school, affordable housing, community space, a food hall, South Street Seaport Museum funding, etc which comes out to over $300MM) without providing the tower? The existing agreement is a done deal. Personally, I would love it if the tower could be built at the Heliport site at pier 6. The community wants to get rid of that also and it is already a city owned site. Alas, that makes the project even more expensive as HHC would have to rebuild not one, but TWO piers. Perhaps the city can donate the pier 6 site and provide enough tax and other incentives to make it work. I have no idea, but its worth a discussion. Again, where is YOUR plan to rebuild the pier without HHC money? The city will not and should not pay for it when there are so many other priorities and they have already said they will not pay. At the end of the day, if it takes a tower at Pier 17 to get all of these benefits, so be it.
Funny how the same talking points are spewed out as if I challenged any of those. Any opp to get that stuff said, eh? Again: if HHC wants to build community support, piss or get off the pot. Paid marketing lawyers and part-time residents without kids asking for a school and street chuggers are a huge miscalculation, far as good faith. Pay now.
As for your tower: Good luck building a free standing residential tower down there that won’t crack in half when floodwaters and high winds simultaneously imbalance it from different directions after city construction contracts indefinitely delay any sort of flood protections. Would you live there? Could you afford to?
PS Why isn’t the proposed “affordable housing” in the tower?
But then you’re a real estate agent, no? Lots invested, right?
YES, I would live there, but I’m very happy where I am. I trust architects and engineers know much more about construction than you do. Once again, you propose no alternative. It is YOU who must “piss or get off the pot”. HHC has offered what they will provide to get what they want. What are YOU offering? How will YOU pay for the pier reconstruction and rebuilding of the Tin Building without HHC? It’s a fair question that opponents seem to have no answer for. Whether I can afford to live somewhere (or you for that matter) has NO bearing on whether it should be built. As for Affordable housing, who cares where it is as long as it’s in the neighborhood?
Luiz,
When did NYC stop being responsible for building public schools? Have you heard of the NYC Department of Education and School Construction Authority?
In 2008 SHop Architects said that they wanted to put a school west of South Street, because they thought it was too dangerous for school children to have to cross South Street. This year, they want those same school children to cross dangerous South Street & want to add some more traffic to the mix with a new service road extending onto the pier?
You “trust architects and engineers”?
“As for Affordable housing, who care where it is as long as it’s in the neighborhood”? What the heck is that supposed to mean?
Schermerhorn Row is on the U.S. National Register of Historical Places. It is 200+ year old architecture, that was recently restored. When did it become ok to steal from the public trust to give to the poor? Why on Earth would anyone entertain tearing it apart & put ‘affordable’ housing there?
Last I checked, taxes paid for infrastructure repairs and schools and there are a lot of taxes being paid in Lower Manhattan.
The Schools are not stepping forward to fund schools that the community desperately needs, so when a developer offers to build one, attention MUST be paid.
Sorry, I have no fear of South Street being a dangerous street. Kids cross West Street to go to school all the time and that is a far busier street. By the way, isn’t Water Street pretty busy? Kids cross that all the time too. Where is your outrage?
My affordable housing comment is pretty self explanatory. Why does it have to be inside the tower? It can just as easily be nearby. Who cares where it is, as long as it is IN the community? Are people going to turn it down because they don’t like the address? Seriously?
As for Schemerhorn Row, I agree that it is a tremendous historic site and I would want to see the portion of the building that houses the remains of the old hotel preserved and kept as part of the South Street Seaport Museum. That is what compromises do. Why shouldn’t the rest of it be converted to housing? I’d be happy to hear the pros and cons. Don’t forget that a significant portion of the new housing would be in the new building being constructed on John and South Street.
Schools do not step forward. NYC government and NYC agencies are responsible for building schools. Yes, we should pay attention when a private developer offers to step forward – and ask “why are they doing this?” HHC answers to their share holders, HHC is not a philanthropic organization by any stretch. HHC has projected to their share holders that their largest profits will come from The South Street Seaport.
HHC is renting the Seaport for less than $3.50 a square foot. You can’t live in a refrigerator box in NYC for less than $3.50 a square foot.
Perhaps, you have no fear of South Street, but, ShOP did only a few years ago – before they decided that they wanted to put a private service road, adding substantially to the vehicular dangers.
Oh, and the majority of children that attend PS 89 don’t have to cross West Street, they live in Battery Park City.
Schermerhorn Row is on the U.S. National Register of Historical Places. It is 200+ year old architecture, that was recently restored with millions of dollars of public financing When did it become okay to steal from the public trust in order to give to private developers?