Hidden no more, Seaport developer’s desire for hotels & housing revealed

Downtown Express photo by Milo Hess  It was  Tartan Day at the Seaport Saturday. More photos on P. 2.

Downtown Express photo by Milo Hess
It was Tartan Day at the Seaport Saturday. More photos on P. 2.

BY TERESE LOEB KREUZER | The Howard Hughes Corporation wants to erect a first-class hotel, market-rate residential apartments and additional retail space in the Seaport. There is no longer any doubt about their intentions.

Nine days after the City Council approved a ULURP (Uniform Land Use Review Procedure) application from Howard Hughes for construction plans on Pier 17, and for rezoning the East River waterfront between Maiden Lane and the Brooklyn Bridge, new information has surfaced about what the Dallas-based developer and E.D.C. agreed to as the basis for a “mixed use project” in the Seaport.

A Letter of Intent between the parties dated Dec. 12, 2011 had previously been released, but portions of it relating to a “mixed use project” were blacked out. Now, in an unredacted version, it becomes clear what Howard Hughes, and its subsidiary, South Street Seaport Limited Partnership, have in mind.

Though the Letter of Intent does not stipulate exactly where these buildings would go, the amount of square footage mentioned suggests that to a large extent, they would have to be in the newly rezoned waterfront area.

The New Market Building, which is not in the Seaport historic district, is a likely spot for this possible development. Although the City Council just approved zoning changes to limit building heights in the area, the zoning could be changed again.

Should Howard Hughes proceed with some version of its mixed-use plans for the South Street Seaport, they would still have to go through another ULURP process. They would have to be vetted by Community Board 1, the Landmarks Preservation Commission (for those parts of the plan affecting a landmarked district), the City Planning Commission, the Borough of Manhattan President and the City Council.

The unredacted Letter of Intent was obtained via a Freedom of Information Law request to the E.D.C., and provided to Downtown Express, which first reported its contents online, March 29.

The letter says the hotel could be about 95,000 square feet, and there could also be approximately 280,000 gross square feet of market-rate residential apartments, and about 82,000 gross square feet of additional retail space.

In addition, the stipulations include about 60,000 gross square feet of parking plus reconstruction of the Tin Building to consist of approximately 100,000 square feet. The document notes that the Tin Building is now a four-level building but that the South Street Seaport Limited Partnership would have the right to increase it in height to five levels.

The document states that the E.D.C. and the Hughes subsidiary acknowledge that the range of areas for each of the major components of the mixed use project are general estimates and that, in connection with the development of the final plan for the mixed use project, the Seaport subsidiary has the right to reallocate space among its major components without the consent of the E.D.C.

“The allocation of square footage between hotel use and residential may vary as between such two uses as S.S.S.L.P. shall determine in its sole discretion,” the letter says.

“We’ve been asking [Howard Hughes] for a master plan for the site all along. They have obviously not been telling us the truth when they said they didn’t have one,” John Fratta, chairperson of Community Board 1’s Seaport Committee, said when told of the new information. “Obviously, hearing this, there was a very clear plan. This is the problem that the Seaport Committee and I’m sure, the board, has with Howard Hughes. They’re not being forthcoming with us.”

Asked what the Howard Hughes “mixed use project” would consist of and where the elements of it might be located, Alex Howe, a spokesperson for H.H.C. declined to comment.

He also declined to comment on whether there was a master plan for the Seaport.

Downtown Express photo by Milo Hess Councilmember Margaret Chin came to the South Street Seaport on Saturday to celebrate Tartan Day with Robert Currie, president of the Clan Currie Society. She said she was happy that lots of people were at the Seaport again and that the leases of the Pier 17 tenants had been extended through the busy summer season.

Downtown Express photo by Milo Hess
Councilmember Margaret Chin came to the South Street Seaport on Saturday to celebrate Tartan Day with Robert Currie, president of the Clan Currie Society. She said she was happy that lots of people were at the Seaport again and that the leases of the Pier 17 tenants had been extended through the busy summer season.

On March 29, Kelly Magee, press secretary for City Councilmember Margaret Chin, in whose district the South Street Seaport is located, said in an email, “There is absolutely nothing in the L.O.I. (Letter of Intent) that describes H.H.C.’s development plans. Absolutely nothing. They haven’t even taken their option to develop!”

She subsequently clarified to say that the square footage and specific uses in the letter, fall far short of fully fleshed out “development plans.”

Robert LaValva, founder of the New Amsterdam Market on South St., said that in August 2012, he was allowed to look at the unredacted L.O.I. though he was not allowed to keep a copy. He said that he did this in the presence of Councilmember Chin and several members of her staff, along with some of City Council Speaker Christine Quinn’s staff members. “I certainly remembered that the Letter of Intent made reference to hotels and market-rate housing,” he said, but without the actual document in his hands, he was unable to prove this.

However, when he testified in front of City Council’s Sub-committee on zoning and land use on March 14, 2013, he said, “Some people will try to tell you that the ULURP before the Council today has nothing to do with the Fish Market site and that we should express our concerns in the future. I am here to tell you that is not the case.”

He went on to say, “What is troubling about this is that E.D.C. and Howard Hughes have a Letter of Intent to redevelop the Fulton Fish Market site as a luxury residential high rise, hotel and retail complex. The proposed rezoning therefore enables a development that has never been revealed to the public or reviewed by the Council. If we wait until these plans are proposed, it will be too late. The only time to protect this site from demolition is now.”

LaValva said subsequently that Magee scolded him at the time for bringing these matters up at the Pier 17 ULURP hearing.

Seth Pinsky, president of the E.D.C., told Downtown Express March 28 that E.D.C. can say “no” to a proposal from Howard Hughes, depending exactly on what is proposed. The plans would have to meet certain criteria, many of which are spelled out in the Letter of Intent.

E.D.C. officials have not explained why the unredacted version was withheld until after the Council vote.

The Hughes firm has until Aug. 30 to exercise its option and submit more details.

Councilmember Chin, in an email to Downtown Express March 30, suggested the Seaport developer has a development plan that has not been released to the public.

“Like the community board, my office has also asked Howard Hughes to make their development plans public,” Chin said.

“I understand the frustration people feel, but the Letter of Intent (L.O.I.) is not a master plan for the Seaport. The L.O.I. does not contain any specific development proposals, and furthermore, it is not accurate to use the numbers quoted in the L.O.I. to predict what future development could entail. On March 20, 2013, as part of the Pier 17 ULURP, the Council passed a rezoning that limits what can be built at the Seaport. This applies to any form of development be it residential, commercial, or community facility use. This recently passed rezoning set the limits for future development and supercedes what is in the L.O.I.

Howard Hughes Corporation will be redeveloping Pier 17 and has an option on the Tin Building, which is in the Seaport Historic District, and the New Market Building, which is just outside.

Howard Hughes Corporation will be redeveloping Pier 17 and has an option on the Tin Building, which is in the Seaport Historic District, and the New Market Building, which is just outside.

“If Howard Hughes does take the option to develop, they will have to present a formal plan to the city, but this has not happened yet. That plan will have to go through the public ULURP process. Development cannot proceed unchecked. The city has final say and approval on development at the Seaport.”

Howard Hughes Corp. is scheduled to meet with C.B. 1 April 16, although executives are expected to talk about short-term plans to bring more visitors to the Seaport this summer.

-— With Reporting by Josh Rogers

Spread the word:

11 Responses to Hidden no more, Seaport developer’s desire for hotels & housing revealed

  1. What Howard Hughes is assuming is that there will not be another Tropical Storm Sandy in the near future. It is quite possible that there will be such a storm, and the tenants and the Hughes Co. will lose a lot. we should really have large areas of parkland with artificially created hills to mitigate the effects of storm surges.

    W.

  2. Chin says she asked Hughes Corp to "make their development plans public." So don't approve the ULURP until they do. Oh, wait, you and Speaker Quinn and the City Council already approved it? Perhaps Chin/Quinn should officially be on the payroll of corporate interests instead of the charade that they are representatives of the community.

  3. If a residential property goes up here and the plans for the Path-mark site is for two residential towers, sounds like the Financial District is going to be right where Tribeca and Battery Park City are with respect to school shortages and other amenities. Does nothing ever sink in to these people that you have to provide the basic amenities? I guess not because people still flock to the neighborhoods. Did you miss the past 10 years of wait lists for kindergarten seats.

  4. This is certainly the 2nd post, of urs I went through.
    Although I really love this 1, “Hidden no more, Seaport developer’s desire for hotels & housing revealed | DOWNTOWN
    EXPRESS” the most. Cya -Trista

  5. I’d thought from the first scene we see Iron Man in THE AVENGERS, it was estealishbd that the arc reactor was set up on the feeder cable under water a few miles south of the Verrazano Narrows, which would put it outside of the city jurisdiction in an area where the line between New York and New Jersey is still being fought over. Considering how much power the unit in his chest gives Tony, it’s easy to assume that a unit the size of his thigh could power the building and maybe for a few hours Grand Central Station beneath it.As for how to get around the zoning restrictions, his easiest path might be to seek rezoning, with assistance coming from this argument: That as the under-area of the property from whom he would have purchased air rights (the way Pan Am Airlines had to when they built the real-life 200 Park Avenue) being a utility (Metro North) which provides an essential service and that, as a fellow service provider (the man who privatized this country’s defense as he claims in IRON MAN II) his presence is also useful and essential, that having two services available at the same site makes perfect sense. And presumably, if Stark Industries offers to re-negotiate the air rights over Grand Central, that could buy him a LOT of brownie points in Albany and City Hall Good piece, and a great conversation starter over here.

  6. I still think it should be a bed and breakfast as opposed to a hotel

  7. The Howard Hughes Corporation is already a popular hotel that no need to erect other establishments.

  8. We are all glad of the result of the revelation. That merely gives much more benefit to hotels and housing owners for their business to be more productive and would also benefit the city's tourism.

  9. Attracting tourism will be the basic objective of such acts,, But hopefully people don't bother much about making things for that benefit their own people but build things to attract others

  10. I agree with Brian, I think B&B would be a better choice instead of a hotel. This will help bring in more tourists though, that's the bottom line. Anyway, thanks a lot for sharing this Josh.

  11. Being located in the seaport historic district, of course they have to do some studies first and make sure they come up with the right approach as the council as the last say. They will probably state their intentions after a thorough analysis of the situation.
    Thanks for sharing Josh.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


four + 9 =

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>