CB1 chair Catherine McVay Hughes chatting with Chris Curry, senior executive vice president of The Howard Hughes Corporation, before the start of CB1's Landmarks Committee meeting on Jan. 5. With Curry was one of HHC's lobbyists, Julie Greenberg, (with back to camera).

to the Landmarks Preservation Commission to extend the South Street Seaport Historic District to be congruent with the Federal Historic District boundaries, which include the area of the proposed tower on the New Market Building site. If the New Market Building were within the City's Seaport Historic District, the building would be protected and there could be no further discussion about constructing a massive tower on the South Street Seaport waterfront.  

The request to extend the South Street Seaport Historic District boundaries is not new. As the resolution stated, Community Board 1 has been trying to get these boundaries extended for the last 15 years.  

"We have tried to get this passed through three LPC chairs and two administrations, but have not succeeded in getting this request granted," said Ehrmann. "It is highly unlikely at this point - at least within normal processes - that this will occur."

But the committee had to ask.   

The rest of the evening unspooled a series of pronouncements on the patchwork quilt of proposals that Howard Hughes had laid in front of the committee. The group approved the HHC plan to dismantle and move the landmarked Tin Building, but nixed a proposal to add an additional floor to the structure.  

A canopy made of ethylene tetrafluoroethylene, (ETFE), a clear plastic, was approved for the roof of Pier 17, presumably to make the roof usable in all seasons, although its perch high above the East River, open on all sides to wind and weather, might make some of that use problematic. Some CB1 members opposed to the canopy said that they feared that its true purpose was as a rack from which to hang loudspeakers for mega-events that could, if Howard Hughes has its way, draw thousands of fans to Pier 17.   

A proposal to dispatch the unattractive Link Building was approved without comment. Not so a small canopy linking the Tin Building and Pier 17 - designed to keep precipitation off the heads of pedestrians. This proposal was not considered "appropriate or contextual" in Bruce Ehrmann's words. Said the draft resolution, it further removes "the sense of place and grittiness of the Historic District."

Opponents of the Howard Hughes proposals have said that the little canopy was not the only thing removing the "sense of place and grittiness of the Historic District." At Community Board 1's Dec. 10 Landmarks Committee meeting, CB1 member Paul Hovitz famously remarked that the Howard Hughes proposals, including the glass pavilions and tubular lighting suggested by HHC for placement under the FDR Drive, reminded him of Las Vegas.

The draft resolution commented warmly on the idea of pavilions and lighting, but said they needed further work "to develop a more integrated solution."

The proposal to create view corridors down the East River Esplanade "is appreciated in the application and much welcomed," said the draft resolution.  

At that point, the draft resolution devolved into something resembling dyspepsia. HHC's proposal to extend Beekman and Fulton Streets to the piers will "introduce disruptive and dangerous vehicular traffic, undermine the historic character of the district and directly contradict the pedestrianization goals of the Seaport Working Group, " said the draft resolution.  

Opponents of that proposed street extension have said that its real and primary purpose would be to serve occupants of the Howard Hughes waterfront tower, should it be built. In any case, CB1's Landmarks Committee was not a fan.   

Then there was the matter of the South Street Seaport Museum and what space it might occupy and of Schermerhorn Row, and how it might be utilized. Howard Hughes has proposed turning 202-year-old Schermerhorn Row into affordable housing, while building a little pavilion for the South Street Seaport Museum on Pier 16, next to its historic ships.  

Chris Curry and Jonathan Boulware

Jonathan Boulware, interim president of the South Street Seaport Museum, was invited to come to the front of the room so the committee could ask him some questions.   

"I know it's a placeholder," said Catherine McVay Hughes to Boulware, referring to the Pier 16 pavilion, "but there is no way that the museum would move out onto the pier into that small space?"

Boulware paused slightly before answering, perhaps because he was stunned by the question. "I'm not sure how to respond to that with sufficient enthusiasm," he said, eliciting laughter from the audience. "Absolutely not. We would fail to perform our essential function if we were situated only on Pier 16. Without the marriage of a square-rigged ship and the spaces on Schermerhorn Row, we would not be the South Street Seaport Museum." The audience applauded.

Ehrmann said of the proposed pavilion on Pier 16, "We're not here to judge placeholders that have no architectural presentation."

The draft resolution deplored the fact that remnants of old, 19th-century hotels, currently extant within Schermerhorn Row and part of the South Street Seaport Museum, never received interior historic designation, which would have protected them.    

Curry interjected that "the hotel space within Schermerhorn Row - we've always had earmarked for the museum." He said that Howard Hughes was waiting for the museum to finish its current feasibility study "so they can tell us what they need on Schermerhorn Row."  

This remark seems to place Howard Hughes in the driver's seat as the arbiter of the South Street Seaport Museum's fate - and also of the fate of Schermerhorn Row. For many reasons, its suitability for affordable housing is questionable, and for additional reasons, undesirable.

It is, itself, a historic artifact, rescued from decay and demolition with millions of dollars in public funds. It contains historic artifacts in addition to the old hotels - walls covered with 19th-century graffiti, centuries-old industrial machinery, fire-charred ceiling beams and handmade bricks, the remnants of old fire doors, the tracery of staircases, long disappeared and other testaments to its colorful history as New York City's first World Trade Center.  

If Howard Hughes gets its way and transforms Schermerhorn Row into affordable housing, all of this history would be lost to the public. 

While throwing The Howard Hughes Corporation some bones, on its last page, the draft resolution finally got down to some verbiage that cannot have made HHC execs too happy. That tower cropped up again.  

Be it further resolved, said the resolution, "Community Board 1 is committed to work with the applicant to ensure the survival of the sense of place of the Historic District and the surrounding area, including the iconic views of one of the most important individual landmarks in the world, the Brooklyn Bridge."  (Translation: No tower blocking those views.)

Next: "Community Board 1 again appeals to the Landmarks Preservation Commission to provide leadership and support the community in this process by immediately calendaring the extension of the New York City South Street Seaport Historic District to reflect the same boundary as the Federal Historic District to help ensure the sense of place remains within the Historic District and to preserve the vitally important link between the Historic District and the iconic Brooklyn Bridge Individual New York City and Federal Landmark." (As Bruce Ehrmann remarked, Howard Hughes probably doesn't have to worry too much about this, but you never know.)

Finally, said the draft resolution, "Community Board 1 does not support the segmentation of the proposed plan and appeals to Landmarks Preservation Commission, the City Planning Commission, the Economic Development Corporation, all elected officials and the Mayor to require the postponement of any further consideration of the application until the entire plan is resolved in accordance with the Seaport Working Group guidelines (attached)."  

And that was the zinger - the really important clause that will undoubtedly be discussed further on Jan. 26 at Community Board 1's full board meeting, and if passed by the full board, would place The Howard Hughes Corporation on formal notice that without a master plan that conforms to Seaport Working Group guidelines, there is no deal that Community Board 1 can support.  

- Terese Loeb Kreuzer

Chris Curry, senior executive vice president of The Howard Hughes Corporation, at the end of Community Board 1's Landmarks Committee meeting on Jan. 5, 2015.

At the meeting of Community Board 1's Battery Park City Committee on Jan. 6, committee chairman Anthony Notaro said that the committee was very disappointed in the RFP process and viewed it as "flawed in that there was a very low rating on community amenities, community focus and even less so on experience."

He commented that all of the elected officials representing Lower Manhattan have formally requested that the Authority withdraw the current RFP and reissue it with more transparency.

"The BPCA is supposedly meeting in January," Notaro said. He said that he didn't know what action the board would take at that time. Until a decision is made, the Community Board has asked the Battery Park City Authority to extend Fortenbaugh's contract.   

At the Jan. 6 Community Board meeting, Fortenbaugh and Robin Forst, a spokesperson for the Battery Park City Authority, gave conflicting accounts of what has happened to date.  

Fortenbaugh said that the Authority had sent him a dockage agreement for him to sign. "It was onerous," he said. "They wanted $10 million [liability insurance] per vessel. They wanted another $10,000 security deposit on top of the $30,000 that we had already given them. [It said that] we can't use the clubhouse as it's been used for 10 years [because the agreement prohibits serving liquor or alcohol of any kind]. It was an exit document."

Robin Forst addressing Community Board 1's Battery Park City Committee.

Forst countered that, "there is some incorrect information circulating and I wanted to take the opportunity to clarify a few of the points. The BPCA became the marina's operator on the first of January when the prior license agreement expired. As the owner and operator, it is our obligation to protect both the asset and its visitors. To that end, Ted Wallace was hired as the interim director of marina operations and FJC was hired to provide security at the marina and PEP continues its patrols, which include the marina area. In addition, the Authority assumed all insurance costs for the operation and oversight of the asset. While chains have been installed at all vacant slips as a safety precaution, access to boats in the marina has not been restricted. North Cove Marina Management prior to the expiration of the 2005-2014 license was offered an opportunity to continue to dock its vessels at the marina for up to 90 days at a substantially discounted rate with the ability to continue its Manhattan Yacht Club and Sailing School business. Although NCMM was required to show concerns for its property in order for its vessels to remain docked at the marina, BPCA informed NCMM that its current insurance was sufficient provided that it remains in effect. Currently the Honorable William Wall along with other smaller vessels and equipment are in the marina."

Fortenbaugh said that he had not been informed by the Authority that his current insurance was adequate.  

Just before noon on Jan. 7, Fortenbaugh received an email from Michael LaMancusa, who works in the Real Property department of the Battery Park City Authority. LaMancusa invited Fortenbaugh to meet with him, Ted Wallace, and an attorney from the BPCA's Legal Department, at Battery Park City Parks Conservancy offices, preferably before 4 p.m. that day "to discuss coordination of North Cove Marina Management's provision of certain records, documents, and materials to the Authority, pursuant to the terms of License Agreement, as well as the removal of any personal property from the Marina on or before January 20, 2015. We should also discuss any other protocols necessary to facilitate the Authority's operation of the Marina." 

Fortenbaugh replied through his attorney that he couldn't attend a meeting on such short notice but that another day and time would be welcome. The BPCA then withdrew its suggestion of a meeting.  

On Jan. 8, more than 100 people assembled at the Battery Park City library for a Town Hall meeting, expressing support of Fortenbaugh.

Fortenbaugh said on the morning of Jan. 9 that so far nothing material has changed, however. He said that he was looking into where and how he could move the Honorable William Wall clubhouse and other property of the Manhattan Sailing Club and the Manhattan Sailing School that remain at the marina.  

A thaw does not seem imminent.

- Terese Loeb Kreuzer