By Jere Hester
Battery News
October 23, 1989
“Seaport Historic District Expanded” and “Milstein Plan
Draws Boos”
Area activists had been fighting for the landmarking of the block known as “Block 106” on city maps since 1985. After years of waiting came the verdict, which five of the city’s biggest banks called “a breach of faith.” On Oct. 12, the Board of Estimate voted to extend the South Street Seaport Historic District one block. The block, bordered by Peck Slip, Dover, Pearl, and Water Sts., was added to the district by the city Landmarks Preservation Commission that past July.
“We were up against some of the biggest power brokers in the city, but we won,” said Paul Goldstein, district manager of Community Board 1, which fought for the extension. “It was a real David and Goliath battle.”
A two-hour public hearing drew over two dozen supporters and opponents of the extension. City Council president Andrew Stein was the only Board of Estimate member to vote against the plan.
Five banks fought the extension along with several building owners and the Postal Service, which wanted to build a bigger, more modern facility on the site. Opponents of the landmarking said the decision would cripple development on the block.
The five banks made a deal with the city back in 1973 that guaranteed them 1.4 million square feet in development rights in exchange for forgiving $7.5 million in mortgages on area buildings.
The city then took over the structures and established the South Street Seaport complex. The banks feared that the project, which called for development in platforms on the East River from Fulton to Wall Sts., would never get off the ground.
If Block 106 had not been added to the district, developers could have constructed a 50-story tower there.
In the same issue was a similar article about the Seaport Historic District, also written by Hester. In the face of mounting community opposition, Milstein Properties was preparing to present its new design for an office building at 250 Water St. to the Landmarks Preservation Committee. Over 60 angry residents had shown up at a recent Community Board 1 meeting to criticize the proposal, which called for a 15-story, 180-foot tall office building with retail space, because they felt it was too tall and bulky for the neighborhood, and would dwarf the other buildings in the district.
Milstein Properties had bought the property ten years earlier for $3 million, but the site was still a garage and remains one today. Milstein hired architect and former Landmarks Commission member Charles Platt to design the 480,000 square foot building. Platt was an outspoken opponent of Milstein’s last plan, which had been scrapped in May of that year.
Milstein senior vice president James Yasser said the developer hired Platt because it wanted to learn from its past mistakes. “The last four were bad submissions,” he said. The commission did eventually approve an office tower for the site, but it was never built. Subsequent residential designs were rejected by the commission.
Prepared by Helaina N. Hovitz
