Search results for "New York City Economic Development Corporation"
Soundview and LES
NYC Ferry seeks approval to build docks for two new routes
New York City’s ferry service, which has seen a surge of popularity amidst the city's current transportation crisis, is looking to add two new routes that will cater to the Lower East Side, the Bronx, and Queens, by next summer, as first reported by DNAinfo.
The city’s Economic Development Corporation (NYEDC) filed an application with the Army Corps of Engineers earlier this month to expand the NYC Ferry service by building docks along the Soundview and Lower East Side route.
The Soundview route will stop at Clason Point, East 90th Street, East 62nd Street, and terminate at Wall Street’s Pier 11. The Lower East Side route will make stops at Long Island City, East 34th Street, Stuyvesant Town, Corlears Hook, and also end at Wall Street. The application also included a request to construct 22 floating docks for a “homeport” and boat barge at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, a site that is going under extensive redevelopment.
The Army Corps is seeking comments and suggestions for the proposed new docks, one of which at the South Bronx landing is nearly 58 feet long. The responses will then be used to “issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit,” according to DNAinfo.
The ferry system is Mayor Bill de Blasio’s $55 million plan for a five-borough network that focuses on connecting residential areas to Manhattan’s business districts, as well as bringing increased transportation access to the city’s underserved communities. Rides are operated by Hornblower, a Californian company that has previously operated in New York before, and cost the same amount as a subway ride ($2.75). Current routes include an East River, Rockaway, and South Brooklyn. An Astoria ferry route is slated to begin on August 29.
This second phase of expanding NYC Ferry’s services, which only launched in May, comes after reports revealed the system had hit the one million rider mark in July. Both routes, if the application is approved, will begin next summer.
In 2015, Mayor de Blasio dedicated $115 million of funds to renovate the three million-square-foot site into a campus that would bring in commercial and industrial tenants. A former World War I military supply base, the Cass Gilbert–designed site was designed to foster an intermodal system of transferring goods between ships, trains, and trucks. The confusing circulation has previously deterred tenants from moving to the facility, and in an effort to attract more tenants, New York–based WXY is redesigning the campus's outdoor space.
WXY's new public space improvements, which span 12,000 square feet, include new seating, permeable pavement for improved stormwater runoff, and better wayfinding mechanisms for pedestrians to navigate between the ferry landing, parking, and the building. The existing landscape will be preserved where possible.
The city acquired the complex in 1981 and the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC) is the steward of the terminal. The city has been trying to attract new tenants in its ‘Core Four’ industries: traditional manufacturing, advanced manufacturing, food manufacturing, and Made in New York (production of film, TV, and fashion). The terminal's floors are made out of reinforced concrete and can support loads of 250 to 300 pounds a square foot, making it well suited for manufacturing industries.
The renovation will bring an additional 500,000 square feet of manufacturing space by this fall. Rent hikes and small spaces have forced manufacturing companies out of the Garment District, and the city hopes the revival of Sunset Park’s many industrial spaces will aid the ailing industry, according to a New York Times report earlier this year.
“The Brooklyn Army Terminal has grown into a hotbed for modern manufacturing, diversified talent, and entrepreneurial zeal,” said NYCEDC President Maria Torres-Springer in a statement last year.
The redevelopment of BAT joins neighboring Industry City and the South Brooklyn Marine Terminal along the Sunset Park waterfront.
Exposing the Garment District
How to save Manhattan's Garment District
The garment industry—and its district in west Midtown, New York—continues to be underappreciated within a city that has transitioned to one that consumes material goods rather than producing them. As recently as 2009, alternative zoning was proposed in an attempt to consolidate all the manufacturers into one building in the Garment District (see our 2009 article “Shrink to Fit”). This spring, the Economic Development Corporation (EDC), which supports manufacturers, proposed to eliminate the special zoning laws that promote the preservation of industrial space in the district. This current zoning overlay requires a one-to-one replacement of manufacturing space when (in general) a landlord converts space to commercial use, but it has been loosely enforced. While the proposal maintains the existing industrial zoning, it is not favored by the manufacturing community, Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer, community boards, or groups such as the Garment District Alliance, Design Trust for Public Space, and the Municipal Art Society, among others. Together, these parties, who have requested additional time to review the proposal, have formed a steering committee in advance of the formal land-use review process (ULURP), slated to commence in August 2017.
The new proposal would also place limits on construction of new hotels in the area, which are considered “industrial use,” but has pressured industrial owners to sell. The city promises $15 million in technical assistance and costs for relocation into city-owned spaces in the Brooklyn Army Terminal ($100 million capital investment) or a future city-operated garment center building in Sunset Park ($136 million capital investment) to be completed in 2020. However, the synergy of the interdependent ecosystem of designers, contract manufacturers, suppliers, and distributors still has an irreplaceable value, even as it erodes.
Two alternate propositions:
Instead of removing the preservation requirements of the District’s zoning, I am proposing two scenarios to sustain the Garment District’s dense cluster of what I call “Vertical Urban Factories.” One approach could be to embrace the District’s organic mix of garment industries and residential, office, and retail space in a unique hybrid building type. Industrial preservation requirements could instead be tightened through “mandatory inclusionary manufacturing,” similar to the mayor’s plan for requirements for housing in newly rezoned areas.
Most mixed-use industrial districts (or “MX” districts) are proven to tip toward residential and commercial development because of the higher rents they command, and building owners profit from the industrial conversion to more lucrative uses. The Garment District is no different; it is an industrial zone, with other nonindustrial uses allowed. But since fashion is a lighter industry, like other niche design-driven industries, it is actually clean and quiet and can be easily integrated with office and residential uses in the same buildings. What if the higher-value residential tenants could consciously support the lower-rent garment tenants (or other light manufacturing spaces) through cross-subsidies? The result would be a diverse mix of making, selling, playing, and living; creating a 24/7 work-live community. The ground floor could remain retail space relating to the supplies that comprise the products—buttons, zippers, sequins, fabrics—while the lower and middle floors, where the showrooms are often located, would be required to be maintained as factories. The upper floors could contain the higher-value showrooms, and commercial and residential units. In reverse, new hotels could be required to house garment manufacturing, and guests could have a unique experience of watching manufacturing from their hotel rooms!
Another approach is to make the garment workers visible, injecting energy into the area with new physical transparency, exposing the industrial mysteries of workers making patterns, cutting, sewing, and pleating fabrics, in what I call the “consumption of production.” The emergence of industry-as-spectacle combines retail with making, so that the consumer also can see into the process from beginning to end, in our experience economy. This would be part of a longtime tradition of urban merchants and their workshops, or even the phenomenon of open kitchens in restaurants, and follows new interests in authenticity. In this new context, it combines another hybrid of retail-factory spaces for urban chocolatiers, coffee roasters, and bakers bringing street life to cities. In doing so, we can redefine and bolster the dynamism and diversity of our innovative and productive city.
Long Island City’s booming waterfront could be getting yet another high-rise, mixed-use project. However, this time the developers are proposing something new: the inclusion of factory space with the shiny new apartments.
After a year-long selection process, the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYEDC) chose developers TF Cornerstone (TFC) to lead the $925 million mixed-use development on the 4.5-acre site at 5-40 44th Drive and 4-99 44th Drive, as first reported by the New York Times. ODA, Handel Architects, and Mathews Nielsen Landscape Architects are the architects.
TF Cornerstone’s proposal will see a 1.5-million-square-foot, two-building complex with 1,000 rental apartments as well as 100,00 square feet of light manufacturing space. There will also be 400,000 square feet of offices, 19,000 square feet of stores, an elementary school, and a one-acre waterfront park along the Anable Basin on the East River.
The two towers are planned to rise to around 65 stories and 50 stories but will taper towards the top. The apartments will range from studios to three-bedroom units and 25 percent of the units will be below market rate in accordance with the EDC's Request for Proposal (RFP).
“One of the primary goals of this project is to support the commercial, technology, artisan, and industrial businesses of Long Island City, while also balancing that work environment with [the] market and affordable housing,” Jake Elghanayan, principal at TFC, said in a press release. TFC will also be working with three other development partners: Greenpoint Manufacturing and Design Center, Coalition for Queens, and BJH Advisors.
New York’s current zoning laws separate housing and manufacturing industries, creating clear boundaries in the city as to where factories can be. This project, which still has years to go before construction starts, will require rezoning approval to include manufacturing space in the development. If all goes according to plan, however, the project is expected to be completed by 2022.
This article originally appeared as Africa’s Speculative Urban Future on urbanNext.  United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2015), World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables, Working Paper No. ESA/P/WP.241.  Vanessa Watson. “African Urban Fantasies: Dreams or Nightmares?,” Environment and Urbanization 26, no. 215 (2014): 229.  Christopher Marcinkoski, The City That Never Was (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2015).  For a more complete discussion of these and other historical examples of speculative urbanization, see “A Brief History of Speculative Urbanization” in Marcinkoski, The City That Never Was, 16–48.  “Booms and Busts: The Beauty of Bubbles,” Economist, December 18, 2008.  Zenata Eco City project website, (accessed October 25, 2015).  While the Denver-based firm Oz Architects did much of the initial planning for Kigali 2020, the current scheme is clearly driven by Surbana given its characteristic disconnect with reality as seen in other projects such as their work in Mumbai.  “Egypt unveils plans to build new capital east of Cairo,” BBC (March 13, 2015).  For a discussion of these post-war pursuits see Eric Mumford, The CIAM Discourse on Urbanism, 1928-1960 (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2000).  “China in Africa: One Among Many,” Economist, January 17, 2015.  See for example, The EU-Africa Infrastructure Trust Fund. For a discussion of the motivations behind these investments see, The World Bank, “Harnessing Urbanization to End Poverty and Boost Prosperity in Africa,” October 23, 2013.  See Jessica Chu, “Investigation Into German Involvement In Land Grabbing In Zambia,” Zambia Land Alliance and Caritas Zambia (March 23, 2012), and Hawkwood Capital statement on corporate social responsibility.  Examples include the aforementioned Surbana and CITIC, as well as U.A.E.’s Emaar.  See “Urbanization Beyond Speculation” in Marcinkoski, The City That Never Was,220–235.  For example, a common critique of the utility of the contemporary Landscape Urbanism discourse is its perceived embrace of open-endedness and indeterminacy at the expense of well-defined physical or policy interventions.  Michelle Provoost, “Why Build a New Town?” in Volume no. 34—City in a Box. The French version of the article was published in issue 4/2016 of Swiss magazine TRACÉS.