The print edition describes this as virtuous. That is an unfortunate word to use when no mention is made of energy efficiency or environmental innovation. Those elements should be part of any critic's work in the age of climate crisis.
12
As several readers have noted, this article is sorely lacking in background of how Essex Crossing happened. There were years of monthly community board meetings that included many stakeholders as public members working with the City to plan this development. The Times recently recommended that people vote against giving community boards more time and information on the Charter Revision land use action ballot question. Essex Crossing is an example of how community boards can collaborate on land use actions. It does take a long time and hard work. The community board members and stakeholders participated as volunteers to serve their community.
15
As this article states in the first paragraph, Essex Crossing replaces a "vast no-man's land" and "civic wound." Who wouldn't prefer buildings - of any sort - over the rat-filled parking lots that were created decades ago by bulldozing the tenements that were already there? There's no denying that when all of the new buildings on Delancey are finally open, the boulevard will feel much more lively and enhance the community more than parking lots would ever do. But to suggest that this type of mega-development should be repeated ignores the fact that to do so elsewhere would require other neighborhoods to be demolished, as well as the fact that Essex Crossing adds more people, more cars, more street congestion - more everything - to the LES without providing for all those bodies and cars. More people cramming onto the same old subway platforms. More children cramming into the same schools. More cars fighting with one another to make it down the one-lane Clinton street, which is now clogged with (and often blocked completely by) 18-wheelers day and night, delivering to Target and Trader Joe's. More cars fighting for parking spots and no new garages and fewer parking options. The fact that all of this is allowed to occur is both surprising and deeply frustrating. And, no, it shouldn't be allowed to happen again, especially if that means razing buildings that are already home to living, breathing, hard-working New Yorkers.
13
This reads like a press release for the glassy glossy Essex Crossing, especially obnoxious because ‘they’ won. Call gentrification what it is. Developers have every inch of the city tagged on their map, this is only a preview of what’s to come.
The original Essex Market was a rare piece of communal harmony housed in a classic indoor market structure often seen in Europe and Latin America but rare in this country. Besides fresh produce and other food supply, there were nice bakeries, specialty food stores, and the wonderful gallery Cuchifritos. A farmer’s market without the hype. A place that’s part of the culture fabric of LES loved and already missed by many.
There was no real reason for Essex Market to be closed except someone said so. Someone had big plans for the LES without the people there in mind. Someone whose idea of history and culture can only be interpreted in dollars and square footage. Someone who thinks he knows better than you and can replace your world with his.
While so many rejoice Target and Trader Joe’s coming to LES, I mourn another piece of vanishing New York.
15
Sounds like communism to me. Subsidized rents? Who decides which businesses qualify, and how large the subsidies should be? Would anyone want to compete on those terms?
Lower-margin businesses supported by high-margin ones? Again, who determines the criteria? What happens when a "high-margin" business is stumbling? Or when "lower-margin" one is thriving?
Free organic food? How many heirloom tomatoes can I get? One at a time, or enough to make homemade marinara sauce for a dinner party? At what income level is one told they have to purchase their own heirloom tomatoes for five bucks a pound at Whole Foods?
Apartments for those earning zero? Who gets the master bedroom? Do they get free cleaning supplies and a weekly maid service? Are there regulations on how many square feet per person? Bunk beds in multiple bedrooms, or can I have the whole place to myself?
I'm left of center, and Hudson Yards is an abomination.
Sounds like Essex Crossing is as well.
3
YAY! The Vessel and Hudson Yards disgust me. It's a tribute to NYC's corruption and wealthy. Essex isn't perfect, but it's a start.
10
Grew up 5 blocks to the north. Looks pretty fancy for old Delancey.
12
One group that was left out of this project were the small non-profit institutions that are (or were) based on the LES.
Before Essex Crossing was even started, commercial rents were rising and small old building were being torn down to be replaced by apartment buildings (cheaply built but expensive) or hotels--the money for development was not domestic.
Many of the non-profits in those buildings had to leave and had no reasonably priced space to move too (especially office space). As far as I knew, the non-profits were not asked to be part of this development.
17
Essex meat market, purveyor of fine veal. Now where’s the goose liver? Yum
1
Although I'm mostly a fan of Essex Crossing the man building is a monstrosity. It's actually not the 26 stories the Author and developer claim, it's more like 34+ stories since they don't count the Commercial space. It's a much bigger eyesore than the Blue Building which seems tiny in comparison.
And presenting the theory that Sheldon Silver " conspired to thwart redevelopment proposals" to keep his Jewish voting base as fact is ridiculous. Prior proposals were trash and the timing was not right. This part of the LES was not ready for this type of development until recently.
11
Yes it's not as worse as The Hudson Yards, but it would feel the same if the displaced residents of the neighborhood could go back and be able to afford living in so called ' affordable units'. Just having the title of ' affordable housing' doesn't mean everyone can afford. Some of these affordable units rents are between $2000-$3400 - just check NYC affordable housing website. And its just a limited number of units that developers use as a shell to go higher in their built floors. This would be a success if rather than having chained grocery stores ( trader Joe's,etc) they could find a way to bring local farmers or suppliers to sell their stuffs. Walk between those buildings in winter and enjoy the wind tunnel. I would say this is something between Chelsea Market and Hudson Yards. Typical developers disaster creations in North America. Might be helpful to learn from European cities such as Berlin or London.
17
While I see from some of the comments that even Essex Crossing has its critics, it still looks like the conclusion: "But it points toward a better way," is accurate.
Many factors have been considered. It even mentions organic food. I was thinking it was missing the mental health frontier, and then--it got there, too! I imagine the developers had to be very creative to do this (which might make a good separate story).
It looks like some lessons have been learned along the way.
Some key questions emerge: Why aren't all developments planned this way? How could the next batch of developments do even better; e.g. I'm not seeing anything on Living Buildings. After some time passes, how is the income diversity, about which some commenters are suspicious, working out? Any surprises, both good or bad? Any other post-construction lessons, both favorable and not? Are critics coming around?
I'm also glad for an article on something not predictable, that's reasonably holistic, that aims for more than a small improvement.
That's the kind of thing, and reporting, we need in many areas of life. What's possible, is it working (and what "working" means can be a highly relevant debate), how could it be improved, what are the less obvious human and organizational stories, including social innovations, along the way? If it isn't happening where it's urgently needed, why not?
Probably requires a different level of journalism, but this and a few similar recent articles show you're up to it.
8
No, it isn't.
The anti-Hudson Yards would be designed by an architect who isn't allergic to aesthetics.
This is not such a development.
11
True. NYC’a architectural inventiveness post-9/11 is so vanilla. I just returned from Berlin where the creativity and diversity of its recent development is mind blowing. NYC is a design snooze fest.
13
You had me at "anti-Hudson Yards" or as I like to call it "Dallas East".
21
I would love to live here!
1
The high cost of housing and low construction rate is from an artificial politically induced market scarcity of land caused by zoning density restrictions. In Microeconomics this a classic "rent-seeking" "market failure."
These laws benefit landowners such as Trump and harm those that have to rent housing -- it is a reverse tax that is backed by the Democratic run city council. Because of the Democratic City Council, Trump is far weather than he would be without their (to him) helpful laws creating an artificial scarcity of land.
Rescind the regressive "tax" on housing costs by rescinding the laws which benefit Trump and other billionaire landlords over regular renters and there will be plenty of affordable housing.
Since about 2000, Japan has had federal laws that override local laws on zoning density restrictions.
The result: in 2014: In NYC 20,000 housing units built, for CA, 90,000 and for Tokyo alone 140,000.
Had the laws which apply to Tokyo been applied to NYC a decade ago, there might have been 1.4 million more housing units.
Fix the zoning laws and Trump's wealth drops and more affordable housing is created without using taxpayer dollars which can then go to other things such as mental health care for New Yorkers.
Harvard Economist Edward Glaeser, who wrote an entire book on cities, wrote this opinion piece.
Glaeser: Build big, Bill
https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/build-big-bill-article-1.1913739
11
"Apartments selling for millions now mix with ones for families of two earning as little as $15,000 a year, and some for those earning zero."
What about families that that earn under $80k a year per household? Those that work two jobs so one can stay home and raise kids. Those that have to responsibly budget every month so they stay clear of debt and only go on one vacation every few years.
Project like this are whats killing NYC, you either have no problem paying the $3,253 a month for a studio(with a bathroom) at the Rollins building or you are making $15k a year and receive priority housing in a luxury building.
All at the expensive of the those that are in the middle, NYC is doomed.
43
Whoop-de-do! Another mall in NY with corporate chain stores and $4,500 per month 1-bedroom rentals. It's another giant step toward turning NY into another gentrified and boring city. This development has nothing in common with massive affordable housing initiatives like the Mitchell-Lama Housing Program or Stuyvesant Town-Peter Cooper Village. The few token giveaways for low-income tenants who will not be required to use a "poor door" does little to move the needle on New York's overwhelming shortage of affordable housing. It's another painful giveaway to developers, and this article reads like a real estate advertisement.
35
Would love to see an article on the 30 former residents that have returned after all of these years.
22
Rejoice! To be labeled as the Anti-Hudson Yards, you only need to price apartments around $6-7 million.
15
This is basically a puff piece and what all and sundry consistently fail to point out is the impact these massive builds have on surrounding and continually eroding infrastructure, street / pedestrian traffic at all hours and the overall quality of life for those in neighboring communities (read: the majority) that suffer owing to hundreds and hundreds of new residents being squashed into a small area. Nice for lining the pockets of the developers, the shareholders, and big construction, but as usual the rest of us get stuffed as we eternally fight our way past construction sites just to get to where we need to go.
19
This has more than not in common with Hudson yards. Any development does. The lower east side as it existed until recently was the anti Hudson yards.
13
To think one corrupted and now convicted politician was able to stop development for self interest. The land was cleared of tenements using eminent domain it was a taking which requires the public good exceeds that of the property owner.
After the seventies and eighties the city has come back to life but has to date failed to use it's revival and strong stream of revenue to balance and improve two things; housing and mass transit.
The solution applied to the crime of Shelly Silver can be also applied to public housing some of which is in such poor shape in warrants clearing like the tenements only not requiring five decades to re-purpose the land.
3
As much as affordable housing makes sense in general terms, government subsidized housing means the rest of us are paying for people to have the benefit of living in Manhattan, which is arguably a luxury.
If we sold off the government owned projects in Manhattan, the billions generated would pay for probably 2-5X more housing units located in another borough (even close to the Subway).
I don't think we need to segregate rich and poor and want a nice mix of everyone in Manhattan. But a lucky few really do get a windfall on everyone else's dime.
16
@Mmm I strongly disagree. I live in Manhattan (albeit in a rent-stabilized apartment!) and I moved here to experience New York as the diverse city that makes it worlds different than the suburb I grew up in. Without subsidized housing, it is a rich-person's bubble.
34
@Elizabeth Ellis Hurwitt
I hear you but Manhattan is maybe the most expensive and unique place to live in the country.
Just to ensure less well off people live with dignity and a solid roof over their heads doesn't actually require building housing in Manhattan. Same with Beverly Hills or Miami Beach or wherever else.
13
@Mmm
I share your sentiments....Manhattan real estate is the engine that drives the city. It's pure folly to build public housing in Manhattan instead of in other boroughs, when the property taxes on non-public housing could generate enough money to build *much* more public housing in other boroughs (and this is not a NIMBY statement, since I live on the Lower East Side and we have a humongous amount of public housing).
9
Multi-million dollar apartments whose neighbors have $0-$15k/yr in income. It’ll be blissful harmony I’m sure.
15
@Andy Deckman
Everyone will learn to live with it, and that will be a good thing.
3
@Andy Deckman I would be embarrassed to live in NYC and think this was some kind of troubling new development. Rich people in their bubbles who have no idea of the history of this city are the ones we need out.
3
TIF equals Taxing Ignorant Fools aka the 99% for the benefit of the corrupt crony capitalist corporate plutocrat oligarch welfare gilded age robber baron malefactors of great wealth.
7
I recall District 1 was originally promised a new school space in Essex Crossing but it all fell through. D1 has not had a new school building in fifty years-most of the buildings are over 100 years old.
16
This is a misleading article. Hudson Yards was built above a railyard, and displaced no one. Essex Crossing was built on top of an existing neighborhood and displaced thousands. Hudson Yards was built within a few years; Essex Crossing was a vacant lot for 50 years and only finally developed because the NIMBY Shelly Silver was removed from office and hauled off to prison.
Both developments are dominated by very expensive residential, retail and office space, with comparable rents. Both have some degree of public giveback. Both were developed through guidelines set by City Planning, with extensive community input and environmental review. Really only Hudson Yards has iconic architecture.
15
@Osito
Sheldon Silver's appeals have kept him out of prison so far. In fact, I walked right by him just yesterday (he lives down the block from us). As an aside, he's gained a lot of weight and I barely recognized him.
9
@Osito
Hudson Yards cost roughly $20 billion to build and got $7 billion in tax breaks.
4
So if the land was vacant for 50 years, how was anyone displaced by building on this vacant land? So you think the eyesore parking lots were somehow better?
Thanks the thoughtful article! I understand the the project is being built by private developers, but can you explain if the land itself was initially public land or private land? It's my understanding that a big differentiator between which public benefits can be expected from a piece of real estate is whether or not the city (the public) owns it, or if it is privately owned land.
4
@Sebastian Essex Crossing is being built on the largest tract of City owned land in Lower Manhattan.
5
When I walked through Hudson Yards recently, I had no desire to explore its tall, boring buildings which seemed to channel wind tunnels. The Essex Market complex, by contrast, is like a picture-windowed Grand Central, replete with smaller stalls and public interactions. Unlike at Chelsea Market's narrower, more crowded aisles, I feel I can breathe here. The missing elements for Essex Market/the Market Line included a paucity of seating on the main level, and no bike parking - until now heavily used sidewalk bike racks were installed. Now, if we could get bike racks by the Rollins, where Trader Joe's and Target are located, and could now get more seating at the Essex Market's main level?
In sum and as a long time neighborhood resident, I see the still in progress Essex Crossing as a definite plus.
30
You're right - it is striking and arresting. I lived on the LES for a dozen years before being priced out in 2014 and when I go back I am floored. It's pretty great. BUT if I, a middle class man, was priced out in 2014, then there is no way someone of my income level could ever live there again. I'm very glad there is low-income housing. Absolutely necessary. But there is no way I can afford a $4,000 month apartment nor qualify for a $1,500 one. Too.Many.Rich.People. The rich will ultimately destroy the fabric of the neighborhood.
45
@Mike I thought they already had, as they've done across most of Manhattan.
6
It was a good match of what the local community wants, Trader Joe’s, a target that has impressed, and local vendors. Versus empty malls suffering the death of retail.
14
It's hard to share the writer's apparent satisfaction with Essex Crossing knowing its history; it's actually the site of a terrible crime. I've wandered by it a few times now and it's strange to think that so many people are oblivious to how the people who were living there were displaced so deceitfully. The shiny new space is cold and uninviting, in my opinion. Much of the affordable housing is not really affordable - $3k rents on income of $120k gross. That's roughly half the net income - half! Truly we give landlords all of our money in this town. Worse, few people look at broader affordability - virtually all of the restaurants and shops and grocery stores in the area are chasing the high-end customers, with prices to match. The poor who "win" the lottery of an apartment soon learn that it's expensive to live in the area.
34
@Joe 3k/mo would put you right in the range of 30% gross income spent on housing that is considered affordable. Considering the market rate rent is 100% higher, I'm not exactly sure what price you'd want them to rent a brand new apartment for.
Gentrification is going to happen when there is limited space that lots of people want to live in. This seems like a good compromise.
No one has a right to live in Manhattan.
Just what we need! A development project that features studio apartments with rent in excess of $5K monthly.
35
@Larry Came here to say the exact thing. It took five seconds to google and find out that you need to pay $60k in rent to live here. Truly, the Anti-Hudson Yards!
9
I like what they have done as far as retail stores goes. The Essex Market and TJ's and Target are what everyone seems to be looking for. I will be interested if this will feel like a unique neighborhood or a vapid urban district with no personality, no community or sense of home.
8
This is a wonderful article. And has great meaning for me. I was Deputy Commissioner of Housing in NYC during the early 80’s. A strong effort was made to break the Seward Park blockage and almost succeeded. But the then governing Board of Estimate had some key vote reversals at the last minute and the attempt to rebuild the area was defeated. The fear of affordable housing and racial change was paramount. I remember all of us who worked on the plan were very dejected. Particularly as the vote reversals were so last minute and broke pledges that had been made.
I
have lost touch with New York over the years but reading this article speaks to so many of the improvements the City has made in the way it is governed.
24
I'm not sure how it's the "Anti-Hudson Yards."
It's still a fake, corporate chain project which is a imitation of what the real thing used to be, all in order to increase corporate profits.
Just like everything else in NYC today.
49
@Laidback It certainly is a "corporate chain project" that's simply used to "increase corporate profits."
However it integrates into the urban fabric much better than the Hudson Yards does, and it seems to place an effort onto providing housing and improving the lives of the less fortunate, which the Hudson Yards project does not do.
Essex Crossing is not a perfect project, however it is commendable in comparison to Hudson Yards, Waterline Square, Pacific Park Brooklyn, and the buildings that surround Domino Park.
28
@Jonathan
Trader Joe's alone, which probably makes big profits, is extremely well appreciated in what was a food desert for decades. Low income, middle class and well helled gentrifiers all shop there and many new jobs for locals were created.
As you suggest, I don't think the issue can be characterized in binary terms anymore. Bad and Good togethe - progress is a blend: something our political culture needs to return to as well.
11
@Laidback It's 50% affordable housing. Understand now?
I hope the affordable rents are truly affordable. I've lost all faith that the affordable housing programs are providing what they claim.
20
@Caleb By affordable and because the article gives no price points, we assume $2,000 a month for a studio and up.
2
@Andrew Try $3,253 a month for a Studio with a bathroom in the Rollins.
But hey, there's a Trader Joes!
6
Thoughts from a very long time resident of the neighborhood:
30 of the 1800 displaced got to return. Hah! The "affordable" apartments are divided up: a third for seniors, a third for the mentally disabled and formally homeless and a third for everybody else including younger working people. The "project's centerpiece, the 26 story Essex", is a particularly ugly building where the rents are over $6000 a month! I like the new Essex Market because many venders relocated there, but to describe the old market as "dingy" and "squalid" is to engage in Robert Moses "blighted slum clearence" type language. Mr. Kimmel has written a puff piece. I'm glad he included the history of the dirty dealings of Sheldon Silver, but he has mostly emphasized the pros of this mega project without seriously describing the shortcomings. However, neighborhood residents will eventually get used Essex Crossing.
56
@Robert Building on this scale in a city as notoriously resistant to new projects as New York involves a lot of compromise. What achievable alternative do you have in mind for Essex Crossing?
8
@John G I have in mind more Low Income Housing and better looking buildings.
11
@Robert Kimmelman is reasonable in his judgements of what is good at Essex Crossings. A deflated puffiness, I would venture.
It does characterize the neighborhood input which was extensive and hard won - and distinguishes the overall development process, goals and realization.
The interaction with traffic, infrastructure at Clinton Street is horrific, however! I wish Kimmelman had included some discussion in this piece that can be sistered with his inability to appreciate Universal Accessibility for the Queens Public Library project he praised, but is partly unusable and impossible to use due to ignoring ADA and the most basic accessibility regulations.
Clinton St, the edge of Essex Crossings, abuts the balance of the neighborhood that Moses left mostly untouched. Now, though, the stink of garbage, insane double bike paths and incessant Williamsburg Bridge traffic at this edge, smack in the middle of the Coop Village "East of Essex" nieghborhood is a terrible, mistake, flaw and error by the developers, planners, architects...This may get addressed by DOT (please?!) but i would like the developers work with their designers to solve that mess...that is soft of brushed (literally) to ths side of the new, making a mess for the old.
4
Imagine the Lower East Side in the current year with a tightly-bound community of 1,800 families right on Delancey Street. Is anyone surprised that you get the urban dysfunction of the 70s when you rip that out and put in parking lots? How many tax credits do we need to get that back? This new development is like a tattoo you get to cover up a scar. Let's remember what could have been while we move on.
18
The new Essex market is a gem. So much better than the old market. And after the incredible throngs at the Lower East Side Pickle Day a few weeks ago its clear that the pushcart markets on Orchard and Rivington Streets were not going to scale for another 100 years.
All that said, I took exception with the broad oversimplification of Sheldon Silver's actions in blocking the construction of new housing projects. While Mr. Silver is a well deserved punching bag I don't think his actions were exclusively to defend his voting base.
If the plans were to build something even remotely close to what we see today then I think there would have been significantly more enthusiasm from the community. What was actually planned was more giant, utterly sterile housing projects.
Projects are deserts for services.
Moses' razing of scores and scores of tenement __blocks__ with their plethora of storefront services, replacing them with enormous brick monoliths meants mile-long commutes for residents simply to buy a loaf of bread. In fact Extell's demolition of the Pathmark supermarket is a poignant example of this.
I know this first hand having lived in the co-ops on Grand St. for many years and having spoken to many of the residents who were around at the time. They were holding out for something more closely akin to what we see presently rather than another 12 giant brick towers with thousands more people and no more services.
21
@bili
It is refreshing to read an analysis that is not just cynical knee jerk condemnation. The were certain things that were done in that earlier era that perhaps seemed enlightened then but did not stand the test of time. Public housing design defined by hideous ‘tower in the park’ architecture is very high on the list.
4
@bili Well said..
Also the accusations of NIMBY-ness by many critics are mostly inaccurate. Have a look in our backyard already. The LES area around Grand St. has been surrounded by troubled public housing for decades. The previous plans for SPURA along Delancey St. would have been disastrous. Big Box stores-more failed public housing projects. Others might do well to save some of their schadenfreude and not heap it on Silver. His presence saved NYC from many development mistakes,ie. Bloomberg's westside football stadium and Guliani's Governors Island casinos. We tend to quickly forget these dodged bullets.
4
In my two visits to the Essex Market, I was pleasantly surprised. It has a nice mix of shops so far and it doesn't feel too hectic. Unlike some new food courts in town, the vendors here are not trying to gouge you with $20 tacos.
That said, arriving at the market is less pleasant. The sidewalks in the area are often filthy and cracked. Delancey Street is a barrage of cars and trucks jockeying to enter the bridge. The F Train stop is just gross. If the city wants to spur large-scale development in a neighborhood, then infrastructure must keep pace and be modernized as well.
58
@Brian I agree completely.
The way these developments connect to the neighborhoods they are inserted into, is typically the worst part of their realization. The City and its approval processes should require greater scrutiny with City Planning or DOT before they are granted permission.
I hope our next Mayor will begin to lead on those substantive issues, and less on lobbying for progressive values unsupported by how to run a city with development of the pace we have in NYC.
2
@Brian Essex-Delancey is one of the stations in the MTA's (shamefully overdue) new accessibility project, which will presumably include some cosmetic refreshing as well.
1
So basically reinforcing that NYC living is only for very rich and poor while people in the middle need to spend their lives commuting to NJ, LI, Westchester, etc
89
LI, NJ and Westchester aren’t exactly affordable either. I plan to leave altogether in 2020.
8
@M3guy
You don't know this neighborhood very well. 'NYC living' in this neighborhood IS defined by the very diverse economic demagraphic we have in this part of the LES.
In fact, this is where the birth of the middle class, with housing created by Amalgamated - a clothing workers union - in 1929- 1950 can be argued.
A first step for many working class to find stable, quality housing. It remains that way today.
14
You work the same jobs and earn the same salaries as those of us in the city, and we’re not all pulling in half mil bonuses at Goldman. In my experience, you suburbanites just make choices that make it unrealistic to live in Manhattan - you don’t actually want the median urban lifestyle. You want lots of space, excess bedrooms, a big family, a car. Obviously these things creep into “luxury” when crammed onto an island with 70k people/mile.
Not to minimize the crippling wealth inequality in this country, but the plight of the uncompromising LIRR commuter is not the same conversation.
15
Not to mention they didn’t get a $6 billion tax break.
12
Go see ‘Homeless Brooklyn’ for a taste of the type of Real Estate corruption mentioned in the article ... Robert Moses doesn’t get a break ... it just proves the point that government corruption is LOCAL ... it’s really where a change in ‘density’ or ‘zoning’ can lead to big, big profits ... the film itself is not ‘great’ but it is a first film for the director Ed Norton
6
I just went the Essex site and if you think those rents are "affordable" you don't work for a living
64
@Stan Snyder those are market rate rents, not affordable housing rents....
4
I read this article right after reading the one about accessibility issues at the Hunts Point library. I feel that the Essex Market has also missed the mark in terms of accessibility, most notably in that the seating is two flights up from the food vendors. There are two elevators, but that doesn’t come close to addressing the issue. I was there a few weeks ago on a Saturday while there was a free family event in the community room. One elevator was not working, and there were tons of families with kids and strollers waiting to use the elevator on both levels, not to mention elderly people with assistance devices. My husband has a hand injury and is not able to carry a meal tray up two flights of stairs to the seating area. Looking around, it seemed like the layout of the market was failing to serve a large proportion of the people there. I’m glad to read that this project is successful on many levels, but as with the design-forward library, function seems to be following form. Put some seating in the street level! I love beautiful spaces, but I also like being able to eat a hot meal in them.
25
@Susan There is a lot to be said when these projects truly comply with the spirit of the ADA that is for all to have access to exactly the same spaces without having to rely on a back door, a lift...
Ground level eating areas may begin to emerge as the market acclimates and the other areas expand. I hope they are reading these comments.
The Market Line boites and bars are all below ground that will kill their viability and make them unsustainable. Retail NEEDS to be at grade for ADA compliance as much as for rent sustainability.
That architects encourage (to developers enjoyment) relying on subterranean spaces for public gathering spaces, bars, restaurants is insane. They are "cheap" space for developments initially but useless soon after when no one will pay rent for something they need street traffic to stay viable.
1
No mention of what happened to the Delancey Underground project in the space that used to be a turnaround area for the trolley cars.
8
I was actually at Essex market last Month
I’d been a skeptic but this is actually much
Better than it sounds and feels more like an actual NYC destination than Chelsea market
39
I’m sorry the author didn’t mention the large role played by Manhattan Community Board 3 in shaping the compromises and consensus that made this possible after 50 years of nothing. I was not part of the process myself, but saw how board members with very diverse goals and perspectives figured out and negotiated with the city an overall plan that received unanimous community board approval and went on to be executed by the city (with active ongoing board oversight). Genuine community participation — not just window-dressing “consultation” — is what made the difference here.
73
@10009
I completely agree. CB3 worked tirelessly on this and fought for the neighborhood. I went to the meeting when the final vote was taken. It made me cry.
I try to go to the market several times a week to support the vendors who sell fish, meat, produce and cheese.
It is a blessing to be able to shop this way.
28
@10009 I also was acquainted with several CB3 members at the time this was worked out and am stunned that this project actually happened. Like Togo, when I walk home from Essex/Delancey, I usually walk through the market because I still can't believe my eyes.
BTW, the vendors we go to are ecstatic about the new market.
10
Yes this is nice but also an example of why the City will never solve its affordable housing problem. A prime site in Manhattan had been completely underbuilt. Only 1,079 units? I say double the heights, double the units, and double number of affordable housing at a minimum. The tallest tower is only 260 feet; even twice that would merely be mid pack for Manhattan.
So next time you walk by, just imagine if these buildings were twice as tall. In that scenario 540 additional affordable housing units could have been built. Choices.
12
@Jeff
The Extell building on South Street is pretty much exactly what you propose. No need to imagine; all you have to do is walk past it and see what the horrible result of doubling (or tripling or quadrupling) the height of a typical apartment house is.
The result is that life is in permanent shadow for everyone else in the neighborhood, but not for those on the tall top floors of the huge new building.
17
@Michael c And at this point, only 20% of the 815 units have been sold. It's a disaster in every way imaginable.
2
@Michael c That Extell building is the best thing to happen to the LES in generations. It's exactly what the LES needs- high density, mixed use, mixed income housing. And if you're concerned about shadows, the taller, the better, as tall, narrow buildings produce fewer shadows than short, squat buildings.
1
The Extell project is just north of the Manhattan Bridge, not between the bridges.
5
This is nice to hear: that the community stands to benefit.
It is a given that NYC changes. That said, the space of the new Essex Market is not like the old; it is not warm and human, it is generic like a mall, like a Whole Foods. Is it just new construction materials or methods of planning? Why does it seem that most newly designed buildings feel unwelcoming?
34
@Joe Blow I would only say that with being able to see inside, see the food stalls, the people buying, eating and shopping is welcoming. Whatever the judgement when standing inside, the connection to the street is vastly better...and therefore, welcoming.
1
Essex Crossing shows what can result when public-minded developers, far-sighted elected officials and sensible local community leaders work together to balance community benefits along with economic development through private enterprise in public-private partnerships. The Amazon debacle in Long Island City could have produced a similar result to Essex Crossing on the LES if the short-sighted local electeds, the tone-deaf monopolistic behemoth, Amazon, and frightened local community leaders hadn’t undermined that project. These developers, Mayor Bloomberg, and the local community leaders and electeds should be applauded for showing how economic development done properly can bring real benefits to our under-served neighborhoods. The LES is getting what Long Island City deserves: a fantastic new job-creating project with affordable housing and a great mix of other public benefits. Well done!
8
A very interesting and well written article. I admire the author's almost poetic flow of words.
I was stuck on, or maybe intrigued by, the phrase "....This may come as close as we can now get, in a political system obeisant to private enterprise, to balancing equity with gentrification....".
I read this several times, puzzled by the author's injection of a political statement in a descriptive article.
7
@Harry The article very clearly spells out the political and historical context: the Regan era privatization of governmental responsibility. Within this context, the assertion that the political system is beholden to private enterprise is descriptive. That within this system it was actually possible to build something other than another upscale mall -- Las Vegas on the Hudson -- is both a marvel, and a tragedy. A tragedy, because Essex Crossing should be the norm, not an exception. A tragedy because "....This may come as close as we can now get, in a political system obeisant to private enterprise, to balancing equity with gentrification...."
43
@Harry If you don't see the current political system as "obeisant to private enterprise" then you haven't been paying attention. This has been blatant in national politics since the Reagan years.
11
Essex Rising is built on the empty lots created by Robert Moses and what came to be known as Urban Removal—pushing out people of color in the name of renewal. Exacerbated by Shelley Silver. No getting away from politics here, and we can’t just blame it on Reagan.
27