Chelsea Objects to Seminary's Development Plan
By Tovah Pentelovitch | From Preservation | Feb. 15, 2007
For the oldest Episcopal seminary in America, it's build up or move out.
Manhattan's General Theological Seminary, established in New York City's Chelsea neighborhood in 1817, is comprised of 18 buildings, most dating to the late 1800s. Today, although the seminary has spent $9 million in the past eight years on maintentance, 16 of the 18 buildings are in a state of grave disrepair.
"If we [the seminary] can't get money from use of our development rights to help maintain older buildings," says Maureen Burley, the seminary's executive vice president for finance and operations, "then we will be facing having to leave Chelsea."
Ten years ago the seminary came to the conclusion that finding a partner with money is "the only feasible way to raise the needed income to ensure the survival of the institution itself, as well as its historic buildings," according to a extensive preservation plan set forth by the seminary in 2006 to justify its decision to develop. In 2004 the seminary began seeking a development partner.
The seminary chose the New York-based Brodsky Organization and in 2005 unveiled a development plan that proved to be highly controversial in Chelsea.
The plan called for demolishing the deteriorating Sherrill Hall, built in the 1960s, to make way for a new apartment complex standing 151 feet tall—double the 75-foot height limit allowed by the Chelsea Historic District's zoning restrictions. Chelsea neighbors objected to the proposed building's large size and contemporary style.
To quell the protests, the seminary revised the original plan in December 2006, cutting back from a 17-story structure to a 15-story building with less glass and more masonry. It submitted the plans for consideration and approval to the Landmarks Preservation Commission.
However, the revised plan is still not acceptable by many Chelsea residents' standards. On Jan. 24, a joint committee of the Chelsea Preservation and Planning Committee and the Landmarks Task Force voted 11-2 vote that the seminary's application to the Landmarks Commission is inappropriate in several aspects, ranging from the design to the guidelines. On Feb. 6 another group, Community Board 4, approved the joint committee's recommendation to deny the Seminary's application.
"I'm not 100 percent convinced that such a relatively extreme proposal is absolutely necessary in order to generate the income that [the seminary] needs in order to survive," says Andrew Berman, the executive director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation. "It seems that a somewhat more modest proposal might be enough."
What are the seminary's options? Berman suggests that the school team up with other churches who have successfully restored their historic properties.
The seminary has looked into partnering with other religious institutions, says Burnley. "However, those institutions face the same problems we face: They have historic buildings with no money to fix them."
Chelsea's Community Board 4 has suggested that the seminary sell its student housing to fund repairs or lease street-level space to retail stores.
But Burnley says leasing commercial real estate "would generate less than a tenth of what the current proposal would generate," and commercial land would become taxable. Furthermore, without on-campus student housing, the seminary, which currently houses 120 seminarians and their families as well as 16 faculty members, would no longer be able to recruit students and would cease to be a seminary.
The Landmarks Preservation Commission will hold a hearing no earlier than Feb. 23 to make the final decision on the plan.
For more photos, stories, and tips, subscribe to the print edition of Preservation magazine.
Comments
