a report from the metropolitan waterfront alliance
on the future of the new york/new jersey waterfront
Aquatecture
Green Harbor
Harbor Recreation
Mass Water Transit
Working Waterfront
photo by robert simko
A Q UAT EC T U R E
Harbor Education
Good waterfront design should be safe, adaptable and ecologically beneficial. It
should bring us to the waterfront, onto and into the water, and then back to the land.
But there are challenges:
• maze of bureaucracy
• policy disconnected from science
• too few docks and docking hardware
• dated, narrow land-use and construction guidelines
Solutions? Turn the page...
the white papers 2008/2009
aquatecture overview and history
m e t r o p o l i ta n wat e r f r o n t a l l i a n c e
2
AQUATECTURE
As redevelopment of the New York/New Jersey shoreline expands, an understanding of
“aquatecture” – the subset of architecture focused on the built environment at the waterfront –
is essential. Using an interdisciplinary approach, architects, designers, builders and developers
must be mindful of the unique environment where land and water meet.
Aquatects face a busy future in the metropolitan region. Waterfront land values are soaring,
giving rise to luxury shoreline developments. Government officials have called for an expansion of
parks and ferry services, necessitating the creation of more docks and public open space. At the
same time, all facets of maritime industry and activity, from shipping to recreation, are growing,
requiring the construction of more dry docks and other facilities to support the growth of the Port.
Aquatecture: A Short History
Since the founding of New Am-
tion allowed industry to relocate,
sterdam as a European trading out-
waterfront sites were decommis-
post 400 years ago, structures at the
sioned or abandoned, their structures
waterfront have tended to relate to
torn down or left to decay.
the shipping and transportation indus-
In the 1970s, government
tries. When waterborne passenger
guidelines for cleaner water began to
and freight transportation reached its
reduce pollution. In the ’80s, ferry
peak in the early 20th century, piers,
service was rejuvenated when NY
wharves, warehouses, factories and
Waterway launched its trans-Hudson
terminals lined the urban shores. The
routes. And in the ’90s, the
waterfront was crowded, lively, with
waterways were rediscovered for
people and goods coming and going.
recreation, as sailboats and kayaks
As alternatives to water transport
took to the waves. During the same
expanded, however, people began to
decades, preservationists were argu-
lose their connection to the region’s
ing more effectively for the value of
greatest natural resource. Industry
historic buildings. As parallel environ-
expanded, and the wetlands became
mental, transportation and preserva-
our dumping grounds. The shoreline
tion movements gained strength,
was fenced off from the public.
waterfront structures began to be
Landfill at the waterfront became a
considered for redevelopment and
way to dispose of waste and create
undeveloped shoreline tracts were
“new” land. Eventually, as globaliza-
reappraised for their rising value.
the white papers 2008/2009
aquatecture today
m e t r o p o l i ta n wat e r f r o n t a l l i a n c e
3
Aquatecture Today
A new understanding of environmental conditions, construction
must go beyond conventional archi-
technology and public needs
tectural planning principles. Planners
informs waterfront development in
and architects have to consider the
the 21st century. With the waterways
ramifications of wind and tide, the
cleaner than they have been in a
implications of climate change –
century and with maritime com-
including storm surge and rising sea
merce and shipping growing, gov-
levels – and the importance of
ernment officials are analyzing ways
enhancing marine life. With the emer-
to best use shoreline property, bal-
gence of sustainable building prac-
ancing the requirements of business
tices, designers must now integrate
and transportation with those of
ecologically appropriate site strate-
tourism, recreation and housing.
gies, energy and resource efficiency,
Clearly, New York and New Jersey
water and stormwater quality and
need more waterfront facilities: piers,
quantity management, and a higher
dry docks and refueling stations;
focus on interior and exterior environ-
marinas and boathouses; community
mental quality of life. Mixed use
centers, schools and scientific moni-
development and improved public
toring and education stations. By
access to the water are green imper-
nature more complicated to build and
atives as well, as is the requirement
maintain than buildings on land, the
to design for long-term flexibility
CONTINUED ON PAGE
4
COURTESY OF THE NYC DEPT. OF PARKS & RECREATION
The water’s edge
of Harlem River
Park has been
redesigned with
input from engineers, architects,
scientists, artists
and community
members. The
project features
an ecologically
beneficial design
that actually creates new marine
habitats while
offering safe
public access
such as tidepools
for wading.
design of any waterfront structure
the white papers 2008/2009
aquatecture today
4
m e t r o p o l i ta n wat e r f r o n t a l l i a n c e
CONTINUED FROM PAGE
3
and adaptability.
The variety of conditions and
opportunities along the metropolitan
George, Staten Island adapted the
original structure and is partially
covered with a “green” roof.
shoreline can lead naturally to diverse
Innovative aquatecture, however,
development. State-of-the-art aquate-
can get bogged down in the regulato-
cture can be applied to parks and lux-
ry process. Agency jurisdictions over-
ury housing as well as buildings for
lap. Policy priorities may be inconsis-
industrial, commercial and municipal
tent. Permitting is overly complicated.
activities. An interdisciplinary team
The course of action can be unclear,
approach combining urban planning,
like a sediment-clogged waterway.
design, engineering, architecture and
PlaNYC, Mayor Bloomberg’s far-
biology – in many cases with a high
reaching proposal for maximizing
level of community involvement – is
the city’s environmental health and
proving to be very successful.
quality of life while accommodating
Some recent projects at the met-
growth, has the potential to reshape
ropolitan shoreline are good illustra-
waterfront planning–if the various
tions of forward-thinking aquatec-
city, state and federal agencies take
ture. A newly built edge of the
a unified approach to enacting rec-
Harlem River Park, for example,
ommendations pertaining to the
includes the re-creation of a rocky
shoreline. The present system, frag-
shoreline next to a promenade and
mented and inefficient, creates an
bikeway, with tidepools and
atmosphere in which most aquatec-
stepped-down seawalls that allow
ture simply meets minimum guide-
people to touch the water and better
lines instead of fulfilling the poten-
understand marine life. The new
tial this once-in-a-century chance to
design of the ferry terminal at St.
redevelop the waterfront represents.
CALL TO ACTION
Aquatecture expands the diversity of waterfront uses while enhancing the diversity of marine
life. Good waterfront design should bring us not just to the waterfront, but onto and into the
water. Seeking the most creative and practical design ideas, the Metropolitan Waterfront
Alliance convened a group of architects, scientists, engineers, designers, planners, community
leaders and policy-makers to discuss challenges and solutions as the Aquatecture Task Force.
the white papers 2008/2009
aquatecture challenges and solutions
CHALLENGE
m e t r o p o l i ta n wat e r f r o n t a l l i a n c e
5
PLANNERS AND DESIGNERS MUST NAVIGATE A MAZE OF BUREAUCRACY
In the harbor estuary surrounding New York and New Jersey more than 18 agencies have a regulatory role. All told, more than 30 different agencies have some influence along the shoreline or in
the water. It is a complicated, sometimes overlapping system, seemingly non-transparent at times,
that stymies even the most sophisticated land owners and waterfront developers. For the small
business owner, maritime user or individual landowner, the bureaucracy can be overwhelming.
The waterfront can be thought of as four zones, each with its own regulatory framework.
WATERFRONT SITES AND UPLAND PORTIONS
are regulated by local city planning and building agencies, or in some cases, special
authorities such as redevelopment agencies or development corporations.
THE COASTAL ZONE
is the area along the shore that includes the floodplain. It is regulated by the federal
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 and includes review by local and state agencies
including the NY Dept. of State and the NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection.
THE INTERTIDAL ZONE
is the edge area between Mean High Water and Mean Low Water. It can be a sloping shore,
a pier or a vertical bulkhead where the water rises and falls. Regulation is state and federal,
including NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, NJDEP and the National Marine
Fisheries Services.
NAVIGABLE WATERS
are deemed so by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and generally include the area
downstream from natural barriers such as waterfalls and man-made obstructions such
as bridges. Security issues are shared by the U.S. Coast Guard with state and local
agencies. Water quality is regulated by local, state and federal agencies.
SOLUTION
CREATE A ONE-STOP SHOP FOR WATERFRONT PERMITTING
The permitting process can be simplified and made more efficient if all major regulatory agencies
agree to establish offices at a central location.
• Information can be disseminated easily.
• Officials can meet directly with applicants and with each other if need be.
• Permits can be handled in a timely fashion.
the white papers 2008/2009
aquatecture challenges and solutions
CHALLENGE
m e t r o p o l i ta n wat e r f r o n t a l l i a n c e
6
DATED, NARROW LAND-USE AND CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES
Zoning and land-use policy has not kept pace with the times in dealing with potential
uses of the water and waterfront, structural diversity and public access. Planners and
designers do not always act with sensitivity toward the waterfront’s unique physical environment. On the other side of the table, today’s narrowly focused construction and building guidelines rarely take a wider ecological impact into account. Zoning regulations
(Section 62 of the NYC Zoning Resolution) focus on basic land use and geometry at the
water’s edge: height or footprint of a building, setback from the Mean High Water line,
etc. While there is some flexibility in zoning regulations regarding waterfront uses that can
allow innovation, non-water-dependent uses have been allowed to usurp maritime business. In the case of Brooklyn’s Erie Basin, a zoning change authorized a big-box store to
force a working shipyard out of business.
ENCOURAGE A VARIETY OF STRUCTURES
COURTESY OF THE PORT AUTHORITY OF NY/NJ
SOLUTION
FOSTER DIVERSIFICATION
The dynamic interplay of industry, commerce,
residences, culture and recreation at the
shoreline will bring people to the water. Such
diversification, which planners now see as
crucial to the health and success of a city,
needs a variety of structures, many of which
can be multi-functional.
REWARD GREEN DESIGN
• Encourage innovation in environmental
design. In Chicago, for example, projects that
include green roof components are expedited.
• Update building and zoning codes to
make ecological productivity a meaningful
project goal.
The environmentally
progressive five-slip
ferry terminal at the
World Financial Center,
opening in late 2008,
offers seating,
bathrooms and
concessions, and will
even be available for
public events.
the white papers 2008
aquatecture challenges and solutions
CHALLENGE
m e t r o p o l i ta n wat e r f r o n t a l l i a n c e
7
POLICY IS DISCONNECTED FROM SCIENCE
Most waterfront development today does not take rising sea levels into account. New construction at
or near the shoreline may be flooded in the not-so-distant future, yet most flood insurance is based on
present conditions. More than any other design discipline, aquatecture must consider environmental
science; integrating analyses of storm surges and forecasts of rising sea levels, for example, into architectural blueprints, site plans and land use plans. Building, zoning and environmental regulations need to
be scrutinized through a scientific lens, and high standards for sustainability implemented. Although
Mayor Bloomberg’s PlaNYC 2030 recommends adjustment of building codes and permits with regard to
expected environmental changes, the suggestions fall short of what some experts say is needed.
Land-based environmental issues affect waterfront planning as well. The many impermeable paved
surfaces in the city, for example, means that rainwater is not absorbed into the ground and regularly
surges into the waterways, carrying garbage and bacteria collected along the way. These same paved
surfaces aggravate the “heat island” effect by retaining heat long past sunset, resulting in the
consumption of more energy to keep us cool.
SOLUTION
INFORM PUBLIC POLICY AND URBAN DESIGN WITH SCIENCE
AT THE WATERFRONT
• Design any waterfront structure with sensitivity to the punishing marine environment,
given the effects of tidal action, salt water corrosion and stronger winds.
• Anticipate rising sea levels and storm surge when building bulkheads and seawalls
• Place mechanical and electrical infrastructure in less vulnerable locations.
ON LAND
• Create more planted areas (known as swales) next to paved areas such as sidewalks
and parking lots. Cities around the U.S. and the world have found that water absorption
into swales lessen burdens on sewer systems. Planted areas also cool the city and improve
air quality.
AT THE LABORATORY
• Using scientific analysis, gauge each new structure’s physical and financial risk
(such as damage from a storm surge ) and potential value (such as the benefit of cleaner
water gained from pollutant-filtering bivalves attached underwater to structures).
the white papers 2008/2009
aquatecture challenges and solutions
CHALLENGE
m e t r o p o l i ta n wat e r f r o n t a l l i a n c e
8
LACK OF ACCESS
Long fenced off from the people, river edges are
opportunities for accessible, flexible and ecologically
responsible treatment: terraces down and into the water,
for example, or gabion structures that create new habitats
for river life. For too many years, market-driven shoreline
development has denied the public its rightful access to
the water. This is contrary to the Public Trust Doctrine,
which states that the waterfront and water inherently
belong to the public.
Encourage Entertainment
and Dining at the
Waterfront
SOLUTION
BUILD TO DRAW PEOPLE TO AND ON THE WATER
TRANSIT ACCESS BY LAND AND WATER
• Design routes to the waterfront that allow people to reach
the shoreline safely by foot, bicycle, mass transit, boat and car.
• Build town docks and transit connections at the ends of
COURTESY OF THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE
PARK CONSERVANCY/JULIENNE SCHAER
major cross streets, along with launches, landings and
get-downs at many places in between.
The waterfront should be a destination for
• Coordinate an extensive ferry system with land- based
all people, regardless of income level. One
public access.
way to bring people to the water’s edge is to
• Expand existing ferry routes to allow greater choice in
invite them to eat. Today only a handful of
public transportation.
restaurants do business on the waterfront
• Broaden MetroCard and SmartCard technology to include
and many of them are expensive. This can
ferry transit.
OPPORTUNITIES TO TOUCH THE WATER
• As docks, piers, marinas and boathouses are added to the
waterfront, the edge of the shoreline around them can be
made friendlier, less abrupt, with fewer walls, fences and
change. From picnic areas, ice cream shops
and food markets to four-star restaurants, the
water’s edge can be home to a spectacular
range of food.
Above, visitors to the café, picnic tables,
benches and sandbox of Brooklyn Bridge
railings, more ladders into and out of the water, and even
Park’s Pier 1 relax and enjoy magnificent
simple boulders for climbing. Amenities such as shelters,
views.
restrooms and affordable food options complete the picture.
the white papers 2008/2009
aquatecture challenges and solutions
CHALLENGE
m e t r o p o l i ta n wat e r f r o n t a l l i a n c e
9
DOCKS AND DOCKING HARDWARE ARE SCARCE
A PROBLEM PARTICULARLY IN EMERGENCIES
Emergency scenarios bring the need for more docks and docking hardware into sharp focus. When Lower
Manhattan was evacuated on 9/11, boats of all types transported more than 250,000 people to safety in just
a matter of hours. On that day, however, many people were forced to climb over decorative railings and jump
onto vessels gunning their engines to stay steady at sheer concrete walls.
Even on a typical day in the NY/NJ area, a great need exists for more places to dock – but there are no
comprehensive guidelines ensuring boat access at waterfront developments.
Establish Aquatecture
Review Board
While numerous regulatory agencies oversee
planning and land-use in waterfront development,
little thought is given to the most unique part of the
equation: the water itself. As the North River
Historic Ship Society recommends, however, developers of waterfront sites should engage maritime
experts – from marine biologists to vessel captains
and fleet operators – as design plans take shape.
NYC’s Design Commission (formerly known as
SOLUTION
BUILD MORE DOCKS
DEVELOP NEW PIER AND BULKHEAD GUIDELINES
• Update design guidelines for edges, bulkheads
and piers to ensure safety and flexibility for a
wide range of water uses, from recreation to
transportation of all types.
ESTABLISH DOCK HARDWARE STANDARDS
• Standard dock hardware – fendering, cleats,
bollards and other elements that all boats,
including historic ships, require for docking –
the Art Commission), which reviews art, architec-
should be an integral part of waterfront
ture and landscape architecture proposed for con-
planning, just as benches and light poles are
struction or restoration on city-owned property,
stock elements of urban design.
offers a good precedent. An Aquatecture Review
USE SCIENTIFIC DATA
Board could be a subcommittee of the Design
• Outline environmental impacts caused by
Commission – or even a freestanding agency –
building at the waterfront or in the water and use
with oversight on waterfront developments. Such
the information to help determine size and shape
a Board could enforce installation of such funda-
of a structure, as well as the type or texture of the
mental design elements as cleats and bollards,
materials used to build along the edge.
removable railings and fendering systems and
even installation and availability of electricity,
running water and sewage pump-out capability.
the white papers 2008/2009
aquatecture
A Letter from the
President of the MWA
In an unprecedented series of
meetings, hundreds of leaders of
maritime organizations, government
agencies and businesses came
together over the course of a year
to address issues relating to the
stewardship and redevelopment of
the New York and New Jersey
waterfront. This is the Metropolitan
Waterfront Alliance.
Divided into six Task Forces, they
shared their expertise and collaborated across boundaries, recognizing
that timing is crucial. Critical land
use, regulatory, and environmental
decisions made now will determine
the success or failure of efforts to
reclaim the waterfront for public use,
preserve the water-dependent businesses that underlie our quality of
life, and nurture the recovery and
health of our harbor estuary.
This is one of six policy papers
drawn from hundreds of hours of discussion and debate and informed by
a wide range of practical knowledge.
These papers provide background on
key issues and offer a series of challenges and solutions. Together they
led to the Waterfront Action Agenda,
which is forward-looking, as well as
socially, environmentally and commercially responsible. Civic and
political leaders take note: our
waterfront is not what it could be.
Following the prescriptions set forth
in the MWA Waterfront Action
Agenda, we can begin to realize our
Harbor’s potential.
- Roland Lewis
President and CEO
Metropolitan Waterfront Alliance
The Metropolitan Waterfront Alliance
457 Madison Avenue, NY, NY 10022
T: 212.935.9831 F: 212.935.3193
www.waterfrontalliance.org
White Paper Authors: Carter Craft, Alison Simko
10
Aquatecture Task Force Members
CO-CHAIRS
Ramon Cruz
Vincent Mantero
Principal, New Civic Works
Environmental Defense
Douglas Durst
David Cunningham
Port Authority of New York &
New Jersey
Hillary Brown
Architect
Laura Manville
Michiel de Jong
AIANY
DHV Ports, Waterways, Marinas
John McLaughlin
Urban Answers
Tineke de Vries
Alex Garvin
Consulate General of the
Netherlands
NYC Dept. of Environmental
Protection
President, The Durst
Organization
Michael Fishman
Philip Myrick
Principal, Alex Garvin Associates
Margaret Flanagan
The Project for Public Spaces
Ronald Alevras
South Street Seaport Museum
Rick O'Conor
Lawler Matusky + Skelly
Engineers LLP
Jonathan Fogelson
Roosevelt Islander Blog
Urban Answers/Columbia
University
Tom Outerbridge
Columbia University
Alessandra Galletti
Jaime Paquette
Bissera Antikerov
Project for Public Spaces
Solar One
HOK Planning Group
Stephanie Gelb
Linda Pollak
Jonathan Bien
Battery Park City Authority
Marpillero Pollak Architects
Tern Group LLC
Rosalie Genevro
Eric Rothstein
Marc Boddewyn
Architectural League of NY
eDesign Dynamics
Hudson River Park Trust
Judith Heintz
Margie Ruddick
Wendy Brawer
WRT Design
Wallace, Roberts & Todd, LLC
Greenmap System
Seamus Henchy
Leann Shelton
Jackie Brookner
Seamus Henchy & Associates
EEK Architects
Artist
Ton Horrevorts
Sally Siddiqi
Meta Brunzema
HMSmanagement
Peaceful Places, LLC
Meta Brunzema Architects PC
Hui-Rung Huang
Daniel Simon
Jack Buchsbaum
Columbia University
NYC Dept. of Environmental
Protection
Lee Altman
Stephen Butler
Stephanie Jennings
Sims Corporation
Downtown Alliance
Steven Smith
Jungku Kang
Oak Point Property LLC
Anne Buttenwieser
Columbia University
Jeffery Sugarman,
The Neptune Foundation
Jonathan Kirschenfeld
NYC Department of City
Planning
Colin Cathcart
Jonathan Kirschenfeld Architects
Kiss & Cathcart
Ziv Lavi
Betty Chen
Department of City Planning
Empire State Development
Corporation
Governors Island Preservation
and Education Corporation
Sam Lawrence
Charles Chiang
Columbia University
Office of US Senator Mary
Landrieu
Columbia University
Bijou Chirathalattu
FX Fowle
Ken Cohen
Pantheon Properties
Yuka Terada
SITE Architects and Landscape
Architects
Hoonsuk Lee
Giuseppe Lignano
Columbia University
Ada Tolla
Lot-Ek
Brianna Wolfe
NYC Mayor’s Office of Long Term
Planning & Sustainability
Chris Zeppie
Lot-Ek
Port Authority of New York &
New Jersey
Paul Mankiewicz
Ricardo Zurita
The Gaia Institute
Zurita Architecture & Planning
MWA Board of Trustees
Paul Balser, Co-Chair; John H. Watts, Co-Chair;
Paige C. Sutherland, Treasurer; Kent L. Barwick, Secretary
Margaret C. Ayers, Laurie Beckelman, Paul Beirne, Majora Carter,
Peter Davidson, Eugenia M. Flatow, Dr. Emlyn Koster, John Neu, John Solomon
the white papers 2008/2009