Manhattan’s aspiring skyline,a global symbol of architectural achievement,is facing a stark reality check with the stalled and tilting One Seaport tower. The luxury condominium project,located on Maiden Lane,has become a costly and visible example of the challenges inherent in building on land reclaimed over centuries-much of it originally marshland and riverbed [[3]]. This story details how a decision to forego standard foundation practices has left a multi-million dollar building unfinished, embroiled in legal battles, and increasingly resembling a modern-day ruin.
Building skyscrapers is rarely a straightforward undertaking, a lesson well-understood since attempts to correct the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Despite this, developers continue to erect towering structures in locations ill-suited to support their immense weight. Often, the promise of engineering solutions – and the engineers typically deliver – smooths the path, even when projects involve constructing 100-story buildings in desert environments.
However, even the most sophisticated architectural and engineering techniques aren’t foolproof. The Millennium Tower in San Francisco began to sink and tilt years after its completion, requiring extensive underpinning. As of recent data, stabilization efforts have addressed a 40-centimeter descent and a 73-centimeter tilt at the building’s highest point. The One Seaport building in New York City, while less dramatically inclined, has faced even greater challenges.
Manhattan Island, encompassing 59 square kilometers, owes approximately 10-12 square kilometers to land reclamation projects. Initiated by Dutch colonists in the 17th century and continued by the English, these projects involved filling in the shallow areas of the East River and Hudson River with construction debris and waste. This practice continued into the 1970s; Battery Park City, for example, was built on land created from the excavated material generated during the construction of the original World Trade Center towers.
This creates an inherent problem: high demand for new skyscrapers in Manhattan clashes with the unstable ground conditions. Deep foundations, involving the installation of hundreds of massive concrete pilings extending 50-60 meters below the surface, are typically employed to transfer the building’s load to more stable strata. The difficulties surrounding One Seaport stem from an attempt to bypass this crucial step.
A Manhattan Skyscraper’s Struggles
Maiden Lane, located in lower Manhattan, runs near the World Trade Center and Wall Street, the heart of New York’s financial district, and extends to the East River waterfront. This area, created during the earliest phases of land reclamation, features particularly poor soil quality. Formerly occupied by docks and warehouses, the site hosted a large, single-story parking garage for decades. In the early 2000s, developers identified it as an ideal location for a luxury residential skyscraper, offering proximity to the financial center and impressive views, coinciding with the area’s revitalization.
After a period of multiple investors, the property was acquired in 2013 by Fortis Property Group for $64 million. The company envisioned a 200-meter, 60-story glass tower with 80 luxury apartments, many spanning entire floors, reflecting the current preference for expansive residences among Manhattan’s wealthiest residents.
Construction began in early 2016, concurrent with the launch of apartment sales. The project was entrusted to Italian construction firm Pizzarotti, while marketing was spearheaded by Fredrik Eklund, a prominent New York luxury real estate broker. Eklund, a Swedish national with a diverse background – starting as an economic journalist, then an investment banker, followed by a stint as a gay porn actor, before transitioning to real estate and gaining celebrity through a luxury home-focused reality television show – quickly gained traction. Within a day of launch, 16 apartments were under contract, and by autumn 2017, two-thirds of the units had been sold, with completion initially slated for early 2018.
Manhattani toronyházak, középen a One Seaport torzója – Fotó: Gary Hershorn / Getty Images
The decision to forgo pilings, opting instead for soil stabilization through grout injections, remains contentious. The parties involved are currently engaged in multiple lawsuits to determine responsibility. By the time the building was nearing completion, a slight tilt – approximately 8 centimeters – became apparent. While independent assessments deemed the structure stable in this condition, it triggered alarm among investors and prospective buyers. Attempts to correct the lean by shifting weight with large concrete slabs on the upper floors proved ineffective. By September 2018, with the uppermost level completed and glass facade installation underway, the tilt at the 205-meter height had reached 20 centimeters.
The project quickly descended into turmoil, with buyers backing out of contracts and financing arrangements expiring. Fortis and Pizzarotti filed lawsuits against each other. Approximately $250 million had already been invested in the construction, equivalent to roughly $100 billion forints. The decision to skip the piling process is estimated to have saved around $6 million on the foundation work.
Fortis continued to attempt a rescue through 2020, bringing in new contractors and developing contingency plans, but ultimately abandoned the effort. The One Seaport tower has remained vacant for five years, its upper floors windowless. In recent years, it became a target for graffiti artists, who rappelled down from the roof to spray a multi-story “XSM RAMS NOTE” tag, which remains visible.
Currently, over twenty lawsuits surround the building, which possesses all necessary permits but is unsellable due to the controversy. The original developer is unwilling to complete it, unable to sell it, and demolition and rebuilding would be prohibitively expensive. The most likely scenario is that the building will remain a “zombie skyscraper” for years to come, awaiting a bold investor or intervention from the city if it becomes structurally unsafe.
(Sources: New Yorker, New York YIMBY, Wall Street Journal, New Atlas)
