HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive


    53W53 in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #401  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2008, 8:03 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
If everyone got a friend a sign (even if they're not interested in skyscrapers), just right there we'd double in signatures. Keep that in mind guys.
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
     
     
  #402  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2008, 9:53 PM
aluminum's Avatar
aluminum aluminum is offline
I love boxes.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZZ-II View Post
1000ft too tall for NY
Wake up and smell the coffee.

(Don't get me wrong, I love NYC)
     
     
  #403  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2008, 10:06 PM
nygirl1 nygirl1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 566
No ZZ-II is right. It is ridiculous to even phathom. Hate to piss any chicagoans off and I really mean that but NY paved the way for each and every skyline out there. You cannot deny the city that pioneered the skyscraper but it is happening. Someone on SSC said it really well in that these people are so afraid of change and having to share their respected neighborhoods with new faces that they will fight to the end. The thing is they are taking from the city, one of its most storied features which is the skyline and architecture in general. The city has always been transforming its skyline longer than most if not all and to me that just shouldn't be stopped. You are right too, however, 1000 ft has become to high for these people even 600 ft is too high for the morons over on the east side and I mean this is NY and it is more than these people and their neighborhoods. I don't think they'll be taken seriously forever but at the moment we have given them an inch and they want a yard.
So it is laughable in one sense to say 1000 ft. is too tall for NYC but on the other hand it is for some sad New Yorkers and because some don't want to stir the pot it is a ridiculous process to get an ok from the city on top of having to battle opposition that would prefer hugging the past and freezing it forever.
__________________
Brooklyn: The Motherland.
     
     
  #404  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2008, 8:12 AM
NYC2ATX's Avatar
NYC2ATX NYC2ATX is offline
Everywhere all at once
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SI NYC
Posts: 2,450
Ah, it has a name now. Since when?
__________________
BUILD IT. BUILD EVERYTHING. BUILD IT ALL.
     
     
  #405  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2008, 8:39 PM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,098
Okay, here we go. This is it.

The hearing for the air rights transfer aka "Modification of bulk pursuant to Section 74-79 of the Zoning Resolution" has been scheduled by the Landmarks Preservation Commission on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 at 9:30 A.M. in the morning of that day, a public hearing will be held in the Conference Room at 1 Centre Street, 9th Floor.

I suggest everyone who wants to help should attend that meeting and speak up and show your support for the project.

In the meantime, I'll try to find out tomorrow how your letters and comments can also be submitted to the commissioners prior to the meeting.


     
     
  #406  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2008, 8:41 PM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,098
By the way, in case anyone needs directions...


Quote:
The Landmarks Preservation Commission is located on the 9th Floor of the Municipal Building at

1 Centre Street

at the corner of Centre Street and Chambers Street, across from City Hall, in Manhattan.

The Municipal Building is very well served by subway. The 4/5/6 Brooklyn Bridge Station and the J/M/Z Chambers Street are directly below the Municipal Building.

The A/C/E and 1/2/3 all stop further west on Chambers Street. The City Hall stop for the R & W trains is also close by.

A number of buses also serve the City Hall area. Please follow the link below to the MTA's Lower Manhattan transit map for more information.
     
     
  #407  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2008, 2:43 PM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,098
Just got off the phone with the receptionist over at the LPC...

They are saying that you should MAIL (and not email) your letters to:

LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION
1 CENTRE STREET, 9TH FLOOR
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10007
ATTN: CORY SCOTT HERRALA


Be sure to reference the hearing item numbers, 08-6392 (Block 1269, Lot 30) and 08-6382 (Block 1270, Lot 34) in your letters.

The other thing I just want to add is that the 9:30 AM hearing start time does not apply to these two items. Since they are numbers 14th and 15th, a more precise time for when they will come up will be posted in a day or so.

So anyone planning on going does not have to be there by 9:30.

I'll let you know the exact times as soon as they are up.
     
     
  #408  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2008, 3:18 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is online now
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,900
Quote:
Originally Posted by aluminum View Post
What is the main reason of such a strong protest against this building ? Is it the location ? Is it the height ? Or is it just 'the present New York City, where 1000' is just too tall (except the WTC)' ? Could it be the combination of all three ?
There is no height limit in New York. These same people would be complaining even if the tower were half its height. It has more to do with how they see development:

Quote:
In its resolution sent today to Robert Tierney, the chairman of the landmarks commission, the community board noted that the developer "has not provided a written preservation plan and independent Shadow Studies, as requested by the Committee, which are imperative in order to assess if there is an adequate preservation plan in place" and for the commission to report whether "the new tower will 'relate harmoniously to the subject landmark buildings" including the "stained glass windows of St. Thomas Church which face west to the Development site."

The resolution also said that the museum's famous sculpture garden is not a landmark, "but an eventual candidate for Scenic Landmarking, very likely the most adversely affected open space in the vicinity of the proposed tower."
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #409  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2008, 3:23 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is online now
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,900
Quote:
Originally Posted by StatenIslander237 View Post
Ah, it has a name now. Since when?
Posted on the previous page, but apparently the name has been around for a while before then. It also has an official height status given as 1,155 ft (or 1,154 judging from the stacking diagram)

__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #410  
Old Posted Mar 26, 2008, 12:18 PM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,098
Here's the resolution that CB5 sent to Landmarks:

Quote:
Requests for reports from the Landmarks Preservation Commission pursuant to Sections 74-711 and 74-79 of the Zoning Resolution to facilitate Transfers of Development Rights to 53 West 53 Street from St. Thomas Church and the University Club, both individual landmarks.


WHEREAS, The New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission ("LPC") has been requested to provide a Report to the New York City Department of City Planning ("DCP") pursuant to Section 74-711 of the Zoning Resolution to facilitate the transfer of approximately 275,000 square feet of floor area from 678 Fifth Avenue (St. Thomas Church) to a development site located at 53 West 53rd Street going through-block to West 54th Street; and

WHEREAS, LPC has been requested to provide a second report to DCP pursuant to Section 74-79 of the Zoning Resolution to facilitate the transfer of approximately 136,000 square feet of floor area from 1 West 54 Street (The University Club) to a development site located at 53 West 53rd Street going through-block to West 54th Street; and

WHEREAS, The receiving Development site, 53 West 53 Street, contains 210,238 square feet of available floor area, which will be supplemented by another 7,000 square feet of available floor area from the existing Museum of Modern Art ("MoMA") to be used for the Connector Building; and

WHEREAS, The grand total of 628,238 square feet for the proposed new Mid Block development would result in a 75 story 1,155 ft. high eccentric, asymmetrical tower according to designs prepared by the celebrated French architect, Jean Nouvel, for the Developer, Hines; and

WHEREAS, The proposed tower at 1,155 ft. would be higher than the Chrysler Building's 1,047 ft., and just under the height of the Bank of America's 1,200 ft. tower nearing completion, and the Empire State Building at 1,250 ft., ranking it as the third tallest building in New York City if it were built; and

WHEREAS, Unlike all the other buildings cited above and some other towers of comparable height (New York Times Building 1,046 ft., including a mast on top of the building proper; Citicorp. 915 ft. and Trump World Tower 861 ft.), the proposed building, to be known as Tower Verre, will not be either on a wide avenue or major, wide crosstown street and will not occupy a full avenue blockfront; and

WHEREAS, The Developer has not provided a written preservation plan and independent Shadow Studies, as requested by the Committee, which are imperative in order to assess if there is an adequate preservation plan in place and for LPC to Report whether
The new tower will "relate harmoniously to the subject landmark buildings" pursuant to

Sect. 74-711 (a) (2) including the stained glass windows of St. Thomas Church which face west to the Development site,

There will be a "minimal adverse effects on the structures or open space in the vicinity in terms of scale, location and access to light and air" pursuant to Sect. 74-711 (b) (2), namely:

  • 5 West 54 Street, the Landmarked Starr Mansion
  • 7 West 54 Street, the Landmarked Lehman Mansion
  • 9-11 West 54 Street, the Landmarked Goodwin Mansion
  • 13-15 West 54 Street, the Landmarked Rockefeller Mansion
  • 17 West 54 Street, the Landmarked Rockefeller Apartments
  • MoMA Sculpture Garden, not a Landmark, but an eventual candidate for Scenic Landmarking, very likely the most adversely affected open space in the vicinity of the proposed tower,
  • 51 West 52 Street, the Landmarked CBS Building
  • There will be an "adverse affect (to) adjacent buildings ... by unduly restricting light and air to surrounding streets and properties" pursuant Sect. 74-721 (a) (3); and

WHEREAS, Furthermore, with respect to the University Club transfer of air rights, Sect. 74-79 requires adherence to the regulations of Sect. 74-792 of the Zoning Resolution which states:

(e) "As a condition of permitting such transfers of development rights, the Commission shall make the following findings: (1) that the permitted transfer of floor area or variations in the front height or setback regulations will not unduly increase the bulk of any new development, density of population or intensity of use in any block to the detriment of the occupants of buildings on the block or nearby blocks and any disadvantages to the surrounding area caused by reduced access of light and air will be more than offset by the advantages of the Landmark's preservation to the local community and the City as a whole;

"The Commission (City Planning Commission) shall give due consideration to the relationship between the landmark building and any new building developed on the adjacent lot regarding materials, design, scale and location of bulk.

"The Commission may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards to minimize adverse effects on the character of the surrounding area"; and

WHEREAS, Not only the properties set forth in point 2) hereinabove may be adversely affected by the proposed new tower, but other low and mid-rise buildings, many of them historic but not Landmarked, will also be affected, and

WHEREAS, The Zoning Resolution contemplates that the private burden of ownership of a landmark property may be offset by the benefit of a sale of development rights, and the public burden of a new building of higher density is alleviated by the continued existence and maintenance of a landmark, and further that these benefits and burdens bear some reasonable relationship to each other; and

WHEREAS, Community Board Five values the University Club and St. Thomas Church, notes that both are currently in good condition and is pleased to see ongoing maintenance plans, however, the proposed development rights transfer is expected to total over 400,000 square feet and result in a building triple the size of one built without development rights, thereby creating a public burden that far exceeds any public benefits; and

WHEREAS, Any new construction of the magnitude proposed would constitute a major disruption in traffic flow, an impediment to emergency vehicles, cause noise, contribute to air pollution, create problems for removal of construction debris on narrow cross-town streets, preventing access to, and the quiet, safe enjoyment of, the Landmarked properties; therefore, be it


RESOLVED, That Community Board Five urges the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission to issue two Reports to the New York City Department of City Planning recommending DENIAL of BOTH:

> the transfer of 275,000 square feet of Air Rights from 678 Fifth Avenue (St. Thomas Church) under Sect. 74-711 of the Zoning Resolution to the development site located at 53 West 53rd Street, and

> the transfer of 136,000 square feet of Air Rights from 1 West 54 Street (The University Club) under Sect. 74-79 of the Zoning Resolution, to a Development site located at 53 West 53 Street.

The above resolution passed by a vote of 27 in favor; 1 opposed; 2 abstaining.
     
     
  #411  
Old Posted Mar 26, 2008, 1:31 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is online now
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,900
Quote:
WHEREAS, The grand total of 628,238 square feet for the proposed new Mid Block development would result in a 75 story 1,155 ft. high eccentric, asymmetrical tower according to designs prepared by the celebrated French architect, Jean Nouvel, for the Developer, Hines; and

WHEREAS, The proposed tower at 1,155 ft. would be higher than the Chrysler Building's 1,047 ft., and just under the height of the Bank of America's 1,200 ft. tower nearing completion, and the Empire State Building at 1,250 ft., ranking it as the third tallest building in New York City if it were built; and

WHEREAS, Unlike all the other buildings cited above and some other towers of comparable height (New York Times Building 1,046 ft., including a mast on top of the building proper; Citicorp. 915 ft. and Trump World Tower 861 ft.), the proposed building, to be known as Tower Verre, will not be either on a wide avenue or major, wide crosstown street and will not occupy a full avenue blockfront; and

WHEREAS, The Developer has not provided a written preservation plan and independent Shadow Studies, as requested by the Committee, which are imperative in order to assess if there is an adequate preservation plan in place
Those blowhards sure know how to word it...

But the "grand" total isn't that grand at all, not even for a "mid block" tower.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #412  
Old Posted Mar 26, 2008, 8:59 PM
Swede's Avatar
Swede Swede is offline
YIMBY co-founder
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sol.III.eu.se.08
Posts: 6,760
How does the process work in NYC? is it open for anyone to chime in with Landmarks? if so, a nice refutation of CB5's "arguments" would be in order.
/CB5 comes of as about as coherant and serious as Chris Rock's cinematic masterpiece CB4.

//adding 1155ft to the thread title.
__________________
Forumers met so far:
Huopa, Nightsky, Jo, wolkenkrabber, ThisSideofSteinway, jacksom, New Jack City, LeCom, Ellatur, Jan, Dennis, Ace, Bardamu, AtlanticaC5, Ringil, Dysfunctional, stacey, karakhal, ch1le, Hviid, staff, kjetilab, Þróndeimr, queetz, FREKI, sander, Blue Viking, nomels, Mantas, ristov, Rafal_T, khaan, Chilenofuturista, Jonte Myra, safta20, AW, Pas, Jarmo K, IceCheese, Sideshow_Bob, sk, Ingenioren, Ayreonaut, Silver Creations, Hasse78, Svartmetall
     
     
  #413  
Old Posted Mar 26, 2008, 9:30 PM
Alxx611's Avatar
Alxx611 Alxx611 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Orleans, LA/ Mobile, AL
Posts: 374
I'm sorry I'm probably going to be torn to pieces for saying this, but I still don't understand the militantly pro-development stance everyone on this forum tends to have about every project.

While I'd absolutely love to see this project built, I don't understand why everyone finds any opposition NIMBYs have as completely irrational and insane. These people are the ones who actually have to live near the tower and deal with the construction and effects of placing a new tower in their neighborhood, so I feel they have every right to criticize it, whereas most people on this forum don't live where the tower is being built, hell many of them don't even live in NYC, so i think its selfish that they think they have a right to decide if the tower should be built or not and be able to create petitions, just because they find the building attractive or just because its tall.
     
     
  #414  
Old Posted Mar 26, 2008, 9:40 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
^^^ Oh please. Dealing with construction, noise, 'city life', is all part of living in the city. If these people have problems accepting that, then they shouldn't be there in the first place. Construction and pro development is no stranger to Manhattan, so these folks shouldn't act like these proposals are out of the norm.

I have to say, stating what you just said on a 'skyscraper forum' is fighting an up-hill battle. I've said this before and I'll say it again, Manhattan is the business captiol of the World, and to decline development for any use is just not practical. I don't know how they do things down in Mobile, but up here, pro development is Manhattan.
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
     
     
  #415  
Old Posted Mar 26, 2008, 11:42 PM
Muskavon Muskavon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 451
Yeah, it'd be a bit understandable if you lived in a rural Iowa neighborhood and your neighbor decided to build a 200 story office building. An aversion to skypcrapers while living in Manhattan is pretty absurd. It'd be like living in that Iowa neighborhood and being pissed off when you see people grow corn.
     
     
  #416  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2008, 12:13 AM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muskavon View Post
Yeah, it'd be a bit understandable if you lived in a rural Iowa neighborhood and your neighbor decided to build a 200 story office building. An aversion to skypcrapers while living in Manhattan is pretty absurd. It'd be like living in that Iowa neighborhood and being pissed off when you see people grow corn.
100% correct. I mean, this isn't a game, skyscrapers aren't new to these people.
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
     
     
  #417  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2008, 12:27 AM
Muskavon Muskavon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 451
Funny thing is I live not far from Alxx611 in Pensacola, so I undrstand his point and I wouldn't sign a petition for this since I don't live there. But I think, as the financial capital of the world, NYC actually has a responsibility to the rest of the United States to support, promote and do whatever it takes to maintain and grow that position for the strength of the country as a whole in both standing and stature. If that even takes plowing down rows of lowrise apartments now and then...whatever. There is a greater good to be served, IMO.
     
     
  #418  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2008, 12:36 AM
Alxx611's Avatar
Alxx611 Alxx611 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Orleans, LA/ Mobile, AL
Posts: 374
I guess it is pretty stupid to choose to live in New York and not anticipate a highrise being built near or around you.
     
     
  #419  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2008, 12:42 AM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alxx611 View Post
I guess it is pretty stupid to choose to live in New York and not anticipate a highrise being built near or around you.
It is plain and simple, which is why we have such a low tolerance level for these people.
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
     
     
  #420  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2008, 1:42 AM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is online now
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Otisburgh
Posts: 44,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muskavon View Post
Yeah, it'd be a bit understandable if you lived in a rural Iowa neighborhood and your neighbor decided to build a 200 story office building. An aversion to skypcrapers while living in Manhattan is pretty absurd. It'd be like living in that Iowa neighborhood and being pissed off when you see people grow corn.
hear, hear.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. (Bertrand Russell)
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:13 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.