HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #481  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2015, 8:47 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014


Quote:
Originally Posted by NYC4Life View Post
Raze that damn Duane Reade store, that could be a good start.
The one story retail structure is a product of zoning. In order to achieve the high density of 1 Penn Plaza, the other areas of the lot was artificially reduced in intensity. Additionally, New York's zoning code also offers density bonuses for private plazas and open spaces. It sounds good in theory but the unintended consequence is this shit.

I wish there was minimum height limits and building coverages to prevent crap like that from ever being built again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #482  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2015, 9:01 PM
BrownTown BrownTown is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,884
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
I wish there was minimum height limits and building coverages to prevent crap like that from ever being built again.
What is even the justification for these sort of zoning laws? I never understood why a city like NYC thought they needed to keep buildings shorter or make people pay absurd amounts of money or make absurd open areas like this just to get higher. Shouldn't NYC embrace height instead of trying to fight it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #483  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2015, 9:25 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownTown View Post
What is even the justification for these sort of zoning laws? I never understood why a city like NYC thought they needed to keep buildings shorter or make people pay absurd amounts of money or make absurd open areas like this just to get higher. Shouldn't NYC embrace height instead of trying to fight it?
NYC's Department of Planning website has a good background:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/zone/zonehis.shtml

Quote:
As early as the 1870’s and 1880’s, New Yorkers began to protest the loss of light and air as taller residential buildings began to appear in Manhattan. In response, the state legislature enacted a series of height restrictions on residential buildings, culminating in the Tenement House Act of 1901.

By then, New York City had become the financial center of the country and expanding businesses needed office space. With the introduction of steel frame construction techniques and improved elevators, technical restraints that had limited building height vanished. The Manhattan skyline was beginning to assume its distinctive form.

In 1915, when the 42-story Equitable Building was erected in Lower Manhattan, the need for controls on the height and form of all buildings became clear. Rising without setbacks to its full height of 538 feet, the Equitable Building cast a seven-acre shadow over neighboring buildings, affecting their value and setting the stage for the nation’s first comprehensive zoning resolution.

Other forces were also at work during the same period. Housing shortages, caused by an influx of new immigrants, created a market for tenements built to maximum bulk and minimum standards. Warehouses and factories began to encroach upon the fashionable stores along Ladies’ Mile, edging uncomfortably close to Fifth Avenue. Intrusions like these and the impacts of rapid growth added urgency to the calls of reformers for zoning restrictions separating residential, commercial and manufacturing uses and for new and more effective height and setback controls for all uses.

The concept of enacting a set of laws to govern land use and bulk was revolutionary, but the time had come for the city to regulate its surging physical growth. The groundbreaking Zoning Resolution of 1916, though a relatively simple document, established height and setback controls and designated residential districts that excluded what were seen as incompatible uses. It fostered the iconic tall, slender towers that came to epitomize the city’s business districts and established the familiar scale of three- to six-story residential buildings found in much of the city. The new ordinance became a model for urban communities throughout the United States as other growing cities found that New York’s problems were not unique.

But, while other cities were adopting the New York model, the model itself refused to stand still. The Zoning Resolution was frequently amended to be responsive to major shifts in population and land use caused by a variety of factors: continuing waves of immigration that helped to swell the city’s population from five million in 1916 to over eight million in 2010; new mass transit routes and the growth corridors they created; the emergence of technology and consequent economic and lifestyle changes; the introduction of government housing and development programs; and, perhaps more than anything else, the increase in automobile usage, which revolutionized land use patterns and created traffic and parking problems never imagined in 1916.

By mid-century, many of the underlying planning principles of the 1916 document no longer stood the test of time. If, for example, the city had been built out at the density envisioned in 1916, it could have contained over 55 million people, far beyond its realistic capacity. New theories were capturing the imaginations of planners. Le Corbusier’s “tower-in-the-park” model was influencing urban designers of the time and the concept of incentive zoning - trading additional floor area for public amenities - began to take hold. The last, still vacant areas on the city’s edges needed to be developed at densities that recognized the new, automobile-oriented lifestyle. Also, demands to make zoning approvals simpler, swifter and more comprehensible were a constant.

Eventually, it was evident that the original 1916 framework needed to be completely reconsidered. After lengthy study and public debate, the current Zoning Resolution was enacted and took effect in 1961.

The PDF Document 1961 Zoning Resolution (30.6 MB) was a product of its time. It coordinated use and bulk regulations, incorporated parking requirements and emphasized the creation of
open space. It introduced incentive zoning by adding a bonus of extra floor space to encourage developers of office buildings and apartment towers to incorporate plazas into their projects. In the city’s business districts, it accommodated a new type of high-rise office building with large, open floors of a consistent size. Elsewhere in the city, the 1961 Zoning Resolution dramatically reduced residential densities, largely at the edges of the city.

Although based upon the leading planning theories of the day, aspects of those zoning policies have revealed certain shortcomings over the years. The emphasis on open space sometimes resulted in buildings that overwhelm their surroundings, and the open spaces created by incentive zoning provisions have not always been useful or attractive. Urban design theories have changed as well. Today, tower-in-the-park developments, set back far from the city street, are often viewed as isolating and contrary to the goal of creating a vibrant urban streetscape.

Time passes, land uses change, and zoning policy accommodates, anticipates and guides those changes. In a certain sense, zoning is never final; it is renewed constantly in response to new ideas—and to new challenges.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #484  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2015, 11:22 PM
BrownTown BrownTown is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,884
Yeah, I understand WHAT they were trying to achieve, I just don't understand WHY. It just seems a little counterintuitive to want to live in NYC and then complain about lack of sunlight. If you want sunlight then move to Los Angeles or somewhere similar. NYC has Central Park if people want to get away from the skyscrapers and that beats all these little plazas and parks combined. Not to mention that a tall tower surrounded by open area is an incredibly inefficient use of land and money. The taller a building gets the less usable space there is per floor (because it's being taken up by more elevators and columns) and the more it costs per square foot. It seems like the current zoning practices just drive down density and consequently drive up rents.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #485  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2015, 11:36 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is offline
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,302
So does this mean 2PP is guaranteed to stand for many more decades hindering plans for a new Penn Station?
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #486  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2015, 8:25 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
Penn Station's New Public Plaza







Quote:
The design team that turned Times Square into an archipelago of pedestrian islands brought their expertise to Penn Station, where a new public plaza has been unveiled. The Snohetta-designed plaza, located on 33rd Street between 7th Avenue and Madison Square Garden's loading dock, is part of landlord Vornado's plan to make the area surrounding Penn Station less of a hell hole (because lord knows that the actual station won't be improved any time soon), and so far, it seems to be working. Granted, the plaza has only been open for a day, but a mid-morning jaunt to the area did not incite feelings of dread or leave us in a murderous rage.

Most of the new plaza is simply painted road that gives pedestrians much more space, but there are also several wooden benches that double as planters and sculptures by Keith Haring and Roy Lichtenstein. There are also two sets of wooden steps, similar to the TKTS booth stairs in Times Square, and audio equipment indicated that they might be setting up for one of the promise performances.

On Friday, Untapped snapped a few photos of the plaza under construction, and according to a halal cart vendor on the plaza, today is the first day it opened to the public. Enjoy it while you can because it will only exist until October 11.
============================
http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2015/0...nd_of_nice.php
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #487  
Old Posted Aug 11, 2015, 1:59 PM
phoenixboi08's Avatar
phoenixboi08 phoenixboi08 is offline
Transport Planner
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 577
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
Penn Station's New Public Plaza

============================
http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2015/0...nd_of_nice.php
It almost makes me consider lingering in the area...
__________________
"I'm not an armchair urbanist; not yet a licensed planner"
MCRP '16
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #488  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2015, 2:54 AM
giantSwan's Avatar
giantSwan giantSwan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Northeast, United States
Posts: 294
just overhaul this entire area already
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #489  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2015, 12:41 AM
aquablue aquablue is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,741
If they can get msg to move, the area will take off. I am hoping that penn is rebuilt someday. There are loads of far available to develop a new CBD around penn. I predict that this will be the final area of mega development after the current Hudson yards and midtown east are built out barring more rezoning.

Then again, far in the future given the focus on Hudson yards right now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #490  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2016, 6:25 PM
sparkling's Avatar
sparkling sparkling is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 765
Gov. Cuomo to Back a Penn Station Overhaul
Plan would focus on improvements for busy New York travel hub serving Amtrak, NJ Transit and LIRR

ANDREW TANGEL
January 05, 2016

Quote:
New York’s Penn Station, long ridiculed as outdated, crowded and miserable for travelers, would undergo a major overhaul under a plan expected to be announced as soon as this week, according to people familiar with the matter.

The nation’s busiest train station and a main hub on Manhattan’s West Side, Penn Station has become a focus for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who has sought to stake much of his legacy on upgrading the state’s aging infrastructure.

Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, is expected to announce a plan for a major revamp of Penn Station as soon as this week, these people said.

A spokesman for Mr. Cuomo declined to comment.

The plan is expected to involve jump-starting a long-stalled project to build what is known as Moynihan Station, a project stretching back to the administration of the governor’s father, Mario Cuomo.

Continue Reading
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #491  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2016, 7:36 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is offline
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,302
What a way to dream big.
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #492  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2016, 8:19 PM
Submariner's Avatar
Submariner Submariner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,341
The only way to overhaul Penn is to tear down MSG and the cesspool of a office tower on top of it and rebuild from scratch.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #493  
Old Posted Jan 7, 2016, 5:50 AM
mrnyc mrnyc is offline
cle/west village/shaolin
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
The only way to overhaul Penn is to tear down MSG and the cesspool of a office tower on top of it and rebuild from scratch.
i think it would be wise to rebuild out moynihan first dont you?

then you will get your wish.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #494  
Old Posted Jan 7, 2016, 6:29 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
I don't know what to make of this except to say that Penn needs a complete overhaul. It would be a waste of funds to put only a cosmetic band-aid.

For the economic health of the region, train capacity needs to be increased, followed by quality of commute improvements.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #495  
Old Posted Jan 7, 2016, 6:50 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
Say what?!? MSG supports the plan!!

http://www.playbill.com/news/article...theatre-378035

MSG, the company that runs Madison Square Garden and several other key large venues in New York City, says its supports Gov. Andrew Cuomo's railroad station renovation plan that may call for the "friendly" demolition of one of its theatres.

At a Jan. 6 press conference Gov. Cuomo unveiled several proposals to convert the former Foley Post Office on the west side of Eighth Avenue at 34th Street into a bright, modernistic new station, which would replace Pennsylvania Station, the main New York City terminal for both the Long Island Railroad and the New Jersey PATH trains—therefore one of the major access points for theatregoers from those two regions. The governor said he has earmarked $3 billion for the project, which includes retail development on neighboring streets. He said the state is seeking developers to carry out the project.

- See more at: http://www.playbill.com/news/article....FBeRF1zK.dpuf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #496  
Old Posted Jan 7, 2016, 6:52 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,014
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #497  
Old Posted Jan 8, 2016, 10:33 PM
BBMW BBMW is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 89
This is now a dome deal. MSG is going nowhere. They will sacrifice the little theater under the arena to allow Penn Station improvements. Those who wanted to get rid of MSG will not get their wish.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #498  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2016, 1:01 AM
BrownTown BrownTown is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,884
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBMW View Post
This is now a dome deal. MSG is going nowhere. They will sacrifice the little theater under the arena to allow Penn Station improvements. Those who wanted to get rid of MSG will not get their wish.
This deal is far from done. I give it 50% chance at best. This isn't the first time we've hard these tall tales and so far there and I doubt the budget is much better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #499  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2016, 6:11 PM
BBMW BBMW is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 89
Well, here's the kicker. The state could make the deal with MSG to take control of the theater in return for pushing through the renewal of the operating license for the main arena (which would cost the state nothing.) Then the state could not bother to come up with the money to execute the project. But MSG would still stay open. I could very easily see this happening.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #500  
Old Posted Jan 10, 2016, 9:52 PM
pico44's Avatar
pico44 pico44 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBMW View Post
Well, here's the kicker. The state could make the deal with MSG to take control of the theater in return for pushing through the renewal of the operating license for the main arena (which would cost the state nothing.) Then the state could not bother to come up with the money to execute the project. But MSG would still stay open. I could very easily see this happening.


Well, which is it? Is it a "done deal" or could you "easily see this happening"?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:32 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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