NEW YORK | 15 Penn Plaza (Hotel Penn) | 1,200 FT / 388 M | 61 FLOORS

[RobertWalpole]

Originally Posted by NYguy

For those not familiar with NY, the model includes a 2.5m square foot building that Sherwood Equities plans to build. It will be located on Sherwood's lot, part of which is currently empty and part of which contains a McDonald's lot. The lot is located on W34th St and 10th Ave. This could turn out to be a 400m+ tower. There is no design at the moment and the white rectangular "block" simply (depicted to the left of 15 Penn) shows the height of what will be built. More information about Sherwood's future tower can be seen on its website: http://www.sherwood-equities.com.

[NYguy]

^ The McDonald's lot would be just south of Sherwood's site, on the southside of 34th. Sherwood Equities was also considering going with a large hotel for the site, but now that the convention center expansion won't be what it was, they are likely to stick with the office. It's also one of the so called "four corners" towers (two others being the Girasol, and the former WPC site).

Originally Posted by philvia

in this photo, isn't the base already blocked by the new towers on 6th ave?

Yeah, but the base would be blocked from anywhere but standing nearby the building anyway. Meanwhile, Bloomberg finally speaks out...

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/..._building.html
Bloomberg comes out in support of rival skyscraper near Empire State Building



Mayor Bloomberg says the new skyscraper slated to be built just west of the Empire State Building would be a 'great addition' to the skyline.

BY Adam Lisberg
August 25th 2010

Mayor Bloomberg came out in strong support Tuesday of a massive new skyscraper slated to be built just two blocks from the iconic Empire State Building.

"I think it'd be great for the city," Bloomberg said of the 1,216-foot tower proposed for the site of the Hotel Pennsylvania, across the street from Penn Station.

"It would be a great addition to our skyline. It would be easy for people to get to, and I think it would be a phenomenally popular building."

Vornado Realty Trust has been assembling land and air rights for years to build a state-of-the-art office building just to the west of the national landmark.

The City Council is expected to approve the controversial skyscraper.

Anthony Malkin, whose family company owns the Empire State Building, believes the tower will block views of his family's iconic skyscraper, and asked a City Council committee this week to reduce its height.

"I don't understand that," Bloomberg said. "I think this is something that's great for the city, and you know, competition's a wonderful thing.

"One guy owns a building. He'd like to have it be the only tall building. I'm sorry, that's not the real world. Nor should it be."

Malkin said his family respects Bloomberg's opinion, but believes the height and design of the new tower are too much for its location near the Empire State Building.

"We are pro-development and think this area represents a great opportunity for development," Malkin said.

"The City Council has . . . gone out of \[its\] way to understand the situation. In the end, the elected representatives of the city of New York have to decide."

Ny1

• Video Link

[NYguy]

http://www.city-journal.org/2010/eon0824jb.html

Manhattan’s Other Building Controversy
Plans to construct a high-rise near the Empire State Building have sparked opposition.

Josh Barrow
24 August 2010

...The Empire State Building has essentially stood alone over its 79 years, making it a rarity among tall Manhattan buildings. It was constructed during a building boom that led to a glut of Manhattan office space while the economy was mired in the Depression; after its completion, high-rise construction in New York came to a near-standstill for 20 years. By the time demand caught up with supply in the 1950s, there was little interest in building tall near the Empire State Building. Desired office locations in Manhattan had shifted northward—running roughly from Third to Seventh Avenue, and from 40th Street to Central Park. Most of this area is within walking distance of Grand Central Terminal, which handles 150,000 daily passengers from suburbs north of Manhattan.

Unfortunately, Penn Station—where commuters from New Jersey and Long Island arrive, and which handles four times GCT’s traffic—lies south of this zone, in an area with relatively limited office development. Over 70 percent of Midtown office workers can walk to work from Grand Central; only 36 percent can do so from Penn Station.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is addressing this problem with the East Side Access project, which will add a new rail terminal for Long Island commuters 140 feet beneath Grand Central. The $8.1 billion project, to open in 2016, will cut commute times by up to 40 minutes. But even then, half of Long Island trains (and all New Jersey trains) will go to Penn Station. So the 15 Penn Plaza project—which would put one of Manhattan’s largest office buildings across the street from Manhattan’s busiest transit terminal—makes a lot of sense.

What is more important: preserving views of the Empire State Building from afar or giving potentially many thousands of commuters more direct access to their workplaces? That’s what the dispute comes down to.

WNYC radio refers to the proposed building as the “skyscraper next door,” but this is not accurate: the Empire State Building is on Fifth Avenue, and 15 Penn Plaza would be on Seventh Avenue. Some of the outrage about the proposed building stems from a misrepresentation of what it means to be “nearby” in Manhattan. The buildings only look as though they’re very close when viewed from the west, putting them within the same sight line.

Fortunately, the City Planning Commission has already approved a zoning change to allow the project, which exceeds the originally allowable size for the site. And the City Council appears likely to side with the CPC. At yesterday’s hearing, Councilman Leroy Comrie asked: “Is New York City a snapshot taken in 2010 to be held in perpetuity, or is New York City an evolving, dynamic entity?” His formulation suggests that he takes the latter view.

Many others, however—and not just the Empire State’s owners—have come down on the side of preserving views of the building. Henry Stern, a former parks commissioner, even warned the Council that the proposed tower could do “irreparable harm” to the city. It is hard to see how. The Chrysler Building (voted the favorite New York skyscraper of an expert panel assembled by New York’s Skyscraper Museum) has been invisible from New Jersey for decades, surrounded as it is by the skyscraper thicket of Midtown. Yet the city has managed to soldier on.

Saturday’s New York Daily News featured six man-on-the-street interviews about the proposed tower. Four opposed it, citing the impacts on views. Two others supported it, arguing that change and growth ought to characterize New York’s skyline. They’re right: what has made New York’s skyline so interesting and iconic is the freedom to build tall and build dense. But even more important is that the relatively unfettered ability to build has helped make New York an interesting and dynamic city, because developers are able to construct the buildings that enterprises and people need to thrive. Oddly, none of the News’s interviewees addressed the fact that more office space near Penn Station would mean more jobs and shorter commutes.

It is remarkable how many people seem to view the New York skyline principally as something to look at, rather than as a collection of buildings full of people working, living, and creating. Scenic views are great, and there are good reasons to preserve historic structures like the Empire State Building. But it is misguided to limit building density for blocks around it, on some of the world’s most expensive real estate, to prevent changes in the skyline.

Anthony and Peter Malkin, the Empire State Building’s owners, may well be as concerned about views from their tower as they are about views of it. Because of its less-than-prime location, their building doesn’t attract A-list tenants. It is mostly broken up into multitenant floors occupied by small firms, especially law practices (and not of the white-shoe variety.) Croatia and Senegal maintain tourism offices there. But the one thing the building does have going for it is fabulous, unobstructed views in all directions.

The Malkins have every right to try to protect these views. But it’s city officials’ role to recognize that allowing highly dense development around Penn Station is more important than making sure that Empire State Building tenants have pleasing views of New Jersey or lower Manhattan, or that residents of the metropolitan area have pleasing views of the Empire State Building from wherever they are. The city council should defend Vornado’s right to build just as forcefully as it has defended Cordoba House.

Josh Barro is the Walter B. Wriston Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a regular columnist for RealClearMarkets.

[Swede]

I really like the way Bloomberg is taking a stand on both these buildings. Also, 15 Penn made it into one of the local papers in Sweden, where it was subtly blasted all the way through the short article for destroying Manhattans skyline (unsurprising since its a very nimby paper).

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Swede

15 Penn made it into one of the local papers in Sweden, where it was subtly blasted all the way through the short article for destroying Manhattans skyline (unsurprising since its a very nimby paper).

I've noticed this issue getting a lot of press worldwide. I'll be glad when it's finally settled today. It's likely to go in Vornado and 15 Penn's favor, but you never know what those clowns in the City Council will do...

[Swede]

yeah, it's getting attention. I love how most responses to the article on the Swedish papers website was along the lines of "it's Manhattan, quit being such nimbys"

[NYguy]

I see a lot of approvals here from the subcommittee. The full council vote is later...
http://legistar.council.nyc.gov/Meet...863D8C&Search=

[NYguy]

More news...

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...ado-tower.html
New York City Council Land Use Committee Approves Vornado Tower

August 25, 2010
By Henry Goldman and David M. Levitt

A New York City council committee approved Vornado Realty Trust’s plans for a 1,200-foot (366- meter) Manhattan skyscraper that’s opposed by the owners of the nearby Empire State Building.

The council’s land use committee approved the tower by a vote of 19-1, with two members abstaining. The building will be voted on by the full council later this afternoon.

_________



http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stori...own-skyscraper
City Council To Vote On New Midtown Skyscraper

By: NY1 News

After being approved by the subcommittees on Zoning and Franchises and Land Use this morning, the proposal for the development of 15 Penn Plaza now goes before the full council.

...Mayor Michael Bloomberg is defending the project.

"Anybody that builds a building in New York City changes its skyline,” said the mayor. “We don’t need to run around to every other owner and apologize. This is something that‘s great for the city, and you know, competition's a wonderful thing. One guy owns a tall building and wants it to be the only tall building, well sorry, that’s not the real world."

New Yorkers said they, too, support a change in the skyline.

"It would add to it," said one New Yorker.

"I like the tall buildings and all the lights," said another. "That's why people come to New York, right? It's the lights that attract."

"It's New York, there are buildings all over the place," added a third.

The City Planning Commission has already approved the tower.

• Video Link

Love the comments at the end...

[evanmack]

Wait what's up with the huge towers in the background of the model?

[Onn]

Go Bloomberg!!

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

i went to the council hearing and not one of them was against the tower,only concerned about minority involvement in the towers construction and use,they all just advised Vornado to utilize NBWE properly.

[RobertWalpole]

Originally Posted by evanmack

Wait what's up with the huge towers in the background of the model?

[/QUOTE]

For those not familiar with NY, the model includes a 2.5m square foot building that Sherwood Equities plans to build. It will be located on Sherwood's lot, part of which is currently empty and part of which contains a McDonald's lot. The lot is located on W34th St and 10th Ave. This could turn out to be a 400m+ tower. There is no design at the moment and the white rectangular "block" simply (depicted to the left of 15 Penn) shows the height of what will be built. More information about Sherwood's future tower can be seen on its website: http://www.sherwood-equities.com.

Also included are "blocks" which show the massing for towers that will rise on the Hudson Yards site.

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

well this is another win,lets party!

[Dac150]

This one should be in the bag. Finally; it's so refreshing to hear so much support from the city council about a highrise, especially one of this size.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by SkyscrapersOfNewYork

i went to the council hearing and not one of them was against the tower,only concerned about minority involvement the towers construction and use,they all just advised Vornado to utilize NBWE properly.

I was just reading about that...
http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/archives/8621


The unfortunate thing for the people who were trying to save the Hotel Pennsylvania is that the last minute grandstanding by the Malkins at the Empire State drowned out everything else. Not that it would have mattered, but the issue was no longer to "save the hotel". Anyway, the City Council meeting is supposed to begin around 1:30, so approval should be final before the afternoon is out. It would be interesting to see exactly what resolution was passed along with the approval from the subcommittee.

[Onn]

Originally Posted by NYguy

I was just reading about that...
http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/archives/8621


The unfortunate thing for the people who were trying to save the Hotel Pennsylvania is that the last minute grandstanding by the Malkins at the Empire State drowned out everything else. Not that it would have mattered, but the issue was no longer to "save the hotel". Anyway, the City Council meeting is supposed to begin around 1:30, so approval should be final before the afternoon is out. It would be interesting to see exactly what resolution was passed along with the approval from the subcommittee.

Agreed on that. Perhaps it was for the better, you never know.

I feel good about this one considering the sudden surge in need for office space in the city. Approval and finding a lead tent both seem like no brainers. And this will not greatly affect views from the ESB observation deck. Plus the transit bonus card. I mean, what else can you ask for?

[StoOgE]

Originally Posted by Onn

Agreed on that. Perhaps it was for the better, you never know.

I feel good about this one considering the sudden surge in need for office space in the city. Approval and finding a lead tent both seem like no brainers. And this will not greatly affect views from the ESB observation deck. I mean, what else can you ask for?

But how do you propose to see the beutiful streets of Union NJ from the ESB now?

Won't someone think of the children.

[RobertWalpole]

Amazingly, in a recession, Midtown is getting at least three 300+m buildings with a fourth (225 W 57th) in the works!

[Dac150]

Might be amazing in other places, but despite anything there is always vertical development of some sort in this city.

[NYguy]

^ Consider that over the past three or four decades, we've only seen two towers over 1,000 ft under construction in the city - neither to roof height, and both during boom times.

Originally Posted by RobertWalpole

Amazingly, in a recession, Midtown is getting at least three 300+m buildings with a fourth (225 W 57th) in the works!

Well, let's not jump too far ahead. There's only one in midtown under construction, and there are quite a few in the proposal stages. I do expect the Hudson Yards sites to come into play within a year or so because we are getting closer to the 2013 target date of the 7 line extension which will connect those sites (some already cleared for construction) with the mass transit network of the city. I would put the Hotel Penn site as very likely moving forward though. We'll just have to sit back and wait for a tenant, which will then allow the design process of the tower to move forward.




I'm also curious as to what will be built on the Penn East site...