search the site
 daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Supertalls

Supertalls Discussions of projects under construction between 300-599m/1,000-1,999ft tall.
» Proposed Supertalls



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 11th, 2009, 04:59 PM   #1
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

NEW YORK | Central Park Tower | 472m | 1550ft | 95 fl | U/C



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Quote:
Originally Posted by HK999 View Post
Nordstrom Tower to Become World's Tallest Residential Building at 1,775 Feet

http://newyorkyimby.com/2014/07/nord...ilding.html/1#














===============================================================================================




Preliminary massing renderings ahead of finalized design.


===============================================================================================


225 West 57th Street - Extell - Hotel / Condo - by Adrian Smith and Gordon Gill

http://ny.curbed.com/tags/225-west-57th-street



NYC Department of Buildings
Work Permit Data
Premises: 217 WEST 57 STREET MANHATTAN Filed At: 217 WEST 57 STREET MANHATTAN
BIN: 1080870 Block: 1029 Lot: 19 Job Type: A3 - ALTERATION TYPE 3

View Permit History | Printable (PDF) version of this Permit
Job No: 110436644 Fee: STANDARD
Permit No: 110436644-01-EQ-SH Issued: 06/08/2010 Expires: 04/01/2011
Seq. No.: 02 Filing Date: 06/08/2010 RENEWAL Status: ISSUED
Work: Proposed Job Start: 01/21/2009 Work Approved: 01/20/2009
ALTERATION TYPE 3 - CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT - SIDEWALK-SHED
INSTALLATION OF 122 LINEAR FEET OF HEAVY DUTY SIDEWALK SHED FOR BUILDING
DEMOLITION, FILED SEPARATELY. LIVE LOAD 300 PSF. SIDEWALK SHED SHALL COMPLY WITH
CHAPTER #33 OF THE 2008 CODE. NO CHANGE IN USE, OCCUPANCY OR EGRESS UNDER THIS
APPLICATION.

Electrical Application Number for Shed Lighting: Z120397
Use: COM - COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - OLD CODE Landmark: NO Stories: 12
Review is requested under Building Code: 2008

all pics from WNY:





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Drone view of site at 0:30


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Early history:




The following map shows the sites of the two projects being developed on West 57th Street by Extell Development.

155-157 W 57th, which is the subject of another thread (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=776476 ), is shown in red. Its companion tower, 225 W 57th, which is the subject of this thread, is shown in orange.

225 W 57th is a far larger site. Therefore, since 155-157 W 57th will exceed 330m, it is likely that 225 W 57th will be much larger.

Lofter1
__________________

Last edited by desertpunk; July 1st, 2015 at 11:39 PM.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 11th, 2009, 05:09 PM   #2
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

This project almost was killed yesterday by NYC's Landmarks Preservation Commission. Fortunately, the developer prevailed, and this is proceeding.

Here's a story that appeared the day before the LPC's vote:

http://www.observer.com/2009/real-es...rich-buildings

Planned Extell Skyscaper Faces Landmarks Test Over B.F. Goodrich Buildings

By Eliot Brown
November 9, 2009

Extell Development's skyscraper planned for 57th Street and Broadway will face a big test Tuesday, as the city's Landmarks Preservation Commission is set to decide the fate of two connected buildings built by the B.F. Goodrich Company in 1909.

Just what that fate will be is unclear to many involved, a rare twist with a commission where decisions almost always seem predetermined.

Tuesday morning, the LPC is slated to vote on whether to landmark the two buildings, a move that Extell says would force it to scrap the giant mixed-use tower it has planned for the site. In recent months, the company has mounted an aggressive defense against the commission--which typically designates every building it votes to consider--enlisting unions and four powerful elected officials to push back at the designations.

The result was a compromise to designate one of the two buildings--the main headquarters of B.F. Goodrich, located on Broadway--allowing it to destroy the other, located on 57th Street. Preservationists contend this is not enough, saying that if one of the buildings is landmark quality so is the other, and the commission should not bend to political pressure. Extell counters that landmarking both buildings would ruin its prime development site, and force the cancellation of what it says is a $1.5 billion tower.

Extell has told others involved in the discussions that the company believes its compromise plan has the support of the commission's chair, Robert Tierney, though how many of the other votes it will get remains unclear. Preservationists involved in the process also claim they have some of the votes on the 11-member commission.

Should the commission landmark both buildings, Extell would still have another at bat as the City Council has the power to veto any landmark designation (though it's incredibly rare for the Council to take such a vote). Giant skyscrapers don't usually play well with the populist crowd, and Council members could easily be painted as ignoring preservation concerns at the request of a developer.

Here's the story that appeared after the LPC's vote:


http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pb...911109990/1058

November 10, 2009 3:37 PM

Extell gets landmark break on W. 57th

In surprise about-face, the Landmarks Preservation Commission votes to allow developer to raze building in order to make way for 1.5M-square-foot successor.
By Theresa Agovino

The Landmarks Preservation Commission handed Extell Development Co. a huge victory Tuesday when it shelved plans to vote on a building the company wants to raze to construct a huge mixed-used project. In August, Extell Chief Executive Gary Barnett told the commission that the company couldn't incorporate the façade of 225 W. 57th St. into the development and that designating it a landmark would kill the project and perhaps cause his lenders to foreclose on the site.

“Needless to say we are very happy with the outcome,” said Raizy Haas, senior vice president of development at Extell. “It's not just good for us. It is good for the city—it will create many construction and permanent jobs.”

The commission's decision to call off the vote was surprising because it typically doesn't landmark buildings against the will of its owner. But last summer, the commission signaled its interest in designating two buildings on the site owned by Extell by starting the process with an act known as “calendaring,” or putting them on the schedule for review. Later, the City Council, which has the power to override a Landmarks Preservation Commission vote, joined in Mr. Barnett's opposition to landmarking 225 W. 57th St.

The Council's stand was one reason the vote was called off, according to a statement by commission Chair Robert Tierney. He added that after considering information on the building, including analysis supplied by Extell, he didn't think the property was worthy of the designation. In the past, the commission has been accused of being too developer friendly.

However, the commission did vote to landmark 1780 Broadway, between West 57th and West 58th streets, saying it is a noteworthy reminder of the automobile industry's prominence in New York in the early 20th century. Both buildings were owned by BF Goodrich but the Broadway property once served as its headquarters. At least two other buildings in that neighborhood have been landmarked because of their connection to the automobile industry.

Mr. Barnett had said he could work the Broadway building into the development even though it would present costly challenges. Extell plans to construct a tower of up to 1.5 million square feet that would include retail and office space, a hotel, condos and maybe even trading floors. Ms. Haas said it was too soon to say when the company would break ground because three or four buildings still needed to be demolished and an architect hasn't been selected.

Extell is already developing a hotel a block over on West 57th Street.
__________________

Zaz965 liked this post

Last edited by dnobsemajdnob; November 11th, 2009 at 05:17 PM.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2009, 05:22 PM   #3
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

With the very strong rebound on Wall Street and the surge of foreign buyers seeking bargains due to the very low dollar, this project and others nearby (i.e., 155-157 W 57th St. and Torre Verre) look promising.

http://therealdeal.net/newyork/artic...-s-real-estate

Wealthy Russians increasingly interested in high-profile U.S real estate
November 11, 2009 10:30AM

As long as the price of a barrel of oil stays at $70 or above, Russians will keep investing in high-profile American real estate, Edward Mermelstein, a New York City-based real estate attorney and founder of Edward A. Mermelstein & Associates, told CNBC yesterday. While most Russian investors are interested in major resort areas like the Hamptons and Vail, Co., they are also starting to look at distressed assets and commercial properties in Manhattan, according to Mermelstein. "In the past few months, their interest has switched from residential to commercial properties," Mermelestein said. However, for the Russians, the size of the commercial space is not important. They are more interested in high-profile transactions like class A properties in major cities," Mermelstein said.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2009, 06:13 PM   #4
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

The developer purchased huge amounts of air rights from nearby buildings including this magnificent landmark which is located next door.

Lofter1



Derek2k3
image hosted on flickr


Extell buys air-rights from Art Students League on West 57th Street


09-FEB-06

The Extell Development Group has acquired about 140,000-square feet of unused air rights from the Art Students League at 215 West 57th Street.

Ira Goldberg, executive director of the league, told CityRealty.com today that the proceeds from the sale will be used to support its programs. He said he was “not at liberty” to say what the purchase price was of the air-rights.

Criag Evans and Nicola Heryet, both senior managing directors of Colliers ABR, represented the league in the transaction. Mr. Evans told CityRealty.com today that “the negotiations required sensitivity to the unique light and air requirements of the Art Students League,” adding that “we were happy to negotiate a sale that addressed the concerns of the League while allowing Extell to move forward with the development in the area.”

Extell controls the former Hard Rock building just to the west of the League and property extending through the block to 58th Street. The Hard Rock Café was founded in London in 1971 and was located in the base of the 12-story building at 225 West 57th Street where its entrance canopy was a late 1950’s black Cadillac converting with rotating wheels. Hard Rock recently relocated to the former Paramount Theater space at 1501 Broadway.

The league’s building is an individually designated official city landmark rich in the city's cultural and artistic history.

It was completed in 1892 and designed by Henry Jane Hardenbergh, who would become the architect a few years later of the nearby Plaza Hotel.

In their great book, “New York 1900, Metropolitan Architecture and Urbanism 1890-1915” (Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 1983), Robert A. M. Stern, Gregory Gilmartin and John Massengale provided the following commentary about the building:

“The tendency in the Composite Era to monumentalize individual institutions extended even to the more modest fine art, historical and learned societies which had hitherto been content to carry on their proceedings in unassuming quarters that were frequently built for other purposes. In 1890, at the dawn of the Composite Era, the American Fine Arts Society held a competition for a new building…Atypically, the society was newly founded (1899) and building its first headquarters. Typically, however, its construction was made possible by a process of consolidation whereby a number of other organizations, including the Architectural League of New York (founded in 1881) and the Art Students League (founded 1875) agreed to share its galleries, studios and classrooms. During the Composite Era, the Fine Arts Society became the scene of virtually every important exhibition of art and architecture held in the city. The annual exhibitions of the Architectural League held there were major events for the profession and the public at large….The entries for the Fine Arts Society competition reflected the transitional state of American architecture in 1890. The winning scheme by Henry J. Hardenbergh, in association with John C. Jacobson and Walter C. Hunting, managed to bride the two eras. Completed in 1892, it was a stately French Renaissance palace with three central panels dedicated to art, architecture and sculpture. The glazed and densely ornamented panels contrasted with largely blank end bays visually buttressing the façade, while a red-tile gable roof above the projecting cornice paralleled the façade and furthered its aura of imposing domesticity.”

The air-rights will likely enable Extell to erect a very tall, mid-block, condominium tower on the site of the former Hard Rock building.


Copyright © 1994-2006 CITY REALTY.
__________________

Kirgam, Zaz965, Tapani Talo liked this post

Last edited by dnobsemajdnob; November 11th, 2009 at 06:18 PM.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2009, 06:27 PM   #5
HK999
University of HK / 香港大學
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hong Kong SAR / 香港特區
Posts: 3,389
Likes (Received): 336

hope this one is going through. glad it wasn't shut down!

plz change title to NEW YORK | 225 W. 57th St | 330m+ | Pro

looks nicer .
__________________
Sapientia et Virtus 明德格物
Industrial Organization, MSc
HK999 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2009, 06:37 PM   #6
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by chinarulez View Post
hope this one is going through. glad it wasn't shut down!

plz change title to NEW YORK | 225 W. 57th St | 330m+ | Pro

looks nicer .
This is proceeding. The buildings that will come down are empty and ready for demolition.

This developer seems to have a source of foreign money for financing. He is a Russian Jew, and his wife is a Belgian Jew who is heiress to a multi-billion dollar fortune made in the diamond industry.

This developer has several other projects under construction in NYC at the moment.

The title should be changed to Prep. -- not Pro. since demolition is imminent and was held back only by the dispute at the LPC which was resolved yesterday.

Last edited by dnobsemajdnob; November 11th, 2009 at 06:44 PM.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2009, 06:45 PM   #7
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/20...s/#more-101911

November 10, 2009, 1:39 pm
Divided Landmarks Panel Splits Decision on Midtown Buildings
By SEWELL CHAN



The B. F. Goodrich Company building at 1780 Broadway, left, was declared a landmark. A nearby building, at 225 West 57th Street, right, was not. After hearing objections from a property developer that is trying to build a tall luxury hotel opposite Carnegie Hall, a divided Landmarks Preservation Commission voted on Tuesday to give landmark protection to the century-old B. F. Goodrich Building in Midtown Manhattan, while shelving a proposal to give the same protection to a nearby eight-story building.

The 6-to-3 vote by the commission represented an unusual instance of discord on the commission, which under the administration of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has designated hundreds of new landmarks and created new historic districts but has still been accused of being too accommodating to developers and business interests.

The Extell Development Company had acquired both buildings, the 12-story Goodrich Building at 1780 Broadway, and the adjacent eight-story structure at 225 West 57th Street, as part of a broader plan to redevelop a parcel opposite Carnegie Hall, east of Broadway between 57th and 58th Streets, into a hotel and office building that Gary Barnett, the company’s president, called “a new building of world-class design — a landmark for the 21st century.”

One block to the east of the parcel, Extell — which unlike other developers is pushing ahead on projects despite the economic slowdown — is pouring the foundation for what is intended to be a hotel of at least 50 stories.

The commission had previously considered landmark status for the buildings in 1994, but did not act on the proposal. In testimony to the commission on Aug. 11, Mr. Barnett told the panel that the company did not believe either building merited landmark status but could accept a landmark designation for 1780 Broadway.

But any requirement that the facade of the West 57th Street building be preserved, Mr. Barnett said, would lead to an L-shaped floor plan and destroy the value of the air rights associated with the property. “It would kill the development of this site and cause tremendous hardship to Extell, including a potential loss of the site to foreclosure,” Mr. Barnett said.

Not all of the commissioners were convinced. Three — Roberta Brandes Gratz of Manhattan, Stephen F. Byrns of the Bronx, Pablo E. Vengoechea of Staten Island — opposed Extell’s proposal, which had gained the support of the commission’s chairman, Robert B. Tierney. The three favored giving landmark status to both buildings.

In 1870 in Akron, Ohio, Benjamin Franklin Goodrich founded the company that bore his name. The company, an automobile tire and rubber manufacturer, would become one of the world’s largest rubber producers.

The Goodrich Building was built in 1909 as a corporate headquarters, with a ground-floor tire showroom and repair shop. Designed by the Chicago architect Howard Van Doren Shaw, the building has a facade of red brick and limestone, with “abstract, stylized ornament suggesting the influence of Elizabethan and Jacobean sources, the Arts and Crafts movement, and the Vienna Secession,” the landmarks commission said. The company sold the building in 1928.

In the early 20th century, Broadway between 42nd and 72nd Streets was known as Automobile Row, a stretch that included the A. T. Demarest and Peerless Motor Car Company at 224-228 West 57th Street, and the United States Rubber Company at 1790 Broadway, both landmarks.
__________________

Kirgam, Zaz965 liked this post
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2009, 06:46 PM   #8
HK999
University of HK / 香港大學
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hong Kong SAR / 香港特區
Posts: 3,389
Likes (Received): 336

interesting info, the russian jews are megarich today, that's for sure (no offense or prejudices). would be nice if more rich people invest in supertalls these days!
__________________
Sapientia et Virtus 明德格物
Industrial Organization, MSc
HK999 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2009, 01:56 AM   #9
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/m...GveKQ2DXoqPe2K



The building on the left, 1780 Broadway, was landmarked and will remain standing although its air rights will be used. The building on the right, 225 W 57th Street, will be razed. (It already has been covered with netting.) They appear largely similar, but they're different. 1780 B'Way is much nicer.


W. 57th 'landmark' nix
By TOM TOPOUSIS

Last Updated: 5:49 AM, November 11, 2009

Posted: 5:17 AM, November 11, 2009

A developer's plan to build a skyscraper on West 57th Street got a boost yesterday when the Landmarks Preservation Commission voted against historic designation for a century-old building at the site. In an unusual move, a divided commission voted 6-3 to drop the building from consideration even though it had gotten to the last hurdle of the lengthy landmarks review. The eight-story building is one of two that once made up the headquarters of the BF Goodrich tire company in the early 20th century, when the stretch of West 57th Street near Broadway was Manhattan's automobile row. The second Goodrich building, at 1780 Broadway, was voted a landmark. The facade of that 12-story brick structure will be restored by the developer, Extell, which owns both. It plans a 1.5-million-square-foot tower on the West 57th Street site. A developer's plan to build a skyscraper on West 57th Street got a boost yesterday when the Landmarks Preservation Commission voted against historic designation for a century-old building at the site.

In an unusual move, a divided commission voted 6-3 to drop the building from consideration even though it had gotten to the last hurdle of the lengthy landmarks review.

The eight-story building is one of two that once made up the headquarters of the BF Goodrich tire company in the early 20th century, when the stretch of West 57th Street near Broadway was Manhattan's automobile row.

The second Goodrich building, at 1780 Broadway, was voted a landmark. The facade of that 12-story brick structure will be restored by the developer, Extell, which owns both. It plans a 1.5-million-square-foot tower on the West 57th Street site.


Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/m...#ixzz0WbPuelus
__________________

Zaz965 liked this post

Last edited by dnobsemajdnob; November 12th, 2009 at 02:01 AM.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2009, 12:11 PM   #10
Patrick Highrise
visit the world
 
Patrick Highrise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 6,587
Likes (Received): 2765

good news to hear that this project looks like a go ahead. Do we have any renders of this project/tower??
__________________
Patrick
------------------------------------------------------
2016: Riga mei 2016 / Lissabon juni 2016 / Praag september 2016 / Costa Rica
2017: Patagonië / Patagonia / Stockholm - India Ladakh (sept) - Boedapest (okt)
2018: Liverpool (mrt)
Patrick Highrise no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2009, 02:08 PM   #11
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

http://www.archpaper.com/e-board_rev.asp?News_ID=4033

Scrapped!

New York landmarks commission saves one Auto Row building, junks another

The corner of Broadway and West 57th Street, where the Shaw buildings flank the masonry building at center. They are part of a future project by Extell Development.



Typically, preservationists would have been thrilled by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission’s last-minute designation of 1780 Broadway, a 12-story, early modern building designed by Howard Van Doren Shaw and built in 1909 for tire makerB.F. Goodrich. It is one of just two buildings designed by the prolific Chicago School architect in New York, and it became a city landmark yesterday despite the reservations of Extell Development, which owns the property and intends to make it part of a $1.5 billion mixed-use project.

1780 Broadway and 225 West 57th Street.

But the commission, by a vote of 6-3, also decided to cast aside Shaw’s other New York building, the adjoining 225 West 57th Street. Commission chair Robert Tierney said that among his reasons was the opposition of Extell and the city council, which wrote a strongly worded letter [PDF] in August that effectively threatened to overturn the commission’s designation if it went ahead with it. The result has left preservationists apoplectic.

“I’m appalled,” said Simeon Bankoff, executive director of the Historic Districts Council. “I think this inserts a level of politics into a merit-based decision. It’s the job of the landmarks commission to appropriately weigh the merits of these buildings. If the city council wants to kill it, fine, but don’t do their dirty work.”

Christabel Gough, secretary for the Society for the Architecture of the City, was more forgiving of the commission, given the pressure placed on it. “It’s very unfortunate the council substitute its judgment while accommodating a major developer,” she said.

In debating which buildings to preserve, a majority of commissioners argued that 1870 Broadway was a sufficient memorial to B.F. Goodrich’s place along Automobile Row, a succession of midrise office and service buildings that predominated around the turn of the century along Broadway north of 42nd Street.

Preservationists in the audience snickered and groaned at the suggestion that no automotive buildings were built on side streets—there is even one such landmark across the street on 57th Street—but the commission seemed to buy the argument made in August by Extell’s preservation consultant, Higgins & Quasebarth, that because the eight-story building at 225 West 57th was built on spec and never occupied by the carmaker, it was unworthy of preservation.

“In my judgment, 225 West 57th Street did not play as prominent a role in Automobile Row,” Tierney said. “Therefore, it is less deserving of designation, especially in light of the other buildings already landmarked.”

But some commissioners argued that despite this history, 225 West 57th was actually the more significant of the two buildings, being one of the first in the city in which a truly modernist vocabulary began to emerge. “As a work of architecture, it is an extremely strong, extremely rare, and extremely precious example of early modernism,” commissioner Stephen Byrns said. “While it doesn’t share the history with Automobile Row, the details are of a kind rarely seen in New York.”

Among the features Brynes singled out was the building’s distinctive fenestration, abstracted columns, and the incorporation of automotive motifs, such as tire-tread bricks and wing nut sculptures. Meanwhile, he derided 1780 Broadway as impressive but a far more typical example of Chicago School and Vienna Succession architecture.

“1780 Broadway is typical of the era,” Bankoff said. “225 West 57th is not. Maybe if it had been built in the ‘20s, but it is very advanced for 1909.”

Commissioner Roberta Brandes Gratz argued that the two buildings, which are of the similar proportions and construction and connected by a freight elevator in the rear, are inseparable. “I find the 57th Street building more distinctive, and to separate the two would be like separating siblings,” she said. She added that is would be hard to appreciate the Broadway building without its neighbor.

After the vote, Raizy Haas, a senior vice president for development at Extell, said the firm had looked at preserving both buildings. They would be part of a T-shaped development stretching from 57th Street to 58th Street with a spur on Broadway occupied by the B.F. Goodrich Building. But because of differing floor heights in the two buildings and other issues, 225 West 57th could not be saved.

Plans have not been drawn up and a designer has yet to be announced, though Haas said Extell was “absolutely” considering someone on par with its recent collaborators, which include Christian de Portzamparc and SOM.

Matt Chaban

http://www.archpaper.com/e-board_rev.asp?News_ID=4033

This is the Broadway building which was landmarked.


This is the 57th Street building which will be razed.
__________________

Kirgam, Zaz965 liked this post

Last edited by dnobsemajdnob; November 12th, 2009 at 02:20 PM.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2009, 02:27 PM   #12
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Highrise View Post
good news to hear that this project looks like a go ahead. Do we have any renders of this project/tower??
An architect has not been selected yet. However, this building site has almost double the square meters as the one owned by the same developer one block to the east on 57th Street. A building of 330m is rising there. Thus, a supertall of at least that height.

Last edited by dnobsemajdnob; November 12th, 2009 at 05:04 PM.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2009, 05:03 PM   #13
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

This photo was marked to show the two nearby sites on West 57th Street on which Extell is developing two 330+m towers.

This photo omits a site, located at 220 Central Park South (seen in the photo) on which Extell and another developer, the Clarett Group, are engaged in a joint venture to build a 40 story condo designed by Cesar Pelli. 220 CPS is a rental building that Extell and Clarett have been emptying. It is nearly vacant, and I suspect that it will be demolished within a year.

NYGuy


Here is a map that shows the sites.

Lofter1
__________________

Kirgam, Zaz965 liked this post

Last edited by dnobsemajdnob; November 12th, 2009 at 05:30 PM.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2009, 05:26 PM   #14
HK999
University of HK / 香港大學
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hong Kong SAR / 香港特區
Posts: 3,389
Likes (Received): 336

so two 330m+ towers will rise without any troubles (or at least not strong rejections by the residents) and tower verre is fighting for building permits like a tiger vs. a pride of lions for a whole year. can someone explain this? (i know it has to do something with the NYC council which controls air rights, permits, etc.)
__________________
Sapientia et Virtus 明德格物
Industrial Organization, MSc
HK999 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2009, 05:28 PM   #15
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by chinarulez View Post
so two 330m+ towers will rise without any troubles (or at least not strong rejections by the residents) and tower verre is fighting for building permits like a tiger vs. a pride of lions for a whole year. can someone explain this? (i know it has to do something with the NYC council which controls air rights, permits, etc.)
These two towers by Extell can rise as of right. The sites (together with the air rights they bought from contiguous parcels) have enough air rights to build these towers. Nonetheless, NIMBYs tried (unsuccessfully) to kill 225 W 57th by attempting to landmark that building.

By contrast, Torre Verre's transfer of air rights required permission from the City since they did not come from contiguous parcels.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2009, 01:45 AM   #16
Ni3lS
Mod
 
Ni3lS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rotterdam / Stuttgart
Posts: 16,457
Likes (Received): 3420

So any news on a height or floor count?
__________________
MY SHOWCASE
FLICKR / MY TRAVELS:
[2016] > Norway, Valencia, Arvidsjaur, Innsbruck, Moselvalley, Geneva, Lisbon, Basel, Vosges, Munich, Trieste, Barcelona, Nürburgring, Frankfurt, Spa, Berlin, Wuppertal, Dortmund, Como, Monaco, Saint-Tropez, Tegernsee, Hamburg, Lübeck, Madrid, Stuttgart, Faro, Hochgurgl
[2017] > Düsseldorf, Mallorca, Geneva, Annecy, Montafon, Barcelona, Zürich, Shanghai, Suzhou, Hangzhou
Ni3lS no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 13th, 2009, 11:22 PM   #17
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

Only that it should exceed 330m.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2009, 12:43 PM   #18
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

These buildings are ready for demo and for a 350+m tower to rise in their place!



http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/ar...1&ref=nyregion

City Council Influences Landmarks Decision

Robert Caplin for The New York Times

Published: November 18, 2009

Last week the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission voted 6 to 3 to give landmark protection to the 100-year-old B. F. Goodrich tire company building on Broadway just north of 57th Street, but not to a connected building around the corner designed by the same architect at the same time. Some commission members on both sides of that unusual divided vote cried foul, complaining that politics played an inappropriate role.



The B. F. Goodrich building on Broadway, second from left, by Howard Van Doren Shaw, was designated as a landmark last week, but the smaller of the two tarped buildings around the corner, by the same architect, was not.


The vote came after four City Council members signaled that the council might overturn a commission decision to confer landmark designation on the second building because they did not want to jeopardize a hotel tower planned for the site at Broadway and 57th Street. The commission’s chairman, Robert B. Tierney, then recommended a vote against landmark status for both buildings “in light of opposition to this designation from the City Council and certain members of the City Council and the likelihood that that body will overturn any designation.”

Christopher Moore, a commission member who had voted with the majority, said the council should not have been a factor in the commission’s decision.

Mr. Moore said in an interview: “To me, it’s embarrassingly transparent: ‘We’re not going to do this because the City Council has already notified us they’re going to veto it.’ We let the world know. The friction between the commission and its role and the City Council and its role needs to be exposed. My request is we don’t do this again.”

The City Council has the legal authority to overturn landmark designations; in 2005 it vetoed the designations of the Jamaica Savings Bank building in Elmhurst, Queens, and Cass Gilbert’s Austin, Nichols waterfront warehouse in Williamsburg, Brooklyn.

The commission voted on Nov. 9 to designate 1780 Broadway and to remove from consideration a smaller building at 225 West 57th Street in Manhattan. Both buildings — a mixture of limestone and brick with influences ranging from Elizabethan to Vienna Succession — were designed by the Chicago architect Howard Van Doren Shaw and were completed in 1909 on a strip once known as Automobile Row; they are thought to be his only surviving buildings in New York.

The Extell Development Corporation plans to develop the project, which would extend into several buildings, into a 50-story hotel with apartments or offices. Extell had warned that a landmark designation for the smaller building would endanger the project.

Mr. Tierney said in an interview that while the commission’s primary concern was landmark worthiness, it also has “a responsibility to weigh all the information before us to make discretionary judgments based on the facts.” Extell’s president, Gary Barnett, said the vote could be seen as “a good compromise” in the context of the city’s economic ill health. Daniel R. Garodnick, one of the council members who questioned the merit of landmarking the second building, said, “No one complains when the City Council speaks in favor of a building.”

In the 2009 election cycle, Extell made campagn contributions to three of the four councilmembers who questioned the designation of both buildings, as well as to other councilmembers.

The three members of the commission who voted no to landmarking one building without the other contended that both were architecturally or historically important and should not be separated. One of them, Roberta Brandes Gratz, said in an interview that she also objected to what she saw as political pressure. “Intimidation by the City Council should not have an impact on our votes,” she said.

Preservationists also said the commission should not have taken Extell’s concerns into account. “The landmarks commission is not supposed to be considering the development potential of the site,” said Andrew S. Dolkart, the director of Columbia University’s historic preservation program.
__________________

Kirgam, Zaz965 liked this post
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2009, 04:08 PM   #19
dnobsemajdnob
Expert
 
dnobsemajdnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Likes (Received): 54

http://curbed.com/


Landmarks Commissioner Tells City Council to Back Off
[Photo via Google Street View.]

Last week, in a rare instance of politics overtly meddling with historic preservation, the Landmarks Preservation Commission voted 6-3 to designate the former B.F. Goodrich building at 1780 Broadway a landmark, but not its sister building around the corner, 225 West 57th Street. The LPC backed down after Extell, the developer that wants to demolish the 57th Street building (it's already shrouded) and construct a 50-story mixed-use tower in its place, enlisted some members of the City Council to campaign on its behalf—the implication being that if the LPC landmarked the property and jeopardized the project, than a City Council veto would be in the cards. The Times's Robin Pogrebin follows up on all this madness, and surprise, some folks are unhappy with what went down!

Commission member Christopher Moore is particuarly perturbed about the City Council messing in his business, and the way some of his fellow commissioners caved in:

"To me, it's embarrassingly transparent: 'We're not going to do this because the City Council has already notified us they're going to veto it.' We let the world know. The friction between the commission and its role and the City Council and its role needs to be exposed. My request is we don't do this again."
But can't landmarking one building and not the other be seen as a good compromise that preserves history (the buildings look alike, after all) while still spurring development and its economic benefits? That's how some, including Extell's Gary Barnett, are playing it. Said Dan Garodnick, one of the council members who opposed the landmarking, "No one complains when the City Council speaks in favor of a building." Testy! Maybe he was in a bad mood because he know the NYT would points out that three of the four councilmembers who spoke out on behalf of Extell received campaign contributions from the developer.




Some fightin' words from an LPCer. >>

Last edited by dnobsemajdnob; November 19th, 2009 at 04:14 PM.
dnobsemajdnob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2009, 06:43 PM   #20
HK999
University of HK / 香港大學
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hong Kong SAR / 香港特區
Posts: 3,389
Likes (Received): 336

NYguy, SSP

kw~ny
__________________
Sapientia et Virtus 明德格物
Industrial Organization, MSc

Kirgam, Zaz965, raione liked this post
HK999 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
217 west 57th street, 225 west 57th street, central park south, cps, extell, new york, nordstrom tower, nyc, supertall

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 09:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu