NEW YORK | 45 East 45th St (Roosevelt Hotel) | FT | FLOORS - Page 21

ChiND · #**401** Posted **Aug 2, 2024, 1:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TKD

No, it is also 1.3m ZONING SF, it is 1.7m GROSS SF

Thanks. I didn’t realize that there’s a difference between zoning sf and gross sf. So the Roosevelt can have 1.7m gross sf?

TKD · #**402** Posted **Aug 2, 2024, 3:22 AM**

It could have more or it could have less, it's purely a matter of how circulation, shafts, mechanical space, etc is laid out.

NYguy · #**403** Posted **Aug 2, 2024, 3:34 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiND

Thanks. I didn’t realize that there’s a difference between zoning sf and gross sf. So the Roosevelt can have 1.7m gross sf?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TKD

It could have more or it could have less, it's purely a matter of how circulation, shafts, mechanical space, etc is laid out.

Yes, like Vandy, it can have no more than 1.3 msf of zoned floor space in total. But everything else after that varies from building to building.

SkyHigher · #**404** Posted **Aug 2, 2024, 3:42 PM**

They need to somehow work out to keep what is there now with a tower in the middle.

Nice if they did that with 250 Park but being a much smaller footprint pretty much impossible.

ChiND · #**405** Posted **Aug 2, 2024, 3:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

Yes, like Vandy, it can have no more than 1.3 msf of zoned floor space in total. But everything else after that varies from building to building.

Thanks

Crawford · #**406** Posted **Aug 2, 2024, 6:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkyHigher

They need to somehow work out to keep what is there now with a tower in the middle.

There's no way that's gonna happen. Thankfully this dump is history.

BanBrokenChatBots · #**407** Posted **Aug 17, 2024, 4:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkyHigher

They need to somehow work out to keep what is there now with a tower in the middle.

Nice if they did that with 250 Park but being a much smaller footprint pretty much impossible.

The lobby & ballroom are some of the nicest in the City if not the country, the hotel has been used in a number of films including Wall Street and the show Mad Men.. of course the broken AI chat bots will demand to tear down everything beautiful and build a cheap blue-glass-box so the stickman can live inside... Hopefully the people at the city will actually landmark the base of the building including the lobby & ballroom or the devs reuse the base.

SkyHigher · #**408** Posted **Aug 17, 2024, 11:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BanBrokenChatBots

The lobby & ballroom are some of the nicest in the City if not the country, the hotel has been used in a number of films including Wall Street and the show Mad Men.. of course the broken AI chat bots will demand to tear down everything beautiful and build a cheap blue-glass-box so the stickman can live inside... Hopefully the people at the city will actually landmark the base of the building including the lobby & ballroom or the devs reuse the base.

Yes hopefully. Getting way too crowded in that area anyways for a tower to stand out either way.

streetscaper · #**409** Posted **Aug 17, 2024, 12:08 PM**

Yeah there's no reason to tear down this beauty. Landmarks Commission need to do their job!

Ahoi · #**410** Posted **Aug 17, 2024, 12:57 PM**

Landmark status for this building? I think this old hotel will be demolished in the next few years to make way for another tower. Wasn't the application for landmark status rejected here? Or not even applied for it in the first place? I am in favour of the demolition and construction of another possible supertall in New York. New York needs more modern office space, especially in the Grand Central Terminal area (Grand Central Zone).

Crawford · #**411** Posted **Aug 17, 2024, 4:31 PM**

Double-post.

Crawford · #**412** Posted **Aug 17, 2024, 4:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BanBrokenChatBots

The lobby & ballroom are some of the nicest in the City if not the country,

Your subjective views aren't shared by most. And that pic hardly does you any favors. Looks like any random city hotel from the 1920's.

I recently stayed at a 1920's hotel in Cincy that had a lobby about 100x nicer.

Thankfully this dump will soon be rubble.

Crawford · #**413** Posted **Aug 17, 2024, 4:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ahoi

Landmark status for this building? I think this old hotel will be demolished in the next few years to make way for another tower. Wasn't the application for landmark status rejected here? Or not even applied for it in the first place? I am in favour of the demolition and construction of another possible supertall in New York. New York needs more modern office space, especially in the Grand Central Terminal area (Grand Central Zone).

Landmarks already rejected this multiple times, so there's no issue.

Some people just want to preserve every single older building. There were people whining about 270 Park's demolition, saying it had to be landmarked. Pretty much any older building in Midtown has something interesting in its past, or something interesting architecturally, so using that logic, nothing should ever be built, anywhere.

I guess the ESB should have never been built, since it replaced the original Waldorf Astoria (which, unlike this dump, was actually really ornate and nice). Or Rockefeller Center should have never been built, since it replaced really nice brownstone blocks and Columbia University's original campus.

NYguy · #**414** Posted **Aug 17, 2024, 5:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford

Landmarks already rejected this multiple times, so there's no issue.

There is no issue. I don't know why people bother to waste time posting such nonsense. This building is going to be demolished when the partnership with a developer is finalized.

streetscaper · #**415** Posted **Aug 17, 2024, 9:17 PM**

Well I don't agree with Landmark's decision. You guys can whine and get all salty all you want about people merely posting about wanting to preserve this building. I will still state it when the subject comes up. It's obvious that other forumers feel the same way.

NYguy · #**416** Posted **Aug 18, 2024, 1:34 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by streetscaper

Well I don't agree with Landmark's decision. You guys can whine and get all salty all you want about people merely posting about wanting to preserve this building. I will still state it when the subject comes up. It's obvious that other forumers feel the same way.

Nobody is “whining” about anything. Personally, I just state the facts, no matter who is offended. Anybody who has been following this at least a little bit knows this building isn’t going to be landmarked. And it’s just foolish to suggests that it will or might be. People don’t have to like, or even agree with that fact. But that’s the way of the world. I don’t like to spend a lot of time on “what ifs” and “maybes”, particularly when you know where things are headed. There’s no point, and no sense in getting people’s hopes up, however misguided they may be.

streetscaper · #**417** Posted **Aug 18, 2024, 2:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

Nobody is “whining” about anything. Personally, I just state the facts, no matter who is offended. Anybody who has been following this at least a little bit knows this building isn’t going to be landmarked. And it’s just foolish to suggests that it will or might be. People don’t have to like, or even agree with that fact. But that’s the way of the world. I don’t like to spend a lot of time on “what ifs” and “maybes”, particularly when you know where things are headed. There’s no point, and no sense in getting people’s hopes up, however misguided they may be.

"I don't know why people bother to waste time posting" their opinion... sounds a bit whine-y to me... but anyway...

Well I don't think it "will" or "might" be landmarked... But I simply think it "should" be. We're all entitled to our opinions however misguided others "feel" they may be (I could feel the same about my opposition's opinion too).

ChiND · #**418** Posted **Aug 18, 2024, 3:06 PM**

I agree that this should be landmarked and restored. I have good memories there. (The Sheboygan “wrasslin’” team toured the lobby.)

Anyway, it’s coming down. I hope that its replacement is spectacular.

SamLYNY · #**419** Posted **Aug 19, 2024, 12:10 AM**

I think we all have some strong opinions on this building, whether positive or negative. All this means is that when this thing is eventually razed, whatever goes up in its place has to be spectacular.

NYguy · #**420** Posted **Aug 20, 2024, 12:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by streetscaper

"I don't know why people bother to waste time posting" their opinion... sounds a bit whine-y to me... but anyway...

Well I don't think it "will" or "might" be landmarked... But I simply think it "should" be. We're all entitled to our opinions however misguided others "feel" they may be (I could feel the same about my opposition's opinion too).

You can think that it should be. But it's FOOLISH to suggest that it might be, or even may be, given what we know. That is all. If you say that doesn't apply to you, keep it moving.