NEW YORK | 270 Park Ave | 1,389 FT | 57 FLOORS

[Eidolon]

^^^
So long 270 Park, looking forward to meeting 270 Park.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000

Scaffolding looks like it's going up...

Good. The time is nearing when we say goodbye to this one, and watch the birth of the new one.


Meanwhile, I've been thinking about the design of the new tower, and the legacy of the Park Avenue towers - big, boxy, classic corporate towers. I think it's a coup that the city was able
to get a new tower of this size (2msf +) to rise on Park Avenue, a tower of the scale of new towers rising in the Hudson Yards, along a boulevard that drew inspiration from Park Avenue itself.

I think if another tower of this size goes up along Park Avenue (maybe 300 Park if they are able to assemble that whole block), it would be a major success for the rezoning,
regardless of all of the other towers that will rise on the east side.

But looking back on the old guard, and the new tower that will join them...



270 Park Avenue






345 PARK AVENUE




http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/buil...rk-avenue/1876



245 PARK AVENUE


https://observer.com/2010/11/frances...biggest-lease/


https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese...nts-1532437934



299 PARK AVENUE





http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/buil...rk-avenue/2537



277 PARK AVENUE


http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/buil...rk-avenue/1481







375 PARK AVENUE (SEAGRAM)


http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/buil...-building/3529






399 PARK AVENUE


http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/buil...rk-avenue/3388





A touch of the new guard...



425 PARK AVENUE (also by Foster)


https://www.425parkave.com/







https://www.instagram.com/p/BqzvCTanC1F/

[patriotizzy]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Good. The time is nearing when we say goodbye to this one, and watch the birth of the new one.


Meanwhile, I've been thinking about the design of the new tower, and the legacy of the Park Avenue towers - big, boxy, classic corporate towers. I think it's a coup that the city was able
to get a new tower of this size (2msf +) to rise on Park Avenue, a tower of the scale of new towers rising in the Hudson Yards, along a boulevard that drew inspiration from Park Avenue itself.

I think if another tower of this size goes up along Park Avenue (maybe 300 Park if they are able to assemble that whole block), it would be a major success for the rezoning,
regardless of all of the other towers that will rise on the east side.

But looking back on the old guard, and the new tower that will join them...

All of those look almost exactly the same. Makes the city so dull and uninspired. Glad these are the next targets for redevelopment.

As for the guy that feels these are like old friends. Anything will feel like a friend when you spend enough time with them. Even a pile of poop

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by patriotizzy

All of those look almost exactly the same. Makes the city so dull and uninspired. Glad these are the next targets for redevelopment.

As for the guy that feels these are like old friends. Anything will feel like a friend when you spend enough time with them. Even a pile of poop

The same could be said for a lot of the older pre-war buildings. They all look pretty much the same - until you actually look at them, which is something you just haven't learned to do yet. All of those buildings that line Park Avenue are similar only in the fact that they are glass towers.

[patriotizzy]

Originally Posted by NYguy

The same could be said for a lot of the older pre-war buildings. They all look pretty much the same - until you actually look at them, which is something you just haven't learned to do yet. All of those buildings that line Park Avenue are similar only in the fact that they are glass towers.

You make no sense. They look pretty much the same until you actually look at them? I am thoroughly confused
Mind clarifying?

Something that I haven't learned to do yet? Please, open my eyes to the truth that is held in your eye. For I am blinded, I do not know nor understand my own senses
I missed the memo that you are the arbiter of truth.

[NYguy]

Those idiots in CB5...


https://www.crainsnewyork.com/real-e...-midtown-tower

JPMorgan wants to shrink public space in proposed East Midtown tower
Bank seeks zoning bonus without providing open space required by recent rezoning

JOE ANUTA
December 05, 2018

JPMorgan Chase is seeking changes to a recently passed rezoning in East Midtown to provide a smaller-than-required public space at its proposed tower along Park Avenue.

The bank announced earlier this year that it would demolish its current building at 270 Park Ave. and replace it with a much larger structure allowed by the Greater East Midtown rezoning.

Essentially, that rezoning gives developers additional density if they, in various combinations, purchase air rights from landmarked properties in the district, provide transit improvements or build privately owned public spaces.

JPMorgan’s proposed tower would require a 10,000 square foot public space under the rules. However, the bank is arguing that it can only provide a 7,000 square foot space because of an unusual condition at the property. Nearly two-thirds of the block sits directly over a large train shed connected to Grand Central Terminal that is used to store and stage Metro North trains, and the lack of basement and foundation space makes a larger public area infeasible.

Wednesday evening, the bank presented its argument to a Manhattan community board, which voted against the proposal.

“Asking for a huge giveaway in exchange for nothing is not something we would not contemplate,” said Layla Law-Gisiko, chair of the board’s land use committee.

The board argued that granting an exemption on the first development to arise from the rezoning would set a bad percent, and that JPMorgan should at least have offered another public benefit to compensate for the 3,000 square foot shortfall in the open space, if not reconfigured the layout to reach the existing requirement. The bank said that it considered many options but could not arrive at a 10,000 square foot open space that would be suitable to the public.

The proposal will ultimately wind up at the City Council, where a compromise might be struck next year.

Do these people not realize that they will end up with a taller tower? Not that their vote is binding, but it's interesting how the knee-jerk reaction seems to be "no". There is no way that open plaza will be more inviting to the pulic, in that location and configuration.

[JSsocal]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Those idiots in CB5...

Do these people not realize that they will end up with a taller tower? Not that their vote is binding, but it's interesting how the knee-jerk reaction seems to be "no". There is no way that open plaza will be more inviting to the pulic, in that location and configuration.

Believe it or not but in this part of midtown no one cares how tall the buildings are.

And I completely agree with the community board. For them to reduce the scope of a public benefit and offer nothing in return is not something the city should get in the habit of doing. If JPMC said 'we'll reduce the scope of the public space and give $50m to a subway station' then that would be a good deal for the city- or if they simply kept the same amount of square footage- that would be completely reasonable.

We don't need to give developers every last thing they want.

[NYguy]

https://ny.curbed.com/2018/12/6/1812...e-public-space

Chase’s plan to shrink public space at new Midtown HQ met with skepticism
“If we’re not getting 3,000 square feet, we should be getting something”


By Amy Plitt
Dec 6, 2018

As JP Morgan Chase moves forward with its plans to demolish and replace 270 Park Avenue (aka the Union Carbide Building), more of what the banking giant has planned for its new HQ—to be designed by Foster + Partners—is coming to light.

The firm recently filed a zoning text amendment seeking to change the size of a POPS that will be at the base of the building from 10,000 square feet—a requirement under the East Midtown rezoning plan that was adopted in 2017—to 7,000 square feet. Manhattan’s Community Board 5 weighed in at a meeting of its land use committee last night; board members were unimpressed with the proposed changes, and ultimately voted down the proposal.

Layla Law-Gisiko, the chair of the land use committee, noted that they would not vote to “give away something in exchange for nothing, just because.”

On hand to present the proposed were representatives from the firm, along with Vishaan Chakrabarti of the Practice for Architecture and Urbanism, who is consulting with Chase and Foster + Partners on the building. They laid out the reasons why the reduction in square footage is necessary, largely because of the building’s foundation and the location of a train shed for Grand Central Terminal, which runs below the building. (Chakrabarti compared its structural issues to dealing with a Rubik’s cube.)

They also argued that the proposed POPS location on Madison Avenue (rather than Park Avenue or mid-block) is necessary to create a more attractive space for the public.

That space, at least in its preliminary design, would ideally serve several purposes, per the design team: to add more nature to the area (via a green wall and a water feature); to act as a “glowing room,” bringing more light to the neighborhood; and to function as an urban workspace, with seating and areas where building tenants or neighborhood residents could congregate.

But the board took issue with various elements of the proposal. The largest sticking point was the reduction in POPS size without any additional public benefit to make up for it, which many viewed as a bad precedent to set with the first project to move forward under that plan. Other qualms included the fact that the POPS would not have bathrooms, that it would only be open from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., and that the owners hope to host private events there.

Chase recently closed a deal with Grand Central Terminal for the landmark’s air rights in order to build a more dense tower; GCT will receive $10 million from Chase to help with its preservation efforts, and the firm has also contributed $42 million to the East Midtown Public Realm Improvement Fund, which oversees the street-level improvements happening as part of the rezoning plan.

Preservationists continue to call for the city to try and save the original structure, which was built in 1961 and designed by SOM’s Gordon Bunshaft and Natalie de Blois. The building is not landmarked—and thus, among the city’s most endangered buildings—and the Landmarks Preservation Commission hasn’t indicated that will change any time soon.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000

Scaffolding looks like it's going up...

Walked through the area last night...a rendering before Christmas would be a nice Christmas gift.



DECEMBER 2, 2018

[NYguy]

A list of DOB actions...

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...llnumbhous=270

[Amanita]

^I really like a lot of those buildings! After all the time I've spent walking along Park Avenue, they've come to feel like old friends.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Amanita

^I really like a lot of those buildings! After all the time I've spent walking along Park Avenue, they've come to feel like old friends.

270 will be the new master of Park Avenue. It's exciting to see a new age of development there.

[tdawg]

Don't let us down Lord Foster!

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by tdawg

Don't let us down Lord Foster!

I have a feeling we'll be happy.

I take it we could see renderings within a few months now that demo has started?

[Amanita]

I wish they were at least doing a 425 on this one- I view what’s happened to 425 as a rebirth/reincarnation of the same building (due to the retention of part of its structure), as opposed to a whole new building. I’d like to see renders of what Foster’s cooking up though- something that pays homage to the existing building could also be a reincarnation of sorts.

[toddguy]

I hope he can come up with something that fits, but is also a step forward. Maybe something like the pic of the building upthread(forget which one it is)with the fins on top. Something like that with an interesting crown like that and not just a flat top.

[streetscaper]

I think that is my only concern/desire for the design of this building: not a flat top

[Busy Bee]

[NYguy]

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bq3K6UZh_3f/

[Amanita]

Thanks, NYGuy. Thanks to spending time in NYC, I’ve learned to look at these buildings as individuals, and they look nothing alike- each one is unique. Even the three XYZ Buildings on 6th Avenue aren’t perfect triplets, there’s numerous points of difference. Each one of those buildings has its own unique character, it’s own personality. 277 Park Avenue and 345 Park were both designed by the same architect, but are very different- 277 wears black and silver, having been designed to compliment 270 Park across the street. 345 Park is a whole different thing, clad in ivory precast concrete, with raised patterns for visual interest. Given its light colour and the way it sits back on its Plaza, I think it was designed to contrast with, and yet be a respectful neighbor to Seagram next door.

And since there seems to be some confusion, I’m not a guy. All woman here.