HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2007, 1:34 PM
oldpainless's Avatar
oldpainless oldpainless is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daquan13 View Post
I think New York City is becoming a lot like Las Vegas. Old buildings are constantly being demolished to make way for new ones.
Right, but thats what enables NYC to be a world competitor. You can't rest on your laurels alone if you want to lead. Change is essential to adapt and grow. The way New York constantly redefines itself and never rests is essential if its going to be a world leader in arts, finance, insurance, media, etc.

Last edited by oldpainless; Apr 11, 2007 at 1:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2007, 2:05 PM
STLgasm's Avatar
STLgasm STLgasm is offline
Red brick mama.
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: City of St. Louis
Posts: 4,724
In some strange way I love that old aqua building.
__________________
http://stl-style.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2007, 5:27 PM
STERNyc's Avatar
STERNyc STERNyc is offline
Landmark Restored
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daquan13 View Post
I think New York City is becoming a lot like Las Vegas. Old buildings are constantly being demolished to make way for new ones.
Its the other way around. NYC has been demolishing building to make way for new ones, long before Las Vegas was ever a city.
__________________
Somewhere between Child's clarity and Libeskind's dazzle lies the future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2007, 10:53 PM
PhillyRising's Avatar
PhillyRising PhillyRising is offline
America's Hometown
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Lionville, PA
Posts: 11,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by STERNyc View Post
Its the other way around. NYC has been demolishing building to make way for new ones, long before Las Vegas was ever a city.

I was going to say the same thing. New York doesn't get all bent on saving every building from the past. I don't think the original Waldorf-Astoria Hotel was really all that old when it was torn down to make way for the Empire State Building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2007, 11:05 PM
STERNyc's Avatar
STERNyc STERNyc is offline
Landmark Restored
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,407
Another early casualty:



Built in 1897, only twelve years later it was sold to make way for an even taller building in 1909. Such is the nature of the beast that is NYC.
__________________
Somewhere between Child's clarity and Libeskind's dazzle lies the future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Apr 11, 2007, 11:50 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
I am a typical
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 41,172
A city is very much a living organism, constantly changing. As sad as the loss of many of those buildings may be, the city can't become a museum of itself, or it will die. And that would be a greater loss.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 12:15 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldpainless View Post
You can't rest on your laurels alone if you want to lead. Change is essential to adapt and grow. The way New York constantly redefines itself and never rests is essential if its going to be a world leader in arts, finance, insurance, media, etc.
That's true. While it doesn't mean that everything needs to be ripped down, we can't remain trapped in the past. Imagine if 1oo years ago nobody could build anything because people wanted to preserve every structure. I'm of the opinion that the builders of today have every right to leave their mark on the City as the builders of yesterday. The only time I'm stuck in is the present. Let the people 100 years from now look back on what was created when I walked the earth. Whether critical or positive, it won't change the status of the stamp of our time.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 12:15 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
A city is very much a living organism, constantly changing. As sad as the loss of many of those buildings may be, the city can't become a museum of itself, or it will die. And that would be a greater loss.
Exactly.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2007, 12:20 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Somewhat within the theme of this thread...

(Tribeca Trib)

Owner Asks to Demolish Part of Landmark



The building at 25 Broad St




Wing of the building, center, may be demolished. Photo taken when structure was still visible.



By Carl Glassman
MARCH 30, 2007

Among its many Downtown holdings, Swig Equities owns a city protected landmark, the massive 25 Broad Street. It’s “a magnificent property,” Kent Swig, the company’s president, says of the 105 year-old former office building. Most of it, that is.

Swig is seeking permission from the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission to “decertify” the landmark status of a rear wing of the building, which would allow him to demolish it.

The owner is converting the 315-apartment rental building into condominiums. The elimination of the 20-story wing (only the first floor would remain) would allow Swig to create views for the new condos in that part of the building, and “transfer” that bulk by adding 12 stories to what otherwise would be a 35-story tower he plans to construct nearby, at 45 Broad Street.

In return, Swig would restore the building’s exterior.


Last month, he made his pitch to the Landmarks Committee of Community Board 1, which is advisory to the Landmarks Commission.

“Can we actually remove this section, place the bulk [on 45 Broad Street] and put in all the dollars that are necessary into a piece of the building that people will see and enjoy?” Swig asked.

Swig said the wing is only 16 percent of the entire building and, in any event, would be nearly hidden by other buildings going up around it. In addition, he argued, much of the exterior has been altered over the years.

“When one looks at the whole building, it’s pretty clear that [the wing] is a secondary feature,” Swig told the board.

Most members of the committee seemed to agree that the building section could come down, but they took exception to other alterations to the building and especially were not happy that the new tower, 45 Broad Street, would grow taller as a result.

“This is a canyon area and it will just become more so,” said committee member Marc Donnenfeld.


Roger Byrom, the committee’s co-chair, had a suggestion. “Are you prepared to consider [offering] something that the community would get a benefit from?”

“We’re very active Downtown,” said Swig, whose company, by his own reckoning, owns “eight or nine” buildings in the Financial District. “So I think we’re willing to look at anything that’s reasonable and makes sense to the community.”

Matters of bulk transfer are not the purview of the Landmarks Committee and in a telephone interview with the Trib, Swig made it clear that a public amenity could not be exchanged for approval of his plans. Byrom, too, said no tradeoff was on the table.

Nevertheless, Swig, who bought the building for a reported $200 million in 2005 from Crescent Heights—its principal, Bruce Menin, is the husband of CB1 chair Julie Menin—said he was prepared to offer a public amenity in another one of his buildings “just because it’s a nice thing.”

Having later met with several board members, Swig said he has an idea “which they are thrilled over.” Neither he nor Byrom would say what that is but Byrom called it “exciting.” Swig returns to the committee April 12 to again discuss proposed alterations to his building.

Menin said she will recuse herself for the board’s vote on Swig’s plan because she lives at 25 Broad Street.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2007, 8:30 AM
Lecom's Avatar
Lecom Lecom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: the Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 12,703
^Bad news. That building wing is quitessential Downtown and creates on of the neighborhood's densest pickets.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2007, 11:20 AM
SpinoC66's Avatar
SpinoC66 SpinoC66 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Madison Square Garden, 2 Penn Plaza....both will be demolished to make way
for the redevelopment of Penn Station (which sits underneath). Replacement
will include 2 (or more) towers, at 90 (or so) stories...




why are they getting rid of Madison Square? Is it not historic? Are they going to make it Madison Cube?
__________________
Muah Ha Ha

Atlanta rocks!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2007, 1:47 PM
sbarn sbarn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,071
^^ Its not historic... they're planning on moving Madison Square Garden into the western half of the Farley Post Office across 8th Ave. Then the Garden and current stubby tower will be replaced with two enormous towers (estimated ~1000 to 1300 ft tall) and new Penn Station complex.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2007, 2:35 PM
-GR2NY-'s Avatar
-GR2NY- -GR2NY- is offline
RePpiN GR sTreeTz !
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grand Rapids
Posts: 3,388
What was at the site of the BT before it was constructed?
__________________
-Grand Rapids Metro, 1.4 Million strong.

-FerrariEnzo is the coolest forumer ever.

[>>]-Grand Rapids Boom Rundown-[<<]
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2007, 4:20 PM
LSyd's Avatar
LSyd LSyd is offline
Red October standing by
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Columbia/Sumter, SC
Posts: 16,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostInTheZone View Post
people seem to have this mistaken impression that Manhattan is nothing but skyscrapers. There are TONS of 1 or 2 story commercial buildings and 4-5 story run-down tenements with no redeeming architectural or historical value that beg to be torn down. There's also a lot more surface parking lots than you would think, in a lot of places.

Which is why demolishing something like the Hotel Pennsylvania, one of the higher-quality structures in an area with no shortage of crappy tenements and short commericial buildings, offends my preservationist sensibilities all that much more.
i totally agree. so, is this going to increase hotel rates even more?

-
__________________
"The vapors! The fainting couch! Those heartless elitists are burning down the plantation with their logic and arithmetic!"

-fflint
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2007, 4:40 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daquan13 View Post
I think New York City is becoming a lot like Las Vegas. Old buildings are constantly being demolished to make way for new ones.
That's basically the story of the business districts of NYC and Chicago.....or rather, most American cities, just to varying degrees. Very few cities have preserved their old urban core in any meaningful sense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2007, 6:07 PM
-GR2NY-'s Avatar
-GR2NY- -GR2NY- is offline
RePpiN GR sTreeTz !
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grand Rapids
Posts: 3,388
^ Preserving the original CBD in any highly significant amount is a practice seen almost exclusively in small cities IMO. Simply because they're aren't skyscrapers coming up everywhere, they use what they have; lots of lofts and so on.
__________________
-Grand Rapids Metro, 1.4 Million strong.

-FerrariEnzo is the coolest forumer ever.

[>>]-Grand Rapids Boom Rundown-[<<]
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2007, 6:54 PM
LSyd's Avatar
LSyd LSyd is offline
Red October standing by
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Columbia/Sumter, SC
Posts: 16,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by -GR2NY- View Post
^ Preserving the original CBD in any highly significant amount is a practice seen almost exclusively in small cities IMO. Simply because they're aren't skyscrapers coming up everywhere, they use what they have; lots of lofts and so on.
and originally, that was by accident too (lack of development during hot times of urban redevelopment.)

-
__________________
"The vapors! The fainting couch! Those heartless elitists are burning down the plantation with their logic and arithmetic!"

-fflint
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2007, 12:48 AM
CGII's Avatar
CGII CGII is offline
illwaukee/crooklyn
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: rome
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by -GR2NY- View Post
^ Preserving the original CBD in any highly significant amount is a practice seen almost exclusively in small cities IMO. Simply because they're aren't skyscrapers coming up everywhere, they use what they have; lots of lofts and so on.
Or in Europe. Look at all the big cities, new CBDs are rising far from the old ones [Paris, London, Moscow...]. It's just not as feasible here in the states, and actually I prefer the blend of old and new in Boston or NY or Chicago that doesn't exist to that extent in London or Paris.
__________________
disregard women. acquire finances.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2007, 2:24 AM
LSyd's Avatar
LSyd LSyd is offline
Red October standing by
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Columbia/Sumter, SC
Posts: 16,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGII View Post
Or in Europe. Look at all the big cities, new CBDs are rising far from the old ones [Paris, London, Moscow...]. It's just not as feasible here in the states, and actually I prefer the blend of old and new in Boston or NY or Chicago that doesn't exist to that extent in London or Paris.
there's a big mix of old and new in lots of parts of London. some of it dumb and pointless (the loss of the old Euston station,) some of it great (Tower 42, the Gherkin,) and some great adaptive reuse (Tate Modern.) the credit goes to both the British, Germans and the Irish.

-
__________________
"The vapors! The fainting couch! Those heartless elitists are burning down the plantation with their logic and arithmetic!"

-fflint
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Apr 17, 2007, 3:32 AM
STERNyc's Avatar
STERNyc STERNyc is offline
Landmark Restored
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpinoC66 View Post
why are they getting rid of Madison Square? Is it not historic?
My laugh out loud moment of the day.
__________________
Somewhere between Child's clarity and Libeskind's dazzle lies the future.
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 > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:34 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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