NEW YORK | 50 West 66 Street | 775 FT | 70 FLOORS

[JMKeynes]

I suspect that this tower will yield insane prices. This location is amazing, and the building is GORGEOUS!!!

[Hudson11]

Originally Posted by Hudson11

I suspect construction is still being held up by slow dragging lawsuits by local NIMBYs. Sales have been steady at Central Park Tower and One Manhattan Square, so there's no reason Extell would have trouble getting a construction loan to build the Upper West Side's new tallest building

...and it would be nice for Silverstein to build 2 WTC on spec!

[Crawford]

Yeah, Barnett will get crazy prices for this tower. $6,000-$7,000/ft. overall, I'd bet. Maybe even higher?

Now that it's fully financed this will finally start rising. Hope to see some major construction activity shortly.

Also, this will have a major skyline impact. A new 800-ft. tower right off Central Park will be pretty cool.

[JMKeynes]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Yeah, Barnett will get crazy prices for this tower. $6,000-$7,000/ft. overall, I'd bet. Maybe even higher?

Now that it's fully financed this will finally start rising. Hope to see some major construction activity shortly.

Also, this will have a major skyline impact. A new 800-ft. tower right off Central Park will be pretty cool.

I agree. This is appropriate for the Greatest City in the World!

Only in NY!!

[MAC123]

And if that supertall in the Upper East Side close to 57th (forgot the name) ever gets built you could definitely see it moving south. Though I would prefer Central Park not to be surrounded by towers of Steinway and CPT's size, 700-800 footers will look pretty nice. And who knows, maybe when the 2nd Avenue subway finally gets built, we'll see some major construction down the Upper East and right into Harlem. I would love to see some major densification of Harlem.

[chris08876]

Some action!!!!!



Credit: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/bob-m...medium=ios_app

[NYguy]

https://ilovetheupperwestside.com/la...t-66th-street/

Landmark West Loses Appeal Against 50 West 66th Street

Bobby Panza
May 3, 2022

Extell Development won a major ruling against Landmark West last week, when the NYC Board of Standards and Appeals ended deadlocked in a 2-2 tie vote over the fate of a potential high rise going up at 50 West 66th Street, between Columbus Avenue and Central Park West. Landmark West was denied its appeal without a majority decision at the BSA — where a tie vote is awarded to the developer. There was no opportunity for community input during the proceedings.

For now, the ruling gives Extell the green light to move forward with its 39-story (775-foot) residential building. Once raised, the structure would be the tallest in Manhattan north of Central Park South.

[Zapatan]

Awesome, but 39 floors?

This'll be a beauty in any case.

[Busy Bee]

^ The whole reason this tower was sued and has been so controversial is because it includes these "mechanical" levels which stretches all definitions of what a level is by jacking the height of the tower 100 feet or more at a time to ensure higher floors have spectacular views while still technically not exceeding allowable buildable square footage. It's really shenanigans by every definition. Im glad this tower ia happening because its beautiful and the Lincoln Center special district shouldn't have these artificially low allowable buildable space zoning to begin with, but this loophole really does need to be addressed as its just not proper and further encourages other shady techniques that this tower is the exception to because it usually results in a less desirable outcome. See affordable projects that cram 8 floors into a 70' envelope with hideous consequences.

[Crawford]

No, the whole reason they were sued is bc they're absurdly wealthy NIMBYs who literally sue over every single new UWS development.

And, as usual, the point isn't to win (they know there's no legal argument), it's to tie up projects in the courts endlessly, hoping the developers give up.

Thankfully, Extell doesn't back down, and by next year we'll have a landmark new tower. And this is the first of a new UWS cluster of extremely tall towers.

[Busy Bee]

They specifically sued to challenge the perceived abuse of the mechanical floor loophole. The fact they are rich entitled nimbys that try to stop every project they don't like is correlation.

[Raysiri]

Wish one day more skyscrapers would show up further north in Manhattan. In case if New York’s population skyrockets.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

…this loophole really does need to be addressed as its just not proper and further encourages other shady techniques

That “loophole” was already addressed. But nothing shady if it’s legal.

[Busy Bee]

It ain't kosher even if the end results excite skyscraper foamers like us. The problem is the artificially low allowable buildable area in prime areas like the Lincoln Center special zoning district. If that wasn't in place they wouldn't have felt the need to waste hundreds of thousands of cubic square footage just to boost the overall height of the tower to satisfy market demands.

[BuildThemTaller]

Originally Posted by Raysiri

Wish one day more skyscrapers would show up further north in Manhattan. In case if New York’s population skyrockets.

This thing has only 127 units. It's really tall with a very small unit count, relative to its neighbors. Height doesn't necessarily equate to density.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

It ain't kosher even if the end results excite skyscraper foamers like us. The problem is the artificially low allowable buildable area in prime areas like the Lincoln Center special zoning district. If that wasn't in place they wouldn't have felt the need to waste hundreds of thousands of cubic square footage just to boost the overall height of the tower to satisfy market demands.

What is wrong with this? It isn't illegal, or unethical. It's just taller, which angers NIMBYs.

Again, the rejected lawsuit has nothing to do with this, as it was well-established this was legal practice. There's nothing inherently bad about doing 50-foot ceiling heights instead of 5-foot ceiling heights, or including huge mechanical voids, or other height-boosting designs.

[Busy Bee]

Then those allowable height-boosting "voids" should be codified as allowable into zoning and given a technical term and not manipulatively and deceptively claimed as mechanical floors when anyone with a shred of intelligence and decency kbows thats a lie. Essentially by allowing this DOB loophole the city is encouraging sneaky tactics that will continue to bring about controversy and disruptions. DOB should just modify its language to say void levels that boost a structures height shall be allowable with sensible parameters whether they are shared with mechanical space, a restaurant or a pool level...whatever. Just dont wink about it and encourage shenanighans.

[Drcastro]

Originally Posted by Raysiri

Wish one day more skyscrapers would show up further north in Manhattan. In case if New York’s population skyrockets.

Developers don’t build “in case if”. That’s a sure way to go out of business.

[chris08876]

[chris08876]

Credit: bleak