NEW YORK | 343 Madison Avenue | 844 FT | 49 FLOORS - Page 8

JMKeynes · #**141** Posted **Jul 26, 2020, 1:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quixote

More fantastic pre-war buildings biting the dust. These buildings may not be particularly ornate or worthy of landmark status, but they're part of a uniquely NYC vernacular. Cities like Philly, Chicago, and maybe a few others only have them in limited quantity.

How much longer does this have to continue before you, Crawford, et al. start growing concerned? Do you guys really think 74 Trinity was a fair trade-off? It's boring and doesn't even make an impact on the skyline.

I also like these buildings, but in all fairness, Midtown (between 42nd and 50th) was architecturally sodomized long ago. Nonetheless, NY still has a sea of gorgeous old pre-War buildings below 42nd, on the UES, the UWS, Wall St., SoHo, TriBeCa, the Village, Union Square, Madison Sq., Lincoln Sq., etc.

NYguy · #**142** Posted **Jul 26, 2020, 1:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quixote

How much longer does this have to continue before you, Crawford, et al. start growing concerned? Do you guys really think 74 Trinity was a fair trade-off? It's boring and doesn't even make an impact on the skyline.

I"m not concerned at all, because I walk the streets of Manhattan consistently. The hyperbole of people about any demolition of an older, pre-war building in Manhattan is almost laughable. And this is living a business district, not a museum, as I keep having to repeat on this forum. There are noteworthy buildings to be saved, obviously.

On another note, I missed an important point about the overall height of this tower, and assumed the 1,050 ft figure was the full height. However, other elements will push the height higher. If the bulkhead reaches 1,080 ft, it's possible that a parapet could reach higher.

A little more information on the tower...

Demo should begin in the fall....

DCReid · #**143** Posted **Jul 26, 2020, 1:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

I"m not concerned at all, because I walk the streets of Manhattan consistently. The hyperbole of people about any demolition of an older, pre-war building in Manhattan is almost laughable. And this is living a business district, not a museum, as I keep having to repeat on this forum. There are noteworthy buildings to be saved, obviously.

On another note, I missed an important point about the overall height of this tower, and assumed the 1,050 ft figure was the full height. However, other elements will push the height higher. If the bulkhead reaches 1,080 ft, it's possible that a parapet could reach higher.

A little more information on the tower...

Demo should begin in the fall....

Does anyone know how they can estimate the height of the building?

JMKeynes · #**144** Posted **Jul 26, 2020, 5:06 PM**

This sounds promising.

In light of the small floor plates, I assume that this will be marketed to very high-end hedge funds, VC and PE firms, and maybe small, hyper elite law firms.

NYguy · #**145** Posted **Jul 26, 2020, 6:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCReid

Does anyone know how they can estimate the height of the building?

They’ve likely been working on this for a while. It was supposed to be built a few years ago. But usually when they get to the approvals, they have an idea because of the various approvals and studies. I’m assuming the 1,050 ft height would be the main roof height.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

This sounds promising.

In light of the small floor plates, I assume that this will be marketed to very high-end hedge funds, VC and PE firms, and maybe small, hyper elite law firms.

It also has very high ceilings like Vanderbilt. But half of Vanderbilt’s 1.5 msf.

JMKeynes · #**146** Posted **Jul 26, 2020, 7:15 PM**

This could potentially be quite nice. At first, I was concerned about the shallow plot limiting the design, but the plot is basically the same size as 425 Park’s.

NYer34 · #**147** Posted **Jul 26, 2020, 9:16 PM**

RIP to the MTA Headquarters Building.

One of our dwindling examples of Classic Gotham.

Really wish we had any pride as a city and preserved our pre-WWII architecture.

Busy Bee · #**148** Posted **Jul 26, 2020, 9:43 PM**

While they're at it how about they just fix the flawed sky-plane building code that has gifted us dozens upon dozens of absurd looking and streetwall destroying set-back budget hotel towers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

This sounds promising.

In light of the small floor plates, I assume that this will be marketed to very high-end hedge funds, VC and PE firms, and maybe small, hyper elite law firms.

NYer34 · #**149** Posted **Jul 27, 2020, 3:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

While they're at it how about they just fix the flawed sky-plane building code that has gifted us dozens upon dozens of absurd looking and streetwall destroying set-back budget hotel towers.

Amen!

Quixote · #**150** Posted **Jul 27, 2020, 4:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYer34

RIP to the MTA Headquarters Building.

One of our dwindling examples of Classic Gotham.

Really wish we had any pride as a city and preserved our pre-WWII architecture.

It would also be nice if these buildings could stay since it's a example of a 100% pre-war Midtown block. Whenever I explore Google Street Maps, I always have a hard time finding a block anywhere in Manhattan south of 59th street that isn't tainted by some post-war monolith/monstrosity.

Quote:

I"m not concerned at all, because I walk the streets of Manhattan consistently. The hyperbole of people about any demolition of an older, pre-war building in Manhattan is almost laughable. And this is living a business district, not a museum, as I keep having to repeat on this forum. There are noteworthy buildings to be saved, obviously.

To be clear, I'm not militant about preservation. I fully acknowledge that just because something's old doesn't mean it's automatically worth saving and that something better can't take its place. There's lots of forgettable pre-war stock worthy of demolition, but large, tall, big-footprint buildings should be preserved. Encourage developers to build taller office buildings like London's 20 Fenchurch that taper downward. That would do more for the skyline than another austere glass box.

NYguy · #**151** Posted **Jul 27, 2020, 4:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

While they're at it how about they just fix the flawed sky-plane building code that has gifted us dozens upon dozens of absurd looking and streetwall destroying set-back budget hotel towers.

What they did was eliminate new hotels in the district altogether (one of many concessions to get the rezoning approved). But that's another issue altogether.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

This could potentially be quite nice. At first, I was concerned about the shallow plot limiting the design, but the plot is basically the same size as 425 Park’s.

Yeah, its the full blockfront, and has a 30 FAR, the highest of the rezoning. It also has that setback on the eastern facade where the core is, but the core here looks to be central.

Again, loving the marriage of skyscraper and transit.

The podium here will reach 300 ft, which is higher than what would normally be allowed. I think a box is perfectly fine here, for this height and location. We don't have the blue glass towers rising in the area, but I still wouldn't want that here.

The cantilever above the MTA vent..

And my rough estimate of what this will look like along with Vandy...

https://www.instagram.com/p/CDI-wVBA5yI/

NYguy · #**152** Posted **Jul 27, 2020, 5:06 PM**

Rough look (minus setback)

Some rough 270 Park and Grand Hyatt action...a 21st century business district.

JMKeynes · #**153** Posted **Jul 27, 2020, 7:52 PM**

The City!

SkyHigher · #**154** Posted **Jul 28, 2020, 10:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

The City!

Will it ever be the same....

Sky88 · #**155** Posted **Jul 28, 2020, 11:17 AM**

For NYguy
So, ultimately the height of 343 tower will be 1,080ft?
Do you think that Grand Hyatt tower will be taller than Tower Fifth?

It would be fantastic if there was finally a 2,000 ft tower on the Roosevelt Hotel site, we will have a super 21st century Skyline.

JMKeynes · #**156** Posted **Jul 28, 2020, 11:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sky88

For NYguy
So, ultimately the height of 343 tower will be 1,080ft?
Do you think that Grand Hyatt tower will be taller than Tower Fifth?

It would be fantastic if there was finally a 2,000 ft tower on the Roosevelt Hotel site, we will have a super 21st century Skyline.

The opposition to a 2,000 foot tower would be unparalleled. NY NIMBYs don't want it. I don't think that the Grand Hyatt will be developed for quite some time.

Also, I'd be surprised if the Hyatt is taller than 1 Vanderbilt. I would not be surprised if it's little more than 1,000'. That's still very tall, so I hope that the design is great.

SkyHigher · #**157** Posted **Jul 28, 2020, 11:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sky88

For NYguy
So, ultimately the height of 343 tower will be 1,080ft?
Do you think that Grand Hyatt tower will be taller than Tower Fifth?

It would be fantastic if there was finally a 2,000 ft tower on the Roosevelt Hotel site, we will have a super 21st century Skyline.

It's likely now many of these projects not just here but in the city in general will be delayed now, downsized, even cancelled due to the risk. No one really knows how bad things will look like the other side of this crisis. But one thing is for sure demand for office space will never be the same. The world will never be the same.

JMKeynes · #**158** Posted **Jul 28, 2020, 11:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkyHigher

It's likely now many of these projects not just here but in the city in general will be delayed now, downsized, even cancelled due to the risk. No one really knows how bad things will look like the other side of this crisis. But one thing is for sure demand for office space will never be the same. The world will never be the same.

That is incorrect. NY will always be the financial and commercial capital of the world, and the demand for new space will not abate. If anything, this temporary crisis will drive the demand for more new towers to replace old ones.

People are social creatures and need to work in offices. Further, the whole world isn’t going to move to the Dakotas. Lastly, Dense city living is essential to combat climate change.

SkyHigher · #**159** Posted **Jul 28, 2020, 12:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMKeynes

That is incorrect. NY will always be the financial and commercial capital of the world, and the demand for new space will not abate. If anything, this temporary crisis will drive the demand for more new towers to replace old ones.

People are social creatures and need to work in offices. Further, the whole world isn’t going to move to the Dakotas. Lastly, Dense city living is essential to combat climate change.

"NY will always be the financial and commercial capital of the world"

Yes but also the most expensive. It's likely many small to medium business with an option of having more of their employee's work from home will take that option and downsize.

In terms of bigger business Google is one to watch. They are going to have a big presence in HY. Or will they when this is all said and done?

"the demand for new space will not abate. If anything, this temporary crisis will drive the demand for more new towers to replace old ones."

There is no evidence to back this up. This crisis is unprecedented in the cities history.

"Dense city living is essential to combat climate change."

Seriously? With what millions of workers working from home isn't going to help the environment tenfold compared to that....

mrnyc · #**160** Posted **Jul 28, 2020, 1:11 PM**

i hate to be a debbie downer, but this being the mta hq site a reminder that the mta is undergoing an extrememly worrisome covid related fiscal tsunami meltdown.

mta ceo pat foye describes it here:

https://www.amny.com/oped/op-ed/