NEW YORK | 316 Fifth Ave | 535 FT | 40 FLOORS

[mousquet]

Again, we have plenty of the same shit here, earlier, more original and prettier. Take some time for a trip to Paris if you will and walk the streets, then you realize. Walk rue du Quatre Septembre, boulevard des Italiens, the entire surroundings of Opéra Garnier, some residential streets of the 16th arrondissement, and more, you'll see that we have lots of things more remarkable than this building in New York.

What do you think? It's no accident if they decided to eventually demolish it. They know about what they are doing.

So it's no use keeping it, friend. Let them free themselves and build something much taller to host more people right there. They will build something very good on this spot. How could you even be doubtful?

If you want some real quality Neo-Classical crap that must roughly be from the same era, see the Book tower they're refurbishing in Detroit. I'm usually against neo-stuff and pastiches cause it's backwards, but that one is an exception. It looks like an absolute neo-Roman dream. Sometimes, even always, some exceptions occur like that one. I bet even the hard-line French modernists would bow to that one in Detroit, but not to this one on the 5th avenue. It's nothing so outstanding.

So you'll have to mourn it until you make Paris your own (which is nothing impossible).

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by mousquet

Again, we have plenty of the same shit here, earlier, more original and prettier. Take some time for a trip to Paris if you will and walk the streets, then you realize. Walk rue du Quatre Septembre, boulevard des Italiens, the entire surroundings of Opéra Garnier, some residential streets of the 16th arrondissement, and more, you'll see that we have lots of things more remarkable than this building in New York.

What do you think? It's no accident if they decided to eventually demolish it. They know about what they are doing.

So it's no use keeping it, friend. Let them free themselves and build something much taller to host more people right there. They will build something very good on this spot. How could you even be doubtful?

If you want some real quality Neo-Classical crap that must roughly be from the same era, see the Book tower they're refurbishing in Detroit. I'm usually against neo-stuff and pastiches cause it's backwards, but that one is an exception. It looks like an absolute neo-Roman dream. Sometimes, even always, some exceptions occur like that one. I bet even the hard-line French modernists would bow to that one in Detroit, but not to this one on the 5th avenue. It's nothing so outstanding.

So you'll have to mourn it until you make Paris your own (which is nothing impossible).

How could I be doubtful? LOL. Do you think I trust a greedy NY developer to build something decent. No, it's hit or miss. NY builds horrendously boring towers often and knocks down old ornate buildings all the time. Check out what NY looked like before the art-deco era and notice how worse it looks today. So yeah, they know what they are doing, and that involves making as much cash as possible and to hell with design and character.

And this is not about Paris, stop making it so. This is about NYC, stop trying to start a city vs city, I can see right through you.

[mousquet]

Originally Posted by aquablue

How could I be doubtful? Because NY builds horrendously boring towers and knocks down old ornate buildings all the time. Check out what NY looked like before the art-deco era and notice how worse it looks today. And this is not about Paris, stop making it so. This is about NYC, stop trying to start a city vs city, I can see through right through you.

I don't care what you claim to see when you can't even see this building on the 5th avenue is not worth preserving.

And this is my last word to you, since you want to be offensive.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by mousquet

And this is my last word to you, since you want to be offensive.

Why so sensitive?

[chris08876]

Current Status. Time for the great equalizer. The wrecking ball. Unfortunately, it can't or won't be incorporated.


Credit: Tectonic

[Busy Bee]

Taliban

[NYer34]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Current Status. Time for the great equalizer. The wrecking ball. Unfortunately, it can't or won't be incorporated.

Definitely "won't," not "can't."

Developers lie through their teeth about what "can't" be done. With the margins these guys will have they could have incorporated these buildings and re-created the Singer Building on top of them. No pride in our city.

[chris08876]

^^^

If it's not landmarked, it's gone. Besides, if they buy the rights to the parcel or property, they can do what they please. Just like if you want to wear a bugs bunny suit outside on your lawn, on your property, you have every right.

There is the legal way to do things, and there is the absurd way which is what NIMBYS seek to do.

Time to just face the reality. Its coming to an end, what was on the site. I think its also a loss, but I won't let one parcel suddenly get the emotions out, and proclaim that the city has no pride.

If developers had a NIMBY mentality towards cities, and preserved everything... they would file chapter 11 real quick! We seem to forget that developments are business not charity works.

And I agree, the Singer Building, next to the old Penn, was a travesty, but we move on. Sometimes things will suck, but NYC has been doing pretty damn good wouldn't you say? It's not the end of the city.

[Busy Bee]

Get off it man. This isn't "preserving everything"... This structure is special and any creative development team would have first looked at the site and asked "how could we integrate this fantastic beaux arts beauty into a new building?" and not "how fast can we flush this gorgeous building down the tube so we don't have to rack our brains and use our imagination on how to save it?" If you really think this is just another mundane building "making way for progress" then I have nada more to say. Just ask yourself, would any other first world country bulldoze such a thing? Probably not.

[chris08876]

^^^^^

I'll quote:

"But according to landmarks rules, property owners that have demolition permits issued prior to designation would have that work grandfathered in and would be allowed to proceed — spelling certain doom for the Kaskel & Kaskel building, since the demolition permits have been submitted with no designation in sight."

I'm all for fairness, and the developer did what was "legally" right. Think about if you were a developer and bought this parcel. For someone to tell you, nah... you can't build here.

Knowing this now... they should seek to amend the rules to change this. It's the thinking to change a perfectly legal, applied method into something else that I'm against. The deal was made, and these were the rules aiding in its fruition.

Had the rules been different, than the developer would have to abide by those. In this scenario, they worked in favor.

[Busy Bee]

NOTHING is stopping the developer from "facadectomizing" the facade and reincorporating even part of it in the base of the new tower. The idea of this being heaped in a dumpster is Penn Station-nauseating.

[pico44]

Man, that little green and slate roof is just. The. Best.

Bummer

[chris08876]

The slow execution of this gem is occurring.


Credit: Oppix56

[Hudson11]

[yankeesfan1000]

From YIMBY per Oppix56 :



https://discourse-cdn-sjc1.com/busin...e4a10872b6.JPG

[chris08876]

Credit: JC_Heights

[NYer34]

Who are the criminal terrorists developing this site? There are 2-3 disgusting modernist buildings right near this -- why couldn't these a**holes buy those?

Instead, they destroy one of our finite supply of beautiful historic buildings -- with more modernist schlock likely to come in its place. Literally negative respect for New York and New Yorkers. Disgusting.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by NYer34

Who are the criminal terrorists developing this site? There are 2-3 disgusting modernist buildings right near this -- why couldn't these a**holes buy those?

Instead, they destroy one of our finite supply of beautiful historic buildings -- with more modernist schlock likely to come in its place. Literally negative respect for New York and New Yorkers. Disgusting.

Please. As if you cared for this building before. Let's not throw that terrorist word around so freely.

[Busy Bee]

^Correct. Terrorist has a very specific and relevant meaning in our time. I prefer Taliban or philistine.

[chris08876]

Credit: Oppix56