October 27, 201410 yr Author 432 park topped out recently -- here are couple views i saw of it from brooklyn and the bronx
October 27, 201410 yr I know it's polarizing, but I'm in love with 432 Park. It's height, slenderness ratio, raw structural expression, massive glass windows without being a boring all-glass curtain wall, it's domination of Midtown, everything. It and 111w57th are two seriously awesome skyscrapers. I can't wait to watch 111 start its rise.
October 28, 201410 yr My friend posted some interior photos of 432 Park on Facebook recently, and I must admit, it terrifies me haha I find something cold and sterile about the place. It doesn't feel "homey" to me. It looks like the kind of place Patrick Bateman would live, though I'm sure regardless of the price, they will get a lot of applicants. And as expected, the views are remarkable: What It’s Like To Live In A $95-Million Penthouse 1,396 Feet Above New York City 11 days ago by Audra http://www.boredpanda.com/residential-tower-432-park-avenue-manhattan-penthouse-architecture/
October 29, 201410 yr Author ^ patrick bateman could not have afforded to get his shoes shined there. 432 park is for the real rich people, not the new money yuppies. or yuppie killers or crazies in the american psycho's case. as for the building, yes it is definately, quite purposefully sterile, but i am sure we will be seeing magazine articles about these people decorate their apartments over the next few years. probably will still be sterile lol!
November 2, 201410 yr ^ patrick bateman could not have afforded to get his shoes shined there. 432 park is for the real rich people, not the new money yuppies. or yuppie killers or crazies in the american psycho's case. as for the building, yes it is definately, quite purposefully sterile, but i am sure we will be seeing magazine articles about these people decorate their apartments over the next few years. probably will still be sterile lol! for me 27 is as high as I go. I don't want to live that high up! I don't even like working that high up.
November 8, 201410 yr Author more stuff happening around nytown this one is nordstrom tower 217 w57st note these are just 2nd round massing renders far as i know and yes its supposed to get a nordstrom dept store at the base *** speaking of nordstrom tower, here are a few mind-boggling general renders of the near future midtown skyline these are with all the pretty much happening/certain to happen new big projects like 111 w57st, moma tower verre, etc. (ie., no hudson spire) *** i walked by the construction site of this crazy twin residential towers project recently 626 1st ave its by SHoP architects http://ny.curbed.com/tags/626-first-avenue *** another tower in northern long island city queens 423-01 42nd road; 40 stories http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20130129/REAL_ESTATE/130129891 here is the current site its an old factory bldg *** a pretty cool sort of cantilever for this one *** i dk, something up around 432 park tower i guess *** harlem gets a sci-fi castle 1800 park ave old render The new designs for 1800 Park Avenue, the development formerly known as Harlem Park, were recently unveiled at a Community Board 11 meeting, and let's just say they're a good deal more interesting than developer Ian Bruce Eichner's other big project that's currently in the works. Eichner, who seems to have a penchant for very tall buildings, has tapped architects ODA for the design of the two towers that, at 32 stories and 320 feet, will be Harlem's tallest. The rows of setbacks appear to be ODA's new thing but, in the case of 1800 Park, they look particularly odd next to the boxy neighboring tower. The Community Boards concerns focused not on the height, but on the amount of affordable housing that the towers would provide. The project had originally committed to the 80/20 plan, with 380 market-rate rentals and 120 affordable ones, but now the numbers have changed, and Eichner's Continuum Company is guaranteeing only 70 affordable apartments out of 650 total units (11 percent). The developers are still trying to find financing for the $415 million project. http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2014/01/10/harlems_tallest_buildings_will_look_like_a_scifi_castle.php *** the pyramid rental apt bldg on the westside is well underway 625 w57st the designer is danish & actually underneath its a european style apt bldg w/a central courtyard The colossal sloped wall that sweeps up Danish starchitect Bjarke Ingels’ first major New York City design project at 625 West 57th Street is almost up. Last month, the Durst Organization scored a $411.5 million construction loan to finance the 43-story, 800,000-square-foot rental building, which recently topped out. And according to Buzzbuzzhome, the Dursts would really like everyone to stop calling the eye-catching structure a “pyramid.” “My father doesn’t like people calling it a ‘pyramid,’” developer Alexander Durst, son of 1 World Trade Center developer Douglas Durst, told the New York Daily News. “It’s a tetrahedron.” Prices have yet to be announced, but the top-floor rentals could go for $90 a foot. Twenty percent of the units will be affordable. See more at: http://therealdeal.com/blog/2014/11/02/gigantic-curtain-wall-rising-at-bjarke-ingelss-westside-project/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter#sthash.YkkJnlrJ.bhihrbAq.dpuf *** and last, but not least, a bit more on the staten island ny ferris wheel: OCTOBER 16, 2014 A thrill ride themed on the subway is planned for the Staten Island waterfront where a giant Ferris wheel will be built. New York Wheel CEO Rich Marin described the 4-D ride to tour operators Wednesday at the site for the planned 625-foot wheel. Mr. Marin said the thrill ride will "simulate a ride in a subway car" on an adventure through a fictional tunnel beneath the harbor. It will be called Time Train. He also said a webcam will be installed on an old lighthouse just offshore. It'll provide a 24-hour look as construction proceeds on the wheel near the ferry terminal. The New York Wheel is scheduled to open in 2017, with groundbreaking planned for 2015. Other attractions will include a hotel and outlet mall anchored by Nordstrom Rack. more: http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20141016/HOSPITALITY_TOURISM/141019906/staten-island-ferris-wheel-complex-getting-4-d-ride-cam The wheel will have 36 cars, each carrying up to 40 people, and will take 38 minutes to go around, Marin said. It will be lit up facing Manhattan and will offer a light show nightly. The train ride will be a secondary attraction, but one that gives visitors another reason to spend time at the site, along with dining options and the mall. Right now shoppers often head to outlet malls outside the city, like Woodbury Commons, 50 miles north of Manhattan. more: http://nypost.com/2014/10/16/giant-ferris-wheel-planned-for-staten-island-to-boost-tourism/ ***
November 8, 201410 yr Thanks for the update. I cannot even keep track of all the stuff going up in NYC.
November 8, 201410 yr Author thx and yeah i know neither can i -- and i watch this kind of thing more closely than the average person -- so its just random stuff that i had photos of or that caught my eye lately
November 8, 201410 yr The wheel in Staten Island isn't a bad idea, to be honest. It makes sense. "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
November 14, 201410 yr Kriston Capps @kristoncapps 22h22 hours ago NYC is undergoing a major skyscraper boom. This is New York in 2018. Don't be alarmed: http://bit.ly/1ugaL1t "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
November 14, 201410 yr These images excite me. People think enjoying height wars is the same as enjoying a pissing match, but I enjoy it because the engineering involved impresses me. It's the same reason I love fast cars. They are impressive. This current onslaught of MASSIVE towers in NYC is incredibly impressive from a planning, engineering, and architectural perspective. Watching 432 Park rise has been quite enjoyable and we're just getting started with these skyline-changing buildings. The next few years are going to get exciting for NYC.
November 18, 201410 yr Author Kriston Capps @kristoncapps 22h22 hours ago NYC is undergoing a major skyscraper boom. This is New York in 2018. Don't be alarmed: http://bit.ly/1ugaL1t hmm there is something awfully familiar about that render :laugh: *** an anchor tenant has been signed, so it looks like one vanderbilt, the new big tower next to grand central, will happen sooner than later. "The move to One Vanderbilt will allow us to consolidate our New York City offices into one regional headquarters, and will offer an outstanding experience and great brand visibility for our employees and our customers," said Christopher Giamo, regional president at TD Bank.: http://nypost.com/2014/11/17/td-bank-to-anchor-68-story-one-vanderbilt/ *** here's another biggie - 111 w57th -- 1400ft! :-o Move over 432 Park, there’s a taller, slimmer and sexier ultra-luxury residential tower coming to Midtown. At the Municipal Art Society’s 2014 Summit for NYC, Simon Koster, Principal at JDS Development Group, provided the audience with a compelling presentation on how our ideals can serve as the basis in how we shape our city. The restored crown of Stella Tower, the East River mega-rental project at 616 First Avenue, and 111 West 57th Street’s discretionary approval by the Landmarks Preservation Commission were used as relevant examples. And the 57th Street project really caught our eye. The 1,400+ foot tower will also become the slimmest building in the world with a slenderness ratio of 1:23. Its narrow profile and stepped crown evoke the romantic art-deco towers of the 1920s and ’30s and other timeless city landmarks. SHoP Architects are the designers and WSP Group are the engineers/magicians making sure things remain upright. In regards to 111 West 57th, Koster notes that the Landmarks-approved façade is the most intricate curtain wall ever designed for a modern residential building. The east and west elevations of the building are load-bearing walls clad in an energetic pattern of terra-cotta panels with bronze filigree details that create a dynamic play of light and shadow. The glass curtain walls on the north and south facades provide sweeping views of Central Park and Midtown. And like a god looking down from Mt. Olympus, the stunning image shown above depicts what such an upper-floor view looking south would be. As if that were not enough, the tower will also have front-and-center views of Central Park to the north. more: http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2014/11/17/first_floorplan_for_the_worlds_skinniest_skyscraper_revealed.php
November 18, 201410 yr I know it's polarizing, but I'm in love with 432 Park. It's height, slenderness ratio, raw structural expression, massive glass windows without being a boring all-glass curtain wall, it's domination of Midtown, everything. It and 111w57th are two seriously awesome skyscrapers. I can't wait to watch 111 start its rise. If I had a spare 81 million I'd be all over that penthouse apartment that's for sale lol.
November 18, 201410 yr Kriston Capps @kristoncapps 22h22 hours ago NYC is undergoing a major skyscraper boom. This is New York in 2018. Don't be alarmed: http://bit.ly/1ugaL1t Thin is the new Phat.
November 18, 201410 yr Author here are a few 111 w57st renders *** and here is something kind of crazy and interesting just announced for the hudson river park: Pier 55 gets $130M bid to create an ‘island oasis’ By Steve CuozzoNovember 17, 2014 | 12:09am A spectacular new public park out on the Hudson River off West 13th Street will feature entertainment “programmed” by top showbiz talent led by Oscar-winning producer Scott Rudin. More remarkably, most of its estimated $130 million construction cost will be funded by a $100 million-plus gift from the Diller-von Furstenberg Family Foundation. The city is putting in only $17 million, and the foundation is responsible for any cost overruns. Pier 55 will look more like an island than a pier. Mounted 186 feet offshore, its rolling landscape is to include small groves, open grass and spots for lounging. Two pedestrian walkways from a widened West Street esplanade will take visitors to the free-to-all park. A 700-seat amphitheater will host arts events and performances under the direction of a team headed by Rudin, whose screen credits include “The Social Network” and “Moonrise Kingdom.” The 2.7-acre park and performance space is designed by British firm Heatherwick Studio and landscape architect Mathews Nielsen. It will replace rotting Pier 54, where the steamship Carpathia brought survivors of the sunken Titanic 102 years ago. The park will sit atop 341 stilt-like, concrete piles, compared with the old pier’s more than 3,400 piles. Its surface will rise like a gently undulating carpet from 15 feet above the water at its lowest point to 71 feet at its southwest corner — an “innovation to give the fish more sun,” said Hudson River Park Trust President/CEO Madelyn Wils. The project is a partnership of the trust — the state body that manages the 4-mile-long park from Battery Park City to 59th Street and the piers astride it — and the foundation headed by IAC media company Chairman Barry Diller and fashion designer Diane von Furstenberg. Its $100 million-plus donation is a remarkable commitment even by today’s high-profile philanthropic standards. The state, meanwhile, will kick in $18 million to extend the narrow West Street esplanade 50 feet farther over the water, from Pier 53 to West 14th Street. The plan drew praise from elected officials, including Gov. Andrew Cuomo and, perhaps most interestingly, Mayor Bill de Blasio. The mayor has previously suggested peeling off donations to glamorous Manhattan parks to help rundown ones in other boroughs. But he was effusive without qualification about Pier 55, saying, “We are deeply appreciative of the generosity of great New Yorkers like Mr. Diller and Ms. von Furstenberg without whom this visionary project would not have been possible.” Diller said, “We are so lucky as a family that we get to do this.” more: http://nypost.com/2014/11/17/pier-55-gets-130m-bid-to-create-and-island-oasis/
November 19, 201410 yr This "Scouting NY" blog is awesome... How To Erase A 75-Year-Old Drug Store From Existence http://www.scoutingny.com/mishkins-is-gone-forever/
November 24, 201410 yr Fulton Center Transit Hub opens-- the Oculus http://www.mainstreetpainesville.org/
January 14, 201510 yr Author fcr's 32 story/363 unit modular tower on dean street next to the arena is finally back under construction after some long delays: http://m.nydailynews.com/life-style/real-estate/forest-city-ratner-modular-brooklyn-tower-back-track-article-1.2076674
January 17, 201510 yr Here are a few pics of Pier A off Battery Park which dates from 1884. It was built by the city and used for various purposes (docks dept, fire dept, etc.) and had been abandoned for many decades (an oversimplification of its history, to say the least). It was recently re-opened after years of restoration and houses a restaurant. The upper floors should open in the spring. Looks nice-- http://www.mainstreetpainesville.org/
January 20, 201510 yr I'm always bemused by the cheerleading on this website for what seems like development for the sake of development. This hideous building in the distance (located in midtown on Park Ave, this view is from all the way from Madison Ave & 79th St) is one of those stick skyscrapers affordable to maybe the "one percent of the one percent." It has marred the skyline permanently. Why would anybody want such a thing? http://www.mainstreetpainesville.org/
January 20, 201510 yr I'm always bemused by the cheerleading on this website for what seems like development for the sake of development. This hideous building in the distance (located in midtown on Park Ave, this view is from all the way from Madison Ave & 79th St) is one of those stick skyscrapers affordable to maybe the "one percent of the one percent." It has marred the skyline permanently. Why would anybody want such a thing? Here's where skyscraper design is a matter of taste. Some here love the jagged design of the proposed Nucleus skyscraper. I hate it, in part because it does not embrace its height. Say what you want about 432 Park, it does do that. It embraces and revels in its sheer height, much like the twin towers did.
January 20, 201510 yr ^sadly I'll probably get used to it (somehow). But at least the twin towers were accessible to the public. This building is just an affront to just about everyone. I guess what makes it worse is that clones of this have been popping up all over, destroying the classic views that New York was known for. I thought there were at least some zoning regulations to prevent these. Where's our mayor when you need him? :wave: http://www.mainstreetpainesville.org/
January 22, 201510 yr I also am not a fan of 432 Park. I don't necessarily care about the architecture, because I kind of waver between liking the stark whiteness of it, and resenting the complete abandonment of detail, but I do hate the scale and the gimmick that the building represents. This isn't a tower with a ton of units to allow for more people to be able to call Manhattan home. It's a palace to the uber rich where many of the units won't even be lived in full time. I suppose these super tall residential fortresses could be the future of Manhattan development, and that would disappoint me. New York is amazing because despite the huge scale of the buildings, it usually feels really comfortable and manageable at street level. The use of setbacks, street level details, and even inspiring shapes/forms of buildings and the spires that top them all contribute to an imageable, personable city. This building seems sterile and superimposed in the city, rather than part of it.
January 22, 201510 yr I also am not a fan of 432 Park. I don't necessarily care about the architecture, because I kind of waver between liking the stark whiteness of it, and resenting the complete abandonment of detail, but I do hate the scale and the gimmick that the building represents. This isn't a tower with a ton of units to allow for more people to be able to call Manhattan home. It's a palace to the uber rich where many of the units won't even be lived in full time. I suppose these super tall residential fortresses could be the future of Manhattan development, and that would disappoint me. New York is amazing because despite the huge scale of the buildings, it usually feels really comfortable and manageable at street level. The use of setbacks, street level details, and even inspiring shapes/forms of buildings and the spires that top them all contribute to an imageable, personable city. This building seems sterile and superimposed in the city, rather than part of it. Yeah, I can see why some of you might dislike it, it's kind of "up-sprawl". It allows one to live in dense surroundings while separating oneself from it all at will. Manhattan, of course, grew "up" because it could not grow out. Geology helped make this more practical. So in a very real way it's ironic.
January 22, 201510 yr Architecturally speaking personal taste doesn't really matter so I won't comment on that. But the "classic" skyline of NYC (that of the 30s and 40s) was one of a plateau of smaller buildings with a handful of much larger buildings bursting through the former ceiling of buildings below. This new wave of supertalls does exactly that. All the future renderings of the skyline with all these proposal is more reminiscent of classic New York than anything any of us have ever seen in person. For that I celebrate buildings like 432 Park Avenue. It embraces its ridiculous height and slenderness and destroys the former 700-800 foot plateau of Midtown. As does One-57. As will 111 W57th. As will 220 Central Park South. As will 227 w57th. As will 520 Park Avenue. As will One Vanderbilt. And so on and so forth.
January 22, 201510 yr ^I agree. The idea of having a palace to the uber rich where many of the units won't even be lived in full time has been around for ages. Belgravia in London to Park Avenue in 30's New York. And as far as "This building seems sterile and superimposed in the city, rather than part of it." It's in Midtown. Most of Midtown is exactly that. If this building were in, say, The Village or Chelsea, I'd see your point. But this is Midtown, the very definition of sterile and superimposed. Across the street is the ultimate streetscape crusher, Citicorp Tower (I'm not going to call it Citigroup or whatever). And of course, the iconic PanAm Tower totally annihilated any sense of "scale" for that area to begin with. If anything, this is the perfect location for such a bold tower. I couldn't see it in Lower Manhattan (unless it was adjacent to the WTC complex). "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
January 22, 201510 yr ^That actually brings up a good question about the future 125 Greenwich building. Similar roof height to 1WTC (1,356 feet) and a slenderness ratio on par with 432 Park. It'll likely be an ultra minimalist glass tube with exquisite facade detailing that not everyone will appreciate and will dominate its surroundings with only the WTC complex to compete in vertical scale. That building is one I'm really looking forward to developing more. From cityrealty nyc. 125 Greenwich for those who don't know is the super tall slender building next to the WTC complex in the background. You can get an idea of how tall 125 Greenwich is going to be. I actually really like that it will likely be blue glass as it relates to the WTC complex in that regard yet shows how drastically different residential and commercial skyscrapers are in terms of floor plate sizes. It also shows how crazy massive the WTC buildings really are in terms of overall volume.
January 23, 201510 yr Author get used to 432 park, there are a dozen like it planned or on the way. you dont like? maybe you'll like the next one. as it should be. its midtown.
January 23, 201510 yr One-57 had so much potential. The massing is interesting and the way its height is oriented towards the park works really well. It was all up to the glass and the pattern and, well, they effed it up. The colors don't form a nice gradient like they did in the renderings and the pattern isn't as much like a waterfall as in the renderings. There are light and dark shades of the same blue which work great and then...teal? Whoever specified that should be fired. It messes up the whole "light to dark blue" gradient they were going for. And then the pattern is the final nail in that coffin. It just looks bad. And then the ventilation panels in the crown on the east and west sides of the building that look nothing like the glass and are significantly darker? Amateur. For a building that just sold a $100 million penthouse you'd expect perfection, not mediocrity.
January 23, 201510 yr You'd expect it in Las Vegas but even CityCenter is better than One57. "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
January 23, 201510 yr Eh, maybe I just don't like such sudden, radical change. These new skinny super talls just seem like they're being built because we discovered the tech to make such structures possible. I get that NY is a vertical city, but I think being hundreds of feet taller than even the surrounding massive skyscrapers is kind of...gauche. It makes the city look gimmicky and tacky, like Dubai or something.
January 23, 201510 yr You basically just described NYC in the 20s and 30s. New, ultra tall buildings that dwarfed their neighbors being built because we finally had the technology to build that tall. Way more slender than existing buildings in NYC, way taller, very much "look at me" buildings. This current boom is very "classic New York" for those reasons.
January 23, 201510 yr Well yeah, it's 2015, not 1930. Art deco was just as modern feeling when the Chrysler was built as 432 Park is for 2015. It wasn't met with pure affection when it was built. In fact a lot of people viewed art deco as a slap in the face to more traditional styles and felt it was entirely inappropriate to build such a massive building in such a style. It stood for something a lot of people didn't agree with, greed. As did the Empire State Building.
January 23, 201510 yr I actually love a lot of contemporary and modern architecture. I meant the comparison between Trump/Chrysler in the context of imageability. Once a dozen or so more of these slender super talls go up, will anyone even remember 432 Park? It has no staying power beyond being tall, which the NY skyline will tell you is only temporary.
January 23, 201510 yr I think it has some subtle uniqueness which will keep it interesting. The open mechanical levels that will break the building up into 6 sections are really interesting and we haven't yet gotten to see how that'll be played up at night. The cylindrical mechanical levels will be illuminated dividing the building up. The scale of the windows and raw concrete structure is also something we haven't seen before. It might not be as unanimously appreciated by the general public, but this building really pushes the capabilities of glass and concrete. The height, though it will be surpassed in a very short time, will still render its presence unimpeded from Central Park. Basically nothing can be built in front of it meaning its position in the skyline from Central Park is not going to change. It will get neighbors that are taller eventually but it'll still be in that second layer of buildings along the southern stretch of Central Park. Obviously it's impossible to tell how something will age and how people will look at it in the future, but I don't see 432 Park having any trouble remaining an important part of the skyline for a long time both in terms of height and architecture.
January 24, 201510 yr Author the reason for these isnt new tech, its that ny seems to be the new london for the ultra-rich to own apt homes. more so than ever. you can already see it here and there at night in these expensive bldgs. they're mostly dark. they'll all sit empty much of the time.
January 26, 201510 yr the reason for these isnt new tech, its that ny seems to be the new london for the ultra-rich to own apt homes. more so than ever. you can already see it here and there at night in these expensive bldgs. they're mostly dark. they'll all sit empty much of the time. Which means they will probably be empty today. Maybe I'm strange, but riding out a blizzard and its aftermath at the top of one of these buildings, as long as the utilities hold out, strikes me as fundamentally awesome.
January 26, 201510 yr I have not visited London but a lot of criticism is building amongst natives regarding large sections of the city that are now sitting dark since so many of the homes and apartments are owned by foreigners looking to get their money out of their home currencies. England is apparently letting anyone purchase as many properties as they want without any sort of special tax obligation. Compare that to Switzerland, which permits ownership of just one residence by any foreigner. Switzerland, obviously, has faced this issue for a long time. The problem for foreigners investing in England and the United States is that they run the risk of having their assets seized. When Terry Anderson was held captive in Iran, $30 million in Iranian assets in the United States were seized and given to Anderson upon his release. What did he do with the money? He bought a few bars in Athens, OH. No, really.
January 26, 201510 yr I'm not so sure the "buildings will be dark" issue will actually come to fruition. One-57 had a little more than half of its units bought by locals meaning they're likely to be used regularly. And the other units will likely have automated lighting systems that illuminate rooms even when nobody is home. The same thing happens here in Indian Hill. Homes have a handful of lights that turn on regardless of occupancy because their owners don't care about the slight difference that'll make in their utility bill. It's likely these ultra luxury residences will have that as well so that no matter when the owners decide to stop by the lights are on. Buildings like 15 Central Park West sell to these same types of people and it doesn't sit dark at night. Regardless of how many people are in it it is lit up like any other residential building. I think we'll find the same thing happens with all these ultra luxury buildings.
January 27, 201510 yr Author its true there is not a 1:1 comparison with westend london on this issue of foriegners buying up properties they don't live in very often. one57 being half full of locals is an excellent example of that. its more a worry in ny that that is where we are headed with all these new luxury towers springing up or planned, than it is a reality at this point. the trend is pretty clear though.
January 29, 201510 yr Do any of these luxury towers have parking garages? I remember when the Trump World Tower went up in 1999-2000 it didn't appear to have any parking. I think that thing was the first of super-skinny residential towers.
January 29, 201510 yr Not that I know of. Not that they need them really. These types of developments cater to people who are driven, not ones who drive, and as such their cars can be stored elsewhere and called whenever they desire to move about town.
January 30, 201510 yr Author past the deco era there was another big trend of skinny residential towers in the early 1980s. they weren't supertall though, they were most mid-block and infill. i guess people got alarmed and the city tried to ban them: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/18/realestate/18Deal1.html?pagewanted=all as for parking, its pretty restricted since i think the 1960s for manhattan residential bldgs and even more so in public housing. there are certainly lots and garages, but a much of it is underground in the basements of buildings around midtown. so no chicago-style bs of car park floors bumping up bldg heights.
January 30, 201510 yr ^Ah yes, the sliver buildings- they even inspired a meh movie by our own Joe Eszterhas: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108162/ Parking development is heavily restricted in the Manhattan core (it's capped, and until recently could only be used by residents- though that part was widley ignored), but you can still build small garages as of right, and a lot of buildings do. The city just modernized those zoning provisions, in fact, in part to anticipate the growing use of automated parking technology. Not sure about the 340 Park or One57 though. And believe it or not, the situation for public housing is actually kind of backwards: NYCHA projects are still subject to the older legacy requirements that force them to have parking. It's nuts, and the city would love to put those surface lots to better use, but it's politically radioactive. Apparently, a lot of public housing residents illegally sublet their parking spaces to make some extra $.
February 1, 201510 yr Author the general rule in the most dense residential areas is 40% parking and that is provided mostly off-site in garages and lots or its just waived. there are many zoning districts, such as 96st or lic per the zoning reg examples below, where no parking at all is required: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/zone/zh_r9.shtml public housing parking is reduced from even 40% rules due to lack of cars, elderly, non-profits. as a big visible bulk of them are tower in the park era those do have surface lots. however, even those lots are targeted because the city has been talking about squeezing in market rate apts bldgs on them.
Create an account or sign in to comment