Century Club May Sell Air Rights

[londonlawyer]

As set forth in the following article in the Dec. 13, 2006, Abraham Rosen will raze a glorious building located at 516 5th Ave. This guy is the epitome of both a schmuck and a philistine.

"CENTURY CLUB EYES SALE OF AIR RIGHTS ABY ROSEN"

December 13, 2006 -- THE venerable Century Club at 7 W. 43rd St. is negotiating to sell most of its air rights to Aby Rosen, who intends to build a new tower on Fifth Avenue.

We've learned that the membership, now led by author Sidney Offit, voted to enter into discussions with Rosen for such a sale, which could eventually include all but about 10 percent of the club's transferable air rights.

Rosen, club personnel and Offit did not return calls for comment.

Rosen's RFR Holdings already owns the three townhouse-style buildings at 516, 518 and 520 Fifth Ave. on the northwest corner of 43rd St. The eastern side of the Century Club abuts those properties.

In fact, in 1979, the then-owners of 518 Fifth Ave. and the Club were locked in a legal battle over 518's protruding staircase. The two sides ultimately settled.

With a land area of 100 feet-by-100 feet, the Century Club could have well over 100,000 feet of air rights to sell.

There are no height restrictions on Rosen's plot, which deed records show spans about 85 feet by 125 feet.

The recently constructed boutique office building diagonally across the avenue at 505 Fifth Ave. is about 90 percent leased, but has commanded healthy asking rents of more than $90 a foot.

Paul Glickman of Cushman & Wakefield, who represents 505, said, "Another boutique office building in the Grand Central market would be well-received."

[daver]

Century Club at 7 W. 43rd St - selling air rights, not getting razed
http://www.nyc-architecture.com/MID/063B.jpg
http://www.nyc-architecture.com/MID/063.jpg
http://www.nyc-architecture.com/MID/Midtown056.jpg
http://www.nyc-architecture.com/MID/Midtown055.jpg

[londonlawyer]

That building, to my knowledge, will not be razed. Abraham simply bought its air rights.

[MidtownGuy]

^stunningly beautiful

[ablarc]

^stunningly beautiful
Worthy of Palermo, don't you think?

[MidtownGuy]

you were reading my mind!

[MidtownGuy]

If they did try to raze this beauty, I'd chain myself to the building and you'd see me on NY1 being hauled away.:eek:

[Fabrizio]

Thats an important landmark and cannot be torn down. Of course if Rosen gets to build on top of the Park-Bernet... perhaps we could expect a glass tower sitting on top of this building too?

[londonlawyer]

I don't think this building is involved. I believe it's the one from which Abraham Philistine purchased the air rights. The three parcels are on the s.w. corner of 43rd and 5th. The one located at 43rd and 5th is stunning and should not be razed. The middle parcel is no big deal, and the northernmost property is nice and should be saved. Rosen should be sent back to wherever he came from. He is greedy and cares only about his profits. He really makes me sick.

Schmuck!
http://www.thecityreview.com/lex610b.jpg

[pianoman11686]

Londonlawyer, your glaring hatred of Aby Rosen is starting to get tired. Can you at least change the title of the thread so that people are not misled into thinking this building is actually getting torn down?

If this is how you think of someone who owns and plans to take good care of arguably two of the most important pieces of Modernist architecture in the city, as well as hiring world-class architects for his new buildings, then what do you have to say for the rest of the bunch?

[londonlawyer]

Londonlawyer, your glaring hatred of Aby Rosen is starting to get tired. Can you at least change the title of the thread so that people are not misled into thinking this building is actually getting torn down?

If this is how you think of someone who owns and plans to take good care of arguably two of the most important pieces of Modernist architecture in the city, as well as hiring world-class architects for his new buildings, then what do you have to say for the rest of the bunch?

Pianoman, I do hate Abraham and don't care if people find it tiring. He is ruining NYC and is motivated by his own rapacious greed. The building at 43rd and 5th is getting torn down.

[pianoman11686]

Can you please outline how exactly he is "ruining" NYC?

[londonlawyer]

By razing beautiful, old buildings. However, he is not the only such schmuck. Macklowe is another putz for razing the Drake, as are the mishuganuh "developers" who razed the 56th Street townhouses, Shelly's, the jewel on 72nd and B'Way, etc.

[pianoman11686]

The only other one I'm aware of that's actually getting razed is the YWCA on Lexington. Having passed by it almost everyday during the summer, I am okay with it being demolished. It's got some ornamentation, but not anything that, at least in my opinion, is a good reason to preserve it. You have to take into account the context as well: every other corner of the intersection of 53rd & Lex has commercial, glass highrises.

BTW: Aren't you the one who repeatedly called for certain small "crap" buildings to be razed on 5th, and replaced with boutique hotels/office towers?

[londonlawyer]

Ornamented buildings are not crap. The building across the street from Abraham's site, which houses a BestBuy, is an example of the crap that I want to see razed, as is the horrific white thing in high 40's on the west side of the avenue which houses a B of A.

[daver]

I'll be walking past 42nd and 5th tonight, I'll run up a block and see if I can get a decent pic out of my cellphone of 516, 518, 520. Hopefully before it gets too dark.

[ablarc]

...as well as hiring world-class architects for his new buildings...
The world-class architect in post 9 needs sartorial advice.

[londonlawyer]

The world-class architect in post 9 needs sartorial advice.

Despite the stereotypes that Brits dress conservatively, they generally do not. Sir Norman is a case in point.

[daver]

Crappy cell phone pics abound... 516 on the South side, right next to Century Club:
http://biteboy.com/wired/516e.jpg

East facing side on 5th, 518 on right:
http://biteboy.com/wired/516h.jpg

518:
http://biteboy.com/wired/518a.jpg

520:
http://biteboy.com/wired/520a.jpg

The three of them from Best Buy (which truly is a pretty nasty building):
http://biteboy.com/wired/516-520a.jpg

And from directly across 5th:
http://biteboy.com/wired/516-520b.jpg

[ablarc]

^ That Modernist glass building (SOM, 1954) on the far corner of the fifth photo sure is a beauty. Used to be called Manufacturers Hanover Trust. What is it now?

A keeper.

[pianoman11686]

I'm not positive, but I think I remember Chase being the ground-floor tenant, with offices possibly above that. More info on the building (510 5th Avenue) here (http://www.thecityreview.com/fifth510.html)

Ablarc, what do you think of the buildings that the developer is proposing to demolish?

[ManhattanKnight]

What is it now?


It's a Chase (which bought Manny Hanny some time ago and now uses MH's former headquarters at 277 Park as its own):

510 Fifth Avenue
http://www.waltlockley.com/trust/P1010211.jpg

[Fabrizio]

510 was RUINED with bad renovations. It was the most elegant building... a jewell. But hasnt it been since landmarked?

That group of buildings shown above is the look of Gotham. Does anyone here want to see all that classical detailing and those beautiful materials forever gone? Isnt that what the area of 5th should be about? What could be more beautiful than that corner shown above? Gives me goose bumps. To be replaced by what? And arent the small foot prints great? Delivering variety and intimacy.

Say hello to glass walls and the obligatory parking garage entrance.... hows about a nice, brittle glass wall like the Bank of America Tower here? Side street ruined...grace gone.

[londonlawyer]

510 was RUINED with bad renovations. It was the most elegant building... a jewell. But hasnt it been since landmarked?

That group of buildings shown above is the look of Gotham. Does anyone here want to see all that classical detailing and those beautiful materials forever gone?...

510 is still a nice building nevertheless.

With respect to 516, it's magnificent, and Rosen's razing it will warrant him a place in hell. 518 is forgettable (though it probably was nice once). 520 is nice and should be preserved.

As I said the other day, Midtown is rapidly become the worst area of Manhattan. Architecturally, the stretch of 5th south of 42nd Street is much nicer than the part between 42nd and 50th. In fact, the buildings between 14th and 23rd are utterly magnificent. I fear, however, that as rapacious vultures like Abraham, Macklowe, etc. are razing gems in Midtown, they'll eventually plunder areas like the Flatiron, etc. It makes me sick.

[pianoman11686]

I'm not too concerned about 518 or 520 Fifth, but it will be tough to lose 516. I think a classy sliver building could even work well in between 516 and the much larger building to the north, something similar to LVMH on 57th. Let's hope that whatever is built in its place, is at least a worthy successor.

[Fabrizio]

Will you guys please LOOK at those photos. Its an assemblage....its NOT about individual buildings. The assemblage is beautiful.

LMVH tower? Small, name architect, exquisite workmanship... one comes along in mid-town maybe...oh.... once every 20 years or so.

Great that we are reduced to crossing our fingers and hoping for the best.

[londonlawyer]

...Great that we are reduced to crossing our fingers and hoping for the best.

Sadly, thanks to schmucks like Abraham and Gershon, that is the situation to which we're reduced.

[Fabrizio]

Its New Yorkers that are to blame. Period.

What would the French, the English, the Italians say if you started to tear down Bond Street, Faubourg St Honoré, Via Condotti? Isnt the above photo of 5th, the architectural equivalent of these:

( Notice how the Faubourg St Honoré looks so Paris, Bond so London, the Condotti so Rome and the above photo of 5th soooo New York. Yet New Yorkers just sit back and HOPE for the best. Sad.).

(And will you guys notice too that many of the buildings on those streets are not great. Bond has 2 story non-descript buildings. But these are PREMIER shopping streets. Its the small-foot, prints the intimate scale, harmony of materials.... just like that stretch of 5th)

[pianoman11686]

Okay, I know I'm probably going to get crucified for saying this, but here it goes anyway...

I understand what you're saying Fabrizio, but I just don't see this stretch of 5th as worthy of comparison to any of those European counterparts. I remember walking down Via Condotti a few years ago, and it was spectacular - very much the embodiment of Rome, except on a more expensive scale. Look at some of the retail on that street - Bvlgari, Cartier, Versace, Gucci - sound familiar? Those are precisely the same retailers located ten blocks north of these buildings, on the stretch of 5th Avenue that is, at least in my opinion, much more associated with New York - big, grandiose displays of wealth, a diverse mix of skyscraper architecture, Rock Center, the Plaza, St. Pat's, etc.

Once you venture south of Saks, it's a completely different atmosphere: delis, cash-only electronics stores, tacky tourist gift shops, the occasional chain-store-you'd-find-in-any-shopping-center, and a few surviving art galleries whose gates are graffitied. I just don't find this to be worthy of "New York's 5th Avenue," and would probably try to avoid it if I was showing friends around town. Hate me if you must, but I find it's a good thing that developers are showing more interest in this area. I think the stretch of 5th from 59th to 42nd, and probably even 34th, should be uniformly stunning, and it won't become so unless some of the nondescript stuff is replaced by expensive new architecture. Now, whether we'll end up considering the new stuff to be high-quality, and deserving of its location on 5th Ave., is a different story. But this guy Rosen has shown willingness to build well, and I think he can pull it off. I hope he can, too.

[Fabrizio]

Pianoman: it is impossible to imagine now, but all through the 1970s 5th Avenue was, from 59th street on down, a jumble of junky electronic/camera stores (one was right in front of the Plaza) , "auction" houses, and cheap jewelry stores. By late afternoon guys from senegal would set up shop on the sidewalks. The only thing that saved the avenue were the airline ticket offices (of which there seemed to be one on every block), Tiffanys, Bonwits (on it last legs), RockefellerCenter, Bergdorfs, Bulgari, Harry Winston and Saks. Plus a few stray boutiques like Gucci and Elizabeth Arden and acouple of bookstores. And that was it. the rest of it was a squalid mess.

So remember: although retail comes and goes.... its the built environment that we are left with. Why destory this one because there are cheap delis and luggage shops?

The truth is that stretch of 5th below Saks has great, intact blocks of buildings that could be restored and house deluxe shops, restaurants and lofts. Those smallish classical-style buildings and the environment they create have VALUE. It could become an exciting, swanky, elegant new neighborhood. How about another Kensington? 5th ave is a brand name and the brand should be nurtured.

Or will we have a mish-mash of styles, more blank sidewalls, reflective glass, cheap looking condos and so on?

Keep crossing your fingers and hope for the best.

[londonlawyer]

Okay, I know I'm probably going to get crucified for saying this, but here it goes anyway...

Once you venture south of Saks, it's a completely different atmosphere: delis, cash-only electronics stores, tacky tourist gift shops, the occasional chain-store-you'd-find-in-any-shopping-center, and a few surviving art galleries whose gates are graffitied. I just don't find this to be worthy of "New York's 5th Avenue"...

I agree with Fabrizio. While the retail on the stretch currently is lousy, certain buildings, such as 516, are magnificent. This area has improved dramatically in a few years and better retail will come.

Moreover, there are meritless buildings on this strecth that should be razed like the dump that houses BestBuy, the white POS that houses the B of A and Stawski's wreck which is located at 579. However, to raze 516 would be a heinous crime. That's why Rosen makes me sick. The same holds true with respect to his rape and plunder of the YMCA, Macklowe's pending destruction of The Drake and Monian's maniacal plan to raze the stunning coop on Park. These guys are greedy swine driven by nothing but profit. (Bear in mind that I support making huge profits, but not if it entails destruction.)

[MidtownGuy]

Fabrizio is right on when he says it's about all of them together, not just picking which one should be spared. They work beautifully together.
Together with their neighbors you have a stunning composition!

Look at the 5th photo. The ascending heights of these 3 buildings beautifully compliment the setbacks of the gorgeous 500 Fifth Avenue, and in the 6th photo the setbacks of their neighbor to the south.

I can't stand the thought that we are left with "hoping for the best", knowing damn well that what gets built here will never have the materials, worksmanship, or contribution to a historical streetscape. Buildings like these will never be created again, and they are crucial to the city's charm and historical heritage. The small footprints that Fabrizio emphasizes are what give us the potential for interesting retail uses in the future, regardless of what happens to be there right now. Whatever's built is almost guaranteed to have one large boring tenant in the base, one that already has another branch within 5 blocks. That type of monotony is good for New York and New Yorkers?

Gotham's architectural heritage and unique quality of life is being destroyed in a Godzilla crush of developer greed. Who's going to stop them before it's too late?

[kliq6]

I agree with Fabrizio. While the retail on the stretch currently is lousy, certain buildings, such as 516, are magnificent. This area has improved dramatically in a few years and better retail will come.

Moreover, there are meritless buildings on this strecth that should be razed like the dump that houses BestBuy, the white POS that houses the B of A and Stawski's wreck which is located at 579. However, to raze 516 would be a heinous crime. That's why Rosen makes me sick. The same holds true with respect to his rape and plunder of the YMCA, Macklowe's pending destruction of The Drake and Monian's maniacal plan to raze the stunning coop on Park. These guys are greedy swine driven by nothing but profit. (Bear in mind that I support making huge profits, but not if it entails destruction.)

I agree with you on most that you say but the YMCA is not a great building and i wouldnt miss it.

[pianoman11686]

So remember: although retail comes and goes.... its the built environment that we are left with. Why destory this one because there are cheap delis and luggage shops?

I'm not saying that we should destroy it because of its retail. As I've said before in several threads on the forum, I am in favor of historical reuse. What I was trying to say was that you were painting these buildings a little too colorfully; they are not, shall we say, "emblematic" of New York in the way those European streets are of their respective cities. If they truly were, we'd have to wonder why they fail to attract the kind of retail and interest that other parts of the city do.

And again, why must we be so pessimistic about anything modern that gets built here? Didn't you say, at one point, that the Olympic Tower does a great job of coexisting with St. Pat's? I wonder how many old, little buildings were torn down to make way for that one.

[londonlawyer]

....they are not, shall we say, "emblematic" of New York in the way those European streets are of their respective cities. If they truly were, we'd have to wonder why they fail to attract the kind of retail and interest that other parts of the city do.....

NY, like all other US cities, suffered serious decline during the 60's, 70's and 80's. Various areas rebounded from that decline quicker than others. This stretch of 5th is only starting to recover, and therefore, it still has lousy retail. Nevertheless, we needn't raze beautiful buildings to kick start its revival.

On that stretch, buildings like this should be razed, but buildings like 516 should be preserved.

http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2003/06/199202.jpg

[Fabrizio]

"And again, why must we be so pessimistic about anything modern that gets built here? Didn't you say, at one point, that the Olympic Tower does a great job of coexisting with St. Pat's? I wonder how many old, little buildings were torn down to make way for that one."

A beautiful limestone department store was on the Olympic Tower site. And it never should have been torn down. The Olympic Tower is however mostly well done (expect for its awful public gallery).

"And again, why must we be so pessimistic about anything modern that gets built here?"

Please point out to me the modern buildings built on 5th in the last 30 years below Saks that are attractive and worthy of the 5th avenue address. Most of them are awful.

"What I was trying to say was that you were painting these buildings a little too colorfully; they are not, shall we say, "emblematic" of New York in the way those European streets are of their respective cities. "

I think you are VERY very wrong about that.

LondonLawyer writes: "Nevertheless, we needn't raze beautiful buildings to kick start its revival."

In fact, if you want to kickstart a revival then landmark the area. THAT is a sure way to attract "upscale".

-----

Pianomanman some quotes for you about 5th from cityreview:

"The period after World War II has not been kind to Fifth Avenue although it took a decade or so before serious destruction began. Just contrast the wonderfully ornate hanging lanterns at the Sherry Netherland Hotel, at right, with the plain vanilla wrapper of its apartment building neighbor adjacent to it, shown at the right."

"By the end of the 1960's, many fine, old retailers were leaving the avenue as banks, airlines, travel agencies and tourist traps were willing to pay substantially higher rents and the sophisticated charm of the avenue gave way to a more corporate and sleazier character."

"The city planners tried to address some of the avenue's problems by enacting, on March 26, 1971, the Special Fifth Avenue District from 38th to 58th Streets extending 200 feet to the east and west into the midblocks off the avenue. The new regulations banned new plazas and off-street parking facilities, restricted signs to not more than one-third of retail windows, permitted residential uses on higher floors to encourage mixed uses to enliven the area at night, and limited retail use by banks and travel bureaus to not more than 15 percent of the linear street frontage of the zoning lot on or within 50 feet of the avenue and no more than 10 percent of the total lot area of the zoning lot within 50 feet of the avenue."

"There are still a few blocks left on the avenue that consist of small-lot properties and some of this have retained their charm although the incursion by the Philippine Building, the large mostly blank wall shown at the left, was not a high-water mark of inspired design even if the avenue is the proper place for national showcases. Other blocks have kept a good cluster of older buildings although their integrity has been marred by ambitious retailers."

[stache]

"By the end of the 1960's, many fine, old retailers were leaving the avenue as banks, airlines, travel agencies and tourist traps were willing to pay substantially higher rents and the sophisticated charm of the avenue gave way to a more corporate and sleazier character."



I miss all the old airline offices. They represented exotic countries and had mid century/glam interiors that were visible from the sidewalk.

[lofter1]

Pianoman: "Didn't you say, at one point, that the Olympic Tower does a great job of coexisting with St. Pat's? I wonder how many old, little buildings were torn down to make way for that one."

A beautiful limestone department store was on the Olympic Tower site. And it never should have been torn down. The Olympic Tower is however mostly well done (expect for its awful public gallery).

I never saw what the Olympic replaced, but I've got to disagree with you about the Olympic, Fabrizio ...

Not a great pic, but this gives some idea of the visual jumble that looms over St. Pat's:

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p242/Lofter1/Midtown/Olympic_01b.jpg

[ManhattanKnight]

I never saw what the Olympic replaced

Olympic Tower replaced the Best & Co. Department Store (Image 1 below), which, in turn, replaced Cass Gilbert's 1902 Union Club (Images 2 and 3).

[Fabrizio]

Lofter: you are right. And we can see how much better off the avenue would be without the Olympic Tower. (Imagine if after the War, 5th had been left as a low-scale limestone canyon....a respite from the towers of 6th).

BUT as far as modern towers go, I think its a good one.

[stache]

Onassis put the tower right next to St. Pat's as a giant single finger salute to the Catholic church.

[londonlawyer]

Onassis put the tower right next to St. Pat's as a giant single finger salute to the Catholic church.

He was every much of a greedy philistine as Abraham and Gershon are. It was a crime to raze the beautiful building that occupied Olympic Tower's site. As I've said, NY'ers have learned nothing from the pillage of Penn Stn.

[pianoman11686]

I think you are VERY very wrong about that.

LondonLawyer writes: "Nevertheless, we needn't raze beautiful buildings to kick start its revival."

In fact, if you want to kickstart a revival then landmark the area. THAT is a sure way to attract "upscale".

Then at some point, one must ask the very same question again, with a qualifier: if the current area was indeed worthy of upscale retail, the type that the blocks north of it are home to, then why did it deteriorate while upper 5th avenue flourished, despite the presence of modern skyscrapers like Trump Tower, Olympic Tower, 666 5th, etc.?

Is there something inherently more attractive (to the upscale retailer) about the area further north?

[pianoman11686]

Some more quotes from the City Review article:

While on the subject of the city's bureaucrats destroying the city with virtually no public notice or press coverage at the time, the Bureau of Franchises and Licenses also happened to permit hordes of suburban commuter buses on Fifth and Madison Avenues...

The city's ailing central artery got a major infusion of healthy and quality redevelopment in the late 1980's when Solomon Equities and the Taubman Company erected a new 53-story tower incorporating a relocated Bendel's at 712 Fifth Avenue (see The City Review article) at 56th Street and when Bergdorf Goodman expanded its commitment to the avenue by opening a large men's store across the street from its famous store at 58th Street.

But Fifth Avenue is not really about architecture as much as its parades of people, boulevardiers and fashions. The 57th Street intersection is the center of the world and has been for half a century. The agreement in the late 1980's of the owners of the four corner buildings to hang the great electric light snowflake during the winter holidays almost makes up for the suburban buses and Rockefeller Center's Christmas Tree never fails to memorably impress.

Fifth Avenue's most elegant stretch from 49th to 61st Streets remains very imposing, lively and the best the city has to offer. The southern stretch from 32nd to 48th Street never was quite as elegant and over the years has lost a lot of its important retail stores such as B. Altman's, Gorham's, Sloan's, Woolworth and Kress.

As great as the city's and the avenue's problems are, individual enterprises can make a surprising difference.

[lofter1]

There was a HUGE fight over preserving the store fronts that are at the base of this tower ...


The city's ailing central artery got a major infusion of healthy and quality redevelopment in the late 1980's when Solomon Equities and the Taubman Company erected a new 53-story tower incorporating a relocated Bendel's at 712 Fifth Avenue ...

[Fabrizio]

Yes, in fact, that site incorporates and preserves a streetfront of low scale elegant limestone buildings, the type that we are talking about preserving here.

Pianoman: from City review: "But Fifth Avenue is not really about architecture as much as its parades of people, boulevardiers and fashions."

I can only disagree here. Besides the elegant small limestone structures, 5th has the EmpireState Building, Rockefeller Center, Saint Patricks, The Public Library, The French Building, The Plaza, the Pierre, The Sherry Netherland, The University Club,.... so Id say it IS about great architecture. Architecture that sets a tone... "people, boulevardiers and fashions" can also be found in other parts of town and in other cities... but it is that architecture that is unique and will remain.... so lets safeguard it.

Lower 5th: First of all, lower 5th had Lord&Taylor, B. Altmans, Arnold Constable, Orbachs in its heyday (just off of 5th)... all luxury department stores. In fact, in away, they were the true white glove retailers.

Pianoman: "if the current area was indeed worthy of upscale retail, the type that the blocks north of it are home to, then why did it deteriorate while upper 5th avenue flourished, despite the presence of modern skyscrapers like Trump Tower, Olympic Tower, 666 5th, etc.?"

As Im trying to tell you: upper 5th DID deteriorate to a point that is hard to imagine today. Pianoman, how old are you?

And again you are doing your strawman thing: NOWHERE do I imply that buildings like TTower, Olympic or 666 would impede commerce. My point, Zippys and London Lawyers is about the asthetics of the avenue. Big shiny luxury condos will certainly bring in people and spark developement... no argument there. But development can be done ANOTHER way. Preserving those groups of buildings, especially now that small and boutiquey is fashionable (in retail, lofts, restaurants, gallerys) some creative zoning and incenitives could make lower 5th a wonderful place... the beautiful buildings are there.

Soho, Tribeca etc. could also have been "improved" by tearing down their beautiful buildings 30 years ago, but preservationists insisted on another route.... and development followed. "Development" can also mean restorations and conversions in building use.


-

[pianoman11686]

I can only disagree here. Besides the elegant small limestone structures, 5th has the EmpireState Building, Rockefeller Center, Saint Patricks, The Public Library, The French Building, The Plaza, the Pierre, The Sherry Netherland, The University Club,.... so Id say it IS about great architecture. Architecture that sets a tone... "people, boulevardiers and fashions" can also be found in other parts of town and in other cities... but it is that architecture that is unique and will remain.... so lets safeguard it.

That's all fine and good. In fact, I was surprised that Horsley made that statement at all; I just thought it was interesting that he did, while you were using it as a kind of justification for your arguments.

But the way you correct him is even more interesting. You cite the very type of building I would cite, when describing 5th to someone that knows little about it. They're all grandiose, imposing structures - showcases of architecture on a scale befitting New York.

As Im trying to tell you: upper 5th DID deteriorate to a point that is hard to imagine today. Pianoman, how old are you?

Not nearly old enough. ;)

And again you are doing your strawman thing: NOWHERE do I imply that buildings like TTower, Olympic or 666 would impede commerce. My point, Zippys and London Lawyers is about the asthetics of the avenue. Big shiny luxury condos will certainly bring in people and spark developement... no argument there. But development can be done ANOTHER way. Preserving those groups of buildings, especially now that small and boutiquey is fashionable (in retail, lofts, restaurants, gallerys) some creative zoning and incenitives could make lower 5th a wonderful place... the beautiful buildings are there.

Soho, Tribeca etc. could also have been "improved" by tearing down their beautiful buildings 30 years ago, but preservationists insisted on another route.... and development followed. "Development" can also mean restorations and conversions in building use.

Sorry about the straw man. I'm just trying to rationalize the entire process, which I'm starting to realize, is perhaps not the way of going about it.

You see, in my view, I find aesthetics go hand in hand with value. There's a reason the most aesthetically beautiful buildings in New York, and everywhere for that matter, were built as grand showcases of wealth. There's a reason Cartier is housed in that gorgeous Millionaire-Row era mansion, or Versace in its bleached-white townhouse.

When I compare the two different sections of 5th, then, I'm confused as to why one is the height of wealth and beauty, while the other has floundered. And, if what you say about that part of 5th is true, I'm even more confused as to why it has recovered so well from its nadir, with several large, new modern buildings to boot, while the other one is still inferior, and happens to have so many more of these "little gems" and fewer modern highrises. That's why I'm encouraged to see new development, especially by people like Rosen who have a better eye for architecture.

As for sparking restorative/readaptive development through creative zoning and incentives...well, I think you can guess where I stand on that one.

[ablarc]

Will you guys please LOOK at those photos. Its an assemblage....its NOT about individual buildings. The assemblage is beautiful.

Cities are best when they add up to more than the sum of their parts.

(hurriedly murmurs this conversation's latecomer.)

[Fabrizio]

"When I compare the two different sections of 5th, then, I'm confused as to why one is the height of wealth and beauty, while the other has floundered. And, if what you say about that part of 5th is true, I'm even more confused as to why it has recovered so well from its nadir, with several large, new modern buildings to boot, while the other one is still inferior, and happens to have so many more of these "little gems" and fewer modern highrises."

What does it matter?

Obviously, Upper 5th has anchors like the grand hotels, 57th street, Bergdorfs, Tiffanys... on down to St. Pats and RockCenter... all of these grand elements, despite ups and downs will make it eternal.

So think of lower 5th like Tribeca and Soho years ago... somewhat abandoned, seedy. Because of creative vision, zoning, landmarking those areas are now among the most exclusive zips in the US. And we the public, have great historic architecture to enjoy.

you also write: "You see, in my view, I find aesthetics go hand in hand with value."

May I be honest? If you just mean monetary value, then I think your idea of asthetics is poverty stricken, your vision is short and uncreative.

Again: Soho, Tribeca, the Miami Art-Deco district for that matter, were full of gems waiting to be polished. My gosh... you would have had the Miami art-deco district with its once seedy, cheap, old small hotels... a slum really ....bulldozed over. Instead today, its an international destination that suddenly made Miami hip and sparked further development.

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=miami%20art-deco&w=all

Please read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Beach

http://www.mdpl.org/Art%20Deco/historicdistrict.html

a must read:

http://www.miamisunpost.com/archives/2004/12-02-04/IMAGE/special/thoughtsandmemories.htm

----

[ablarc]

the Miami Art-Deco district for that matter, were full of gems waiting to be polished. My gosh... you would have had the Miami art-deco district with its once seedy, cheap, old small hotels... a slum really ....bulldozed over. Instead today, its an international destination that suddenly made Miami hip and sparked further development.
And another: http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showthread.php?t=17226&highlight=miami

[pianoman11686]

"May I be honest? If you just mean monetary value, then I think your idea of asthetics is poverty stricken, your vision is short and uncreative.

I think the two go hand in hand, if not initially, then after some time. Perhaps that's why Penn Station got demolished, while Grand Central didn't. If you're talking about latent, unrealized value, then it's obviously up to people that have certain qualifications - educational and/or experiential - to discover that value. Then, it's only a matter of time before money comes in, as it has in SoHo, Miami Beach, etc.

Again: Soho, Tribeca, the Miami Art-Deco district for that matter, were full of gems waiting to be polished. My gosh... you would have had the Miami art-deco district with its once seedy, cheap, old small hotels... a slum really ....bulldozed over. Instead today, its an international destination that suddenly made Miami hip and sparked further development.

No, I wouldn't have bulldozed it. If I see something worth saving, I'll want to see it saved. I may not be "correct" in every instance, or even the majority of the time, but I don't consider myself architecturally ignorant. I think what these preservationists did was noble and worthwhile, and in the long run, justifiable.

[jeffpark]

I don't think this building is involved. I believe it's the one from which Abraham Philistine purchased the air rights. The three parcels are on the s.w. corner of 43rd and 5th. The one located at 43rd and 5th is stunning and should not be razed. The middle parcel is no big deal, and the northernmost property is nice and should be saved. Rosen should be sent back to wherever he came from. He is greedy and cares only about his profits. He really makes me sick.


what building are you talking about that's "don't think this building is involved"??

and what building is "Abraham Philistine" building.??