The Rushmore (80 Riverside Blvd) - Condo - Upper West Side

[krulltime]

Another tower that needs a thread...


The Rushmore (80 Riverside Blvd):


http://www.pbase.com/image/72639117.jpg

[krulltime]

Marketing starts for the Rushmore at 80 Riverside Boulevard


19-SEP-06

Marketing has begun for The Rushmore, the 41-story, twin-towered residential condominium development at 80 Riverside Boulevard that occupies the blockfront between 64th and 63rdth Streets.

It is across 64th Street from The Avery, a 30-story condominium development and both are projects of the Extell Development Corporation[b/] on land it acquired from Donald Trump, who has developed several residential towers just to the north.

[b]The Rushmore has been designed by Costas Kondylis and Partners, the architectural firm that has also designed the Avery and many of Mr. Trump’s projects.

The Rushmore has a 16-story base with corner windows at the north and south and a setback at the 4th floor in the center of the blockfront. The twin towers are setback and are joined at the lower three floors.

Mr. Kondylis has borrowed a stylistic treatment of the towers from Cesar Pelli’s World Financial Center at Battery Park City where the upper part of the towers have slightly protruding sections with different fenestration patterns.

Mr. Kondylis has kept his towers symmetrical and the protruding sections stop at the 34th story and the top five floors have a banded fenestration pattern reflecting the fact that are “penthouse” units.

A recent advertisement for the building showed the floor plan of the full-floor Penthouse A that is priced at $6,525,000 and it indicated that the apartment has an entrance gallery that leads to a very large living and dining room space with a fireplace and also has four bedrooms and a large family room and kitchen area facing the Hudson River.

The 425-foot-high Rushmore will have 289 one- to five-bedroom apartments priced from $1,000,000 to more than $7,000,000. Completion is planned for 2008.

The building will have 6 duplex apartments entered on the ground floor. Floors 2 and 3 will have 22 apartments. Floors 4, 5 and 6 will have 18 apartments. Floors 7 through 14 will have 10 apartments. Floors 15 through 17 will have 6 apartments. Floors 18 through 36 in each tower will have 2 apartments. Floors 37 through 41 in each tower will have one apartment.

The building will have a swimming pool, La Palestrina Fitness and Wellness Services, a 185-car garage, a children’s playroom designed by Kidville, NY, a billiards room, Abigail Michaels concierge, a bicycle room, and a theater and entertainment suite.

Residents will be offered a choice of three kitchen designs with fixtures by Sub-Zero, Viking, Miele and bathrooms will have fixtures by Kohler and Waterworks.


http://www.cityrealty.com/graphics/uploads/1158683079_rushmoreb.jpg


Copyright © 1994-2007 CITY REALTY.COM INC.

[krulltime]

January 4, 2007:


http://www.pbase.com/image/72639346.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/72639344.jpg

[antinimby]

Extell certainly doesn't fool around.

They mean business.

Add another one to the condo-land that is Riverside.

[finnman69]

They should be up to street level in a few weeks (that photo above shows the foundation walls at ground level, street level is where Riverside is). The building will extend over the amtrak tunnel. Tower crane went in a week ago.

[MidtownGuy]

A couple of double-tower buildings all in the same area was OK, but isn't this getting really tired now? Repetition ad nauseam.

[finnman69]

A couple of double-tower buildings all in the same area was OK, but isn't this getting really tired now? Repetition ad nauseam.

The Nimbys/Coalition for a Geriatric West Side forced the issue and SOM complied by designing the super strict zoning.

[Scraperfannyc]

A couple of double-tower buildings all in the same area was OK, but isn't this getting really tired now? Repetition ad nauseam.


Actually, I think it is funny. Twin towers popping up all over manhattan after the destruction of the TT. Hope they keep getting bigger and bigger.

[Gringo]

Just curious, does anyone know how sales are going in this development?

[MidtownGuy]

Hope they keep getting bigger and bigger

Not if they look like that! Ugly, boring, bland, banal. I just spent some time
on the world threads at SSC and coming back to pictures of these joyless NY projects is a downer.

[londonlawyer]

This is a decent design. Ironically though, it looks like the rental that Silverstein is building on 42nd Street. It doesn't make sense that a tower with multi-million dollar condos will look just like a tower with $3,000/ mo. one bedrooms.

[Peakrate212]

Here is an observation: You will know sales are good when the buyers hijack this thread and talk about their 421a status, move in dates, lobby carpeting etc...

am I right?

See 30 WEA as an example.

[spaceboy]

Here is an observation: You will know sales are good when the buyers hijack this thread and talk about their 421a status, move in dates, lobby carpeting etc...

am I right?

See 30 WEA as an example.

Could be more the demographic, but good point.

[Derek2k3]

This is a decent design. Ironically though, it looks like the rental that Silverstein is building on 42nd Street. It doesn't make sense that a tower with multi-million dollar condos will look just like a tower with $3,000/ mo. one bedrooms.

Blame Kondylis' limited vocabulary.

[dobakmit]

Here is an observation: You will know sales are good when the buyers hijack this thread and talk about their 421a status, move in dates, lobby carpeting etc...

am I right?

See 30 WEA as an example.

Do you mean 10 WEA? Can't seem to find info on 30 WEA.

[londonlawyer]

Blame Kondylis' limited vocabulary.

Is he designing both? They seem to be the same design but Silverstein's is glass and Extell's has a stone facade.

[sfenn1117]

6/30
http://i7.tinypic.com/623t1df.jpg

The Avery is disappointing.
http://i15.tinypic.com/625y2vp.jpg

[dobakmit]

6/30


The Avery is disappointing.


Just curious, why do you say it is disappointing? I didn't end up buying there after extensively looking at it, but just wanted to hear your opinion.

[sfenn1117]

It's a boring design and looks a bit cheap

[spaceboy]

It's a boring design and looks a bit cheap

I always amazed when you guys say you can tell that it was cheaply made. Any hints for us non architects, but aspiring real estate junkies?

[pscoln1]

it may be built like crap but the land on which its built sure as hell is the opposite. $$$

[lofter1]

Not necessarily applicable to The Avery, but on many new buildings one thing I note that is "cheap" is the use of extruded aluminum for storefront / facade at street level. This material will inevitably get bumped, banged and bent out of shape -- it really has very little strength when hit dead on and it doesn't take that much of a punch to make it look bad.

Another way to go "cheap" is the use of thin veneer stone to clad a building at street level. When it is used you'll see around loading docks, etc. that within 6 months - 1 years that some of this stone has been banged / cracked chipped away. Cheap.

Other things that reek of "cheap": The infamous exposed floor plates. And "Fedders" inserted air conditioning units. Pre-cast brick-like panels.

[RandySavage]

I always amazed when you guys say you can tell that it was cheaply made. Any hints for us non architects, but aspiring real estate junkies?

It doesn't take an architect or an engineer to spot flagrant cheapness.

Some examples:

Cheap:
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb276/scumonkey/brick-brac.jpg
Courtesy: Scumonkey

http://i2.tinypic.com/ouw2ee.jpg
Courtey: Antinimby

Not Cheap:
http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/1401/377hotel02cxh5.jpg
Courtesy: ZippytheChimp

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p242/Lofter1/15%20CPW/The%20Wall_Making%20It%201/15CPW_30a21.jpg
Courtesy: Lofter1

Sadly, in the past few years there are scores of examples of the former and only a handful of the latter. And this dilution of architectural integrity is severely damaging the priceless character and quality of the City.

[J.Hayes]

Does anyone know what will be built on this site between 62nd and 63rd st.

[Eugenius]

I believe Extell has two more buildings planned south of the Rushmore, one between 61st and 62nd, and one between 62nd and 63rd. You can see them in the rendering of the Rushmore's surroundings on the Rushmore website.

[Skylimitone]

I noticed the same thing you can see them in the 'line up' here: http://www.riverside-south.com/

[lofter1]

OMG, get a load of this news ...

Seems all my wrath toward Trump in regards to the cruddy exteriors of his RivSOuth buildings should have been aimed at the locals :mad:

BTW, how long is it before this generation of "build nothing new" UWS NIMBY's have fallen by the wayside?

Extell Has Too Much Glass for Angry Upper West Siders

CURBED (http://curbed.com/archives/2007/11/30/extell_has_too_much_glass_for_angry_upper_west_sid ers.php)
Friday, November 30, 2007
by Joey

http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_11_rushmore.jpg

Extell's bottom line would look far less impressive without the stats padding
of its Upper West Side developments, but the company just can't seem to
stop ticking people off up there. This time around, the Sun (http://www.nysun.com/article/67277) reports that a
community group called the Riverside South Planning Corporation is asking a
judge to block Extell's development at 80 Riverside Boulevard, arguing
that the glassy towers do not follow the design guidelines agreed to by
Donald Trump in the early 90s when he owned the land—guidelines that were
passed on to following landowners. The problem? Too much of that sweet,
sweet glass. But this little squabble is coming a little late in the game, no?
After all, 80 Riverside Boulevard is the Rushmore, and our records indicate (http://curbed.com/archives/2006/11/28/rushmore_making_friends_with_neighbors.php)
that it's been doing its thing for a while now. What's your game, mysterious
Riverside South Planning Corporation?

· UWS Group Asks Judge To Block Development (http://www.nysun.com/article/67277) [Sun]
· Rushmore Making Friends With Neighbors (http://curbed.com/archives/2006/11/28/rushmore_making_friends_with_neighbors.php) [Curbed]
· The Rushmore (http://www.therushmoreriverside.com/) [Official Site]

***

UWS Group Asks Judge To Block Development

NY SUN (http://www.nysun.com/article/67277)
By SARAH PORTLOCK
Special to the Sun
November 30, 2007

A community group is asking a state judge to prevent the development corporation Extell from going through with its new project along the Upper West Side on grounds it violates a 12-year old design agreement about the land, according to a lawsuit filed yesterday in New York State Supreme Court (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=New+York+State+Unified+Co urt+System).

Designs for the building at 80 Riverside Blvd., located in the Riverside South complex, include more glass than the original design guidelines permit, according to the suit, which was filed against Extell by the nonprofit organization Riverside South Planning Corporation (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Riverside+South+Planning+ Corporation). The suit further charges that Extell has not sought the planning corporation board's approval before its construction and it has not calculated the building's energy efficiency.

A spokesman for Extell said he had not seen the lawsuit and could not comment.

Donald Trump (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Donald+Trump) originally owned the property, located between Eleventh Avenue and the Hudson River (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Hudson+River) between West 59th and 72nd streets, and built several towers there in the early 1990s.

When he first purchased the land to create Riverside South, the local community was outraged and in order to secure community and government approval for his plan, Mr. Trump agreed to a series of binding design construction agreements in 1993. The agreement included a stipulation that if Mr. Trump sold the property, its new owners would also be subject to the design guidelines.

When Hudson Waterfront Associates (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Hudson+Waterfront+Associa tes+LP) purchased the land in 1994, it abided by the guidelines, the suit says. Extell then purchased the land from Hudson in 2005.

The development plan focuses on environmental sustainability and design criteria for buildings and open spaces.

[investordude]

These guys could have sued a long time ago. The renderings and details for this building have been available for an extended time period. The state needs to disallow buildings from being halted when they are fairly far along towards completion.

As an aside, I think the state should invalidate a clause that binds a new owner to a clause he didn't sign. If these guys want to sue someone, it should be Trump. A private agreement these people didn't sign and probably weren't aware of shouldn't be binding on them.

[lofter1]

Binding clauses / declarations regarding sales of real estate are well established in property law.

If every new owner were not bound by previously-negotiated contracts between parties we would have the Wild West.

One could negotiate a deal and then sell the property to a new corporate entity -- thereby, under the proposed "not bound by previous contracts" rule, cancelling the previous stipulations.

[investordude]

You probably know the law better than me but it doesn't seem right. Even curbed is wondering why they waited so long to sue.

[lofter1]

I'm not saying they sould be allowed to sue at this late date.

There is a legal term -- "laches" -- which pertains to delinquent action in regards to enforcing provisions of agreements. If a party waits too long to seek enforcement then the argument can be deemed "stale" (too old to be valid).



LACHES, DOCTRINE OF (http://www.lectlaw.com/def/l056.htm) - Based on the maxim that equity aids the vigilant and not those who procrastinate regarding their rights; Neglect to assert a right or claim that, together with lapse of time and other circumstances, prejudices an adverse party. Neglecting to do what should or could, have been done to assert a claim or right for an unreasonable and unjustified time causing disadvantage to another.

Laches is similar to 'statute of limitations' except is equitable rather than statutory and is a common affirmative defense raised in civil actions.

Laches is derived from the French 'lecher' and is nearly synonymous with negligence.

In general, when a party has been guilty of laches in enforcing his right by great delay and lapse of time, this circumstance will at common law prejudice and sometimes operate in bar of a remedy which is discretionary for the court to afford. In courts of equity delay will also generally be prejudicial.

But laches may be excused from ignorance of the party's rights; from the obscurity of the transaction; by the pendency of a suit, and; where the party labors under a legal disability, as insanity, infancy and the like.


Seeimg as how the USW group was a party to the original agreement they would be hard pressed to prove that they should be excused from a claim of delinquent filing this lawsuit based on any of the instances cited in the last paragraph above.

I think their lawsuit will be dismissed.

And they should fire their lawyer -- or at least not pay the bill for this latest legal motion.

[spaceboy]

See this is what I mean. Maybe I'm just a greedy capitalist pig, but why are locals upset that these new condominiums are raising their property values and improving the local area in general??? I don't think I'll ever "get it".

[krulltime]

December 8, 2007:

http://www.pbase.com/image/90186037.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/90186042.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/90186045.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/90186040.jpg

[pianoman11686]

These soar more than I expected them to. Good proportions, Costas.

[ablarc]

but why are locals upset that these new condominiums are raising their property values and improving the local area in general???
I don't think they're upset.

I think they feel a duty to pretend to be upset.

I think they're just sanctimonious hypocrites.

(Lots of that going around.)

[ablarc]

These soar more than I expected them to. Good proportions, Costas.
Yeah, folks on this board are generally too hard on this project.

(Just look at that looming hulk in the background if you want something to disrespect.)

[lofter1]

The Rushmore appears to be in a whole different league from any of the other buildngs that have gone up in Riverside South ...

Much better massing & mix of materials.

[MFL101]

I hope that was a joke Lofter...they all look the same to me. I don't know why someone would want to live all the way over there anyway.

[lofter1]

No joke -- when it gets its facade you'll see quite a difference between the Rushmore and the ones that came before.

[zarzapan]

I don't know why someone would want to live all the way over there anyway.

Yeah, why would you want to have a great view of the river and be close to the bike path and parks?

[Rushmore]

Hi,

Does anyone know when should the building be completed?

Thanks! :)

[lofter1]

I have no excuse for my stupid my ill-informed comment shown below (let's just blame it on some un-named meds -- and over-glossy renderings showing the building from afar) ...



The Rushmore appears to be in a whole different league from any of the other buildngs that have gone up in Riverside South ...

Much better massing & mix of materials.

Rest assured that I take it back, having gotten up-close to the site yesterday.

The view of the east facade from the sidewalk below is not too pretty, but reveals a building that is rather brutal and clumsy (not to mention wavy as all get out) ...

***

[pmacapagal]

Hi,

Does anyone know when should the building be completed?

Thanks! :)

I think the projected completion date is early 09. I sold a unit there on a lower floor and that is when they said the closing should take place.

[SlavMan1]

Time for some new pictures of the Rushmore. A lot more floors have been done and a lot less units are left.

[Derek2k3]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2175/2303600324_c3e2cd5ee6_b.jpg
yoshie231 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yoshie231/)

[antinimby]

Sorry folks but the construction of your building has been shut down (http://www.nypost.com/seven/03282008/news/regionalnews/two_cranes_are_sidelined_103849.htm) by the DOB.

[Saffster]

is it due to a crane inspection?

[Derek2k3]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2309/2423621780_7865671b43_b.jpg
JannekeO (http://www.flickr.com/photos/24786071@N08/2423621780/sizes/l/)

[OttoBloggo]

I heard a rumor in the neighborhood that the little park between The Rushmore, West 63rd, West 64th, and West End Ave. might be up for sale to a developer. Word has it that the owner of the park (West End Towers/Brodsky) wants to unload the property after their tax-abatement—in exchange for which the park was built—expires in 2009 or 2010.

The park is cute, though it's often a little messy with all the neighboring construction. But having a new building go up on that site would sure kill the eastern views of The Rushmore.

[Fahzee]

^ my understanding is that the park was built by the developers of the Rushmore and the other buildings and given to the city- it was part of a community benefit agreement - so it seems unlikely that the park could be sold.

then again, parks were sold to build the new Yankee Stadium....

[Derek2k3]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2009/2527243663_983b5daa9d_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3212/2527243659_f54ccaf6df_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2074/2527243655_337d65e484_b.jpg

[lofter1]

The masonry banding on the upper floors of the Rushmore is odd. It gets thicker as the bands move towards the top of the building.

Where the building wants to get lighter and airier instead it appears heavier and more earthbound :confused:

[Eugenius]

^^ Agreed. The banding does look awkward, plus it seems to be replacing glass that is present in the lower floors. Could it be that the upper floors cannot have floor to ceiling windows because of some wind-related danger?

[SlavMan1]

As a resident of the Avery, I can assure you that construction work at the Rushmore has resumed full speed ahead. In fact, the crane was taken down about 2 weeks ago. The building will probably be finished by early 2009.

[Derek2k3]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3136/2635323094_da1a375961_o.jpg


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3025/2635323106_ac723b8dfd_o.jpg


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3059/2635323104_18d29580fd_o.jpg


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3005/2635323116_4b26c228e9_o.jpg


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3190/2635323114_a65896fcd6_o.jpg

[antinimby]

^ Hopefully that parking lot will one day in the near future be home to a tall and beautiful Portzamparc tower.

[SlavMan1]

That parking lot is part of Extell's Riverside South development plan (lots L, M and N). The lot will be closed within the year or so, so I hear. Extell has already excavated the foundations for the next 2 buildings going up between the lot to the south and the Rushmore to the north. One of these new buildings (a mixed rental and condo) will be called the Aldyn. HINT: someone should create a new thread on these two new buildings.

[econ_tim]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3290/2666210768_e8e352c256.jpg

here's what is going on directly to the south

[econ_tim]

the shape of things to come:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3013/2668504402_45fd5d0f33_o.jpg

and the present:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3097/2665385381_7519778617.jpg

[antinimby]

Oy, more blandness to come.

[scumonkey]

http://www.cincicakeandcandy.com/images/products/019522051108.jpg

cookies anyone?!

[antinimby]

Gee, no thanks. They tend to lead to tooth decay.

[futurecity]

Yah, bland.... wish they could have gone for a more glassy look here.

[Derek2k3]

Remember bland rules are enforced by community idiots.


http://www.nysun.com/article/67277

UWS Group Asks Judge To Block Development

By SARAH PORTLOCK
November 30, 2007


A community group is asking a state judge to prevent the development corporation Extell from going through with its new project along the Upper West Side on grounds it violates a 12-year old design agreement about the land, according to a lawsuit filed yesterday in New York State Supreme Court.

Designs for the building at 80 Riverside Blvd., located in the Riverside South complex, include more glass than the original design guidelines permit, according to the suit, which was filed against Extell by the nonprofit organization Riverside South Planning Corporation. The suit further charges that Extell has not sought the planning corporation board's approval before its construction and it has not calculated the building's energy efficiency.

A spokesman for Extell said he had not seen the lawsuit and could not comment.

Donald Trump originally owned the property, located between Eleventh Avenue and the Hudson River between West 59th and 72nd streets, and built several towers there in the early 1990s.

When he first purchased the land to create Riverside South, the local community was outraged and in order to secure community and government approval for his plan, Mr. Trump agreed to a series of binding design construction agreements in 1993. The agreement included a stipulation that if Mr. Trump sold the property, its new owners would also be subject to the design guidelines.

When Hudson Waterfront Associates purchased the land in 1994, it abided by the guidelines, the suit says. Extell then purchased the land from Hudson in 2005.

The development plan focuses on environmental sustainability and design criteria for buildings and open spaces.

[SlavMan1]

So much for this joke of a lawsuit. The Rushmore is scheduled to open sometime in Feb. 2009. Much of the scaffolding has already been removed. The street between the Rushmore and the Avery (West 64th St) has now been opened, so NIMBIES can get a better look at what it's like to live in a luxury condo.

[Skylimitone]

Is there a new tower rising just to the south of Rushmore?

[SlavMan1]

Actually, 2 new buildings are going up just south of the Rushmore. One building will be a condo/rental and the other one a rental. Both buildings are now rising above ground.

[SlavMan1]

6576

6577

6578

Taken on Nov. 16, 2008 from West End Ave and West 63rd St looking west.

[Skylimitone]

Thanks for those. Do these Rushmore siblings have names yet?

[avngingandbright]

A very handsome collection of buildings. Really "trumps" many of the newer highrises in the city, and have a sort of timeless quality yet a similarity to the better of the highrises of the 1980s.

[SlavMan1]

One of the buildings will be called the Aldyn. No info on what the other one will be called. Does anyone have any suggestions? Care to make Extell an offer for naming rights?

[Skylimitone]

Ansis is the name I choose.