Optimus Prime
October 27th, 2007, 01:47 PM
Does anyone know if there are any requirements for maintaining the level of the streetwall in the zoning regs? It doesn't seem like it, with buildings like O'Hara's 47 E 34th (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=193260&postcount=108) being but one example of a horrible but widespread trend.
If there is no such requirement in place, could we lobby for one? How would we go about it. The requirement I am thinking of is that new developments must maintain the level of streetwall of its highest adjacent neighbor. In other words, you build between a seven story building and a five story building, both of which rise straight off the lot line, you must hold to at least the seven story streetwall.
Developers will hate this because they can build higher under FAR if they set the building back at a lower level. The worst architects and developers are taking advantage of this. The better ones realize how important streetwalls are. It's time to stop the two-bit architects and the cheap developers from ruining our streetscapes. We may not have a lot of power over what they put up in the skyline, but the streets belong to us.
If there is no such requirement in place, could we lobby for one? How would we go about it. The requirement I am thinking of is that new developments must maintain the level of streetwall of its highest adjacent neighbor. In other words, you build between a seven story building and a five story building, both of which rise straight off the lot line, you must hold to at least the seven story streetwall.
Developers will hate this because they can build higher under FAR if they set the building back at a lower level. The worst architects and developers are taking advantage of this. The better ones realize how important streetwalls are. It's time to stop the two-bit architects and the cheap developers from ruining our streetscapes. We may not have a lot of power over what they put up in the skyline, but the streets belong to us.