Scrapped!

[alonzo-ny]

this thread is to discuss what could have been if all the massive towers proposed had been built,

eg buildings like the larkin building and the many towers stunted by the depression

i was also told the ge building was originally to be taller than the empire state

[yyy]

Talking about visionary buildings - what do you say about the Cintas tower? It is a visionary building that should be 2,231 ft tall with 180 floors :shock: :D I wonder if they'll ever built it in NY :D

Look here for more information.
http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=103160

[TonyO]

This link has a drawing...

http://www.skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=10420

[yyy]

Wow :shock: Cool. Thanks for the link tonyo :D

[BrooklynRider]

this thread is to discuss what could have been if all the massive towers propesed had been built,

eg buildings like the larkin building and the many towers stunted by the depression

i was also told the ge building was originally to be taller than the empire state

Hi Alonzo-

It's great to have you here and jumping into the discussions, but you can see everyone asccepts the terms of using the forum. It would be great if you would make the effort to capitalize & punctuate your writing where grammatically required. I'm not looking to get flamed here - just hoping we all keep to the high, consistent standards of this forum.

Cheers!

[alonzo-ny]

No problem! If anyone can find any pictures or information on any of the buildings stopped by the depression would be much appreciated. Does anyone know why Donald Trumps New York Stock exchange tower (546.8m) was cancelled as it obstructed JFK flight paths but the wtc didnt? And does this mean no tower of that size would ever be constructed in that area?

[Stern]

Too many to name. For me the biggest heart-break is the never-built Travelstead Tower.

[GLNY]

For me the biggest heart-break is the never-built Travelstead Tower.

Stern,
Good call, this was the greatest disappointment of the past 25 years. IIRC, the KPF design was voted one of the 10 best skyscrapers of the 20th century by the British equivalent of the AIA. I bought an apartment in the late 1980s based (in small part) on the potential view of this tower on the skyline.

Mayor Koch really dropped the ball on this project. And, most of the transferrable air-rights that would have facilitated the larger FAR still exist.

[Stern]

Good call, this was the greatest disappointment of the past 25 years. IIRC, the KPF design was voted one of the 10 best skyscrapers of the 20th century by the British equivalent of the AIA. I bought an apartment in the late 1980s based (in small part) on the potential view of this tower on the skyline.

Mayor Koch really dropped the ball on this project. And, most of the transferrable air-rights that would have facilitated the larger FAR still exist.

That’s the real kicker it was the city not the developer that killed the project. If it were not for zoning, for which there are written encyclopedias about, this project would be towering in the heart of midtown, a peak completing the points, Citicorp, Chrysler, and Metlife. While Im not a big fan of postmodernism the design was pure glory, something ultra-modern would completely throw the skyline off, this perfectly complemented it and more importantly would’ve completed it.

[Stern]

Basically I never got into many of these "never-built" proposals because they were interesting concepts hot off the drawing boards. Travelstead Tower on the other-hand was wholly New York.

[BrooklynRider]

Can some provide stats and proposed location on Travelstead Tower? Any renderings?

[Gulcrapek]

383 Madison, where Bear Stearns is now. It had a cross-shaped, tapering floor plan.

[larven]

Never heard of the Travelstead Tower before reading this thread but I did a google search and managed to find this rendering. What a pity it never got built, very post-modern and of its time but magnificent nonetheless. It would have been one of, if not the best, skyscrapers in NYC.

1989; Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates. 1080 feet; 74 storeys.

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/30travelstead.jpg

[BrooklynRider]

Ah, now I recall the project. I was at Bovis at the time. It was initially proposed to be the the site of a new World's Tallest Building (at the time).

[yyy]

Never heard of the Travelstead Tower before reading this thread but I did a google search and managed to find this rendering. What a pity it never got built, very post-modern and of its time but magnificent nonetheless. It would have been one of, if not the best, skyscrapers in NYC.

1989; Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates. 1080 feet; 74 storeys.

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/30travelstead.jpg

Looks nice but not the best I've seen. The ESB building looks better.

[DougGold]

Still, it's a building that has style and tone. It's not just huge sheets of glass like everything else going up nowadays. I'm sad that it never went up.

[larven]

KPF designed a series of striking post-modern towers during the 80's that unfortunately were never built. I know its off topic slightly but I thought it was worth showing these 2 skyscrapers that were both proposed by the practise for Houston. The one on the left was KPF's entry into The Bank of the Southwest competion that came runner up to Helmut Jahns winning but unbuilt design. The other tower is unamed but intended for a site on the fringes of Houstons CBD. Its a pity none of them, including Travelstead, were ever built IMO.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/larven/kpf.jpg

[DougGold]

Wow--great stuff!! What buidlings did they design that DID go up?

[kz1000ps]

Check out Chicago's 311 South Wacker Drive--this building has what appears to be much of the facade detail of the Travelstead. Also 135 East 57th, the Heron Tower and Shearson Lehman Plaza.

[alonzo-ny]

Travelstead tower is a building i have always been disappointed it was never built as there is nothing else like it in the world and its a building new york could really need. Any chance the design could be used at another site in the future, as an architecture student myself i one hope to design great buildings like this in new york.

I recently read in a book detail the 20s boom a 138 storey tower was proposed if anyone else has ever heard of it.

[FRED]

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/1856img_1322copy.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/1856img_1325copy.jpg

[TLOZ Link5]

Nice. The black-and-white gives the photos a noir atmosphere.

[Stern]

Some unbuilt Pei Cobb and Freed designs:

Helix:

http://www.pcf-p.com/a/v/tb/00he-t2.jpg
http://www.pcf-p.com/a/v/tb/00he-i.jpg
http://www.pcf-p.com/a/v/tb/00he-p.jpg

Design completed 1949

area: 179,762 s/f

height: 22 stories

floor plate: 8,171 s/f

use: residential tower

Finance Place/New York Stock Exchange:

http://www.pcf-p.com/a/v/tb/00fi-t2.jpg
http://www.pcf-p.com/a/v/tb/00fi-i.jpg

Design completed 1962

site area: 2 city blocks

height: 671 ft., 45 stories

floor plate: 95,000–24,300 s/f

trading hall: 68,580 s/f, 80 ft. tall

use: investment building for stock exchange

Proposal For a New Williamsburg Bridge

http://www.pcfandp.com/a/p/8705/8705-2.jpg
http://www.pcfandp.com/a/p/8705/8705-3.jpg
http://www.pcfandp.com/a/p/8705/8705-1.jpg
http://www.pcfandp.com/a/p/8705/8705-4.jpg

Preliminary design completed 1988

This proposal calls for the erection of a cable-stayed bridge just 48 feet to the south side of the existing bridge. Construction, executed over 32 months, would be accomplished without interruption of navigation, vehicular traffic or mass transit. Upon completion of the bridge, sections of the approach viaducts would be laterally launched — literally slipped into place — and attached to existing touchdown points in Manhattan and Brooklyn, requiring a one-time traffic shutdown of only 80 hours.

The bridge has a central span of 1,600 feet and side spans of 661 feet. The main bridge deck and viaducts consist of 10-foot reinforced concrete slabs that rest on transverse beams spaced 22 feet apart, and provide a system for deck replacement without auxiliary support. The width of the deck is kept to a minimum (105 feet) by locating transit below the roadway. This strategy permits simpler structural solutions and a more advantageous placement of supports, while providing the bridge with a slender appearance and avoiding unnecessary impingements on the land at either end. The tracks are rerouted in Brooklyn to skirt the south side of Washington Plaza, instead of bisecting it as they do today, in order to enhance the urban potential of the area.

Two Delta-Frame bridge towers rise 585 feet above the river. Each encloses the top cable anchors of the bridge in humidity-controlled chambers for protection against corrosion. Other innovative systems facilitate the inspection and renewal of bottom anchors and the replacement of cables without temporary strengthening. The legs of each tower, twisted 90 degrees, yield necessary longitudinal stiffness at the base of the bridge and the required transverse stiffness at the top, all within the context of an elegant architectural solution.

Motorists and subway passengers enjoy skyline views through open construction while pedestrians and bicyclists, removed from traffic on an upper timber deck, enjoy spectacular views in every direction. Scenic remnants of the granite abutments of the old bridge are incorporated as belvederes into pedestrian systems on either side of the river, and are supplemented in Manhattan by a new foot ramp to the East River esplanade. A new vehicular link to the FDR Drive is also proposed to alleviate congestion. Improvements to the Brooklyn embankment include a new bus facility and green market on land gained from the realigned tracks.

[Stern]

The Hyperboloid is a sensational design although it was not released until years after the fate of Grand Central was decided, it was saved, and the Met Life Building was already built.

Hyperboloid:

http://www.pcf-p.com/a/v/tb/00hy-t2.jpg
http://www.pcf-p.com/a/v/tb/00hy-i.jpg
http://www.pcf-p.com/a/v/tb/00hy-p.jpg

Design completed 1956

site area: 5.63 acres

area: 3.8 million s/f

height: 1,497 ft. 108 stories

floor plate: 18,145–93,481 s/f

use: investment office tower

[macreator]

Why is it that no developers ever consider to use some of these stunning never built designs? Some of them are certainly in the public domain or could be grabbed for some small fee, no? And while some never built designs are totally impractical, the Travelstead building was quite close to being built.

[michelle1]

Travelstead project was really sensational, it's a shame that the project has died.

[RandySavage]

Here's a skyline shot of what 1 New York Place may have looked like:

http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/90storey3.jpg

[BrooklynRider]

I don't think that 1 New York Place was more symbolic of height and bulk, than design. Had that actually been built, I think I'd be hating it based on that photo.

[RandySavage]

A bunch of renderings for mega-projects can be found on skyscraperpage:

10 Columbus Circle:

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/4fig__05.jpg


Trump Project (mistaken often for the proposed NYSE Tower):

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/28newyorkcity-newyorkstockexchange.jpg

Met Life North (1928)

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/1856metropolitan_life_north_building__original_des ign_.jpg


Trumps Television City Tower:
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/28newyorkcity-televisioncity.jpg

[BrooklynRider]

I love Metlife North. That's one I'd love to see restarted.

Television City would have been a much better project than what we got with Riverside South.

[Fabrizio]

Let´s face it, most of the never-built projects shown here are pretty awful.

That Travelstead tower looks like a giant Tiki mask.

KPF was the 1980´s at it´s worst... they did some of the kitschiest stuff.... just take a look at 135 East 57th street...

[RandySavage]

Another never built beauty from the 1930's - the Larkin Building 110 Stories:

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/28nyc-larkin.jpg

[Fabrizio]

That Larkin building has always puzzled me in that there is no ornamentation yet it´s still not quite in a modern style. It looks cartoonish. A Marvel comics version of a skyscraper. Anyone know who the architect was and what other work they did?

[alonzo-ny]

Wow forgot I started this one! Id love it if all these giants were built, you wouldnt hear any arguements on the forum over whether gehrys tower will be 900ft or 1000ft then. Id would be amazin to see how the skyline would look if they were all there, if anyone has alot of spare time place whip up a rendering. I love travelstead, its my favourite never built, i like the one that would have been in place of the metlife. I dont like the circular pei cobb and freed design really, it reminds me of the corn cob twin towers in chicago which i hate, boggin. Maybe ill use some of these bad boy designs when im mixing things up in ny in the future when im a master skyscraper architect!!!

[stache]

With the MetLife bldg. going through an ownership change, it would not suprise me if it had a tower put on top of it a la Hearst.

[alonzo-ny]

I was refering to metlife at grand central but id really love it to see the other metlife tower live up to its original grand intentions

[lofter1]

I love Metlife North. That's one I'd love to see restarted.

I agree. MetLife North is a great design.

Plus, if it were to be built to the grandeur of the original design, it would have the added benefit of minimizing that horrid black box - aka the Merchandise Mart Building - on the corner of Madison & 26th (whose claim to infamy is the way it separates the two beauties in that area, NY Life & MetLife):

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=115522.

[lofter1]

Come to think of it...

We could add the Merchandise Mart and it's ugly sister, the Olympic Tower (http://www.greatgridlock.net/NYC_Images/olympic.html) to the list of "wish they'd never beeen built" (but that's a different thread).

[alonzo-ny]

I think new york has the biggest tall ass buildings never built to big tall ass buildings actually built ratio which in reality is probably like 100:3 (esb, wtc)(i dont consider chrysler supertall as it looks like a kids toy compared to esb)

[BrooklynRider]

I think the Larkin Building is hideous. It's like the ESB's ugly step sister. Horrible proportions and no grace.

[alonzo-ny]

The larkin looks a bit realistic as it gets so thin at the top so how can elevators get there? It it really quite ugly.

[macreator]

Beyond just elevators fitting in the top, who would want to rent a floor with just enough room for a desk and a typewriter sans chair and person?

I suppose they could fill the pyramidal top with some sort of unconventional water tower....

[Clarknt67]

Why is it that no developers ever consider to use some of these stunning never built designs? Some of them are certainly in the public domain or could be grabbed for some small fee, no? And while some never built designs are totally impractical, the Travelstead building was quite close to being built.


What do you mean by "public doman?" In literature that would mean the life of the author PLUS 75 years. In this case, the renderings/plans were paid for by the developer, but remain either property of the original developer or the architect.

My guess is it's mostly ego that prevents a project like that from being picked up by someone else. Would you want to spend $100M to build a building that would forever be known not as YOUR vision, but as the leftovers of another developer?

[alonzo-ny]

I dont think there are many buildings that dont use ideas from another building, all that changes is how big a part of your design that is and i think the best architects get it as small as possible. As an architect you will design many buildings and i wouldnt see shame in one of them bringing life to someone elses unrealised building but i would make it my own i wouldnt simply propose their exact design id make it the best building i could.

[lofter1]

From the Sunday NY Times, referencing a number of never-built architectural ideas for NYC.

It includes Frank Lloyd Wright's proposal for Ellis Island (picture below) and Gaudi's un-built Manhattan hotel.

More images are found in a "Multimedia Slide Show" at the NY Times link.

It's a Bird!
It's a Plane!
It's Architecture!

By ALEXANDRA STARR
Published: July 31, 2005

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/31/arts/design/31star.html?8hpib


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2005/07/29/arts/31starr_slide2.162.jpg (http://javascript<b></b><img%20src=&quot;images/smilies/tongue.gif&quot;%20border=&quot;0&quot;%20alt=&quot;&quot;%20title=&quot;Stick%2 0Out%20Tongue&quot;%20smilieid=&quot;5&quot;%20class=&quot;inlineimg&quot;% 20/>op_me_up2('http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2005/07/29/arts/20050731_STAR_SLIDESHOW_index.html',%20'20050731_S TAR_SLIDESHOW',%20'width=750,height=600,scrollbars =yes,toolbars=no,resizable=yes'))


FOR some comic book fans, the fictional cities of Metropolis and Gotham, home to Superman and Batman, feel as real as New York, the inspiration for both towns. Now there is another city to add to their dreamscape: the Cinderella City, the setting for the comic book series Manhattan Guardian, the latest issue of which arrives on Sept. 7. As the title of the series indicates, Cinderella City is unmistakably New York, but it is a New York that is at once more true to life and more fantastical than that of any other comic book tribute.

Much of the Cinderella City looks like the New York of today: grimy subway stations, soaring buildings, busy street scenes. But Grant Morrison, the Scottish writer who created the Manhattan Guardian as part of the larger Seven Soldiers series, also laced it with architectural marvels that were proposed but never actually constructed.

The first issue of Seven Soldiers, published last February, features a broad Manhattan skyline that includes a hotel that the Spanish architect Antonio Gaudí designed for New York nearly a century ago. Not far away is the so-called Rolls-Royce Building (its facade resembles a grill) that the Austrian architect Hans Hollein unsuccessfully proposed as the new headquarters for Chase Manhattan Bank in the late 1950's. And snaking around the two buildings is the Mid-Manhattan Expressway, the elevated highway long championed by New York City's powerful urban planner Robert Moses.

All of these buildings, Mr. Morrison said, will reappear in other issues of the Seven Soldiers series, as will other unrealized architectural marvels. The opening panel of Manhattan Guardian's third issue, for example, featured Frank Lloyd Wright's domed futuristic complex Ellis Island Key, which the architect designed shortly before he died. Mr. Morrison, who lives in Glasgow, said by embellishing on the existing New York he was tapping into his favorite comic book power: the ability to create alternative realities. "Things as they are have never really been enough for me," he said.

It was the urge to reimagine the world around him that led Mr. Morrison to conceive the series. He had just finished four years writing the X-Men when DC Comics approached him about masterminding the relaunching of Superman - about as prestigious a gig as there is in the comic-book world. But Mr. Morrison was wary. "There are limits as to what you can do with characters that have already been established," he explained.

Ultimately, he agreed to write story lines for the most famous superhero in history on the condition he could also produce 30 books about long-forgotten DC Comics characters, allowing him full creative license to concoct narratives and a new city in which to stage them. Mr. Morrison said he was attracted by the fun of curating a personal version of New York, as well as the novelty of bringing DC Comics characters into the city previously dominated by its rival, Marvel. (Peter Parker was living in Queens when he was bitten there by a radioactive spider). One of the reasons Mr. Morrison decided to name his town the Cinderella City was to differentiate it from Gotham and Metropolis, which he deems "ugly stepsisters."

One of the first new characters that Mr. Morrison introduced was the Manhattan Guardian, New York's first eponymous superhero. The original Guardian appeared in the 1940's; the protagonist was a beat cop who allied himself with tough local kids to punish evildoers. The title of the book reminded Morrison of the British newspaper, which, in turn, gave him the idea of a tabloid's hiring a superhero. But the publication, he quickly determined, couldn't be based on his side of the Atlantic. "A superhero with a British tabloid would promote bingo with Page 3 girls," he said. So Mr. Morrison created The Manhattan Guardian, a tabloid that employs Jake Jordan, a veteran of the New York Police Department, to protect New York from nefarious characters.

The decision to line this particular New York with monuments that didn't make it past the drawing board sprang from a conversation with Paul Laffoley, a Boston-based architect. Mr. Laffoley entered the 9/11 memorial design committee with a proposal to revive the American hotel that Gaudí is said to have contemplated creating in 1908. Mr. Morrison had been an enthusiast of Gaudí since he picked up a Taschen art book of the Spaniard's work 19 years ago, and he was taken with descriptions of the proposed building, which would have stood almost as high as the Eiffel Tower, with an observatory in the shape of a sea urchin at the top.

Mr. Laffoley's proposal for ground zero did not make the cut, of course, but Mr. Morrison decided to erect the building in the pages of his comic book. It dovetailed nicely with the broader theme for his city: "I want it to be a more exalted New York, where things that were dreamed of were finally brought into reality."

After that, Mr. Morrison waded through academic texts to find other never-built masterpieces. His standards were high. "I chose only the things that looked most bizarre and beautiful," he explains. "I wanted them to be like a Gaudí building. He managed to create things that looked utterly improbable and fantastical, by sheer force of will." The Midtown expressway made the cut: Mr. Morrison liked how the elevated highway burrowed through buildings, reminding him of a monorail that he had ridden in Sydney that whizzed through department stores. And the concept of a building resembling a Rolls-Royce grill was intriguing.

"It's the kind of thing that would become a tourist haunt, or a terrorist target," he said. "All of the buildings I've included are. They would have been icons of the city."

After immersing yourself in Mr. Morrison's version of New York, it's a little hard to see the city in quite the same way. Perhaps in real life, even these extraordinary designs would have come to feel familiar, but on the page they are a striking reminder of how much one structure can matter. Whether or not you think the mid-Manhattan expressway made sense as urban planning, the image of a road bursting through a building is not one you'll soon forget.

To make the fantasy city feel real, the artist Cameron Stewart realized Mr. Morrison's story lines using as much visual data as possible. During a four-day trip to New York last fall, Mr. Stewart, who lives in Toronto, spent hours in the subway, snapping photos of benches, pipes and rush-hour passengers. "It's the details that make it complete," he explained. "Most readers won't catch all of them, but if they weren't there, it wouldn't feel like a real world."

Under Mr. Morrison's guidance, Mr. Stewart also added a few flourishes of his own. The Manhattan Guardian's principal nemeses, for example, are pirates who hijack New York subway trains; they wear credit card earrings and cellphone belts, a tongue-in-cheek allusion to the bounty they would have collected from 21st-century victims. And in the panel in which the Cinderella City is named Mr. Stewart sent "Pumpkin cabs" - in orange instead of the traditional yellow - zooming by on the street.

In a sense, the Guardian is a valentine to a city that both Mr. Morrison and Mr. Stewart call their favorite in the world. But neither man has plans to move here. Mr. Stewart said he had toyed with the idea during his October visit, but the outcome of the presidential election a month later prompted him to shelve the plan. Mr. Morrison, meanwhile, is wary of the constant stimuli. "I'd be too high voltage," he said. "I'd never get anything done." He is putting in 13-hour days, not only redesigning Manhattan, but also working on Superman, whose 67-year-old insignia he has already changed. "A lot of mad ideas come into my head," he says with a chuckle. "I'm lucky people will pay me for them."

[macreator]

What do you mean by "public doman?" In literature that would mean the life of the author PLUS 75 years. In this case, the renderings/plans were paid for by the developer, but remain either property of the original developer or the architect.

My guess is it's mostly ego that prevents a project like that from being picked up by someone else. Would you want to spend $100M to build a building that would forever be known not as YOUR vision, but as the leftovers of another developer?

I meant more along the lines of the architect of some unbuilt buildings (the rest of MetLife North) being long dead and the price for buying out the design being nominal.

While I agree that many developers probably would not want to stake their name on a famous old building or design (like the Singer building) and rebuild it, as the building would forever be referred to as the Singer Building no matter what the new name was, there are a good amount of a less famous unbuilt visions that a developer would probably not have an idenity crisis with.

[Derek2k3]

Travelstead Tower
383 Madison Avenue
70 /72 /74 stories; 1,040' /1,068' /1,080'
Kohn Pedersen & Fox Associates
Developers: G. Ware Travelstead and First Boston Inc.
Commercial Office
1.4 /1.6 MSF
Unbuilt 1989

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2071/2204987374_59a9e58841_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2087/2204987380_3cbec6d2c0_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2131/2209052432_3c00b050e8_o.jpg


New York Syscraper Page
http://www.geocities.com/madison383/

"The Manhattan Savings Bank at 383 Madison Avenue was built by Robert Knapp and was sold to Ware Travelstead in 1982. Travelstead proposed a landmark building as their new headquarters, and the building they selected was exactly that. Travelstead proposed a tower to rise on two sites, each with an equal amount of transferable air rights from Grand Central Terminal. The tower, nearby some of Manhattan's tallest would well exceed the Pan Am Building, and even the Chrysler Building at 1080 feet and at 74 storeys it would encompass a total of 1.6 million square feet. The spectacular design is one of the world's best by Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates who proposed a masterful post modern high rise. From a classical base with ornate features, the tower would rise maintaining a form based on "+" shaped base. In between the gaps created by the "+" slanted pyramid projections would slope inwards ending at a point near the towers top. With intricate details the tower would truly be a great addition to the New York skyline, despite that it was blocked by the city due to the towers controversial usage of air rights. In 1989 Travelstead unsuccessfully sued the city, leaving the site abandoned until 2000. In 2000 construction began on Bear Stearn's new headquarters which would also use Grand Central's unused air rights but would rise on a smaller site than that selected by Travelstead. At 777 feet it will become a landmark in time but nothing to the extent of what could have come of the Travelstead Tower, which could have become one of New York's greatest landmarks."


383 Madison Avenue, New York City
http://members.tripod.com/~archihan/383.htm

The two major constraining factors cited by the engineer as influential to the design were the building setbacks designated by code, and the need for clear-span trading floors at the base. The necessity of straddling subway tracks at the foundation posed a third constraint. The design that resulted divides the building above grade into three distinct zones : the concrete trading floors ; mid-level office floors tied together at the top by a "shoulder" truss ; and 20 stories of additional space resting on the shoulder. The drawing at left is a structural axonometric of one quarter of the tower. Because the building has not been presented for review and approval by the civic institutions responsible, no plans or architectural elevations are shown. Complete coverage of the project will appear in an upcoming issue of RECORD.

LeMessurier's most recent super-tall building design is a proposal for a site in Manhattan. The architects for the project, Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates, took great care to maintain all necessary setbakcs in the building envelope to conform to municipal codes while providing their client with a maximum "as of right" envelope. The resulting taperings and setbacks suggested two possible structural solutions. First, the building could be supported by columns placed around the periphery at about 10 ft on center. This was rejected for two major reasons : It would lead to a nightmare of geometric complexity since the building slopes inward as it rised, making each office floor unique.(Office floors are planned in the shape of a Greek cross intersected by a square service core.) And, placing columns at the building's edge would restrict window access. A second and more favorable approach was to pull the structure within the building interior at a dimension useful as an office module. With this approach, the engineer designed the structure with diagonal members that will take shear and transfer gravity loads to points at every eighth floor. Like the bracing in the Bank of the Southwest, the shear structure for the 383 Madison Avenue tower will cross to define the service core, thus optimizing the congruence of an architectural and engineering form.(In confining the strucuture to the interior, the architects were afforded greater liberty in organizing the facade.)

The structure will use both high-strength reinforced concrete and steel. The first 10 stories above grade are to be used as trading floors with clear spans. These floors correspond to the zone in the tower where the strain from wind forces are at their greatest. Here, concrete will be used, since concrete is considerably more rigid per dollar than steel. Steel will be used below grade because concrete would require sections too thick to thread through the subway tunnels the building must negotiate to reach its foundation. The steel above the trading floors is tied together approximately two-thirds up the building at a "shoulder" truss that binds the lower structure together and serves as a platform upon which, in effect, an additional 20-story steel building is stacked.

Structural engineer: LeMessurier Associates / SCI, Cambridge, in association with Weiskopf & Pickworth, New York
Architects: Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates PC, New York
Owner: 383 Madison Associates
Stories: 70
Height: 1,040 ft above grade



Links:

383 Madison Is the Wrong Address (http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50713FE35550C718EDDA00894DE484D 81) ($)
The New York Times
Editorial Desk
Published: September 22, 1986

A Battle Looms Over Grand Central's Air Space (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DEFDD143CF935A35754C0A96F9482 60&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all)
David W. Dunlap
Published: July 6, 1989

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=383madisonavenuenue-newyorkcity-ny-usa
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=8332
http://www.thecityreview.com/mad383.html
http://ragette.org/skyline/kipsbaybuildings/383%20Madison%20Avenue.htm

[ablarc]

Thanks, Derek, for starting this thread. I'm sure it will have a long and distinguished history (sad to say).

[Skylimitone]

Rockefeller Plaza West, 7th Av between 49th and 50th Street. 55 Floors

The Lehman Brothers Building is actually one of my favorite buildings in the city. So I don't think I'd trade the design for this one, maybe just add the 20 or so missing floors.

https://community.emporis.com/images/5/2001/11/133500.gif

[NYatKNIGHT]

Related thread. (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5494)

[Skylimitone]

Maybe threads can be merged, Moderator's choice.

[Derek2k3]

Rockefeller Plaza West
745 Seventh Avenue
~800 feet 55 /57 story
Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates
Rockefeller Center Development Corporation
Commercial Office
1.36/ 1.6 MSF
Unbuilt 1993

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2297/2209818004_d257c3fbc4_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2257/2209818002_e3f7e479f4_o.gif http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2005/2209024005_7382d9454a_o.jpg
KPF

Gates Merkulova Architects LLP - KPF Projects
Rockefeller Plaza West, New York, 1987-1990

http://www.gmarch.com/KPF%20Projects/RPW.html

The management of Rockefeller Center intended to build the last element of the Rockefeller Center complex, its western-facing entrance, on a site on Seventh Avenue, between 49th and 50th Streets and adjacent to Exxon Plaza in Manhattan. The building was to house offices, an educational-technical center for the performing arts, and was to link into the underground concourse network. The project won a Citation from Progressive Architecture Magazine in 1988.

The contrasting models of the modernism, Rockefeller Center and Times Square, form the context for the project, and inform its design. The lessons offered by these visions of the city have allowed for a consideration of the building as an assemblage, the pieces of which resolve the various site conditions, while the whole is both monumental and dynamic, embodying the energy of the modern city.

Four major elements compose the building. A central core pins the building to the site and defines it on the skyline, acting with the RCA Building as a bookend to the Exxon Building. Around this core laminations are placed, creating a condition of rotation which terminates the east-west axis of the complex and creates a new relationship to the Times Square valley to the south. The variety of scales created by these laminations, as well as their irregular composition, allows the building to graft itself onto the existing cityscape. The building is clad in limestone and glass, with metal ornamentation placed on the surface of the stone to articulate setbacks and to shimmer in the sunlight.

A two-tiered podium, stepped toward the west, defines the Seventh Avenue street wall. This surface is covered by electronic signage, and a building entrance is indicated by a tower of light. An irregular configuration is created at the Plaza to the east, resolving ground level site conditions and providing the main entrance to the building.

A portion of the building element facing Times Square is disengaged and transformed into an object made of glass and metal, specially lit at night, hovering over the Square and acting as an agent in its definition. The various incisions formed by the manipulation of the building mass are seen as habitable places to indulge in the fantasy of living in the sky which informs the myth of New York.

The project was subsequently abandoned due to the changes in the marketplace


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2022/2209024923_eca404fc3d_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2018/2209024915_77af7f9a94_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2030/2209024907_0c2fc35f66_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2284/2209024001_91cc087671_o.jpg


Commercial Property: Rockefeller Center;
The Labyrinthian Path to Building a 55-Story Tower

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE0DC153DF93AA3575AC0A9669582 60&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

The New York Times
By David W. Dunlap
Published: September 9, 1990


LEAD: Something big stood in the way as the Rockefeller Center Development Corporation planned a transfer of air rights from a low-rise Fifth Avenue block to the Seventh Avenue site on which it planned to build Rockefeller Plaza West. That something was the Exxon Building. Because Rockefeller Center sold the Exxon tower in 1986, it broke a direct chain of ownership from the British Empire Building, Maison Francaise, Channel Gardens and Lower Plaza (which generated the air rights), through the G.E.

''It is probably the longest reach for the transfer of development rights that we know of in the city,'' said Stephen Lefkowitz of Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler, lawyers for the Rockefeller Group, of which the development corporation is a subsidiary.

It was not the only complex solution arrived at in the development of Rockefeller Plaza West, construction of which may begin next year. ''It had always been in the back of everybody's mind here that a day would come when we would build behind the Exxon Building,'' said Lee S. Saltzman, senior vice president of the development corporation.

But first, assemblage of the site had to be completed. This occurred in a fishbowl, with the sellers knowing who the buyers were and pricing properties accordingly. ''There's no question that the reaction was that they were dealing with a deeper pocket than the usual developer,'' Mr. Saltzman said. He said that the assembler's axiom - ''You pay most dearly for the last pieces'' - held true.

Rockefeller Center also had to buy out the lease of a Woolworth store at Seventh Avenue and 50th Street that was to run until 1998.

Although Mr. Saltzman declined to discuss the cost, city records show that the last piece, a 4,200-square-foot parcel, was purchased by the Rockefeller Group for $13.89 million.

The Seventh Avenue site could have contained a building of 815,500 square feet under zoning rules.

That was where the air rights came in. All told, Rockefeller Center has about 2 million square feet of unused development rights. Some 739,800 come from the Fifth Avenue block between 49th and 50th Streets, where two six-story buildings flank the Channel Gardens. If developed to the allowable limit, this block could have 912,800 square feet of space, but as built it has only 173,000.

Because there is no legal limit on the amount of air rights that can be transferred, Rockefeller Center executives hoped their skyscraper would be allowed to exceed the recognized - though not codified - density limit for mid-Manhattan, which is a floor-area ratio of 21.6 to 1 (meaning that a 10,000-square-foot lot can have a building with 216,000 square feet). They proposed a 57-story tower with a floor-area ratio of 22.2.

But both the City Planning Commission and Community Board 5 objected to that density. ''That was of major concern,'' said Jack Goldstein, chairman of the mid-Manhattan board. ''We asked that the bulk be reduced to below the 21.6 level.''

The tower lost 40,000 square feet, or two stories. As approved, it is to use 506,000 square feet of development rights.

Another factor complicating the building's design was its location at the northern edge of the theater district. It has to include entertainment-related space and enormous electric signs, under zoning rules that are meant to preserve some of the district's character.

Mr. Saltzman described the charge to the architects at Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates: ''Create a new western gateway to Rockefeller Center, integrate the western and eastern portions and, at the same time, don't turn your back on Times Square.''

''We didn't want to fall into the pitfall of imitating Rockefeller Center,'' said Gregory Clement, an associate partner in the architectural firm, ''but we wanted to find a way to give a visual sense that this was part of Rockefeller Center.''

That meant a tower almost as high as the 850-foot G.E. Building (also known as 30 Rockefeller Plaza), to establish a skyline relationship that would bridge the shorter Exxon Building between them. It meant echoing the basic massing of 30 Rock, which has a central core wrapped in thin protruding layers - Mr. Clement calls them ''laminations'' - terminating in setbacks. And it meant a facade of limestone piers.


What made the assignment ''very difficult,'' Mr. Clement said, was creating Times Square-style signage for a Rockefeller Center tower. The architects came up with large screens for the signs, which appear almost to float in front of the limestone wall, above the first 60-foot-high setback.

When it came to entertainment-related uses, Mr. Saltzman said: ''The first advice I received was, 'You put two movie theaters at the bottom of the building and you've got enterntainment space.' But we said, 'Let's take a broader look that would allow us to embrace the entertainment-related use as opposed to grudgingly accepting it.' ''

''A rehearsal studio was really the direction in which we kept finding ourselves moving,'' Mr. Saltzman said. ''There were plenty of theaters but what seemed to have disappeared from the Times Square district was rehearsal space.'' The studios will be underground but have their own entrance on Seventh Avenue, as well as their own elevators, stairway and building systems.

Mr. Goldstein said this was ''the only example where a developer in the theater district has opted for rehearsal space because that's what the entertainment community wanted most.''

''Rockefeller Center has had a tradition where it does respond to the broad interests of the community,'' Mr. Saltzman said. ''There was a true feeling here that we didn't want to push something that was regarded as hostile by the community.''

As part of that philosophy, he said, certain key groups like the community board were consulted early and often during planning.

''It is a model of how to approach a community board respectfully,'' Mr. Goldstein said. ''They simply decided that was part of the development process. They never misled us. They never hid anything. If they could do something, they said they could; if they couldn't, they said they couldn't. They certainly disagreed with us about density. Nevertheless, that disagreement didn't bring discussions to a halt.''

With the review and assemblage completed, and demolition under way at the Woolworth site, Rockefeller Center is now beginning in earnest its search for an anchor tenant. It is most unlikely that the tower would be built on a purely speculative basis.

Last year, Mr. Saltzman said, there were preliminary talks with prospects whose needs ranged from 400,000 square feet to more than 1 million, including financial service concerns, professional firms and communications companies. ''We've now begun to reopen the dialogue,'' he said.


Links:

ARCHITECTURE VIEW; A Gesture To the 'Good' Rockefeller Center (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE6DF1031F932A15756C0A96F9482 60)
The New York Times
Paul Goldberger
Published: May 21, 1989

Bear Stearns Is Negotiating For Space in Proposed Tower (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9906E3DC1F3CF931A25751C0A9619582 6)
The New York Times
Charles V. Bagli
Published: February 12, 1997

Cablevision/MSG buys Radio City Productions (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3601/is_n19_v44/ai_20162346)
Real Estate Weekly
Published: December 10, 1997

Big names ignite Rock West plans: lease will initiate construction. (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-20533725.html)
Crain's New York Business
Lore Croghan
Published: April 20, 1998

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=rockefellerplazawest-newyorkcity-ny-usa/
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=47258
http://companies.jrank.org/pages/2440/Kohn-Pedersen-Fox-Associates-P-C.htmll
http://www.gmarch.com/KPF%20Projects/RPW.html
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Maze/9975/scurkem2.html
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=3rd&navby=case&no=992224p
http://www.hennesseyingalls.com/hennessey/product.asp?s_id=0&dept_id=5234&pf_id=PAAAIAEPIHKAKCBL&

[Derek2k3]

Some Details.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2047/2209818000_7126d7bf58_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2015/2209972674_7d06937559_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2103/2209024913_3a8f35902a_o.jpg
KPF

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2312/2209024009_474538f2e0_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2194/2209024003_05342dd245_o.jpg
KPF

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2339/2209818006_779c43476f_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2109/2209023995_f264f13771_o.jpg
KPF

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2376/2209818008_c715c3590b_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2041/2209024013_335acde332_o.jpg
KPF

This was the initial design for Morgan Stanley:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2414/2209817998_91d37292cb_o.jpg
KPF

[RandySavage]

Thanks for all these renderings! Do you have similarly detailed info/renderings on projects like:

One New York Place (at Fulton Transit Hub)

10 Columbus Circle

Television City

Cintas Tower

Larkin Tower

NYSE Tower

[Skylimitone]

My goodness, Derek you're good! Lofter you too....:)

What I like about the design is that its a modern extension of the Rockefeller theme. Rockefeller Plaza meets 7thAv/Times Square. Very Interesting. Unfortunately the building we got (though I like it) is the typical 21st century lack of details.

Now lemme see you do uummm :rolleyes: South Ferry Plaza, I wish they built it.

[Derek2k3]

New York Stock Exchange Tower
33 Wall Street; Between Exchange Place, Wall, Broad & William streets
51 stories 900 feet
Skidmore Owings & Merrill
City & State of New York
Commercial Office
1.8 MSF (600,000 ft of Trading Floors)
Unbuilt 2002

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2276/2209422047_94e6edb562_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2132/2210214926_be9b65c1a1_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2316/2210214950_f6cb1b27c2_o.jpg
Advanced Media Design (www.amdrendering.com)
SOM (www.som.com)


The New York Inside Guide
New York Stock Exchange Tower
http://www.geocities.com/nyskyscrapers/downtown.html

The New York Stock Exchange has occupied a small 36,000 square foot trading floor since 1903 at 22 Broad Street. The neoclassical building has come to symbolize America's lead in global finance, and made New York a business forerunner. The New York Stock Exchange has been seeking to leave the historic building however, in hopes of finding a space more suitable to its demands, more specifically a larger trading floor. The board first hoped to remain in New York's financial district. Developers offered to move the exchange, several times to the lower east side. The plan never materialized and the site was sold to make way for high-rises. Further east there were several proposals to to build the exchange on piers. Another proposal was for a tower and trading facility to rise on the site of the Signer Building, well financed, the plan fell through due to board opposition. Less serious proposals have also been made for the late World Trade Centers and Battery Park City. It was becoming obvious that the New York Stock Exchange might have to leave the financial district and even New York.

The New York Stock Exchange made this public and the cities of America responded. From the east coast, to the west and even as far away as Alaska people wanted the New York Stock Exchange in their city. The board finally decided on a move to New Jersey. This is hardly news, the New York Stock Exchange has been planning to move to New Jersey for quite some time now. The New York Stock Exchange has forgone a move to allow New York to come up with a better proposal. And in the year 1999 New York came up with one that met the New York Stock Exchange's requests. The new, New York Stock Exchange will just move across the street, a very simple proposal, you would think.

In fact this is one of the most complex proposals in New York City history. The plan is to buy everything in between Broad Street, Williams Street, Wall Street and Exchange Place. This calls for the demolition of three office buildings and one residential building with 435 Apartments. The only building remaining will be the historic 5 storey J.P. Morgan Bank building at the corner of Wall and Broad Streets which will be converted into a visitors center. Demolition wise this will not be an easy task since one of the buildings, 15 Broad Street is 40 storeys high! Demolishing a building over 500 feet across the street from the New York Stock Exchange will be by all means be a difficult task. The Landmark Conservation groups have approved demolition on the four buildings, they recognize the loss, but realize the inevitable gain. Demolition has ben delayed in light of the immediate office demand. New York State will pay $900 million for this project a drastic upgrade from original prospects. To make up for the huge sum payed for the New York Stock Exchange, New York will build a huge 1.2 million square foot tower above the trading floors.

At 900 feet the New York Stock Exchange Tower will be the first skyscraper built in the financial district in a decade, and the tallest since the World Trade Centers. The base of the tower will consist of 600,000 square feet for the New York Stock Exchange. Of the 600,000 square feet there will be two 50,000 square foot trading floors costing $350 million. Above the trading floors for the New York Stock Exchange there will be four more 40,000 square foot trading floors. The combined trading floors are reported to hover 320 feet above Wall Street.

Above the base will be 1.2 million square feet for other tenants. New York State is currently looking for a tenant for this space. Since tenant negotiations have been taking a long time, the Giuliani administration is preparing to go alone on building the tower. Making the New York Stock Exchange the first large scale speculative office building in more than a decade. This is a huge gamble if the commercial real estate market takes a dip, leaving a $900 million office building vacant of tenants. The office building will rise 50 storeys and will have its own separate entrance. Currently known as the New York Stock Exchange Tower, the building will be renamed for its anchor tenant. The tower is aimed to attract financial tenants who would be lured by being above the exchange, and the prestigious location. One draw back about the building is that it will have small 35,000 square foot plates, smaller than the currently available floor plates in midtown.

Designed by David Childs of Skidmore Owings and Merril the tower will rise to the east of the landmarked J.P. Morgan Building. The base will have a high tech, flashy design, similar to the new LED screens in Times Square. The tower will be a multifaceted steel and glass box with a flat roof. According to Wesley Moon of Skidmore Owings and Merrill's interior's department the New York Stock Exchange Tower is a beautiful building with an identity all it's own. It is clean, simplistic, and functional with a hint of decoration...in the way of the facade gradiates from dark to light through a scattering of rectangular panels as the building rises.

As for the old exchange, the building will house New York Stock Exchange executive and administrative offices along with a Police Department substation.

Demolition is still set to begin in fall of 2001 with completion anytime between 2004 and 2006.


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2385/2210215020_697ff70a3f_o.jpg


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2277/2210214924_45290c27fb_o.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2101/2210215046_f3e43b40a2_o.jpg


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2063/2210215048_f52a047c28_o.jpg


Links:

NEIGHBORHOOD REPORT: FINANCIAL DISTRICT; Residents Wish Stock Exchange Was Bearish About a New Office (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F00E2DD1039F933A2575AC0A9669C8B 63)
The New York Times
Denny Lee
Published: September 10, 2000

Without a Developer, City May Go it Alone on New NYSE Building (http://www.observer.com/node/43734)
The New York Observer
Andrew Rice
Published: December 10, 2000

Stock Exchange rips off New York City (http://stream.paranode.com/imc/print/dec_20indy_20proof.pdf) (PDF)
THE INDYPENDENT
Published: December 2001

NYSE's Chairman Unplugs His Plans For a New Exchange (http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0ICQ/2001_Dec_3/81232325/p1/article.jhtml)
The New York Observer
Andrew Rice
Published: December 3, 2001

Toward a Post-Terrorism Architecture (http://www.usefulandagreeable.com/postterrorism.shtml)
U+A Magazine
David Childs

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=newyorkstockexchangebuilding-newyorkcity-ny-usa
http://www.clarett.com
http://www.greatgridlock.net/NYC/nycnew.html

[Derek2k3]

Thanks Skylimitone.
Thanks for all these renderings! Do you have similarly detailed info/renderings on projects like:


Nothing not seen before but I'll do those with time too.

[lofter1]

Stock Exchange: http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/images/icons/icon13.gif

What a massive tank that would have been.

And would've killed Trump's profits at 40 Wall.

[ramvid01]

Wow the stock exchange buildings is utterly HUGE. Totally out of scale. I would have to say that if it were built it would have totally killed that southern view of downtown.

[alonzo-ny]

Yep, it was disgusting, thank god it never got built.

[lofter1]

RE: Stock Exchange Tower

It's trying to do that "dissolving into the sky" color trick -- ala William Beaver.

At least Childs understood that the trick worked better using reflective glass rather than trying the same thing with brick :confused:

But it is really a monstrosity.

Eccccch http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/images/icons/icon13.gif

[ramvid01]

^^ I would have to say that with that girth, there is nothing using optical illusions that could make it disolve into anything. It more likely look like the sky is disolving into the building first before ever looking like it is disolving into the sky.

[antinimby]

It still hurts a lot just to think about the Travelstead and Rockefeller Plaza West not getting built while two inferior designs did get built in their place.

While Bear Stearns is itself not too bad, it is not nearly as elegant nor as sophisticated as Travelstead, which would have became an integral part of the city's skyline. It had that certain Gotham quality to it.

Rockefeller Plaza West at 800 foot would have made that part of Times Square even more incredible, not to mention how much superior the detailing it had than the bland-as-you-can-get Lehman Brothers building.

I agree with others that it was for the better that the NYSE exchange tower wasn't built.

[Derek2k3]

Here's the site for 33 Wall. The tallest building to be demolished was 15 Broad, now known as the Downtown by Philippe Starck (http://www.downtownbystarck.com/).

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2249/2213747156_643c20b8d8_o.jpg
Stern

[NYatKNIGHT]

80 South Street:

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2405&d=1158380531

[DarrylStrawberry]

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2405&d=1158380531

You can probably add 161 Maiden Lane to this list as well.

[antinimby]

I'm sorry but 161 Maiden Lane doesn't belong in this thread of great but never built proposals.

It belongs in the garbage pail.

[DarrylStrawberry]

I'm sorry but 161 Maiden Lane doesn't belong in this thread of great but never built proposals.

It belongs in the garbage pail.

whoops, I didn't know that the thread was only about un-lame projects.

[alonzo-ny]

New York Skyline - If only

this thread is to discuss what could have been if all the massive towers proposed had been built,

eg buildings like the larkin building and the many towers stunted by the depression

i was also told the ge building was originally to be taller than the empire state

My original intentions for this thread, from many moons ago.

[zukkyun-chan]

I don't know if this fallen proposal from 1930 was massive enough for you, but it hasn't been ever mentioned on this entire forum, yet it's one of my favorite buildings anywhere in the world that never got built: the Fashion Building, "the first skyscraper in full color" (what), designed by William Bergen Chalfant for Amos Parrish & Co.

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/1158/11afashionbldg1930giantro0.jpg

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/5816/11afashionbldgreversesb9.jpg

Sadly the rendering is not in full color... Anyway, I saw a thread for this building at a certain other architecture forum and just totally fell in love with it... To me, this is Art Deco at it's awesomest; sort of like the Chrysler Building, only even further over the top. It's like a mixture of ancient Egypt, pre-Columbian Central America and Gothic put in a classic tripartite form, all rendered through glorious Art Deco style with 60 stories and a huge statue in the crown. Additionally, "the first skyscraper in full color" is probably the best developer's description of a building ever.

It would be great if someone knew something more about the project, though I guess that's not very likely. I'm not sure it even ever was a serious proposal... A Google search provides very limited information about the architect and the commissioning company.

[lofter1]

That Fashion Building tower would have been a stunner http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif .

Architect William Bergen Chalfant is note HERE (http://www.icam-web.org/member.php?subnode_id=50&page_id=5707) as connected to the Northwestern Terra Cotta Company (http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/2797.html), which manufactured terra cotta for buildings.

EMPORIS has a LISTING (http://www.emporis.com/en/cd/cm/?id=northwesternterracottacompany-chicago-il-usa) of NW Terra Cotta buildings.

The National Building Museum (http://nbm.pub30.convio.net/exhibitions-collections/collections/ntc-collection.html) has info on the company...

Northwestern Terra Cotta Collection

http://www.nbm.org/assets/images/exhibitions_collections/nortwestern-terra-cotta/ntc-acroteria.jpg
Collection of the National Building Museum
Skilled craftsman at the
Northwestern Terra Cotta Company
factory sculpt shell-shaped acroteria;
Chicago, 1914.

At the beginning of the 20th century, architectural terra cotta was firmly established as America’s premier material for detailing commercial structures, especially the new, steel-framed skyscrapers then rising in Chicago and New York. After the devastating Chicago fire of 1871, the fireproof qualities of this ancient, baked-clay form propelled its acceptance as a less expensive and lightweight alternative to stone. Terra cotta’s popularity peaked in the 1920s, before being eclipsed by modernist curtain walls of glass, exposed steel, and concrete.

One of the nation’s pioneering manufacturers was the Northwestern Terra Cotta Company (1877–1956), headquartered in Chicago. To direct both production and installation, the studio’s draftsmen transformed architectural blueprints into comprehensive “shop drawings” that identified exactly where and how each puzzle-like piece would be secured to its supporting structure. Favored by such international architectural luminaries as Louis H. Sullivan, Daniel Burnham, and Albert Kahn, the company ultimately contributed to thousands of buildings across the country in a wide array of styles.

In 1982, the Museum received an unprecedented gift of 50,000 drawings created by the firm from 1900–54. The collection remains one of the largest and most valuable of its kind.

http://www.nbm.org/assets/images/exhibitions_collections/nortwestern-terra-cotta/ntc-griffins.jpg
Collection of the National Building Museum
This shop drawing details the
mythically inspired griffin which crown
Pittsburgh’s Allegheny County
Soldiers and Sailors Memorial Hall
designed by Palmer & Hornbostel.
Ink-on-linen shop drawing, 1908.

http://www.nbm.org/assets/images/exhibitions_collections/nortwestern-terra-cotta/ntd-glazing.jpg
Collection of the National Building Museum
Northwestern Terra Cotta Company employee
spraying protective glazes and clay coatings
(called slips) on to a terra cotta sculpture
before firing; Chicago, 1914.

[antinimby]

It would have certainly been another very recognizable NY icon.

It says "upper Fifth Avenue" but I wonder where exactly it would have been.

[Stroika]

"The building will not be the tallest in the world, but the most beautiful."

I wonder if this is what goes through the heads of developers like Macklowe, Moinian or Zuckerman, or "architects" like Kostas, O'Hara or, in Williamsburg, Karl Fischer.

Or if it's what McSamKaufman are now thinking after buying one of the most prominent remaining plots along Battery Park...

[antinimby]

Beauty is the last thing on those two suckers' minds.

One is thinking about how best to maximize profits (Sam Chang), the other is thinking about what new, retarded psychedelic color strips he should do on his next building (Gene Kaufman).

[zukkyun-chan]

While Kaufman's buildings are definitely not "the most beautiful" they sadly do come usually in "full color"... Anyway, thank you lofter1 for your post; you already found more relevant sites and interesting stuff than I did.

[lofter1]

... what McSamKaufman are now thinking after buying one of the most prominent remaining plots along Battery Park...

Actually the new McSam plot is opposite 1 New York Plaza -- and a couple of blocks east of the eastern edge of Battery Park (where the McDonalds (http://www.lovelyrestaurants.com/258481) is now -- DOF has a "Termination of Lease (http://a836-acris.nyc.gov/Scripts/DocSearch.dll/Detail?Doc_ID=2008041600067001)" for the McD's recorded 4.08, end date: 11.08) ...

McSam still buying properties

Real Deal (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/mcsam-still-buying-properties)
05/14/08 at 01:10PM

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trd_three/images/35226/6_Water_Street_articlebox.jpg (http://ny.therealdeal.com/assets/35226)
6 Water Street

Hotelier Sam Chang has been busy selling development sites (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/mcsam-sells-fidi-lot-for-60-million) lately, but
he's still in the buying business. His McSam Hotel Group (http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/mcsam-supersizes-in-lower-manhattan) purchased two
adjacent Financial District sites in mid-February, at 6 Water Street and
32-38 Pearl Street. He paid $56 million for the parcels, an eye-opening
$448 per developable square foot. The 8,400-square-foot site is zoned for
a maximum of 125,000 square feet of commercial or mixed-use space. A
five-story building houses a McDonalds at the Water Street site, and a
seven-story building with an Italian restaurant stands at the Pearl Street
address. The sellers were Richard Breton, Stephen Meringoff and Jay Shidler.

***

That ^ article lists 32-38 Pearl Street ("Cafe Fonduta") ...

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/204/476214073_e1501a11b2.jpg?v=1177879249

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/204/476214073_e1501a11b2.jpg?v=1177879249

In recent years the owners / tenants at 323 Pearl have been at loggerheads ...

Since Attack, More Landlord-Tenant Clashes Downtown

NY TIMES (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0DE2DF153AF930A15752C1A9679C8B 63)
By SUSAN SAULNY
November 23, 2001

Tensions between landlords and tenants of buildings close to ground zero in downtown Manhattan have led to more rent strikes and threatened evictions in the last week, with several cases to go to mediation in Housing Court over the next month.

Angered by what they say are lagging cleanup efforts and inadequate rent reductions and rent credits after the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, hundreds of tenants have organized themselves and decided to withhold rent from landlords.

''You have to understand the level of upset here,'' said Sudhir Jain, an information technology consultant and representative for his fellow tenants at 50 Battery Place, where he said about 60 of 200 tenants are withholding rent. ''We've all gone through a traumatic event. Now to go through the court system with legal proceedings -- it's adding another layer to everything that's happened and it's like a slap in the face.''

The first case to go to Housing Court mediation will deal with apartment buildings at 32 Pearl Street and 88 Greenwich Street. Some tenants in each building have been withholding rent for two months, said their lawyer, Jack Lester. The case is scheduled to be heard on Thursday.

Housing Court mediations are not binding, ''but the emphasis is to resolve disputes,'' Mr. Lester said. ''From a practical standpoint, the fact that we have a mediation conference scheduled may set a framework for settlement, which may obviate the need for litigation in other buildings.''

Tenants' complaints focus on cleanup and air quality as well as transportation and shopping difficulties since the attack.

The tenants who have organized themselves at 32 Pearl Street are typical of unsatisfied tenants downtown. They say they want to be compensated for hardships that resulted from the Sept. 11 attack or have the option to leave without penalty.

The landlords of 32 Pearl Street have offered a 10 percent rent reduction for the term of the lease. They also offered tenants with medical concerns or children under 19 the option of breaking a lease on 30 days' notice without penalty. Everyone else is required to give 60 days' notice and would have to forfeit their security deposit, said Richard Breton, one of the owners of 32 Pearl Street.

''We're struggling to deal ethically and humanely with our tenants, but we're constrained by the economic factors of operating our buildings,'' Mr. Breton said. ''We're trying to help the tenants and work with them, but they can't expect landlords to provide 100 percent of the relief they seek. We know they're suffering and feel depressed.''

Katherine Mogg, president of the tenants' association at 32 Pearl Street, said about 60 percent of the tenants in the 21-unit building are on a rent strike. (Most of the units are two-bedroom apartments and rents average $3,200.)

''We're dealing with fairly major adjustments to our lifestyle,'' Ms. Mogg said, citing the dearth of transportation and shopping options. ''The landlords' response was quite disappointing.''

Ms. Mogg said that for weeks after Sept. 11 the tenants found it impossible to communicate with the building's management. Eventually, they organized and wrote the landlords a letter outlining their complaints about failures to clean up and monitor air quality, and the absence of rent credits and reductions.

From the landlords' point of view, the tenants' letter was a ''laundry list of demands'' about a building that is a quarter-mile from the disaster site, and one not badly damaged in the attacks.

''We've been one of the least affected buildings,'' Mr. Breton said. ''We didn't lose utilities or phone service and were not required to close by any government office.'' He said he was surprised that the tenants rejected his offer and decided to go on a rent strike.

The level of discontent and disagreement between landlords and tenants seems to be spreading. The number of buildings where tenants are staging rent strikes has grown from two in Battery Park City to at least seven in downtown neighborhoods.

At 88 Greenwich Street, the tenants' association president, Kate Webber-Pitcock, said the building was ''full of people who've never not paid a bill in their lives, and who are loath to withhold money.'' She added, ''It is symbolic of how difficult it is to live here that these people would do something like this.''

But landlords say they are struggling just to pay operating costs and other expenses, which have not declined since Sept. 11.

''We would like to reach an amicable settlement with our tenants,'' said Kevin Singleton, the senior vice president of Rockrose Development, which owns two buildings in Battery Park City where tenants are withholding rent. ''But their demands in our view have to be consistent with the marketplace.''

Mr. Lester said he was optimistic because he believed that the Housing Court hearings offer ''an excellent opportunity to mediate settlements.''

Mr. Lester said he hoped that a framework would come out of the proceedings that would create a precedent for other tenants living near ground zero.

<LI style="BORDER-RIGHT: #000 1px solid">Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

[antinimby]

Farewell nice handsome old building. Your only fault was that you did not fill out all of your air rights.

In your place, no doubt, we await (with trepidation and dismay) something unspeakable from the disgusting pair of Chang-Kaufman. :mad:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/trd_three/images/35226/6_Water_Street_articlebox.jpg (http://ny.therealdeal.com/assets/35226)

[pianoman11686]

^Makes you wonder what purpose they even serve in the first place.

[antinimby]

To leave this city worse off and more ugly than they found it, all the while lining their pockets with more dough and in those regards, they are succeeding. :(

[scumonkey]

Couldn't be worse news, & that mc D's and the little deli next door are the only place to get anything after hours in that neck of the woods.:(RIP

[pianoman11686]

Sorry, I should've specified I was talking about air rights.

[Stroika]

I know many of us either talk about doing this or actually do it quite often, but what about applying for landmark status for these two? Does anyone know their pedigree, age or if they could have any claim to landmarking? The charm of the Financial District is the mix of smaller older structures, grand 1920s towers and, yes, Modernist hulks. No use seeing part of that pie get thrown out for a McSam.

And after all, there's gotta be some people in the city planning agencies who are tired of McSam's Reign of Terror...

On a sidenote, is there any support toward for organized opposition to each and every one of his projects, wherever it may be? If we torture Mr Chang enough, he may finally start to get the message and be a bit more, er, discerning in his choice of architect.

[lofter1]

Most likely it is too late ...

6 Water had a Permit (http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/JobsQueryByNumberServlet?requestid=2&passjobnumber=110126863&passdocnumber=01) issued in April 2008 for:

REMOVE WINDOWS, STOREFRONT, CORNERSIS AND BRICK LINTELS AS SHOWN ON DRAWIN

[lofter1]

To stop Chang you'd have to be a step ahead of him.

But Mr. McSam seems to know he's disliked, and therefore the recordings of his RE deals are held off until the first filings are done at DOB.

Once DOB gives the OK for Demo / Partial Demo then Landmarks is stymied.

It is City policy that City agencies will not overstep each others' bounds, as long as the process is carried out according the the NYC Administrative Code.

Playing that system is probably Kaufman's biggest asset to Chang.

[Stroika]

Interesting ... and so terrible for us all... Lofter, what makes you think Kaufman is the one who plays the system for Chang, as opposed to Chang himself or some other lackey?

[lofter1]

It's done at DOB. The name GAK / Gene Kaufman Architects is all over the McSam / Chang DOB permits & filings. It could be a "lackey" within GAK.