PDA

View Full Version : NIMBYs against UN expansion



NYguy
December 26th, 2002, 10:09 AM
Newsday...

Neighbors object to city's plans to renovate UN
*
December 26, 2002, 3:17 AM EST

NEW YORK (AP) _ Members of the community board that encompasses the United Nations say they disapprove of the city's plan to use public parkland to expand the agency's headquarters in exchange for an esplanade along the East River, a published report said Thursday.

"We don't think that's equal to an active park," Edward Rubin, chairman of the land use committee for Community Board 6, told The New York Times. "We won't go easy on this."

The city plans to build a 35-story, $350 million office building on a public park one block south of the United Nations. The new tower would house about 4,500 United Nations employees during the five years it would take to renovate the crumbling Secretariat building.

After the Secretariat building is refurbished, the United Nations would consolidate its other programs in the tower. The new tower and the Secretariat building would be connected by a tunnel.

Janel Patterson, a spokeswoman for the city's Economic Development Corporation, told The Times the agency was evaluating its options and would present its proposal to the community board in February.

Last week, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a capital renovation plan, allocating $1.05 billion to renovate the Secretariat building.

NYguy
December 26th, 2002, 10:14 AM
NY Times...

U.N. Expansion Proceeds, Even as Neighbors Object
By CHARLES V. BAGLI

The Bloomberg administration is moving forward with plans to build a 35-story, $350 million office building for the United Nations on a public park near the East River, despite neighborhood opposition.

The new tower would allow the United Nations to move about 4,500 people out of its headquarters in the crumbling Secretariat building so that the building could be renovated. It would also extend the United Nations campus along First Avenue by one block, to 41st Street. The campus now stretches from 42nd Street to 48th Street.

Although the United Nations General Assembly adopted a capital master plan for the project last week, members of the local community board say they are unwilling to go along with it.

The city's proposal to replace the parkland used for the office tower with an esplanade along the East River does not adequately offset the loss of a valuable public asset, they said.

"We don't think that's equal to an active park," said Edward Rubin, chairman of the land use committee for Community Board 6. "We won't go easy on this."

The private use of parkland is a particularly volatile issue in densely built Manhattan, where the smallest bit of green space is highly prized. Christian DiPalermo, executive director of New Yorkers for Parks, said that Board 6's area, from 14th Street to 59th Street on the East Side, had some of the least amount of land devoted to public parks among the neighborhoods in the city.

Janel Patterson, a spokeswoman for the city's Economic Development Corporation, said the agency was still working on the plans, which she expected to present to the community board in February.

"The exact plan to mitigate the loss of park space is still being examined," she said. "But possible alternatives include an esplanade along the East River and enhanced utilization of the U.N.'s north lawn."

The proposed 950,000-square-foot office tower for the United Nations would sit on the western half of Robert Moses Playground, a windswept asphalt park on First Avenue, between 41st and 42nd Streets. The park surrounds a 10-story ventilation shaft for the Queens-Midtown Tunnel. A dog run and handball courts at the 1.3-acre playground would go untouched, but an area used for roller hockey would disappear under the new tower.

Mr. Rubin suggested that the city could compensate the community by building a new park of at least equal size on part of the 9.2 acres south of Robert Moses Playground. Developers have proposed creating a vast office and residential complex on that property. The developers, the Fisher real estate family and Sheldon H. Solow, had hoped that the United Nations would be a tenant for that project.

But months ago, the developers told Deputy Mayor Daniel L. Doctoroff that it made more sense to leave the playground alone and build the new United Nations tower on their property. They have argued that using that property for the tower would also avoid potential security problems related to building over the Queens-Midtown tunnel.

The developers are buying the land from Consolidated Edison, which recently tore down a nearby nine-story office tower at 708 First Avenue.

The city and the United Nations Development Corporation, however, have persisted with plans to build on the park because the United Nations wants to control, rather than lease, the building.

On Dec. 20, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a capital plan, which set a $1.05 billion construction budget for the renovation of the landmark glass and marble Secretariat building. The building, which is 50 years old, is plagued by outmoded ventilation systems, exploding steam valves, falling concrete, asbestos and lead paint.

Under the plan, the United Nations would move in 2004 to the newly built tower for five years, until the renovation of the Secretariat is completed. A tunnel would connect the new tower to the old United Nations campus.

When the headquarters reopens, the United Nations would consolidate its other programs and agencies into the new tower. That would enable the city to sell the buildings at 1, 2 and 3 United Nations Plaza.

The United Nations hopes to obtain a long-term $1 billion loan from the United States for the project. In all likelihood, the United Nations Development Corporation, an agency created by the city and the state, would issue bonds for the separate development of the 35-story tower. But first, the agency would have to go to the State Legislature for permission to build on a public park.

amigo32
December 27th, 2002, 05:31 AM
NIMBYS??? *They want it both ways? *They want a city, AND green space? * * *

amigo32
December 27th, 2002, 05:53 AM
I am just being sarcastic, of course. Don't mind me!

(Edited by amigo32 at 5:05 am on Dec. 27, 2002)

NYguy
December 27th, 2002, 07:51 PM
Green space is overrated...

Fabb
December 28th, 2002, 05:27 AM
How about a green building ?
A building that includes trees and plants, and respects the natural light is feasible. There should be more of them.

TLOZ Link5
January 1st, 2003, 05:23 PM
Quote: from Fabb on 4:27 am on Dec. 28, 2002
How about a green building ?
A building that includes trees and plants, and respects the natural light is feasible. There should be more of them.

It probably wouldn't sit well with the NIMBYs. *They'd claim that such an approach would result in a "corporate atrium" with too forbidding a presence to be utilized by the public.

Derek2k3
March 6th, 2011, 05:48 PM
Why is this UN building thread closed. I don't think there's another thread on the building around.
http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3696&page=1


http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5137/5492586945_34fe1ff746_b.jpg
Large: chrisk1982 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisk1982/5492586945/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

BStyles
March 14th, 2011, 07:18 PM
Um...I guess these go here:
http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1410.jpg

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk157/BOJAMforeva/SAM_1411.jpg

ablarc
March 14th, 2011, 07:34 PM
Because the old cladding's spandrel panels were the same as the view windows, they were better. The new, more reflective window cladding makes the spandrels read as horizontal stripes. This makes the building less of an abstract sculpture by introducing an unwelcome element --in this particular modernist example-- of SCALE.

This building's function and symbolism suggest a monumentality beyond scale.

Derek2k3
March 14th, 2011, 07:45 PM
The old cladding is on the bottom. The new uniform cladding is above.

I actually don't mind the tacky-toned glass. Maybe I got use it...

ablarc
March 14th, 2011, 08:02 PM
The old cladding is on the bottom. The new uniform cladding is above.
Then the new uniform cladding is actually a restoration to the original concept.

Bravo!

The garish two-tone cladding must have lasted barely more than a decade.

lofter1
March 14th, 2011, 08:38 PM
In this old image the horizontals are barely noticeable (aside from the 3 bands that really stand out):

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2045/1537604633_a9e7b5ec79.jpg

Another old view (BIG Image HERE (http://ephemeralnewyork.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/unheadquarters.jpg)):

12506

12508

12507

ablarc
March 14th, 2011, 11:09 PM
Find me a picture from 1975 ... please.

lofter1
March 14th, 2011, 11:12 PM
Yes, sir.

NoyokA
March 14th, 2011, 11:16 PM
The United Nations is so incredibly underrated. Seagram and Lever House get all the press, yet the UN came first, has a more noble function, better location, better proportions, more visual interest (marble sides, sloping lowrise wing intersected by a dome), actual grounds instead of a plaza. I just don't get it.

lofter1
March 14th, 2011, 11:35 PM
Is 1969 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8534413@N03/2639703268/) close enough?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3077/2639703268_38f291889d.jpg
united nations complex and midtown looking northwest september 1969

>> All images from eralsoto's Photostream / United Nations at Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=united+nations&w=8534413%40N03&z=m&ss=2)

This ONE (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8534413@N03/2610102507/) is from 1953

Here's 1973 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8534413@N03/4739086179/)

1974!!! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8534413@N03/4989310890/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

Here it is in 1979 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8534413@N03/5279201431/lightbox/) (when it looks like they were doing something with some windows)

By January 1981 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8534413@N03/5455052222/lightbox/) it seems the windows had been changed out.

lofter1
March 14th, 2011, 11:45 PM
model of one and two united nations plaza 1969 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8534413@N03/5288930507/lightbox/) :confused:

By eralsoto at flickr

lofter1
March 14th, 2011, 11:53 PM
aerial view of united nations building looking northwest from east river july 1977 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8534413@N03/5276822226/lightbox/)

lofter1
March 14th, 2011, 11:57 PM
aerial view of midtown manhattan looking west from east river showing united nations august 1951 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8534413@N03/5273400876/lightbox/)

TREPYE
March 15th, 2011, 08:42 PM
The garish two-tone cladding must have lasted barely more than a decade.

Modernism materials age pretty ungracefully.

GordonGecko
March 15th, 2011, 10:46 PM
Agree 100%

scumonkey
March 10th, 2012, 02:05 AM
Since the renovation of the UN thread was closed ??? i guess I'll just have to drop these here...
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb276/scumonkey/IMGP2796webbed.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb276/scumonkey/IMGP2775webbed.jpg

Amanita
March 10th, 2012, 05:01 AM
That's what the Secretariat looks like with new skin? Niiiice!

stache
March 10th, 2012, 07:18 AM
Second photo = worst view of the UN building, ever.

bigchet
March 10th, 2012, 05:14 PM
What is going on in the fore ground of the second picture?

vanshnookenraggen
March 10th, 2012, 07:37 PM
My buddy lives at Tudor City with a great view of the UN. They really did a great job on the new exterior. It keeps the original design but looks so much cleaner.

stache
March 10th, 2012, 08:55 PM
chet, eventually that will be filled with housing.

bigchet
March 11th, 2012, 03:10 PM
Is that the old Con Ed site?

lofter1
March 11th, 2012, 03:48 PM
yes, it is.

GordonGecko
March 11th, 2012, 05:12 PM
Is that the old Con Ed site?

http://wirednewyork.com/real_estate/coned/

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3472

stache
March 11th, 2012, 06:24 PM
Thanks, Gordon. I wasn't sure where that thread was. :)

bigchet
March 11th, 2012, 06:39 PM
Hope they start building something there soon.