Hotel Pennsylvania - by McKim Mead & White - to be replaced by 15 Penn Plaza [Archive] - Page 8

TREPYE

September 12th, 2010, 11:18 PM

http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/image/15Penn_dusk.jpg

WOW!

What an example.

Destroying NYC's fabric and at the same time erecting the mediocrity that degenerates this city's architectural profile. I have stopped caring because its either something old and nice get torn down for some thing less than worthy or some crap cratitecture gets erected. But this is something else I tell you, it is the quintissential double whammy, any worse and there would be talk of replacing ESB with an SOM cash cow. It is what I would denote as the Regressive Replacement as with this NYC regresses into some of contemporary wannabes of this age. Glass age superficials that build for mass, not grace.

Many of these cities would kill for a structuture with the grace, history and recognition of Hotel Penn. Many cities would build around structures ike these to set up their cities character. Yet here in this depressing city of knaves, schemers and profiteers it get relegated to rubble in the name of its "disrepair" and make space modern office space.

The hotel is not old it is deliberately going into putrid conditions so that the putrid intention of the developer gets fufilled. Considering all of the other useless lots that are around that SHOULD be demolished it is, once again, a travesty that this city gives its citizens and visitors.

Meanwhile Pelli once again shows his age and his lost touch with this lamentable generic design that he borrows from Hong Kong, Charlotte, Cleveland and Jersey City; at least the first two got topped as we are getting Jersey's decapitated version. In addition, it is bulky, graceless and nondescript superficial glass, it couldnt be a pimple in ESB's ass in terms of presentability.

And folks bring up this absurdity of free market. Free maket is not a good driver for all things, science and technology, yes; NYC architectural design, it is like Supermans kryptonite. It weakens it and eventually it will make it nondescript and a mere mortal or [wannabe] Dubai. Developers markets are made primarily of opportunist that begged, borrowed and stole to their position, never, and I emphasize the word, NEVER, caring about anything greater than themselves. That is why we attempt to have goverments in place to protect us from these stake holders who never relinquish their myopia; but yet they fail us too, no (lets make sure we vote some of em out). And yet again, in this case the developer rumbles on to NYC's architectural regression...

As I have said before, take plenty or pictures of the NYC skyline so that we can show our grandchildren of how this city once was.

dbhstockton

September 13th, 2010, 12:03 AM

Hear, hear

infoshare

September 13th, 2010, 08:35 AM

Yeah, I HEAR ya, it's not terrible: but, I would like to see that 'architectural design' get a few revisions/improvements. Less bulk: for one.

BBMW

September 13th, 2010, 03:16 PM

Would you like some cheese with whine.

I'm sorry, the Pennsylvania has been a dump for as long as I can remember (going back 30+ years). If it was such a part of the "fabric" of the city, someone would have found somethign better to do with it over the decades. It's a crappy, old, run down hotel that should have been torn down two booms ago.

http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/image/15Penn_dusk.jpg

WOW!

What an example.

Destroying NYC's fabric and at the same time erecting the mediocrity that degenerates this city's architectural profile. I have stopped caring because its either something old and nice get torn down for some thing less than worthy or some crap cratitecture gets erected. But this is something else I tell you, it is the quintissential double whammy, any worse and there would be talk of replacing ESB with an SOM cash cow. It is what I would denote as the Regressive Replacement as with this NYC regresses into some of contemporary wannabes of this age. Glass age superficials that build for mass, not grace.

Many of these cities would kill for a structuture with the grace, history and recognition of Hotel Penn. Many cities would build around structures ike these to set up their cities character. Yet here in this depressing city of knaves, schemers and profiteers it get relegated to rubble in the name of its "disrepair" and make space modern office space.

The hotel is not old it is deliberately going into putrid conditions so that the putrid intention of the developer gets fufilled. Considering all of the other useless lots that are around that SHOULD be demolished it is, once again, a travesty that this city gives its citizens and visitors.

Meanwhile Pelli once again shows his age and his lost touch with this lamentable generic design that he borrows from Hong Kong, Charlotte, Cleveland and Jersey City; at least the first two got topped as we are getting Jersey's decapitated version. In addition, it is bulky, graceless and nondescript superficial glass, it couldnt be a pimple in ESB's ass in terms of presentability.

And folks bring up this absurdity of free market. Free maket is not a good driver for all things, science and technology, yes; NYC architectural design, it is like Supermans kryptonite. It weakens it and eventually it will make it nondescript and a mere mortal or [wannabe] Dubai. Developers markets are made primarily of opportunist that begged, borrowed and stole to their position, never, and I emphasize the word, NEVER, caring about anything greater than themselves. That is why we attempt to have goverments in place to protect us from these stake holders who never relinquish their myopia; but yet they fail us too, no (lets make sure we vote some of em out). And yet again, in this case the developer rumbles on to NYC's architectural regression...

As I have said before, take plenty or pictures of the NYC skyline so that we can show our grandchildren of how this city once was.

scumonkey

September 13th, 2010, 03:35 PM

would you like a new record for that player...

TREPYE

September 13th, 2010, 04:38 PM

Derek2k3

September 13th, 2010, 04:55 PM

Not that its worth should be determined by this, but ask any New Yorker what the Hotel Penn looks like and they'll have no idea. No one but hard-core architecture fanatics are going to remember this building when its gone. It'll be like the Drake, a nice building that vanished into the dust.

Yea, it'd be a nice building if fixed up, but comparing it to the Plaza and the old Penn Station is crazy. There is nothing about this ungainly hotel that is memorable and no renovation will change that.

bigchet

September 13th, 2010, 05:41 PM

Thats right very few will miss or even know the Penn hotel is gone or ever was there. But they will not be able to miss 15 Penn Plaza when its finished. This magnificent tower will become a landmark on the NYC skyline.

ttk

September 13th, 2010, 06:03 PM

Bigchet, the new tower at 15 Penn plaza will be "magnificent" and "a landmark on the NYC skyline" ONLY if it is significantly redesigned, because as currently designed it promises to be nothing but an appalling eyesore and blight on the community.

Music Man

September 13th, 2010, 07:05 PM

I see a giant glass beard and mustache trimmer.
10881

TREPYE

September 14th, 2010, 09:24 AM

Yea, it'd be a nice building if fixed up, but comparing it to the Plaza and the old Penn Station is crazy. There is nothing about this ungainly hotel that is memorable and no renovation will change that.

Im sorry if my previous statement about the Plaza wasnt, well, simple enough. I never compared it to the Plaza what I am saying is that if the developer showed some of the care and maitenance the Plaza (obvioulsy the Plaza is grander) has gotten Hotel Penn would be more recognized and well regarded.

Thats right very few will miss or even know the Penn hotel is gone or ever was there.

Of course not, if you think this:

This magnificent tower will become a landmark on the NYC skyline.
Why bother trying to learn to enjoy the subtle complexities of a fine red wine when you can just have some sweet easy to taste grape juice, right. :rolleyes:

Beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder. The beauty of Hotel Penn is that it is of a dying breed of architecture that is going extinct. Actually, it is already dead because nobody builds like this anymore. Stone work and brick mansory are elements that just do not and prob will never get built to this level of authenticity again. Why so quick to throw it away, for another glass box; we will be getting those till the end of time.

ZippyTheChimp

September 14th, 2010, 09:33 AM

How many people miss the Singer Building? For that matter, what people miss [or complain] about Penn Station is the travel experience. GCT is appreciated because it was saved, and still here.

dbhstockton

September 14th, 2010, 09:40 AM

How about this broken record: the only way to avoid this crap is some form of the 1916 setback zoning. NYC's modernist zoning policy is the real bulky, decrepit relic in this conversation.

NYC needs a simple, straightforward code that can't, under any circumstances, be gamed by savvy connected developers. It would force even the crap to conform to an overall vision of classic New York that everyone can agree on. I'd be happy if this project simply acknowledged that magnificent 7th ave street wall, which is as successful and iconic as upper Park Avenue.

Think of what the Garment District factories along 8th ave and all the side streets would have looked like without setback zoning. As it stands now it's a classic New York neighborhood. Dirty and old, yes, but 100% New York.

Where would we put the supertowers, you ask? To be honest, I can do without them. If that frustrates you, good. All this old-fashioned talk of tearing Hotel Penn beacuse it's a dumpy old piles bricks frustrates me. Perhaps we could let our planners, not developers, decide where to put our supertalls.

ZippyTheChimp

September 14th, 2010, 10:01 AM

If it had been neglected and allowed to deteriorate, the Park Central Hotel at 7th Ave and 55th would be regarded by some as an old pile of bricks.

BStyles

September 14th, 2010, 10:11 AM

All vornado did was take advantage of the air rights and planted a box at this site. They should've redesigned this skyscraper to compliment the ESB. A few tiers would be nice.

lofter1

September 14th, 2010, 10:18 AM

Vornado did quite a bit more than "take advantage of the air rights" as anyone knows if they've been following their path at City Hall and City Planning through the maze of bonuses, variances, and tax breaks which have been granted for this project.

BBMW

September 14th, 2010, 10:39 AM

They played the political game and won. This project has touched pretty much every agency and political committee involved in the land use process.

ZippyTheChimp

September 14th, 2010, 10:46 AM

^
Really only the mayor's office and City Council. DCP and LPC are in reality, controlled by the mayor. CBs have no power, and BPs have little since 1990.

As fair a game as 2CC.

antinimby

September 14th, 2010, 12:50 PM

It also helps that there is no groundswell of community residents out to fight it, like say the Tower Verre. If there were, you can be sure the pols would not be so receptive of this tower.

The question I really have is why Vornado targeted the hotel and this particular site for developing this office tower.

Couldn't they do that on the Manhattan Mall side of the block? What about the Sbarro/McDonald's block?

The Hotel Penn is a big building. Common sense says that they should have gone after smaller buildings that are easier to demolish.

ZippyTheChimp

September 14th, 2010, 01:14 PM

AN: I think the major difference between Tower Verre and 15 Penn is residential vs commercial.

Despite ups and downs, the residential real estate market in New York is insatiable. A residential tower is going to be built on 53rd no matter what, so city government can afford to push some populism.

With office space, there's the threat (real and imaginary) that the company will go elsewhere.

BBMW

September 14th, 2010, 03:05 PM

With smaller lots, you have to assemble. You probably have to deal with holdout owners, etc. With the Hotel, they bought one big chunk, and can build what they want on just that.

Also, this lot is directly across 7th from Penn Station, and directly connected with it underground. For every commuter going through Penn Station, this is going to be a very attractive location. It's just a fabulous development sight.

The question I really have is why Vornado targeted the hotel and this particular site for developing this office tower.

Couldn't they do that on the Manhattan Mall side of the block? What about the Sbarro/McDonald's block?

The Hotel Penn is a big building. Common sense says that they should have gone after smaller buildings that are easier to demolish.

stache

September 14th, 2010, 06:22 PM

The hotel is currently not directly connected to Penn.

BBMW

September 15th, 2010, 12:40 PM

Isn't there an underground passageway (may be currently closed)?

ZippyTheChimp

September 15th, 2010, 12:42 PM

^
Yes, there is. But like the plaza bonuses, it's peanuts.

BBMW

September 15th, 2010, 04:02 PM

Could be a nice little selling point to a potential tenant. You employees can get in the building from Penn in bad weather without getting their feet wet. Not a big deal, but not nothing.

stache

September 15th, 2010, 05:38 PM

Yes that is precisely how they got the zoning bonus. They will reopen and update the Penn/Herald Square tunnel.

Derek2k3

September 15th, 2010, 11:51 PM

NY Mag
The Ungainly Monoliths of Manhattan’s Future

* 8/30/10 at 5:02 PM
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/08/the_ungainly_monoliths_of_manh.html

http://images.nymag.com/images/2/daily/2010/08/20100830_15pennplaza_560x375.jpg
An artist's rendering of 15 Penn Plaza

Manhattan’s skyline is about to change — not today, maybe not tomorrow, but as soon as the economy perks up, and when it does the Empire State Building will lose its splendid isolation. New York seems to have mixed feelings about this. Last week, the same City Council that stunted Jean Nouvel’s proposed MoMA Tower allowed the 1,216-foot future tower at 15 Penn Plaza to creep into competition with the icon of icons.

But the battle over this one building’s height is a distraction from the coming cavalcade of skyscrapers. Two of the projected four World Trade Center towers are already sprouting. A 1,000-foot apartment building is going up across 57th Street from Carnegie Hall. A pair of proposed giants collectively called Manhattan West may one day loom over Ninth Avenue at 33rd Street.

Height is not a problem — the skyline should remain as dynamic as the city, and the obvious direction for change is up. Architecturally, though, the next boom already looks disappointing. To get a sense of how the future skyline will look, check out the Bank of America tower at 1 Bryant Park, a bulky glass stele that executes a modest twist to lend itself an air of grace.

Pelli Clarke Pelli’s uninspired design for 15 Penn Plaza is a harbinger of a bigger, beefier West Side, as office towers follow residential towers in the march toward the Hudson. These will not be the elongated masonry pyramids of the twenties, stepping back as they go up, nor will they be the modernist office towers of a generation ago, rising uniformly like vertical blocks.

“Look at the family of new buildings that are being proposed, from the World Trade Center towers to Hudson Yards,” says Rafael Pelli, the lead architect for 15 Penn Plaza. “They are fundamentally different animals.”

In the new business behemoths, a few indentations or judicious asymmetries set off the taut seamlessness of their skins. The top of 15 Penn Plaza will curve slightly inward as if embarrassed by its massiveness. Vertical folds in the curtain wall on each façade and at each corner resemble slits in a satin gown worn by an elephant.

These are not so much whims of style as forms shaped by technology and the demands of the most valued tenants. Financial firms may be in moral disrepute at the moment, but they still dominate the prime office market, and they require enormous, column-free trading floors and high ceilings. Large, populous floors in turn mean a few more high-speed elevators, which get packed into a thicker concrete core. Glass walls are necessary to keep the inner cubicles from feeling sepulchral, and besides, they offset higher cooling costs with thrifty lighting systems. Quiet and efficient air-conditioning ducts take up space between floors, meaning that 80 stories need a lot more height than they once did.

At 15 Penn Plaza, these efficiencies were added to conditions negotiated with an assortment of city agencies: extra-wide sidewalks to relieve congestion, a new pedestrian tunnel linking Sixth and Seventh Avenues, a set of freshly renovated subway exits, and plentiful retail on the lower floors — all in exchange for a huge zoning bonus in allowable floor space. These civic virtues benefit everyone who walks by or below the tower, but at the same time, the bouquet of constraints adds up to a building that is largely formed even before the architects begin designing.

Aesthetic arguments always seem feeble against such calculations, but the unsentimental efficiency that built this city is poised to raise a crop of ungainly monoliths.

philvia

September 16th, 2010, 12:24 AM

wahhh it's not tall and skinny with lots of setbacks like 1930s new york, wahhh it's not a tall, fat box like the previous 5 decades of new york!

ttk

September 16th, 2010, 08:52 AM

First the critics will cry, philvia, and once these things are completed, the public will despair after looking at these banal monstrosities, day in and day out, year after year, until they lose the capacity to even care about their inability to govern their community in the face of demands for public subsidies by the well-to-do and well-connected.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan once described the phenomenon of "defining deviancy down." As these buildings go up, they will become monuments to the debasement of our public institutions.

TonyO

September 16th, 2010, 10:47 AM

Height is not a problem — the skyline should remain as dynamic as the city, and the obvious direction for change is up. Architecturally, though, the next boom already looks disappointing.

What a cop-out. "We're not going to use what we know is a dumb argument like being afraid of tall buildings, so we'll use highly subjective arguments about design to be against tall buildings." So they think 1 Bryant Park is somewhat ok, but not 15 Penn? Laughable.

The top of 15 Penn Plaza will curve slightly inward as if embarrassed by its massiveness. Vertical folds in the curtain wall on each façade and at each corner resemble slits in a satin gown worn by an elephant.

Give me a break. This magazine may sell to nimbys but there's nothing newsworthy being relayed here. It's the same poo-pooing of the new while trying to appear open to new things.

lofter1

September 16th, 2010, 11:26 AM

The fact is that the design is second rate.

ZippyTheChimp

September 16th, 2010, 11:51 AM

NY Mag: The top of 15 Penn Plaza will curve slightly inward as if embarrassed by its massiveness. Vertical folds in the curtain wall on each façade and at each corner resemble slits in a satin gown worn by an elephant.
Give me a break. This magazine may sell to nimbys but there's nothing newsworthy being relayed here. It's the same poo-pooing of the new while trying to appear open to new things.Over-the-top descriptive terms notwithstanding, many people here with a sophisticated view of architecture have panned this building.

Downtown has bigger buildings and more office space, but the once-famous skyline has been muted to only massive, one box at a time.

Do you agree?

TREPYE

September 16th, 2010, 12:04 PM

^ Yep. Graceful spires soaring out of DT were drowned out by modernist blobs that give us that jumble of a skyline that resembles a graceless piece of dough.

NY Mag
The Ungainly Monoliths of Manhattan’s Future

* 8/30/10 at 5:02 PM
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/08/the_ungainly_monoliths_of_manh.html

Aesthetic arguments always seem feeble against such calculations, but the unsentimental efficiency that built this city is poised to raise a crop of ungainly monoliths.

Right on! Hopefully someone with some clout reads this and takes action.

Cant Capitalism move forward with some more aestheic taste? This barebones profiting is costing this citys iconic profile.

Considering whats being demolished, what is being erected and what it will lead to, this will be one of the most depressing developments this city has ever seen.

15 Penn will turn into Midtowns own One Chase Plaza.:(

ZippyTheChimp

September 16th, 2010, 12:11 PM

^
Oh no. Trepye's on my side.

J/K. :) Welcome back. We'll talk Mets in the off-season.

ttk

September 16th, 2010, 12:35 PM

If 15 Penn turns out to be a One Chase Plaza then we will be very lucky. That is a superb work of modern architecture by Gordon Bunshaft of SOM, back when it was the leader of American architecture - the McKim, Mead, and White of its day.

Far from being One Chase Plaza, the present incarnation of 15 Penn Plaza coughed up by Pelli Clarke Pelli promises to be more like a Midtown version of 55 Water Street. Ugh.

TREPYE

September 16th, 2010, 12:48 PM

^
Oh no. Trepye's on my side.

J/K. :) Welcome back. We'll talk Mets in the off-season.

Sorry; thanks; Wilpon needs to sell pronto.

If 15 Penn turns out to be a One Chase Plaza then we will be very lucky. That is a superb work of modern architecture by Gordon Bunshaft of SOM, back when it was the leader of American architecture - the McKim, Mead, and White of its day.

Far from being One Chase Plaza, the present incarnation of 15 Penn Plaza coughed up by Pelli Clarke Pelli promises to be more like a Midtown version of 55 Water Street. Ugh.

Eye of the beholder. I behold 1CP to be a repulsive, imaginatively frugal piece of architecture and undoubtedly one of the worst things that ever happened to NYC. 55 WS was pretty much inspired by 1 CP, large floor plates, plazas instead of setbacks; if you like one how could you not like the other?? Unless the building's color has a high bearing on your architectural outlook, which I would find rather primitive.

londonlawyer

September 16th, 2010, 01:45 PM

ttk

September 16th, 2010, 01:51 PM

ablarc

September 16th, 2010, 02:32 PM

I think you nailed it, ttk, (you ol' elitist).

TonyO

September 16th, 2010, 03:35 PM

Over-the-top descriptive terms notwithstanding, many people here with a sophisticated view of architecture have panned this building.

Downtown has bigger buildings and more office space, but the once-famous skyline has been muted to only massive, one box at a time.

Do you agree?

They said the same thing about the BofA tower, and now that's the example of how to build modern gracefully. It's ridiculous. My opinion of 15 Penn is that it's along the lines of 1WTC, or 4WTC, or 30 Hudson St.: acceptable. It does its job but it's doesn't vere outside the mainstream. It's not likely the final design and it will be tweaked. Maybe with some horizontals and small setbacks like 2IFC in Hong Kong (which I consider a very attractive tower) it could be improved.

But all the hyperbole denies the fact: building on a grid after over 100 years of skyscrapers and you have a finite set of basic designs. Don't like this one? The alternatives won't be very new and exciting to you either, let alone anyone stuck in the "it was always better yesterday" camp. The only ones who have money to burn by consistently designing the far-fetched are in Dubai and China. And the more "different" designs that go up in either of those places would likely get more ridicule here in NY and moreover, just not fit.

Alonzo-ny

September 16th, 2010, 03:54 PM

It isn't that difficult to build with more grace. Simply tapering the tower or having setbacks does wonders.

dbhstockton

September 16th, 2010, 08:07 PM

But all the hyperbole denies the fact: building on a grid after over 100 years of skyscrapers and you have a finite set of basic designs.

You can't have thought that statement through. It sounds like you feel like everything's been done and there's no room for creativity. That can't be true.

BStyles

September 16th, 2010, 10:41 PM

If that were the case, then the entire New York skyscraper body would be glass boxes. I have no problem with glass. It's shiny, it's energy-efficient, but in terms of design, there's always a time and place for it. I vote on a redesign of this building.

Stroika

September 16th, 2010, 11:41 PM

The bottom line is that NY is becoming uglier and more pathetic as each day passes. The latest tragedy is 120 W 57th soon to be followed by the demolition of the 57th Street townhouses. NY is a sewer.

The only way to amend that is a blanket landmark of anything pre-WWII. This would allow pre-war buildings to be razed after review, but if the city doesn't want to go to crap it'll need to sharpen its defenses against pre-war architecture being ravaged. I know this will happen at some point; I fear it won't happen until most of what's left is razed.

TonyO

September 17th, 2010, 12:35 AM

You can't have thought that statement through. It sounds like you feel like everything's been done and there's no room for creativity. That can't be true.

Go reread it, I didn't say ^. Basic design limits what can be done, that's the truth. Some people here start calling NY a "sewer" and such in this thread for this building! It's going too far.

londonlawyer

September 17th, 2010, 09:21 AM

The only way to amend that is a blanket landmark of anything pre-WWII. This would allow pre-war buildings to be razed after review, but if the city doesn't want to go to crap it'll need to sharpen its defenses against pre-war architecture being ravaged. I know this will happen at some point; I fear it won't happen until most of what's left is razed.

I agree with you. However, I don't think that such blanket protection ever will occur.

ZippyTheChimp

September 17th, 2010, 09:33 AM

Go reread it, I didn't say ^. Basic design limits what can be done, that's the truth. Some people here start calling NY a "sewer" and such in this thread for this building! It's going too far.I agree with some of this.

New York as 'sewer': I don't think there's any period in its history when New York has looked better than the present. I challenge anyone to provide an alternate. Let's use Manhattan as the example, all of it, river-to-river.

I disagree with the rest of what you said.

infoshare

September 17th, 2010, 09:34 AM

The Burj scaled-down to a height slightly taller than the ESB could be the ideal solution for this site. With this design (http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2010/01/the-burj-dubai-new-worlds-tallest-building-shows-that-nothing-succeeds-like-excess.html)we get a building that is: somewhat 'skyline consistent' , less 'visually' bulky while permitting more light/air getting to street level, and a striking-exciting-impressive looking building. A win-win architectural addition to that site; which at this point I realize will require much more than 'tweeking' - probably a total redesign would be required to get it 'right'.

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2010/01/the-burj-dubai-new-worlds-tallest-building-shows-that-nothing-succeeds-like-excess.html

londonlawyer

September 17th, 2010, 10:40 AM

I agree with some of this.

New York as 'sewer': I don't think there's any period in its history when New York has looked better than the present. I challenge anyone to provide an alternate. Let's use Manhattan as the example, all of it, river-to-river.

I disagree with the rest of what you said.

New York in the 1930s looked much better in my opinion. It resembled London and the Back Bay of Boston.

ZippyTheChimp

September 17th, 2010, 10:46 AM

TREPYE

September 17th, 2010, 12:44 PM

The difference between 1CP and 55 Water is rather obvious to the discerning eye, TREPYE. One is a superb example of mid-century modernism, and (for good reason) a city landmark; the other is not. I'll have a little more to say later on the relative merits of these two buildings, but I gotta get back to work.

Its not about discerning, its about what impact the building has on you. As far as style goes, for me, is constitutes about 80% of the buildings presentation. i.e.:

If you like the ESB, you will probably like the Chrysler. (art deco)
If you like the Woolworth then you probably like 70 pine street. (gothic)
If you like the Citicorp building you would like 1 worldwide plaza. (post modern)

You may probably like one better than the other but the style drives its categorization and your judgement whether its good or bad.

The form it takes, and the principles behind 1CP are the same as 55 WS. Ok so the facade and material quality are different, so what I say, no matter what they do it is still lipstick on a pig. Both modernists, both huge, both obstrusive and consequently both graceless.

And this 15 Penn will set precedent to construct low end, graceless highrise architecture around the ESB.

londonlawyer

September 17th, 2010, 01:09 PM

^
Look at ALL of it. How about 10th Ave to the river, or places like Corlear's Hook? They were a major component of Manhattan, and not nice at all. Manhattan wasn't only places like Fifth Ave.

Really just a transference. Check this out. (http://www.newsweek.com/2009/11/26/the-death-of-fifth-avenue.html)

I agree with you re: 10th Ave to the river but disagree about the rest of Manhattan. For people who like classic, pre-war architecture, these are very sad times in NYC.

ZippyTheChimp

September 17th, 2010, 01:33 PM

^
I agree about the loss of architecture, but that's not what I mean.

If you took a walking tour of all Manhattan during any time period, I don't think an overall impression would be pretty.

londonlawyer

September 17th, 2010, 01:35 PM

I disagree. Manhattan once once filled with a sea of stunning, classic buildings. Fortunately, many parts of Manhattan still are. However, midtown is losing them en masse, and to make matters worse, they're being replaced with cheap, glass boxes. The Hotel Penn is one of many examples of this tragic trend.

ZippyTheChimp

September 17th, 2010, 01:46 PM

I disagree. Manhattan once once filled with a sea of stunning, classic buildingsWhat percentage is a sea?

"Manhattan was once filled with a sea of slaughterhouses and shabby wharf buildings, and slums."

Sometimes we take from the past only the impressions we want to see, without considering the reality.

BBMW

September 17th, 2010, 02:28 PM

I take this as a positive. NYC should not be about "classic, pre-war architecture". It should be about business. It always has been, and always should be. That is why most of you beloved pre-war buildings were built, to be tools for the business that occupied them. Now, while some of them can be repurposed, if nothing else to capitalize on their 'charm', they're really obsolete, and don't make optimal use of the land they sit on. Therefore they need to be replaced.

There isn't much need for a hotel on that site. It isn't the hub of interstate transportation it used to be. If a high priced (high profit) hotel could be made to work there, someone would have bought the Pennsylvania at some point over the years (Ian Shraeger maybe), and done it up. No one has, so it's time to move on an replace it.

Something like 15PP is the right tool for the job that now needs to be done. And after all, at it's most basic, a building is a tool.

For people who like classic, pre-war architecture, these are very sad times in NYC.

ZippyTheChimp

September 17th, 2010, 03:16 PM

^
While the majority of NYC architecture was built for utilitarian purposes, some structures were built to be iconic.

Mr Woolworth was showing off his retail empire. The race between 40 Wall and Chrysler to be the tallest. Chrysler itself symbolic of its owner's business.

15 Penn is certainly a tool; won't say anymore about that. A building this prominent should take a cue from its predecessors.

ablarc

September 18th, 2010, 11:06 AM

what percentage is a sea?

19.6 !!

(Some experts say 20.89, but they're often discounted.)

ZippyTheChimp

September 18th, 2010, 11:19 AM

^
I'll check that and get back to you. There may be an outlier in there.

mariab

September 18th, 2010, 01:01 PM

While I will concede that every building needn't be designed in pre-war style, there is something good to be said about the way they were designed. They each had a very distinct personality, which you just don't get from today's designs. Look at some other city skylines. They look mostly, to varying degrees, like every other city skyline. Maybe you can pick out Chicago because of the Sears Tower, or Dallas because of the neon. Other than that, who has a skyline as immediately recognizable as NY? There are even imaginative post-war designs if you really look, and they are all completely functional in their own way. One thing a lot of pre-war buildings need is major freshening up, & I don't care how corny this sounds, but most of them could use a good power wash. I don't believe that carbon deposits & grime add character, any more than they do to your car. It's obvious we have strong opinions on personal architectural tastes, & I like how for the most part, people on this forum can keep the vitriol in check & express valid & informed opinions. This is probably another one of those debates where there is no clear winner, but it's nice to see mostly mature discussion on the subject.

Merry

September 18th, 2010, 10:11 PM

If you like the Woolworth then you probably like 70 pine street. (gothic)

I don't mean to nitpick, but 70 Pine Street is Art Deco. I admire the Woolworth, but I don't like it much ;).

And this 15 Penn will set precedent to construct low end, graceless highrise architecture around the ESB.I agree. Not one of Pelli's finer moments. I'm not convinced that this building would fit nicely anywhere in Manhattan, but it sure doesn't where it's proposed.

I'll take 1920s/1930s architecture and Manhattan up until the end of the 1950s any day - minus the horrendous living conditions in tenements as depicted by Jacob Riis, noisy, dirty els and the other unsavoury elements already mentioned. You can't pick and chose, though, that's city life. Some things improve - thankfully immeasurably, others just change, but not always for the better. It's all relative in terms of comparisons, but IMO, Manhattan's marvelous skyline, particularly Downtown, started going downhill roughly after the construction of 2 Broadway in 1959.

londonlawyer

September 19th, 2010, 12:55 AM

Khandahar-on-Hudson's Talibanesque "developers" have expedited the city's journey on the Bamiyan Express. Perhaps all of our "developers' " names should be preceded by "Mullah."

http://www.laputanlogic.com/images/2003/09/24-0018

Khandahar-on-Hudson "developers" arriving for a conference.

http://www.september11news.com/Nov1TalibanTankKandahar.jpg

Merry

September 19th, 2010, 05:05 AM

^ Is that your new, old mantra LL, and default response on all threads from now on? No more records in the collection, hey? :) ;)

londonlawyer

September 19th, 2010, 08:38 AM

Yes. I am outraged by the continued loss of these buildings.

Derek2k3

September 19th, 2010, 11:06 AM

I don't mean to nitpick, but 70 Pine Street is Art Deco. I admire the Woolworth, but I don't like it much ;).

I agree. Not one of Pelli's finer moments. I'm not convinced that this building would fit nicely anywhere in Manhattan, but it sure doesn't where it's proposed.

I'll take 1920s/1930s architecture and Manhattan up until the end of the 1950s any day - minus the horrendous living conditions in tenements as depicted by Jacob Riis, noisy, dirty els and the other unsavoury elements already mentioned. You can't pick and chose, though, that's city life. Some things improve - thankfully immeasurably, others just change, but not always for the better. It's all relative in terms of comparisons, but IMO, Manhattan's marvelous skyline, particularly Downtown, started going downhill roughly after the construction of 2 Broadway in 1959.

A nice level-headed assessment.

Merry

October 13th, 2010, 06:00 AM

Will Vornado's 15 Penn Plaza Disrupt Empire State Building's FM Airwaves?

by Matt Chaban

It appears the fight over 15 Penn Plaza is not yet over. Vornado's 1,216-foot Rafael Pelli-designed skyscraper on the Hotel Pennsylvania site has already rocked the skyline, and now it is hitting the airwaves.

The Real Deal spotted a funny story in Radio World about how the city's broadcasters are worried over the impact the slick new tower might have on transmissions from the Empire State Building's spire.
The Empire State Building is home to 19 FM stations and most of the city’s digital television transmitters. Many radio and television broadcasters migrated there after the collapse of the World Trade Center’s twin towers in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Multipath issues are nothing new in the city because of its monstrously tall buildings, but the proximity of the skyscraper to the Empire State Building — approximately a quarter-mile — raises a red flag for some in the broadcast community.

Any nearby obstruction to FM signals from Empire could have a major impact on the radio market, observers said. New York generates the second-most revenue among radio markets in the country, according to BIA/Kelsey.
Perhaps broadcasters could move back downtown to One World Trade Center, once the city's tallest-building-to-be is complete. If they did, though, it would be yet another blow to the struggling Empire State Building.

http://www.observer.com/2010/real-estate/airwaves-shock-15-penn-plaza?utm_medium=partial-text&utm_campaign=real-estate

BBMW

October 13th, 2010, 03:28 PM

Didn't they put an antenna on top of Conte Nast?

scumonkey

October 13th, 2010, 03:31 PM

that was supposed to be temporary

HoveringCheesecake

October 13th, 2010, 05:11 PM

that was supposed to be temporary

Hmm. I hope they leave it. It fits the look of the building perfectly.

GordonGecko

October 14th, 2010, 02:03 PM

Perhaps broadcasters could move back downtown to One World Trade Center, once the city's tallest-building-to-be is complete. If they did, though, it would be yet another blow to the struggling Empire State Building.
It's all Karma for dissing Mother Teresa

BStyles

October 14th, 2010, 02:17 PM

Damn straight. If they had lit the tower, then they wouldn't be having this problem.

BBMW

October 15th, 2010, 02:16 PM

15 PP needs a finial. They could put an antenna on that.

digitaliterati

October 20th, 2010, 02:42 PM

Hmm. I hope they leave it. It fits the look of the building perfectly.

The only good thing that can be said about that absurd looking antennae is that it's just skinny enough, being an antennae, to not utterly trash an unbridled view of the ESB. Make no mistake however, it is distracting. Massive poles of steel never look all that appealing, and anything within, say, a half mile of the ESB that rivals it in height will invariably do just that.

This insane glass popsicle referred to as 15 Penn Plaza however will do more than distract. Its presence without a doubt will culturally mock the ESB. Its roof-line seems to rise halfway up the height of the Empire's Art Deco spire. In and of itself, as insipid modern day glass human containers are concerned, it's not a horrible design. Though its profile resembles my Braun razor with the nose-hair adaptor in place, its outline does have some merit.

But the ESB is one of the greatest buildings and human structures ever made, and damn near 80-years old. Nothing--and I mean nothing--should be allowed to visually and aesthetically rival the ESB from river to river within a specified latitude of Midtown.

It's a damn travesty.

stache

October 20th, 2010, 07:58 PM

and welcome to the forum. :)

Stroika

October 20th, 2010, 08:47 PM

But the ESB is one of the greatest buildings and human structures ever made, and damn near 80-years old. Nothing--and I mean nothing--should be allowed to visually and aesthetically rival the ESB from river to river within a specified latitude of Midtown.

It's a damn travesty.

Indeed. The smart money says this glass pop does to the Midtown skyline what Chase Manhattan did downtown -- ruin all of its glory with a deadening, ironic Modernist ham-hand.

HoveringCheesecake

October 21st, 2010, 10:16 AM

Just think, if I didn't like that antenna we would not have received that eloquent post. I think you all owe me one.

James Kovata

October 22nd, 2010, 12:32 PM

15 PP needs a finial. They could put an antenna on that. The building looks so..."current Pelli." It looks like the International Financial Centre in Hong Kong, which of course, is a Pelli, among others. No antenna or spire, please, we have enough needles in mid-town that artificially raise rankings. The one good thing about this building is that its height is genuine.

stache

October 22nd, 2010, 08:41 PM

Let's all give Hovering a Bronx cheer!

Bob

October 27th, 2010, 09:02 PM

ENOUGH of this "scalloped top" architecture. Today I drove through Nashville on I-40 and noticed a new skyscraper there that emulates the Pelli scallopped-top treatment. The style is not attractive. It's seen its day, elsewhere, in Hong Kong and in Jersey City. To replicate this nonsense on the new 15 Penn Plaza would be, well, nonsense.

scumonkey

November 9th, 2010, 06:56 PM

A behemoth office tower that may rise opposite Pennsylvania Station would deface New York City’s skyline and cast a pall over surrounding streets already shortchanged on light and air.
Vornado Realty Trust (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=VNO:US)’s 15 Penn Plaza will stack as much as 2.83 million square feet on a site that was zoned to accommodate just 1.6 million square feet.
The tower tapers only slightly as it rises about 1,200 feet -- the height of the Empire State Building -- dwarfing two massive cookie-cutter residential towers to the south that are a sad legacy of Manhattan’s recent housing boom.
Architect Rafael Pelli (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Rafael%20Pelli&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1&partialfields=-wnnis:NOAVSYND&lr=-lang_ja), of Manhattan-based Pelli Clarke Pelli (http://www.pcparch.com/), carved slit-like corner recesses to slim 15 Penn’s glassy bulk, but this overweight monster appears to be bursting at its seams.
Stroll along the jammed sidewalks of West 32nd Street or West 33rd, east of Seventh Avenue, breathing in the diesel exhaust of idling trucks and buses. The blank walls of a multilevel retail mall or the blank wall of several massive trading floors -- depending on the tenant mix -- will line half the length of the block.
Scoops, Freebies
How did this thing get so huge?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-09/behemoth-tower-packs-2-83-million-square-feet-of-blight-james-s-russell.html

GordonGecko

November 9th, 2010, 07:03 PM

they should make it skinnier and much taller

STR

December 21st, 2010, 12:56 AM

From Empire State.
http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/9222/n74v.jpg

Trespassing on an open lot a block south.
http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/5527/n73h.jpg

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/7418/n72l.jpg

NOTE: ESB was ~40 feet too short in this shot because I didn't correct for elevation when placing it.
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/5957/n70o.jpg

Zoomed out showing Manhattan West (ditto on ESB).
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/7493/n71j.jpg

lofter1

December 21st, 2010, 01:00 AM

The New New York :cool:

Tectonic

December 21st, 2010, 01:16 AM

Don't mind new tall buildings on the skyline but this one is so bulky.

STR

December 21st, 2010, 02:36 AM

^Compared to...what? The foorprint is 207x177, smaller than the WTC buildings, Bank of America, the rest of the Times Square buildings and indeed most of the post war buildings citywide. It's not that much wider than the ESB itself, and less bulky than most of Rockefeller Center from the north or south, and it's vastly more efficient space than the landmarked building. It's an office building, as such it has an ideal width, which is around 200 feet square.

http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/1602/n75c.jpg

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/1544/n76h.jpg

scumonkey

December 21st, 2010, 02:40 AM

Of all it's numerous flaws, the reclycling of the top of the NYT building here,
really is a derivative crime.
The new building uptown looks like it's flipping it the bird.

Stroika

December 21st, 2010, 03:24 AM

This new hideous Cesar Pelli wang sure is going to be one hideous Cesar Pelli wang.

STR

December 21st, 2010, 03:40 AM

Of all it's numerous flaws, the reclycling of the top of the NYT building here,
really is a derivative crime.

Umm...two things:
1) The NYTimes HQ was NOT the first building with a parapet
2) That the curved, glass parapet on this building does NOT in any way resembles the ceramic rods of the Renzo Piano work.

Pelli's do seem to lack the inventive gene, but accusing them of ripping off another NY building is a dramatic stretch. They overplay their own work.

The new building uptown looks like it's flipping it the bird.

That's what you get when you hire a French Architect...or when a committee dictates you enclose a whole roof.

scumonkey

December 21st, 2010, 04:01 AM

Umm one thing- I never said they were ripping off another NY building.
Maybe I haven't 'splained myself so well Lucy.:o
The use of a parapet wall, about the same height in relation to, and open at all four corners like, the NYT building...
and so close to it is a derivative crime.

STR

December 21st, 2010, 04:35 AM

I am unclear that there is a distinction between "rip off" and "derivatve crime." Seems like synonymous terms to me, but even if agree that "derivative crime" is a lesser indictment, that's still a big stretch. At worst, I'd say it's a derivation of Pelli's previous work on Hong Kong's International Financial Center, but that's about it. Even that...I'm not feeling strong about because it's not a specific feature. 3 World Trade will have the 4 parapet walls too, and they'll even be glass. I don't think Pelli "stole" from ol' Dick Rogers either.

It's like a patent. If it's fairly generic, been done before by a lot of people, or an obvious solution to a problem, then it's neither infringing on another patent, nor is patentable itself.

And it's an old idea. The earliest example I found in 2 minutes of searching is the Opera City building in Tokyo, finished in 1996.
http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/6981/tokyooperacitytower001.jpg

scumonkey

December 21st, 2010, 04:51 AM

Your taking my use of the term crime to literally.
The whole building (in my opinion) is a crime,
and to use that shape/form at the top -so close
to another building that also uses it is crime- an assault on ones better senses.
No- not a crime as in broken architectural rules/laws *except for lacking good taste,
or trying to show anything fresh or original.
Feel free to feel otherwise- I won't be changing my mind.
The only thing nice about this building is your rendering.

STR

December 21st, 2010, 05:04 AM

Oh, I can see a lot of reasons to dislike this, or any Pelli building (he's only done 3 since the 80's and just kept rearranging the details). I just don't think the crown will look all that similar to Piano's tower*. However, it's hard to say. Very little has been published on the facade. Nearest I can tell, 15 Penn is using the facade to continue the taper to the pinnacle, and probably to hide the mechanicals. Therefore the crown will like be fairly opaque, with a full stop when it meets the sky. NYTimes attempted to do a fade-into-the-sky effect, and the rods were progressively spaced out as it neared the top to accomplish that.

Two different intents, two different materials. But feel free to stick to your argument. I get it now, I just...can't be quite that picky, but that's me. You have to live with this thing.

(*=I don't think the "it's too fat" argument holds much water either, but "boring" "uninspired" "unoriginal" and "meh" are all plausible arguments.)

Glad you like the render. Good night sir.

STR

January 14th, 2011, 07:46 PM

You know, the Brookfield's Manhattan West towers make 15 Penn look so much better by comparison.

http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/1403/n125.jpg
http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/1403/n125.jpg

lofter1

January 14th, 2011, 07:48 PM

The least they could do is put a spire on top of the fat thing.

Tectonic

January 16th, 2011, 09:18 AM

Those towers are huge.

BrooklynLove

January 16th, 2011, 09:30 AM

Looks like a graphic equalizer

bigchet

January 16th, 2011, 11:20 AM

could use another super tall right in between.

meesalikeu

January 18th, 2011, 12:40 AM

yaargh those two are monsters!

BStyles

January 18th, 2011, 10:08 AM

The least they could do is put a spire on top of the fat thing.

If they put a spire on top of it, it probably wouldn't be very tall. If it was, then they'd never get the thing built, because neighbor Malkin would probably sue the hell out of Vornado.

BBMW

January 18th, 2011, 01:46 PM

On what basis?

Anyway, since it's on a zoning variance, the spire would probably have to go back through the whole ULURP process again, so it isn't likely happening.

If they put a spire on top of it, it probably wouldn't be very tall. If it was, then they'd never get the thing built, because neighbor Malkin would probably sue the hell out of Vornado.

STR

January 18th, 2011, 11:33 PM

Links for full size provided, all 5 images are 1800x720.

http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/6089/n137.jpg
http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/6089/n137.jpg

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/33/n138.jpg
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/33/n138.jpg

http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/151/n139.jpg
http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/151/n139.jpg

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/7206/n140j.jpg
http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/7206/n140j.jpg

http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/6537/n142.jpg
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/6537/n142.jpg

Derek2k3

January 19th, 2011, 04:15 AM

Cool. Didn't expect the PA Tower to look so insignificant. C57 and Torre Verre also seem small from downtown. Time for a 1500 footer, though it might take a decade just to get these proposals built.

lesterp4

January 19th, 2011, 10:16 AM

i fully agree. she didn't know what she was talking about.

NoyokA

January 19th, 2011, 11:41 AM

I wish these renderings were made during the approval process at its full height. That would've actually showed her.

infoshare

January 19th, 2011, 11:43 AM

Someone should email #1, 2, 4 & 5 to that dumb ................ to show how wrong she was about the Torre Verre overwhelming the ESB.

I agree, Amanda Burden is among the worst when it comes to arbitrary, capricious and outright senseless decisions regarding Architecture in NYC: but lets have "civil discourse" here on the WNY forums. Also, that sort of vile 'public insult' is a bit reckless and may result in problems for the Mods/admin here - those type of posts (when spotted) will be deleted.

infoshare

January 19th, 2011, 12:05 PM

I found this interesting: this new building seems to be not only having an adverse effect on the ESB 'radio wave transmission/reception', or the aesthetic sensibilities, - but, this may now also be a matter of "good chi (http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/08/25/empire_state_buildings_feng_shui_all_out_of_whack. php)".

NY Times article - http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/25/realestate/25feng.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/08/25/empire_state_buildings_feng_shui_all_out_of_whack. php

Derek2k3

January 19th, 2011, 03:30 PM

I think STR has the tower rendered at 1050' not 1250'. Even without the renderings, the distance from ESB to the the building made her argument asinine.

STR

January 19th, 2011, 06:38 PM

Tower Verre is 1050ft in all of the renders. The extra height doesn't add much, as it's a tiny little stick of a building. I personally feel that the "full height" aesthetically harms the building by making it too thin. In terms of the skyline, the building never gets much of a skyline impact. 1050' gives the building a mountain-ish look that it loses as the sides are stretched to become more vertical.

NoyokA

January 22nd, 2011, 08:56 PM

NYC can be very frustrating. A good skyline looks like the Lower Manhattan skyline with the former World Trade Center. A central very tall building or buildings, some tall buildings of varying heights. Midtown is all the same height, Citicorp, Trump World Tower, and Bank of America help, as will Carnegie 57, but you need a monster that is a pinnacle, Torre Verre would have done that. The Empire State Building is great but too far south. Now they're going to build a plateau of 1,200 footers, one would be good, but the amount they're proposing will actually detract from the skyline, if the Brookfield, Related, and 1 Penn Plaza airrights all go through along with 15 Penn Plaza it'll be no different than the XYZ buildings.

LeCom

January 23rd, 2011, 04:06 PM

^Such a skyline may not be the most graceful in the world, but a "plateau" of 1200-footers would not only give Downtown and its WTC a run for its money, but would actually beat it in terms of sheer skyline impact. Besides, we're talking about uncertain plans for a reasonably far future. FOr now, we'd be lucky to get at least one 1200-footer in the area, which would actually do a good job of providing a pinnacle for the existing mini-skyline of 600-footers around Penn Station.

Comparison to the XYZ is also quite wrong. I know what you're driving at - vertical monotony - but you've gotta remember that 1) the XYZ were about twice as short in height; Exxon is about the size of 1 Penn Plaza, which would be dwarfed by any of the proposed towers, thus the scale will have a whole different effect. 2) We're very unlikely to get designs as uninspired as the XYZ. They may be acceptable or even somewhat mediocre by world standards, but I bet they would be at least several notches above the XYZ design. 3) The XYZ are situated on large, long blocks, and are extruded straight up from there. Aside from superblocks like the MSG and the Railyards, Penn Station area simply doesn't have as many adjacent, large sites as the XYZ had, so in either case, the buildings would appear slimmer, more vertical, and more integrated into the city fabric (as they mostly make use of available sites as opposed to outright leveling entire blocks and neighborhoods).

Lastly, I agree that Midtown needs one monster of a pinnacle, but I think that Tower Verre, even at its original height, is too skinny and insubstantial to serve at that eye catching pinnacle. At best, it would have just barely more impact than Chrysler or BofA.

mariab

January 23rd, 2011, 09:03 PM

Locked-out partier falls to death from hotel roof (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/locked_out_partier_falls_to_death_c6zEiLMbYOzm0xsn ihGGqM)

By JOHN DOYLE and FRANK ROSARIO
Last Updated: 7:05 PM, January 23, 2011
Posted: 7:05 PM, January 23, 2011

A bridge-and-tunnel partier tragically plummeted to his death at the Hotel Pennsylvania in Herald Square this morning after becoming locked out in the cold on a lower-floor roof, cops said.
Moon Nam, 23, of Jersey City had checked into the Manhattan hotel with pals after spending a night on the town with pals, sources said. He woke up at 6 a.m. to head home.
But he inexplicably took a freight elevator in an attempt to get to the lobby, police said.
The dazed-and-confused Nam wound up on a different floor and at some point entered a rear stairwell on the fifth floor, where he walked through an exit door, leading him on to a set-back roof.
The door then slammed shut behind Nam, leaving him alone and outside in the early-morning cold, cops said.
Nam either tried to yell down for help to passers-by on West 32nd Street or attempted to climb down himself, according to police.
That’s when he slipped and fell to his death, officials said. The incident has been ruled an accident.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/locked_out_partier_falls_to_death_c6zEiLMbYOzm0xsn ihGGqM#ixzz1BujzU0Ba

BrooklynLove

January 24th, 2011, 08:18 PM

Darwinism at work.

STR

January 25th, 2011, 12:50 AM

I'd say Alcohol at work.

Travis

January 25th, 2011, 02:21 AM

Is "bridge and tunnel partier" common slang? I've never heard that before.

econ_tim

January 25th, 2011, 10:07 AM

bridge and tunnel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_and_tunnel) refers to someone who lives in the outer boroughs or, God forbid, New Jersey

hynespb

January 25th, 2011, 12:10 PM

the dude didn't have a cell phone?

lofter1

January 25th, 2011, 12:16 PM

Dropped it while looking over the icy ledge.

mariab

January 25th, 2011, 05:08 PM

bridge and tunnel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_and_tunnel) refers to someone who lives in the outer boroughs or, God forbid, New Jersey

Oh, you & all your people were born & raised in Manhattan eh?

JCMAN320

January 25th, 2011, 09:44 PM

He just left behind a new wife here in Jersey City; some compasion please. As for econtim; leave your comments on your side of the river!

Merry

May 13th, 2011, 07:18 AM

A Hotel With a Luxury: More Sidewalk Elbow Room

By CHRISTOPHER GRAY

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/05/15/realestate/streets-1/streets-1-popup.jpg

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/05/15/realestate/streets-2/streets-2-popup.jpg

IT is a favorite game to scout Pennsylvania Station, on the west side of Seventh Avenue from 31st to 33rd Street, for relics of the original 1910 building, demolished in the 1960s. Searchers find old handrails, stairways, columns and other elements.

But hunters should also look on the east side of Seventh, opposite the station, where the largest survivor remains undisturbed, an odd 15-foot setback 400 feet long. It runs in front of the old Hotel Pennsylvania, to be torn down by Vornado Realty Trust to make way for a 67-story building. But it looks as if the peculiar recess, established to create a forecourt to the old station, will survive.

When the Pennsylvania Railroad began buying property for its new building around 1900, it did not plan on going into the real estate business, as had the New York Central Railroad, the developer of not only Grand Central Terminal but also its surrounding blocks. Indeed New York Central, which had controlled much of the area for decades, envisioned a great income-producing tower directly above the station.

But the “Pennsy” started with nothing, and strained its budget just buying the dozens of properties it needed between Seventh and Eighth Avenues, from 31st to 33rd Street. Half a dozen proposed designs for Grand Central and its neighborhood exist. But no significant variants of the Penn Station plan survive, just the familiar monumental four-sided colonnade.

The railroad did splurge on the two blockfronts on the east side of Seventh Avenue, from 31st to 33rd, facing the nominal entrance to the station itself.

This property lay fallow until 1919, when the railroad and Ellsworth Statler built the largest hotel in the world, 2,200 rooms, on the east side of Seventh from 32nd to 33rd.

According to an article in The American Architect, the goal was to “translate into concrete expression the ideals and enthusiasm of the great railway system.” That seems a heavy burden for a workaday structure serving department-store buyers and traveling salesmen.

The Hotel Pennsylvania is not much more than a big box with a dollop of classical features; it is strange how little ornament it takes to separate our conception of the historic from the disposable.

In 1916, when the hotel project was just forming, the railroad put in place a restriction: “No building or other structure shall be erected upon any part of the surface of the 15-foot strip of land fronting on Seventh Avenue” except for a portico. That requirement was to remain in place for 21 years from the completion of the hotel.

As it happened the architects, McKim, Mead & White, designed only a small portico, six projecting Ionic columns running just half the length of the facade and about six feet out, so the bulk of the setback area was essentially public space.

The intended effect of the setback — a plaza — was compromised by the scale of the 22-story hotel, which dwarfs the extra 15 feet. It does show how the builders of Penn Station considered their surroundings important and their station a civic monument, but it is next to absent from critical writing about the station and the hotel.

In 1921 the railroad sold the blockfront south of the hotel to Equitable Life, which echoed the earlier setback with the office building known today as 11 Penn Plaza. For a 22-story building on a 200-foot front, that’s 66,000 square feet, quite a sacrifice for aesthetics, since the original size of the plot was 51,000 square feet. Even doubled in span, the 15-foot recess is hard to see amid the jumbled skyline around Penn Station, which never got the coherence of Park Avenue north of Grand Central.

New York’s grid plan is a jealous god, and infractions like the Pennsy setback are rare. Among the others is one on Madison Avenue at 41st Street. The east side of Madison was widened a few feet in the 19th century, although thousands walk along daily without registering the change.

Manhattan has plenty of oddball property lines, but they are usually difficult to see, reflecting some old roadbed on the interior of a block. One that comes to mind cuts right across West End Avenue from 91st to 92nd Street, where a long, angled boundary line runs midblock from Broadway to Riverside. This is the path of 18th-century Jauncey Lane.

A hundred or so years ago, landowners were afraid to build on it, concerned that someone would sue, claiming to have established an easement — a legal right to use the lane — by walking it to and from the Hudson.

So the builders either set their buildings back, as with 640 West End Avenue, or built oriel windows out over it, as with 190 and 194 Riverside Drive, keeping the old pathway clear for any potentially litigious pedestrian.

Drawings for the Vornado tower, which was approved last year but now appears to be on hold, respect the setback — Vornado did not try to recover the lost space. So it appears that the strange 15-foot gap along Seventh Avenue will, like Jauncey Lane, survive far beyond the railroad station it was intended to honor.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/15/realestate/a-hotel-with-a-luxury-more-sidewalk-elbow-room-streetscapesseventh-avenue.html?_r=1

londonlawyer

May 13th, 2011, 07:44 AM

It is utterly amazing that the city would consent for this gem to be destroyed. There are a lot of building sites in NY. The jackasses at Vornado should restore this building. I'd like to see Dick Cheney personally escort Steve Roth to Guantanamo and administer the water boarding.

NYCDOC

May 13th, 2011, 10:16 AM

I know it's been said here many times, but it really is amazing to me everytime I come to this forum that we keep loosing such great examples of this city's architectural gems. Depressing. The building has so much history and enhances the streetscape. It would be amazing to be able to polish it up and get it back to it's original proud state. Largest hotel in the world at one point?!? Wow. But I guess that's the way things go.

In 20 years from now, someone will be adding the Hotel Pennsylvania's picture to the Demolished thread on this forum lamenting it's demise and being baffled that NYer's did nothing to prevent it from being taken away!

ttk

May 13th, 2011, 11:06 AM

The reason why it is being demolished and replaced by an ugly, graceless, and bloated behemoth that is (ahem) too large for the neighborhood is that the Bloomberg Administration does not give a tinker's damn about landmarks, historic preservation, or balanced development. Why does the City under this Mayor give developers anything they want, virtually without question? The Mayor is operating under the muddled and narcissistic conviction shared by many, many other members of the plutocracy: the only way the public interest can be advanced is after they make lotsa money.

ZippyTheChimp

May 13th, 2011, 11:18 AM

It's nothing new.

The Waldorf Astoria was demolished to build the ESB.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3426/3728003470_b0d98f0cbe.jpg

ttk

May 13th, 2011, 11:29 AM

Touche, Zippy and thanks for that pic. If only the architecture of 15 Penn Plaza approached the architectural quality of ESB.

futurecity

May 13th, 2011, 12:36 PM

To be honest, the Waldorf Astoria was far superior to the ESB in design. The ESB is basically a rather bleak stone box with a few art-deco features here and there. Yes it is a landmark, but just because it is tall, doesn't mean it is exceptionally good architecture like that fellow there. Why or why did they have to replace that hotel and not demolish some other lessor building?

Think of how amazing midtown would have looked today if they had any sense back then. The streets look almost like another Paris. Pity there was no other place to build ugly glass boxes and they had to decimate this area.:( Oh well, that is what happens when you have a limited amount of land to work with and want to build up.

The hotel pen is another sheep in wolfs clothing. Good riddance to it. It is incomparable to old buildings like the waldorf. The new building is actually superior IMO to that old stack of bricks and would give the area a rather futuristic feel. I agree it would have been better to build it elsewhere and keep the Penn for its few redeeming features (roof/base), but I won't be shedding any tears for what is basically a large brick box with a little ornamentation stuck on like an afterthought.

ZippyTheChimp

May 13th, 2011, 12:43 PM

Historic landmarking isn't limited to architectural considerations.

In hindsight, it's reasonable that one would be torn between the old Waldorf and the ESB. dismissing either out of hand is a bit ridiculous.

MidtownGuy

May 13th, 2011, 12:45 PM

The streets look almost like another Paris.Even better, I'd say. Old pics of New York make Paris look like a bore in comparison.
---

That they're tearing down this historic hotel is a disgrace.

futurecity

May 13th, 2011, 12:52 PM

I just can't see how it is. I really feel, in this case (and I love historic designs), that the replacement is just far more interesting than what I feel is a fraud of a building.

ZippyTheChimp

May 13th, 2011, 12:56 PM

The hotel was built contemporary to Pennsylvania Station, by the same architects. hotels are typically built neat transportation centers. It has maintained its same utility throughout its life.

So how is it a fraud?

ttk

May 13th, 2011, 01:45 PM

This very interesting picture of the Waldorf Astoria has so much to say about scale and proportion, light, and context. Except for the hotel, because the buildings are so low, Fifth Ave. is filled with light, and we can see much farther down the Avenue than (I would guess) we can see now. Look at how the street slopes down, and then rises back up to the vanishing point.

The other remarkable thing in the photo is how majestic the old Waldorf Astoria looks when it is framed by the old low rise mansions of Fifth Ave., such as the Second Empire A.T. Stewart mansion on the NW corner of Fifth and 34th Street. Even though the newly built hotel shattered the pre-existing scale of the neighborhood, from the photo at least, the streetscape is transformed and enhanced by it.

I have read that Lever House had the same dramatic effect when it was completed on Park Avenue, framed as it was at the time exclusively by classically-themed brick and limestone residential buildings and hotels. In “Lost New York” Nathan Silver makes the same point about when the Museum of Modern Art was originally built, because its only neighbors were beaux arts mansions and brownstones up and down 53d Street.

NYCDOC

May 13th, 2011, 02:52 PM

futurecity

May 13th, 2011, 05:32 PM

It is a sheep in wolf's clothing i feel. It doesn't deserve the heaping of praise it receives on this forum. To me it is a rather mediocre building that has defrauded people into thinking it is a remarkable prewar artifact which is somehow superior to its future replacement. On that point, I'm flabbergasted, as the replacement is one of the most soaring, organic and futuristic buildings NY will have ever seen on its skyline. Compared to this dowdy afterthought to the great Penn Station, the new building shines as if NY were awakening to the 21st century. A beacon for a modern midtown. Now, i'd be fine with keeping the building if another site were available for the great Pelli tower, but alas no.

futurecity

May 13th, 2011, 05:39 PM

That really is a terrific picture of 5th avenue and the Waldorf does look majestic. As much as I love the ESB that is clearly a priceless streetscape that we would all have been fortunate to have today.

I agree, the streetscape is far far superior to what is there today. Midtown could have remained as NY's London/Paris. Unfortunately, Manhattan is too small and skyscrapers replaced what we see there.
I for one rate art-deco architecture far below neo-gothic, beaux-arts, and victorian styles. It is far too plain for me overall and i like large ammounts of ornament on my older buildings.

ZippyTheChimp

May 13th, 2011, 06:05 PM

It is a sheep in wolf's clothing i feel. It doesn't deserve the heaping of praise it receives on this forum.Hyperbole.

that has defrauded people into thinking it is a remarkable prewar artifact which is somehow superior to its future replacement.Hyperbole

the replacement is one of the most soaring, organic and futuristic buildings NY will have ever seen on its skyline.Hyperbole

the new building shines as if NY were awakening to the 21st century. A beacon for a modern midtown.Hyperbole.

Now, i'd be fine with keeping the building if another site were available for the great Pelli tower, but alas no.If you had read some of this thread....

Time for Sermonette.

futurecity

May 13th, 2011, 06:21 PM

This is an incredibly predictable response from an overly defensive person who appears to feel the need to belittle other people's views.

Music Man

May 13th, 2011, 09:26 PM

ZippyTheChimp

May 13th, 2011, 09:45 PM

This is an incredibly predictable response from an overly defensive person who appears to feel the need to belittle other people's views.Are you "flabbergasted?"

You're the one that seems to be all defensive about this. I just find your descriptions quite funny.

A building commits fraud against the people. News at 11.

futurecity

May 13th, 2011, 09:56 PM

You don't like the word? I think its rather funny sounding.

ZippyTheChimp

May 13th, 2011, 10:09 PM

I already said it was funny.

arcman210

May 13th, 2011, 11:15 PM

I bet alot of that beautiful architecture still exists under that marble, gypsum and mirrors.

antinimby

May 14th, 2011, 09:15 AM

That "now" lobby reminds me of Trump Plaza in Atlantic City.

Very 1980's tacky.

MidtownGuy

May 14th, 2011, 09:41 AM

What a gorgeous lobby that was. New York is retarded.

TallGuy

May 14th, 2011, 03:41 PM

Music Man, Thanks for those lobby photos. I have stayed at the Hotel Penn in the mid 80's and been in the lobby/bar recently prior to a show at MSG, and the place to me was never more than a run down 1-star mega hotel long overdue for a renovation. Your photos though have given me an appreciation of what it was and how it could be restored to that grandeur if only given a chance. Too bad...

mariab

May 14th, 2011, 05:23 PM

In MM's pics, the newer lobby looks like it has a glam version of a drop ceiling. Bleh. In the older lobby, I could walk in & say "wow!" The new one is more like "Hm, nice." I like the floors, though. I wouldn't turn up my nose at staying here a night or two before it closes.

TallGuy

May 14th, 2011, 07:00 PM

Old beds/coverings and rugs, and it accepts pets (fleas). There are far worse, but there are a lot better for a little more money.

Music Man

May 15th, 2011, 12:11 AM

I actually did stay in that hotel once. Back in 03, I think. I don't remember those fast food menu like screens behind the counter. They must have been put up within the last few years. And yes, it was kind of tacky like you read in the reviews. The AC unit in my room broke and flooded the room with an inch of water. Only up side is that the room I got was pretty big compared to some of the others I could have gotten. The rooms on the south side in the mini towers that had windows facing each other were barely big enough to fit a double bed and have room to walk around. Seedy amenities aside it was kind of interesting to walk around the building and find some remnants of the original. The floors that hadn't been renovated recently still had rooms with the original doors with the pass-through compartment where back in the day you could hang your suit for a bell hop to pick up and get cleaned. The most recently renovated rooms (like mine supposedly was) had new doors with a false panel where the pass-through would have been.

Here are some photos I took of the doors when I stayed there.

12982
Original door with modern keycard handle.

12983
Closeup of the lock for the inner compartment door to the left of the card reader. Keys were long gone and the inner door screwed closed.

12984

This is on one of the upper "show" floors where the rooms you see on the website are located. Seems they kept the compartment doors on this floor, or they at least kept the locks to make it look more authentic.

Music Man

May 15th, 2011, 12:15 AM

And as for the pets. Not only does it allow pets, but they also host a dog show.

econ_tim

May 15th, 2011, 08:30 AM

Here are some photos I took of the doors when I stayed there.

The Boston Park Plaza also has (non-functional) compartment doors like the ones in your pictures. Not my first choice for places to stay in Boston, though.

LeCom

May 15th, 2011, 01:58 PM

Sad to look at what this building used to have compared to what's left. Particularly the lobby. :(

Before:
http://www.thecityreview.com/hpennarchreview3.jpg
http://www.thecityreview.com/hpennarchreview2.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b7/Hp_lobby_corridor.JPG/452px-Hp_lobby_corridor.JPG

Now:
12957
12956
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3132/2681624330_6614528bd3.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyohm/2681624330/)
The Hotel Pennsylvania Lobby (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyohm/2681624330/) by mightyohm (http://www.flickr.com/people/mightyohm/), on Flickr

This exemplifies why I support the building's replacement. It was never a looker from the outside, with its unadorned tenement-style tower, arranged in narrow claustrophobic bays/light wells, and trimmed with some flat ornamentation at the base and the very top. Sure it has history to boot, and it had some amazing interior spaces - probably the best feature of the hotel. Now its interiors have been cannibalized and the building's most valuable aesthetic element has been stripped bare. Right now it perfectly plays into the drab feeling of the whole neighborhood. Bordered by the shoddy Penn Plaza to the west and rundown tourist trap souvenir stores elsewhere, the building feels drab and dull on the inside (at least the lobby, that's as far as I've been) and unwelcoming and grimy in the outside. I'm none too happy about demolishing a valuable piece of New York history, but at this point the building is a liability to the cityscape.

ZippyTheChimp

May 15th, 2011, 02:34 PM

Right now it perfectly plays into the drab feeling of the whole neighborhood. Bordered by the shoddy Penn Plaza to the west and rundown tourist trap souvenir stores elsewhere, the building feels drab and dull on the inside (at least the lobby, that's as far as I've been) and unwelcoming and grimy in the outside. I'm none too happy about demolishing a valuable piece of New York history, but at this point the building is a liability to the cityscape.Rather than a drab feeling, I think it contributes to a cityscape that's rare on 7th Avenue.

Look at this view downtown. An intact, harmonious throwback to another time:

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/87840903/large.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/250/445601452_c0777d6fb4_b.jpg

A big, glass podium would subtract from it.

It's obvious from #1 where a new tower should go.

LeCom

May 15th, 2011, 03:24 PM

Good point. Garment District and the neighboring blocks are some of my favorite places in Manhattan. Unspoiled Gotham canyons existing amid districts bursting with change and redevelopment. I agree that the above location (the "obvious one" with shoddy lowrises and billboards) is undisputably a better location for the tower. However, despite its aesthetic appearance, functionally Hotel Penn belongs more to the immediate MSG/Penn Station district than the Garment District. The former has the incredible energy associated with one of the biggest transit hubs in the country, while the latter is more of a historic district with its own distinct economy, programming and users. Tourists and commuters abound on 34th and maybe a block north and south of that, but they rarely venture beyond that stretch. My point is: despite its date of construction, appearance and proximate location, Hotel Penn is a definite part of the Penn Station area as opposed to the Garment District, and should be treated as such.

scumonkey

December 14th, 2011, 11:15 AM

from today's curbed: (http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2011/12/14/skyline_showdown_between_esb_15_penn_halted.php)

Skyline Showdown Between ESB & 15 Penn Halted (http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2011/12/14/skyline_showdown_between_esb_15_penn_halted.php)

http://ny.curbed.com/uploads/121411-esb15penn-p1.jpg
Defenders of midtown skyline sanctity and Empire State Building owners Malkin Holdings can breathe easier today
now that Vornado Realty Trust announced its plans that it may renovate (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/realestate/commercial/time_out_seen_in_skyline_war_Rg47P5grAVT5Ocs4QFn5I J/0) the much maligned Hotel Pennsylvania
rather than erect a towering glass challenger to the ESB and just ruin everything. The battle between the two buildings—one beloved,
the other still a glass dream—was fought in the court of public opinion (http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/08/15/15_penn_plaza_stepping_on_empire_states_toes.php), before the City Planning Commission (http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/07/15/planning_commission_gives_hotel_penn_execution_its _blessing.php), and in many renderings (http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/08/18/midtown_skyline_battle_now_being_fought_with_rende rings.php)
that showed how the skyline would be dramatically altered by the addition of 15 Penn Plaza (http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/04/13/hotel_pennsylvania_killer_gets_a_name_15_penn_plaz a.php) for good or bad

For now it seems like more mundane concerns like a weak economy and a failure to attract big financial firms as tenants,
along with competition from other development projects (e.g., Brookfield's four tower Manhattan West project on 9th Avenue)
made Vornado decide that renovation of the Hotel Pennsylvania is a better short term bet than erecting an 1150-foot challenger to the Empire State Building.
For superfans of glassitechure, we once again present the most vertical of all renderings of 15 Penn Plaza, in tribute to what might have been.
http://ny.curbed.com/uploads/121411-pennbig-p1.jpg

scumonkey

December 14th, 2011, 11:19 AM

Time-out seen in skyline war

Last Updated: 3:05 AM, December 14, 2011
Posted: 11:51 PM, December 13, 2011

More (http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&username=nypost) http://www.nypost.com/rw/SysConfig/WebPortal/nypost/images/icon_print.gif Print (http://www.nypost.com/f/print/news/business/realestate/commercial/time_out_seen_in_skyline_war_Rg47P5grAVT5Ocs4QFn5I J)
http://www.nypost.com/rw/SysConfig/WebPortal/nypost/images/columnist_headshots/lois_weiss.pngLois Weiss

BETWEEN THE BRICKS

The Empire State Building just might keep the 34th Street skyline to itself for a few more years.
Sources tell us that Vornado Realty Trust (http://www.nypost.com/t/Vornado_Realty_Trust)is putting off constructing its taller challenger to the west at 15 Penn Plaza until market rents reach a point where it’s worthwhile to redevelop the site with an office building.
In the meantime, Vornado is mulling plowing millions of dollars into renovating its Hotel Pennsylvania, a dowdy cash cow that now sits on the future development site at Seventh Avenue between West 32nd and 33rd streets, across from Penn Station and Madison Square Garden.

“It could cost $30 million just to renovate the rooms,” said one executive who was not authorized to speak on the record. “It’s 1,000 rooms and everything adds up.”
Vornado would also commit millions of dollars more to update the lobby and common areas.
In December 2007, Vornado was days away from signing a lease that would enable it to develop a new tower and trading floors for Merrill Lynch (http://www.nypost.com/t/Merrill_Lynch)when the Wall Street firm switched CEOs and gears amid its deepening financial crisis.
Since then, financial firms that would be the natural anchor tenants have found themselves cutting headcount and putting off major moves until the global economy improves.
Vornado is also facing increased competition for anchor tenants as Brookfield readies its $5 billion, four-tower 5.4 million-square-foot Manhattan West site on Ninth Avenue and Related Cos. gets traction on the West Side with Coach becoming the first tenant/owner for the first Hudson Yards tower.
Downtown also continues to be redeveloped with four World Trade Center towers and availabilities in Brookfield’s World Financial Center, along with Edward J. Minskoff’s redevelopment of 101 Ave. of the Americas, as Post colleague Steve Cuozzo reported yesterday, and his spec building at 10 Astor Place. There is also ready-to-go space in 11 Times Square.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/realestate/commercial/time_out_seen_in_skyline_war_Rg47P5grAVT5Ocs4QFn5I J#ixzz1gWhwx4lW

scumonkey

December 14th, 2011, 11:21 AM

The restoration of the Hotel Pennsylvania...What a fantastic Christmas present!

antinimby

December 14th, 2011, 12:09 PM

Good news!!

HoveringCheesecake

December 14th, 2011, 12:10 PM

The first of the large Midtown towers to go on-hold/get canceled. I'm sure it won't be the first.

ASchwarz

December 14th, 2011, 12:38 PM

The first of the large Midtown towers to go on-hold/get canceled. I'm sure it won't be the first.

There is nothing "on hold or cancelled".

The article is a non-story. Vornado doesn't have a tenant yet, and probably won't have one for at least two or three years, so they're simply weighing whether or not it makes sense to sink extra $ in the existing building.

They've been mulling this for nearly a decade now. If they do put money in the property, it will be the most minimal of upgrades, because they're competing hard for with Related, Brookfield, SJP, Boston Properties and Silverstein for anchor tenants.

BStyles

December 14th, 2011, 08:42 PM

Honestly, I kinda saw this coming. There are more important projects going on around the city that require at least one tenant to get going, if you know what I mean. Not only that, Hotel Pennsylvania is one of the last remnants in the area of the above-ground Penn Station days, and I'd linda like it to stay for many years to come. I do, however, wish that they would restore the hotel lobby to its original style.

BrooklynLove

December 14th, 2011, 09:11 PM

hotel penn has a great location and solid occupancy rates. it's hard to understand how a capital investment in this building aimed toward bringing it back as an upscale hotel wouldn't yield strong returns, if a reasonable financing arrangement can be reached.

londonlawyer

December 14th, 2011, 09:44 PM

This is great news. I hope that the hotel is fully restored.

PS: I agree with Hovering Cheesecake. There is no way that the Hudson Yards, Brookfield's Manhattan West or WTC 2 or 3 will ever be built. NY doesn't need that much space.

I also highly doubt that Torre Verre and 432 Park will be built. Moreover, I predict that a banal, glass 50 story box will rise at 225 W57th.

BrooklynLove

December 14th, 2011, 10:09 PM

PS way overbroad. NYC is one of the few cities currently creating new businesses and pulling in new regional offices of out of state companies, while managing to retain the vast majority of existing NYC based companies. residential rent levels have customarily been a solid leading indicator of regional job growth and commercial development, so based on that metric NYC is looking pretty solid right now for continued commercial development.

londonlawyer

December 14th, 2011, 10:24 PM

Ask Cheesecake for his analysis.

HoveringCheesecake

December 14th, 2011, 11:44 PM

Ask Cheesecake for his analysis.

I think everyone pretty much covered it. New York City isn't some magical paradise that is immune from our economic woes.

arcman210

December 15th, 2011, 12:02 AM

Hopefully a renovation of the passageway is still in their plans.

Stroika

December 15th, 2011, 04:54 AM

I'm with the many others who are happy to hear this news. I love a good skyscraper, but this building is Cesar Pelli's standard, boilerplate, one-design-fits-all phallus. He's already built one for GS in Jersey City. Hong Kong has another, and SF is supposed to get one. I am happy for it not to be built, especially given the ridiculously hypocritical situation around it where Burden cut down the size of Torre Verre (on 53rd St.) because it would "interfere" with the ESB while this hulk, on 34th St., was allowed to be as tall and bulky as anyone wanted, with no fears about such "interference."

The Hotel Penn is a beautiful, classic building, and one of the few representatives left of NYC's golden era of hotels, when great hotels were built around railway stations including GCT (most of which have been demolished) and Penn Station. I'd much rather see this piece of architectural and general history remain standing and get the good cleaning/makeover it deserves than have one of Pelli's lazy "anywhere in the world" highrises go up here. If we need that building so badly, there are plenty of lots (and one hideous Madison Square Garden) that would be much better sites for it in the area.

antinimby

December 15th, 2011, 12:41 PM

PS: I agree with Hovering Cheesecake. There is no way that the Hudson Yards, Brookfield's Manhattan West or WTC 2 or 3 will ever be built. NY doesn't need that much space.You're being sarcastic, right?

I also highly doubt that Torre Verre and 432 Park will be built. Moreover, I predict that a banal, glass 50 story box will rise at 225 W57th.You have some kind of inside information or is this just a hunch?

Hof

December 15th, 2011, 01:48 PM

Great news--the Hotel Pennsylvania survived its close brush with obliteration and gets a much-needed renovation. For now.
Vornado still owns the property and could reverse their decision at any time when the economy changes, but if they are indeed going invest into full renovation then the Penn may have bought a few more decades of existence. Hopefully, the redevelopment won't alter the exterior of the building too much and hopefully, the structure can recieve some kind of Landmark status so that future fears of demolition can be eased. And, if they have any sense, the lobby will go back to what it was.
As recently as July 2007, the center part of the lobby was still open. Only the areas around the registration desks had the dropped ceiling. There were huge paintings of deco cityscapes on the walls and the marble pillars soared to the 3rd floor ceiling. Vornado probably installed the drop ceiling as a cheap way to defer maintainence on the large-scale lobby and it's architectural detailing, assuming, as short-term owners, that the place would soon be torn down so why bother to maintain it. I'm sure that the magnificent lobby is all still intact, just hidden by plastic panels. How cheesy.

It really is a landmark, one of the few McKim, Mead and White public buildings that have survived in the City, and it's architecture is not as dull as some critics would have it. It's a functional, spare style-- as a hotel should be--and the "lightwall wings" design was very popular on large hotels all over the country. The Penn has a lot of detail in the cornices and mullions and brickwork, and the lobby and public spaces are grand, writ large in a Jay Gatsby way. When it was built it faced the monumental Penn Station and it's appearance was meant as a counterpoint to the roccoco detailing of the Station's facade, the flapping flags, canopied entry and grand lobby serving as a symbolic gateway into the splendors of Manhattan for the arriving train passengers.

"Everything in New York is BIG", it shouted, and the architecture critics of it's day praised the design.
--but, Public Housing???. Maybe as a prototype, a useable building style meant to house a lot of people, a McKim, Mead and White template.

I'm a big fan of the hotel, having stayed there a LOT. I was there a few times with my Dad when I was a kid, then maybe a dozen times since 1995. I was last there in '07, and the place was showing visible signs of neglect and indifferent maintainence. The old hotel did not deserve that, I'd thought when I saw how down at the heels it had become. This was just after Voronado announced plans to demolish it and put up a glassy supertower with a huge trading floor, one that would forever change the way we all look at the Empire State building, the Grand Dame of all skyscrapers, anywhere. I thought then that I was going to be one of the final guests in the place...
I'm an equal fan when it comes to preserving the existing sightlines on the ESB (from all directions) AND maintaining the intense urbanity of the 7th Ave streetscape around the hotel. A splashy glass tower on that block would have lain waste to the continuing streetwall of old stone monoliths marching down 7th, and the loss of the Pennsylvania and its modern replacement would have made for a double architectural tragedy in the Garment District. Three tragedies, if you add in an obtrusive, scene-stealing rival to the ESB.

I'm very happy the Penn is going to stay around for awhile.

HoveringCheesecake

December 15th, 2011, 02:48 PM

You're being sarcastic, right?

I assumed he meant that, at least right now, there isn't enough demand for all of those towers to be built at the same time. When the economy gets better, then sure they can go hog wild. But if WTC 2 and 3 can't find anchor tenants, how are all of these others building going to do so? Hudson Yards is apparently an exception since they can offer cheaper rent than other developers.

londonlawyer

December 15th, 2011, 03:30 PM

I assumed he meant that, at least right now, there isn't enough demand for all of those towers to be built at the same time. When the economy gets better, then sure they can go hog wild. But if WTC 2 and 3 can't find anchor tenants, how are all of these others building going to do so? Hudson Yards is apparently an exception since they can offer cheaper rent than other developers.

Torre Verre, 432 Park, 56 Leonard and 225 W57th won't be built either.

HoveringCheesecake

December 15th, 2011, 03:46 PM

I don't know if I agree there. Rich foreigners seem to be willing to shell out ridiculous amounts of money for units that they will only use a few weeks or a few months per year. Take a look at One57.

Who knows how long that will last, though?

56 Leonard is a building that I really hope gets built.

\/\/\/ Indeed. Post more, Hof!

antinimby

December 15th, 2011, 03:49 PM

Thank you Hof for sharing that with us.

I agree wholeheartedly. Couldn't have said it any better.

mariab

December 15th, 2011, 04:27 PM

but if they are indeed going invest into full renovation then the Penn may have bought a few more decades of existence.

Here's hoping.

Alonzo-ny

December 15th, 2011, 04:35 PM

If they give the exterior a good clean like Milford Plaza it will look fantastic.

londonlawyer

December 15th, 2011, 05:02 PM

I love the Hotel Penn and hope that it's landmarked. However, this site has over 2m sf as of right, and it will be developed unless this site is landmarked before it's razed.

Music Man

December 16th, 2011, 07:25 AM

I have a feeling it will just be a more of an "upgrade" renovation as opposed to a "restoration."

ZippyTheChimp

December 16th, 2011, 08:40 AM

In the meantime, Vornado is mulling plowing millions of dollars into renovating its Hotel Pennsylvania, a dowdy cash cow that now sits on the future development site at Seventh Avenue between West 32nd and 33rd streets, across from Penn Station and Madison Square Garden.

I wish Vornado would just sell to a hotel developer. It doesn't add much to Vornado's total revenue, but it's very profitable even as a dump, so they might be able to find a buyer. Besides, the hotel industry has been holding its own in a miserable economy.

Hotel Pennsylvania earnings:

2009.......$15.1 million
2010.......$23.7 million

Percent of 2010 Vornado EBITDA......1.2%

The City Has 7,000 New Hotel Rooms in the Works, But Can it Fill Them?

December 13, 2011 7:27am | By Jill Colvin, DNAinfo Reporter/Producer

MIDTOWN — Booming construction from West 54th to West 36th streets has put the city on track to hit 90,000 hotel rooms by the end of the year — a whopping 24 percent gain since 2006 — and with an additional 7,000 rooms now in the pipeline, there are no suggestions it’s slowing down.

“It’s the fastest pace that the city has ever seen in terms of hotel development,” said Kimberly Spell, chief communications officer at NYC & Company, the city’s tourism division.

But the huge rate of growth has prompted some to question in New York can attract enough visitors to fill the rooms.

NYC & Company expects to welcome 40 new projects over the next 30 months. And while the outer boroughs comprise an increasing chunk of that growth, 22 new hotels, complete with 4,120 rooms, are now under construction in Manhattan alone.

The city’s largest hotel project, a 68-story high-rise that will one day house twin Marriott hotels, is now rising along Broadway and West 54th Street. Closer to Eighth Avenue, construction is underway on a new 34-story hotel with mystery backers.

Further south, more rooms are coming to West 36th Street between Fifth and Sixth avenues, with a new 188-room Hyatt Place at 52 W. 36th St., a Holiday Inn Express at 60 W. 36th St. and a proposed 17-story Ideal Hospitality project at 48 W. 36th St.

“Overbuilding has always been a negative in this industry,” said Joseph Spinnato, president and CEO of the Hotel Association of New York, which has been overseeing the industry in the city for more than 130 years.

Spinnato said that while there are some in the industry who believe the city is approaching its saturation point, he’s convinced there’s still growing room.

“When is the glass truly full? I don’t know. But right now... there are markets that haven’t fully been tapped.”

Driving the embrace of the hotel boom is the fact that, despite the growing number of rooms, the city continues to enjoy the highest occupancy rates in the nation — close to 85 percent of rooms filled last year.

Room rates also appear to be recovering following the crash, with visitors paying $261 per night on average so far in 2011, city numbers show.

Again and again analysts said they are confident that the city will be able to absorb the new rooms.

“I think there is a significant reservoir of unaccommodated demand,” said John Fox, senior vice president at PKF, a leading hotel consulting firm, who noted that part of what has made the industry so strong is that it can benefit from a weak economy.

When the dollar’s low, he noted, tourists are drawn from overseas. At the same time, Americans who may have otherwise boarded flights to London or Paris, come to New York instead.

Still, he said the room boom will likely have at least a minimal impact on existing rates.

“There likely will be a dampening down of the occupancy rate because of the openings,” he said.

Some credit the hotel boom to developers catching up on stalled projects as the economy improves.

“Things really slowed down after Lehman," said Jordan Barowitz, director of External Affairs at the Durst Organization, who said that, while the market hasn't improved as much as many would have liked, many new projects appear to be coming online.

“The pipeline has been moving much more slowly," he said.

But now, “Stuff is finally going to shake loose,” he said.

Roland deMilleret, managing director of the New York office of HVS Global Hospitality Services, who specializes in the Manhattan market, said that financing essentially “disappeared” in Sept. 2008 because of the crash, with no money available in 2009 or 2010.

While several projects backed by big brands in premium locations have been lucky to secure backing this year, he says the real boom is going to hit in 2014, 2015 and 2016.

“At that time we're going to see a huge spike in new supply,” he said, adding that, even then, supply will likely lag behind growing demand.

Mitchell Hochberg, the principal of Madden Real Estate Ventures who currently serves on the Board of Directors of Orient-Express Hotels, credited the recession for helping to "keep the lid on the market" and preventing overbuilding in recent years.

But he cautioned that, while certain sectors of the market may have lots of growing room, others may be saturated already.

There’s been relatively little growth in the luxury market, leaving room there, he said. And while there’s been a large increase in the number of “select service” hotels, like Courtyard by Marriott and Garden Inn, there appears to be growing demand.

The one space where he sees the potential for too many rooms is in the boutique sector, which has seen numerous newcomers open their doors. To stand out from the crowd, he predicted more branded hotels affiliated with national chains and special features to create buzz.

At the same time, more tourists have been flocking to the city than ever before. NYC & Company expects to hit an unprecedented 50 million tourists before January 1st — a year ahead of schedule.

Many in the industry credit the company for helping to lure new visitors to the city that had never come in large numbers before. The city, for instance, welcomed a whopping 77 percent more tourists from Brazil in 2010 than 2009, thanks to aggressive marketing and partnership efforts, said Spell.

Next year, the group is hoping to turn its focus to India and China, with plans to work with the federal government to push for visa waivers and improve the welcome process to help unlock new demand.

While some, including the author of a recent article in New York Magazine, have questioned whether the city will really be able to continue luring as many tourists in the long run as it has in recent years, Spell shunned the b-word: bubble.

“I think the very definition of a bubble is something that has artificially grown and therefore can’t sustain itself. But we’ve created new infrastructure,” she said.

“This is a change in how we do business,” she said. “It’s not going away.”

And those jumping into the industry, like Damon Pazzaglini, the chief operating officer at Durst Fetner Residential, are banking on it.

Pazzaglini has recently partnered with Ian Schrager to open a new PUBLIC New York Hotel at 855 Sixth Avenue, between West 30th and West 31st streets — marking his first foray into the hotel industry. He said that he's confident in the city's market and potential for growth.

“The demand is higher today than at any other point in the history of New York City,” said Pazzaglini, who said he feels safe, even if the market stalls.

“We’re so far ahead of all other markets,” he said. “With that kind of cushion, [there's a lot] we could absorb.”

Copyright © 2009 - 2011 Digital Network Associates dba DNAinfo.com.