Reply With QuoteWe can all agree that Macklowe is the worst thing to happen to NYC since Robert Moses.Originally Posted by alonzo-ny
I say if we can prevent Macklowe from developing anything anymore, then this should take care of alot of the issues relating to bad developers destroying NYC. Not only are his designs hideous and short, they are empty according to his website, or at least ready to be leased. They are ugly to look at and nobody wants to be in them. His projects are as interesting as strip malls and they maybe useful for third world countries, but not much more than that.
Separately, the Roosevelt is much too nice to destroy.
Also, the replacement for the Penn Hotel should be certainly nothing less magnificent than the original Penn Hotel when it was all new. When they destroyed the original Waldorf to build the empire state, they built a much bigger and better Waldorf to take its place. This is the kind of development tactics I would like to see...
Last edited by Scraperfannyc; August 21st, 2007 at 02:02 AM.
We can all agree that Macklowe is the worst thing to happen to NYC since Robert Moses.
ok we would agree on macklowe but i doubt we'd agree on the hotel penn for example.
So sad about the fate of this classic old building and what it seems likely to get built.
The really painful part is the loss of all of the beautiful townhouses on 57th St. Macklowe sucks.
This thread made Curbed today: Macklowe's Drake Replacement Revealed, To Much Chagrin
Those pictures of the demolition are so disturbing for me.
I'll never understand how a man like Macklowe, who could spend a little, or a lot, extra on architecture if he wanted to, is able to live with himself.
I place more blame on the Landmark Preservation Commission than the developer. There are always going to be greedy b----rds like Macklowe who will happily make the world worse for their own financial gain.
The LPC should have been a check against something like this happening.
To reiterate, it's not just the building itself that is a big architectural loss, but the juxtaposition of that crafted 1930's style with the ugly modern glass boxes that surround it.
To paraphrase Field of Dreams, this building is a part of our past. It reminds us of all that once was good, and what could be again.
Can someone explain why Macklowe is being criticized, given the fact that:
1. There are design critcisms despite no public rendering;
2. There are height critcisms despite Macklowe building out the entirety of the allowable F.A.R. (plus air rights?);
3. There are bulk criticisms despite the fact that office buildings need larger floorplates than residential buildings.
Nobody has addressed these issues and nobody has given a rational reason for the anti-Macklowe talk.
Seems to me the problem is the City, which needs to increase F.A.R. in East Midtown. You can thank the NIMBY crowd, which cut the F.A.R. back in the late 1980's.
^ I think the Drake is landmark-worthy and shouldn't be taken down.
But if it had to be razed for an office building (of limited size due to F.A.R), maybe replace it with something of architectural worth, like this:
While there haven't been official renderings, it's safe to say, based on Macklowe's history, that the outcome will be along these lines:
[QUOTE=ASchwarz;182993]Can someone explain why Macklowe is being criticized, given the fact that:
1. There are design critcisms despite no public rendering:
His website shows buildings all of the same cloned cheap stripmall quality type for the ones that HE built.
2. There are height critcisms despite Macklowe building out the entirety of the allowable F.A.R. (plus air rights?);
I am sure Macklowe could build much bigger and better buildings elsewhere in the city if he wanted to but he chooses not to. He is the worst developer I have seen and his work is terrible. All of his buildings that he built lack height and architecture. He only seems to choose to build by destroying buildings that are much better designed than the designs he would ever build. To me, he is an F (fail) quality developer who is loose in NYC. People are not crying about Macklowe for no reason you know.
Exactly, the rough sketch of what's posted on Macklowe's site approximates what will be built there. A building with angles and a crown will not be.
Macklowe is cheap, and he's also too stupid to realize that maximum rents can be generated by a landmark. A entity like Caxton, Blackstone or KKR that can afford to pay $175/s.f. wants to be in a tropy building, not in a building that has a clone in White Plains or Stamford and rents for $30 /s.f. there.
ASchwarz: please show us some commercial buildings done in the last few years by this firm that are attractive.
http://www.macklowe.com
good idea!
I'm for this group --- and it doesn't just have to be about protecting certain things -- it could also be about promoting good architecture (i.e. actually campaigning to support TALLER buildings... or buildings with forms as opposed to just dumb blocks...) ;-)
Landmarks are to be honest irrelevant. Most of the members are UES residents that only concern is to make sure park Ave stays the same. They often can care less about the city besides there area. Case in point, Yankee Stadium never being made a landmark. Last good person on Landmarks was Joan Gerner.
To lose the Drake for this is a disgrace. Losing it is okay in my book but for something grand, especially with its address.
I am hopefully optimistic that this will not be built and that creepLowe will sell the site. How can he build a spec tower in the current market? Many spec towers are rising at the moment incl:
1. creepLowe's own 510 Madison;
2. The new spec tower across the street on Madison;
3. SJP's tower;
4. 1095 6th; and
5. 2 spec towers by Extell (i.e., Diamond and Medical).
BP is smart enough not to proceed without a tenant commitment. Could Macklowe be dumb enough to do so?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks