What a depressing thread.
I have a couple questions for New Yorkers. You guys have a first hand/front seat view of the development going on in NYC. It’s been a while since I’ve been to the city.
Despite the recent lost of significant historic structures in the city (i.e. the Drake, townhouses… etc.), NYC still has a vast amount of beautiful historic structures within the city…. right? Is this destruction isolated to Mid-town Manhattan or is this problem affecting the entire city?
I'll go up and shoot some pics.You guys should see the nice buildings on 73rd and Lex
The article from the Jan. 9, 2007 edition of the NY Post is set forth below. Amazingly, Weiss and Cuozzo seem to admire this jerk's demolition of nice structures.
Here's the article:
There seem to be no limits on the ambitions of Harry and Billy Macklowe. The father-son team own the GM Building, commanding the highest rents in the U.S.; they recently bought 1330 Sixth Ave. for $498 million; and they plan major new projects at 510 Madison Ave. and at the former Drake Hotel site on Park Avenue.
Now, the Macklowes are in the early stage of a new assemblage on Lexington Avenue. The company already controlled 1018 Lexington, one of six adjacent, four-story buildings on the north side of the western blockfront between 72nd and 73rd streets.
Now they've quietly bought No. 1012 as well for $5.5 million. Since the Macklowes are not in the business of managing tenements, we assume they have bigger game in mind.
I'm just hoping that NY is not losing its old world charm at the expense of greedy developer. That's what I admire most about NY. I'm sadden by the lost of these pre-war beauties. It's these old structures that separates NY from Hong Kong, Dubai, to some extent Chicago (Chi-town has many but it's not close to NY in numbers) and all the other major skyscraper centers around the world.
I guest it makes me feel a little better knowing that NY still has thousands of these beautiful old structures within its city limits.
I understand all people views here, but this city is constantly changing and manythings will come and go as time goes by and there really is not alot anyone can do about it
This building is a gem on a stretch of road with plenty of gems. St Barts, Seagram, Lever, PepsiCo. The Drake may not be on the level of those other buildings, but when you consider the same stretch has several godawful boxes constructed for the sole purpose of making as much money as possible; the frustration at seeing this wonderful building and others ready for destruction is depressing. This Drake should be protected.
What is happening to the townhouses and especially the Drake is criminal. I've sent Tierney an angry letter. The Landmarks Commission is government agency and they must be held accountable for this failure of duty.
It is true that the city is always changing. Without some kind of ethos which says you can support robust development while at the same time saving things of lasting value for the benefit of future generations of New Yorkers, in the end we lose what makes New York unique from other world cities with endless skyscrapers. Let's keep building skyscrapers but let's do it in a way that preserves the interest of the streeetscape at sidewalk level. The remarkable aesthetic experience that a streetscape like the stretch on 57th provides can be easily preserved with a tower rising behind and above, especially in this case since the already doomed Drake that is a part of the project sits behind them.I understand all people views here, but this city is constantly changing and manythings will come and go as time goes by and there really is not alot anyone can do about it
If a relative left me 40 million dollars, it would seem like a lot at first. But then I'd start chipping away at it. Without wise development of my financial portfolio I might spend it bit by bit until my bank balance was no different than my neighbors.
New Yorkers "hit the lottery" with all this utterly irreplaceable architectural wealth that our forefathers created and left to us. Materials and craftsmanship that we will not see much of again. Some people might be cavalier and think we can knock these things down month after month, chipping away at the ol' bank account. There are so many of them, it is said. But it's shortsighted. The fact that they are sprinkled all around Manhattan is not something to be taken for granted and spent frivolously. Their presence and effect on the beauty of New York is cumulative and "greater than the sum of its parts". Our decendants could have the pleasure of enjoying this architectural wealth (and the real
$$$ wealth it generates in the long run) if we'd just have the common sense to think beyond our own short-term benefit; developing blocks that need it, and recognizing other blocks (like the one on 57th) as timeless and irreplaceable.
I thought we had mechanisms in place to help guide the process of change in a rational and long-term-beneficial way. One, for example, being the Landmarks Commision. Yet time and time again we have witnessed its inability (or willful negligence I'm beginning to believe) to save treasures like the townhouses on 56th street, which were destroyed for a banal 16- story residential. This is not the way to solve the housing shortage or to develop the city. It's not like they're building an 80-floor beauty there.
A little bit of common sense and New York will continue to change and develop, but in a thoughtful way. The goal should be overall improvement, we're intelligent human beings and we can guide these forces of architectural change to our collective benefit.
Last edited by MidtownGuy; April 13th, 2007 at 01:33 PM.
Having said this however, I believe the Drake should be saved and done over like the Plaze was. AS for the 510 site, ill stick to my original opinion, nothing that was taken down was worth saving