Page 36 of 47 FirstFirst ... 2632333435363738394046 ... LastLast
Results 526 to 540 of 703

Thread: Gene Kaufman...kough...kough, hack....hack...

  1. #526

    Default

    A new 21 story hotel by Kaufman was filed yesterday by the way. Cheers!

    333 West 38th Street

    NOOOOOOOOOO!
    say it ain't so.....That's right across the street from me- and that makes like the 9th piece of $hit
    this mullah has dumped on the surrounding two blocks- ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!
    We don't need anymore 'effin hotels around here- the area is saturated already

  2. #527

    Default

    Scumonkey, the city tends to take neighbors' objections seriously (oftentimes too seriously, I would argue). If Kaufman has been able to systematically destroy your neighborhood, why haven't residents spoken up? It seems that some community opposition would gain the city's ear ... and do everyone in New York a favor by sparing us new Kaufman atrocities.

    Is there anyone leading opposition to Kaufman's crap in your neighborhood? If not, why don't you give it a shot ... distribute some flyers to neighbors, call for a meeting of residents in neighboring buildings, meet with the local Community Board, etc.

  3. #528

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
    There's still seedy hotels left in Manhattan?
    Every single one of these "budget" hotels are seedy when they are in Manhattan. They are fine if you want a relatively cheap stay in the Midwest, but a Comfort Inn or somesuch in NYC just screams don't go there!

    Unless you love bedbugs, or something. There's a reason they are cheap!

  4. #529

    Default

    Kaufman is the Energizer Bunny of architects (so-called, in his case), he just doesn't stop. The latest is to be built at 237 West 54th Street for Joseph Moinian, and he just got permission to build it higher still with air rights from the Booth Theater.

    Can the neighborhood be incensed and complain? Sure. Does it help? No.

    http://www.dnainfo.com/20111111/midt...oversial-hotel

    So CB5 gave it the ol' rubber stamp, and there he goes again.

  5. #530
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    Do you know what seedy means?

    The guests at these hotels are as wholesome, Disney, middle-America, tourists as you can get. The other common type are the college-age European backpacking visitors.

    Manhattan is overrun with them.

    If you think that's seedy, then you haven't seen what is really seedy.

  6. #531

    Default

    Is there anyone leading opposition to Kaufman's crap in your neighborhood?
    My upstairs neighbor sits on community board 4- there is nothing we can do...
    Seems Bloomberg gives the green light to build anything anyone wants to in this area,
    height restrictions/ scale be damned...
    (as long as they deposit funds into his Hudson Yards coffers).

  7. #532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HoveringCheesecake View Post
    Every single one of these "budget" hotels are seedy when they are in Manhattan. They are fine if you want a relatively cheap stay in the Midwest, but a Comfort Inn or somesuch in NYC just screams don't go there!
    You couldn't be more wrong. The budget chain hotels usually get about $400/night for their Manhattan locations.

    They're absolute gold mines, and are hugely important for these hotel chains. They're also critically important for the city's tax base, and provide huge benefits to everything from the city's schools to the city's public safety.

    The city needs far more of these hotels. I know that folks on WNY don't like how the exteriors look, but I think they're terrific. Super for the city budget and economy, and they replace parking lots and tumbledown taxpayers with density and vitality.

    Yes, they could look better, but 99% of them replace parking lots or taxpayers, so, even in terms of exterior aesthetics, they're huge improvements.

    And added bonus of no parking. None of these hotels provide parking, and they eliminate thousands of neighborhood-killing parking spaces.

  8. #533

    Default

    Yes, they could look better, but 99% of them replace parking lots or taxpayers, so, even in terms of exterior aesthetics, they're huge improvements.
    Says who...I'd rather the parking lots or the tax payers. Let them build nine or ten of them all around you and see if you wouldn't feel differently about them.
    There is no reason Kaufman should be allowed to put so much drek up on one block- destroying the area with his visual blight.
    If this crap is so good for the city then why not spread the wealth (sic) around?!

  9. #534
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    How are they "lively"?? Most of those little set back plazas are hardly ever used by people except as a way in the door (they probably enter fast lest they have to look at the dull pile they're entering). But that outdoor space is handy for the hotel to stow garbage before the trucks pick it up.

  10. #535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
    There's still seedy hotels left in Manhattan?
    Check out the reviews for hotel Carter in the Theater District, for instance. Main key words off their webpage on Google reviews:

    bed bugs · disgusting · port authority bus terminal · dead body · music hall

    http://maps.google.com/maps/place?um...ed=0CDQQ4gkwAA

  11. #536
    Senior Member Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    926

    Default

    Post 473 in this thread is hilarious! The whole thread is hilarious.

  12. #537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
    Do you know what seedy means?

    The guests at these hotels are as wholesome, Disney, middle-America, tourists as you can get. The other common type are the college-age European backpacking visitors.

    Manhattan is overrun with them.

    If you think that's seedy, then you haven't seen what is really seedy.
    Your post sums up what I was thinking to begin with. I assume the information was lost in translation?

    Perhaps things were confused in the MIDWESTERN -----> EASTCOST translation. People in America tend prefer hotels that they are familiar with at home.

    My sincere apologies.

    Quote Originally Posted by ASchwarz View Post
    You couldn't be more wrong. The budget chain hotels usually get about $400/night for their Manhattan locations.

    They're absolute gold mines, and are hugely important for these hotel chains. They're also critically important for the city's tax base, and provide huge benefits to everything from the city's schools to the city's public safety.

    The city needs far more of these hotels. I know that folks on WNY don't like how the exteriors look, but I think they're terrific. Super for the city budget and economy, and they replace parking lots and tumbledown taxpayers with density and vitality.

    Yes, they could look better, but 99% of them replace parking lots or taxpayers, so, even in terms of exterior aesthetics, they're huge improvements.

    And added bonus of no parking. None of these hotels provide parking, and they eliminate thousands of neighborhood-killing parking spaces.
    Yes, my entire point was that those particular hotels were budget establishments outside New York City. It has nothing to do with the prices in NYC.

    The price comment was referring to the cost of said hotels in the central portion of the United States. They might be expensive in Manhattan, but elsewhere they are the opposite. I spent slightly more than $300/night at the Millenom Hilton, for example.

    Sorry for the confusion.

    12 hours later - and sorry for the rambling drunk post. Mods feel free to slap me around a bit.
    Last edited by HoveringCheesecake; November 17th, 2011 at 02:30 PM.

  13. #538
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    The Odd Couple ( or American Gothic 2.0 ) ...

    ...

    Patti Smith Responds to Criticism Over Chelsea Hotel Concert

    DNA Info
    January 11, 2012

    CHELSEA — Singer-songwriter Patti Smith has responded to widespread criticism from Hotel Chelsea tenants who say an upcoming concert at the landmark building's ballroom proves that she's sold out to its controversial landlords.

    "I am an independent person, not owned or directed by anyone," wrote Smith in a statement.

    "My allegiance is to the Hotel itself, and I have done nothing to tarnish it. It is very difficult to embrace change, but my great hope is to witness the Hotel Chelsea find a strong and positive place in the 21st century."

    "My current involvement with the Hotel Chelsea began some months ago when I heard rumors that the hotel would be leveled," Smith wrote. "I was devastated and entered in a dialogue with the architect [Gene Kaufman], through a mutual friend."

    The hotel is landmarked, and so cannot be knocked down, though renovations have gutted the building. In December, a housing court judge told the Chetrits to clean up renovations that an environmental survey said were hazardous to tenants' health.

    Smith also said her future role would be to help preserve the "artistic cachet" of the hotel and "participate in the development of a possible artists-in-residence program."

    Ed Hamilton, who runs the "Living With Legends" Hotel Chelsea blog, said the response simply wasn't enough.

    "We are worried about who the rightful tenants are going to turn out to be," Hamilton wrote, pointing out that the Chetrits have filed eviction papers against several artists that already live there.

    "We are glad that you aren’t taking compensation but you should not let the Chetrits use you for propaganda purposes."

  14. #539
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Looks like the love didn't last ...

    Patti Smith Cancels Controversial Hotel Chelsea Concert

    DNA INFO
    January 12, 2012

    CHELSEA — Songstress Patti Smith has canceled a performance at the Hotel Chelsea that had been set for Thursday evening but sparked controversy among the historic building's remaining residents.

    “In respect for the wishes of the Chelsea Hotel Tenants Association, I have canceled tonight’s performance,” Smith wrote in a statement. “My motivation was solely to serve the tenants. If this serves them better, than I am satisfied.”

    After receiving invitations to Thursday’s concert, the hotel’s roughly 80 residents largely slammed it as a sell-out move by singer-songwriter Smith — and a shady PR ploy by the hotel’s new owners, the Chetrit Group.

    The hotel’s tenants have been locked in an extended legal battle over the safety of a renovation project at the building, and the Chetrit Group has filed eviction motions against several longtime residents.

    Tenants reacted positively to the news that Smith had canceled the concert. In their own statement issued Thursday afternoon, the hotel’s tenant association declined the invitation to the concert, questioning the timing and citing an ongoing lawsuit over the renovation.

    “This turn of publicity overshadows our concerns, and conversation with management, and we fear our participation in this event will be misconstrued,” it said.

    The statement went on to say that the tenants represented by the association hope to come together with the hotel’s new management in a constructive way.

    Smith played a show at the hotel for representatives of the developer and the building’s new management company, King and Grove, on Wednesday, residents said.

    Some residents and protesters had planned to gather outside the hotel to rally against the concert and recite lyrics to Smith’s iconic song, “The People Have The Power” Thursday evening. It was unclear if the protest would still occur after Smith canceled the show.

  15. #540
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Seems that Jeremiah at Vanishing New York might have turned the tables for tonight "Hotel Guests Show" when he called for a public "Die In" outside the Chelsea before Patti hit the stage.

    Last night she did a private show in the presence of her inamorato ...

    Patti at the Chelsea

    JEREMIAH'S VANISHING NEW YORK
    THURSDAY, JANUARY 12, 2012

    Last night Patti Smith played a private concert at the Chelsea Hotel. Reported Ed Hamilton, blogger at Living with Legends, on his Facebook page, "tenants were not invited... Gene Kaufman, the architect, is in attendance."

    An audience member--invited to the party by the hotel's controversial new management company, King and Grove (a "lifestyle hotel brand defined by modern luxury with eclectic influence")--tweeted a photo of Patti onstage in the hotel's ballroom. Hamilton shared the link:



    Something about all this feels dirty. The grainy pic, the information leaking out across Facebook and Twitter. It's hard to accept that Patti Smith is working with the developers who are gut renovating the Chelsea and evicting its tenants.

    An anonymous commenter here was at the show last night and wrote: "It was for 'press' but it seemed more like friends of the owner. First let me say that Patti Smith thinks she is doing the right thing by just being a positive presence." However, says Anon, "To say that 'I just want to do good' and turn a blind eye to the means to the end result is unacceptable... I leave Ms. Smith with these words: "Indifference to injustice is the gate to hell.'"

    Tonight, she's playing a concert for the tenants--a move that many are not happy about. Wrote the Times last night, "Some wondered whether the new owner, the Chetrit Group, was using Ms. Smith in a craven attempt to make peace. Others demanded that Ms. Smith cancel the show."

    Smith responded to the negative press on her website, outlining how she is working with the hotel's new management (without pay) and saying, "My small performance for the tenants was my own idea. My hope is that we might have a nice evening and the opportunity to communicate directly. I am an independent person, not owned or directed by anyone. My allegiance is to the Hotel itself, and I have done nothing to tarnish it."

    I'm a fan of Patti Smith, of her music and her writing, and I want to give her the benefit of the doubt. I want to believe that she believes she's helping the tenants and keeping the Chelsea's spirit intact. But I'm not sure what to think.



    If you're confused, too, and you'd like to make a statement about all of this, but you're not sure what kind of a statement to make, come to tonight's flash mob. Lie down and "die in" in front of the Chelsea at 8:00 p.m., concert time, raising a lit lighter in the air and reciting the lyrics to "People Have the Power" (click for lyrics to print), then leave. If it's still raining, turn to the hotel, light the lighter under your umbrella, recite the lyrics, and go.

    What does it mean? I'm not sure. I do know that the tenants have been fighting this battle by themselves for years and they're getting picked off one by one. The people of the city have not shown up outside the hotel to lend support with any kind of protest. So look at it that way--or just see it as something to do as Patti plays guitar while the Chelsea Hotel dies.

Similar Threads

  1. 33 Beekman Street - Pace University Dorm - Gene Kaufman
    By londonlawyer in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: December 13th, 2014, 09:27 PM
  2. 20 Maiden Lane: Another Nightmare from Chang & Kaufman
    By lofter1 in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: November 16th, 2011, 05:51 PM
  3. How to Hack an Election
    By Kris in forum News and Politics
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: December 25th, 2008, 01:47 PM
  4. Intercontinental hotel - Nassau St. (by the horrible Gene Kaufman)
    By antinimby in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: August 2nd, 2007, 02:10 AM
  5. Gene Robinson, the first openly gay bishop
    By TLOZ Link5 in forum News and Politics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: November 7th, 2003, 01:03 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software