Reply With QuoteThis doesn't bode well for the quality of the development based upon their most recent buildings around town. Hopefully Toll Bros. will be smart enough to bring abroad a quality architect for such a high profile location.
According to the WSJ, Toll Brothers purchased this site.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...DDLETopStories
Last edited by londonlawyer; October 14th, 2010 at 07:22 AM.
This doesn't bode well for the quality of the development based upon their most recent buildings around town. Hopefully Toll Bros. will be smart enough to bring abroad a quality architect for such a high profile location.
The site is now within the UES historical district. If still current, the new building permit would be grandfathered in. I'd imagined a new design would require LPC approval.
I hope that they use the design that Ark planned to build. Unlike their POS on W57th, this was going to be a beautiful, classic building.
132 East 65th Street
'McMansion' Builder to Erect Mid-Rise in UES Historic District
Toll Brothers, a national luxury home builder, purchased 132 East 65th St., to the chagrin of some locals.
DNA Info
By Gabriela Resto-Montero
DNAinfo Reporter/Producer
October 21, 2010
UPPER EAST SIDE — A luxury developer known as the father of the "McMansion" phenomenon purchased a Lexington Avenue property last week, causing locals to worry about the future aesthetic of the neighborhood.
Toll Brothers, the new owners of 132 E. 65th St., announced it would build a 15-story, 25-unit luxury building on the lot, which sits on a block mostly populated by four- and five-story brownstones.
"I think that a 15-story building, without seeing any plans, is probably not going to be a good relationship to what exists right there," said Tara Kelly, executive director of Friends of the Upper East Side Historic District.
The site's original developer, Trevor Davis, of Davis Development Holdings, tore down a 1922 mansion at the location to make room for a luxury mid-rise, but foreclosed on the property in 2009, OurTown reported.
Neighbors reacted with a campaign to add East 65th Street to the Upper East Side Historic District and were successful this past March, but the plans for the luxury apartment residence were grandfathered into Toll Brothers' purchase.
The loophole saved Toll Brothers from having to present their plans before the Landmarks Preservation Commission for approval, said Elisabeth de Bourbon, a spokeswoman with the commission.
Preservationists said they'd like to work with the developer to find a design that's acceptable for the neighborhood.
"We'll do everything we can to make sure whatever is constructed there is respectful and contextual," Kelly said.
For their part, the Toll Brothers recognize that the neighborhood has a unique character, said Christine Sciarrotta, a spokeswoman for the developer.
"We will be building what was approved, which will closely resemble the existing traditional architecture of this well-known neighborhood," Sciarotta said in a statement.
Copyright © 2009 - 2010 Digital Network Associates dba DNAinfo.com
All 4 of the New Building Applications / Permits for this site (861-863 Lexington Avenue) state this:
AUDIT: NOTICE TO REVOKE 08/11/2010
Anybody know what that means for the plan here?
Like this?"We will be building what was approved, which will closely resemble the existing traditional architecture of this well-known neighborhood," Sciarotta said in a statement.
I saw a full rendering of the building, and it's really beautiful. (Of course, cheap materials will ruin it.)
These outraged people are full of sh.it. Lex has ENORMOUS potential, but sadly, so much of it is rundown. Perhaps these phonies should campaign to get the schlongs whose properties are poorly kept to restore them.
The Touraine, 65th Street & Lexington Avenue.
This is new residential condominium currently under construction on the Upper East Side; a classical design done in a way that Vitruvious or Palladio definitely would not approve of - proportions, entablature, column placement all design elements that have been way too 'compromised' to meet the approval of the 'classical design' purist.
This type of 'new construction' consists basically of to a bunch of 'historical' design features draped on-top-of a given set of contemporary construction methods and habitation requirements. 'Historical Recreations' are very popular and I think they have proven to 'sell better' than modernist buildings: I can see why people feel 'traditional design' is the way to go, and will ultimately be their preference for a new home. Me personally, I would prefer to see a contemporary design being constructed on this site.
I am not entirely an 'aesthetically illiterate' as some might accuse me, I just use an entirely different 'criteria of evaluation' for new buildings: so for my taste - this new building easily passes as being a 'very handsome' looking new building. And I do hope it will be 'exquisitely crafted' and built with good quality materials.
This type of 'historicist' building is something even a modernist could love; but, the construction quality need be nothing less than sublime, otherwise the thing just comes off looking like a cheaply built historical recreation, a disappointment rather than a delight.
Unlike many forum 'critics' who post scathing diatribes about innocuous architectural designs, I do not believe any "BUILDING" needs to meet with the same 'high aesthetic' standards' as are understandably required of the 'Fine Arts', such as painting/sculpture. So I hope some of the 'purists' will understand why I personally think this building is a 'real beauty'.
In terms of construction methods/materials a facade done with engineered stone panels, preferably a limestone veneer, on the exterior would be nice: but precast concrete panels will be the most likely choice: which look great too, if done right.
Basically my introductory thesis here boils-down to a simple assertion of my personal preference, that is: 'historicist' architectural design (good) - 'modernist' architectural design (better).
News item from curbed.com - http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2011/0...eiled.php#more
And, here is some news on the project from my broker buddy: site photos I have taken are forthcoming.
http://thebrokerbuddy.com/index2.php...raine-unveiled
But why try to make it look faux Palladian when, as you say, all the proportions are simply wrong?
Lest I be accused of being scathing or worse, I'll stop here and hope for a reply ...
It's great to read those 'scathing' reviews - there silly, but still a good read. Any way!Originally Posted by lofter1
All 'historical/classical' new construction is "faux" in the sense that it is a 'contemporary building constructed in a 'historical' style.
More to your point. The proportions, entablature, scale, column & window spacing in classical design were derived from such established principals as the 'sculptors cannon of ideal proportions' or the 'fibonacci mathematical sequence' or the 'golden section' - the overall architecture design would be 'primarily' in keeping with these 'Albertian' or 'Pallladian' classical design guiding principals.
In a modern building the developer will demand 'great big windows' or need to 'value engineer' to cost effectively conform to contemporary building methods & materials. So, given that social, functional, financial context the best (in typical cases) a developer/architect can do is 'compromise' the truly "classical design".
That is what I meant by saying that this type of building is basically "historical design features draped on-top-of a given set of contemporary construction methods and habitation requirements".
I my opinion these 'historicist' buildings must by necessity be 'watered-down': the only option would be building an exact replica of the Santa Maria Novella.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...QEwBA&dur=1054
There is the other option of using proportions that work for the building in question, with the decorative elements doing the same.
On this plan we see grandiose detailing (but not in the PoMo mode, where exaggeration is taken to the next level -- thankfully that era is pretty much over). Here those design details simply appear arbitrarily tacked on, seemingly as an enticement to folks who are looking to Live Big
The TOURAINE (thought I would mention the name so searches would direct people to this thread.)
Do we have a thread for this?
From Curbed.com
We've been waiting on news of The Touraine, the new Toll Brothers condo building currently in progress at Lexington Avenue and 65th Street. The website's still fairly sparse, but putting some life in a slow late-summer Friday is this rendering of the project, which just arrived in the Curbed inbox. The project, by IA Interior Architects, should open its sales office "in just a few short weeks," with move-ins set for fall 2012 and pricing from $1 million to $15 million. Meanwhile, Toll's Dumbo project 205 Water has a 1,100-person waiting list, according to the Brooklyn Eagle. So this could be a fun rivalry.
?
http://www.thetouraine.com/
Wow. Are you sure the Toll Brothers are building this? That actually looks good.
They are building this design but not because they want to but because they kinda have to.
Read post # 20 above about how they are only using this design (that was submitted by the previous developer) in order to avoid having to go in front of the LPC and also to appease "neighbors."
The Toll Brothers would have given us a hideous glass box otherwise.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks