Riverside South Development

[RoldanTTLB]

You know, I guess I didn't realize how the site was laid out. This is in the spot for building 2. The final Riverside Center tower is actually north and west of this, bordered by 61st and 62nd to the south and north, and then Riverside and unnamed street to the west and east. Interesting. I'm still amazed that's not under construction first.

[Stroika]

So is this connected to the de Portzamparc master plan?

This looks like a generic, third-rate filler building appropriate for Miami but having sadly made its way to New York (like the Riu Hotel proposal renders we've seen or something out of LIC like "The Edge" or "Queens West"). Something from an inferior hack like Costas Kondylis or even Arquitectonica.

In a word, it doesn't seem to be at all of a piece with what was promised for Riverside South. Anyone know what's going on?

[Derek2k3]

Yes, this is part of the master plan. Extell spun off 2 sites of the project to private developers. I was hoping that as part of the project's approval, city planning would mandate that the design Extell presented must be retained.

Bids to develop two Riverside towers due this month
January 11, 2012 09:30AM

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2012/01/...ue-this-month/

...Carlyle and Extell are looking to sell the land so they can unload the onus of meeting affordable housing and community space demands on another buyer, while they focus on three other planned condominiums closer to the Hudson River. The two buildings must include a public school and day care for 45 children, garages with bike racks and car-charging stations and a retail space that includes an auto sales shop...

[ZippyTheChimp]

Thanks.

So I guess we can expect more of the same for building 5.

[ASchwarz]

So is this connected to the de Portzamparc master plan?

This looks like a generic, third-rate filler building appropriate for Miami but having sadly made its way to New York (like the Riu Hotel proposal renders we've seen or something out of LIC like "The Edge" or "Queens West").

That Riu Hotel rendering is not the correct rendering. They just used a pic from some other random Riu Hotel in Spain or Mexico or something, and then stuck a "Times Square" name on the building. It wouldn't even fit onto the site.

[EastMillinocket]

Their only high-rise hotels are in Guadalajara and Panama City, and they look nothing like the RIU New York rendering.

[DUMBRo]

Yes, this is part of the master plan. Extell spun off 2 sites of the project to private developers. I was hoping that as part of the project's approval, city planning would mandate that the design Extell presented must be retained.

Bids to develop two Riverside towers due this month
January 11, 2012 09:30AM

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2012/01/...ue-this-month/

I suppose that corner lends itself to some kind of value engineering but disappointing all the same. If the other condo towers hew to the original script, I'll be satisfied.

[ASchwarz]

Their only high-rise hotels are in Guadalajara and Panama City, and they look nothing like the RIU New York rendering.

No, they have high-rise hotels all over the globe, not only in Guadalajara and Panama City, and that isn't the rendering for the New York site.

It doesn't even make sense in terms of zoning and massing regulations.

[Stroika]

Here's hoping they don't let Barnett get away with this. The city needs to find a way to end these "bait-and-switch" plays by developers -- first Atlantic Yards (Gehry becomes pre-assembled cardboard boxes), now this. Not cool.

http://observer.com/2012/09/starchit...erside-center/

Starchitect Switcheroo! Will the Upper West Side Get Any Pritzker-Worthy Buildings at Riverside Center?

By

Matt Chaban

9/21

Has the Upper West Side fallen for an eight-acre bait and switch?

At least one and possibly all five towers at the massive Riverside Center development will not be the work of Pritzker Prize-winning architect Christian de Portzamparc. The French designer helped Extell Development and the Carlyle Group sell their swank plans to the community and the City Planning Commission. The latter was so taken with the crystalline designs of Mr. de Portzamparc, who also designed the LVMH headquarters and Extell’s One57 tower, that restrictive zoning covenants were set to ensure the buildings would look as promised.

But now, Extell and Carlyle have turned over one of their tower sites to the Dermot Company, which has hired local firm SLCE to design the apartment building on the West End Avenue section of the site. While Dermot insists its project will be up to the standards promised during last year’s public review process, some, including the exacting City Planning chair Amanda Burden, worry the design doppelgangers will lead to lesser work.

“I am extremely disappointed to learn that the developer of Riverside Center has chosen not to retain Christian de Portzamparc as architect for this project,” Ms. Burden said in a statement.

When Dermot came to the local community board last month to present its version of the designs, there was some disappointment that they had not been joined by Mr. de Portzamparc. “If you look at it, they’re more usual, they’ve probably been value-engineered,” Ehtel Shefer, chair of the board’s Riverside Center working group, told The Observer in a phone interview. “I don’t know if it’s the feeling of the entire board, but certainly some people were disappointed.”

Back in 2005, Carlyle and Extell bought the remaining undeveloped portion of Donald Trump’s Riverside South development from his Hong Kong partners (to the consternation of Mr. Trump) for $1.76 million. Much of it has since been developed as new towers by Gary Barnett, Extell’s principal, but the southernmost parcel had to be rezoned because previous plans called for a new television studio to be built on the site.

Instead, Mr. Barnett trotted out his plan for a 3.1-million-square-foot city within a city within a city designed by Mr. de Portzamparc. Five jagged towers were arrayed around three acres of open space. After much back-and-forth with Councilwoman Gail Brewer, the developers agreed to building 20 percent of the apartments as affordable housing and to include a school on the site.

When it came time to start building, Carlyle, which controls a majority stake in the site, decided to hold a competitive bidding process, to which Extell was invited but not guaranteed the chance to build the first tower. Instead, the prize went to Dermot. When it comes time to build the remaining four parcels, Carlyle expects to go through the same private bidding process.

Mr. Barnett said that given the large amount of affordable housing and the school in the first building, he was less interested in winning the project. He still hopes to take the lead on some, if not all, of the other development sites, though he acknowledged there was no guarantee any of the towers would be his to build.

“I hope we get to build some, but I don’t know,” he said. “If we do, I can tell you, Christian de Portzamparc will be our architect.”

Carlyle declined to comment.

Councilwoman Brewer was ambivalent about the changes. “I was more concerned with the school and the affordable housing, but I can see why people might be angry about this,” she said. “They certainly made a hard sell for him [Mr. de Portzamparc] during the ULURP.”

In a brief statement, Dermot principal and COO Stephen Benjamin, stressed that his tower was still under design and, given the zoning covenants, would still resemble what was originally proposed. “We are in the midst of the design process for a spectacular building that will be in full compliance with the zoning as is our obligation and right,” Mr. Benjamin said.

Ms. Burden raised the same point in her statement, that even if the de Portzamparc name is not on the final buildings, his master plan for the site remains, and the essence of his work will persist.
“The integrity of de Portzamparc’s work will be maintained because key architectural features—including, among others, building silhouettes, distinctive sloped and angled sculptural forms, facets and sloping tower tops—are embodied in the land use approval and are a condition of developing the site,” Ms. Burden said. “De Portzamparc was instrumental not only in shaping the site but also in developing these design controls.”

“The City Planning Commission fully understands that a developer may decide to change architects over time for a number of reasons,” she continued. “De Portzamparc’s important contribution to this project will survive this developer’s decision to look elsewhere for design services.”

[Gulcrapek]

A sea of mediocrity

[Gulcrapek]

The Rushmore, The Avery, and others. The quality of materials and of construction up close is shockingly poor (for the most part). I'm not sure how the people who live in these buildings don't notice.

[lofter1]

They notice, but it's the option they have if they want to buy and have a riverfront location. Designs with thin veneered facades are what are offered. Plus the views are good. Anyway, they spend a lot more time looking out than looking at the buildings.

[RoldanTTLB]

The vast majority of these are rentals, too. That never hurts. The people who live over here are looking for a different kind of apartment/living experience than say, the Lower East Side can offer as well. Many of these apartments are larger and have (rich) families in them. The prevalence of playgrounds and daycare facilities (and grocery stores), all help this along. BPC is similar. While they're towers on a street grid, the area is quite suburban feeling.

[ASchwarz]

The vast majority of these are rentals, too. That never hurts.

Only five of the buildings are rentals. The majority of Riverside South buildings are condos. Granted, some of the condo buildings may allow rentals, but the residents are mostly owners, or living in primarily owner-occupied buildings.

[RoldanTTLB]

I count 10 buildings. If half are rentals, and some of the condos are rented, there's probably more renters. It comes down to units… that said, I think more of the rear buildings, not facing the river are rentals as well.