So does this mean the tower will be shorter if the school is built AFTER?
This is bad news in my opinion.
Questions begin over structure for new school
By Ronda Kaysen
When Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Schools Chancellor Joel Klein stood in Tweed Courthouse in February and announced that a new pre-K-8 school would be coming to a Frank Gehry-designed tower on Beekman St., they far from settled the matter.
The $65 million East Side school, the most expensive ever built in New York City, will not open until 2008, but already school officials, community leaders and parents are reconsidering what type of school they would like this new one to be and which of their youngsters they would like it to serve.
“It’s entirely possible that it may not be a pre-K-8,” Paul Hovitz, chairperson of Community Board 1’s Youth and Education Committee, said in a telephone interview.
Peter Heaney, superintendent for Region 9, appears to be backing away from the original school plan for the site. The Beekman St. school’s fate is far from sealed, he indicated at an April 6 Town Hall meeting about Downtown schools. “We’ll have to have discussions as to how that school is structured,” he said.
Downtown schools are facing a looming overcrowding crisis with 13,000 new residential units expected to crop up south of Canal St. in the next five years. Although many in the community agree the neighborhood needs more schools, they remain divided about whether they need more elementary school seats or a zoned middle school for older children.
“When you’re building new schools, this is the time to think through the admissions formula,” said City Councilmember Eva Moskowitz, who chairs the Council Education Committee and helped bring two new schools to her district, at P.S. 234 parents meeting earlier this week. “If you don’t want a K-8, I think there’s plenty of time.”
For those already entrenched in an elementary school crowding dilemma, the decision is obvious. “I always think in terms of triage, and the biggest emergency needs to be taken care of first and that’s elementary schools,” Sandy Bridges, principal of the overcrowded P.S. 234 in Tribeca, said earlier this month.
P.S. 234 is already at 122 percent capacity and its population is expected to balloon in the coming years with two new residential sites directly opposite the school in the works – adding 700 units of housing to the immediate neighborhood by the start of the 2007 school year, the same year a 150-seat annex built for the school in one of the two developments opens. “There’s a huge explosion of little children,” Bridges said.
P.S. 234’s School Leadership Team recently decided to cancel its pre-K program next fall and for the foreseeable future to make room for the ever-increasing student body, a move that worries Region 9.
“It’s outrageous that the school has to make a decision not to have a pre-K,” Heaney said at the Town Hall meeting, calling the move “upsetting.”
For all the parents and educators panicking about the neighborhood’s elementary schools, there are as many who insist the neighborhood desperately needs a zoned middle school for its children. Currently, the only zoned middle school for the area is the Simon Baruch School on E. 21st St., with no direct subway or bus access for most children.
“Why not zone the East Side middle school and I.S. 89 as two C.B. 1 zoned schools?” suggested C.B. 1 member George Olsen at a Youth and Education Committee meeting held earlier this month to discuss the middle school problem. Olsen wondered aloud if the new school could be structured to mirror P.S./I.S. 89 in Battery Park City – two separate schools that share the same building – thereby creating two middle schools for Downtown students.
But the top person at the Dept. of Education does not appear keen on the idea of repeating the P.S./I.S. 89 model. It now favors the K-8 structure for its new schools, a policy shift Schools Chancellor Klein emphasized at the February press conference. “It will be a big, big thing to have that continuity through elementary and middle school,” Klein, Heaney’s boss, said then.
Downtown secured the East Side school last September as part of a development agreement brokered for the community by City Councilmember Alan Gerson and Deputy Mayor Daniel Doctoroff. Ratner’s Beekman St. site – adjacent to developer Bruce Ratner’s 75-story tower – was not finalized until February after negotiations with Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Bloomberg and Ratner. The mayor said the city would put $45 million in the capital budget and $20 million was likely to come from the Lower Manhattan Development Corp. if it was needed. Ratner said he was obligated to pay any costs over $65 million.
The community never formally discussed zoning a single K-8 with the region or the Dept. of Ed. during those negotiations, C.B. 1 district manager Paul Goldstein told board members at the Youth and Education Committee meeting. “The only thing we ever said was that we wanted the school for C.B. 1,” Goldstein said. “The way the school morphed into that announcement [by Klein] was not the result of discussions that we had.”
The Tweed Courthouse announcement was news to more than just the community: the City Council Education Committee was unaware of the $65 million project, as well. “It was not in the capital budget and I don’t believe in projects not being in the capital budget,” said Moskowitz at P.S. 234. “It never went through my committee, it’s not a done deal.”
Gerson, who brokered the deal, is not worried about the capital budget. “It’ll be amended into it,” he said in a telephone interview. “That’s more of a technicality than anything else.”
All sides agree on one point, at least: the Beekman St. school is a long way off. The Dept. of Ed. generally zones schools six months before they open and a fall 2008 opening date – a year later than initial projections — is optimistic at best. “There’s a serious question here in terms of the projected opening date,” Hovitz said, noting concerns that the 100,000 sq. ft. school may not be designed or constructed until after the tower is completed. “It seems to me that it would be a far more efficient way to do this.”
So does this mean the tower will be shorter if the school is built AFTER?
This is bad news in my opinion.
Um, there is no reference to height in the article. The height of the building hasn't changed since the project was announced.Originally Posted by PHLguy
I work for the City and can probably get the building's planned height. I'll try and get an exact number. Also, they have started digging on the western portion of the lot. There is already alot going on at the site, though much of the parking lot is still open.
I am speculating, and Im not saying Im right either, I hope I'm wrong.
If construction of this tower and the caltrave tower why havent we seen the design yet?
Hey, that would be cool if you could get the height, spire and roof etc. thanks for that!
Originally Posted by PHLguy
WHAT? STOP YOUR BULLSHIT ASAP. The article you posted didn’t need to be posted in the first place, all it stated what has been printed for weeks. The building will be 75 storeys and will have a school at its base. Since nothing has changed what so ever, now, you must give me a reason why you asked if the building will be shorter, and give a reason why you should be allowed to continue to post here, additionally give every member on this board a reason why they should take time out of their days so they could read your asinine ungrounded spam posts.
Instead of apologizing how about you just go join your contemporaries at SSP?
That would be great but I don’t know if it’s up to the permit stage yet.Originally Posted by ASchwarz
Originally Posted by Stern
I have reading comprehension difficulty, why people like you go out and make fun of kids who are different is beyond me, I misunderstand alot of articles, so STOP ****ing with me and go about your own business, be mature.
Sorry everyone else...
Anyway, we were supposed to see this building a month ago, I wonder whats going on.
:::In best NASA voice:::
Houston, Do we have a rendering?
Going back to that skyscraper question, I thought the bedrock takes a dive at about 28st and doesn't reemerge until about Chambers St. And i thought that's why there is a huge gap between Lower Manhattan and 34st in terms of tall buildings. I mean, it seems to be a unnatural way for Manhattan to develop. One would think the CBD would simply have expanded to Houston or 14st during the 1900's instead of jumping all the way to 42st. Anyone got some more info on why this is?
In my opinion, the article is relevant to this thread. The fact that you may have misinterpreted it does not change that. The school is part of the building.
I think your error is in what the article meant by designing the school after the tower is completed.
The school will occupy 100,000 sq ft, obviously in the base of the building. Figure 5 floors (I'm speculating), that's 20,000 sq ft base. Since the tower will be residential, I can't see it more than 100 ft on a side or 10,000 sq ft plates. so the base will be at least twice as large as the tower foorprint.
They can build the raw space of the school, and leave the specific design for later - depending on whather it will be a K-8 or some other configuration.
Try to stay out of trouble.
Alex Ballard: As a general rule, the bedrock is closer to the surface Midtown and the area below what used to be the Collect Pond. Historically, skyscrapers were built in these areas because it was more economical to get to the bedrock. With modern construction methods and the high price of real estate, that is no longer the case. Also, there are small areas in both Midtown and Downtown where the bedrock was gouged by the glaciers and filled with rubble. An example was the site of a tall residential building on Duane St between Broadway and Church St. Foundation drilling was so long and expensive that it contributed to the developer going bankrupt.
I'm just wondering if they already know what the tower is going to look like and why they won't release it.
I pray for this project, If this and calatrava don't go up I'll be devistaded.
Dude, stop obsessing about these projects, especially this one that’s still in the very early stages of development, that way if the project is a bust you won’t feel depressed and if it’s a success you’ll be happily surprised. Projects like these take a course of about a decade so if there is no information for about a week, you don’t need to speculate or panic, information will come about in due time.
There has been no renderings released because there has been no need to. Ratner can't even offer the building until an offering plan is filed with the Office of the Attorney General of the State of New York. Buildings can be considerably underconstruction until they start offering units.
Additionally I don't think a rendering can be released, for issues involving the school, for a recently created design survey, surveys usually come before not after a design is made, and lastly Gehry is not SOM, as an A-List architect he has can make certain demands and he doesn't work on the same time-table as corporate architects do.
80th South Street has been approved already. Its going to be built. But back to this thread, I agree with Stern. Welcome to NY, it takes projects a good minute to be rolling.Originally Posted by PHLguy
That's true. but when I read about something Like FT (Which I don't know will be built, let alone other towers) I trick mself into thinking that most projects are like that.Originally Posted by Stern
According to Fabb (SSP) this building will be around 800 feet tall. Which I think is just about perfect for its placement in the skyline.