8 Spruce Street - Beekman Tower - by Frank Gehry

[ASchwarz]

Why couldn't they have just relaxed zoning for the certain areas, like the yards? I.e, the zoning for the commercial towers could have been mixed-use unlimited. Most of these massive towers today in China and ME are mixed use.

In China and Dubai, the towers aren't being built for profit. They're essentially government-backed projects.

There is no market incentive for giant 2,000 ft. megatowers. We could build them in NYC (or in Secaucus, wherever), but they don't make financial sense. The floorplates become massively inefficient, and are mostly elevator space.

I don't think many people want tax dollars going to useless monuments.

[lofter1]

If you relax zoning, you have to relax it for all the property, and you get owners maximizing their sites by putting up even more gigantic buildings shoulder to shoulder. You'll wind up with a dystopian Blade Runner landscape.

Or, in other words ...

The ridiculous NYU 2031 plan.

[futurecity]

In China and Dubai, the towers aren't being built for profit. They're essentially government-backed projects.

There is no market incentive for giant 2,000 ft. megatowers. We could build them in NYC (or in Secaucus, wherever), but they don't make financial sense. The floorplates become massively inefficient, and are mostly elevator space.

I don't think many people want tax dollars going to useless monuments.

Yes, but why limit the zoning envelope on such rare sites like on the yards? If it were zoned unlimited, the developer could decide what he wanted to do with it. If he were interested in designing a 600m tower, he would not be able to do so profitably under current FAR as the upper floors would be too small. It seems like someone wants to shape NYC and prevent it from having very tall buildings due to either a) not wanting massive buildings due to NIMBY issues, or b) wanting to spread development around the city and not concentrated in a small amount of plots.

[ZippyTheChimp]

It's zoned for 12 million square feet.

[futurecity]

Not what I asked. I said, why limit the FAR on those sites when there are so few available like those. Why not zone unlimited for select parcels on the yards so a developer can decide to do what he wants.

[lofter1]

FAR was mainly instituted in NYC to maintain light and air to the streets below. Allow unlimited FAR and in many areas you'll have cold dark canyons. Hardly a plan for good urbanism.

[TallGuy]

This does raise an interesting question: How close is Manhattan to being built-out, at least in terms of new 1,000+ footers? Is it foreseeable that in the not too distant future, let's say 50 years, that in order to put up a significant building another one of similar mass would have to be demolished? Any city needs some form of constant renewal process to remain vibrant and relevant. I would think this won't be in our lifetimes, but it has to be a real issue at some point.

[futurecity]

FAR was mainly instituted in NYC to maintain light and air to the streets below. Allow unlimited FAR and in many areas you'll have cold dark canyons. Hardly a plan for good urbanism.

However, if FAR was unlimited only on certain target plots a very tall building could be built without creating a canyon effect. Also, it would allow the developer more freedom to create something special if he desired.

Right now, NY could be zoned to allow a 600m building in select cases and places like the yards which are relatively isolated and not on canyons. If it makes no sense to build it, at least the developer would have a choice and wouldn't have to design around a zoning envelope.

The zoning system is like a hatchet when it needs to be like a scalpel.

[lofter1]

How close is Manhattan to being built-out, at least in terms of new 1,000+ footers?

Far from it. All a developer need do is to buy up multiple parcels on a single midtown block -- or the entire block -- and a tower well in excess of 1,000' would be possible.

The problem isn't the limitation of zoning. It's more the inability to purchase & put together a viable building plot that would allow for a 1,200 - 1,500 - 2,000 foot tower. But it can happen -- and we're seeing it right now (Drake Hotel site, One 57, and soon a 225 W 57).

[ZippyTheChimp]

Yes, but why limit the zoning envelope on such rare sites like on the yards?

It's zoned for 12 million square feet.

Not what I asked.

Yes it is, and I answered your question. Do you think that 12 million square feet is really limiting? And do you think it's smart to construct a law that puts no limits at all on development. So what if a Hudson Yards developer decides to build it out to 30 million square feet? Since you've granted unlimited as-of-right, how do you control it.

However, if FAR was unlimited only on certain target plots a very tall building could be built without creating a canyon effect.

Again, zoning is about neighborhood density. Do you think 12 million square feet is sufficient for a site with one subway station?

Right now, NY could be zoned to allow a 600m building in select cases and places like the yards which are relatively isolated and not on canyons.

See above.

[GordonGecko]

[BStyles]

I must go and see what the plaza looks like, sometime soon. I hear it's very nice.

[RoldanTTLB]

Not open yet! Getting closer, though. The shot above is incredible, though, and I can't wait for the observation deck up here.

[NYBOY75]

Not open yet! Getting closer, though. The shot above is incredible, though, and I can't wait for the observation deck up here.

Me too! I can't wait to get video and pictures from the observation deck. I would or anyone would get nice close-ups of The Beekman.

http://www.youtube.com/user/NYBOY75

[RoldanTTLB]

OMG so close you can taste it...


IMG_4427.JPG by denkmanttlb, on Flickr