Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 60 of 60

Thread: Far West Village

  1. #46
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default 100 Barrow Street

    St. Luke in Fields wants to add tower on the block

    The site as it appears now, from Google Street View: http://goo.gl/maps/khoSm

    More Info and renderings from GVSHP [pdf]: http://www.gvshp.org/_gvshp/preserva...ion1.13.14.pdf

    THE VILLAGER
    January 16, 2014


    A rendering of the planned “Barrow St. Apartments.” Courtesy Barry Rice Architect

    BY SAM SPOKONY and LINCOLN ANDERSON |
    A West Village church hopes to construct a 15-story residential building on the corner of Greenwich and Barrow Sts., in order to fund both an expansion to its private school and the construction of a new mission building that will provide 24/7 services to L.G.B.T.Q. youth and other underserved people.

    The Church of St. Luke in the Fields — which owns the entire block that is bounded by Greenwich, Barrow, Hudson and Christopher Sts. — plans to grant a 99-year lease to Toll Brothers, a luxury developer, for management of the future residential tower at 100 Barrow St., which would rise to about 153 feet. That’s 23 feet shorter than the massive Archive residential building on the other side of Greenwich St., but 33 feet taller than the building directly to the south.

    Representatives of the church and its associates are quick to note that the proposed 70,000-square-foot, as-of-right building is much smaller than what zoning allows. By law, a residential development on that spot could be built up to 200,000 square feet.

    The building is also planned to be so-called “80/20” housing, in which the developer would receive a tax break for making 20 percent of the units affordable. Currently, 10 of the tower’s 46 rental units are planned to be affordable, while the rest would be market rate. In an interview on Jan. 14, Barry Rice, the projectʼs architect, said that the developer has not yet filed for a 421a exemption for the 80/20 tax break, which requires state legislative approval, but that they plan to soon.

    When explaining the plan for 100 Barrow St., those behind the effort refer to it as the “economic engine” for the church’s goals both to expand the financially strapped St. Luke’s school — which borders the church within its self-owned lot — and build the new mission center.

    “People understandably think it would be ideal if we could do those things without any new development on the block,” said Reverend Caroline Stacey, rector of St. Luke’s. “But the truth of the matter is that we need that residential building in order to provide the necessary income stream for the school to have what it needs, and for us to build the mission space.”

    Since the proposed development site lies within the Greenwich Village Historic District, the plan will need a certificate of appropriateness from the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission before moving forward. Representatives of the church, the developer and their architect are currently scheduled to go before the L.P.C. on Feb. 4.

    St. Luke’s, which includes pre-K to eighth grade and is currently located in a two-story building along Greenwich and Christopher Sts., had 200 students in 2012, when it started expanding.

    “We realized that in this day and age, with the economic expectations and also the academic evolution of schools, to have just 200 students was not a generationally sustainable model,” said Bart Baldwin, head of St. Luke’s School.

    Since then, the Episcopal, nonprofit school has constructed two additional classrooms and currently serves 228 students. Eventually, if the income-generating 100 Barrow St. building is approved, the school hopes to construct two additional floors — a total of 20,000 square feet, including nine classrooms and a 4,000-square-foot gym — and expand its enrollment to 320 students. The expansion level would make heavy use of yellow-colored brick. The schoolʼs current small gym would become a 200-seat auditorium/theater.

    Slightly more than half the children currently attending the school live within Community Board 2, according to Baldwin. He stressed that a similar portion of those potential new school seats would serve the Village area, which has faced plenty of school overcrowding in recent years.

    St. Luke’s annual tuition is $34,000. About 23 percent of the school’s students get financial aid.

    The square block was formally part of Trinity Church, but in the 1970s Trinity “spun off” all its chapels, which are now independent, except for St. Paul’s.

    The church currently has a Saturday night feeding program for L.G.B.T.Q. youth and H.I.V.-positive people that accomodates 80. But the program is outgrowing the space — which is why St. Luke’s wants to build a new mission center on the site of the school’s current playground at the corner of Hudson and Christopher Sts.

    “It’s an incredible ministry,” Stacey said.

    As for when the mission would be built, Stacey said they can’t say exactly when, since it would depend on 100 Barrow St. getting constructed, and the revenue from that.

    “We don’t have the money to build it yet,” she said of the mission.

    The mission would be “townhouse scale,” with a 24/7 drop-in center. Individuals would be able to get a change of clothes and take showers. It won’t be “a homeless shelter,” Stacey said, though they are allowed under regulations to do an eight-to-10-bed facility.

    In the future, the mission building could be “repurposed” to meet whatever the community’s needs may be — perhaps serving seniors, for example — she pointed out.

    As for the playground that the mission would eventually replace, the expanded school would have recreational space on its rooftop.

    The block’s gardens — which are the “fields” of St. Luke in the Fields, and are also known as “The Close” — would not be reduced for any of the projects, Stacey stressed. And with the construction of the Barrow St. tower, the rear gardens behind three townhouses on Barrow St. that the church owns would be better opened up to public view, though would not be available for actual public use.

    As for the affordable housing component in the planned tower, Stacey noted, “It’s the first affordable housing in the West Village in — what I’m told — a decade.”

    They hope to start construction on the Barrow St. tower and the school expansion this summer.

    The school addition would be built “like a bridge” on piles over the existing building, which dates from 1955. Work would be done during non-school hours and over school breaks.

    Andrew Bartle is designing the school expansion, while Beyer Blinder Belle is coordinating the entire project.

    Regarding the three Barrow St. townhouses, the tenants there are currently non-church affiliated and on one-year leases. The buildings would be emptied and extensively renovated, also by Toll Brothers, with each townhouse getting up to $2 million worth of work on it.

    Rice, the architect for the Barrow St. tower, explained that the building materials for all the new construction are based on the color palette of the type of bricks used in the area. The middle section of the new tower would be copper clad, which would take on a light-green patina over time, mirroring accents on the church.

    They stressed that there would be “no segregation” at the Barrow St. tower, with the affordable units’ tenants sharing the same entrance as the market-rate tenants.

    The rector stressed that they are not a wealthy congregation — many of the worshipers are artists and self-employed — and that they need this project to move forward sustainably into the future. The church’s current endowment for the entire block is only $2 million, she said.

    It’s a long-term plan the church has been carefully planning for decades, added Rice, who is also a school parent.

    “It hasn’t been rushed to this point,” he said.

    The St. Luke’s group presented their project to Community Board 2ʼs Landmarks and Public Aesthetics Committee later on Tuesday evening. The committee, however, had its criticisms of the mission component, the tower’s height and some of the building materials.

    Speaking afterward, Sean Sweeney, the committee’s co-chairperson, said, “St. Luke’s was saying this would help the community, but it’s a private school, and a center for troubled youth, which the community has had many problems with along Christopher St. The community found an irony in that part of their proposal.

    “And how does it benefit the community to build a 15-story building that’s out of scale with the rest of the community?” he continued.

    “We’re going to recommend approval of the school building, but there was some concern about the yellowish color on the top floor of the school building expansion.” Also, he added, “The tower has a window wall in the center which seems out of context with the top and bottom of the building.”

    Or, as Doris Diether, the committee’s co-chairperson, said, “I thought the building they’re putting up looked ridiculous. It looked like a sandwich — it’s brick on the bottom, glass in the middle, and brick on top.”

    The committee’s resolution will recommend approval of the school expansion, ask that the tower’s height be lowered and also ask St. Luke’s to provide a master plan.

  2. #47

    Default

    I like it, though it's a bit tall for the area.

  3. #48
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    ^ There's a taller and bulkier building just across the street.

  4. #49

    Default

    I know, but they're old, and we don't need to add more, particularly next to those small Federal-era townhomes.

  5. #50
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    I'm of the opinion that those townhouses are better highlighted by the taller building next to them than something similar in height to them. Contrast works better to bring out something's unique features than something that strives to imitate it.

  6. #51

    Default

    I like it. The miserable empty lot currently there has no business existing.

  7. #52

    Default

    The Church of St. Luke in the Fields - Barrow and Greenwich Sts

    Commissioners Ask for Further Refinement to Design of St. Luke’s Church Development

    03/19/2014


    Previous rendering - ABA Studio

    Commissioners generally concurred that the parking lot was an appropriate site for residential development and that vertical enlargement of school was compatible with the historic district. On March 11, 2014, the Landmarks Preservation Commission heard from applicants on a proposal to build a residential tower on the Church of St. Luke in the Fields’ campus and to expand the existing school. The applicants responded to extensive public testimony from the February 4th hearing, and were advised by Landmarks commissioners on the appropriateness of the project.

    Local elected officials, Manhattan Community Board 2, residents and preservationists opposed the project sited at the western edge of the Greenwich Village Historic District. They found the proposed tower too large for the district, and the design and materials inappropriate. Other residents spoke in support of the proposal. A representative of the Real Estate Board of New York noted that the plan would bring affordable housing to the neighborhood.

    Consultant Bill Higgins, retained by both the school and the tower developers, Toll Brothers, spoke to the “characteristic combination of scales” that defined Greenwich since the 1920s. Higgins also stated that the proposal needed to be considered in the “the real context in which this site exists,” close to the large Archive Building, an individual landmark standing outside the boundaries of the historic district. Responding to criticism for the use of brightly colored metal panels, Higgins said the glass and metal additions to the school, designed by Andrew Bartle Architects, were harmonious with the brick while remaining distinct from the historic fabric. Higgins said the design of the addition drew on traditional mansards, and the colored panels reflected a “youthful quality” appropriate to a school.

    Architect Barry Rice noted that the proposed tower was shorter than the Archive Building, and that the project would retain a public garden space and a visible private garden space. Rice said the project was “very site specific,” and that the tower had been mischaracterized as a “glass box.” Rice reiterated that the building was composed of various forms, in a variety of materials, including glass, bronze and brick.

    Landmarks commissioners responded by first addressing the appropriateness of the tower development. Commissioner Michael Goldblum found that the site of the planned tower, currently a parking lot, could sustain a large building. Goldblum, however, found the proposed articulation too complex, and recommended a “simpler, quieter approach.” Goldblum also found the proposed “campanile” overwhelmed the church’s steeple, and suggested that the building’s massing be lowered. Commissioner Margery Perlmutter said the immediate neighborhood did not possess examples of juxtaposed buildings of differing scales. Perlmutter further stated that the proposal contained too much glass, and suggested that the base would benefit from more detailing. Commissioner Michael Devonshire determined that a lower, squatter building could be appropriate for the site.

    Commissioners were divided on the appropriateness of the school addition. Commissioner Libby Ryan found it appropriate as presented, and said the “exuberance” of Greenwich Village “shouldn’t be squelched.” Commissioner Goldblum determined that while the massing was acceptable, the colored metal panels felt “arbitrary and commercial.” Commissioner Diana Chapin found the panels to be “disrupting.” Chair Robert B. Tierney said he would support a zoning intervention that would allow the applicants to construct a building with similar bulk to that proposed, but lower, with less complexity and fewer setbacks.

    Chair Tierney asked the applicants to study the additions further, make revisions and bring both applications back to Landmarks at a later date.
    LPC: 100 Barrow Street; 657 Greenwich Street, Manhattan (15-1091; 15-1090) (March 11, 2014) (Architects: Beyer Blinder Belle, Andrew Bartle Architects, Barry Rice Architects).

    By: Jesse Denno (Jesse is a full-time staff writer at the Center for NYC Law).

    © 1997-2010 New York Law School
    http://www.citylandnyc.org/commissio...nt/#more-21806

  8. #53
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    Landmarks commissions OKs shorter St. Luke’s tower
    The residential tower to stand 32 feet shorter than original design


    May 09, 2014 05:55PM


    Rendering of 100 Barrow Street


    The proposed West Village building for the Church of St. Luke in the Fields will now stand three stories shorter than its original design as a result of a new ruling by the Landmarks Preservation Committee.

    The commission, which rejected the church’s proposal to build a 15-story, 153-foot-tall tower atop a parking lot at 487 Hudson Street in March, unanimously approved the new design on Tuesday. The tower will be 121 feet tall, or three stories shorter, than the original design. Despite the revision, the building’s overall size actually increased by 1,400 square feet, though the number of residential units remains the same.

    While the church plans to allocate a portion of its residential tower to affordable housing, some Greenwich Village residents voiced concern over the lack of a public comment period following the presentation made by the project’s architects.

    “We are deeply disappointed that the L.P.C. approved this revised design today,” Andrew Berman, executive director of the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, told The Village. “The new design is substantially different than the old one, and yet the public was given no opportunity to review or comment upon this new application, which will have a profound visual impact upon the neighborhood.” [The Villager] -Kerry Barger

    http://therealdeal.com/blog/2014/05/...t-lukes-tower/

  9. #54
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    I would have preferred the brick setback tower in the original design to remain as that looked very nice and instead eliminated all the glassy middle section.

    Of course all the silly concern here is to chop down the height instead of worrying about what looked better for the area.

  10. #55

    Default

    original design was much better

    new version looks like it belongs in dc

  11. #56

    Default

    Idiots! The old design was fantastic!

    Meanwhile, this is the city that lets 1,000 Kaufmans bloom.

    The city's forbidding emphasis REALLY needs to move from height to design.

  12. #57
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Possible Deal May Bring Money to Repair Pier 40 in Manhattan

    Link to POST in Pier 40 WNY thread


    Pier 40, above, is deteriorating faster than originally feared, a report is expected to reveal.
    Photo Credit: Richard Perry/The New York Times


    A deal to develop the St. John’s Terminal Building, left, could fund the repairs.
    Photo Credit: Richard Perry/The New York Times

  13. #58

    Default

    Great! St John's terminal is an eyesore. Pier 40 also is. Hopefully, it will get a new brick facade.

  14. #59
    NYC Aficionado from Oz Merry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,473

    Default 160 Leroy / 357 West Street

    New Details for Herzog & de Meuron's West Village Condos

    November 14, 2015, by Amy Plitt


    A older rendering of the building

    Though Ian Schrager's condos on the Hudson River have been in the works for some time now, few details have been available: we knew they were being designed by starchitecture firm Herzog & de Meuron; that the address changed from 357 West Street to 160 Leroy Street; and that residents would have 50 pricey condos to choose from. And now, an article in the New York Times revealed more details on the somewhat mysterious development, including the fact that the sales gallery is now open to prospective buyers. But those buyers will need to pony up plenty of cash: one-bedrooms begin at $2.6 million. There's also a "12,000-square-foot penthouse with about 7,500 square feet of outdoor space and a private pool," though Schrager remained mum on how much that one will cost.


    A new rendering of the building, courtesy DBOX

    The number of units has been bumped down to a modest 49, and will rise 15 stories over the Hudson River. As seen in the rendering above, Herzog & de Meuron's curved building remains much the same as the older renderings, and will feature floor-to-ceiling windows that will "improve sightlines and offer views in more directions," according to the firm. The building will also have a 9,750-square-foot courtyard, designed by Madison Cox Associates; it's all expected to be completed in 2016.

    Ian Schrager's New Condos on the Hudson [NYT]

    http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2015/1...ondos.php#more

  15. #60

    Default

    Beautiful!

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Greenwich Village Preservation Watch - Be on the alert!
    By OKoranjes in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: June 24th, 2015, 03:17 AM
  2. Perry West - 173/176 Perry Street @ West Street - by Richard Meier
    By Edward in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: December 26th, 2010, 09:52 AM
  3. Replies: 62
    Last Post: September 12th, 2009, 12:33 PM
  4. A Prickly Mason-Dixon Line in the Village
    By Kris in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 22nd, 2008, 07:08 PM
  5. New Condo project in Village
    By ASchwarz in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 20th, 2003, 09:35 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