Fordham University Expansion at Lincoln Center - by Cooper, Robertson & Partners

[Alonzo-ny]

Most general guidelines Ive ever heard of state high-rise as beginning at 12 or 15 storeys.

[antinimby]

Fordham Reaches a Compromise on Its Expansion Plans



By CHRISTINE HAUGHNEY
Published: February 24, 2009

Fordham University, after months of contentious discussions with community groups and elected officials, has reached a compromise on its proposal to turn its four-building site near Lincoln Center into a 12-building campus.

Details of the modified plans, which have won the approval of the Manhattan borough president, Scott M. Stringer, are expected to be announced in a news conference by Mr. Stringer on Wednesday.

The compromise will help Fordham move forward through the public approval process.

The new plans include what politicians and community officials call small but significant changes to the proposed 3 million square feet of classroom, office and dormitory space between Amsterdam and Columbus Avenues and 60th and 62nd Streets. The new proposal involves cutting 206,000 square feet of space from the original expansion plan by moving some classrooms underground, devoting less space to parking and setting buildings farther from the curb. It also requires Fordham to consult with the community as the plans progress.

Mr. Stringer said that the compromise aimed to help Fordham, a major educational institution and employer, grow, especially when the city wants to diversify its job base. At the same time, the plans stop Fordham from building a dense cluster of towers.

“The goal was for Fordham to co-exist with the community,” he said. “This is going to enable Fordham to grow, and that benefits the city. It also preserves and protects the best aspects and qualities of the neighborhood.”

The development was good news for Fordham, which has been trying for more than a decade to add to its cramped West Side campus.

The university, which uses the Lincoln Center site for various graduate programs and has a larger campus in the Bronx, introduced its expansion plans four years ago. It received permission from the Department of City Planning on Nov. 17 to start seeking approval from various government agencies. But approval by the Planning Department only set Fordham on a path for more criticism. At a Community Board 7 meeting on Jan. 21, more than 150 local residents turned out to complain about the plans, saying the project was too tall and dense for the neighborhood. The board ultimately rejected the plans 31 to 0.

Since then, the university agreed to a dozen points it has worked out with Mr. Stringer’s office and received measured approval from community groups. Helen Rosenthal, chairwoman of Community Board 7, praised the compromise for its changes to the original plan’s height, density, parking garages and open space. She said the board hoped to keep working with Fordham as it moves through the process.

For example, board members would like the building heights further reduced for the proposed towers along Amsterdam Avenue, and would like the process allowing the community to review the design for Fordham’s buildings to have “a little more teeth,” she said. “We just don’t want to review it. We want to be able to sign off on it.”

The proposal now requires approval from the Planning Department and the City Council.

The Rev. Joseph M. McShane, president of Fordham, said in a statement that he was “delighted” with the compromise and called the plan “a good one that serves both the community and the university.”

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

[Derek2k3]

For example, board members would like the building heights further reduced for the proposed towers along Amsterdam Avenue, and would like the process allowing the community to review the design for Fordham’s buildings to have “a little more teeth,” she said. “We just don’t want to review it. We want to be able to sign off on it.”

How a group of naysayers can guise themselves as representatives of a neighborhood of tens of thousands can force all these demands on property they don't own is ridiculous.

I bet at least half of the 150 people from the community are from that ugly apartment tower that shares the block with the Fordham plan.

[Solusipse]

Ignorance, arrogance, greed, hypocrisy and politics reign.
City evicts thousands of families and virtually gives land to Fordham with legally binding restrictions that it must build an academic campus covering no more than 35% of the land with no more than 20 story buildings aggregating no more than 2 Million square feet to complement the adjacent performing arts campus and may not sell the land or profit from it.
Fordham defaults in its obligation for 40 years then comes to City claiming it needs 3 million square feet in 60 story buildings covering 65% of the land so it can sell 5% of the land for $300Million to private developer to build 750,000 square feet of luxury condos to pay for other buildings it hasn't even designed and won't build for 20 years that will have to be 50-60 stories high to squeeze into the remaining land.
Project will overtax schools, public transportation, pedestrian movement, sewage treatment facilities, reduce open space, cast shadows over performing arts campus. Politician gets sidewalk widened by 10 feet in front of undesigned buildings that won't be built for 20 years and declares victory.
Commentators on this site debate what constitutes a highrise, and Fordham plants on this site claim objections are NIMBY syndrome. Don't worry, if you're brain dead it doesn't matter whether the free market or the government screws you. You probably won't notice anyway.

[TonyO]

Ignorance, arrogance, greed, hypocrisy and politics reign.
City evicts thousands of families and virtually gives land to Fordham with legally binding restrictions that it must build an academic campus covering no more than 35% of the land with no more than 20 story buildings aggregating no more than 2 Million square feet to complement the adjacent performing arts campus and may not sell the land or profit from it.
Fordham defaults in its obligation for 40 years then comes to City claiming it needs 3 million square feet in 60 story buildings covering 65% of the land so it can sell 5% of the land for $300Million to private developer to build 750,000 square feet of luxury condos to pay for other buildings it hasn't even designed and won't build for 20 years that will have to be 50-60 stories high to squeeze into the remaining land.
Project will overtax schools, public transportation, pedestrian movement, sewage treatment facilities, reduce open space, cast shadows over performing arts campus. Politician gets sidewalk widened by 10 feet in front of undesigned buildings that won't be built for 20 years and declares victory.
Commentators on this site debate what constitutes a highrise, and Fordham plants on this site claim objections are NIMBY syndrome. Don't worry, if you're brain dead it doesn't matter whether the free market or the government screws you. You probably won't notice anyway.

I don't think Fordham building up an under-developed site means the community is "getting screwed". In fact, once the construction is complete, I can see no minuses for the area. Have you been on the campus? It's mostly airspace wasted by tennis courts and parking lots in a dense part of the city.

I would bet that you were just as against Time Warner Center. Now you probably enjoy the Borders book store or Whole Foods, and the revitalization the project brought to the area. Don't forget the Circle itself, a great redesign.

[Solusipse]

Thanks for your intelligent reply.
No one is opposed to Fordham's expansion in an appropriate manner:
1. To a reasonable density 2-2.2Million Square Feet
2. To a reasonable height 40 stories
3. For its own academic use as was required by law: Urban Renewal Plan; eminent domain; master plan for Lincoln Square and to avoid what would otherwise have been an illegal state subsidy to a religious institution.
4. To the extent used for residential purposes, to provide moderate income housing.
5. To provide open space available to the public and not locked away on top of its illegal "podium" cloistered from the public.
6. Fordham touts its community outreach. It certainly has not been in evidence here.

All of which is mandated by the current NYC Zoning Resolution which allows for reasonable modifications if they are "in furtherance of good design", which for the foregoing and other reasons FU's are not.

Incidently, I and many others were against the original Time Warner Center, and by persisting in opposition got the far superior cornerstone for that important location we now have. Check it out, it's a fascinating story of citizen involvement that worked. I think you're having a hard time conceptualizing just how massive and overbearing the FU proposal.
FU's buildings will be BIGGER than the Time Warner Center but in a residential and cultural neighborhood.

[antinimby]

Fordham plants on this site claim objections are NIMBY syndrome.

I doubt any of the regular forumers here like Derek, Tony and myself for example, are Fordham "plants."

We've been here for many years and we comment on just about every friggin project throughout the city and beyond.

Unlike you, who's just signed up just for the sole purpose of commenting in this thread. That makes you a NIMBY plant.

[Solusipse]

OK, that's good, but if you comment on projects, informing yourself better about what they entail would permit a useful analysis, dialogue and hopefully improvements reflecting legitimate community concerns rather than you automatically assuming that any opposition to development justifies the use of your nom de plume.
The Fordham expansion is both justified and has to be an improvement over the presently insular and underdeveloped wasteland there now. However, it should be more open to and part of the community facility that was the vision of the Lincoln Square Urban Renewal Plan rather than being perched on top of its pedestal walled off from the community. Its square footage should correlate to its own stated needs, which is about 2.2 Million square feet, rather than shoehorning in another 800,000 of non-institutional square feet solely for the purpose of generating huge revenues from the sale of a site that it acquired thru condemnation which it covenanted and contractually agreed would be put to academic use. That may be good business, but it's not good design or land use.

[stache]

Wasteland(?)

[ASchwarz]

Solus, the Hamptons are calling, baby. Lots of "light and air" in your Sagaponack residence.

No worries about bothersome things like universities, neighbors, and urban planning. Just your own domain, and complete isolation from the public realm...

[ASchwarz]

I also love how opponents make these random determinations of "reasonable".

Why is 40 floors reasonable? Why not 20 floors, or 80 floors? Why is one "reasonable", and the other "unreasonable"? At street level, a tall building is a tall building. There is no difference at street level between a 40-floor or 60-floor building.

Same with the random annointing of 2.2 million square feet of space as a "reasonable" level. Why, exactly?

[antinimby]

OK, that's good, but if you comment on projects, informing yourself better about what they entail would permit a useful analysis, dialogue and hopefully improvements reflecting legitimate community concerns rather than you automatically assuming that any opposition to development justifies the use of your nom de plume.

Save that bit of misdirected advice for yourself. We simply know more about this and every project than you ever will. You sound like you got all your information from the leaflets they hand out when you go to those CB meetings.

And unlike you and your knee-jerk reactionary anti-dense, anti-height types, our opinions on each project are formed on a case-by-case basis. We are equally against bad projects as we are supportive of well designed and positive developments.

The Fordham expansion is both justified and has to be an improvement over the presently insular and underdeveloped wasteland there now. However, it should be more open to and part of the community facility that was the vision of the Lincoln Square Urban Renewal Plan rather than being perched on top of its pedestal walled off from the community.

This is more about design rather size or height. I know it's difficult for you to comprehend that because all you see is height and size and you automatically think it's bad.

Its square footage should correlate to its own stated needs, which is about 2.2 Million square feet, rather than shoehorning in another 800,000 of non-institutional square feet solely for the purpose of generating huge revenues from the sale of a site that it acquired thru condemnation which it covenanted and contractually agreed would be put to academic use. That may be good business, but it's not good design or land use.

A smart and successful society has to constantly change and evolve to meet its changing needs. This is no longer 1961. It would be dumb for the school and city to still hold on to that original agreement when the surrounding neighborhood has changed and grown while all that wasted space sit idle and underutilized.

[Derek2k3]

This is no longer 1961.

Exactly.


eralsoto
1962

[Stroika]

Fully agree, Antinimby. I really hope this goes through -- the area around Lincoln Center has a windswept, end-of-the-world feel from the relative emptiness to its south and west. And on the other sides all you see is 1970s Soviet towers on top of 3-story plints 7 times their width. It's a nightmare in massing and density -- huge open spaces with towers awkwardly scattered around. The Fordham project could bring some closure to this mess.


Preservation of pre-war New York is one thing. But Fordham's superblock is a disaster. Build it out, build it dense and build it tall. The vitality of Lincoln Center should spill over toward Fordham's campus, which it currently doesn't. Parking lots/grassy knolls/hideous 70s mega-plints are not the way forward for this ill-conceived superblock. Like many of you guys, I'd be skeptical if Fordham wanted to destroy something worthwhile -- but its campus is a waste of space and (according to my friend in law school there) the facilities are an atrocity and deterrent to enrolling there.

[stache]

The Columbus Circle station, while still unfinished, gets extremely crowded. With any luck they would factor additional transportation into any alterations.