122 Greenwich Avenue - One Jackson Square - by Kohn Pedersen Fox

[lofter1]

CB's are only advisory -- Landmarks has already given this the "OK", and most likely the BSA (Board of Standards and Appeals) will do the same.

It appears that the main chunk of additional "bulk" would be in the NE corner of the site, which seems to be planned as an "air well" of sorts.

[pianoman11686]

[...]

The board committee also frowned at the design’s undulating glass facade and the scale of its tower portion, concluding that the size and look of the design of the tower did not fit into the neighborhood’s quaint, low-rise character.

[...]

“This is a design that does not work and which the community does not want, and here they are asking for more of the same,” Berman continued. “It’s hard to imagine that there is no way to make a profit on this site unless they are allowed to build an extra-large building that will take more of our light and more of our air.”

The project at the intersection of 13th St. and Eight Ave. was given the green light by the Landmarks Preservation Commission in May and is slated to start construction within the next few months, if it gets the nod from the B.S.A. A date for a hearing has not yet been set.

An absolute outrage, and an embarrassment for all the people who have dedicated themselves to this cause. It proves they have not learned one thing from the years of mindless opposition that have resulted in so many missed opportunities and bland buildings. Old buildings and parking lots will get bought up, and replaced with something new. Either you want to see creativity, and something that can enhance a neighborhod, or you want to enforce conformity and dullness. This is a prime example of people thinking they have earned the right to influence legal business decisions, when it is neither their right nor their civic responsibility. You want to preserve something, fine. Preserve it, but don't halt progress in a city where forward-thinking projects are already so slow to develop because of all the inherent complexities and fears that must be conquered.

I hope these people fail miserably in this pathetic attempt to assert their will on those of others. And while I'd be all in favor of pointing out the faults in their perception of architecture and development, I'd be even more in favor of enrolling them in a course on democracy.

[lesterp4]

I used to live around the corner from this site. It was a parking lot and people would complain about the park across the street ("the derelicts hanging out") and this vacant lot. Now somebody wants to build something nice which will probably get rid of the derelicts across the street and and add an interesting design to the neighborhood and they scream bloody murder. I think there is no pleasing these selfish idiots. I also hope it gets built. I agree that they do not have the right to stop progress and free enterprise. I thought that was what capitalism is about!!!!

[BrooklynRider]

I'm not exactly who the "neighbors" of this building would be? The residents of the buildings on Jackson Square? The residents of the few townhouses on 13th Street? It is hard to figure out who is claiming to "lose" anything due to this. The building is to the north of all of them and so there are no shadows blocking light and there are no exceptional views it will block. Just rather odd objections.

[kurokevin]

Tomorrow afternoon this building is seeking a variance from the Board of Standards and Appeals. I've made my voice pretty clear that I fully support this building in my hood. A while back I wrote letters to several parties and was recently was re-contacted by the developer themselves.

They've asked me to speak in favor of the building at tomorrow's meeting, however, I am unable to attend so I am writting another letter instead.

It seems people actually read these letters, unfortunatly, often the only people to write them are old and outraged NIMBY's.

If anyone is interested in supporting this building, please send me a PM and I will forward you the neccassary information ASAP.

Thanks!

[ablarc]

CB's are only advisory -- Landmarks has already given this the "OK", and most likely the BSA (Board of Standards and Appeals) will do the same.

...and a good thing too. Landmarks' comments all seemed professional and informed, while the CB's are the mindless, ignorant pap that you would expect from people who basically don't know squat and lack the humility to admit it.

[pianoman11686]

From http://cityrealty.com/new_developments

Building with undulating facades in Village gets variance 13-DEC-06



The New York City Board of Standards & Appeals yesterday approved a variance for a new 36-unit residential condominium building fronting on Jackson Square at the intersection of Eighth and Greenwich Avenues and 13th Street.

The building, which will be located at 122 Greenwich Avenue, has a five-story-high wing facing the Square and an 11-story-tower at its north end which is near 14th Street.

A revised design for the project was unanimously approved last May by the Landmarks Preservation Commission.

The variance permits the project to not conform to existing floor area, lot coverage, rear yard, height and setback, inner court, and elevator bulkhead requirements.

Hines Interests and Aby Rosen are the developers and William Pedersen of Kohn Pedersen Fox is the architect for the building that is distinguished by its rippling, multi-faceted clear glass facades with windows of different widths that appear to be randomly placed. Each floor of the building undulates differently in plan.

The building does not extend all the way to 14th Street and so its north wall will be blank, and at the landmark commission’s request at its previous hearing on the project Mr. Pedersen has changed its north façade to make it less busy. He has also gently wrapped the glass walls on its west façade at the corners to meet some concerns expression at the last meeting about how the design interfaced with neighboring properties.

Hines Interests is one of the nation’s major developers whose skyscrapers have revitalized many urban skylines in the United States.

Mr. Rosen is an owner of the Seagram Building and Lever House on Park Avenue and a developer of a new mixed-use apartment and hotel tower designed by Sir Norman Foster planned to rise behind the Seagram Building at 610 Lexington Avenue. He is seeking permission from the landmarks commission to build a residential condominium tower designed by Foster on the north end of the former Parke-Bernet Building at 980 Madison Avenue.

Mr. Pedersen is the design partner of Kohn Pedersen Fox, one of the world’s foremost architectural firms, whose masterworks include 333 Wacker Drive in Chicago, the Shanghai World Financial Center, the Parkhaven Tower in Rotterdam, the Rodin Museum in Seoul, South Korean, Roppongi Hills in Tokyo, and the Westend Strasse 1/DZ Bank Headquarters in Frankfurt.

At the landmarks commission meeting, Commissioner Richard Olcott described the revised design as “a really wonderful and interesting building.” Commissioner Jan Pokorny said it was “exciting and bold.”

Numerous community and civic groups had opposed the project, arguing that its design is “inappropriate” to the character of the Greenwich Village Historic District and questioning whether the changing nature of new construction in the area is altering the “context" of “historic districts.”

[ablarc]

Hines Interests and Aby Rosen are the developers and William Pedersen of Kohn Pedersen Fox is the architect for the building that is distinguished by its rippling, multi-faceted clear glass facades with windows of different widths that appear to be randomly placed. Each floor of the building undulates differently in plan.

Mr. Rosen is an owner of the Seagram Building and Lever House on Park Avenue and a developer of a new mixed-use apartment and hotel tower designed by Sir Norman Foster planned to rise behind the Seagram Building at 610 Lexington Avenue. He is seeking permission from the landmarks commission to build a residential condominium tower designed by Foster on the north end of the former Parke-Bernet Building at 980 Madison Avenue.

Mr. Rosen is busy as a beaver.

A difference of opinion that may be repeated at Parke-Bernet:

At the landmarks commission meeting, Commissioner Richard Olcott described the revised design as “a really wonderful and interesting building.” Commissioner Jan Pokorny said it was “exciting and bold.”

Numerous community and civic groups had opposed the project, arguing that its design is “inappropriate” to the character of the Greenwich Village Historic District and questioning whether the changing nature of new construction in the area is altering the “context" of “historic districts.”

The public and professionals sure see things differently.

I'm not ready to recognize the wisdom of these "community and civic groups." They seem mostly to be arguing for dullness. Thank goodness they're often overruled.

[pianoman11686]

Would you extend your sentiments about this project towards Parke-Bernet? Do you think the community's views are misguided there as well?

One thing to keep in mind when you talk about "the public" seeing things differently: it's still a very small slice of the pie. People who have an agenda will always make their voices heard louder, and will overrepresent the "community" that they're trying to defend.

[lofter1]

Your final comment ^^^ is true for both sides -- pro & con -- in this and other zoning / landmarking situations.

[infoshare]

This is Architecture (with a capitol A) and I hope the NIMBYs do not manage to block/delay the construction. And BTW., the last 10 or so comments or so have been very enlightening....I don't GROK the oppositon.

Oh, and Pianoman your are Freeking Brilliant:and I am sure you will only be more so when you turn 18 - Gheeeez.

[antinimby]

One of our forum members, kurokevin, was behind the efforts in support of this project.

[modlv]

...it just got greenlighted.

http://www.cityrealty.com/new_develo...r?noteid=16161

Interesting fr that link is this:
"The variance permits the project to not conform to existing floor area, lot coverage, rear yard, height and setback, inner court, and elevator bulkhead requirements."

Hmm...

[modlv]

The developer has finally posted initial marketing including a teaser website (no floorplan porn though, at least for now). Pics of site on the link:
http://www.curbed.com/archives/2007/...ckson.php#more

[Derek2k3]

Thanks. They could atleast put an image of the building on their website.