could also be side view vs front view
2 Likes
If I’m not mistaken he mentioned a build date by 2029. When was construction optimistically set to begin then?
4 Likes
“ Last week TF Cornerstone and RXR Realty, development partners of the Grand Hyatt New York redevelopment in Midtown East, announced a cultural program at 175 Park Avenue with New York City-based non-profit Public Art Fund and Lord Cultural Resources. This will include public art installations, community events, and programming inside and around the Skidmore Owings & Merrill designed skyscraper.”
“175 Park Avenue will be a new, 21st century building that delivers world-class public spaces and transit improvements to the heart of Manhattan,” said Jon McMillan, director of planning and senior vice president at TF Cornerstone. “We couldn’t be more excited to have Public Art Fund and Lord Cultural Resources on board to ensure we make the most of this opportunity to bring something new and exciting to the neighborhood.”
9 Likes
I think it’s the exact same render, but someone bumped up the contrast 2%.
1 Like
Monday, June 21st, 2021, at 6:00pm
Video Conference
https://bit.ly/3zuGKRo
EJ Kalafarski, Chair T&E
Sam Levy, Vice Chair T&E
Layla Law-Gisiko, Chair LUHZ
Matt Hartman, Vice-Chair LUHZ
This meeting will be conducted virtually. The general public should register in advance here and public comment is welcome: https://bit.ly/3zuGKRo[](https://bit.ly/33z9nxV)
Accommodations are available upon request; email office@cb5.org.
Agenda (Joint Committee)
- 175 Park Ave , an application by Commodore Owners LLC for East Midtown Special Permits to facilitate a mixed-use office, retail and hotel development.
6 Likes
Lol they gave thumbs down to 343 Madison, no way they’re going to approve of this. Hopefully they’ll be ignored. CBs are pretty toothless. I’ll never understand people who are against tall buildings in Midtown Manhattan of all places.
2 Likes
Welp, here we go again if that’s the case. I remember the last time some of them heavily criticized this building, because of how it overpowers Grand Central Terminal and the Chrysler Building
1 Like
What do you mean about 343 Madison?
1 Like
CB5 didn’t like it due to complaints about sidewalk sunlight. But CBs are just advisory.
WHEREAS, Community Board Five, however, does not believe these improvements as proposed are sufficient to justify the additional FAR requested given the substantial density the building will bring to the area and the resulting increased demands on public transit in a corridor that already is experiencing a significant increase in density from the East Midtown and Vanderbilt Corridor rezonings; and
WHEREAS, the building massing is not compliant with the Vanderbilt Corridor daylight evaluation requirements, causing the sidewalks to be darker than a compliant massing would, and Community Board Five believes the building massing should comply with the requirements of the existing zoning, to minimize the encroachment on the sky exposure plane; and
WHEREAS, Retail frontage on Madison Avenue is a priority to maintain a vibrant and welcoming street experience for pedestrians, and the proposed lobby width is unnecessary and should be reduced to comply with the existing zoning; and
WHEREAS, CB5 recognizes that a street wall height in excess of the compliant 150 feet may be appropriate, the proposed 321 foot street wall height is excessive and should be lowered; and
WHEREAS, CB5 does not object to the special permits requested related to entrance recess, curb cut, loading berth, and street wall design to accommodate the entrance to East Side Access; therefore be it
RESOLVED, Community Board Five recommends denial of the special permits requested in this application unless the above concerns are addressed, specifically enhanced below grade public transit improvements, a lower street wall height, compliant daylight evaluation score, and a reduction in lobby width to accommodate the required retail frontage on Madison Avenue.
https://www.cb5.org/cb5m/resolutions/2021-june/resolution_4/
1 Like
Huh… more retail facing the street? I didn’t even realize there was a specific zoning requirement for that on a building like this. I actually agree with that one.
3 Likes
Sorry for the confusion, that was CB5’s thoughts on 343 Madison, not 175 park. I was replying to bmosborne. Yes, I agree that both of these towers could use more street-level retail.
3 Likes
Oooh. Sorry. I see now.
But yes, my comment would probably apply to both anyway.
1 Like
At this point I kinda treat your builds as unofficial architectural renderings. Nice work.
3 Likes
Thanks. 175 Park was one of the hardest builds I’ve made in Minecraft due to the base and the crown
2 Likes
nimbys gonna nimby!
5 Likes
this lawsuit is about sixty years late, lol. I would argue towers like this and 1 Vanderbilt on the other flank add to the grandeur of the station. They certainly make it more accessible.
11 Likes
Bruhh, no way this lawsuit will go through. The article did say that the MTA and LPC declined to comment.
So she is against this new supertall but yet not criticizing the current grand Hyatt hotel that is blocking most of the east side of Grand Central Terminal
7 Likes