NEW YORK | 270 Park Ave | 1400 FT | 70 FLOORS


#223

Are you involved with the project? If so, are the “massing models” basically representative of the final design?


#224

I wish and hope this was 1400 ft to the roof with a nice crown or spire bringing this to 1600 or 1700 ft.


#225

rooting for Gale Brewer on this one. As BP, she can get the City Council on her page and we’ll probably get the 1566’, 10k sf public space version. Chase will undoubtedly build with or without the variation. If the variation is not approved, they might choose to opt for the taller, as of right scheme - which, in accordance with the rezoning, offers 10k sf of public space.


#226

This is the one time I’m rooting for Gale


#227

Is this one of the situations in which Gale’s or whoever’s opinion is only advisory and JPMC’s plan will be rubberstamped?


#228

Hopefully someone with influence, will also impose high architectural standards on this tower.


#229

Possibly.


#230

Too much money at play. Too much tax revenue at play. This will rise without hindrance. The city will cater to those that pay the coffers and provide jobs.

Anyways, lets hope for the taller version.


#231

scaffolding now occupies half of the frontage on Park Ave. The bollards on the scaffolded side were stripped down to bare concrete


#232

It will be fascinating to see the deconstruction of a 700 ft building.


#233

Hasn’t started planning commission review yet.


#235


#236

Yea but like fashion some things are classic/timeless like a three piece suit while others are terrible/kitch like a fanny pack. Criticizing bad things is beneficial for society.


#237

What counts as bad is highly subjective in many cases though. You and I are just going to have to agree to disagree on this.


#238

I’m less concerned about this coming down than I am about So Low’s demolition of five beautiful old buildings on 57th St.


#239

I don’t want to see this come down, imho it is excellent. Maybe the back end, but there are far uglier buildings surrounding from the era to go after. Alas.


#240

I would’ve preferred JPMC to anchor 2 WTC, but I’ll take a new 1,400’ + tower over this.


#241

Lol 270 Park Ave. or 2 World Trade Center, either way a foster design (big’s design isn’t geared as much towards financial tenants and is imho unattractive and inappropriate).

There is so much trash that needs to come down in other desirable parts of midtown that this does feel a bit tragic. A cosmic lost opportunity to redevelop the entire block 33rd to 34th from 6th to 7th say or something along those lines.

Whose to say that 40 years from now we’ll feel like this was the 21st century sequel to losing the Singer building. It’s not beautiful but has a viable role where it is and it’s demolition would be unthinkable in 99.99% of places on Earth


#242


#243

Generally I am sympathetic to preservation, but, I mean the reason why Singer disappeared (Hello 1 Liberty Plaza) was the rapid onslaught of International style buildings during the mid 20th century. Singer was unique. 270 Park less so. There are several other examples of this type in NYC and elsewhere.Yes, its facade was well executed. It that enough if, OTOH, what we get as a replacement has a totally improved public experience at ground level and the building has better amenities for the people who work in it?