NEW YORK | One57 (Carnegie 57) | 1,005 FT | 75 FLOORS

[ablerock]

And a video about the marble used in One 57:

• Video Link

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by ablerock

• Video Link

There's a brief shot of the model illuminated that looks intriguing. Some bold lighting strips. Perhaps showing the floors that the potential buyer is experiencing in the model?

That episode will be shown next week.

I always like looking at those models.

[ILNY]

Park Hyatt at One57 set to open in August

February 25, 2014 08:34AM

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2014/02/...pen-in-august/

The Park Hyatt Hotel at One57 is scheduled to open for business on Aug. 28, when the five-star hotel will occupy the first 30 floors of the Extell Development condominium tower.
Average hotel room rates will range from $855 a night for a Park Deluxe King room to $1,255 for a 1,000-square-foot Park Terrace suite. Amenities include a nearly 2,000-square-foot gym, a 25th-floor spa, a restaurant run by chef Sam Hazen, and “unparalleled amenities for canine companions,” according to the hotel website, as cited by the New York Post.

Shortly after closings launched at the condo component of the 1,004-foot-tall building at 157 West 57th Street, a buyer already offered a one-bedroom for sale, as The Real Deal reported. [NYP] — Mark Maurer

[ablerock]

Originally Posted by ablerock

There's a brief shot of the model illuminated that looks intriguing. Some bold lighting strips. Perhaps showing the floors that the potential buyer is experiencing in the model?

This is the shot I mentioned:

[King DenCity]

^I could grow to love that.

[KevininPhx]

Preview: Season Finale Puts the Spotlight on NYC's Tallest and Most Luxurious Condo Tower - Super Skyscrapers www.TVFirstLook.com

[NYguy]

One57 has been the poster child of the foreign real estate buyers, the king of the "billionaires row", sending a chain reaction of overreaction through neighborhoods that could already have been classified as for the "wealthy only".

The rich strike back.




http://nypost.com/2014/02/22/foreign...not-the-enemy/

Foreign real estate buyers in NY are not the enemy





By Diane Francis
February 22, 2014

I’m a foreigner who bought in New York, but I’m not the enemy.

My husband and I live in Toronto, but we just bought a condo on 57th Street in a 25 year-old building. I have owned a condo in New York since 2005, and we moved to a bigger place near One57, or Oligarch Arms, and near other controversial sites designed to give wealthy outsiders stunning city views.

To us, New York outshines other capitals such as London or Paris because it’s the world’s biggest shopping mall, complete with 24-hour room service. It’s also a theme park for adults who like theater, art, museums, opera, comedy clubs, food, fashion and dynamic streetscapes. We have invested our after-tax Canadian dollars here rather than buying a place in Florida to golf and mall walk.

We’re not the only ones — figures are imprecise, but estimates are that foreigners like us have been buying roughly one-third of the city’s condos as second or third homes.

.....Attacking New York’s newest, part-time residents like us is fiscally foolish. The facts show that we are the solution, not the problem, to New York’s budget. We are walking wallets — and we just want to have fun.

Robust condo sales to people like us have brought economic development and jobs.

Even better, 63 percent of us pay cash, a stabilizing effect on an over-leveraged real-estate market, because we can. We contribute to the GDP and are the gift that keeps giving. Every year we stay, we will pay condo fees, cable bills, dry cleaners, utilities and sales taxes. We will buy tons of concert, theater, art show, exhibits and hockey tickets.

My husband and I alone will fork out at least $25,000 a year in property and sales taxes.

Better yet, we don’t cost the city a dime because we don’t dump our kids into public schools or drive cars that damage roads and create potholes. We don’t make political demands, don’t crowd your libraries or hospitals and don’t deduct mortgage interest from our income taxes like New Yorkers do. If we break laws, we get tossed out. If we have broken laws, we cannot get in.

We are an economic fantasy come true. A captive tourism industry, we market the city abroad, like social media platforms on legs, boring to tears our friends and family about how wonderful and safe New York really has become. We support cheesy souvenir shops, park vendors peddling iconic photos of Depression workers on a girder and reworked musicals on Broadway. We bring in relatives and friends who love riding the horse drawn carts through Central Park. We buy the T-shirts and the labels at Barneys and Bergdorf Goodman.

Some locals grumble about the buyers of the lavish “safety deposit boxes in the sky” and whether they are hiding ill-gotten gains.

London and Paris may specialize in catering to despots, potentates, monarchs and questionable characters from former colonies, but New York City is different. Buyers here must submit to a rigorous process that requires us to pay for credit checks, police checks and proving we don’t owe taxes anywhere. Worse yet, we had to disclose on paper, for their perusal, all of our personal and business assets, stock and bond trades, cash and bank accounts worldwide. These figures had to be verified by banks, accountants or lawyers.

Such scrutiny makes us so desirable to America’s economy that Sen. Charles Schumer has proposed a bill to Congress that would grant visas to any foreigner paying more than $500,000 for a residence.

While unlikely, and somewhat daft, the facts show that we deserve a slap on the back, and not one in the face, for buying a slice of the Big Apple.

[aquablue]

Why does this tower remind me of something remarkably superficial looking? I hate to veer towards the word tacky, but it reminds me of someone trying way too hard to stand out. It looks like something you'd find in Coney Island. It's like a Miami tower plonked down in Manhattan which looks totally out of place. I'm talking mainly about the facade, it just screams Miami to me. In fact, it's like waves so it belongs in Sunny Isles or something.

[599GTO]

Miami could only dream of getting a tower that looks like One57.

[NYguy]

^ There will be some pretty cool looking towers going up there. But this tower is hardly more Miami than Manhattan. It's a throwback to the classic New York skyscraper, with a modern twist.


The program was very interesting, the most interesting of the 4 for me.

[NYguy]

http://observer.com/2014/02/of-golde...eaden-critics/

Of Golden Geese and Leaden Critics
Demonizing the wealthy might feel good, but it hurts New York


By Gary Barnett
2/28/14

New York City has worked hard to present an appealing and welcoming image to the rest of the world, attracting a record number of visitors who spend money here and invest in city real estate. They create thousands of jobs and over $50 billion in economic activity. Tourism, hotels and construction are some of the largest economic and tax generators for our city.

But some critics question the civic value of constructing super-luxury buildings, especially tall ones with views of Central Park, such as those that my company is building on Manhattan’s West 57th Street. Some suggest that we saddle purchasers of such apartments with extra taxation, even though they make few demands on the public services their taxes help underwrite.

Others intentionally ignore the economic benefits and jobs that development provides, seeking to add new layers of regulation in order to stop large-scale construction that provide high-quality jobs both during the building phase and after.

A New York Times business columnist recently wrote that “ultra-wealthy nonresidents who own property in New York City certainly make a ripe target for potential revenue.” A Times architecture critic, stepping far beyond his area of expertise, suggested “the mayor could lobby to raise taxes on those out of town plutocrats buying zillion dollar aeries.”

Do we want to send a message to wealthy pied-a-terre buyers, both American and international, that they are a ripe target and New Yorkers are going to charge them more for the privilege of investing in our city? If we subject foreigners to added taxation for owning a residence in New York City, it’s just common sense that many fewer will buy. If we drive away a pool of ready buyers at luxury prices, some of these buildings will not get built at all.

We need a balanced approach if we don’t want to injure—or kill—the goose that lays the golden egg.

To assemble a large site along with unused air rights, enabling a large building, takes many years and very substantial sums of risk capital. It took Extell 10 years to assemble the site for One57-a mixed-use building with a Park Hyatt hotel at its base—and eight years for the Nordstrom tower a block to the west. Tall buildings cost more to build and take longer, exposing the projects to significant risk, such as the market crash of 2008.

New construction is the lifeblood of major cities, providing dynamic renewal and serving as a major economic engine and revenue generator for city and state coffers. Over the next 20 years, One57 will generate over $1 billion in real estate, sales, hotel occupancy and other taxes, according to planning documents we prepared for city review. The Nordstrom tower, which will house the first new department store to open in Manhattan in over 40 years, will contribute more than $2 billion in tax revenue.

Critics have a right not to like the design of One57, a sinuous sculpture of cascading ribbons of glass on its south facade and a Klimt-like pixilation of glass that changes color and transparency as the sun progresses on its east and west facades. They can inveigh against the Nordstrom building, even though most criticism is based on premature and incomplete drawings and faulty information.

But they cross the line with throwaway advice to Art Students League members to vote against their future and turn down the tens of millions of dollars my company has offered for the right to build a cantilever on the Nordstrom tower that would begin more than 200 feet above the roof of the League building. That plan was approved by the city’s Landmarks and Preservation Commission, and welcomed by the art league’s leaders. The same Times architectural critic, however, expressed the hope that “cranky artists might still succeed where Landmarks failed, and shelve the cantilever. Here’s hoping they do.”

What possible purpose, other than spite, would this advice serve? The building will still be built, just as tall, but it would hurt Nordstrom and Extell needlessly, affecting the expanded floor plate essential for modern department stores and providing more attractive floor plans for the apartments above.

More importantly, it would hurt the Art Students League, an institution that for over 100 years has nurtured American artists. The League plans to invest the proceeds of Extell’s payment for the cantilever permission to renovate and expand its landmarked building, and add programs and scholarships to serve its members. Who will replace that money? Advising the Art Students League to reject a plan that benefits them is like the armchair general, safe behind the lines, declaring his army will fight to the last man.

A few blocks from my Queens home live some of the best structural concrete workers in the world. They earn an average union wage over $100,000 a year. The thousands of person-years of union jobs generated by construction of these buildings, as well as the hundreds of permanent jobs at the Park Hyatt and Nordstrom, provide meaningful employment to middle class New Yorkers. Jeopardizing the ability to build buildings like these also jeopardizes their livelihood.

Disregarding the jobs and other benefits that development brings our city is a brand of elitism that may be fine in the rarefied circles of architectural critics, but has no place in the multidimensional world of public and social policy.

Last week, the members of the Art Student League voted to approve the cantilever transaction, by a vote of over 1,300 to 200. Which just goes to show that the artists may be cranky- but they are not stupid.

Gary Barnett is the President and founder of Extell Development Company

[Submariner]

There is no numerical or logical argument against the development of these towers. Objections to them are born out of spite or the psychological condition I think NIMBYism is.

A while back, someone on Reddit's NYC section was complaining about these towers with the usual rehashed nonsense they picked up from some bitter blog. His or her argument came down to these points:

- the towers hurt the poor.
- the occupants don't pay taxes and the city is getting robbed.
- the trees in Central Park will die (yeah, the trees in Central Park will die)

Upon asking him/her to quantify how the towers hurt the poor, I was told that they could have built affordable housing there. When I explained to him that the land prices, assemblage issues and the relatively small parcels made this impossible, I was told I hated the poor. I asked him/her to show me how it was economically feasible for a private developer (or even the state) to build low income housing on these sites, and I was told we should force the rich to give up their wealth at gun point.

Upon asking him/her to show me how the new buildings won't generate substantially more in revenue for the city than the buildings that were previously there did, I was told that developers, along with Bloomberg (and for all I know the Illuminati and the lizard people) were trying to force the poor onto the streets. When I asked he/she took into account the billions of dollars these towers will spend on construction and permanent jobs, I was told to "suck a rich guys d**k."

I didn't even bother to ask for an explanation as to how these towers would kill the trees in Central Park - it's no different than trying to have a rational conversation with someone coming down from PCP.

So yeah, none of these arguments stick. Once I see actual facts and statistics backing up their claims I'll pay attention but until then, it's best to simply pay no heed or attention to their nonsensical drivel.

[FMIII]

A very intersting article about the rise of Gary Barnett: The Anti-Trump

The article is a bit old but (2010) but it is worth reading.

http://nymag.com/news/features/establishments/68503/


New-York News and Politics by Gabriel Sherman Sept 26 2010

[NYguy]

He's looking at that Nordstrom model like he really wants to build it. Do it Gary, do it, it's not too late.

[Perklol]

Originally Posted by Submariner

Reddit

If I were you I would avoid that website like the plague.

[hunser]

As of 17 February: Mihai Andritoiu

[NYguy]

stephen1855

[Camstonisland]

I hope there are LEDs or something along the edges of the tower and on the vents (or whatever the dark area at the top is). as seen in hunser's picture, it doesn't make a big mark on the night skyline. maybe when some billionaires move in it will stand out more

[Hudson11]

the art deco ish vented cladding at the top is depicted lit up at night in some renderings.



other than that, its a residential skyscraper so nothing flashy.

[Tectonic]

The spire on the NYT Tower changes color at night as well? The skyline is so dynamic now thanks to these new LED lighting.