View Single Post
  #10  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2018, 7:01 PM
JSsocal JSsocal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 714
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
I'll just put you in the crowd that doesn't understand the purpose of the district, and I grow weary of trying ti explain it. Yes, Manhattan island is covered with "functioning" buildings. The old tenements were "functioning", but desirable? No. Chase doesn't have to be in east Midtown, but the city made it possible to stay, in the process keeping it's number one business district viable for the companies at the top who need and look for the best there is to offer in terms of modern office space, with all of the amenities that entails.

And we aren't even going to discuss this part:


https://www.6sqft.com/new-70-story-j...east-rezoning/
You don't need to cherry pick what I wrote- In the next paragraph I write that I agree the new building should not be halted for this. A new 2.5m sf tower is a boon to east midtown. No arguments here.

All I am lamenting is that 270 Park is aesthetically striking, very large, and still quite a functioning office building that many smaller tenants would happily occupy.

And my whole point was that this was an issue of size (Chase needs lots of space and this happens to be the property they own) and not that the building was obsolete. Let's not compare this to this to tenements, this building is plenty desirable.

Here's something key: if this property was owned by a developer and not by a bank that's building it's own headquarters then this building would not happen.

In my opinion the worst offenders in midtown, the ones I would agree with you are 'functioning but undesirable' right now are the early postwar wedding cake buildings that are small, forgettable, and unpleasant to be in. I'm hoping that those will be the buildings that are quashed because to me those are the ones holding back the district.
Reply With Quote