LANDMARKS BOARD CRITICIZES HEIGHT OF PROPOSED BUILDING ON COLUMBUS
Developers are proposing a new 8-story building on Columbus. It’s the third building from the left in the rendering above by BKSK Architects.
Developers want to tear down a small commercial building at 466-468 Columbus Avenue between West 82nd Street and West 83rd Street and replace it with a new mixed-use building. Because the building is in an historic district, the Landmarks Preservation Commission is weighing in, and the commissioners weren’t sold on the design after their first look at the building, according to a report in NY YIMBY.
The three-story building on the site now (pictured at right) once housed the vegan restaurant Blossom, which has since moved to Columbus and 84th. Developer Roe Corporation and BKSK Architects want to construct an eight-story mixed-use building on the site, with retail on the ground floor and full-floor apartments on the other floors. But the commissioners were concerned about the height.
LPC Chair Meenakshi Srinivasan, as said before, had no problem with demolition of the existing structure. Of the new building, she said “the general approach to this is appropriate.” She was not, however, 100 percent sold on the height, particularly the greater heights for the top three floors (12 feet).
The architects will have to bring the proposal back to the LPC for another review.
The current building is relatively new and decent construction but small. I never understood why someone went to the trouble to build a tiny new building there in the first place. Would be great to add a couple of floors on top and make the whole things a SCHOOL! Hello DOE are you listening?!
Aww man, I really love that Ray’s pizza. Is it a sign of Age that I am realllly resisting Change!?
I don’t think the Ray’s Pizza will be affected. It’s south of the site being discussed. (Look at the first picture, which is the architect’s rendering of the new building — Ray’s is still there.)
I agree with you, by the way: That Ray’s is one of the few places left where you can almost always sit down to eat something quickly. Best pizza in the whole wide world? OK, maybe not — but good, and good enough for lunch. Glad they’re there, and hope they stay.
Isn’t 465 Columbus just as tall, if not taller? It was only built in the late 80s, so the cat may be out of the bag a little bit here.
Looks appropriate and in scale – Green Light !
if these developers “donated” to the “mayors” one NY program then they’re good to go
Is that a full length private terrace on the top floor? If so, can I live there??
Proposed building is a vast improvement over the shabby, deteriorating surrounding buildings. I support preservation of historically significant buildings, but “preservation” for the sake of impeding change is nothing more than obstructionism. NYC neighborhoods are in constant change, even within supposed historical neighborhoods. I pass that small vacant building several times per week, and it’s been vacant for two years. If a developer wants to come in an make that a viable space again, actually IMPROVING the entire block, the LPC should not capriciously delay and obstruct the improvements. Get outta the way!
“the height, particularly the greater heights for the top three floors (12 feet).”
These apartments must house Giants among Men.
Landmarks rules all and that is why many small businesses are out! They do a good job in preservation but throw fines at all the small locals
They won’t accept neon signs, they won’t accept appropriate signs, the small buisness owner has to just pray a local does not complain ( Jackson Hole had to shut off turn on signs constantly ) It is time Lanmarks preserves but changes with the times appropriately! Cities change constantly and that is a part of history, if you do not let it and it stands still you are not historically doing anything but trying to stand still.
I take issue with the weird floating cornice above the roof terrace. Why not just put the primary cornice above the 7th floor and have a much reduced cornice on the top floor?
That’s not a cornice. Its to provide some shelter for the terrace on the top floor. Look at any building with terraces and the top floor has a concrete slab covering it>
Regardless, it’s fugly. The rest of the building seems fine.
I looked it up. I think it’s a contraction:
fug·ly
ˈfəɡli/
adjectivevulgar slang
very ugly or unattractive.
“I told him we all thought he was fugly”
The overhang’s profile is intended to make it look like a cornice. It looks ridiculous instead. A slab or pergola would have looked much more appropriate for the purpose of providing shade / cover from the elements. Agree with Nathan: the rest of the building looks fine, but that overhang in the guise of a floating cornice is fugly.
Will this never end?
Re: “…want to construct an eight-story mixed-use building”
O.M.G. !!!!!!!!!
An eight-story building !!!!!!!
Oh, the horror !
Perhaps these lyrics from “Oklahoma” might just put things into perspective:
“Everything’s up to date in Kansas City
They gone about as fer as they can go
They went an’ built a skyscraper seven stories high
About as high as a buildin’ orta grow.”
hate:
sun?
air?
proportion?