New NY State License Plate Revealed—And Required On All Cars
Cops: Fort Greene Violence Sparked By Chicken Wing Promotion
Access-A-Ride Renders Bike Lane Inaccessible
The UWS Gets Its Very Own Apple Store
64 Things Restaurant Patrons Must NEVER Do
The Landmarks Preservation Commission approved a modern design for a townhouse to be built at 34 East 62nd Street. The lot, just east of Madison Avenue, has been empty ever since Dr. Nicholas Bartha blew up his home, which seemed like an effort to keep his ex-wife from taking the home as part of their acrimonious divorce settlement.
The new design (rendering on right), by Preston T. Phillips, is a departure from the original townhouse, which was more traditional and was declared a landmark in 1981. CityRoom reports that the LPC approved the design 8 votes to 2, with LPC chairman Robert Tierney declaring, "The new building relates well to the streetscape and district through its proposed materials, scale, hierarchy and organization of facade elements." However, One of the opposing members said, “It’s a missed opportunity for good, modern design that isn’t hostile." Ouch.
The new design, which still has room for a driveway on the right, includes four bedrooms, conservatory, spa, waterfall, indoor pool, wine cave and geothermal heating system (at least as of an August plan). And the property is owned by Janna Bullock, who paid $8.3 million for the lot and told the NY Times she would resell it for $30-40 million.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
not bad, however check out his portfolio. He looks like the architect for Gordon Gecko types. Lots of splashy primary colors and faux finishes.
It looks like a fire stair tower. Still it is better than anything by Frank Gehry or as I like to call him Frank Lloyd Wrong.
I like how the shadows on the rendering fall in three different directions. Will there be three suns?
Yeah, they're going to get to work on building those in February once the buildings commission votes on it.
I hate modern architecture.
Why wouldn't you just put a garage where the driveway is going to be? It'd make all the other floors and the roofspace larger?
I think that the building's lot might not include the driveway - I suspect it's for the big building on the right?
From Bartha to Bauhaus to Blech.
That isn't the final plan pictured - they revised it twice before it was approved. That diving board on the top floor has been pulled way back, the entry door faces the street and the giant planter is much smaller now. Tiny victories...
Proof you don't need tase to be an Architect.
"The new building relates well to the streetscape and district through its proposed materials, scale, hierarchy and organization of facade elements."
Nice bullshitting for justification of its's ugliness and lack of style.
Yes,... concrete relates well to the sidewalk, but that does not mean it actually looks good.
fyi: tough to put in a driveway due to the fact you'd need curb cuts in the sidewalk, which approvals are difficult. And 1 driveway also removes one street parking space permanently.
I assumed that:
The new design, which still has room for a driveway on the right,
implied there was plans to actually have a driveway.
fyi: tough to put in a driveway due to the fact you'd need curb cuts in the sidewalk, which approvals are difficult. And 1 driveway also removes one street parking space permanently.
Does anyone actually know what you have to do to GET permission to put a driveway in a townhouse?
1 driveway removing 1 street parking spot seems to be fair, doesn't it? Especially if you park more than 1 car in there.
Could pass for a psych ward, detention center, or re-education facility.
what about planting a little tree or something!
this perennial industrial wasteland that is NYC is sooooo ugly, not like european cities.