Renovation of the UN - by Fumihiko Maki with S.O.M.

[Kris]

August 21, 2003

An Elite Contest for a Growing U.N.

By FRED A. BERNSTEIN

A LITTLE more than 50 years ago, the United Nations brought together some of the world's most prominent architects, including Le Corbusier and Oscar Neimeyer, to design its headquarters on the East River. The result is a Modernist icon.

Now the United Nations needs more space, and it has once again turned to some of the world's most prominent architects. The United Nations Development Corporation, an agency created by New York City and State, is narrowing the field in an elite competition to design a 900,000-square-foot building.

Earlier this year, Roy Goodman, the former state senator who heads the development corporation, wrote to all 23 living winners of the Pritzker Prize, which is considered architecture's highest honor. The laureates include Frank Gehry, Rem Koolhaas and the nonagenarians Philip Johnson and Mr. Neimeyer. Mr. Goodman invited them to compete to design a building on First Avenue at 42nd Street, just south of the existing United Nations complex.

Several of the architects, including Robert Venturi, I. M. Pei and Mr. Gehry, decided not to compete, they or their spokesmen said. Others wanted to, but were eliminated early in the summer. Mr. Johnson's design partner, Alan Ritchie, said: "We wrote a letter, saying we were interested, and enclosed a brochure of our work. We got a `Thanks but no thanks' letter."

Joshua Ramus, a New York-based partner of Mr. Koolhaas, said that he submitted a statement of interest, but that "we weren't selected."

That left four architects in the running: Richard Meier of New York, Fumihiko Maki of Tokyo, Norman Foster of London and Kevin Roche of Hamden, Conn. All are known for creating sleek Modernist buildings.

Mr. Venturi said by telephone from Switzerland that he assumed his lack of experience with skyscrapers would have hurt his chances. His wife and design partner, Denise Scott Brown, added: "You get attached to what you design, and then you're terribly disappointed."

Told who the four finalists were, Ms. Scott Brown said: "We made the right decision. If they want those people, they wouldn't want us."

Employees of Mr. Roche and Mr. Foster said they were not at liberty to discuss the competition. The development corporation referred calls to Janel Patterson, a spokeswoman for the New York City Economic Development Corporation, who said she could not comment. But Mr. Maki and Mr. Meier said they were working on designs, which are to be be reviewed in early October.

"It won't be easy to accommodate 900,000 square feet of office and conference space on the site," said Mr. Maki, who is best known for museums in Japan and a cultural center in San Francisco. "But architects are an optimistic species."

The United Nations site is now occupied by the Robert Moses Playground and a bulky air vent for the Queens-Midtown Tunnel. And some members of the community object to the loss of the playground. But Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, a director of the United Nations Development Corporation, predicted that a proposed land swap would give the community a park far superior to the current one, because "there will be less carbon monoxide."

That, however, will not solve the problem for the four architects. Mr. Meier, who has designed a pair of new apartment buildings in the West Village but is best known for the Getty Center, his modern acropolis in Los Angeles, said he had considered talking to Mr. Maki, Mr. Roche and Mr. Foster about proposing an alternate site. But he said that the United Nations had not encouraged contact among the architects. "They've gone out of their way to keep each of us in our own stable," he said, adding that each architect had toured the site separately.

The new building would allow the United Nations to consolidate its staff. Occupants of the 50-year-old Secretariat building would move into the new one while the Secretariat undergoes a badly needed renovation. Later, United Nations offices in a variety of buildings in Midtown would move to the new tower.

Mr. Meier enters the competition with some trepidation. "The energy that goes into the process is enormous, and it's all on our part," he said. "And who knows what they're going to do?"


Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

[NoyokA]

The finalists are all great.


Richard Meier of New York, Fumihiko Maki of Tokyo, Norman Foster of London and Kevin Roche of Hamden, Conn. All are known for creating sleek Modernist buildings.

I have high-hopes, and expect the best entry to win.

[Zoe]

Given the size of that lot, what is the shortest building that could be put up and conform to the 900,000 sqft requirement? *Anyone know? *I am trying to prepare myself for disappointment in the height. *Very excited about the prospect of getting a Foster or another Meier building in the city!

[Gulcrapek]

A previous article mentioned 35 floors, so probably around the height of the current Secretariat.

[Edward]

Here is the older thread on UN expansion (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/topic.cgi?forum=4&topic=304).


The view of East Side of Manhattan from Queens West, with UN Secretariat Building (http://www.wirednewyork.com/un.htm) and the Con Ed site (http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/coned/default.htm) to the south. Developers envision a mixed-use project of office and residential towers, with shops, parks and other recreational spaces.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/coned/images/coned_un_chrysler_7dec02.jpg

[Kris]

A chance to enhance the East Midtown skyline while complementing the UN complex. (I decided to create a new thread since the old one focuses on the NIMBY reaction.)

[DougGold]

Which object in that photo is the "bulky air vent for the Queens-Midtown tunnel"? Is it visible?

[TLOZ Link5]

It's either the tan-brick building slightly right of center, or the tan-brick building on the far left of the photo.

[JACKinNYC]

Quote: from Stern on 10:52 am on Aug. 21, 2003
The finalists are all great.


Richard Meier of New York, Fumihiko Maki of Tokyo, Norman Foster of London and Kevin Roche of Hamden, Conn. All are known for creating sleek Modernist buildings.

I have high-hopes, and expect the best entry to win.



I work in advertising and have learned to always expect the worst, most uninteresting, "safest" idea to be chosen by any client... especially the bigger, more "important" clients. Maybe Kofi Annan will have some say. I'd expect him to maybe have good taste.

[DominicanoNYC]

Yeah hopefully.

[NoyokA]

The United Nations decision to build the World's first glass wall skyscraper on the eastriver provides good precedent. Their decision to invite only Pritzker Prize winners to a private competition provides more precedent. Besides you cant go wrong with the architects choosen. I have high-hopes.



I work in advertising and have learned to always expect the worst, most uninteresting, "safest" idea to be chosen by any client... especially the bigger, more "important" clients. Maybe Kofi Annan will have some say. I'd expect him to maybe have good taste.

[Freedom Tower]

Is this land they wish to build on already owned by the UN? If it isn't then they will own even more NYC real estate, which I believe they are not taxed on.

I read it was a playground and all, but this isn't owned by the UN is it?

Also, if the UN is forced to keep just that small parcel of land they already have that would force them to build taller! Another question, I know I'm asking too many but, does the city get any profit from the UN building there or is it just the land sale?

(Edited by Freedom Tower at 9:24 pm on Aug. 21, 2003)

[JerzDevl2000]

I'm UNsure of anything good until I see it, the seat of "World Government" better find a new HQ suitable for being noteworthy on a world scale!

[Kris]

February 14, 2004

Japanese Architect Wins U.N. Competition

By JULIE V. IOVINE

Fumihiko Maki, a Japanese architect known for classical modern designs executed with a craftsman-like approach to technology, has won the competition to design an additional building for the United Nations.

His selection was reported Tuesday by The New York Sun. Officials at the United Nations Development Corporation, which develops and manages the organization's office space, said a formal announcement is not expected until late this month.

Mr. Maki said by phone yesterday that he admired the slender silhouette of the United Nations Secretariat building. "The thin slab is something quite unique because in America office buildings tend to be large and squarish," said Mr. Maki, who has also been chosen to design the new office buildings at the World Trade Center site.

Construction of the United Nations building, on First Avenue between 41st and 42nd Streets, will allow the current complex, just north of the site, to be expanded and renovated.

The proposed design is "glassy, white and sheer but elegant," said Edward Rubin, a member of the selection jury and chairman of the land-use committee of Community Board 6, which represents the neighborhood that includes the United Nations complex. Mr. Maki and his firm, Maki & Associates, will be working in partnership with Skidmore, Owings & Merrill on the 35-story building, which is expected to cost about $330 million and be completed by 2008.

The United Nations complex, completed in 1952, now needs both expansion and renovation, including the removal of asbestos and lead paint. Once the new, 900,000-square-foot building is completed, it will be used by the General Assembly, the Secretariat and their staffs. They will move back when the renovation is complete; the new building will then house United Nations employees now working at other Midtown locations.

The Robert Moses Playground and a ventilation shaft for the Queens-Midtown Tunnel are now located on the development site. Community Board 6 supports the development as long as the United Nations replaces parts of the 1.3-acre playground that will be lost, Mr. Rubin said. At risk are a soccer field and a blacktopped surface where a roller hockey league has played for more than 20 years.

The United Nations has agreed to pay for a $100,000 esplanade on the East River, said Michael Sherman, a spokesman for the development corporation.

But paths for strolling are not the same as playing fields, said Mr. Rubin. "We take our active space very seriously,'' he said. "We want a suitable replacement and we want it as close to the existing Robert Moses park as possible.''

The competition was open only to winners of the Pritzker Architecture Prize, the highest honor in the profession. The other contestants were Kevin Roche of Hamden, Conn., and Lord Norman Foster of London. Richard Meier, a New York architect, withdrew from the competition last summer. "I told them it's the wrong site," he said. "All the requirements for size, traffic, security, access - everything cannot be met on that site."

The selection of Mr. Maki suggests an effort to honor the original building's reputation as an icon of International Style modernism. Mr. Maki's approach to building combines subdued refinements with technological flourishes, as seen in the swooping steel roof of the Fujisawa Municipal Gymnasium in suburban Tokyo, which suggests both an ancient warrior helmet and a hovering spaceship.

Mr. Maki said, "The U.N. reminded us that whatever we did we had to respect the existing building and not make an addition that is too aggressive or too iconographic, but rather friendly and quiet."

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[Kris]

www.maki-and-associates.co.jp

The Architecture of Fumihiko Maki (http://www.arcspace.com/books/maki/index.htm)

[Kris]

Maki Highrise (http://www.maki-and-associates.co.jp/html/works/yit_e.htm)

[NoyokA]

What no renderings?

Its nice to see a community group so supporting, hopefully they wont mind a 1,100 foot tower in their backyard.

[Gulcrapek]

Is that what you've heard now?

[Kris]

Designs to keep the enemies at the gate

By Ted Smalley Bowen

Published: February 19 2004 19:00 | Last Updated: February 19 2004 19:00

Whatever it has done for global peace and equality, the United Nations is an undoubted architectural trendsetter. Its International Style 1950s headquarters in Manhattan, with its sleek monolithic exteriors and soaring, open interiors helped establish a US beachhead for postwar modernism. Now plans for extensive renovations and the addition of a new administrative building, to be designed by Fumihiko Maki, have once again put the UN at the forefront of design - this time the struggle to reconcile security features with aesthetics and openness.

"We do not want to turn this place into a fortress. The UN belongs to the member states and it has to be the people's institution. The design concept should be in harmony with the existing complex," says Toshiyuki Niwa, executive director of the UN's capital master plan, which is overseeing the project. "However, our experience in Baghdad has had a strong effect on us. You have to think about all kinds of implications."

The architectural manifestations of post-9/11 angst can be ugly. The design constraints, building materials and technologies intended to bolster security threaten to mar existing buildings and produce a generation of mean and uninspiring structures - lacklustre boxes with windowless façades hunkering behind guardhouses and thickets of bollards, those stubby car-stopping posts mushrooming on city sidewalks.

A walk around Boston, which will host this summer's high-security Democratic national convention in its new conference centre, illustrates the problem. The historic Massachusetts State House is trapped behind an evolutionary assortment of perimeter defences - jersey barriers (slabs of concrete bolted together), metal pedestrian barriers and bollards obscured by ornamental metal cages. A thick black chain snakes around the main gate. Signs apologise for the inconvenience.

On Boston harbour, the 1998 Joseph Moakley Federal Court House - built after the 1983 bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut and the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma first prompted a rethink on the security of military and government facilities - greets pedestrians with brick walls, barred windows and bollards. The building's "open" feature, a sloping glass wall, faces the water.

Concerns for building security are as old as architecture. But, while the crenellations, portcullises and lancet windows of medieval castles were both security features and pleasing to the eye, it is hard to imagine jersey barriers, metal detectors and blast-resistant curtain walls morphing into their aesthetic equivalent.

Castle-builders were concerned with aesthetics as well as defence, according to Mark M. Jarzombek, professor of architectural history at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This is, in part, why their style survived military obsolescence. Palaces that served no defensive purpose continued to incorporate crenellations and the like for symbolic and aesthetic reasons.

Security was not a specialised aspect of building, says Jarzombek. Until the end of the renaissance, architects' engineering skills were suited to both military and building demands. But by the 17th century, military architecture became its own, less aesthetic discipline. The present situation "is a return to the realisation that architecture is vulnerable," he says. "It puts military planning back into the design."

Warren John Mathison, managing principal with Moshe Safdie and Associates in Somerville, Massachusetts, which has designed federal courthouses and Ben Gurion airport in Israel, says: "One approach is to lock it all up and put barriers around everything, and it appears as 'I'm scared and I'm gonna hide behind my wall here'. Another is 'all right, I'm going to make sure that everybody's aware that they're being watched and there's the need to identify yourself, but do it so that it doesn't visually disrupt the approach to a building'."

However, that can be difficult to achieve. "Some of the devices that are necessary - magnometers and the X-ray machines for checking luggage - are visually disruptive," he says. The problem is that most customers do not care about the aesthetics, so manufacturers have not had to develop more visually pleasing products. "So we have to deal with it in our own way, by enclosing it in something or placing it in a building in a manner that's aesthetically acceptable."

However, not everyone thinks security features should be hidden. It may be deemed necessary to leave them visible for tactical reasons. Some architects argue that there is also an aesthetic justification for that approach. "If it's really going to interfere with the architecture, [present it] as an intrusion that appears reversible," says David Fixler, a principal at Einhorn Yaffee Prescott in Boston and president of the New England chapter of Docomomo, the international group dedicated to preserving modernist buildings.

And there is yet another dilemma - allowing access by emergency services. "Everything you do to keep a terrorist out will also act to keep emergency people out of the building, unless you provide a means to override those security features, and that's not too likely," says Donald Dusenberry of Simpson Gumpertz & Heger engineering in Boston. "Fixed bollards keep out fire-trucks, blast resistance in glass probably won't allow windows to open or be broken out."

There are further difficulties with the retrofit of modern buildings such as the UN complex. This includes the Secretariat building (sporting New York City's first glass curtain walls), the domed General Assembly, a library and a conference building cantilevered over FDR Drive, and was the work of the International Committee of Architects, with names such as LeCorbusier and Oscar Niemeyer. "The buildings are subtle and human - marvellous modern architecture," says UN staff architect and project manager Katherine Grenier. "The preservation of modern buildings is tricky. Their feel and atmosphere comes from very subtle proportions, refined and clean and simple design. There are no cherubs to hide a new diffuser behind."

Designers and engineers, faced with a balancing act between all these conflicting demands, say the onus must finally be with the building's owner realistically to assess the risks of attack and avoid expediency and overreaction - the enemies of pleasing and effective design.

"You can try to make buildings stronger and more secure, but it may be that not many people wish to look at these structures," says Eduardo Kausel, professor of civil and environmental engineering at MIT. "Terrorist attacks are extremely rare. It makes no economic sense to design all structures to withstand them."

www.ft.com

[Kris]

Fumihiko Maki (http://www.pritzkerprize.com/maki2.htm)

Maki's competition entry for the new European Central Bank premises:

http://www.new-ecb-premises.com/3-photos-design_phase1/models_gross/154.jpg

www.new-ecb-premises.com

[Kris]

20/05/2004

Press Release

Fifth Committee Hears Progress Report on Capital Master Plan To Modernize UN Headquarters in New York

Construction of New Building Could Begin in Late 2005

The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) this morning was presented with a progress report on the Capital Master Plan for the refurbishment and modernization of the United Nations Headquarters in New York.

The plan was approved by the Assembly in December 2002, when, by the terms of its resolution 57/292, it expressed concern over the hazards and deficiencies of the current United Nations buildings and endorsed modernization of the existing complex and construction and lease purchase of a new United Nations building south of 42nd Street.

Briefing the Committee, Under-Secretary-General for Management, Catherine Bertini, said that subject to resolution of various legislative and security approvals, the United Nations Development Corporation (UNDC) hoped to begin construction of a new building on the corner of First Avenue and 42nd Street late in 2005. The Secretariat was trying to accelerate that date, if possible. [The UNDC is a not-for-profit public benefit body created by the New York State legislature in 1968, with the support of New York City, to provide space and facilities for the United Nations community in New York.]

The Capital Master Plan in all its aspects would be considered during the fifty-ninth session, when she hoped to present to the Assembly a number of options for the financing of the project, she said. Key decisions later this year would be critical to timely implementation of the Plan.

The Secretariat continued to talk with the host Government and members of Congress regarding an interest-free loan from the United States, which still required congressional approval. [On 16 March, the United States representative submitted to the Fifth Committee his country’s provisional proposal for a $1.2 billion loan at 5.54 per cent interest for a maximum period of 30 years.] Meanwhile, the Organization was also looking at several other funding options, which included a 25-year or shorter repayment period to the host Government, which would lower the total cost.

Also under consideration were nine additional scenarios -– all within the parameters of the current host country’s proposal -- involving various disbursement rates, grace and time periods. All those options could be adopted in response to a formal United States offer. Other possibilities related to the use of the United States offer as a guarantee against borrowing money from the private sector and giving Member States such opportunities as payment of their total assessment up front, thus avoiding any interest.

Turning to funding, she said that each of the three components of the Capital Master Plan would be funded differently. The refurbishment of the United Nations complex was the responsibility of the Member States and would be handled by assessments. The Secretariat also hoped to offer Member States the opportunity to fund the refurbishment of specific conference rooms. The new building (DC-5) would be financed separately through the sale of bonds by the United Nations Development Corporation. That would not require any other cost to Member States. The rent that the United Nations would pay to the UNDC for building during the Plan was included in the $1.2 billion Plan cost. The major focus for the new Visitors’ Centre would be on the private-sector financing through various United Nations Associations.

Now that there was a better sense of possible options, she would soon be recommending to the Secretary-General the appointment of an Advisory Board for the Capital Master Plan, she continued. Many of the issues would be “coming together” by late summer, and she expected to propose a range of funding modalities to the Assembly in the fall. By that time, she also hoped to have more solid negotiations, if not decisions, from the City and State of New York on the prospects of using the space on the corner of First Avenue and 42 Street for the new building and from the United States Congress about the pending proposal requested by the United Nations Development Corporation for the bond financing scheme for that facility. The UNDC had signed a contract with a renowned architect, Fumihiko Maki, for the design of the new building, supported by a New York firm, Fox and Fowle. It had also initiated a security assessment of the new building.

Reports had also been prepared on the proposed new mid-sized meeting rooms and additional parking capacity. Those documents would be considered during the fifty-ninth session.

Following the presentation, representatives of Ireland (on behalf of the European Union), United States, Canada, Japan, United Republic of Tanzania and Nigeria took the floor, welcoming the information provided and asking questions on the details of the project.

Responding to questions from the floor, Ms. Bertini reiterated that on the issue of DC-5, the proposal was to finance the building by the sale of bonds. To begin that process, a legal commitment from the Assembly was needed that the Organization would pay rent for the building. The corner of 42nd Street and First Avenue was officially designated as park space. New York City and State had to pass legislation to take it off the rolls as park. That was one reason why the initial plans contained a proposal for an esplanade as a trade-off for the public for the lack of that space.

She also clarified that discussions with community groups continued on the matter. However, the Councilwoman for the neighbourhood supported the Plan, and the Mayor was very excited about the project. Alternative space had not been explored, as it was unlikely that the legislature would not pass.

John Clarkson, Officer-in-Charge of the Capital Master Plan, responded to a question on the lease purchase. He said the agreement between the United Nations and the Development Corporation was that the Organization would lease the space for 30 years, at which time it would have the option to buy the building for a nominal fee of $1 dollar. If it paid the bonds off early, it could own the building before the 30 years.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/gaab3618.doc.htm

[RedFerrari360f1]

Still nothing...

[Gulcrapek]

Kevin Roche John Dinkeloo's entry: www.krjda.com > projects > current work

[NoyokA]

In every sense of the word, not a winner.

[ZippyTheChimp]

POLS GIVE HUSH-HUSH OK FOR U.N. EXPANSION

By KENNETH LOVETT Post Correspondent

November 18, 2004 -- ALBANY — State lawmakers have quietly agreed on a bill that would allow the United Nations to begin planning a controversial major renovation and expansion of its Manhattan headquarters, The Post has learned.
The legislation, which the state Senate is set to approve today, grants the United Nations Development Corp. permission to undertake the required environmental and land-use review processes for the project, which has drawn local opposition.

The bill also temporarily incorporates a nearby park within the UNDC district so the agency can plan for the construction of a 35-story office building on the park site.

The Robert Moses playground, located on First Avenue, between 41st and 42nd streets, would remain open during the planning process.

Now 52 years old, the U.N. Secretariat building needs major structural renovations and security upgrades, Assembly bill sponsor Steven Sanders (D-Manhattan) said.

The new office building on the park site would serve as a temporary home while the U.N. headquarters is renovated.

After the renovation, the office building on the park site would be used to consolidate the U.N. offices that are now spread around Midtown, officials said.

The project has been opposed by the local community board, which feared the loss of the park land, despite a plan to create a new esplanade along the East River.

The legislation was recently agreed upon by the GOP-led state Senate and the Democratic-controlled Assembly and has strong support from the Bloomberg administration. Sanders insisted that it allows only for the planning to move forward and should not be seen as final approval for the project.

"I think there are a lot of people who would just as soon have the U.N. pack its bags — as it occasionally threatens to do — and move elsewhere," Sanders said.

"But the city very much wants the U.N. to remain in the city."

Before the planning begins in earnest, congressional approval will be needed to guarantee a $1 billion to $2 billion loan for the expansion project, he said.

One city official said the Bloomberg administration is confident of congressional support for the project.

With the Senate expected to act on the legislation today, Sanders said the Assembly will likely follow suit in coming weeks.

"This bill is not the end of the process, but the beginning," Sanders said.

State lawmakers have until June 30 to grant final approval to the project.


Copyright 2004 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.

[NYguy]

NY POST

EXPANSION POST-PONED

By KENNETH LOVETT

November 19, 2004 -- ALBANY — The Legislature yesterday abruptly postponed a vote on a measure to expand the U.N. headquarters after a lawmaker fumed that the world body doesn't deserve help because it is "corrupt, ineffective and a drain on New York City resources."

Sen. Martin Golden (R-Brooklyn) said it wasn't until he read yesterday's Post that he learned the Republican-led state Senate was set to act on the bill. It would launch planning for the renovation of the United Nations and construction of a new 35-story building on nearby city-owned parkland.

Golden was particularly miffed that U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has refused to turn over documents to congressional investigators related to the oil-for-food program scandal.

"This is hardly the time to reward an organization that is either thoroughly incompetent or completely corrupt by granting it the ability to build additional buildings in New York City and in our state," Golden said.

While the Senate scrapped the vote, users of the Robert Moses Playground just south of the United Nations complained yesterday about losing land to the new building. The city has promised to make up for the lost park with a new esplanade along the East River.

"Move [the U.N.] to Washington, D.C.," said Rob Hagen, 34. "That's a nice, corrupt town for them to go to."

"It's not like the city has a lot of places people can go and take their dogs," said Robert Kelly, 32, a dog-walker.

City bus driver Ralph Horowitz, 58, said the park serves as a bathroom break for drivers since it's the last stop on the line.

"I'll knock at the door of the U.N. and bother them," Horowitz said of what he'd do if the parkland is lost.

Senate spokesman John McArdle said no decision has been made whether the U.N. legislation will be on the agenda when the Senate meets again next month.

Roy Goodman, a former state senator who now heads the United Nations Development Corp., warned that if the project falls through, the United Nations — and the $3 billion it pumps into the city's economy — could leave New York.

The Post reported yesterday that the Senate and Democratic-controlled state Assembly had quietly agreed on the legislation that would allow the United Nations to start environmental and land-use reviews for the renovations and new building.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Roy Goodman, a former state senator who now heads the United Nations Development Corp., warned that if the project falls through, the United Nations — and the $3 billion it pumps into the city's economy — could leave New York.

That's nothing. At least the dogs would have a place to poop.

[antinimby]

Golden was particularly miffed that U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has refused to turn over documents to congressional investigators related to the oil-for-food program scandal.

"This is hardly the time to reward an organization that is either thoroughly incompetent or completely corrupt by granting it the ability to build additional buildings in New York City and in our state," Golden said.

This loser guy Golden is just a damn NY senator, he should shut his trap and leave the international politics to the Feds.


"Move [the U.N.] to Washington, D.C.," said Rob Hagen, 34. "That's a nice, corrupt town for them to go to."

"It's not like the city has a lot of places people can go and take their dogs," said Robert Kelly, 32, a dog-walker.

City bus driver Ralph Horowitz, 58, said the park serves as a bathroom break for drivers since it's the last stop on the line.

"I'll knock at the door of the U.N. and bother them," Horowitz said of what he'd do if the parkland is lost.


These damn NIMBYS get me so upset. Why should the UN leave? They have been in NY longer than these dumb losers. Why don't they and their dogs leave?

[TLOZ Link5]

From what I've heard, whenever the question of relocating has surfaced in the UN, they all come to the same answer: No one wants to leave New York.

[NYguy]

A look at the park site (center block) that would be the location of the new tower...


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/36661265/medium.jpg

[kliq6]

with all the UN problems and america wanting to not fund this do-nothing organization, this deal may not happen

[Kris]

December 3, 2004

Dealing Bloomberg a Setback, Senate Balks at U.N. Project

By AL BAKER

ALBANY, Dec. 2 - The Republicans who control the State Senate dealt a rebuke to a fellow Republican, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, on Thursday, scuttling legislation he had long championed to allow the United Nations to move forward with a planned renovation and expansion of its headquarters on the East Side of Manhattan.

Passage of a bill to let the United Nations expansion project go forward had been high on the mayor's list of priorities in Albany. But anti-United Nations sentiment among Senate Republicans, who cited everything from diplomats who do not pay their parking tickets to what they called its anti-Israel and anti-American stances, has stopped the proposal for now.

Mayor Bloomberg has been a strong backer of the United Nations and its expansion efforts. He appointed his sister, Marjorie Tiven, as commissioner for the United Nations Consular Corps and Protocol, the principal liaison between the diplomatic community and the city. And the mayor speaks with pride of his opportunity to address the General Assembly.

But as they returned for a special legislative session next week, the Senate Republicans questioned how they could authorize $600 million in bonds to pay for the project, particularly since it would be backed by fees from United Nations member nations who reportedly owe more than $195 million in fines from violations of city parking laws.

"How can we trust the U.N. nations to pay the fees to pay off this debt when they don't even pay their parking fines?" said Joseph L. Bruno, the Senate's Republican majority leader.

Other Senate Republicans expressed anger at the United Nations over charges that Saddam Hussein had abused its food-for-oil program.

In announcing the Senate's intentions, Mr. Bruno left open the possibility that the legislation might be reconsidered once concerns are addressed.

Gov. George E. Pataki has said he will probably sign the bill if it is passed.

Andrew M. Alper, the president of the city's Economic Development Corporation, said the United Nations is a valuable asset that "makes a major contribution to New York City's reputation as an international city." He said that "the Bloomberg administration is committed to working with the U.N. and the surrounding community to develop an acceptable renovation plan."

The move was a blow to Mr. Bloomberg in Albany, and could reflect a changed atmosphere in the Senate. The number of Republican senators from New York City was reduced on Election Day to four members, from six, so there are two fewer Republicans from the city whom Mr. Bloomberg can lobby to push items on his state agenda.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

[billyblancoNYC]

I still think that this will go through after some more politicking and wrangling. Does anything get done easily in NY?

Whether you agree with them or not, I would have to say this and the main renovation, along with the UN in general, are an overall benefit for NYC.

[londonlawyer]

I still think that this will go through after some more politicking and wrangling. Does anything get done easily in NY?

Whether you agree with them or not, I would have to say this and the main renovation, along with the UN in general, are an overall benefit for NYC.

I agree with you. By the way, it's time for the five boroughs to secede from the state. The city gets shafted by the state and federal government. If the city became the 51st state, its fortunes would improve. I'm tired of having a bunch of wankers in Albany and DC shaft us.

[Kris]

The Battle Over UN Expansion (http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/issueoftheweek/20050111/200/1241)

[Kolbster]

Hmmm, i'm ready for some sexy buildings

[kliq6]

I cant believe im staying this but with the UN's record in both America and Abroad, I hope this does not get built and they move on out.

People say if they move we will loose money, however if they do then all of there property can be sold and put into new use. Most people wouldn't even know they were gone

[billyblancoNYC]

I cant believe im staying this but with the UN's record in both America and Abroad, I hope this does not get built and they move on out.

People say if they move we will loose money, however if they do then all of there property can be sold and put into new use. Most people wouldn't even know they were gone

Yes, but these guys spend alot of money in the NYC economy. Not sure if the replacement would be quite the same.

[NewYorkYankee]

I like the UN being in New York.

[kliq6]

ILUVNYC, do you live in NYC?

[NewYorkYankee]

No





<----Look

[BrooklynRider]

I used to live on East 46th Street and I can tell you it is maddening when the General Assembly is in session. It ties up everything. With that said, despite W's continual attacks on the UN, I think he is committed to utilizing it to further US interests and, along with the NYC government, would press to have it remain in the US and NYC.

[kliq6]

It should move to Arlington, VA. Anyone like me and Brooklyn that worked or lived in that area knows that . Sorry ILUVNYC, but if your not here you don't see that craziness they bring. Ive seen them walk out of restaurants without paying the bill, walking away from concession stands at MSG without paying and from what my neighbors tell me there kids are the worst, do all shorts of things and gets away with it, all in the name of Diplomatic Immunity.

If they move we can convert all those buildings to prime residential projects an use there office space in the Daily News Building and the Chrysler Building as tenant office space

[antinimby]

Kliq6, I understand your POV, however, I disagree with you.
Although, undoubtedly some of these diplomats and their associates act very poorly, we've got to have a more "farsighted" view.
Having the UN gives NY a prestige factor that is hard to quantify in terms of monetary value.
This and other well-known institutions in and around the city is what makes NY, well NY.
Everything has its downsides, but we've got to take the bad with the good.

[kliq6]

antinimby, can I just ask you one think. If the UN really left, would NEW YORK still not be NEW YORK. I don't think having then justifies the city. Its the people and the idea of how NY is the gateway and place that people from all over flocked and continue to flock to reach there dreams.

With the corruption that is going on in there, the prestige is leaving quick

[ZippyTheChimp]

There is no doubt that there is prestige for New York as the home of the U.N., and helps justify the claim as Capital of the World. But there is also no doubt that the U.N. has lost much of its prestige, and become increasingly irrelevant. And the diplomats. In personal interactions with them over the years, my emotions have run the gamut from wanting to let the air out of their tires, so simply punching them in the face.

Maybe someone should research the true economic benefits to the city.

One helpful note: The land on which the U.N. sits was privately owned by John D. Rockefeller Jr. He did not donate the land to the city, but to the federal government. The status of the land is similar to that of a foreign embassy in Washington. If the U.N. should leave, that real estate would not revert to New York.

[billyblancoNYC]

By PATRICK GALLAHUE
http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/21817.htm

February 10, 2005 -- The United Nations is looking at the outer boroughs for a controversial new building to house its interim headquarters, The Post has learned.

Downtown Brooklyn and Queens are being considered as sites for a massive project to house U.N operations while the organization's historic Manhattan headquarters undergoes a $1.2 billion upgrade, sources said.

Although the project was being planned as a temporary facility, that could change once the United Nations is settled in the outer boroughs, one of the sources said.

"This could be a permanent site," the source said.

"It's one of the world's major institutions and it would only help Downtown Brooklyn develop as a business district," said Councilman David Yassky (D-Brooklyn), who added he was unaware of the plans.

The proposed 35-story, $650 million auxiliary building — which U.N. planners call "swing space" — was to be built on Robert Moses Park, a playground next to the U.N. headquarters, but was stalled by the state Senate.

The towering new building was intended to host all operations while security upgrades, safety-system improvements and an expansion of the meeting facilities are completed on the 52-year-old Secretariat building.

Once the renovation is finished — which could take 10 years or more — the new building was intended to become a permanent office for workers now scattered throughout multiple buildings on the East Side.

But now, with earlier plans indefinitely stalled, sources said the United Nations, which had been dead set on staying in Manhattan, has set its sights on other possibilities in the outer boroughs.

"This is the first I've heard they would explore outside of Manhattan," said state Sen. Liz Krueger (D-Manhattan), whose district contains the United Nations. She said she knew they would consider other sites in existing commercial buildings in Manhattan.

Krueger, who supports keeping the United Nations in New York, was enthusiastic about the outer-borough potential and said, "It's about the city of New York."

A spokesman for the United Nations declined to comment.

The United Nations ironically traces its roots back to Queens.

Then-Parks Commissioner Robert Moses converted a skating rink on the 1939 World's Fair grounds in Flushing Meadows Park into a makeshift general assembly hall in the late '40s before construction of the nine-acre U.N. campus between 42nd and 49th streets on Manhattan's East Side.

[BrooklynRider]

I don't think Brooklyn needs the U.N. right now. It will scare away potential tenants with its burdensome secutiry needs and diplomats who, generally, disregard courtesy toward city residents. (Written as a former East 46th Street Resident)

[NYguy]

Somehow, Queens seems to be a good fit for it. But what would become of the current UN headquarters site? Not more apartments, hopefully.

[tmg]

The main campus will stay put. But there's no reason the U.N. can't build a tower or two in L.I.C. It would seem an ideal solution.

[GLNY]

Leavenworth for Kofi Annan; Geneva for the rest of these impotent scoundrels. Woodrow Wilson, rest in peace.

GLNY
(East Midtown resident)

[elfgam]

For some reason there is such a negativity to United Nations among lots of the posts and in our government. True some of the diplomats can be arse-holes but then again a lot of I-bankers are arse-holes and no-one here (or in the state senate or city council) is suggesting we kick them out of the city.

The UN gives an incredible credibility to NY's claim to be the capitol of the world (which it undeniably is). If anything, we should be trying to expand it's presence here (screw Geneva, that's what I say). It also generate a massive amount of secondary economic activity (first through hiring local service firms, and second, well let's be honest... diplomats are loaded).

There was talk a long time ago of building a type of 'UN City' over the near-end of the Sunnyside Rail Yards at the edge of L.I.C. -- I think that would be a great place for it. The city could build a whole campus there (platform and all, wait, where have we heard this before...) and get not only the UN to expand but also the myriad NGO organizations that are here.

[Kris]

February 25, 2005

NYC

Act Globally, Get Stuck Locally

By CLYDE HABERMAN

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/dropcap/i.gifN case you have just emerged from a cryonics experiment, the chatter this week was all about the 2012 Olympics and City Hall's hunger for a stadium on what has come to be known as the Far West Side.

But across town, on what might be called the Far East Side, another real estate squabble is in progress. It may not be the blood sport that the struggle over the stadium has become. But it involves the United Nations, and that is good enough for some New York politicians who insist on conducting their own foreign policy.

At issue is the United Nations headquarters building, more than half a century old and in sorry shape. Some even consider it unsafe.

Good, you can hear diplomat-hating New Yorkers muttering, let the place crumble. But for all its failings, the United Nations is not about to disappear. Another reality is that it is important to New York, try though its detractors may to pooh-pooh the point.

The city's Economic Development Corporation says the organization generates 18,000 jobs and boosts the local economy by $2.5 billion a year. There is also a more intangible quality. "It is largely because of the United Nations' presence that we refer to New York City as the 'Capital of the World,' " a senior city official wrote in 1995 on the organization's 50th anniversary. That was Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, never known for wantonly hugging the striped-pants set.

Not surprisingly, the city and state want to help the United Nations repair itself. So do the White House and Congress, neither of them a likely place to find adoring portraits of Secretary General Kofi Annan.

A deal that they all worked out provides for a $1.2 billion federal loan to get the headquarters in shape. But first, a new 35-story building would be constructed across 42nd Street, on a splatter of asphalt at First Avenue called Robert Moses Playground. This would be financed through roughly $700 million in bonds to be sold by a joint city-state agency, the United Nations Development Corporation. Rent from the United Nations would pay off the bonds.

Thousands of headquarters employees would move into the new building while the old one is repaired. Once the work is done, back they will go. The new building would then be used to gather under one roof United Nations workers now scattered around Manhattan. Many are in city-owned spaces that, once emptied, could be put on the market.

"This is a win-win situation" for the city and the United Nations, said Roy M. Goodman, the former state senator who is president of the United Nations Development Corporation.

Not so fast. Remember, this is New York, where uncomplicated real estate deals are rare.

The Moses Playground may not look like much, but it is a slice of open space for some East Siders, especially teams that use it for roller hockey. The local community board, No. 6, is not yet convinced that its interests are best served by new, vaster park space that the United Nations pledges to build along the river.

A bigger obstacle is Albany. (What are the odds?) The Legislature must give its blessing to the playground arrangement, but the State Senate, taking the lead, has said no.

ENTER foreign policy. Some lawmakers cannot pass up this opportunity to vent longstanding, not to mention widely shared, unhappiness with the United Nations. They have denounced it as anti-American, anti-Israel and corrupt, as evidenced by the charges swirling around the oil-for-food program.

Then there is Old Reliable for New York politicians: parking summonses and diplomats' reputation for not paying them.

In fact, the city's Finance Department says that the deadbeat rate has been reduced virtually to zero. That reality, however, has not stopped the Senate majority leader, Joseph L. Bruno, from citing parking tickets as proof that the United Nations cannot be trusted to pay its debts. Never mind that the city says the organization has never missed a rent payment.

Now the United Nations says it has begun looking for alternatives to the playground, just in case. But Mr. Goodman says he remains optimistic that the project can still be salvaged. "This is so important to New York," he said.

It is not lost on city officials that as rewarding as it may be for some people to stick a finger in the collective United Nations eye, the big losers would be the many New York construction workers who could see good-paying jobs float away.

Copyright 2005 (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html) The New York Times Company (http://www.nytco.com/)

[NYguy]

[The city's Economic Development Corporation says the organization generates 18,000 jobs and boosts the local economy by $2.5 billion a year. There is also a more intangible quality. "It is largely because of the United Nations' presence that we refer to New York City as the 'Capital of the World,' " a senior city official wrote in 1995 on the organization's 50th anniversary. That was Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, never known for wantonly hugging the striped-pants set.

I doubt the UN would leave the city itself, but the headquarters (love it or hate it) is a classic on the city's waterfront...

[GLNY]

Re "Act Globally, Get Stuck Locally":

Although I support this project, the NYT’s hypocrisy is remarkable.

Apparently, they are now in favor of using a joint city-state agency for financing non-public development. How did this volte-face occur? (The Javits Center and several stadium proposals come to mind).

"The big losers would be the many New York construction workers". When the original Columbus Center project (Eli Attila) was underway - with steel already ordered despite the lawsuits - thousand of construction workers demonstrated in front of the Coliseum to support the development. This merited one sentence in the Times, in contrast to numerous articles and editorials backing the Jackie O. and MAS protests.

A "splatter of asphalt at First Avenue called Robert Moses Playground"? At least this space is accessible to the public, unlike the UN's verdant acres. It's also widely used for roller hockey, basketball and exercising dogs, all activates that were excluded from the design for the new, "vaster" (where?) riverfront park.

Finally, the NYT was adamant that TWT would block views and sunlight, create traffic, and detract from the "sacred ground" (Donald's words) of the UN. CB6 is now portrayed as unreasonable for raising similar concerns for Tudor City and Murray Hill residents.

[elfgam]

So what -- ? Just because the NY Times was wrong before doesn't mean it isn't right now...

The playground -- even if it was a great one, is a little thing to sacrifice for pursuing the goal of consolidating the city's hold on the UN -- and upstate hicks like Bruno (not that all people from upstate are), who wouldn't even be able to find France on the map, shouldn't be in any position to try to increase their political power by bashing one of the most important insitutions in the city.

All of the NYT's points are valid, correct, and should be heeded. If anything the city should be trying to get the UN to relocate more offices here, instead of locating so many of them in other cities in Europe.

[Kris]

Bloomberg's Sister Enters the Fray Over U.N. Offices

BY MEGHAN CLYNE - Staff Reporter of the Sun

March 8, 2005

The mayor's sister has been dispatched to Albany to placate opponents there of the U.N. expansion project, in an attempt to break a legislative impasse that has frozen the United Nations' renovation plans and that may imperil the financing of a new 35-story swing-space building that is considered integral to the proposed refurbishment.

Marjorie Tiven, who was appointed commissioner of the New York City Commission for the United Nations, Consular Corps and Protocol, by her brother in February 2002, is a director of the United Nations Development Corp., the city-state entity overseeing the construction of the swing space on Robert Moses Playground on Manhattan's East Side near the U.N. headquarters.

Along with the president of the corporation, Roy Goodman, who is a former Republican state senator, and its chairman, George Klein, who is a real-estate developer, she has been meeting at Albany with sponsors of the stalled legislation and some of its opponents, according to state Senator Martin Golden, Republican of Brooklyn, who falls into the latter camp.

Legislative and other critics of the project have cited a host of complaints in their opposition to the plan, ranging from the loss of parkland in a community already deprived of it, to U.N. anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism, to concerns about aiding the institution responsible for the corruption-riddled oil-for-food program.

Mrs. Tiven's office confirmed that she is "actively meeting with Assembly and Senate leadership about this legislation," but the office declined to comment further while the negotiations were continuing. Calls to Mr. Goodman's office were not returned.

Mr. Golden said that in the recent meetings, the emissaries of the U.N. development group encouraged the state Senate to push the legislation forward, citing support for the U.N. renovation project from the federal government - which has authorized a $1.2 billion loan for the work - in making their case.

While the senator said no hard-and-fast deadline was set by which the legislation must be approved before the United Nations would be forced to abandon its hopes for building over the playground, the U.N. boosters stressed the urgency of starting the project soon to meet deadlines for getting approval for later phases of the construction.

Assemblyman Jonathan Bing, a Democrat who represents the Turtle Bay area around the United Nations and who is a co-sponsor of the moribund legislation, said the development corporation's concern about the delay centered on money and timing.

The legislator said that in his meetings with the threesome in mid-February, the delegation expressed concern that delays in moving the stalled legislation and swing-space construction forward could limit the corporation's ability to get the funds it needs to finance the project. The development corporation has said it plans to pay for the construction by issuing $650 million in bonds.

Mr. Bing and other leaders in Albany said yesterday, however, that there are no signs the legislative gridlock will end soon. A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, Mark Hansen, said that there are no new developments in connection with the legislation.

Mr. Golden, too, was skeptical the Senate would budge and consider the legislation in the near future. For his part, he said, the delegation must provide more information about the project to assuage concerns about it, which he said the officials were working to do.

One of those concerns, the senator said, is security, particularly surrounding the Queens Midtown Tunnel. As The New York Sun reported in January, current plans for the swing space would place the 900,000-square-foot building on top of the tunnel, which has been identified as a potential terrorist target. Mr. Golden said he was waiting on information from the state Senate's committee on homeland security to assure him the new building would not pose any further threat. Another concern about the project that needs to be addressed, the senator said, was its cost.

Mr. Golden previously maintained that nothing short of the resignation of Secretary-General Annan would sway his position on the world body's construction plans at Turtle Bay. But while he said "the state Senate could see itself approving this property in the immediate future if Kofi Annan were to resign," Mr. Golden said that absent Mr. Annan's ouster, which he acknowledged appears unlikely, he might be more amenable to supporting the U.N. plans if these and other concerns about the project were sufficiently assuaged.

Another state senator who has opposed the project, Frank Padavan, Republican of Queens, is waiting for a signal from Washington before reconsidering his position, his spokesman, Peter Potter, said.

"Basically, two things need to be met," Mr. Potter said. "We need to receive a letter either from Ambassador Bolton or the White House expressing the importance and necessity of the changes, and also regarding security issues." Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced yesterday that John Bolton, currently undersecretary of state for arms control and international security affairs - and a past critic of the United Nations - has been nominated by President Bush to replace John Danforth as America's ambassador to the world body.

The other component, Mr. Potter said, is a commitment from Mr. Bing and the sponsor of the legislation in the Assembly, Steven Sanders, a Democrat who represents the immediate U.N. vicinity, that they support the proposed U.N. project.

Messrs. Bing and Sanders, however, said yesterday that the legislation they have sponsored allows only for a land use review to inform the community about the U.N. project, and that they cannot express an opinion about the project itself until the results of the review are available.

To one of the expansion project's most vocal opponents in the Assembly, Dov Hikind of Brooklyn, no information from the city or the United Nations, and no convincing by the mayor's sister, could alter his position.

"It doesn't matter if it's the mayor's sister, uncle, aunt, or anyone else," Mr. Hikind said. "My sentiment of the United Nations is I don't trust them. ... Maybe in five years, if the U.N. becomes a different body and one that we could trust, I would feel differently, but nothing has really changed in the last few months."

Because of opposition from legislators such as Mr. Hikind, the United Nations may be looking at alternatives to its current proposal for the swing space, Mr. Golden said. While the senator said there were no plans to build the swing space at Brooklyn or Queens, which he said was just a rumor, the development corporation said other Manhattan sites were being considered. Mr. Golden said he was not at liberty to identify which. But in planning for the renovation of its headquarters, the United Nations had identified locations on its own property that could be used to house U.N. staff while the refurbishments took place. Renting commercial space around Manhattan for temporary use has also been considered, but another director of the U.N. development corporation, Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, dismissed that option as "not viable."

A spokesman for the city's Economic Development Corp., Michael Sherman, said the city remains committed to the current plan for the U.N. project.

"We are moving forward with our plan to build a new building for the United Nations near its campus in Turtle Bay," he said in a written statement. "This is an important project because it will bring significant jobs and investment to New York City. The U.N. is a valuable asset to New York City, supporting thousands of jobs and contributing more than $2.5 billion to the local economy each year. The U.N. is visited by 800,000 people annually and makes a major contribution to the New York's reputation as an international city."

URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/10201

[krulltime]

Don't get you hopes up about a new tower...


Published on April 04, 2005

RENOVATIONS CALL FOR TEMPORARY RESOLUTION


In preparation for the renovation of its famously dilapidated headquarters, the United Nations is aggressively looking to rent more than 1 million square feet of office space over the next five to seven years.

Industry sources say the U.N. is looking at 485 Lexington Ave., between East 46th and East 47th streets, for its temporary home. The building has 855,000 square feet of empty offices; asking rents average $58 a square foot. Sources say the Lexington Avenue location may be the U.N.'s best available option near its East Side headquarters. The renovations could begin as soon as two years from now.

Newmark, which represents the U.N., and Cushman & Wakefield Inc., which represents building owner SL Green Realty Corp., declined to comment.

A U.N. spokesman says it is also pursuing the construction of temporary space near its headquarters in Robert Moses Park, but hasn't gotten the necessary zoning approval.

--Christine Haughney


COPYRIGHT 2005 CRAIN COMMUNICATIONS INC.

[antinimby]

This is a great example of when a city has gotten too complacent for its own good. ANY other city in the country would be chomping at the bits to get a UN building, let alone its headquarters, temporary or otherwise. Now, because of the dumb city/state bureaucrats and red tape, the only thing the city gains is the preservation of some ugly dog-poop filled park.

[TonyO]

ANY other city in the country would be chomping at the bits to get a UN building, let alone its headquarters, temporary or otherwise.

I'm not so sure. There is a lot of anti-UN sentiment running in the rest of the US. You may be right about other larger cities being open to the UN but if NYC has people complaining about them, other less international cities would be a mess.

Its a non-issue anyways, the UN isn't moving. This project will eventually push through with the UN building renovated with or without a new secondary building.

[NYguy]

NY POST

U.N. BUILD PLAN HITS A BUMP IN TRUMP


April 7, 2005 -- The United Nations has yet to hire a company to renovate its New York headquarters, but Donald Trump and a senator are already making the case to say "You're fired" if the cost comes close to the expected $1.2 billion.

After speaking yesterday with Trump, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) introduced a measure that would cap the loan at $600 million.

Trump told Sessions, a longtime critic of the United Nations, that he could do the job better — and at $500 million. Trump said the officials never got back to him.

"I think Congress should be ashamed of themselves if they let them spend $1.2 billion on renovating a building that should cost less than $500 million," Trump said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"Someone's going to make a fortune on this."

Last year, President Bush proposed and Congress agreed to a $1.2 billion loan for the project over 30 years, financed at 5.5 percent interest. The United Nations has not accepted the loan, so Sessions' measure — if approved — could cut the amount in half.

"The U.N., as we know, is notoriously wasteful in spending its money," Sessions said in a Senate speech. "I wish that weren't so, but it's just a plain fact."

[NYguy]

NY Magazine

Trump and The GOP
Just want to help the U.N. No, really.

http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/people/columns/intelligencer/donaldtrump050418_175.jpg


Jeff Sessions, an ultraconservative Methodist Republican senator from Alabama, has teamed up with multiply married casino owner Donald Trump to try to save the U.N. some money on remodeling its headquarters.

According to Trump, the project’s estimated price tag of $1.2 billion means “somebody is either very stupid or very crooked.” Maybe Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s “son is working on it,” he cracks, referring to the one implicated in the Oil-for-Food scandal.
In a show of goodwill, Trump offered to do the job for less than half that: “I met with Kofi. I told him I’d do a better job.” The U.N. hasn’t responded.

Sessions banded with Trump because he says the U.N. should be funding health care and infrastructure, “not Taj Mahal suites in New York.” But doesn’t he know that’s exactly Trump’s specialty? Perhaps not. Sessions says he’s never been inside a Trump building, but that he “walked past the Trump World Tower recently.” Has he ever seen The Apprentice? Yes, says Sessions, but “not all the way through.”

—Will Doig

[NoyokA]

The United Nations only occupies a small part of its site on the East River.

Two easy solutions:

Get the money by selling air-rights to developers.

Build an expansion building on its own park land saving Robert Moses Park.

[macreator]

I have to agree with Trump, the numbers for the renovation are absurd.

[Furio]

Ted Turner had pledged a billion to the UN. Maybe the time has come for him to cut Donald Trump a check.

[GLNY]

The United Nations only occupies a small part of its site on the East River.

Two easy solutions:

Get the money by selling air-rights to developers.

Build an expansion building on its own park land saving Robert Moses Park.

The first option is intriguing, although I can't think of any contiguous parcels that could accept air rights. I doubt the City would allow higher FARs on the Con Ed parcels. The UN has promised new park land along the river, but that would entail building a platform on the river - raising myriad environmental concerns - and providing access over the FDR and the 42 Street on-ramps.

A better option may be to open a portion of the acres north of the UN to passive recreation. Besides, Murray Hill may get its own new park from the Solow project, possibly on the parcel between 40th and 41st street on the west side of 1st Avenue. A replacement to Robert Moses in this vicinity would be redundant.




Ted Turner had pledged a billion to the UN. Maybe the time has come for him to cut Donald Trump a check.

Turner's pledge consisted of TW shares to be distributed over time, valued at the date of announcement. With the stock now worth a fraction of its previous price, and Ted's personal wealth (and position at TW) much diminished, the UN can write much of this off as bad debt.

[NYguy]

NY SUN

Powell, Koch Back New U.N. Headquarters

BY MEGHAN CLYNE
May 3, 2005


Are you a distinguished New Yorker looking to help the United Nations improve its headquarters at Turtle Bay? If so, the president of the United Nations Development Corporation, Roy Goodman, wants YOU as a member of his Ad Hoc Committee for a New U.N. Office Building.

Using a version of that appeal, Mr. Goodman, the longtime Republican state senator from Manhattan, has enlisted such supporters as Colin Powell, Edward Koch, and Mortimer Zuckerman for the cause.

The development corporation, a city-state entity, hopes to erect a 900,000-square-foot, 35-story swing space on a neighboring city park as part of U.N. plans to renovate and expand the headquarters. The corporation's component of the project has been imperiled by a legislative impasse in Albany, where the Republican-controlled state Senate has, since early December, refused to take up the first piece of legislation that is required for the project to advance.

In a solicitation letter obtained by The New York Sun, Mr. Goodman announced the formation of an ad-hoc committee meant to influence the state legislators. Their opposition to the expansion has delayed the project to the point that, as the Sun reported last month, the United Nations may be considering alternatives for temporary office space as it undertakes a $1.2 billion renovation.

The Goodman letter, dated April 26, came 19 days after the corporation's president told other directors that he expected the state Senate to move on the legislation within the week.

In the letter, Mr. Goodman extols the virtues of the project - which he, the UNDC, and the United Nations maintain is a consolidation, not an expansion, of the world body's offices in the city - and bemoans the roadblock in Albany.

"Unfortunately, the move to green-light the Project is blocked in the State Legislature which brings us to the specific request in this letter," Mr. Goodman and another member of the ad-hoc committee, John Whitehead, a former deputy secretary of state, wrote. "WE RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO JOIN THE AD-HOC COMMITTEE WHICH IS URGING THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO PASS THE LEGISLATION TO PERMIT THE NEW OFFICE BUILDING PROJECT TO PROCEED.

"We believe that the time has come for a group of distinguished citizens such as yourself to make your voices heard in support of this project," the letter continues. "If we let it slip away, New York City will lose thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in revenue." The development corporation and the city's Economic Development Corporation have said the United Nations generates $2.5 billion annually for the city's economy.

The invitation to join the committee, Mr. Goodman told the Sun, was sent to "a mailing list of prominent New Yorkers whose opinions would count." The committee, he said, originated in response to a conversation with the Senate majority leader, Joseph Bruno, who, Mr. Goodman said, "wasn't clear who was really for this proposal."

"So I thought it would be appropriate to put together a group of New Yorkers to convince Senator Bruno of the gravitas of those supportive of the new U.N. office building," Mr. Goodman said, adding that the process of forming the committee began a few months ago.

A partial roster of the committee in formation consists of Mr. Powell, the former secretary of state; a former senator, Alfonse D'Amato; two former mayors, David Dinkins and Edward Koch; Mr. Zuckerman, publisher of the New York Daily News, which has backed the project in an editorial; a leading Clinton administration diplomat, Richard Holbrooke - whose op-ed column frequently appears in the Sun - and the president of the Anti-Defamation League, Abraham Foxman, along with a variety of former American ambassadors and other luminaries.

Mr. Koch, who has called the United Nations a "cesspool" and a "monument to hypocrisy," said his position on the world body's internal operations did not affect his stance on its construction project. Punishing the United Nations "because you don't agree with them, by preventing them from functioning and depriving them of new space, is ridiculous," he said.

Mr. Goodman did not detail exactly what would be asked of committee members. Mr. Koch said, "I assume it's going to be lobbying in some form, either by letter or in person, or by telephone."

Previous attempts by Mr. Goodman and allies to win hearts and minds in Albany seem to have met with little success. As the Sun reported in March, the development corporation chairman, George Klein, and the city commissioner for the United Nations, consular corps and protocol, Marjorie Tiven, who is Mayor Bloomberg's sister and a director of the development corporation, joined Mr. Goodman in a lobbying mission to Albany.

A spokesman for Mr. Bruno, John McArdle, said the senator's office had not been made aware of the ad-hoc committee. "There are no plans to take up the bill at this point," Mr. McArdle said.

Two of the state senators most strongly opposed to the project seemed undaunted by the formation of the committee.

Senator Golden, a Republican of Brooklyn, said of Mr. Goodman's efforts: "He doesn't have to go to all that trouble. All he has to do is get Kofi Annan to step down, and it's a done deal." Mr. Golden has long said that the resignation of the beleaguered U.N. secretary-general would secure his approval for the project.

Senator Maltese, a Republican of Queens, said: "I think all of the arguments have been made, and we've listened to them."

"I don't see how it makes any difference who's on this committee," Mr. Maltese said.

"I'm always willing to listen to my former colleague," he said of Mr. Goodman, "but right now I don't feel I'm going to be persuaded." Mr. Maltese also said the wishes of his constituents - who, he said, are very much opposed to the project - outweighed high-profile support for the U.N. undertaking.

One of the project's leading opponents in the Assembly, Dov Hikind, also said he had been unaware of the committee's formation. Like his colleagues in the Senate, however, he was unimpressed by the list of backers.

"We've made it very clear that we have a very serious moral problem with the United Nations, and I don't care who it is ... 14 different secretaries of state, 16 former this, 20 former that - it will make no difference in the issues of principle involved," the Brooklyn Democrat said yesterday.

Mr. Hikind expressed particular dismay at Mr. Foxman's membership on the committee. "It's absolutely preposterous, and shameful," Mr. Hikind said by phone from Israel yesterday. The ADL, he said, is supposed to combat anti-Semitism, and he complained that Mr. Foxman "is going to support in any fashion an organization like the U.N. that symbolizes anti-Semitism ... and is synonymous with hatred of Israel."

Mr. Foxman, for his part, said: "I think that not everything in life is measured by one criteria. One measures things with other criteria - is this good for the city of New York? The people of New York? The answer is yes; that's no. 1," Mr. Foxman said. He also said it is easier to combat anti-Semitism with the United Nations in New York City than abroad, where it would be subjected to less scrutiny.

[BrooklynRider]

Perhaps all of this with the WTC uprising plays out to a move by the UN to WTC site.

[Jasonik]

Perhaps all of this with the WTC uprising plays out to a move by the UN to WTC site.
Did you see this (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=47947&postcount=1140)?

[BrooklynRider]

Yeah - I'm just turning it into a mantra.

[NYguy]

NEWSDAY

UN looks to B'klyn for temporary space


UNITED NATIONS -- United Nations delegates, welcome to ... Brooklyn?

U.N. planners have found commercial space across the East River that could serve as a temporary home while the United Nations' iconic glass-and-steel headquarters on the East River gets a long-overdue renovation, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in a report Monday.

The report assessed where things stand with plans to renovate the U.N. secretariat building, which was considered modern when it was constructed 50 years ago but now violates most New York City fire and safety codes.

The 38-story tower has no sprinkler system, is packed with asbestos and leaks about 25 percent of the heat pumped into it in the winter.

Annan said a search of more than 100 properties in Manhattan had turned up nothing that satisfied its needs for both office and conference space. A major issue is figuring out where to hold the annual General Assembly debate, when world leaders descend on New York for several days.

The Brooklyn space, part of a larger development in the borough's downtown, could fit the bill, Annan's report said. "The disadvantage is that the site would require additional travel for many staff and delegates," Annan wrote.

U.N. officials acknowledge the chances of a move to Brooklyn are remote.

But even raising the option revealed just how difficult it's become for the world body to find a suitable place to stay during the headquarters overhaul.

The U.N. had originally hoped to build a skyscraper next to the secretariat in Manhattan to serve as "swing space" during the renovation. Once the work was complete, U.N. offices scattered around New York would fill the building.

But that requires approval from the state legislature, and lawmakers who oppose the United Nations on principle have refused -- despite urging from the Bush Administration.

Even if Albany does agree to the legislation anytime soon, the next-door skyscraper wouldn't be ready until 2010, three years behind schedule. Those delays would cost the United Nations $114 million, Annan said.

In the report, Annan also recommended that the United Nations accept a U.S. offer for a $1.2 billion loan, repayable over 30 years at an annual interest rate of 5.54 percent, to finance the U.N. renovation. The loan offer expires on Sept. 30.

[antinimby]

Annan said a search of more than 100 properties in Manhattan had turned up nothing that satisfied its needs for both office and conference space. A major issue is figuring out where to hold the annual General Assembly debate, when world leaders descend on New York for several days. Hey, Kofi! How 'bout this?
Office space -> 7 WTC (oh excuse me, 250 Greenwich St.)
Conference space -> MSG or Javits or Lincoln Center.

[NYguy]

DAILY NEWS

UN eyes space in B'klyn, WTC area

BY PAUL D. COLFORD

Lower Manhattan and downtown Brooklyn may be saying hello, along with bonjour, ni hao and zdravstvuite, to the United Nations - at least temporarily.

The world body is looking for office and conference space while it renovates its landmark East Side headquarters, starting in 2007. Among the sites under consideration is 7 World Trade Center, the high-rise being completed next to Ground Zero.

CB Richard Ellis, the commercial real estate firm that is the leasing agent for the skyscraper, confirmed that UN representatives visited the building.

A total of 2,700 UN employees will have to be relocated for five years or more, UN spokeswoman Marie Okabe said yesterday.

A UN plan to build and temporarily occupy an office tower on the Robert Moses Playground, south of its headquarters, "is now in question," UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said in a report to the General Assembly, because the New York State Senate has yet to approve the needed legislation.

According to Annan's report on the search for space, "after researching over 100 properties ... it appears that existing commercial space that could accommodate the conferencing requirements is unavailable in Manhattan at the scale required."

The UN's General Assembly Hall has seating for 1,800.

Okabe declined to identify the site in downtown Brooklyn, saying to do so "would affect pricing" if leasing discussions ever moved forward.

Borough President Marty Markowitz and real estate players in Brooklyn said they didn't know what site was being eyed.

"But I promise them," Markowitz said, "that as happy as they are in Manhattan, that's as happy as they would be in Brooklyn - just like all the people from Manhattan who have come to live here."

The Brooklyn location is "part of a larger development" and "would accommodate both office and conference space," the report says. "The disadvantage is that the site would require additional travel for many staff and delegates."


_________________________________________________


NY POST

U.N. SNUBS WTC SITE TO BUILD IN BROOKLYN

By TOM TOPOUSIS

May 11, 2005 -- In another blow to Ground Zero, the United Nations yesterday rejected a newly constructed office tower at 7 World Trade Center as a temporary home while its landmark Manhattan headquarters is renovated.

Instead, the world body is considering sites in Downtown Brooklyn as a backup to its first goal of building a new office tower on an asphalt park south of the East Side complex, as The Post first reported in February.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, in a report released yesterday, ruled out any other sites in Manhattan because none of the properties satisfied the need for both office and conference space with room to hold the annual General Assembly.

Marie Okabe, a spokeswoman for the United Nations, would not discuss any talks over 7 WTC because of ongoing negotiations to find a temporary headquarters.

"But we can confirm that we did go out and look at it," she said.

The United Nations is scrambling to find 700,000 square feet of office space to make room for workers who will be displaced during a $1.2 billion overhaul of the aging Secretariat building overlooking the East River.

A plan to build a 35-story auxiliary tower south of the headquarters on a city playground was derailed by the state Senate, which voted down the project last fall.

The Financial Times reported yesterday that the United Nations was considering a move to 7 WTC, the glass-walled, state-of-the-art tower in the last phases of construction by Ground Zero developer Larry Silverstein.

The developer has yet to line up a tenant for the nearly completed building at 7 WTC or for the proposed Freedom Tower.

A spokesman for Silverstein did not comment yesterday on the U.N. decision to pass over the World Trade Center site.

Ground Zero's loss would be Brooklyn's gain, bringing several thousand international workers to the office district. The Brooklyn space, part of a larger development in the borough's downtown, could fit the bill, Annan's report said.

"The disadvantage is that the site would require additional travel for many staff and delegates," Annan wrote.

Joseph Sitt, head of Brooklyn development firm Thor Equities, said he's had discussions with the United Nations about moving to a 1.26 million-square-foot office project that he's developing at the corner of Willoughby Street and Flatbush Avenue.

"We would be very honored and excited to have them," Sitt said, adding that the only catch is that the United Nations wants a seven-year lease while banks willing to finance projects like his usually demand a 10-year lease from major tenants.

[NoyokA]

Joseph Sitt, head of Brooklyn development firm Thor Equities, said he's had discussions with the United Nations about moving to a 1.26 million-square-foot office project that he's developing at the corner of Willoughby Street and Flatbush Avenue.

"We would be very honored and excited to have them," Sitt said, adding that the only catch is that the United Nations wants a seven-year lease while banks willing to finance projects like his usually demand a 10-year lease from major tenants.

I was wondering if this was the site. Glad to hear it is, this will be the first real skyscraper built in Brooklyn since the Williamsburg Saving Bank, it will really get things moving over there.

[kliq6]

Honestly who cares were they go, the just take up prime office space in Midtown, including the Chrysler Building, were other firms can use to expand, they should be in the middle East were most of the worlds problems are

[czsz]

You'd rather have some bland office towers replace what is effectively the world's highest-level economic, political, and cultural forum?

I can understand the majority of the anti-UN sentiment in the United States, but New Yorkers should value the presence of such an elite institution in their city, which has transformed the significance of New York from a global commercial centre to a political and administrative one as well. It grants New York the distinction of being one of the few centres of international governance not dominated by a bland bureaucratical culture. This in effect makes the city very attractive for organisations which desire a vibrant urban setting as well as proximity to such a vital organ as the UN- all the NGOs like human rights or environmental organisations which do, indeed, fill masses of space on First and Second Avenues, land which is valuable precisely because of its proximity to the Secretariat building. This is not to mention those offices crucial to the functioning of the UN itself, the representations of various nations spangled throughout the city, many of which choose to engage in many of their ambassadorial tasks in New York rather than Washington. Departments at NYU and Columbia like political science and international affairs thrive on UN connections, and the output and prestige of these universities provides incomparable benefits for the city as well.

Why toy with the fiction that a third of Midtown would instead be putatively filled by banks and technology companies dutifully filing back from lighter-taxed New Jersey? It wouldn't happen, and from a purely practical economic standpoint alone New Yorkers should be thankful for the blood pumped into its system by the UN's presence, rather than cursing its monopolisation of real estate in a city not only with plenty of room to build upon, but fewer potential occupants than appears to be presupposed.

[BrooklynRider]

It's speculation on my part, but I'd guess it's Ratner's development. Put the U.N. Secretariat in the new commercial tower. Let the General Assembly meet in the arena.

[tmg]

Well put, czsz.

I'll take this a step further. It is quite possible that a large share of the city's jobs in the financial sector will dissipate over the next few decades, which would be an economic disaster for our city. In the future, New York will need to compete against other world cities to attract attract creative and entrepreneurial talent from around the world. If we drive away the U.N. and send the message that different viewpoints are unwelcome, New York risks losing its global appeal and devolve into a parochial backwater.

[antinimby]

I wish someone would tell these bonehead state senators who voted against the UN the above, especially this loser-moron senator from Brooklyn, Dov Hikind. He is anti-UN because he believes that they have been unsympathetic toward Israel. Hey Hikind, you are a senator from NY working in the best interest of the people of NY, not Israel.

[kliq6]

So the UN will help NYC gain more jobs and international companies?? How do you figure? The UN is corrupt and honestly is not an effective organization, sorry to inform you all this. Saying the UN is good is like saying Dave Dinkins was the cities best mayor ever, please

[czsz]

Not only does the UN attract jobs, it has provided thoudsnds, less so by corporations than nongovernmental organisations and other nonprofit firms. Take a walk down First and Second Avenues and read the directories in the office buildings- the Red Cross, Human Rights Watch, and dozens of other organisations have major operations there, in addition to the representation each of the UN's nearly 200 members must provide. Such offices in turn feed others- international law firms, for example, and, yes, banks and financial institutions, which service these organisations on a regular basis. Whether the Sun, Post or WSJ tell you the UN is "corrupt" or "unnecessary," contacts there are essential to members of these firms, organisations, and consulates, which have clustered nearby for a reason. If there were a headquarters for the "International Community," it could be said to be the streets of East Midtown, and to lose that distinction would have grave consequences for New York as a global entrepot indeed.

[NoyokA]

It's speculation on my part, but I'd guess it's Ratner's development. Put the U.N. Secretariat in the new commercial tower. Let the General Assembly meet in the arena.

According to the most recent article the U.N. will move to the proposed Thor Tower, although this will undoubtably help spur Ratner's super development.

http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/album05/gamt.jpg

[NewYorkYankee]

That tower is ammaaazzzinngg! Esp. for Brooklyn!!!

[Gulcrapek]

No UN please. I don't want Downtown turning into a permanent security lockdown.

[czsz]

It could move to East New York, which could use a bit more security.

[macreator]

This would be great for Brooklyn. Such a high profile tenant would certainly do well for Downtown Brooklyn and spur even more skyscrapers. I was walking through Downtown Brooklyn last week and really was surprised by how much development confronted me. I had been there a few years before and it really is growing fast.

[macreator]

So the UN will help NYC gain more jobs and international companies?? How do you figure? The UN is corrupt and honestly is not an effective organization, sorry to inform you all this. Saying the UN is good is like saying Dave Dinkins was the cities best mayor ever, please

It's not only that the UN will continue to attract jobs, it is that the UN has attracted thousands of jobs to New York in the not-for-profit sector and non-government organizations. It's a fact, as czsz mentioned, just walk down the streets of Midtown East, my neighborhood, and you'll see hundreds of organizations filling office space that they wouldn't be filling if the UN wasn't here.

There organizations, and the many governments that send their delegates and staffers to New York to deal with the UN spend billions on City restaurants, law firms, hotels, residential apartments, everything...and they pay top dollar because price isn't an issue.

I'm not a big fan of the UN's policies but for me, the best interests of New York are first in mind for me and diffinately my neighborhood would suffer if the diplomats and aid workers left town. Heck, the restuarants on my block would go under, they've told me half of their customers are UN-related people.

It doesn't matter if the UN is corrupt, it matters that they are spending billions in New York, if we kicked them out they'd be spending billions in Switzerland. It's your choice.

Wanting the UN to leave would be like asking Pfizer to leave because you have religious objections to their Viagra product.

I for one am proud that the world views New York as such a tolerant and intellectually stimulating City so as it should be able to handle the discussion and sometimes arguments of the World Body.

[Derek2k3]

I can't imagine the U.N. there.
http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=45772&postcount=57

[NoyokA]

New York Daily News:
UN may end up as Brooklyn dodgers
BY PAUL D. COLFORD
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Thursday, May 12th, 2005

Not so fast, Brooklyn.

It's anybody's guess where the United Nations will call home during five years of renovations set to begin in 2007. The only sure thing is that UN officials want to stay in the city.

"We're looking at - I don't know - 40, 50, 60 buildings," Andrew Toh, the UN's assistant secretary general for central support services, said yesterday.

As for the tantalizing prospect of relocating to Kings County, Toh said, "We're not quite at that stage, believe me."

A report from Secretary General Kofi Annan fed speculation by mentioning a "commercial site" in downtown Brooklyn that offers office space and room that could be altered "to accommodate conferences." No address is given.

The report notes the location has the "disadvantage" of requiring "additional travel for many staff and delegates," most of whom live in midtown.

Developer Joseph Sitt of Thor Equities has had discussions about moving UN staffers into a new Brooklyn high-rise that would anchor an office development at Flatbush Ave. and Willoughby St.

"We're looking at all possibilities, regardless of whether they're on this side of the [East] river or that side," Toh said.

A site is to be chosen at the end of the year or early in 2006.

Mayor Bloomberg said the city "will make its resources available to help them find every bit of property."

On another front, the UN hopes Albany lawmakers will pass legislation allowing it to build an office tower on Robert Moses Playground, just south of its headquarters, to consolidate offices now scattered around Manhattan - in 2010 at the earliest.

[kliq6]

CZSZ, may i ask your industry that you work in?

[NYguy]

NY POST

U.N. SCHEME RISKY FOR N.Y.

By ANNE BAYEFSKY


May 17, 2005 -- THE scandal-wracked United Nations is making a fresh bid for New Yorkers' tax dollars.

The gambit is a plan to leverage $650 million in bonds guaranteed by state taxpayers to cover a $1.2 billion renovation and expansion of U.N. headquarters.

The United Nations had hoped to get the guarantee passed quietly — but state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and his colleague Sen. Martin Golden (R-Brooklyn) had too many problems with the U.N.'s scheme.

The plan originally included the taking of a Manhattan park and children's playground so that the U.N. could expand over the Queens Midtown Tunnel — but the U.N. is prepared to give up that option if it can just get the bonds to start reconstruction.

Fixing the serious ills that plague the United Nations is not the Legislature's job. So Bruno has rightly made no reference to the Oil-for-Food mess, or the General Assembly's long service as a global platform for anti-Semites. (It has only convened 10 emergency sessions in its history — and six of those occasions were to batter Israel. Not one GA emergency session was held to condemn the genocides in Rwanda or the former Yugoslavia or, now, in Sudan.) Nor does he bring up the scandals in which U.N. peacekeepers raped and abused the very people they were sent to protect.

No: Bruno's questions turn on exposing New York to substantial financial risk — for very dubious possible returns.

Under the plan, the United Nations Development Corp. (UNDC), a state-created public authority, would issue some $650 million in bonds to pay for the expansion project — without any review by the state Public Authorities Control Board (PACB). The bonds would supposedly be paid off by future fees from the U.N.'s member nations.

New York developers ask why the pricetag is so high — market prices, they say, would bring the project in at far less than $1.2 billion. Donald Trump, for one, told the media he could pull off comprehensive renovations for $500 million.

But Bruno's big concern is default: The U.N.'s promise of future fees is questionable, given that 40 percent of member states (including the United States) are now in arrears on payments to the world body's budget. Moreover, Oil-for-Food surely leaves the U.N. Secretariat with a poor name for fiscal responsibility and oversight competence.

Secretary-General Kofi Annan, after all, is stonewalling various probes of the Oil-for-Food program. U.S. Senate investigators believe that Iraq's deposed tyrant Saddam Hussein skimmed more than $10 billion from the program away from food and medicine for Iraqis — and that the U.N. was complicit in the crime.

Bruno has also asked the question that would occur to any city resident: "How can we trust the U.N. nations to pay the fees to pay off this debt when they don't even pay their parking fines?" The city is owed $195 million.

From the West Side Stadium to the Brooklyn waterfront, New York City puts considerable energy into reviewing large development proposals. In the various approval processes, neighborhoods at least get a chance to protest. Why should the U.N. be exempt?

Let the United Nations finally begin to understand that it too is part of this city. If it wants our tax money to build a new edifice, it will be expected to participate in the same open and deliberative review process. Only in that way can we be reasonably sure that our tax dollars won't be sucked up by yet another U.N. sting.

U.N. administrators warn that unless they get their way they will move to Geneva, Paris or Brussels. Is a simple call for transparency really so great a threat?

Anne Bayefsky is a senior fellow with the Hudson Institute and a visiting professor at Touro and Metropolitan colleges.

[NYguy]

NY POST

KEEPING THE U.N. IN NEW YORK


May 20, 2005 -- Anne Bayefsky's column on the U.N. consolidation project contains many factual errors ("U.N. Scheme Risky for N.Y.," Opinion, May 17).

The $1.2 billion represents a federal loan for the renovation of the existing U.N. campus, not for the proposed new consolidation building.

The $650 million in bonds for the new building and park will be issued by the United Nations Development Corporation, with the new building as collateral. Rent payments by the United Nations will repay the bonds, at no cost to taxpayers.

This is the same arrangement that exists at 1, 2 and 3 U.N. Plaza.

It should be noted that the United Nations has never missed a rent payment.

The writer also neglects to mention that the proposed waterfront park is three times the size of the current playground.

As for U.N. diplomats as scofflaws, since a new parking program was established in November 2002, no substantial new parking debt has accrued.

The city's Economic Development Corporation has met with local elected officials and the appropriate community board on numerous occasions, and they support this legislation.

The United Nations is an important economic engine for the city of New York.

In order to assure its most efficient operation, the United Nations needs a consolidation building into which it can place personnel now widely scattered in rental facilities.

The construction of this building will help to assure that the United Nations continues in New York, generating more than $2.5 billion in economic activity each year and accounting for 18,000 jobs.


Sen. Roy M. Goodman

President & CEO
United Nations Development Corporation

[TonyO]

I'm surprised the Post would print a pro-UN letter like that, even if it isn't their own words.

Anyone who advocates the UN leave NY, and thus we lose our influence, is not thinking.

[kliq6]

Do you really think the NY would loose its standing without the UN? If you do them you underestimate this great city

[czsz]

It's a matter of relative decline, first of all. A loss is a loss.

On top of which, New York isn't invulnerable. 18,000 jobs of such calibre would be a great loss anywhere.

Finally, you underestimate cachet and status and the roles they play in shaping global perceptions of New York. It would not be the same city were it to lose its status as a centre of global governance. Hong Kong also has a large stock exchange and an impressive skyline. London has quite a bit of musical theatre and high priced shopping. Alone among world cities, New York has the UN. It would remain great indeed, but quite a bit less unique, less a leader among equals.

[TonyO]

Do you really think the NY would loose its standing without the UN? If you do them you underestimate this great city

I wasn't talking about NYC, I said the US in general. If the UN moved to Asia then the US would lose influence...its a matter of having them in our backyard or not.

Suggesting they move out is a knee-jerk reaction that is better suited for upstate (or Texas).

[NYguy]

I'm surprised the Post would print a pro-UN letter like that, even if it isn't their own words.

In was in direct response to the article they printed a couple of days ago.

[NYguy]

BROOKLYN PAPERS

UN in Brooklyn could clog streets


By Jotham Sederstrom
The Brooklyn Papers

Even with hundreds of new parking spaces included in the Downtown Brooklyn Plan redevelopment project, the arrival of some 3,000 United Nations employees would drown the area’s already packed streets with wall-to-wall congestion, not to mention deplete an already bleak parking situation, a traffic expert and an elected official warned this week.

State Sen. Marty Golden, of Bay Ridge, who blocked a vote in Albany over whether to allow the issuance of $600 million in bonds to fund construction of a 35-story skyscraper next to the United Nations’ current headquarters, said that a move to Brooklyn would almost certainly usher in traffic and parking woes.

“They don’t respect the traffic laws of the city of New York, so I expect them to be parked all over the place,” said Golden. “So in Downtown Brooklyn, which is already congested, it will just continue to go on. They’ll need more meter maids, which will cost taxpayers more money.”

The failure of U.N. officials and foreign diplomats to repay parking violations, he said, is one reason he blocked the bid for new digs in Manhattan.

Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in a report issued last week that the United Nations may have found commercial space in Downtown Brooklyn that could serve its Secretariat and General Assembly needs while its iconic glass-and-steel headquarters on the East River is being renovated.

Besides its staff of 3,000, the U.N.’s General Assembly meetings require a conference hall big enough to seat 1,800 — which a development proposed on the southern corner of Willoughby and Flatbush avenues might be able to provide.

Designed as a major push to retain back-office space in New York City and keep corporations from fleeing to New Jersey, the Downtown Brooklyn Plan, passed by the City Council in August, is expected to encourage more than 6 million square feet of office development in addition to 1 million square feet of retail space and residential development — in part by allowing buildings to rise up to 400 feet.

But according to a draft environmental impact statement for the Downtown Brooklyn Plan released in November 2003, whose authors could not have foreseen the added impact of the United Nations and its slew of diplomatic license plates, intersections all along Flatbush Avenue are predicted to see added traffic. It cited Willoughby Street in particular, of which developer Joseph Sitt has said U.N. officials inquired.

“Willoughby Street would function as the primary access corridor for much of the commercial development that would occur with the proposed actions,” it states, before adding: “The east-bound left-turn movement from Willoughby Street onto Flatbush Avenue Extension experiences congestion in all peak periods.”

Brian Ketcham, a traffic consultant who owns Community Consulting Services, said that the development of 60 blocks in Downtown Brooklyn would add more than 3,700 new off-street parking spaces. But with that, he said, much more traffic could be expected.

Ongoing development in and around Downtown Brooklyn, said Ketcham, threatens to generate nearly 22 million vehicle trips annually while increasing travel in Brooklyn by more than 2 percent.

“Each weekday this new development will generate 59,000 new car and truck trips, another 189,000 subway trips and 47,000 bus trips,” said Ketcham in a study released last month on the impact the Downtown Plan — as well as plans for an Ikea and Fairway supermarket in Red Hook, Lowe’s in Gowanus and Bruce Ratner’s plan for an arena and 17 high-rises at Atlantic and Flatbush avenues — would have on Brooklyn. “This should be of grave concern to everyone in and around Downtown Brooklyn as we watch the MTA cut, not increase, services. The results will be significantly increased crowding for all transportation facilities.”

As for the addition of the United Nations, which he did not count in his study, Ketcham was somewhat dismissive as he explained his belief that the move was a long shot.

“The U.N. has got huge security issues,” he said. “Basically, wherever it’s located it’s going to bring problems within a mile. But frankly, I’m not going to think about it. It’s pretty remote.”

Joseph Sitt, a developer whose Thor Equities company owns both an above-ground parking-lot along Flatbush Avenue Extension and Willoughby Street and the adjoining Gallery at Fulton Mall indoor shopping mall, told reporters that he had been contacted by U.N. officials about the 1.2 million-square-foot office project he has in mind for that area. It would include a 700-space parking garage.

Lee Silberstein, a spokesman for Thor Equities, said this week: “We would be very interested in working with the city and others in bring the U.N. to Brooklyn.”

[antinimby]

. . . said that the development of 60 blocks in Downtown Brooklyn would add more than 3,700 new off-street parking spaces. But with that, he said, much more traffic could be expected.
What?
Why does there have to be off-street parking?
This is NYC, mass transit yes, parking lots NO

[NYguy]

REUTERS

Brooklyn to U.N.: 'We'd love to have you'

Fri Jun 17, 2005
By Irwin Arieff


UNITED NATIONS, June 17 (Reuters) - Many Americans these days would love to see the United Nations move to Africa or France, but Brooklyn came courting on Friday, telling the world body, "We'd love to have you!"

Brooklyn President Marty Markowitz paid a call on U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to give him a Brooklyn lapel pin, a model of the Brooklyn Bridge and a clear message: He would be delighted if the United Nations moved temporarily across the East River to his borough while it renovates its Manhattan headquarters.

"This is sort of like the highest honor that I have and that is the official replica of the Brooklyn Bridge. This is a way of showing you that we would really welcome you. We really would," he told the U.N leader.

Even temporarily, "we'd love to have you," he said.

Annan, though polite, gave no sign a marrying of interests was imminent.

"As you know, we haven't taken a decision," he said coyly.

A top-to-bottom renovation of the main U.N. secretariat building is due to begin in 2007, although the $1.2 billion in needed financing is not yet locked in place.

But the plan requires moving the staff to a new site for a few years while the work is done.

The initial idea was to build a new 30-story office tower in Robert Moses Park right down the street from U.N. headquarters. But that ran into a brick wall when the New York State Legislature, caught up in a wave of anti-U.N. sentiment in the United States, declined to give the necessary approval.

So U.N. officials began scouring the area for alternatives. After looking at more than 100 sites, they said last month that they had found only a single one -- in downtown Brooklyn -- able to accommodate both U.N. staff and conferences.

With a final decision due by the end of September, officials said they were still examining their options.

One idea is to lease Manhattan office space and build a temporary conference building nearby.

Another is to temporarily park a cruise ship or two alongside the headquarters compound's East River waterfront.

[NoyokA]

L.A. Times:

Going Gets Tough for the U.N.

By Maggie Farley

UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. has to move out of its asbestos-ridden, dilapidated headquarters soon for a five-year renovation. But when the world's slowest bureaucracy meets the world's hottest real estate market, can it move fast enough?

For nearly a year, real estate agents have been looking for enough space nearby to accommodate the U.N.'s nearly 10,000 employees during the renovation, which is supposed to begin by 2007. Now, they think they've found it. Just a few blocks away, at 47th Street and Lexington Avenue, there's a skyscraper that seems to have everything: convenience, nearly 1 million square feet of space and a relatively short lease. And, like most property in New York's bubbling market, it has something else: competing bidders.

Although a corporation can strike a deal quickly, the U.N. must have the approval of all 191 members of the General Assembly before it can enter negotiations with the building's owner, S.L. Green. U.N. officials worry that by the time the General Assembly gets around to signing off on it, the space will be gone.

"We need to get going," said Mark Malloch Brown, chief of staff to Secretary-General Kofi Annan. "The challenge is how to somehow preserve the space until the General Assembly votes on it in September."

The options are limited. Some cynics, weary of traffic jams caused by diplomats' motorcades, have suggested that the U.N. move out of New York for good.

The real estate search committee has looked at property in Brooklyn, Governor's Island and Queens and even entertained the idea of holding the General Assembly on a cruise ship docked in the East River in front of the headquarters.

"The problem with that is that it would interfere with the river's navigation channels," said John Clarkson, the officer in charge of the renovation. "But we're not ruling anything out, and we're not ruling anything in."

On Friday, state legislators formally ruled out the U.N.'s preferred option of erecting a new building on a playground across the street, citing disenchantment with corruption in the oil-for-food program. Last week, a procurement official named Alexander Yakovlev resigned over allegations of nepotism and profiting from his position in awarding oil-for-food contracts. He was also assigned to supervise a $44-million design contract for the first stage of the renovation, a revelation that helped legislators pull the plug on the project.

U.N. officials hope the lawmakers will reconsider in time to let the world body erect a building on the playground to consolidate staff scattered in office buildings near the headquarters. The State Department even sent an envoy to Albany last week to pressure state lawmakers not to stand in the way.

From the outside, the shimmering, 39-story Secretariat tower looks radiant and majestic. On the inside, the 1950s furniture lends it a hip, retro feel. But because the U.N. compound is considered international territory, it is not subject to New York health and safety codes, and in times of financial need, maintenance and updating suffered most.

Now, accountants figure, it will cost as much to maintain over the next 25 years as to rehabilitate the entire building.

U.N. officials say that for safety reasons, they must begin renovations by 2007. On a "dirty tour" of the building, Clarkson demonstrated how every vent is backed with asbestos and can't be dismantled without spreading the carcinogen.

On the 28th floor, an unshielded transformer emits such a quantity of electromagnetic waves, it interferes with computers and cellphones. The health effects of long-term exposure are unknown, but there are no offices on that floor just to be safe, he said.

One year, the domed roof of the General Assembly building lifted off during a windstorm as diplomats were speaking inside. Construction workers tacked it back down, but the building where world leaders gather every September for the annual opening of the General Assembly session also needs a full overhaul.

If the General Assembly can't be moved to a cruise ship, then the U.N.'s large, private park on the north side of the building will probably house a collection of temporary buildings for its myriad meetings, said Christopher Burnham, the new U.N. undersecretary-general for management.

But whatever happens, he wants it done quickly.

"It has become a huge financial issue for me because every year or every day we delay adds to the cost of the project," Burnham said.

The General Assembly is considering accepting a $1.2-billion loan from the United States government to help pay for the renovation. Although the original loan to build the headquarters was interest-free, this one will carry 5.54% interest, making the eventual total cost more than $2 billion. Some member states are balking at the price tag.

Until the General Assembly agrees on financing terms, Annan cannot sign a lease. But they can still shop.

"This is New York real estate," Brown said. "We are hoping that a handshake is enough."

[NewYorkYankee]

Well maybe, and hopefully, they'll get into that tower.

[kliq6]

A large firm is looking to make that there HQ's, i dont think it would be wise to pass them over in favor of the UN, but who knows

[pianoman11686]

Yes, this has been talked about at length. The building was planned to be built on Robert Moses Park, and the plan was voted down, mainly due to remaining anti-UN sentiments among Republicans. Hence all the talk of the UN looking to move temporarily to Brooklyn, or 7WTC, or even onto a cruise ship docked next to the Secretariat Building.

[NYguy]

DAILY NEWS

Trump targets UN makeover

BY ELIZABETH S. WIDDICOMBE

WASHINGTON - Washington has called in The Donald to blast the UN's plans for a pricey renovation.

Trump is the key witness tomorrow at a Senate hearing looking to find out if the $1.2 billion the UN says it needs to spiff up its midtown headquarters is excessive.

The tough-talking real estate mogul, who built his 90-story Trump World Tower only a block away from the UN's East Side headquarters, clearly thinks so. The project "should cost less than $500million," he said in April. "Somebody's going to make a fortune on this."

Although President Bush has offered a 30-year loan to fund the project, some lawmakers argue that American taxpayers, who already shell out 22% of UN operating costs, are being duped. The UN is holding out for an interest-free loan.

"Congress has a moral responsibility to be good stewards of the American people's generosity concerning UN funding," said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), chairman of the homeland security and governmental affairs subcommittee.

[BrooklynRider]

Good for Donald. I appreciate a guy who doesn't mince words, but I hope he stays far from the development process. His developing in New York may be prollific, but his eye for good architecture needs the cataract removed.

[Alonzo-ny]

Ive got to say i love the donald, he may be one for publicity stunts, ie rebuild the twins but i love someone who cuts the crap and gets it done right.

[Pottebaum]

Do you think there's a chance the UN would leave New York, or is that just mindless speculation?

[hella good]

its most probably mindless speculation, the un has always been in NY and its not about to change that status now.

[macreator]

The UN isn't going to move. Part of the reason is that they wouldn't be able to get the same subsidies the U.S. gives them anywhere else if they moved.

[NYguy]

DAILY NEWS

Let me fix UN!

http://www.nydailynews.com/ips_rich_content/329-trump.JPG

Donald Trump tells Senate subcommittee that he’s the best man to renovate UN headquarters.

By ELIZABETH WIDDICOMBE


WASHINGTON - New York's flamboyant real estate king had a typically blunt message yesterday for a Senate subcommittee reviewing the renovation of UN headquarters: Hire me.

With knockout wife Melania at his side and a bevy of paparazzi snapping furiously, Donald Trump dazzled a starry-eyed Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee, charging the UN is being eaten alive in the shark-infested waters of Manhattan real estate.

The bumbling bureaucratic giant just needs one thing, he argued: The Donald.

"Congratulations," Trump barked, "You've got yourself a mess on your hands, and it's only going to get worse."

UN planners have "no idea what they're doing," he warned. "We have major slime in New York ... in the form of contractors ... and every one of them will find their way to the UN."

Trump said the $1.2 billion price tag was grossly inflated. "There's only two reasons - gross incompetence or ... corruption."

An Italian architectural firm has already perpetrated a world-class scam, he charged, billing a reported $44 million for its services.

A Trump-run project would cost roughly half as much, and "you could have the entire thing rebuilt in less than two years," he said. Under current plans, it will take that long for construction to begin.

"My building would be better," Trump said, "It would be much newer, much richer. I would put in all marble floors on the ground - I like marble."

When chairman Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) asked Trump if he would bid for the job, the mogul balked: "First of all, they don't know what they want. They don't know what they have. They have no idea what they're doing."

A UN spokeswoman said "the UN would encourage Mr. Trump to bid on the project."

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) called Trump's testimony "a tutorial" and "breath of fresh air." He later gushed to the Daily News that Trump's performance was "the best I've ever seen. It was fabulous."

[BrooklynRider]

And so, true New York chutzpah arrives on Capitol Hill.

I wonder how his comments will go down in the AEC community? Although he's right, he'll need contractors to build anything and he did lump them all together in those comments. Howard Rubenstein to the rescue - I'm sure.

[krulltime]

Hey I got a feeling that he can make it happen... I do want a new building next ot the current UN headquarters. It just look to lonely there... It needs a companion IMO.

[kliq6]

They wont move , the talk all the time about it and do nothing. Just like on there policies there all talk. They may move to Brooklyn but not out of the city. There members love the fine dinning they get here.

Also they wont be hiring Trump, he is a developer not a CM or contractor. They have there own organization UNDC that oversees all capital improvement and real estate projects. Most of the time they bring in foreign contractors, one of the large reasons there is not as much fighting ove this deal as there was on the Jets deal

[Pottebaum]

When yous say move to Brooklyn, do you mean for good--or just temporarily until their new HQ is finished?

[kliq6]

far as i know any move would be temp, the idea is to fix the old HQ while they are in new space. I think Trump wants them to move out completely and go to Ground Zero

[NYguy]

When yous say move to Brooklyn, do you mean for good--or just temporarily until their new HQ is finished?


Here's a little more on that


BROOKLYN PAPERS

U.N.-BELIEVABLE
Seek permanent office space in Downtown Brooklyn

http://brooklynpapers.com/html/issues/_vol28/28_29/28_29annan.jpg

Borough President Marty Markowitz, pictured last month with Kofi Annan, U.N. Secretary-General, is building bridges that may result in the international agency setting up permanent offices here.)


By Jess Wisloski
The Brooklyn Papers

Borough President Marty Markowitz has been lobbying United Nations officials to relocate to Downtown Brooklyn during the planned reconstruction of the international body’s general headquarters in Manhattan — and the effort may be paying off.

Word out of meetings between Markowitz and U.N. Undersecretary General Christopher Burnham this week was that Brooklyn is not just being looked at for the seven-year relocation of their headquarters and General Assembly, but is also being seriously considered for a permanent relocation of some support staff.

“Undersecretary Burnham did say, even if they don’t decide upon Brooklyn as a temporary facility, they still would consider Brooklyn for a full-time expansion,” said Greg Atkins, Markowitz’s chief of staff.

Atkins noted that the July 12 meeting, which included Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce President Kenneth Adams and Downtown Brooklyn Council Director Michael Burke, did not include any real estate developers.

“In fact, we aren’t even ready to be talking to developers in Brooklyn, but we took a delegation of business, educational institution and community leaders to go talk and we went to speak to Chris Burnham about why Brooklyn would be a great possibility,” Atkins said about the half-hour meeting.

“We went to the U.N., we made our pitch and came home,” he said.

Adams told The Brooklyn Papers this week that the U.N. was also eyeing Brooklyn for a permanent relocation of some type.

“I think the thing that struck me about the meeting was first, that the undersecretary made it clear that Downtown Brooklyn is certainly still on their radar screen [for the temporary relocation], but the thing that was a surprise was that he also mentioned his interest in Downtown Brooklyn long-term, that it is a possible site for some function of the U.N. permanently,” he said.

Crain’s New York Business reported Monday that the U.N. had narrowed the potential sites for the 1 million square feet of temporary office space to six locations in Manhattan and Brooklyn.

Burnham has said that the absolute deadline for signing a lease for the temporary space, which is being called swing space, is fall 2006. The space would need to accommodate its Secretariat staff of nearly 3,000 and General Assembly meetings within a hall big enough to seat 1,800.

Calls to Burnham’s office seeking comment for this article were not returned by press time, but several sources confirmed the interest shown by the U.N.

“If, in a sort of post-9-11 security environment, the U.N. were to decentralize some of its functions and spread them around the city, [Burnham] indicated that Downtown Brooklyn could be an appropriate site for the permanent location for a support function of the U.N.,” said Adams.

“Obviously, that is far more lasting than the temporary swing space,” he said.

Interest by the U.N. could help spur new development in Downtown Brooklyn, which passed a major rezoning initiative last year but has yet to result in a spate of new growth.

On May 10, The Brooklyn Papers reported that Secretary-General Kofi Annan said the U.N. may have found commercial space in Downtown Brooklyn that could serve its Secretariat and General Assembly needs.

The Brooklyn site being looked at, which Annan would not identify, would cost the U.N. between $211 million and $220 million for the offices and conference hall, much less than a Midtown Manhattan location estimated to cost between $221 million and $230 million, plus another $45 million for conference space, according to his May 10 report.

The Downtown Brooklyn Plan, signed into law last August, was created, according to its advocates, to encourage the development of 6 million square feet of office space by allowing high-rises up to 400 feet in some zones, in order to attract businesses that are considering moving their back-office space to New Jersey and elsewhere outside the city.

Joseph Sitt, a developer whose Thor Equities company owns both an above-ground parking lot along Flatbush Avenue Extension at Willoughby Street and the adjoining Gallery at Fulton Mall shopping center, said in May that he had been contacted by U.N. officials about the 1.2 million-square-foot office project he has in mind for that site.

The catch, he said after the U.N. report’s release, was that most banks insist on a 10-year-lease from major tenants and not the seven that the U.N. predicts it will need while its old home is being renovated.

That new tower would be just one of three city planners expect to flank a 1.5-acre open space to be known as Willoughby Square.

Lee Silberstein, a spokesman for Thor Equities, said this week that the site near the planned Willoughby Square, adjacent to 1 DeKalb Ave., was indeed being considered by the U.N.

“There have been ongoing discussions,” he said.

Atkins said no developers were mentioned or discussed at the meeting with Burnham.

“We didn’t get into specifics about that. We just wanted to let them know that Brooklyn was open for business,” Atkins said. “We’re not privy to any negotiations, so this is a complete guess on my part, but my guess is they’re talking to property owners and developers.”

Burke, whose organization devised the Downtown Brooklyn Plan, said this week, “There are probably a number of developers that have approached the U.N.

“The U.N. is actively looking in Manhattan and Brooklyn for swing space,” he said. “Given all the development potential in Downtown Brooklyn, we’re hoping that the U.N will decide to relocate here, and I think there is a good possibly.”

Adams said bringing the U.N. to Downtown Brooklyn would be an enormous coup.

“If Downtown Brooklyn was selected by the U.N. it would send a very powerful message about the appeal of Brooklyn,” he said. “Every time news comes out of the U.N., it’s coming from Brooklyn, N.Y. That sends a very strong message,” he said.

“It would put us on a global map. It’s that type of message that is critical to fulfilling the Downtown Brooklyn Plan.”

[billyblancoNYC]

This would really be great for Brooklyn, but I can't believe that LIC has not come up. Is it not a 5 min train ride away??

[Alonzo-ny]

I really liked the idea and symbolic nature of the UN moving to the world trade center (i hate when people say 'moving to ground zero' it aint ground zero its wtc baby) in the article somewhere on this thread

[BrooklynRider]

It isn't faesible for the U.N. to move to the WTC. The U.N. is considered International / Foreign Territory and that won't work at the WTC and atop a major transit hub. Not gonna happen.

[Alonzo-ny]

I guess your right but the idea is nice. I didnt realise the UN feels so cut off from the world when your outside it. I dont know why i thought there would be no fences or whatever surrounding it.

[NYguy]

This chapter comes to a close...

DAILY NEWS

New-nited Nations
Staying in midtown during rehab

By PAUL D. COLFORD


The United Nations plans to scatter employees among as many as four midtown buildings while its landmark headquarters is renovated starting in 2007.

Downtown Brooklyn, identified by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan last spring as a possible site for temporary offices, apparently is no longer under consideration.

"At this stage, what we're looking at is midtown," UN spokesman Farhan Haq said yesterday.

The UN recently invited architectural companies to come forward if they want to be considered for a project renovating and furnishing 560,000 square feet of office space and 80,000 square feet of library space in midtown.

"It is anticipated that there will be two to four building locations to cover this swing space requirement," the UN's invitation said.

Haq said the UN has yet to choose the midtown buildings it will occupy temporarily.

The $1.2 billion renovation of UN headquarters, opened in 1951, will force 2,700 employees to relocate for five years.

"We're still studying a variety of options to see how we can move staff efficiently and at the least overall expense," Haq added.

"We expect to have proposals in mid-November. Ultimately, it's up to the General Assembly to decide."

Sources said the Police Department raised security concerns about the UN's earlier interest in consolidating staff at one location. The 31-story building at 485 Lexington Ave. was identified as a possible choice.

Yesterday, the NYPD said it had no comment on security issues involving the UN.

In addition, the UN will be seeking architects to design and furnish a 150,000- square-foot temporary building, two to three stories tall, on the UN campus.

It would contain "18 conference room/auditoriums ... small office area, cafe area, medical area and broadcast studios," the invitation said.

Although Brooklyn appears to be out of the running, a spokeswoman at Brooklyn Borough Hall said yesterday that as far as she knows, the borough "is still on the table."

The UN's search for swing space accelerated this year because state lawmakers didn't approve legislation allowing the organization to build a 35-story tower on Robert Moses Playground, just south of its headquarters.

Once the headquarters could be reoccupied, the new tower would have been taken over by other UN staffers already spread around Manhattan.

[krulltime]

^ So much for a new tower. Well then this thread was a waste of posts. Except if you are interested in the renovations of the current tower.

[macreator]

I wonder what the security concerns were for 485 Lex?

Is the building around Grand Central?

[ablarc]

Washington has called in The Donald to blast the UN's plans for a pricey renovation.

Trump is the key witness tomorrow at a Senate hearing looking to find out if the $1.2 billion the UN says it needs to spiff up its midtown headquarters is excessive.

The tough-talking real estate mogul, who built his 90-story Trump World Tower only a block away from the UN's East Side headquarters, clearly thinks so. The project "should cost less than $500million," he said in April. "Somebody's going to make a fortune on this."




"Congratulations," Trump barked, "You've got yourself a mess on your hands, and it's only going to get worse."

UN planners have "no idea what they're doing," he warned. "We have major slime in New York ... in the form of contractors ... and every one of them will find their way to the UN."

Trump said the $1.2 billion price tag was grossly inflated. "There's only two reasons - gross incompetence or ... corruption."

An Italian architectural firm has already perpetrated a world-class scam, he charged, billing a reported $44 million for its services.

A Trump-run project would cost roughly half as much, and "you could have the entire thing rebuilt in less than two years," he said. Under current plans, it will take that long for construction to begin.

A UN spokeswoman said "the UN would encourage Mr. Trump to bid on the project."




The $1.2 billion renovation of UN headquarters, opened in 1951, will force 2,700 employees to relocate for five years.
What happened here?

[krulltime]

Cost of U.N. Renovation Soars to $1.9 Billion


By MEGHAN CLYNE
November 17, 2005

A 60-day, top-to-bottom review of the United Nations's renovation plans - meant to bring down the $1.2 billion cost of the project, described by many real estate experts as over-inflated - has instead sent the project's estimated price tag soaring to $1.9 billion.

The new number is derived from an official U.N. report on the renovations to be released today and obtained by The New York Sun. The report, issued in the name of Secretary-General Annan and prepared by Fritz Reuter, the new director of the Capital Master Plan, as the United Nations calls the renovation project, was intended to "challenge all assumptions" about how the refurbishment should be conducted in order to make it less expensive, the U.N. undersecretary-general for management, Christopher Burnham, told the Sun earlier this fall.

The U.N.'s price increase comes as the Senate approved language yesterday restricting U.S. payments to the world body for the purpose of its upgrades.

On Capitol Hill yesterday, lawmakers outraged by the ballooning costs issued warnings that American support might be curtailed in light of fiscal irresponsibility at the United Nations.

Senator Sessions, a Republican of Alabama, told the Sun yesterday that he was "disappointed at the surge in cost," saying the spike further demonstrated the need for congressional oversight of the project.

"This is our money," said Mr. Sessions, who introduced legislation in April that would cap the amount of any American construction loan offer to the United Nations at $600 million. "They just don't seem to get it."

The U.N. report also recommends scrapping plans to vacate the world body's headquarters during the renovation, as had been planned for under earlier renovation models. That change eliminates the need for either a new "swing space" building or for leasing 700,000 square feet of commercial office space in New York City.

The United Nations says it needs to undertake a complete overhaul of its Turtle Bay campus - which is more than half a century old - owing to the dilapidated state of its facilities.

Initial planning for the project was conducted in 2000 and again in 2002, yielding a cost estimate of $1.2 billion. The United Nations determined it needed to empty its premises entirely during the renovations, citing dangers posed by asbestos and other construction hazards. Offices of the world body were to be temporarily housed in a 900,000-square-foot, 35-story "swing space" to be erected by the United Nations Development Corporation, a city-state public benefit corporation, over a neighboring city park.

Because the New York State Legislature did not issue the approvals necessary for the U.N. to seize Robert Moses Playground, the U.N. sought to rent about 700,000 square feet of commercial office space as an alternative.

Today's report, however, states that the "failure of plans for the UNDC5 building," as the swing space is called by the U.N., render it "no longer a realistic option for swing space in the foreseeable future." Moreover, "no commercial solutions were found to accommodate the activities of the General Assembly and other intergovernmental organs," the report states.

As a result, the secretary-general is recommending that the world body undertake its renovation in stages, under one of the four strategies for the refurbishment project set forth in the new report. Under "Strategy IV," the option endorsed by the secretary-general, a "phased approach" is undertaken. Ten floors of the Secretariat building at a time would be vacated and renovated, and the United Nations would lease approximately 228,000 square feet of commercial space in Midtown Manhattan to house the displaced staff.

The world body would also rent commercial space in Long Island City to temporarily house the Dag Hammarskjold Library, and would erect temporary conference facilities on the U.N.'s North Lawn, a park on the world body's campus that is closed to the public. Under all four options, the U.N. would abandon plans to renovate the building occupied by the U.N. Institute for Training and Research, and today's report suggests the possibility of jettisoning that building as a U.N. property altogether, saying it "is not a cost-effective building to operate over the long term."

The total cost of the endorsed "Strategy IV," according to the report, is $1.588 billion, yielding a total project cost of $613.76 per square foot, according to the document.

The report also sets forth "common assumptions" that apply to all four renovation strategies, including the one recommended by the secretary-general. Under these provisions, the report says, an additional $161 million in "scope options for additional security, sustainability, and redundancy" might be applied, on top of another $63.9 million for a "new multifunction hall and large conference room" to be added at a later date. The report says that the cost estimates do not include furniture or equipment such as computers, servers, or broadcast cameras, stipulating: "In order to provide proper furniture and equipment, it will be necessary to incorporate a provision of up to $100 million in the regular budget in the years leading up to the completion of the Capital Master Plan."

Adding the scope options and other add-ons to the base price of the new plan yields a total adjusted cost of around $1.912 billion. America, which shoulders 22% of the U.N.'s operating costs, could expect to pay around $420 million.

The project would be completed in 2014, four years later than the United Nations said it had hoped to finish the upgrades.

According to the report, the increased cost estimates result from the elimination of UNDC5 as a swing space option, construction-cost inflation, and a more precise understanding of the costs of the project now that 60% of the design work has been completed. The report says that the design work will be 100% completed between October 2005 and January 2006, and says the total cost of the design development and construction documents phase will be around $152 million.

Back when the refurbishment project was set to cost around $1.2 billion, the American government had offered a 30-year, 5.54% interest loan to fund the renovation. The secretary-general had recommended to the General Assembly that the United Nations accept the loan offer, despite several member states' complaints that America had not provided the loan interest-free.

The secretary-general now recommends that the costs of the Capital Master Plan be covered by one-time or annual cash assessments from member states, to be set aside in a "capital master plan special account." The report states that the United Nations would need to raise $45 million from member states for the fund before construction commences, and must maintain the fund's balance at 20% of annual expenditures in order to cover "temporary cash-flow deficits" and unexpected expenses. Breaking with U.N. practice, the report says, interest or fines may be imposed on member states that are late in paying their assessments.

In order to be permitted to begin construction, Mr. Annan says in the report, the United Nations must be able to provide a guarantee that it can pay the projected cost of the project. The American loan offer, the report states, "could act either as a source of project funds or as a credit enhancement vehicle to enable the United Nations to access short-term borrowing or letters of credit in international capital markets."

Senator Sessions, who was involved in Senate hearings in July at which real-estate developer Donald Trump testified that the U.N.'s renovation project was excessively costly and would probably end up carrying a price tag of $3 billion, pointed to Mr. Trump's testimony, saying the U.N.'s costs were already beginning to skyrocket. A spokesman for Senator Coburn, the Oklahoma Republican who chaired the hearing, expressed similar concerns.

Mr. Sessions said the wariness was shared by others in Congress, including Senator McConnell, a Republican of Kentucky who is influential on foreign policy appropriations matters. Mr. Sessions said that yesterday the Senate approved 94-5 the loan-capping language he introduced in April, plus a provision that would prohibit the American government from financing interest costs for any loans to international organizations, including the United Nations and the renovation project.

Calls requesting comment placed to the offices of Messrs. Reuter and Burnham, and to the president of the United Nations Development Corporation, Roy Goodman, yesterday and earlier this week went unreturned.


© 2005 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC.

[kliq6]

This is the first time i can think of the NY State actually stoped something that was going to add to our debt and budget, this plan was a joke from the beginneing with the UN not wanting to pay a thing and never having a real set number for whatit would cost.

[macreator]

Well it looks like our chances of getting a new UN building have just gone away.

Although we might get a nice UN conference center in Long Island City which wouldn't be bad.

[kliq6]

$2 billion to renovate this facility, less then that to do a 42 story, 2.1 million sf office building with 7 or more full 90,000 trading floors and massive MEP work for Goldman Sachs, amazing. The UN should stop the crap and get a real Owners Rep like Jones Land Lasalle or something to step in and mange this for them, the price would be cut by more then half

[krulltime]

UN may build temporary hall in $1.6B rehab plan


BY PAUL D. COLFORD
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
November 18, 2005

The United Nations would build a temporary conference hall on its north lawn for General Assembly meetings under a $1.6 billion master plan endorsed yesterday by Secretary General Kofi Annan.

The 100,000-square-foot structure would be in use during an extensive renovation of the UN's landmark headquarters that's due to run through 2013.

In a report, Annan called on the General Assembly to approve the plan, which also calls for the leasing of temporary office space in midtown and space for its Dag Hammarskjold library in Long Island City, Queens.

The $1.6 billion price tag was said to be 55% higher than anticipated a few years ago because New York state lawmakers have blocked the UN's plan to build a 35story office tower on the nearby Robert Moses Playground. The tower was to house employees during renovations and consolidate UN staffers already scattered among other sites in Manhattan.

A bill that would submit the tower to the city's land-use review - the first step in the approval process - has languished in Albany because of anger over the UN's oil-for-food scandal and other grievances.

Though former state Sen. Roy Goodman, CEO of the United Nations Development Corp., said he's still optimistic lawmakers will let the UN proceed on the tower, perhaps early next year, the forecast in Albany is bleak.

"We have not acted on the bill and we don't have any plans to," Mark Hansen, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, said yesterday.


All contents © 2005 Daily News, L.P.

[tmg]

$2 billion to renovate this facility, less then that to do a 42 story, 2.1 million sf office building with 7 or more full 90,000 trading floors and massive MEP work for Goldman Sachs, amazing. The UN should stop the crap and get a real Owners Rep like Jones Land Lasalle or something to step in and mange this for them, the price would be cut by more then half

I'm not sure I've read the article right, but it seems to me that these numbers aren't comparable. When we hear about the cost of a new office tower, it doesn't include the various planning, relocation, and interim leasing costs bourne by the potential tenants. The U.N. is planning a complex renovation of a facility without enough swing space to handle the project efficiently. This will stretch out its timeline, and create a lot of additional logistical costs that they wouldn't have to bear otherwise.

NYS and the US should stop jerking the UN around, and let them proceed with their original plan.

[kliq6]

NY state is in enough debt and waste enough of our tax money on useless handouts, atleast those are to our own citizens so it is somewhat understandable. Giiving a blank check to the UN, not a good move

[krulltime]

I though I that I will never hear about this tower again... But there still hope.


BLOOMBERG PUSHES NEW U.N. TOWER


By KENNETH LOVETT
April 12, 2006

- ALBANY - Mayor Bloomberg is readying a new battle with the state Legislature, this time reviving a plan for a new U.N. building on a city playground, The Post has learned.

Bloomberg aides say once the state budget is resolved, the city will make the U.N. project - which the state Senate killed in 2004 - a priority in Albany.

The United Nations wants to take the Robert Moses Playground from the city and erect a 35-story building that would serve as its headquarters while the main secretariat building is renovated.

Once the main building is done, the new building would serve as additional U.N. office space.

The Bloomberg administration plans to argue that the project will not only create construction jobs, but will ultimately free up two city-owned buildings at 1 and 2 U.N. Plaza that eventually can be sold for big bucks.

The bill would also temporarily incorporate a nearby park within the UNDC district so the agency can plan for the construction of the 35-story office building on the park site.

The legislation was blocked by the Senate in late 2004 after several Republican senators, including Martin Golden (R-Brooklyn), fumed that the world body doesn't deserve help because it is "corrupt, ineffective and a drain on New York City resources."


Copyright 2006 NYP Holdings, Inc.

[Citytect]

Build It!

[krulltime]

Mayor Says He Supports U.N.'s Presence in City


By JILL GARDINER - Staff Reporter of the Sun
April 14, 2006

Mayor Bloomberg said yesterday that while he doesn't always agree with the United Nations he fails "to see the arguments to drive the U.N. out of the city."

"I've always thought that talking face to face, even if you don't like what people are saying, is a lot better than shooting at each other," Mr. Bloomberg said.

His comments came after reports that he is reviving a push for Albany's approval on a 35-story building at a playground next to the United Nations with the expectation that the world body would lease it.

That deal was scuttled in 2004 when the state Senate refused to consider a bill after intense opposition from lawmakers who view the United Nations as anti-American.

Mr. Bloomberg and a deputy mayor, Daniel Doctoroff, who oversees economic development in the city, said that if built, the 35-story tower would allow the United Nations to clear out of two city-owned buildings, which could be sold or redeveloped.

During a phone interview yesterday, Mr. Doctoroff said the city has been "having conversations" with Albany legislators and that it would "like to help the U.N. because the U.N. helps New York."


© 2006 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC.

[Kris]

April 18, 2006
Renovation of U.N. Complex Stalled by U.S., an Official Says
By WARREN HOGE

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/04/18/world/18nations_lg.jpg
The United Nations Secretariat building was lit up last October to mark the U.N.'s 60th anniversary.

UNITED NATIONS, April 17 — The director of the $1.6 billion plan to restore the aging and dilapidated headquarters of the United Nations said Monday that persistent objections from the United States were causing delays in meeting deadlines and jeopardizing the future of the entire project.

Under the plan, the United Nations intends to move its operations into a new temporary building on its existing campus and some office space in midtown Manhattan over the next seven years so that the iconic Secretariat and General Assembly buildings can undergo long-postponed refurbishment.

If approved by the General Assembly, the arrangement will end a 10year search for updated space that has caused the United Nations to consider everything from housing on cruise ships to a move to Brooklyn.

"We're poised with an incredibly responsible set of drawings, completely tested in the market, tested by so many outside auditors that I don't want to tell you," said the plan's director, Louis Frederick Reuter IV, a veteran of large project management in New York, "and these are real costs, they are competitive, they are real good numbers for doing this kind of work in the city."

"It's one of those moments in time that I don't think will be recreated if not acted on in a very short period of time," he said.

Before taking on the remodeling task in 2001, Mr. Reuter was responsible for the $1 billion rebuilding of New York/Weill Cornell Medical Center over the Franklin D. Roosevelt Drive. He said the absence of American agreement was resulting in rising costs and disillusioning the team of experts he had assembled for the task.

"I won't kid you that we're not frustrated that this is being delayed and that the building is not getting healthier," he said. "We are very near consensus, and we are having issues not only with cost increases but also brain drain. There is a lot of other work out there going on in New York."

He said the current impasse had arisen when the United States emerged as the only country blocking $100 million that was to have been approved for the project by April 1. He calculated that the delay was increasing costs by $225,000 a day.

John R. Bolton, the American ambassador, said Monday that the United States had offered $23.5 million but was not convinced that the larger amount was needed at the moment. "I don't think the justification has been made yet on the full $100 million," he said.

"We're not trying to slow this down," Mr. Bolton said, "but we want to proceed in a careful and prudent fashion. The United States thinks that $23.5 million is a lot of money and should carry a pretty good distance until we can have decisions by the General Assembly on some of the other critical questions, like what strategy the organization wants to follow."

Mr. Reuter said the American sum would cover only administrative and design expenses and would not allow the United Nations to move forward on its schedule for obtaining critical lease obligations and commitments to pre-construction work on the temporary building.

Periodic surveys of the 55-year-old structures on the East River, which were constructed under 1938 building codes, have pronounced them alarmingly behind the times and below minimal safety standards. They have cited asbestos insulation, lead paint, outmoded plumbing and electric systems, lack of sprinklers, frequent power shutdowns and leaking roofs.

Mr. Reuter said plaster from the ceiling of the General Assembly fell to the floor last fall just days before 150 presidents, prime ministers and monarchs gathered there to commemorate the organization's 60th anniversary.

The plan calls for the staff to vacate 10 of the Secretariat building's 38 floors in four phases and to move to equivalent space to be leased in a midtown Manhattan office building. Under the arrangement, the secretary general and other Secretariat officials would move but not be obliged to leave the headquarters during the renovation.

A temporary conference hall would be constructed on the sculpture lawn at the north reach of the United Nations campus at First Avenue and 46th Street. Mr. Reuter described it as "like a Wal-Mart, a gymnasium, a big box" and said it would be used in three phases to accommodate people whose work spaces were being overhauled.

The $1.6 billion cost would be covered by added dues assessments for the 191 member countries over five years. The United States, the largest contributor to the United Nations, would be responsible for 22 percent.

The proposal replaces an earlier renewal plan that called for the 3,600 people at the headquarters complex to move for five years to a new $330 million, 35-story building to be constructed on a playground next door. The United Nations had to abandon that plan in August after the New York State Legislature refused to pass enabling legislation.

Mr. Reuter said construction costs would be $405 a square foot, a rate he said was at the low end of the spectrum in New York. "I think that's a great number," he said.

Mr. Reuter said he felt he needed approval by the end of this week when, he said, he understood that the budget committee of the General Assembly would be recessing until May. But Movses Abelian, the secretary of the panel, would not confirm that schedule, saying only that its work continued day by day.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

[krulltime]

U.N. and Bloomberg in Disagreement Over New Turtle Bay Building


By JILL GARDINER - Staff Reporter of the Sun
April 18, 2006

Less than a week after Mayor Bloomberg went public with his plans to push for a new 35-story tower for the United Nations next to its current building at Turtle Bay, the head of the organization renovation project said the organization doesn't need it.

The assistant secretary general who oversees the renovation of the United Nations building, Fritz Reuter, told reporters yesterday that the world body did not need the tower to temporarily house staff while it renovates its dilapidated building.

"I can't wait for them another two or three years to get the approvals and build this building," Mr. Reuter said. "Chunks of plaster are falling down."

The 35-story project, which would be built on a playground on First Avenue, was all but rejected in 2004, when the state Legislature refused to consider it. Much of the opposition to the plan came from those who do not favor the U.N.'s policies.

Mr. Bloomberg is lobbying for the building again, saying it would be an important economic shot in the arm for the city. But Mr. Reuter said that even if the building was proposed as a permanent site, the United Nations would not move there unless it was offered better lease terms than it now has. Its lease runs until 2024.

If the mayor wins Albany approval for the new building, the city would press the United Nations to move out of two buildings it leases from the United Nations Development Corporation, a city and state public benefit corporation, and consolidate at the new site. That would allow the city to sell the two buildings or rent them for far more than they are getting now.

"Those are two very valuable assets," an executive director at the real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield, Glenn Markman, said. "I couldn't pick a number out of thin air, but those are two desirable buildings that would command top dollar."

The United Nations's plan is to construct a temporary warehouse style building on its own property and house staff there for different phases of the seven-year, $1.6 billion renovation.

A spokesman for Mr. Bloomberg, Stuart Loeser, said the city does not negotiate rents in public, but that a new building would be good for the city and the United Nations.


© 2006 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC.

[Citytect]

How ironic.

[Kris]

Building for the future
Jonathan Glancey
April 18, 2006 12:33 PM

The United Nations is not exactly a puppet of Washington, although its famous headquarters building, completed in 1952, is located in mid-Manhattan facing the East river. The organisation looks to the United States government for much of its finance. But now a $1.6bn project to restore the exhausted building complex, planned originally by a multinational team of architects led by the American, Wallace K Harrison, but headed, in design terms, by Le Corbusier and Oscar Niemeyer, who went on to sculpt Brasilia, is being held up, by ... Washington.

The UN complex is a glorious time warp, an international wonderland, its interiors pickled in a curious kind of cold war-meets-Festival of Britain aspic. For fans of authentic period design, it is a slap-up banquet for the eyes. Here halls and corridors are all but unchanged since 1964 when Che Guevara came, dressed in customary battle fatigues, to hold forth against the unfairness of US foreign policy.

For those who work here, though, the UN HQ is less historic and romantic, than a very tired cluster of buildings indeed. Surveys of the complex, constructed under the aegis of 1938 Manhattan building codes, have repeatedly drawn attention to the use of dangerous asbestos insulation and lead paint, to antique plumbing and venerable electric systems, to a lack of sprinklers, frequent power shutdowns and leaking roofs. Plaster from the ceiling of the general assembly hall fell to the floor last October, according to the New York Times, just days before 150 presidents, prime ministers and monarchs gathered here to commemorate the UN's 60th anniversary. The UN has, in fact, threatened to move to almost anywhere, including cruise ships, as a temporary measure, while a full renovation led by Louis Frederick Reuter IV, a New York architect and director appointed by Kofi Annan, the UN general secretary, is carried out.

The first instalment of $100m necessary to get the work going by April 1 was blocked by the United States, the one and only country to see a reason to hold up renovation work. John R Bolton, the US ambassador to the UN, says that the United States has offered $23.5m, but no more. "I don't think the justification has been made yet on the full $100m," he said, adding, significantly, "the United States thinks that $23.5m is a lot of money and should carry a pretty good distance until we can have decisions by the general assembly on some of the other critical questions, like what strategy the organisation wants to follow."

Read that last sentence again: " ... like what strategy the organisation wants to follow". Here is the nub of the matter. The cost involved is chicken-feed to a government that can afford to spend $35m for each of its F-18 fighter aircraft, or fight an unwinnable "war" in Iraq. "Bonkers" Bolton, a George W Bush placeman, has long been a staunch critic of the UN. At a speech given in 1994 to the Global Structures Convocation hosted by the World Federalist Association, he said: "There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United States." He also joked: "The secretariat building in New York has 38 storeys. If it lost 10 storeys, it wouldn't make a bit of difference."

As the biggest contributor to UN finances, the US government is expected to pay for 22% of the estimated cost of rebuilding works on the East river. If it has to pay that much, it wants even greater control over the UN agenda than it has today. When Che Guevara addressed the UN here in December 1964, he said: "Of all the burning problems to be dealt with by this assembly, one of special significance for us ... is that of peaceful coexistence among states with different economic and social systems. Much progress has been made in the world in this field. But imperialism, particularly US imperialism, has attempted to make the world believe that peaceful coexistence is the exclusive right of the earth's great powers." Today, John R Bolton might only bridle at Guevara's use of the plural: there is only one great power on earth today, and it doesn't much like political sniping from inside the UN.

Perhaps the UN headquarters ought to be somewhere else altogether. New York might be a kind of global melting pot, but, ideologically, the rest of the US is not. In the late 40s, however, the land beside the East river was donated by John D Rockefeller at a time when the US was, justifiably, revelling in its role as the saviour of Europe and south-east Asia from brutal dictatorships. The construction cost of the tripartite complex, characterised by its 39-storey green-tinted glass and white marble tower, was financed by an interest-free loan of $65m made by the United States government.

If the UN was to leave New York, its influence on the US would be even less than it is today. Soon enough, the "smoke 'em out" regime of George W Bush will go and, who knows, the US might just possibly move towards an altruistic foreign policy again as it did, to an extent, between Pearl Harbour and the Korean war. The UN building, from that knight-in-shining-armour period, is an architectural reminder of international collaboration, of democratic concern. It deserves to be brought back to full, functioning life, a self-consciously Modern and internationalist building, its would-be stylish halls resounding to any number of opinions, and cared for by those with the cash, as well as the expensive construction skills, to make it work. Go on Washington: open your purse, and make everyone's day.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/jonathan_glancey/2006/04/post_35.html

[krulltime]

U.N. resolves to find office space
Plans to move 550 workers to new site


Julie Satow
Published on April 24, 2006

The United Nations is planning to shift 20% of its workforce, or nearly 550 employees, into 200,000 square feet of office space outside of its East Side campus. The U.N., aiming to make the move by the second quarter of 2007, will search in Manhattan and the other boroughs and wants to sign a four- to five-year lease by the end of 2006.

"It will probably be back-office workers" who go to the new offices, says Fritz Reuter, the assistant secretary general who oversees the U.N.'s capital master plan.

The organization is conducting a study to determine which of its workers could be moved off site without creating too much disruption, he says.

In addition to securing the new off-campus offices, the U.N. will erect a temporary building near its historic U.N. Secretariat, which is to undergo a $1.6 billion overhaul.

The Secretariat will be renovated in phases. Employees who do not move into the off-campus space will shuttle back and forth between the Secretariat and the temporary building while their offices are being upgraded.

The U.N. needs the General Assembly to approve $100 million in spending to finance the 200,000-square-foot lease and other expenses related to the capital master plan. It hopes to complete its study in the next two months. Brokerage firm Newmark Knight Frank will soon initiate a search for the space.


©2006 Crain Communications Inc.

[krulltime]

In addition to securing the new off-campus offices, the U.N. will erect a temporary building near its historic U.N. Secretariat, which is to undergo a $1.6 billion overhaul.

The Secretariat will be renovated in phases. Employees who do not move into the off-campus space will shuttle back and forth between the Secretariat and the temporary building while their offices are being upgraded.


I am still confuse... Are they going to built a new 'temporary' building or not.

[Citytect]

No, they're going to lease space outside of the UN campus instead.

[antinimby]

No, they're going to lease space outside of the UN campus instead....AND build temporary offices on their lawn:


In addition to securing the new off-campus offices, the U.N. will erect a temporary building near its historic U.N. Secretariat, which is to undergo a $1.6 billion overhaul.

Expect something like a trailer park type set up.

[macreator]

This is going to look like crap for years.

And to think, we could have had a new UN tower right next door which would have gone great with the new Con Ed site development.

I hate Albany! Anyone up for secession from New York State?

[antinimby]

Exactly.

Those morons were actually Jewish NY State Senators from Brooklyn and Queens. They thought by disapproving the UN's plans, they would send a message to the UN of their displeasure for what they believed was the UN's bias against Israel.
But has that changed anything so far? NO.

The only thing they've accomplished is to deprived NYC of a nice new office tower and revenue. And also now, the UN will be competing with other companies for the precious few office space that's left in the city, which will drive up costs and which inevitably will cause some firms and jobs to move to NJ and CT altogether.

New Yorkers can sometimes be so GOD DAMN DUMB with their selfishness and shortsightedness.

[macreator]

These guys are as dumb as the people that call for the UN to leave New York City.

I can name a dozen restaurants and stores in my neighborhood that would go out of business if the UN suddenly picked up and left.

What people don't realize is that the UN isn't just the guys working in and around the secretariat building, it is all of the NGO's and government consolutes that employ thousands of people that would also pick up and leave with the UN.

The selfishness is absurd. Now we're stuck with a pretty crappy playground that could have been restored on an extended waterfront esplanade that the UN would have paid for to compensate for the loss of Robert Moses "Park" -- which is just a paved square.

Alright, sorry folks. Enough ranting for me tonight :)

[Scruffy88]

^ Total agreement. I would have loved to see a new 35 story catty corner to the secretariat. GRRR. I dont agree with most of the UNs policies but thats irrelevant. Them being in NYC has many more benefits than the debits (traffic on certain days, security risk...) I dont think we should pander to them, but this tower would have been mutually beneficial. Especially if we get UN Plaza 1 and 2 across 1rst ave back to rent or sell at market price. stupid

[krulltime]

and yet the saga continues...


Frustrated, Leader Of U.N. Renovation Quits His Post


By BENNY AVNI - Staff Reporter of the Sun
May 5, 2006

UNITED NATIONS - Throwing the U.N. renovation project into utter chaos, its leader, Louis Frederic Reuter, quit his post yesterday, saying he was "frustrated" with the organization and expressing skepticism that Turtle Bay can, at present, undertake the task of modernizing the 60-year-old landmark building it calls home.

Mr. Reuter, who only joined the U.N.'s team 10 months ago, has been offered "lucrative" positions with building projects at Lincoln Center and at Cornell Medical Center, which he has led in the past, according to a U.N. colleague, who asked to remain anonymous. Compared to the maddening slow pace of the United Nations, where the project known as the Capital Master Plan is now estimated at $1.6 billion - but might go ever higher - those offers seemed much more attractive.

When asked if dealing with Turtle Bay had made him wish he too could use his talents in the private sector, America's U.N. ambassador, John Bolton, told The New York Sun yesterday, "No, but when I heard of Mr. Reuter's departure the thought lofted across my mind."

Mr. Bolton said there were a lot of frustrations "dealing with the 191 member governments, and the decision making process, and the financial differences between the private sector and life in the government or international organizations are evident for everybody to see."

Mr. Reuter's decision had not been motivated by "a single project," the U.N. developer known as "Fritz" said in a statement released yesterday after announcing his resignation, which will take effect at the end of June. "I am 62 years old and am interested in building buildings not 'selling' them, which activity has constituted the majority of my work over the last year," the statement said.

The U.N. administration tried to pin the resignation on the latest refusal of the Bush administration to approve a $100 million plan Mr. Reuter had pitched to redraw the project. Asked about the resignation during a visit to Washington yesterday, Secretary General Annan said, "I am sorry that he has had to leave because of frustration and a lack of major stakeholder commitment."

But Mr. Reuter said he has been "frustrated by a number of factors, all working together, including the lack of clear support by many major stakeholders and difficulties of working within U.N. practice as it applies to a large building project."

According to U.N. sources familiar with the project, the latest bickering among member states at different committees that must approve each and every step of the project revolves around a plan to erect a temporary building on the U.N.'s north lawn to house U.N. staffers while the main building is renovated.

The north lawn is currently a huge and well manicured garden, but it is rarely used. Another idea - building a temporary building across the street, on Robert Moses Park - was nixed by Albany, but recently revived by Mayor Bloomberg.

Mr. Reuter told reporters last month that neither of these ideas was necessary, as the United Nations plans to renovate the building in stages, several floors at a time. A favorable long-term rental agreement with the city gives the United Nations control of two buildings on prime First Avenue real estate across the street, which also complicates the leasing of further areas.

A major critic of the U.N. plan, developer Donald Trump, said it is overly expensive. Specifically, he cited the recent $100 million tag for designing the project. "A hundred million dollars for an architect to draw a line?" he told the Sun. At this rate, by the time it is completed the project would cost $5 billion, he estimated. "If they wanted me to come and run it," he said, "I can do it for less than $1 billion."

The Capital Master Plan is intended to renovate the badly maintained main building and rid it of asbestos, as well as bring it up to current safety codes. It is financed by the budget, to which America contributes 22%. Washington has also offered a loan at a favorable rate.

Some legislators have in the past expressed skepticism of the project, citing its high price and the ineptitude of its planning. Mr. Reuter's resignation "will set back the whole process, as Fritz really knew what he was doing," one Senate staffer who has closely followed the project told the Sun yesterday.

"Given the serious life-safety issues involved in the renovation and the impact this has on the thousands of employees who work there - including at least some 300 Americans - I hope the U.N. finds someone of his caliber quickly."


© 2006 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC.

[LeCom]

I'd like to see the UN move to Europe, or at least outside the NYC and the US altogether. Not because I don't like it where it is right now, but because it would shame the current city, state and national governments so much, which they all really deserve.

[lofter1]

Who else would foot the bill?

Do you think the UN itself would pay for it?

[krulltime]

Chuck presses gov on UN tower


http://www.therealdeal.net//breaking_news/2006/05/09/images/5311.jpg
Sen. Schumer


Paul D. Colford
May 9, 2006

Sen. Chuck Schumer called on Gov. Pataki and legislative leaders to push through a bill the United Nations needs to build an office tower near its East Side headquarters.

The bill, which would begin the approval process for the tower to be erected on the Robert Moses Playground, has stalled in Albany amid opposition to the UN and outrage over its oil-for-food scandal.

"Whatever one's view of the UN is, the UN creates jobs here and makes New York the capital of the world," Schumer told the Daily News yesterday, after writing to Pataki, State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.

The UN initially planned to use the 35-story tower as temporary space for staffers while its landmark headquarters undergoes a major renovation.

Now that the UN expects to lease offices during the renovation, the tower is seen as a place to someday consolidate hundreds of staffers who work outside headquarters. Construction, renovation and leasing temporary office space are expected to total $1.6 billion.


All contents © 2006 Daily News, L.P.

[kliq6]

Hopefully Bruno and Silver do something right and not hand over the bank open check to the UN for this renovation which can come in much much much less then they estimate

[krulltime]

I am sure this project is dead... but here is a rendering from this guys http://www.krjda.com


http://www.pbase.com/image/65645795.jpg

[lofter1]

Amazing how that ^^ simply deadens the effect of the UN

[kurokevin]

Through shear blind contextuality too.

[BrooklynRider]

Yikes! That is bad.

[finnman69]

I am sure this project is dead... but here is a rendering from this guys http://www.krjda.com


http://i.pbase.com/o4/55/435155/1/65645795.7PPsMWkx.UnitedNations2ndTower.JPG


its so obvious the UN should move to the Freedom tower but the hoity toity diplomats dont want to be so far from their missions, embassies and expensive restaurants

[stache]

If they moved to FT they might as well put a giant target on the building.

[sfenn1117]

I don't think terrorists would dare strike the UN, or any building the UN moved to. As it stands now, they are against the west, and these western countries are the ones most vehemently after them. A strike on the UN would essentially be a symbol that they are against the entire civilized world, and in turn, the rest of the world would also no longer stay on the sidelines.

[lofter1]

That ^^ didn't stop them from blowing up (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/un-hq-baghdad-bombing.htm) the UN Headquarters building in Bagdad ...

[sfenn1117]

Ahh touche, lofter. Admittedly I do not pay attention to the news as much as I should.

[krulltime]

If the terrorist wanted to attack the UN in the first place, they would have flown a plane in 2001 directly to their current UN building. But they didn't. Maybe they will now.

[stache]

That's what spooked so many people that were considering moving into Trump World Tower.

[BrooklynRider]

UN is considered international territory. With the train stations below FT, the UN could not be situated there.

[kliq6]

They are moving ahead with a major renovation next year, they are not, (sadly) going anywhere

[NYguy]

UN is considered international territory. With the train stations below FT, the UN could not be situated there.


Not to mention the everyday hassles of regular office workers trying to get into the building. The UN needs its own tower and designated territory. Keep the WTC open as it is.

[NYguy]

I am sure this project is dead... but here is a rendering from this guys http://www.krjda.com


http://i.pbase.com/o4/55/435155/1/65645795.7PPsMWkx.UnitedNations2ndTower.JPG


I thought the building was supposed to be white?

[BigMac]

New York Sun
August 28, 2006

Schumer Says U.N. Building Is a Danger

By JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN
Staff Reporter of the Sun

The deteriorating condition of the United Nations headquarters should be a source of concern for firefighters and Turtle Bay residents who might be exposed to asbestos in the event of an emergency at the U.N., Senator Schumer said.

At a news conference yesterday, Mr. Schumer pledged to ask Secretary-General Annan and America's U.N.ambassador, John Bolton, to focus their attention on guiding to completion a plan to renovate the U.N.'s landmark building. The plan will cost an estimated $1.9 billion.

Mr. Schumer said yesterday that the long-considered renovation is an "American issue, but particularly a New York issue."

The U.N.'s campus was built more than 50 years ago. It does not comply with many city fire codes and lacks an internal sprinkler system, Mr. Schumer said.

"If this were owned by a private company there would be so many violations the government could close it down," Mr. Schumer said at the news conference, which took place in front of the U.N. yesterday.

Mr. Schumer said the U.N. complex posed several dangers to New Yorkers. He said the plaza where fire trucks would likely park following an emergency could collapse under their weight into the underground parking lot beneath.

"While the blue-green windows of the Secretariat building glisten on the outside every day, on the inside the building is crumbling," he said. "The U.N.'s grave state of disrepair may be hidden, but it is putting the health and safety of thousands of New Yorkers in great danger."

Mr. Schumer is not the first to cite the physical dangers that the building poses to Manhattanites. Yesterday he repeated a warning that a U.N. undersecretary-general voiced during a Senate subcommittee hearing in July 2005. The undersecretary-general, Christopher Burnham, said that if one of the steam pipes in the building were to blow the nearby area could be contaminated by asbestos, according to a transcript of the meeting.

U.N. efforts to go forward with the renovations suffered a serious setback in May when the project head, Louis Frederic Reuter, quit his post. In June, the investigative office of Congress, the Government Accountability Office, released a report that cast doubts on whether the U.N.'s internal watchdogs were capable of ensuring that the renovations were accomplished without waste.

© 2006 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC.

[kliq6]

RFP is out to complete this work, but they have released RFP's before on this and nothing got done, so your guess is as good as mine

[Derek2k3]

I thought the building was supposed to be white?

That was one of the losing competition designs by Kevin Roche John Dinkeloo and Associates.

[antinimby]

Mayor May Revive a Scheme To Get U.N. More Space in City


By BENNY AVNI
Staff Reporter of the Sun
February 13, 2007 (http://www.nysun.com/article/48514)

UNITED NATIONS — While sources say Mayor Bloomberg wants to revive a plan to erect a new building in an effort to avert what he calls the "disaster" of losing the United Nations to another world city, such a building could act as an aid for city developers to regain possession of lucrative office space currently leased cheaply by the world body, sources said.

On a visit to Washington yesterday, Mr. Bloomberg expressed concern about the United Nations leaving New York. According to several sources, the mayor intends to revive an old plan to build a "swing space" to house U.N. offices while its headquarters undergoes an ambitious $2 billion renovation.
U.N. officials, however, say they have no current plan to leave the city. And many business and U.N. sources familiar with the issue say the aim of several real estate developers is not to help the United Nations but to make a Midtown office building more profitable.

The United Nations and several of its agencies currently lease part of the U.N. Plaza Hotel building on 45th Street and First Avenue at well below market rent. If the world body vacates the space, it could be renovated and sold for nearly $500 million — half of it net profit for a lucky developer.

For that to happen, however, the United Nations needs to be persuaded to give up the space. One proposal is to move the offices currently in the space to a new building in Long Island City, Queens, across the East River from the landmark U.N. building. Staffers could be ferried easily to and from the United Nations.

Before a meeting with Secretary of State Rice yesterday, Mr. Bloomberg told reporters that he hoped she could help him keep the world body in the city.

Foreign diplomats and their financial contribution to local businesses "would not be there if the United Nations wasn't in New York City, and to lose the United Nations would be a disaster," the mayor said.

City planners reportedly believe that the state legislators who rejected an earlier plan to erect a building for the United Nations in an open space at Robert Moses Park on 42nd Street may drop their resistance. Opponents of the plan have softened their stance since last year's elections, which changed the power structure in Albany, aides to Mr. Bloomberg believe.

But Senator Martin Golden, a Republican of Brooklyn who led the opposition to the plan, told The New York Sun, "I don't think anything currently happening at the U.N. could make us change our mind."

For their part, U.N. officials say the time has passed for the Robert Moses Park plan, and that their current renovation proposal does not include a permanent swing space. The officials, who requested anonymity, also said they doubt such a space could be built before the start of the renovation this year, which is scheduled to wrap up by 2014.

Mr. Bloomberg's reported plan to revive the swing space idea "has nothing to do with the capital master plan" to renovate the United Nations, the spokesman for the plan, Werner Schmidt, told the Sun. The United Nations is now planning to renovate 10 floors at a time. A temporary conference space will be built on the U.N. campus, and while their offices are being renovated, staffers will be moved to a rented space in East Midtown, Mr. Schmidt said.

He added, however, that the rent for the temporary new class B offices "will certainly be higher" than what the United Nations pays for its space in the U.N. Plaza Hotel building.

Real estate developers have long eyed that building, which the United Nations, the U.N. Development Program, the World Food Program, and the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, among other U.N. agencies, have occupied for several years.

The organization's long-term lease at the building will not expire before 2025.

The United Nations currently pays $25 a square foot for the space, while similar offices in the neighborhood fetch $60 a square foot on average.

One real estate source who crunched the numbers said recently that the United Nations' 320 square feet of offices could be renovated and sold as condominiums for $480 million. The net profit for the developer, according to the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, would be $220 million. The stumbling block for such a plan is persuading the United Nations — which currently enjoys a "dream arrangement," as one U.N. source described it — to give up its lease, and the renewed talk about the Robert Moses Park swing space plan may be connected to such an effort.

But as the Sun earlier reported, the park's location above the Midtown Tunnel presents a major security risk. And building on a public park requires the approval of legislators in Albany, another challenge.

Long Island City, on the other hand, is an area City Hall is interested in developing, and its proximity to the current U.N. campus could make it an attractive option for U.N. planners.

© 2007 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC.

[kliq6]

The UN just approved the funding to renovate the tower, they are not building any swing space.

[aprokos]

Here are some shots of the UN as it looks now...

Panoramic views of the United Nations buildings, NYC (http://andrewprokos.com/photos/new-york/landmarks/united-nations/)

It would be a shame to destroy the symetry of the current buildings and block out even more of the skyline...but perhaps I am a bit biased

[krulltime]

Yet, the UN plans saga continues...


At a Longstanding Playground, Yet Another Plan to End the Games


By ALEX MINDLIN
Published: April 1, 2007

The undistinguished little playground at First Avenue and 42nd Street, just south of the United Nations, has been tempting developers for years. Though it is called Robert Moses Playground, it is not much of a tribute to the master builder: a windswept 1.3-acre patch of painted asphalt, used by children, dog walkers and a roller hockey league.

In 1981, Harry Helmsley tried and failed to acquire the playground from the city to construct a 50-story glass tower. And in 2002, Mayor Bloomberg began pushing a plan to build a United Nations office building on part of the site. The State Legislature rejected that proposal in 2005.

Now the playground is back in play. Staff members from the office of Daniel Doctoroff, the city’s deputy mayor for economic development, have met with most of the legislators representing the neighborhood over the last two months, pitching a plan for a 35-story tower that would consolidate United Nations offices now housed in widely scattered city-owned buildings. Because it involves taking parkland, the plan would require approval in the Legislature.

Janel Patterson, a spokeswoman for the city’s Economic Development Corporation, said that residents would be compensated for the park’s loss by a planned esplanade and bike path along the East River. “The esplanade park would be more than three times the size of Robert Moses,” she said in an e-mail message.

But the playground is 66 years old, and many neighbors say the esplanade is no substitute for this longstanding neighborhood institution. “What they’re proposing is park space for jogging or biking, or for people to sit on a bench and look at the river,” said Brian Kavanagh, the local state assemblyman. “That’s no replacement for a playground that’s used for active sports and kids running around.”

The playground’s most faithful constituency is the East End Hockey League, a roller hockey league that plays five games a weekend there and has used the playground since 1972, often lobbying fiercely for its preservation. Jack Collins, the group’s longtime president, generally plays goalie or defense, a position that strikes him as apt. “There’s a lot of defense going on these days,” he said.

Mr. Collins was skeptical about the group’s chances of finding a replacement space, in one of the city’s least green community districts. “I don’t see where there’s an alternative,” he said. “This is a modest space, but it’s someplace where you can use your imagination and make the most of a little playground.” ALEX MINDLIN


Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

[jersey_guy]

Yet, the UN plans saga continues...
“What they’re proposing is park space for jogging or biking, or for people to sit on a bench and look at the river,” said Brian Kavanagh, the local state assemblyman. “That’s no replacement for a playground that’s used for active sports and kids running around.”


Because as we all know, running and biking are "passive" sports. That tells me all I need to know about the idiots in Albany.

[nyck]

Janel Patterson, a spokeswoman for the city’s Economic Development Corporation, said that residents would be compensated for the park’s loss by a planned esplanade and bike path along the East River. “The esplanade park would be more than three times the size of Robert Moses,” she said in an e-mail message.
A new metric is born. All parks can be measured Moses multiples... it reminds me of the Smoot bridge in Boston.

[NYguy]

NY Sun

Mayor Steps Up Pressure for U.N. Tower

By ANNIE KARNI
April 12, 2007

The Bloomberg administration is stepping up its efforts to erect a 35-floor U.N. office tower on Robert Moses Playground, but the community, which says it is starved for open space, is putting up a fight over the 1.3-acre concrete square.

Earlier this week, city officials presented a new plan at a community board meeting that would create a new ball field, jutting out over the East River around 38th Street, to host the roller hockey leagues and other activities that would be affected by the development.

Initially, local residents and elected officials said a planned waterfront esplanade to be built by the city, which would be almost three times larger than the current park space, would not be a viable land swap for the 66-year-old asphalt park. They said it would not provide recreation space for the sports leagues that currently call the small playground home.

"If we lose Robert Moses, there will be only one ball field in the area," the chairman of Community Board 6, Lyle Frank, said in an interview yesterday.

The city's new proposal, however, gained more traction with the community Tuesday night. Details of the plan have yet to be fully hashed out, but Mr. Frank said the Parks Department agreed to present the community board with renderings of the substitute ballpark soon. A spokesman for Mayor Bloomberg, John Gallagher, said "the administration agrees with the community regarding the need for open space in the area," and that Mr. Bloomberg would be working toward "a plan that works for everyone."

Even if the new development plan wins community support, it could meet resistance at the state level. "The U.N. keeps themselves locked up in that little tower of theirs with no transparency or accountability," a state senator, Martin Golden, said in an interview yesterday. "As long as that's going to persist, there's no reason for the state to do anything for them."

Any plan that involves a loss of city parkland requires the Legislature's approval.

Yesterday, Mr. Bloomberg met with the new secretary-general of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, at the United Nation headquarters at Turtle Bay, but the subject of the new tower was not discussed, according to an undersecretary-general, Alicia Barcena.

Mr. Bloomberg's first push to build a United Nations building on the playground site was killed by the Legislature in 2005. Developing the park space is back on the table now, as Deputy Mayor Daniel Doctoroff seeks to build an office tower that would consolidate United Nations offices that are scattered throughout the city, for which many diplomatic tenants pay below-market rates.

The local City Council member, Daniel Gardonick, and other elected officials who represent the Upper East Side last week penned a letter to Mr. Doctoroff, expressing their view that any discussion of developing a United Nations office tower had to take place in the context of a larger redevelopment plan, and include the pending rezoning of the site of the former Con Edison Waterside plant for residential and commercial use, and the renovation of the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Drive, including plans to move a ramp 20 feet west to open up waterfront park space in one of the densest neighborhoods in town.

Tuesday night's meeting, which drew more than 70 community members, as well as state senator, Liz Kreuger, and Mr. Doctoroff's chief of staff, Mark Ricks, marked the first time that city officials said they would tackle the various development projects in the area as pieces of a comprehensive development plan for the neighborhood, rather than as individual projects.

"There's new opportunity for collaboration between the community and the city," Mr. Gardonick, said.

The open space that has riled up the community is a nondescript concrete square at 42nd Street and First Avenue. But in a dense part of town that has only 26-acres of open space across almost 180 city blocks, elected officials say that every small park is vital to the neighborhood. "To take an existing park from this neighborhood before providing equal or better green space would be a serious blow to the community," Rep. Caroline Maloney said via e-mail.

"The community was happy that for the first time, the city was saying they want to address all the various development projects comprehensively, rather than piecemeal," a spokeswoman Ms. Krueger, Sarra Hale-Stern, said.

[antinimby]

Here are those ballfields:

http://img461.imageshack.us/img461/282/unballfieldstg2.jpg

[cfrobel]

Right on top of the QMT vent building I see.

[NYCDOC]

I really hope that this project gets put together. Not only to develop the playground and give the UN more space, but I hope that it would be part of a broader effort to improve the UN's immediate surroundings. I think it is an embarrassment to NYC that we have a leading world institution here that contributes a great deal to NY's claim to be the "world capital" and we have just pushed it off to the far edge of the city without really creating an area fit for such a symbol.

[BrooklynRider]

The proposed building does not complement the Secretariat building at all. I think it should go back to the drawing board it destroys the beauty of the UN architecture.

[ASchwarz]

The proposed building does not complement the Secretariat building at all. I think it should go back to the drawing board it destroys the beauty of the UN architecture.

Have you seen the proposed bldg? The picture in the thread is from KPF and is not the winning entry.

[BrooklynRider]

Oh, me bad. I thought the one in this thread is the one proposed. I retract my earlier statement (but still have concerns.)

[macreator]

I really hope that this project gets put together. Not only to develop the playground and give the UN more space, but I hope that it would be part of a broader effort to improve the UN's immediate surroundings. I think it is an embarrassment to NYC that we have a leading world institution here that contributes a great deal to NY's claim to be the "world capital" and we have just pushed it off to the far edge of the city without really creating an area fit for such a symbol.

I agree. First Avenue around the UN could use a makeover befitting the honor we have of hosting the UN.

The concrete sidewalks/medians that separate the "UN road" parallel to First Avenue are literally crumbling, and have relatively tall weeds growing through the pavement. Meanwhile the entrances and exits to the First Avenue tunnel are equally shabby looking. It's the little things that count. Either resurfacing, or cobbling over those medians and sidewalks would do a world of difference. Meanwhile the metal work at the ends of the tunnel should be restored instead of haphazardly placing concrete jersey barriers as has been done.

[NYguy]

APRIL 22, 2007

Site of the proposed tower and the vacant Con Ed site...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77641082/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77641089/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77641082/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77641089/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77641100/large.jpg


The UN...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77641134/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77641136/original.jpg

[Derek2k3]

Posted by pianoman11686 in the Con-Ed thread...

Six Architects To Compete For East River Esplanade Design Rights

By ANNIE KARNI
Special to the Sun
June 5, 2007

As the city mulls an expansion of the United Nations campus onto city park space and the state moves forward with plans to rebuild the Midtown segment of the FDR Drive next door, elected officials and community members are seizing the opportunity to open up access to the East River with a new waterfront esplanade.

Six prominent landscape architects, including the architect of the High Line, the architect of the Museum of Modern Art roof garden, and the architect of the Brooklyn Bridge Park, will participate in a design competition on Friday to create a sweeping vision for a waterfront park that would stretch to 63rd Street from 34th Street along the East River.

The proposed 35-story U.N. office tower would be built on the current site of the 1.3-acre Robert Moses Playground. The loss of parkland would require the creation of more open space nearby, and officials have said a new waterfront esplanade would be an appropriate trade. A new tower would require approval by the state Legislature, and the esplanade would require approval from the developer of the former Consolidated Edison power plant site just south of the United Nations, Sheldon Solow, who owns the land. Officials from the state's Department of Transportation and from the city's parks department, as well as representatives from Mr. Solow's office, are expected to meet on Friday for a briefing on the proposed waterfront esplanade.

The 12-hour design competition is being sponsored by elected officials who represent the Upper East Side, including Assemblymen Jonathan Bing and Brian Kavanagh, state Senators Liz Krueger and Thomas Duane, and numerous civic groups. The winning design is expected to be unveiled to the public on Sunday and would serve as a makeshift blueprint for future construction.

State support for the city's plan to expand the U.N. campus has been hard to come by. "I don't believe the Senate's there," a state senator of Brooklyn, Martin Golden, said in an interview. "One would have thought the city would have moved on at this point. The U.N. doesn't curry favor with us. They are a useless group that is at best anti-American."

© 2007 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC. (http://www.nysun.com/article/55880)



It'd be nice if we got something like this, but given the chosen architect and the city, I expect nothing more than a box.
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/7342/200ncp4.jpg

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/4804/200n3ex7.jpg
200 North Riverside Plaza, Chicago (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=164677&postcount=149)

[MidtownGuy]

I really hope the esplanade from 34th to 63rd goes ahead. It would be really nice to finally have access to the riverfront here in E. Midtown. I've always been so jealous of West-siders in that regard.

[macreator]

I really hope the esplanade from 34th to 63rd goes ahead. It would be really nice to finally have access to the riverfront here in E. Midtown. I've always been so jealous of West-siders in that regard.

It would be great to finally have a full East Side esplanade.

On a side note, I've noticed that with the FDR Drive reconstruction, the 1 block section of esplanade accessible via a pedestrian overpass at 51st street has been expanded a bit.

Let's hope this project really happens.

[Derek2k3]

AM-NY
http://www.amny.com/news/local/am-east0611,0,1369136.story?coll=am-local-headlines


Residents push to open up East River waterfront

By Justin Rocket Silverman, amNewYork Staff Writer
jsilverman@am-ny.com
June 11, 2007

A vision to transform the postindustrial no-man's land along the East River in midtown into a vibrant public space was embraced Sunday by elected officials and hundreds of concerned residents.

"There are 154,000 people living in this area, and I don't think [anyone] can remember what it was like to be able to walk down to the river," said Kent L. Barwick, president of the Municipal Art Society. "River access has been sealed off for decades."

advertisement
The society organized a meeting of top architects last week to come up with a plan for the stretch of waterfront running from East 34th to 63rd streets. There is currently no way for pedestrians or cyclists to access this part of the city -- a fact all the more problematic because the area has only one acre of open space for every 5,000 residents, the least amount anywhere in the city.

A major portion of the area in question, a former Con Ed site that stretches from 34th to 41st streets, is the site of a massive development project spearheaded by Sheldon Solow, ranked the 746th richest person in the world by Forbes.

The developer's plans include millions of square feet of residential, commercial and retail space in a waterfront complex.

The vision unveiled Sunday represents the "beginning of a long, complicated process," according to Borough President Scott Stringer, to reconcile Solow's plans with the community's desire for more open space and public river access.

Specs presented Sunday include a large park area elevated over the FDR -- much like the Brooklyn Heights Promenade extends above the BQE. A pedestrian ramp would provide a way to reach the water below. Architects estimated the elevated park between 34th and 41st streets would add 142,600 square feet of open space, at a total cost of $224 million.

"In the 20 years I've lived in New York, access to the rivers has been one of the greatest improvements to the city," said Nelson Smith, 55, a longtime East Side resident. "What exists at this site now is extremely discontinuous and frustrating."

Officials said they are hopeful their design proposal will be considered by the developer and the city's Planning Commission.



http://www.amny.com/media/photo/2007-06/30426025.jpg
DOEGOE Architectural Rendering (http://www.doegoe.com/)

http://www.amny.com/media/photo/2007-06/30426042.jpg
Giles Ashford

Looks impressive. Those rendered placeholders better be off.

[Viktorkrum77]

I've always wanted to visit or see an office floor in the UN building.

I know, weird dream...

Anyways, I'm surprised they need so much office space.

[Jim856796]

APRIL 22, 2007

Site of the proposed tower and the vacant Con Ed site...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77641082/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/77641089/medium.jpg


Is the United Nations expansion going to include this building?

[Jim856796]

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/7366/unitednationsexpansionyr1.jpg
The octagonal building may either be relocated or demolished to make room for the 35-floor expansion tower. Otherwise, the site (bounded by 41st Street and 42nd Street, First Avenue, and FDR Drive) may become a part of the Con Ed redevelopment.

[BigMac]

SarahCat16 on Flickr
June 12, 2007

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1232/639655039_1cfcab2368_o.jpg

[Derek2k3]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2132/1812850830_79faa54e94_b.jpg
Mazda6 (Tor) (http://flickr.com/photos/85625337@N00/)

[ablarc]

^ The solar gain situation may be much improved, but the UN Tower looked better before it switched to mirror glass.

[brianac]

Ground Is Broken On Renovation Of U.N. Headquarters

By Staff Reporter of the Sun
May 6, 2008

UNITED NATIONS (http://www2.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=United+Nations) — An ambitious $2 billion project to refurbish the aging U.N. building was launched yesterday with the ground-breaking for a temporary building on the northern lawn of the U.N. campus, east of First Avenue.

The project, scheduled to be completed by 2013, is designed to modernize the landmark headquarters, which first were occupied in 1952 and have not been refurbished since. Hazardous substances, including asbestos, are to be removed, while new safety features, updated telecommunications systems, and environmentally oriented devices will be installed.

Staffers will move for the duration of the construction project to several nearby office buildings, while the temporary building will host U.N. meetings.

One of the party favors handed out yesterday to guests — among them top U.N. officials and ambassadors, and Mayor Bloomberg's sister, Marjorie Tiven, a liaison between the city and the United Nations — was a gold-colored lapel pin in the shape of a shovel inscribed with the letters "U" and "N."

http://www2.nysun.com/article/75860

© 2007 The New York Sun

[Jim856796]

As part of the renovation, should the exterior facades of all the buildings be restored? They look sorta clean to me. Also, I don't know much about the temporary 3-story building in the North Lawn.

[Jake]

This just started and virtually everyone in the building is rolling their eyes. The UN HQ is extremely complicated internally due to security measures. Now with partial closures it's going to be a labyrinth with a lot of detours.

I don't know much about the process itself other than it was universally accepted that the loss of the prospect of a new building to the south was a big letdown. I'm fairly concerned about the integrity of the historic portions of the building as there are quite a few rooms designed with a worldly vision that may be lost should the changes prove to be significant. It's quite shameful that New York didn't do more to accommodate this inevitability.

I don't think they'll be working on the exteriors since the current schedule looks like a 3 floor at a time endeavor.

[antinimby]

Don't blame all of New York for the actions of a couple stupid NY State Representatives.

In a nutshell, those two felt the UN as a whole wasn't pro-Israel enough so they blocked them from building that tower as punishment.

The city actually wanted to and tried their best to help them build the tower but in the end, the UN elected to go this route, which while logistically is more troublesome would involve less bureaucratic red tape overall than going the new tower route.

[TonyO]

A $300 Million Throwaway

By DAVID D'ARCY

New York

Last May the United Nations broke ground on a $300 million, 175,000-square-foot building on the North Lawn of its property on the East River, to house the Security Council, the U.N. conference organizations, the General Assembly and the organization's eclectic art collection. Yet that new structure, designed by HLW Architects LLP, is scheduled to disappear in as little as five years. It will be leveled and replaced with a lawn (and cherry trees that were uprooted) once the U.N.'s $1.9 billion in renovations to its mid-century buildings are finished in 2013. U.N. staffers will then return to the headquarters built for $35 million on donated land in 1950 and, until now, never overhauled.

The rise and fall of the temporary structure will help the U.N. address urgent security and efficiency needs at the "workshop for peace," a term coined by the architect Wallace K. Harrison, who was on the team -- with Oscar Niemeyer and Le Corbusier -- that designed the modernist campus more than half a century ago. The leaky walls of the Secretariat tower are green from a film applied after 9/11 to minimize shattering from a blast. The buildings are filled with asbestos (which an explosion might propel into the surrounding neighborhood) and they lack a sprinkler system. Underground machinery dates from the 1940s.

Given the ultimate fate of the building on the North Lawn -- demolition -- it's understandable that the U.N. would describe this expensive project unflatteringly. "It's totally unarticulated recyclable-box architecture," said Michael Adlerstein, the American architect who heads the Office of the Capital Master Plan, the U.N. department managing the renovation. This temporary corrugated metal warehouse for officials and art also wasn't the U.N.'s first choice.

In 1998, after the U.N. General Assembly's 192 members voted for the renovation, an ambitious plan for a second tower on a city playground south of the 18-acre site led to a design competition, limited to recipients of the prestigious Pritzker Prize for architecture. Fumihiko Maki of Japan won the contest and proposed a 35-story modernist column in homage to the U.N.'s iconic slab. It was anything but disposable architecture.

The Maki building, at $330 million, was projected for completion in 2008, in time to move staff in during work on the main campus. Mayor Michael Bloomberg, then-Gov. George Pataki and the Bush administration supported it, yet the "alienation" of city park land required approval from the New York State Senate, which delayed a vote in 2004. State senators cited unpaid parking tickets, the U.N. oil-for-food scandal and the Security Council's opposition to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq as reasons to block the measure. Politics killed the sleek gray tower.
[u.n. art] David Gothard

In 2005, Donald Trump weighed in, telling the U.S. Senate's International Security Subcommittee that the U.N. should sell its East River site and relocate to Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan. Mr. Trump also proposed his own accelerated renovation of the original buildings, without moving staff off-site, for $300 million, to protect the U.N. from exploitation in seeking short-term temporary space from New York landlords -- "there is no worse human being on Earth, OK?" Yet Trump never filed a bid, U.N. officials said. Trump says he was never asked to bid, and predicts the project's costs will be $3 billion. "The whole thing is insane," he said.

The $300 million box reflects security concerns and not an open U.N. wallet, said Mr. Adlerstein, noting a request from police that officials and diplomats work on the compound during renovation. "There's no choice," he said. The U.N. opted to keep its art collection on-site because of off-site insurance costs and the high risk of moving some 270 works. The art collection is not insured. "We're self-insured," said Mr. Adlerstein. Since the buildings opened in 1950, only four works of art have been reported missing, and a portrait of former Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim was slashed after his Nazi past was exposed in 1986.

The art in New York falls into three categories: paintings, tapestries, and other transportable objects; massive sculptures requiring heavy machinery to move; and such immovable works as Fernand Léger's huge mural frescoes in the General Assembly hall, which will be covered with plywood and protected as renovation takes place around them. When the headquarters opened, Harry S. Truman, then president of the U.S., referred to one of Léger abstractions as "scrambled eggs."

Most of the art addresses themes of war, peace and universal understanding. In Salvador Dalí's "Five Continents" (also called "Clasped Hands"), which Dalí donated in 1966, entwined weathered hands emerge from the Earth to support an arm that grows a rose at its elbow and a hand at each end. "Torch of Hope" by Henri Matisse is a late cut-out in black, blue and yellow that the artist donated for a Unicef greeting card. For decades, it was displayed in the outer office of the secretary-general. A Norman Rockwell dedicated by Nancy Reagan and Socialist Realist murals from the former Soviet bloc are also part of the mix. Almost all the works of art in the U.N.'s headquarters are gifts from member states. Not all those gifts are masterpieces. "We try not to insult governments, but we don't want to turn the place into a kind of junk shop," said Undersecretary-General Brian Urquhart in 1983 before the U.N. imposed a moratorium on gifts, which was lifted in the 1990s and reimposed during renovation.

But you may need a well-connected friend to see the collection at all. Public access will be limited, probably to tours after the General Assembly meets in the temporary building in late 2011, said Mr. Adlerstein, who noted that the U.N. neither sells nor lends the art it owns.

No matter. The most iconic objects on the U.N. campus have always been the buildings themselves -- not counting the $300 million throwaway structure, of course.

Mr. D'Arcy writes about art and culture for the Journal.

[antinimby]

They're already up to the second floor of that ^ temporary office building...

http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/2196/img0671v.jpg

[TonyO]

thanks for the pic. This temporary project is such a waste.

[philvia]

its necessary evil

[BrooklynLove]

The next degree of paving and digging up roads over and over again.

[Merry]

UN Renovation: Fun Taken Out of East River Complex

Evelyn Leopold

UNITED NATIONS - The bustling corridors of the United Nations are quiet. There are no lines in the cafeteria . The campus is being steadily dismantled in the 39-floor high-rise glass tower on New York's East River. And it's no longer any fun.

Completed in 1952, the landmark skyscraper now has water dripping through its roof, asbestos lining the ceiling tiles, a shortage of sprinklers and erratic heating and cooling systems. So it was time for a $1.87 billion overhaul, the costs divided among member states, with the United States paying some 22 percent or $413 million.

Three plans were drawn up in the past decade, each one more expensive than the last, and one is finally coming to fruition.

The skyscraper (known as the Secretariat building) will remain and is being gutted from the inside. Meanwhile, 3,300 of the more than 5,000 people have been relocated, the remainder by the first few months of 2010.

Many are scattered in office buildings around town while Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and top executives are migrating to a three-story $140 million new building on the north lawn of the complex. Eventually the General Assembly, the Security Council and other conference rooms will move to this building also.

And there they will stay for three years, minimum, more likely five years.

But the human costs are high. Undersecretaries-general who head key departments are to surround the secretary-general in the new office building. However, their staff are scattered around town, some as far as Madison Avenue, five wide city blocks away. Face-to-face interaction between those in political affairs, peacekeeping, and humanitarian affairs, for example, is limited to planned meetings.

And the press is harbored in a library complex on the south side of the campus, a wing off the high-rise. Half have moved, including this reporter, (without TV connections or telephone but with wifi), the other half come early in 2010.

Except for stake-outs at corridors near the Security Council, casual contacts with diplomats and UN officials are disappearing quickly; the attraction of seeing so many people of diverse nationalities in one space is gone.

Wudda, Shudda, Cudda

It didn't have to be this way. The first plan was to take over a little-used park near the UN on 42nd street and build an office complex on it. Once it was complete, staff would be moved in. And once the glass palace was renovated, UN agencies, such as UNICEF or the UN Development Programme, now renting expensive office space in New York, would take over the new building. But that was too logical. The plan was squashed in 2005 by the New York legislature, angry about everything.

Then-State Senator Roy Goodman, a Republican, enlisted an array of distinguished New Yorkers, Democrat and Republican as well as Abraham Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League, to support the project, the UN being the city's number one tourist attraction. But in Albany, home of one of the most dysfunctional legislatures in the country, some state senators said UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan had to resign first while others spoke of an anti-Israel bias. Most paid no attention.

Inside the building things got so bad, Mayor Michael Bloomberg forbid New York schoolchildren to visit the United Nations two years ago unless new sprinkler systems and fire-proof doors were installed, many of which took place, costing millions.

The new building will be as green as reconstruction allows. Total energy consumption is expected to be reduced by 50 per cent compared to the present. The carbon footprint will be reduced by over 45 per cent. The consumption of fresh water will be reduced by over 40 per cent. Renovation in the building's basement involves the installation of 14 kilometers of water piping, 65 kilometers of electrical conduits and more than 60 kilometers of telecommunications conduits. An equal amount of deteriorated materials are expected to be removed, representing almost a quarter of the construction activity of the entire project.

In charge of the project, known as the Capital Master Plan, is Michael Adlerstein, a Brooklyn-born former National Park Service architect involved in the preservation of Ellis Island, the Statute of Liberty and the Taj Mahal. He told a recent news conference that the renovation "should last forever," providing there is proper maintenance every 10 to 15 years. "There are buildings that are hundreds of years old that survive very well."

But in a place like the United Nations, renovation is not high on the agenda so it is put off for years, for decades until there is a crisis "where you have to vacate and do it wholesale," he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/evelyn-leopold/un-renovation-fun-taken-o_b_393357.html

[antinimby]

This about says it all.


It didn't have to be this way. The first plan was to take over a little-used park near the UN on 42nd street and build an office complex on it. Once it was complete, staff would be moved in. And once the glass palace was renovated, UN agencies, such as UNICEF or the UN Development Programme, now renting expensive office space in New York, would take over the new building. But that was too logical. The plan was squashed in 2005 by the New York legislature, angry about everything.

Then-State Senator Roy Goodman, a Republican, enlisted an array of distinguished New Yorkers, Democrat and Republican as well as Abraham Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League, to support the project, the UN being the city's number one tourist attraction. But in Albany, home of one of the most dysfunctional legislatures in the country, some state senators said UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan had to resign first while others spoke of an anti-Israel bias. Most paid no attention.

[antinimby]

Debt-laden Dubai offers to host U.N. headquarters

DUBAI
Fri Jan 15, 2010 (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60E1C520100115) 8:25am EST

http://www.reuters.com/resources/r/?m=02&d=20100115&t=2&i=45934916&w=460&r=2010-01-15T132541Z_01_BTRE60E10O900_RTROPTP_0_CLIMATE-UN-CLOTHING


DUBAI (Reuters) - Dubai said on Friday it has offered to host the headquarters of the United Nations should the global organization want to leave New York, a sign the Gulf emirate's ambitions remain high despite its debt problems. "The government of Dubai announces that it is fully prepared to host the U.N. headquarters on its territory in the event its officials take the decision to move from New York," the Dubai government said a statement.

Dubai's offer comes days after an article by an academic and a real estate developer on the website of Forbes magazine called for the United Nations to relocate to Dubai.

"Bringing the United Nations to Dubai makes sense," wrote Joel Kotkin, a fellow in urban futures at Chapman University, and Robert J. Cristiano, the California university's "real estate professional in residence."

"New York gets rid of one of its worst welfare cheats, and Dubai finds new tenants to fill its vacant towers," they said, describing the U.N. headquarters as a "pain in the butt" which "pays no taxes and annoys hard-working New Yorkers with its sloth, pretensions and cavalier disregard for traffic laws."

Dubai, which has gained worldwide attention for its extravagant real estate projects, left global markets reeling in November when it said it would request a standstill agreement on billions of dollars of debt.

The global financial crisis saw many real estate projects delayed or shelved in the emirate, but construction has barely stopped and new projects are still coming on line, raising questions on how the buildings will be filled in the downturn.

Earlier this month, Dubai's ruler inaugurated the tallest building in the world, the Burj Khalifa.

"Dubai has already built something that looks the part of a 21st-century world capital," Kotkin and Cristiano wrote.

"Let it get a cast appropriate for its glittering set."

© Copyright 2010 Thomson Reuters

[Alonzo-ny]

Hilarious. These people have no grip on reality.

[antinimby]

Just a little background information on this Joel Kotkin fellow because WNY is generally not familiar with his schtick...

He is a Californian (who surprisingly is originally from New York) that is very anti-New York and its density.

His theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Kotkin) is that dense, walkable cities like New York are the wrong approach and supports suburban development more like that of Southern California.

I think he basically would like to see the dismantling of New York and it's world renowned institutions that gives it its prestige and importance (like the U.N. for example) piece by piece so that he can say he was right in predicting the city's ultimate demise.

The dude is sick and everything he says should be taken with a grain of salt.

[lofter1]

... Dubai's offer comes days after an article by an academic and a real estate developer on the website of Forbes magazine called for the United Nations to relocate to Dubai.

"Bringing the United Nations to Dubai makes sense," wrote Joel Kotkin, a fellow in urban futures at Chapman University, and Robert J. Cristiano, the California university's "real estate professional in residence."


Move The U.N. To Dubai

FORBES (http://www.forbes.com/2010/01/11/dubai-burj-united-nations-opinions-columnists-joel-kotkin.html)
Joel Kotkin and Robert J. Cristiano
January 12, 2010

The opening last week of the world's tallest building, the half-mile-high Burj Dubai, has largely been greeted with guffaws and groans. The Daily Telegraph labeled it "the new pinnacle of vanity" -- "a purposeless monument to the subprime era." The Wall Street Journal compared it to the Tower of Babel. (When the Empire State Building was completed in 1931, in the throes of the greatest financial crisis of the 20th century, it was met with similar jeers. The then-tallest building in the world was called the Empty State Building, and it remained vacant for several years.)

Yet the Burj's completion -- indeed the whole wild enterprise known as Dubai -- could signal a potential opportunity to the global community: turning the place into the headquarters for that other misguided ship, the United Nations.

Let's spell out the logic. The United Nations is a pain in the butt. It pays no taxes and annoys hard-working New Yorkers with its sloth, pretensions and cavalier disregard for traffic laws. The place is a sinkhole dominated by anti-American, anti-Semitic and authoritarian fantasies. It is far from the elegant crown jewel that celebrated the U.S.'s global ascendancy after the Second World War.

Today the U.N. building is a mostly empty shell -- water dripping through its roof, asbestos lining its ceiling and an erratic heating and cooling system have forced most UN workers to new facilities. The building is in the midst of a $1.87 billion overhaul -- of which the U.S., which could use the cash for myriad other things, would be on the hook for $437 million.

And the U.N. may be leaving anyway. A relocation committee has recommended that the organization move temporarily to Singapore by 2015. It will be hard to vacate Asia again for New York, which is far away from the bulk of the world's largest population centers.

Singapore might make a fine world capital, since it does work like a fine watch. But it's already crowded, expensive and highly regulated. You have to wonder if hard-working, rational Singaporeans would want to drive up costs and lose their ability to run things as they see fit to accommodate the U.N. bureaucracy.

In contrast, the al-Maktoum family has transformed a once vast, empty landscape into a Star Wars-like capital city of the future. There is no skyline more arresting than the one built over the past 15 years by Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the Absolute Ruler of the tiny Emirate. In just 500 square miles, about half the size of Orange County, Calif., the sheikh has created a monument to modern architectural engineering.

Sheikh Mohammed could offer to build a United Nations City to house the U.N. in any number of vacant office towers. Business Bay has 65 million square feet of office space under construction in more than 200 high-rises. Dubai already has thousands of newly constructed apartments that await the international delegates. More than 2 billion people in Africa, Europe and Asia are within a six-hour flight from Dubai. Travel connections through the world's largest airport would be a breeze. Dubai has 55 five-star hotels to accommodate every regal and royal delegation, as well as the Harvard Medical School Dubai Center, a $1,400,000,000 facility branded with the Harvard crest, just in case one of the U.N.'s elite workers breaks a gasket.

Questions of taste and timing aside, you have to admire the sheikh's chutzpah. The al-Maktoums, descendants of the Bani Yas clan, have ruled Dubai since 1833, first under the protection of the British. The United Arab Emirates was founded in 1971 with big brother Abu Dhabi, the emirate with 96% of the confederation's oil reserves.

Like New York, Dubai aimed first to be a capital of capital. Recognizing that oil revenues at $70 a barrel brought immense cash flow to the Persian Gulf, Sheikh Mohammed set out to create a setting where Arab pride and excess oil revenues could be comfortably parked. His boldness caught the attention of the world financial community and soon the tiny emirate employed more construction cranes than any site on Earth.

For now flying so close to the sun has resulted in a painful and somewhat humiliating fall. With the financial market collapse of 2008 to 2009 international buyers disappeared and property values plummeted. Half of the $300 billion in construction projects screeched to a halt. The Dubai government, with $80 billion to $100 billion of debt, was in trouble, and Dubai World, its investment arm, announced suspension of interest payments on its loans. Enter Abu Dhabi. The neighboring emirate wrote kid brother Dubai a check for $25 billion. What does $25 billion get you in 2010? On Jan. 4, at the grand opening of the Burj Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed announced that the tower would forever be known as Burj Khalifa, named after the Emir of Abu Dhabi.

Let's look a bit longer term. Right now there's 33.6 million square feet of mostly state-of-the-art office space in Dubai. More than 8 million square feet is vacant with millions more in the pipeline. There's a great airport -- as opposed to that aerial dumpster, JFK -- that is hours closer to the emerging economic powers of the new century, notably the oil states, India and China. The workforce is skilled and open to foreigners, since the vast majority are foreigners. In Dubai 83% of the 2.2 million residents are from somewhere else. Talk about cosmopolitan.

But how about New York? "Moving the U.N. to Dubai would be a boon for New Yorkers who have to put up with traffic jams created by the likes of Colonel Qaddafi, scofflaws protected by diplomatic immunity and the loss of real estate revenue they would gain if the U.N. building were turned into something far more useful -- condos with a view," suggests urban historian Fred Siegel, a visiting professor at Saint Francis College in Brooklyn and a fellow at New York's Manhattan Institute.

Liberating New York from the United Nations, in fact, would open up some of the best situated real estate in the world. A treasure trove of great apartments and offices right along the East River would suddenly become available, bringing a potential revenue windfall to New York City, which could use it. None of this would threaten the city's -- or the country's -- economic and political status. That grows out of economic and military power, which the U.N. does little or nothing to augment.

What would Dubai get? It's an ideal opportunity to refurbish its tarnished image on the world stage in a way that plays to its infrastructural and geographical advantages. The Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean are increasingly the focal point of the world economic and political systems. Some of the biggest challenges facing the U.N. are concentrated in the south in Somalia and Yemen, to the west in Israel and Palestine, and to nearby Iran and Pakistan. Dubai would have to reconcile itself to a permanent Israeli presence, but that may not be as difficult as many think. Jews, and even Israelis, do business today in Dubai with perhaps less worry about running into manifestations of anti-Semitism than in London or Paris.

Bringing the United Nations to Dubai makes sense. New York gets rid of one of its worst welfare cheats, and Dubai finds new tenants to fill its vacant towers. Dubai has already built something that looks the part of a 21st-century world capital. Let it get a cast appropriate for its glittering set.

Joel Kotkin is a distinguished presidential fellow in urban futures at Chapman University. He is also an adjunct fellow at the Legatum Institute in London and serves as executive editor of newgeography.com. He writes the weekly New Geographer column for Forbes. His next book, The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050, will be published by Penguin in February 2010. Coauthor Robert J. Cristiano Ph.D. is a successful real estate developer and the Real Estate Professional in Residence at Chapman University in Orange, Calif.

(C) 2010 Forbes.com LLC

[lofter1]

I know the ESB wasn't an immediate success, but is this statement from Kotkin / Cristiano true?




... When the Empire State Building was completed in 1931, in the throes of the greatest financial crisis of the 20th century, it was met with similar jeers. The then-tallest building in the world was called the Empty State Building, and it remained vacant for several years ...


Mr. Kotkin also has his own website (http://www.joelkotkin.com/).

[Alonzo-ny]

I very much doubt that the ESB was completely vacant for several years.

[Alonzo-ny]

Dubai is all wrong for the UN. Why would a city based on slavery, greed and restriction of human rights and freedoms be a good place for an organisation based on peace and well being of the human race?

[MidtownGuy]

^exactly. What a ridiculous idea.

[antinimby]

^ Yup and here's the latest example of that:


From The Times

January 11, 2010 (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6981008.ece)
Woman raped in Dubai charged for having illegal sex

Hugh Tomlinson in Dubai

A British woman who alleged that she was raped in Dubai on New Year’s Eve has had her passport confiscated and may face a jail sentence after she was charged with having sex outside marriage with her fiancé.

The 23-year-old woman, a Muslim from London, of Pakistani origin, said that she was attacked by a man who is understood to be a worker in the hotel where she had been drinking with her fiancé to celebrate their engagement during a three-day holiday in Dubai

When she reported to the police that she had been raped, she and her partner, 44, were themselves jailed for sex outside marriage, which is illegal under the emirate’s laws. Unmarried couples are not allowed to share hotel rooms or live together, although many establishments turn a blind eye. The couple were also charged with being drunk outside licensed premises.

After drinking heavily to celebrate the marriage proposal that evening, the woman passed out in the toilets, where she says that she was followed by a member of staff and attacked. It is unclear if the alleged rape is being investigated by police. The woman’s alleged attacker has denied rape and has claimed that sex was consensual. He has also been charged with illegal sex outside marriage.

A spokesperson for the Address declined to comment yesterday. Dubai police also declined to comment.

The woman’s fiancé was unaware of the incident and took her home, but when she recalled the attack the next morning they went to the police.

It is reported that the police focused on the woman’s drinking and her sexual preferences. It is claimed that standard procedures in alleged rape cases were not followed, although legal sources in Dubai dispute this. A blood test proved that the woman had been drinking. The couple were arrested, charged and jailed overnight. They have been released on bail and their passports have been taken away.

The woman has been advised to drop the rape allegation, admit that she was drunk and marry her fiancé immediately if she wants to go home. She told The Sun: “I always dreamed of a big family wedding in Britain, but now I just want to get married so I can get out of here.”

Copyright 2010 Times Newspapers Ltd.

[ablarc]

^ Another pig sty.

[lofter1]

Awaiting response from Mr. Kotkin ...

[NoyokA]

Giant scaffolding reaching the entire height of the Secretariat installed.

http://media.share.ovi.com/m1/s/1913/47080762c8fa4b53b1017b1e87dc83b3.jpg

[RedFerrari360f1]

They ought to give the northern half of Roosevelt Island to the UN and not allow the diplomats free reign of parking etc. outside of its districts.

The UN property could then be properly developed.

Maybe if my Kotkin has his way we could create a gated community and fit about a dozen homes on the property... what a clown.

[Derek2k3]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2794/4533530972_3a9cbf423d_b.jpg
Quiet Storm! (Still In Guatemala) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/65182655@N00/4533530972/)

Also notice the completed US Mission to the UN.

The towers on the east side are so boringly pragmatic. Hopefully Foster's tower slated to rise next to Trump World Tower is still a go and will juice things up a bit.

[vanshnookenraggen]

I very much doubt that the ESB was completely vacant for several years.

Pretty much. For most of the 1930s it only made money from the observation deck.

[scumonkey]

It did earn the nick name "Empty State Building"...but completely empty?

[Alonzo-ny]

My point is that it probably had at least one tenant pretty soon after it opened.

[ablarc]

When they finish renovating this building, will it retain/regain its midcentury Modernism? Will it still seem Corbusian?

[Derek2k3]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4029/4626110022_33485c8fa7_o.jpg
astikhin (http://www.flickr.com/photos/29769428@N07/4626110022/sizes/o/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4067/4633745218_20e4370267_b.jpg
astikhin (http://www.flickr.com/photos/29769428@N07/4633745218/sizes/l/)

[Derek2k3]

Didn't the state kill this years ago because they believe the UN is anti Israel. Well here we go again.


Crain's NY

June 13, 2010 5:59 AM
City plots huge land deal with U.N.
Plan: Sell East Side city properties to diplos to fund mile-long park.

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20100613/REAL_ESTATE/306139963


City and state officials are crafting a byzantine plan to raise money to close a 21-block gap in the East Side waterfront promenade. The hard part is that it involves selling two city-owned office buildings, razing a playground and constructing a new tower for the United Nations.

The extraordinarily complicated proposal is still in its early stages, and it could easily fall apart as it moves forward, given all of the moving parts. Yet officials say it has a chance because it would offer a way to fulfill major, long-held goals for both the city and the U.N.: The international body would finally get the additional building it has wanted for years, and the city could add park space and waterfront amenities despite the budgetary crisis.

“This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity,” says Sarra Hale-Stern, district office director for state Sen. Liz Krueger, who is working on the proposal that's being spearheaded by the city's Economic Development Corp.

Filling the promenade's gap, which extends from East 38th to East 59th streets, would cost $150 million to $200 million. The city would finance the construction by selling two buildings on East 44th Street that it leases to the U.N. Those sales could yield anywhere from $150 million to $300 million. In addition, sources say, the city is seeking at least $75 million from the U.N. for permission to build on Robert Moses Playground, a 29,000-square-foot blacktop across East 42nd Street from the U.N., on First Avenue.


Trading parkland

But the deal faces numerous obstacles. The playground transaction would require state legislation because it involves eliminating parkland. The idea would be to compensate the community for the loss by expanding the promenade and adding space to existing area parks.

“In the legislation, we are going to have to be very specific about what will be constructed if we take the major step of [removing] parkland,” says Brian Kavanagh, a state assemblyman working on the deal.

Yet getting the OK from Albany may be the easy part. The U.N. would have to approve the deal at a time when it is already spending $1.9 billion on a gut renovation of its headquarters complex.

The idea of the U.N. building on Robert Moses Playground has been kicking around for years, but two factors have resurrected the concept recently.

First, about six months ago, the U.N. hired a consultant to study its real estate needs, sources say. The consultant found that the international body needed to extend beyond its renovated headquarters and space it leases elsewhere. In fact, the U.N. is exploring moving some local employees out of the area. Such a move by a major employer would be a big blow to the city.

The U.N. is also weighing the possibility of constructing a building on its campus, on what is now green space to the north of the General Assembly Building. That's also far from ideal for the city because the U.N. sits on sovereign territory that is exempt from zoning laws, meaning local officials would have no say over what is constructed. Also, the city would be deprived of money if the U.N. built on its own land.
Long-cherished dream

Sources say the U.N. has long wanted to build on the playground site because its proximity to its headquarters means a tunnel could be created to connect the two buildings. Also, any building the U.N. constructed on the playground site couldn't be any taller than its current headquarters, sources say.

“The U.N. really wants to be in that spot, and the community really wants more parkland,” says Dan Garodnick, the local City Council member. “Hopefully, we can get a deal....”

Full article here (http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20100613/REAL_ESTATE/306139963)

[Derek2k3]

You can see the site between the UN building and the Con Ed site in these renderings from Richard Meier's website found by spyguy:

http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/8050/coned1.jpg

http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/8747/coned2.jpg

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/4646/coned4.jpg

http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/9926/coned5.jpg

[sky-flier]

109561095510954109531095210951CMP Reclad of Secretariat Tower Starting
10950

[infoshare]

This is looking good: seems (from the photos) like a total replacement of the 'curtain wall'.

[BStyles]

Any renderings of the new curtain wall, or is it just a replacement?

[ablarc]

Are they attaching barnacles?


What are those bump-outs?

[infoshare]

Those bump-outs may be the temporary rigging used during the installation of the window panes/curtain wall. The entire facade will most likely be 'completely flat' when it is completed. This was supposed to be only a re-clad of the exterior; so don't expect to see any changes to the exterior 'form' of the building. Putting a bump-out on that building would be akin an artist painting a mole on the forehead of 'Mona Lisa' - and that sure would garner a lot of finger wagging from (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purism) the architectural purists. (lol)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purism