DOCSLIB.ORG

CAN WE HAVE OUR CAKE and COMPOST IT TOO? an Analysis of Organic Waste Diversion in New York City

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CAN WE HAVE OUR CAKE and COMPOST IT TOO? an Analysis of Organic Waste Diversion in New York City CAN WE HAVE OUR CAKE AND COMPOST IT TOO? An Analysis of Organic Waste Diversion in New York City February 2016 FOREWORD Founded in 1932, the Citizens Budget Commission (CBC) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan civic organization devoted to influencing constructive change in the finances and services of New York State and New York City governments. A major activity of the Commission is conducting research on the financial and management practices of the State and the City. All research is overseen by a committee of its trustees. This report was completed under the auspices of the Solid Waste Management Committee. We serve as co-chairs of that Committee. The other members of the Committee are Eric Altman, Samara Barend, Ronald Bergamini, Lawrence Buttenwieser, Eileen Cifone, Edward Cox, Kenneth Gibbs, David Greenbaum, Walter Harris, H. Dale Hemmerdinger, Robert Hoglund, Brian Horey, Peter Joseph, Tracey Keays, Calvin A. Mitchell III, James Normile, Timothy Plunkett, Steven Polan, Brian Sanvidge, Martha Wooding, and Edward Skyler, ex-officio. This report is the fifth in a recent series on municipal solid waste management in New York City. Previous CBC reports recommended greater use of waste-to-energy conversion technologies, addressing high collection costs at the Department of Sanitation, implementing a franchise system for commercial waste, and instituting a residential volume-based trash fee. It is the intention of CBC to help reduce the great fiscal and environmental costs of solid waste management through its recommendations. A draft of this report was sent to New York City officials and other interested parties. We are grateful for their comments and suggestions. This report was prepared by Tammy P. Gamerman, Senior Research Associate, under the guidance of Michael Dardia, Co-Director of Research. Michael Dardia and Maria Doulis, Vice-President, provided editorial guidance. The report was edited by Laura Cyriax and formatted for publication by Kevin Medina. Carol Rosenthal, Co-Chair Michael Ryan, Co-Chair February 2, 2016 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 OVERVIEW OF ORGANIC WASTE IN NEW YORK CITY NYC’s trash system Residential organic waste Commercial organic waste 5 HOW MUCH CAPACITY IS NEEDED TO EXPAND ORGANIC WASTE DIVERSION? Composting Anaerobic digestion Wastewater treatment plant co-digestion Total city and regional capacity 8 HOW MUCH WOULD RESIDENTIAL CURBSIDE ORGANIC WASTE DIVERSION COST? Costs of residential curbside collection In-sink food waste disposers 16 OPTIONS FOR COST-EFFECTIVE ORGANICS DIVERSION 18 CONCLUSION 19 APPENDIX A: COST MODEL ASSUMPTIONS 29 APPENDIX B: REGIONAL ORGANIC WASTE PROCESSING CAPACITY 31 ENDNOTES 38 SOURCES OF DATA FOR APPENDICES 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In recent years New York City has focused interest in expanding municipal composting on diverting food scraps and other organic and co-digestion at wastewater treatment material from landfills as part of the City’s plants. Despite these proposals, processing environmental agenda. The City has initiated a capacity will remain problematic, and the City residential collection pilot and recently adopted will compete with private haulers and other a mandate on large commercial producers of municipalities for any new capacity that comes food waste. The City aims to reduce landfilled online. waste 90 percent by 2030 and carbon emissions 80 percent by 2050. Given these challenges, an alternative technology for food waste diversion – in-sink The focus on organic waste diversion stems food waste disposers – should also be considered from three key facts about New York City trash: as part of the City’s organics diversion strategy. 1) a large share of residential and commercial This simple but underutilized technology could trash is organic, adding up to 1.8 million tons divert a significant amount of food waste from each year; 2) managing residential trash is landfills to the City’s wastewater treatment expensive, costing taxpayers $1.7 billion per plant digesters without adding new trucks to year; and 3) current disposal practices rely the road. Garbage disposals benefit residents on transport to distant landfills, damaging the by reducing odorous kitchen trash and resultant environment. pest problems. While such devices have been legal in New York City since 1997, there has Alternative technologies already exist to reuse been opposition from building owners and organic material. But requiring the separate confusion about their legality and impact. The collection of organic waste will necessitate new Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) truck routes, adding significant new costs and has also expressed concerns about the impact worsening local truck traffic, as well as fees paid of additional food waste on its sewer and to transport organic material to composters treatment plant infrastructure and the City’s and digestion facilities outside the city. ability to comply with federal environmental regulations. If the City’s residential curbside collection program were expanded citywide the full costs, Today the cost of the City’s residential organics net of savings from landfill reduction, would pilot program is small, but in the next few years be between $177 million and $251 million it may expand significantly. The City aims to annually. Most of the cost is due to additional adopt its residential organic waste program collection truck routes; at least 88,000 new citywide by 2018, including expansion of truck-shifts would be needed each year. curbside collection as well as new drop-off sites, and the commercial mandate could Processing capacity will also pose a challenge. be expanded as greater processing capacity A survey of composting facilities within 150 becomes available. Such growth would impose miles found available annual capacity for substantial logistical and financial burdens on 176,000 tons, which could accommodate the city. Until the City can address the high just 10 percent of the city’s 1.8 million tons cost of residential garbage collection and of residential and commercial organic waste. secure adequate organics processing capacity, However, proposed developments within a more limited strategy may be appropriate. and outside the city could expand processing The following two targeted approaches could capacity significantly in coming years. Seven achieve meaningful environmental benefits new anaerobic digesters have been proposed without adding new costs. in the region, and New York City has signaled i Expand curbside collections only where could be reduced. DEP operates in a and when additional collection routes more constrained regulatory environment are not required. If participation levels are than DSNY so a joint effort is critical to high enough, the Department of Sanitation developing a technically feasible strategy. (DSNY) could expand the organics program This analysis finds two sanitation districts while avoiding additional collection routes. in the Bronx and two in Brooklyn in areas This could be achieved by either replacing served by adequate wastewater treatment a weekly refuse pickup with an organics infrastructure could reduce trash pickup if pickup or collecting refuse and organics 50 percent of residential food waste went simultaneously with special trucks with down the sink. Implementing this strategy two separate compartments. An analysis in these four districts would reduce truck of the city’s 59 sanitation districts finds traffic and pollution while diverting more such collection efficiencies are possible in than 17,000 tons of food waste and saving 10 districts if organics set-out rates match $4 million annually. Achieving these savings neighborhood recycling rates. Achieving would require collaboration with the City such efficiencies would require City Council and efforts to ensure high levels of Council approval and a significant boost residential usage. The distribution of costs to participation rates. However, if the City for the purchase, installation, and operation can implement organics diversion in these of the devices between the City, building 10 districts without increasing collections, owners, and residents would also need to the City could divert nearly 84,000 tons be resolved. per year without adding costs. At current average participation rates in the residential As New York City seeks to achieve environmental pilot, only one district qualifies. However, benefits through wider diversion of organic operational efficiencies or partnerships waste, municipal leaders should understand with the private sector might allow for cost- that unless residential trash collection costs are effective program expansions in additional reduced by fundamentally altering collection neighborhoods. routes and practices, new program costs will greatly overwhelm any potential savings from Consider encouraging use of in-sink landfill reduction. A significant expansion of disposers in select neighborhoods with organics collection may also outpace regional adequate wastewater treatment plant processing infrastructure if the City cannot infrastructure and capacity to reduce access new facilities under development. A garbage collection. DEP and DSNY should targeted and thoughtful approach, including in- collaborate to identify neighborhoods where sink food waste disposers where viable, would in-sink disposers could be used without preserve municipal resources and ensure burdening existing wastewater treatment organics programs are sustainable for the long infrastructure and where trash collections
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Canadian Centre for Architecture, Montreal 21— 24 September, 2014
    Canadian Centre Museum of for Architecture, Modern Art and Montreal Avery Library, 21— 24 September, New York 2014 25 — 28 September, 2014 Twenty-five years ago the Canadian Centre for Architecture (CCA) opened its doors for the first time and hosted, as one of its inaugural activities, icam 5. For the CCA, as for other members of icam, it is crucial to recognize that our immediate contexts and institutional mandates are quite different today from what they were then. Needless to say, the field is changing and the challenges we face in relation to the built environment are multiple, pressing and in need of re-evaluation. Technology, for example, has both infiltrated our way of life and affected the way in which institutions operate. At the same time, the primacy of historical research has been displaced by a desire to remain current, relevant and broadly recognized as shaping contemporary discourse. It is our responsibility to develop a voice that reaches out and establishes a cultural presence while introducing new questions and offering new possibilities to a larger public no longer determined by their physical vicinity. As resources become scarce, these pressures will likely continue to grow. In this sense it is an opportune moment to pursue the benefits of greater collaboration and take note of emerging models in Africa and Asia. These considerations, indicative of the need to rethink our institutional roles in the years to come, are essential if we wish to continue serving as platforms for future conversation. Mirko Zardini Canadian Centre for Architecture Much has changed since icam last visited New York in 1996.
    [Show full text]
  • PLAZA HOTEL INTERIOR Designation Report
    PLAZA HOTEL INTERIOR Designation Report New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission July 12, 2005 Designation List 366 LP-2174 PLAZA HOTEL INTERIOR: TABLE OF CONTENTS Site Description 2 Testimony at Public Hearing 2 Essay Summary 3 Fifth Avenue and the Site 4 Construction and Opening of Plaza Hotel 4 Hotel Architecture 5 Frederic Sterry 6 Henry Janeway Hardenbergh 6 Warren & Wetmore 7 The 1905-07 Design of the Plaza Hotel’s Interiors 8 1919-1922 addition and 1929 Grand Ballroom 11 The Hilton Plaza (1943-1953) 13 Plaza Hotel (1953 to present) 14 Plaza Hotel Social History 14 Site Plans 21 Individual Room Entries The Edwardian Room 24 59th Street Lobby 29 Fifth Avenue Lobby and Vestibules 31 Grand Ballroom 35 Corridor and Foyer Main Corridors 44 The Oak Bar 49 The Oak Room 52 The Palm Court 57 Terrace Room 62 Corridor, Foyer Stairways Findings and Designation 72 Report researched and written by Research Department Mary Beth Betts, Director of Research, Michael Caratzas, Gale Harris, Virginia Kurshan, Matthew A. Postal, Donald Presa, and Jay Shockley All photos by Carl Forster PLAZA HOTEL INTERIOR Plaza Hotel, ground floor interior consisting of the Fifth Avenue vestibules, Lobby, corridor to the east of the Palm Court, the Palm Court, Terrace Room, corridor to the north of the Palm Court connecting to the 59th Street Lobby and the Oak Room, foyers to the Edwardian Room from the corridor to the north of the Palm Court and the 59th Street Lobby, the Edwardian Room, 59th Street Lobby and vestibule, the Oak Room and the Oak Bar, corridor
    [Show full text]
  • “The 1961 New York City Zoning Resolution, Privately Owned Public
    “The 1961 New York City Zoning Resolution, Privately Owned Public Space and the Question of Spatial Quality - The Pedestrian Through-Block Connections Forming the Sixth-and-a-Half Avenue as Examples of the Concept” University of Helsinki Faculty of Arts Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies Art History Master’s thesis Essi Rautiola April 2016 Tiedekunta/Osasto Fakultet/Sektion – Faculty Laitos/Institution– Department Humanistinen tiedekunta Filosofian, historian, kulttuurin ja taiteiden tutkimuksen laitos Tekijä/Författare – Author Essi Rautiola Työn nimi / Arbetets titel – Title The 1961 New York City Zoning Resolution, Privately Owned Public Space and the Question of Spatial Quality - The Pedestrian Through-Block Connections Forming the Sixth-and-a-Half Avenue as Examples of the Concept Oppiaine /Läroämne – Subject Taidehistoria Työn laji/Arbetets art – Level Aika/Datum – Month and year Sivumäärä/ Sidoantal – Number of pages Pro gradu Huhtikuu 2016 104 + 9 Tiivistelmä/Referat – Abstract Tutkielma käsittelee New Yorkin kaupungin kaavoituslainsäädännön kerrosneliöbonusjärjestelmää sekä sen synnyttämiä yksityisomisteisia julkisia tiloja ja niiden tilallista laatua nykyisten ihanteiden valossa. Esimerkkitiloina käytetään Manhattanin keskikaupungille kuuden korttelin alueelle sijoittuvaa kymmenen sisä- ja ulkotilan sarjaa. Kerrosneliöbonusjärjestelmä on ollut osa kaupungin kaavoituslainsäädäntöä vuodesta 1961 alkaen ja liittyy olennaisesti New Yorkin kaupungin korkean rakentamisen perinteisiin. Se on mahdollistanut ylimääräisten
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise of One World Trade Center
    ctbuh.org/papers Title: The Rise of One World Trade Center Authors: Ahmad Rahimian, Director of Building Structures, WSP Group Yoram Eilon, Senior Vice President, WSP Group Subjects: Architectural/Design Building Case Study Construction Structural Engineering Wind Engineering Keywords: Construction Structural Engineering Wind Loads Publication Date: 2015 Original Publication: Global Interchanges: Resurgence of the Skyscraper City Paper Type: 1. Book chapter/Part chapter 2. Journal paper 3. Conference proceeding 4. Unpublished conference paper 5. Magazine article 6. Unpublished © Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat / Ahmad Rahimian; Yoram Eilon The Rise of One World Trade Center Abstract Dr. Ahmad Rahimian Director of Building Structures One World Trade Center (1WTC) totaling 3.5 mil square feet of area is the tallest of the four WSP Group, buildings planned as part of the World Trade Center Reconstruction at Lower Manhattan in New New York City, USA York City. Currently it is the tallest building in the Western Hemisphere with an overall height of 1776 ft. (541m) to the top of the spire. Ahmad Rahimian, Ph.D., P.E., S.E. F.ASCE, is a Director of Building Structures at WSP. Ahmad’s thirty years of experience with the The 1WTC structural and life safety design set a new standard for design of tall buildings in the firm range from high-rise commercial and residential towers aftermath of the September 11 collapse. The unique site condition with existing infrastructure to major sports facilities. He recently completed the design of 1WTC and One57 W57th Street. His other notable structural also added additional challenges for the design and construction team.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Service Offering
    BUILDING ENVELOPE CONSULTANTS 40 WORTH STREET. #814 NEW YORK. NY 10013 SURFACEDG.COM 212.757.5659 ABOUT US...................................................................................1 Scope of Services.............................................................3 People..............................................................................5 NEW CONSTRUCTION Sample Projects.............................................................13 Services..........................................................................23 MONITORING & INSPECTION Services..........................................................................27 RESTORATION, LANDMARKS & HISTORIC PRESERVATION Sample Projects.............................................................29 Services..........................................................................43 ABOUT US SURFACE DESIGN GROUP provides comprehensive exterior envelope design and construction expertise to projects of all sizes across a wide range of market sectors. We are known for our hands-on approach and our ability to help realize the design intent within the budget and project schedule, while mitigating our client’s risk. Our services range from design-assist of complex specialty structures to historic facade restoration. Our mission is to provide a real world approach to facade consulting and are committed to developing personalized relationships with each and every one of our clients. The partners of our company collectively have over 150 years of experience. They have designed and
    [Show full text]
  • ALABAMA ‘ -;X Whites Build Churchman Was Home for Widow Head of Baptist 'Ol12years with 7 Children^
    PER COPY STAMPA VOLUME 22, NUMBER 54 MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1954 V •’ AT HOME IN SELMA, ALABAMA ‘ -;X Whites Build Churchman Was Home For Widow Head Of Baptist 'ol12Years With 7 Children^ . DR. D. V. JEMISON . SELMA, Ala. — (SNS) — By CARTER JEWEL Dr. D, V. Jemison, who for 12 RICHMOND. Va.—(ANP) — A jenuine way to observe urotnerhoou years was president of the Na. Max Kaufman was illustrated last week in Han- tional Baptist Convention, Inc., iver county near here when white passed early Saturday morning leighbors got together and rebuilt at his home in Selma, Alabama. i home for a Negro widow with To Speak A|/ even children. PRESIDENT EMERITUS FLG WtRS PRESENTED SOPRANO—Mrs. Rosa Page Welch, mezzo About 50 volunteers from Han- Dr. Jeinlson, one of the tore- ■ ■ ‘ ■ ..... '■ |'-s9Pran°, of; international fame on-fhe bccasloh of Ker^oncerL aT iver County and Richmond met at most „religious figures. of. the. .na- LeMoyne the Mississippi Boulevard Christian church here Friday evening is ,he site where Mrs. Stella Morris, | tion, retired.from his, active presi- ll, lost her home and everything ■ dency last year and .was named seen as she receives flowers. A basket of American Beauty Roses she owned a week before Christmas, I PresidentrEmeritus by. the Con­ Dr. Max Kaufman will be/ ,the -7—(¿„presented by Mrs. Corine Elizabeth Rowan right. President of when-fire burned her home to the vention. He was succeeded -Vy-Dr. ;uest speaker at LcMoyne Coliege.-L the Fidelia Club, the sponsoring organization. Mrs. Rosa Ford, ground. Living with Mrs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lasting Legacy of Julian T. White Diverse Experiences
    Summer 2020 + THE LASTING LEGACY OF JULIAN T. WHITE + DIVERSE EXPERIENCES CONTENTS + FEATURES 06 THE LASTING LEGACY OF JULIAN T. WHITE 14 + Photo by Micah Viccinelli + “Nature vs. Nurture” by Chayse Sampy, Black Men in America series QUAD · LSU COLLEGE OF ART & DESIGN 24 WHY LSU ART & DESIGN? Tigers Share Why 02 LETTER FROM 26 I MADE THAT! THE DEAN Designing the Brain with Madelyn Riche 03 DID YOU KNOW? A Line in the Land, with 30 FIELD NOTES Kevin Benham Travel Snapshots 04 FOUR MINUTES ON . 32 CLASS NOTES Visualizing Genetic Relationships, Alumni News and Updates with Courtney Barr 36 EQUIPPED 18 FROM GREAT HEIGHTS For the Doctor of Design in Restoration Architect Elyse Marks Cultural Preservation CREDITS EDITORIAL DESIGN — GDSO PHOTOGRAPHY EDITOR/WRITER ART DIRECTION PHOTOGRAPHERS Elizabeth Mariotti Luisa Restrepo Kevin Duffy Cover photo by Micah Viccinelli, CONTRIBUTORS FACULTY ADVISOR BFA candidate Courtney Barr, Associate Professor Lynne Baggett Kevin Benham, Assistant Professor Madelyn Riche, BID candidate DESIGN & ILLUSTRATION Erika Witt, DDES candidate Lindsey Henriques, BFA candidate Gabrielle Trupiano, BFA candidate COPY EDITOR Ellen Mathis SPRING/SUMMER ���� + Dean Alkis Tsolakis instructs students in the Design Paris program in France, fall 2019. Photo by Willie Goliday II, MArch candidate. Letter from the Dean This issue of the Quad explores the LSU College of Art & Design’s inherently question what is, and what could – rich history, and celebrates change – in our own institution of or what can – be. education, and in the fields of art and design. Meet some current students who are working to You will read about the life of Professor Julian T.
    [Show full text]
  • SHELTON HOTEL, 525 Lexington Avenue
    Landmarks Preservation Commission November 22, 2016, Designation List 490 LP-2557 SHELTON HOTEL, 525 Lexington Avenue (aka 523-527 Lexington Avenue, 137-139 East 48th Street, 136-140 East 49th Street), Manhattan Built: 1922-23; architect, Arthur Loomis Harmon Landmark Site: Borough of Manhattan, Tax Map Block 1303, Lot 53 On July 19, 2016 the Landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation as a Landmark of the Shelton Hotel and the proposed designation of the related Landmark Site (Item No. 4). The hearing had been duly advertised in accordance with the provisions of the law. A representative of the owner spoke in favor of the designation acknowledging the building’s architectural and cultural importance. There were five other speakers in support of the designation including representatives of Borough President Gale Brewer, Community Board 6, the New York Landmarks Conservancy, the Historic Districts Council, and the Municipal Arts Society. A representative of the Real Estate Board of New York spoke in opposition to the designation. A representative of Council Member Daniel Garodnick submitted written testimony in support of the designation. Two other individuals have also submitted emails in support of the designation. Summary Designed by architect Arthur Loomis Harmon and completed in 1923, the Shelton Hotel was one of the first “skyscraper” residential hotels. With its powerful massing it played an important role in the development of the skyscraper in New York City. Located on the east side of Lexington Avenue between 48th and 49th Streets, it is one of the premiere hotels constructed along the noted “hotel alley” stretch of Lexington Avenue, which was built as part of the redevelopment of this section of East Midtown that followed the opening of Grand Central Terminal and the Lexington Avenue subway line.
    [Show full text]
  • Panorama of the City of New York on Long-Term View
    Builders of the Panorama Sizes of the Panorama Queens Museum Panorama New York City Building The model was conceived by Robert Moses Approximate size of Manhattan – 70 x 15’ Flushing Meadows Corona Park and constructed by Lester & Associates of Approximate size of Bronx – 40 x 40’ Panorama On Queens, NY 11368 Fun Facts West Nyack, N.Y. It was paid for by New Approximate size of Brooklyn – 50 x 50’ York City. Approximate size of Queens – 60 x 75’ T 718 592 9700 F 718 592 5778 Statue of Liberty – 1 7/8” w/base 3 1/4” E [email protected] Original Purpose of the Panorama: The Central Park – 27 ¾” x 11’ 3 ¼” of the City of Long-Term Panorama was built as New York City’s Verrazano-Narrows Bridge – 5’ 11 ½” x 1”, queensmuseum.org display at the 1964–1965 World’s Fair. After tower height 7” @QueensMuseum the Fair it served as an urban planning tool. Citicorp (Queens) – 6 ¾” (H) Dates of Construction: July 1961–April 1964 Brooklyn Bridge – 3’ 5 ¼” x 1”, New York View tower height 3” Number of workers: It took more than 100 George Washington Bridge – 4 x 11/16”, full-time workers to construct the Panorama. tower height 6” Staten Island Ferry Ride – 22’ Cost: $672,662.69 in 1964 U.S. Dollars Coney Island Beach – 13’ 4 ¼” Updates: The Panorama was designed to Queens Museum, N.Y.C. Building – 4 ¼”x stay current with the changing city. 2 1/8, Height ½” Complete updates took place in 1967, 1968, Empire State Building – 15” 1969, and 1974.
    [Show full text]
  • Interviews with the Former Chairs of Nyc's
    LEADING THE COMMISSION: INTERVIEWS WITH THE FORMER CHAIRS OF NYC'S LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION The Reminiscences of Gene Norman © 2011 New York Preservation Archive Project PREFACE The following oral history is the result of a recorded interview with Gene Norman conducted by Interviewer Liz McEnaney in 2011. This interview is part of the Leading the Commission: Interviews with the Former Chairs of NYC's Landmarks Preservation Commission oral history project. The reader is asked to bear in mind that s/he is reading a verbatim transcript of the spoken word, rather than written prose. The views expressed in this oral history interview do not necessarily reflect the views of the New York Preservation Archive Project. Gene Norman began working in government while studying architecture. He came to the Landmarks Preservation Commission [LPC] from the Harlem Urban Development Corporation where he’d had dealings with the LPC while renovating landmarked, city-owned buildings. As chairman of the Commission, he worked to improve the day-to-day workings of the LPC, such as dealing with the backlog of Certificate of Appropriateness hearings. He shares his experiences working with Mayor Edward I. Koch’s administration and within the city government. During his tenure, he restructured the LPC, creating the survey department, and worked to make the Landmarks Commission’s dealings with the public transparent. He also established a way to clarify the significant features of landmarked buildings in designation reports, to later aid in hearings for renovations or alterations of the site. During his tenure, several important issues were arose, including St. Bartholomew’s Episcopal Church’s push to demolish the community house, the Flynn-Walsh Bill was proposed, and the Broadway Theaters began being designated.
    [Show full text]
  • Hospitality & Retail
    Hospitality & Retail BBB has more than 30 years of planning and design experience in hospitality projects including hotels, clubs, restaurants, and retail — both new construction and renovation. Many of our projects include landmark-designated properties, adaptive reuse of his toric properties as well as a diverse mix of uses. All of our hospitality and retail projects benefit from our keen understanding that brand identity and lifestyle amenities are as critical to success as program and functional requirements. Projects Hospitality 11 Howard Hotel, New York, NY 11 Howard Hotel Hermès ‘21’ Club, New York, NY New York, NY New York, NY 215 Chrystie Street Hotel, New York, NY 220 Eleventh Avenue, New York, NY Double Tree Times Square Feasibility Study, New York, NY Essex House Feasibility Study, New York, NY General Theological Seminary, Desmond Tutu Center and Hotel, New York, NY Natick Collection ‘21’ Club Hilton Times Square, New York, NY Natick, MA New York, NY Hotel 130, New York, NY New York Palace Hotel, New York, NY New York University Torch Club, New York, NY Old Post Office, Washington, DC General Theological Reno Freight House District Restaurants, Reno, NV Seminary: The NYU Torch Club Desmond Tutu Center New York, NY Retail New York, NY 4 Union Square South, New York, NY 42nd Street Development, New York, NY 401 Fifth Avenue - Old Tiffany Building, New York, NY 600 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL Grand Central Hilton Times Square Terminal Ballpark Village, St. Louis, MO New York, NY New York, NY Cartier New York, New York,
    [Show full text]
  • 26 Broadway (Aka 10-30 Broadway, 1-11 Beaver Street, and 73-81 New Street), Manhattan
    Landmarks Preservation Commission September 19, 1995, Designation List 266 LP-1930 STANDARD OIL BUILDING, 26 Broadway (aka 10-30 Broadway, 1-11 Beaver Street, and 73-81 New Street), Manhattan. Designed 1920; built 1921-1928; architects Carrère & Hastings; Shreve, Lamb & Blake, associate architects. Landmark Site: Borough of Manhattan Tax Map Block 22, Lot 13. On May 16, 1995, the Landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation as a Landmark of the Standard Oil Building and the proposed designation of the related Landmark Site (Item No. 5). The hearing had been duly advertised in accordance with the provisions of law. Eleven witnesses spoke in favor of designation, including Councilwoman Kathryn Freed and representatives of State Senator Catherine Abate, the New York Chapter of the American Institute of Architects, the Municipal Art Society, the New York Landmarks Conservancy, the Fine Arts Federation, and the Seaport Task Force of Community Board 1. No one spoke in opposition to designation. A representative of the owner attended the hearing but took no position regarding the proposed designation. The Commission has received several letters and other statements in support of designation including a resolution from Community Board 1. Summary The Standard Oil Building, largely erected between 1921 and 1926 and finally completed in 1928, incorporates the company's original building (built in 1884-85 and enlarged in 1895). Designed by Thomas Hastings of the architectural firm of Carrère & Hastings, with Shreve, Lamb & Blake as associated architects, the building is notable for its distinctive tower, one of the southernmost spires in the Manhattan skyline, and the sweeping curve of the Broadway facade, which is punctuated by the arched openings of the main entrance portal and flanking large windows that dominate the street wall as it fronts Bowling Green.
    [Show full text]