UWS Photo Of The Day: Old Meets New On West 71st

Thursday, April 25th, 2013

(Click for full-size)

UPDATE 5/2: Another (Fuglier) Angle Of West 71st Street Penthouse Addition

UPDATE 5/8: UWS CONSTRUCTION PORN: Official Zoning Diagrams For 226 W. 71st Penthouse Extension

Was walking on West 71st and spotted this modern, two-story penthouse addition to the townhouse at 226 W. 71st (between Broadway/Amsterdam & West End).

The building was purchased for about $5 million back in April 2011 and has been undergoing renovations ever since.

If anyone lives on a high floor in a neighboring building, I’d love to see a shot of this from another angle.

Thoughts on the esthetic of merging old and new?

Filed under: Manhattan, New York City, NYC, Photos, Real Estate, Upper West Side, Upper West Side Blog, UWS 7 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , ,
  • http://www.facebook.com/alice.szigethy Alice Szigethy

    I have been watching this project for the last few years and am STUNNED that they were able to build that addition upstairs. STUNNED. More power to them….

  • JeffOverley

    Merging classic and contemporary is often great, but I live one block from this building and don’t think they quite pulled it off – it looks like someone dropped a tiny suburban office building on the roof. Had the design been a little more inspired, or at least the paint something other than white, might’ve worked. (Just my two cents – maybe others dig it.)

  • MyUpperWest

    @JeffOverley:disqus I agree that it’s a questionable color choice — definitely seems like they could have gone with something darker and made it blend in a bit more. I think they’re still doing work there, so perhaps they’re going to slap a coat of paint on before all is said and done.

  • MyUpperWest

    @facebook-1660207681:disqus I’m not sure what’s typically involved with adding extensions, but I know this particular building is not landmarked and was sold with the ability to expand up and out. I agree — more power to them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nellie-Smith/1547475472 Nellie Smith


  • Sarah

    I am an UWS’er and work in historic preservation and architecture. If they aren’t in a historic district, they can pretty much do anything they want as long as they remain with the set FAR (Floor area ration) based on their zoning. You just have to hope that they are sympathetic to the aesthetic of the neighborhood. This isn’t as bad as I’ve seen, but it could blend better, and they didn’t set it back far enough (i’m sure they didn’t want to give up that square footage but the overall result suffers because of it.) If it were in a HD, LPC would have required a setback so it was not visible from the street from all angles, the material would have had to blend if any part was visible, etc. We live across the street from the historic district boundary and the visual difference and changes in the last 5 years between being in the district and out of it have been stunning. We’ve had a horrible glass box added on top of a brownstone across the street, and don’t get me started with the ugliness of the Linden 78, the odd cantilevered addition above the Stand Up comedy club, and what is happening at the corner of 78/77 and broadway right now…

  • fitz fitzgerald

    Landmark status or not may not be the issue : the point is that a grossly inappropriate addition was placed in a coherent, modest piece of old NY built environment * possibly without full planning consent. The nature of the consent given needs to be researched / the planning authority needs to be alerted .