Hedge fund manager Bill Ackman is no stranger to controversy. He recently claimed that social media chaos ensued when he tweeted his belief that accused murder Kyle Rittenhouse is innocent. On the business side, the Financial Times deemed him a “veteran of corporate raids and rancorous short selling campaigns.” But closer to home, Ackman struck a decisively softer tone as he spoke about his dreams for his family on the Upper West Side during the Manhattan Community Board 7 virtual meeting on November 3, 2021.
Advertisement
The founder of Pershing Square Capital Management wants to build a two-story glass house atop 6-16 West 77th Street, a landmarked building that sits steps away from both the New-York Historical Society and the American Museum of Natural History. Ackman believes demolishing the current pink penthouse will be an “enhancement,” and that allowing his glass palace will “do something special” where his family can live. He claimed his building would be less visible from the street than the current pink stucco, and reported that his plan includes offers to modernize the building’s fire safety system and elevators.
READ MORE: Ackman Sent Back to Drawing Board: Glass House Must Be Scaled Down
Many of the residents who attended the meeting earlier this month were not sold.
John Richards told the board that he and other neighbors at No. 6-16 found Ackman’s plans “risky and inappropriate,” voicing concern that 93-year-old “sensitive building” will suffer from leak and support structure issues if the project moves forward. Richards noted that the co-op had an extensive replacement of building’s vertical steel support columns “only recently.” He also expressed his fear that allowing Ackman’s glass house will set a bad precedent for “plopping down such inappropriate structures on other historic buildings in the district when there’s enough money on hand.”
Another resident identified as Mrs. Smith echoed Richards’ concerns about precedent, calling it “dangerous” to the historic district. She labeled Ackman’s proposal as “glaringly striking to the style of the building” and believes it looks like a house in Malibu or a restaurant pavilion. Smith has no objection to renovating or sprucing up the current structure, but she was adamant in her opposition to a “Malibu house on the top of the building.”
Roberta Gratz, a seven-year veteran of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, feels allowing the construction will flood similar rooftop additions and that any boards considering future alterations will have a hard time ignoring the precedent Ackman’s penthouse could set. Shareholder Kenneth was a bit more direct. “It looks like a flying saucer landed on top of the roof,” he said in reference to the design plans.
Advertisement
A number of others in attendance supported Ackman. Notably, only one person who spoke in support is a current shareholder at No. 6-16. “It’s crystal clear that this would be a massive improvement” to the building and neighborhood, said David, a resident of the building for a decade. He called the current pink penthouse an eyesore and claimed that residents like Richards, Smith, and Kenneth represent “a small group of very vocal people who don’t like change.”
Ackman backed David in this assertion, claiming that those in opposition are not concerned about architectural integrity. “They just don’t want noise.”
The board members ultimately backed Ackman with a vote of 25 to 7 (with two abstentions, none for cause). Those in support feel that Ackman’s glass house will blend the past and the present; those opposed, obviously, don’t. Board member Page Cowley acknowledged that Ackman’s intentions seem honorable but reported that the building will lose its landmarked purpose. She added that the building is designated as a whole and that it cannot let the “top go to hell.”
Ackman’s plan is headed for a vote in the Landmarks Preservation Commission on November 16.
Aren’t these the same residents on the same block that close 77th street off to the public during the balloon inflation in Thanksgiving eve? Do t reel sorry for any of them.
What does his political of or professional history have to do with this?
More radicalization? America has had enough.
He’s a support of radical vigilante “justice”.
Imagine arguing with him on the street about a fender bender, and I hope you can see the problem.
As long as they respect the safety and integrity of the building I think it’s fine.
Why “billionaire,” and not simply “family?” Why does it matter. I have no particular love for billionaires, but it seems gratuitous to lead with that.
As long as the structure conforms to all the architectural, material and other requirements of the DOB, LPC, BSA and local CB, I say go for it.
Short selling is a type of looting, one that oft leads to broader looting.
Irony.
Jay,
Short sellers are the heroes of finance. Like Tylenol, the keep markets from overheating which costs ordinary investors in the long run. Short sellers risk 100% of their assets every day unlike other investors. Their losses are potentially unlimited.
“Hero’s of finance”, yeah right.
They often set up the destruction of companies. Thereby destroying lives, towns, and many times useful product lines.
Also short selling is fundamentally near term profit taking at the expense of nearly everyone else but those in “high finance”.
The financial transactions tax, which existed in the USA until the early 1960s, needs to be reinsituted.
Tylenol damages your liver, avoid it.
As you say: “if you know nothing [or only have a very narrow self interested perspective] best to say nothing”.
“Ackman backed David in this assertion, claiming that those in opposition are not concerned about architectural integrity. “They just don’t want noise.””
Not wanting months of unnecessary noise and just isn’t a valid objection?
Since Ackman admits the noise is an issue, perhaps he (well an engineering firm he pays together with a very expensive contractor) can figure out how to do the job silently, with no dust spewed into neighbors’ yards and apartments.
That’s just silly. ALL construction is going to create noise, dust, etc. The question is whether his contractors will stay within the law with regard to WHEN they do the work, and with regard to MITIGATION measures for dust, etc. People are allowed to build, even rooftop additions. This whole discussion is absurd if one knows the various laws and regs that are involved. As long as Mr. Ackman and his contractors abide by them, there should be no issue whatsoever.
Ian,
There’s noise and dust, and then there’s noise and dust which go on unnecessarily for months and months because the contractor is incompetent and the Building Department doesn’t demand that the contractor stay within the terms of Building Permit. Yes, I’ve literally read DoB permits and “dust mitigation plans” that basically say, “we’ll use a shopvac”.
And there can be subsections of the problem, in other words, the primary contractor hires an utterly incompetent (cheapest possible, but with liability insurance for NYC) sub to do the demolition and removal and then barely supervises the work of the sub.
Besides increasing noise and dust, this kind of choice (not saying it would be made in this instance) can significantly undermine jobsite (street + backyard/courtyard included) safety.
I do not disagree with anything you say. (I like double negatives…lol) As I said at the beginning, IF Mr. Ackman and his contractors abide by the laws, regs and guidelines of the DOB, LPC, BSA, CB and other agencies with jurisdiction over the project, then have at it. But yes, it becomes a problem if and when this is not the case.
Ian:
I’ve been “abiding” a crew working on a rooftop adjacent to my apartment windows (amongst many other apartments’ windows) that has zero concept of noise or dust control, and is operating well outside the terms of the permit issued by the DoB at the start of the work in May.
Even accepting the non-permitted work, it’s a 6-8 week job (that’s accounting for delays) if the contractor knew what he is doing and bothered use the correct tools and setup. Haven’t been able to leave my windows open on weekdays (when it’s not raining) since May because of the dust, which still finds a way in.
The crew took a break for a week about 2 weeks ago, and the quiet at 11AM M-F was stunning. I kept thinking, “is this how it normally is, has been for the 20 years I’ve lived here?”
But I imagine that Ackman, if some version of this project is ever approved (it wasn’t last night, Nov 16th) will hire a competent team with a real plan–based on thinking and consideration–at the start.
I’m sorry to hear all that. And I fully sympathize: I had to endure workers on a sidewalk shed and scaffolding right outside my window for FOUR YEARS when my then-landlord was doing work on the building. Since I live on a lower floor, the workers were basically walking next to my bedroom window. And the sidewalk shed deprived me of natural light for FOUR YEARS. And in addition to construction noise and dust, I had to endure their f—ing radios blasting music as early as 9 or 10 am.
That said, there will always be “bad actors” among clients, contractors, sub-contractors, etc. But there are just as many who actually have good plans and follow the rules, regs, etc.
It’s basically the luck of the draw. 🙁
people are allowed to build and make noise. if you ban it, when it is YOU who needs the work done, you will feel differently. That being said, doesnt seem to comfortable living in a see-through apt.
lucy:
No one is saying ban these projects.
However they often create unnecessary dust and noise, and some times significant safety issues.
They are NOT always supervised well, especially small projects like this one.
The NYC Building Dept. oft doesn’t bother to enforce the terms of the permits that the DoB has issued. Complaints to 311 are ignored, the contractors treat the sidewalks and streets as private dumps, and/or storage depots for months and months.
No, I am not saying that this project, if approved, would fail to account, in advance, for the points I’ve made above. If they care to, the very wealthy can afford to hire much better contractors and engineering firms to do the work on projects like this one.