New York Supertalls

[hunser]

Update: 225 West 57th Street, 1200ft+ (365,8m+), Proposed. Moved from #16 to #9 now.

This tower will probably rise to over 1,200 feet as it has about 30% more air rights than One57.
Important note: Height is not final, only an approximation. Also, there have been no renders released so far.

[stormkingfan]

The first couple of times of looking at Hudson Yards, I thought they were a bit comical for towers their size. Today, I took a long look at the pics above, and realize I like them. They're like two giant sailboats waiting to be launched onto the Hudson. Peaceful looking.

Put 'em up!

[Black Star]

Utterly incredible proposals.....

Was in NYC in Oct. Stayed at the Milford. Was a dream come true to be there and experience one of the greatest cities in the world.

Go Rangers.

[scalziand]

more accurate citation-http://elitedaily.com/elite/2011/yorks-super-building/

[Zapatan]

I love 432 park ave.!

[lulujune]

magic cities and magic manhaton

[DrNest]

A great thread. Thanks for the useful info!

[marshall]

I too hope this building gets built, and the full height is attained. I am happy that 1WTC will soon be finished, but New York needs a 2,000 foot skyscraper. The Chinese and Arabs are building huge skyscrapers, the Burj Dubai is over 2,000 feet, hello!! While in the 1970s any building over 1,000 feet was considered great, and still is to a point, that is no longer the measuring stick. It is now 2,000 feet and beyond. New York needs to get back into the skyscraper game wholeheartedly. We need to stop spitting out designs and then cringing at the last minute and winding their heights back down...This only makes for more generic, boring-looking bland buildings. Any city can have 500-1,000 foot buildings, but this is New York for pete's sake. I don't mean have them all over the city, just having one great 2,000 footer would put New York back on the cutting edge and map of skyscraper buildings globally..I am not a huge fan of the Internationalist boxy styling, but I am sure there are creative people out there who could design a building with elements of the past and present, while making it safe and environmentally efficient too. All this being said, with things the way they are, and nothing ever seeming to get done in the way of big projects, I would guess that 1WTC (once completed) will likely be the tallest building in New York for many many years to come..

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by marshall

I too hope this building gets built, and the full height is attained. I am happy that 1WTC will soon be finished, but New York needs a 2,000 foot skyscraper. The Chinese and Arabs are building huge skyscrapers, the Burj Dubai is over 2,000 feet, hello!! While in the 1970s any building over 1,000 feet was considered great, and still is to a point, that is no longer the measuring stick. It is now 2,000 feet and beyond. New York needs to get back into the skyscraper game wholeheartedly. We need to stop spitting out designs and then cringing at the last minute and winding their heights back down...This only makes for more generic, boring-looking bland buildings. Any city can have 500-1,000 foot buildings, but this is New York for pete's sake. I don't mean have them all over the city, just having one great 2,000 footer would put New York back on the cutting edge and map of skyscraper buildings globally..I am not a huge fan of the Internationalist boxy styling, but I am sure there are creative people out there who could design a building with elements of the past and present, while making it safe and environmentally efficient too. All this being said, with things the way they are, and nothing ever seeming to get done in the way of big projects, I would guess that 1WTC (once completed) will likely be the tallest building in New York for many many years to come..

Give it time, and a better economy and I wouldn't be surprised if proposals higher than the WTC, 432 and Sears emerge.

Dubai nearly collapsed because of the building bubble, there were a few 1600 footers cancelled because of it there.

[samsonawane08]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Give it time, and a better economy and I wouldn't be surprised if proposals higher than the WTC, 432 and Sears emerge.

Dubai nearly collapsed because of the building bubble, there were a few 1600 footers cancelled because of it there.

Yes you are right. While building a tall skyscraper it is equally important to see whether the proposed height is even necessary. Simply building tall structures
for the sake of competition is unnecessary waste of capital.

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by marshall

I too hope this building gets built, and the full height is attained. I am happy that 1WTC will soon be finished, but New York needs a 2,000 foot skyscraper. The Chinese and Arabs are building huge skyscrapers, the Burj Dubai is over 2,000 feet, hello!! While in the 1970s any building over 1,000 feet was considered great, and still is to a point, that is no longer the measuring stick. It is now 2,000 feet and beyond. New York needs to get back into the skyscraper game wholeheartedly. We need to stop spitting out designs and then cringing at the last minute and winding their heights back down...This only makes for more generic, boring-looking bland buildings. Any city can have 500-1,000 foot buildings, but this is New York for pete's sake. I don't mean have them all over the city, just having one great 2,000 footer would put New York back on the cutting edge and map of skyscraper buildings globally..I am not a huge fan of the Internationalist boxy styling, but I am sure there are creative people out there who could design a building with elements of the past and present, while making it safe and environmentally efficient too. All this being said, with things the way they are, and nothing ever seeming to get done in the way of big projects, I would guess that 1WTC (once completed) will likely be the tallest building in New York for many many years to come..

We could just finish the Metlife North Building. Would be be the tallest art deco skyscraper in the world, succeeding the ESB like it was suppose to. The existing structure would need to be strengthen in order to bring the roof height from the 1,400s to 1,500 or 1,600s in feet and up to 2,000 feet via a spire. New York would finally have the tallest roof height in the U.S. if that were to happen and the title would go to a greatly designed building as 432 Park is not exactly what you would called good architecture.

[Roadcruiser1]

Originally Posted by jd3189

We could just finish the Metlife North Building. Would be be the tallest art deco skyscraper in the world, succeeding the ESB like it was suppose to. The existing structure would need to be strengthen in order to bring the roof height from the 1,400s to 1,500 or 1,600s in feet and up to 2,000 feet via a spire. New York would finally have the tallest roof height in the U.S. if that were to happen and the title would go to a greatly designed building as 432 Park is not exactly what you would called good architecture.

It was built to have 110 floors not 130. At best it can reach 1,700 feet, and 2,000 feet is impossible. Again we don't want 2,000 feet skyscrapers. It is only going to be empty like the skyscrapers in China and Dubai. We don't want empty skyscrapers. We want ours to be full. So no this won't happen. Besides America doesn't care about skyscrapers anymore. Most Americans want more mass transit. We don't want a good view we want more ways to move around. If you guys like it so much you can move to China, you can move to Dubai. Just stop complaining.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

It was built to have 110 floors not 130. At best it can reach 1,700 feet, and 2,000 feet is impossible. Again we don't want 2,000 feet skyscrapers. It is only going to be empty like the skyscrapers in China and Dubai. We don't want empty skyscrapers. We want ours to be full. So no this won't happen. Besides America doesn't care about skyscrapers anymore. Most Americans want more mass transit. We don't want a good view we want more ways to move around. If you guys like it so much you can move to China, you can move to Dubai. Just stop complaining.

China and Dubai can have both (good transit and fantastic scrapers), we could too. They are not mutually exclusive even here. Transit is usually government funded and real estate is private. If the need arises for taller towers in Manhattan in the future, I'm sure wanting will have nothing to do with it. If the economy starts growing and manhattan is still a hot location for business in the future, they will have no choice but to maximize the small land area and go up.

Most Americans don't want mass transit. That is why they elected a congress full of transit hating fools. The new transportation bill shows you what most americans think of transit, they prefer cars and oil rigs. Also is Mitt is elected, say goodbye to HSR and transit funding. Say hello to off-shore drilling and highway expansion.

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

It was built to have 110 floors not 130. At best it can reach 1,700 feet, and 2,000 feet is impossible. Again we don't want 2,000 feet skyscrapers. It is only going to be empty like the skyscrapers in China and Dubai. We don't want empty skyscrapers. We want ours to be full. So no this won't happen. Besides America doesn't care about skyscrapers anymore. Most Americans want more mass transit. We don't want a good view we want more ways to move around. If you guys like it so much you can move to China, you can move to Dubai. Just stop complaining.

I didn't say that the Metlife North should be 2,000 feet by rooftop. Something good above the height of the Sears Tower is what would suffice. A few years ago, this country was thinking on building a 2,000-foot building,but the economy rendered that useless. I don't want any western skyline to be filled with tall empty skyscrapers, but I don't want our cities to stop growing in height. London, a city long against the development of anything tall, now has a supertall. And if it makes the situation here seem better, skyscrapers are only built if there's a demand. And there will always be a demand in NYC.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by jd3189

I didn't say that the Metlife North should be 2,000 feet by rooftop. Something good above the height of the Sears Tower is what would suffice. A few years ago, this country was thinking on building a 2,000-foot building,but the economy rendered that useless. I don't want any western skyline to be filled with tall empty skyscrapers, but I don't want our cities to stop growing in height. London, a city long against the development of anything tall, now has a supertall. And if it makes the situation here seem better, skyscrapers are only built if there's a demand. And there will always be a demand in NYC.

I'd prefer though if most US cities focused on becoming cities and not parking lots before they started thinking about taller towers. I.e, what use is tall towers is nobody actually wants to use the city center or live there?

A 2000ft tower is a vanity project, but in China w/ their population and congested cities, it will serve them well in the future. NYC could also fall into that category with the tiny landmass called manhattan. THen again, the economy could collapse again.

I also see NIMBY issues for a 2000 foot tower. I'd be happy with a 500m to roof in NYC.

[marshall]

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

It was built to have 110 floors not 130. At best it can reach 1,700 feet, and 2,000 feet is impossible. Again we don't want 2,000 feet skyscrapers. It is only going to be empty like the skyscrapers in China and Dubai. We don't want empty skyscrapers. We want ours to be full. So no this won't happen. Besides America doesn't care about skyscrapers anymore. Most Americans want more mass transit. We don't want a good view we want more ways to move around. If you guys like it so much you can move to China, you can move to Dubai. Just stop complaining.

Yeah I wouldnt want empty skyscrapers either...But I think Americans should care about infrastructure and competing globally with the Chinese and Arabs again...And with transit and skyscrapers both. LOL and Id def never go live in China no thanks!

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by marshall

Yeah I wouldnt want empty skyscrapers either...But I think Americans should care about infrastructure and competing globally with the Chinese and Arabs again...And with transit and skyscrapers both. LOL and Id def never go live in China no thanks!

Can't compete with the Arabs.... they had a blank slate and OIL funds and they are princedoms with no democracy. Dubai had Abu Dhabi helping it out. Arab states are unique cases, don't even think Americans can start building towns like they did. You don't compete. The Germans don't need to compete do they? No.

[1Boston]

Originally Posted by marshall

Yeah I wouldnt want empty skyscrapers either...But I think Americans should care about infrastructure and competing globally with the Chinese and Arabs again...And with transit and skyscrapers both. LOL and Id def never go live in China no thanks!

But that's what sets America apart. We can build relatively tall towers but only out of demand. Probably all of the towers going up in the eastern world are being built so they can say they have the tallest, it's where America was in the 20s. 432 park is going up in NY because there is need of new retail, not say NY has a 1,420 foot roof that looks good but no one actually lives there. One of the most interesting things about infrastructure, specifically towers,IMO is what goes on on the inside.

[599GTO]

Oh fuck yes we do want a 2,000 ft tower. Isn't 1 WTC 1,776 ft? Are you saying it will be empty? Weren't the original twins well occupied? 2,000 ft and 1,776 feet is not much of a difference.

The difference between Dubai, and the Chinese cities is that they're all economic wastelands and New York is the financial, wealth and commerce capital of the world. I can guanrentee that a 2,000 ft tower in Manhattan wouldn't sit empty.

I don't think anyone is asking for 50 2,000 ft towers, but a few would suffice.

[Roadcruiser1]

Originally Posted by 599GTO

Oh fuck yes we do want a 2,000 ft tower. Isn't 1 WTC 1,776 ft? Are you saying it will be empty? Weren't the original twins well occupied? 2,000 ft and 1,776 feet is not much of a difference.

The difference between Dubai, and the Chinese cities is that they're all economic wastelands and New York is the financial, wealth and commerce capital of the world. I can guanrentee that a 2,000 ft tower in Manhattan wouldn't sit empty.

We can't even get Two and Three World Trade Center leased, and Four World Trade Center is filled with government tenants because they can't find any private tenants and you are already saying that we should build a 2,000 footer? That is outrageous, and not just that a majority of the Hudson Yard towers still don't have tenants. New York can't build buildings that would be empty. We did it with the Empire State Building, and we did it with the original World Trade Center. It was mistake and NYC will not do that again...