SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Completed Project Threads Archive (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=348)
-   -   NEW YORK | Central Park Tower (Nordstrom)| 1,550 FT | 131 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=191095)

Eidolon Dec 15, 2012 3:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don098 (Post 5939036)
I know I'll be in the minority when I say this, but I'm sorry, that just looks ridiculous. It's completely, utterly out of scale with the rest of the skyline. It'd look much better if they lopped at least 300 feet off of it. It's going to look out of place.

Those pictures omit 432 Park, One57, 220CPS and the Hudson Yards development which would really balance that picture, not to mention they will all be completed before 2018 when this tower is done, one shouldn't forget about the large midtown towers coming in the 2017to +2027 timeframe either. If there ever was anything out of scale with the rest of the skyline, it was the ESB before midtown reached a 700ft plateau.

yankeesfan1000 Dec 15, 2012 4:22 PM

Holy. Hell.

fleonzo Dec 15, 2012 4:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don098 (Post 5939036)
I know I'll be in the minority when I say this, but I'm sorry, that just looks ridiculous. It's completely, utterly out of scale with the rest of the skyline. It'd look much better if they lopped at least 300 feet off of it. It's going to look out of place.

You're failing to realize what others, here, have already acknowledged...NYC is going into a new era of Super Tall(s) construction in what is really a catch up to what has been going on in Asia/Gulf States for the past decade. Expect to see alot more buildings in the 1,000-1,500+ ft range because 500-700 ft is not going to cut it (except for BKLYN and Queens) for large scale projects!

khaizer007 Dec 15, 2012 5:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eidolon (Post 5939043)
Those pictures omit 432 Park, One57, 220CPS and the Hudson Yards development which would really balance that picture, not to mention they will all be completed before 2018 when this tower is done, one shouldn't forget about the large midtown towers coming in the 2017to +2027 timeframe either. If there ever was anything out of scale with the rest of the skyline, it was the ESB before midtown reached a 700ft plateau.

Agreed! Not to mention my favorite, Tower Verre, which i'm still crossing my fingers will get built. This tower will be the tallest of all but it will fit just fine with the rest of them.
On a side note i can't say how thrilled i am when five years from now we will look at 1 WTC and 432 Park as just tall towers among many when 225 w 57 and the Hudson Yards North tower are built. This is perhaps the most exciting time for NYC skyscrapers in my lifetime. Can't wait till 2017!!

NYguy Dec 15, 2012 6:09 PM


Great indication of height, though I suspect the design will be a little less straightforward with slightly more bulk.
Also keep in mind that Norstrom will play a heavy role in the orientation of the tower...

Quote:

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-...e-in-manhattan

Pete Nordstrom said the search was complicated by the company's need for a particular configuration
plus space for a loading dock, among other requirements. At about 285,000 square feet on seven floors,
the new store will be almost twice as big as Nordstrom's average store.



Quote:

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article...TATE/120629880

The department store's requirements included ceiling heights of at least 25 feet and open floorplates without
central elevator cores, and that combination made most existing buildings unworkable, Mr. Trulson said.
....Excavation on the site's 40,000-square-foot footprint could begin by the first quarter of 2013.



Quote:

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2012/06/...-hudson-yards/

Nordstrom executives will assist in decisions such as who the architect of the apartment, hotel and retail tower
will be, Barnett said.

Barnet said Nordstrom “will anchor an iconic tower with spectacular views of the Park, city and beyond.”


All signs point to a spectacular tower...:tup:

Eidolon Dec 15, 2012 6:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by khaizer007 (Post 5939130)
Agreed! Not to mention my favorite, Tower Verre, which i'm still crossing my fingers will get built. This tower will be the tallest of all but it will fit just fine with the rest of them.
On a side note i can't say how thrilled i am when five years from now we will look at 1 WTC and 432 Park as just tall towers among many when 225 w 57 and the Hudson Yards North tower are built. This is perhaps the most exciting time for NYC skyscrapers in my lifetime. Can't wait till 2017!!

I'm predicting New York will get a tower taller than 225 W57th and 6 to 12 other supertalls we don't know of proposed before 2020. Before 2020, New York will already have completed at least 15 supertalls, with at least another 4 under construction by then and that number likely to be higher when 2020 comes around! Then the stage will be set for a megatall.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the new tallest roof in America starting to rise towards the sky next year. :cheers:

Dale Dec 15, 2012 6:40 PM

They're going to have to rename Time Warner 'Lil Stumpy.'

aquablue Dec 15, 2012 7:06 PM

I don't like the idea of a double facade design that attempts to play old vs new. I don't think the building has to 'fit in' to the surroundings in this way as it could appear forced and constrained. I think the building needs to decide what it wants to be, highly modern or classic, but not both. I don't want to end up with a pastiche.

IMO, I hope the building doesn't defer to the past, but is a highly modern design that uses very little brick/stone, if any at all. I wouldn't mind if this thing ended up with a very far-out design either. Midtown is full of mixed styles and that is what makes it vibrant.

The height is very impressive though from your excellent model.

NYguy Dec 15, 2012 7:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aquablue (Post 5939228)
IMO, I hope the building doesn't defer to the past, but is a highly modern design that uses very little brick/stone, if any at all. I wouldn't mind if this thing ended up with a very far-out design either. Midtown is full of mixed styles and that is what makes it vibrant.

With One57, Barnett has shown that he can build something highly modern in design, yet with enough "NY" that it could fit in with the classic New York tower. I think we will get something distinctive, beyond just height. And itsn't it amazing that we're already talking about a building taller than 432 Park before that one barely gets off the ground? Great times to be a skyline watcher.

DURKEY427 Dec 15, 2012 8:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 5938146)
I have no idea. We didn't see a rendering of One57 until after it was already under construction.

Ok thanks. Hope this one will be amazing. Bring on New New York:notacrook:

NYC GUY Dec 15, 2012 11:53 PM

I'm gonna assume the base facade will be stone cause usually Nordstrom's have these beige facades and the top will look contemporary.

NYguy Dec 16, 2012 6:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYC GUY (Post 5939534)
I'm gonna assume the base facade will be stone cause usually Nordstrom's have these beige facades and the top will look contemporary.


Here's a version of the store that was being planned for the east side...

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 5811103)
here's a proposal from one of Nordstrom's many earlier attempts to build in Manhattan...


http://massforma.com/arch/nordstrom-tower/

Nordstrom Tower

Alfred Huang was the Senior Designer responsible for the schematic design and planning for the project. This mixed use proposal was an attempt to bring retail giant Nordstrom into Midtown Manhattan. Situated on the prominent retail corridor of Madison Avenue, the the seven story podium animates the streetscape, adding 280,000 square feet (26,000 square meters) of exciting retail opportunities. The project takes full advantage of the zoning envelope as it rises to 670 feet (200 meters) above the retail podium with typical office floors at 22,500 square feet (2,100 square meters). The design accounts for existing MTA Metro North railroad underground by offsetting tower infrastructure and generating a dynamic interlocking of programs and services.

Alfred Huang designed the project in 2008 while employed with Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, LLP.



http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5204/...6dc29cfa_b.jpg



http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5022/...2cd4a440_b.jpg


JDRCRASH Dec 16, 2012 7:48 PM

Oh my, that is SEXY. :slob:
Shame it didn't get built.

599GTO Dec 16, 2012 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don098 (Post 5939036)
I know I'll be in the minority when I say this, but I'm sorry, that just looks ridiculous. It's completely, utterly out of scale with the rest of the skyline. It'd look much better if they lopped at least 300 feet off of it. It's going to look out of place.


Empire State Building also looked "ridiculous" and "out of place" when it went up.

I hope it's taller than depicted in the mockup renderings provided in the last page. 1,800ft please.

Dale Dec 16, 2012 11:31 PM

Yes! 1,550 is weak! :cool:

Duck From NY Dec 17, 2012 4:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 599GTO (Post 5940428)
Empire State Building also looked "ridiculous" and "out of place" when it went up.

I hope it's taller than depicted in the mockup renderings provided in the last page. 1,800ft please.

The Woolworth Building totally ruined Lower Manhattan's skyline.

http://www.nycvintageimages.com/site...nyc-1529_0.jpg

http://www.nycvintageimages.com/cata...onic-buildings

aquablue Dec 17, 2012 5:46 AM

Apparently this tower will be designed by Adrian Smith of Burj Dubai/Jin Mao/Kingdom Tower fame, according to an article posted on SSC by Mr. Robert W.

The Jin Mao is a very nice tower and so is the Kingdom Tower. However, we probably won't be getting anything extremely creative or out of the box from the likes of Adrian compared to Herzog de Meuron or Zaha Hadid types, which is fine with me as long as it is super modern.

-Filipe- Dec 17, 2012 1:35 PM

Oh im happy there designing it same architect for the willis tower and the trump international hotel or whatever the name is, cant wait to see the design

pico44 Dec 17, 2012 1:42 PM

Shoot. I'm not happy about Adrian Smith designing this tower. I'd rather have David Childs over him.

Bummer

Crawford Dec 17, 2012 2:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pico44 (Post 5940974)
Shoot. I'm not happy about Adrian Smith designing this tower. I'd rather have David Childs over him.

Bummer

Adrian Smith would also not be my first choice.

He's designed lots of supertalls in Asia, so he certainly has the technical skills, but I would want someone with a bit more artistic flair.

But I'm still pretty damn excited. Can't wait to see a rendering, and hope it's 1700 ft. or more, with a dramatic pinnacle.

miesian Dec 17, 2012 3:31 PM

So I guess Nordstrom wanted hard-edged international corporate glitz. Check out the ASGG website for a sampler. It could work......:shrug:

NYguy Dec 17, 2012 6:32 PM

Been a little groggy, but this news wakes me right up..



http://observer.com/2012/12/gary-bar...ment-building/

Gary Barnett Taps Architect of World’s Tallest Tower to Design NYC’s Tallest Apartment Building

By Matt Chaban
December 17, 2012

Quote:


There had been rumors that Gary Barnett had tapped Swiss starchitects and downtown darlings Herzog & de Meuron to design his supertall skyscraper at the corner of 57th Street and Broadway, but now The Journal reports that Adrian Smith is the architect for 225 West 57th Street. The bigger surprise, literally, may be that the 1,550-foot height for the Extell tower, which The Observer previously reported, may just be a starting point.

This wouldn’t be the first time Mr. Barnett has jacked up the height of one of his buildings. His One57 tower was listed in building permits as reaching 953 feet with 73 stories, but the finished building tops 1,005 feet with 90 stories.

Whether this could produce a 1,600-foot tower (or taller) remains to be seen, but one thing Mr. Barnett previously told The Observer he will not be pursuing is a spire, a common tactic used to push building heights further into the stratosphere, as is the case at 1 World Trade Center. There, the building is 1,368 feet, matching that of its historic predecessor, while a 408-foot mast pushes the building to the symbolic height of 1,776 feet.

On a side note, Mr. Barnett said it was his partner in the project, Nordstroms—which will anchor the bottom six floors of the tower with its first New York City outpost—that suggest Mr. Smith. A former partner at SOM’s Chicago office, the deisnger is best known for the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, the world’s tallest tower that reaches some 2,717 feet, more than a mile high. The tower has a spread of apartments on the upper floors that help it lay claim to the world’s tallest apartments, as well.

Another of Mr. Smith’s prominent commissions is the tallest residential tower in Chicago, and this hemisphere, and the city’s second biggest building, the Trump International Hotel and Tower, which reaches 1,389 feet (thanks to spire, of course—the roofline is at 1,170 feet).

And so the fight for the city’s tallest apartment tower continues.

Last year, New York by Gehry surpassed another Trump confection, the World Tower near the U.N., by 16 feet. The Bruce Ratner-built building usurped the crown held for a decade with its rippling metal curves stretching 876 feet into the air. When Mr. Barnett’s One57 opens next year, it will top 1,005, but CIM and Harry Macklowe’s fast-rising 432 Park will be far bigger, in a year or two, even surpassing the Trump Chicago tower, at 1,397 feet, arguably becoming the biggest building in New York. Until Mr. Barnett finishes 225 West 57th Street, of course. Or until something even bigger comes along.

http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.c...er_chicago.jpg


____________________________________________________



http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.c...er_chicago.jpg

Extell's Chief Thinking Tall For Midtown


http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/i...1216171803.jpg

By Elliot Brown
December 16, 2012

Quote:

Gary Barnett, one of New York's leading developers, is planning a new Midtown skyscraper that could rise 300 feet higher than the Empire State Building, and he's has hired the architect who designed the world's tallest tower. Mr. Barnett said in an interview that his Extell Development Co. has tapped Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill Architecture LLP to design an apartment tower atop the city's first Nordstrom Inc. Jepartment store. New York-based Extell is aiming high: Last month, the company filed a permit application to build a 1,550-foot tower on the site just east of Broadway between 57th and 58th streets. While the precise height could easily change—Mr. Barnett said plans were very preliminary—the developer is clearly gearing up to build one of the tallest towers in the city, and one that would offer sweeping views of Central Park a block to the north. Of course, any groundbreaking is still quite a ways off and Extell needs to line up crucial construction financing. But Mr. Barnett said: "It's going to be a tall building."

Plans for the building are moving forward at a time that a new type of skyscraper is beginning to emerge on the Manhattan skyline. For decades, office towers accounted for most of the towers built more than 600 feet high, while top residential apartments were generally found in low-slung Upper East Side cooperatives. But now a handful of developers are building very tall, slender luxury residential towers, betting that the wealthy will pay for great views.

Mr. Barnett, currently one of the city's most prolific developers, has been on the vanguard of this change. A few blocks east of the Nordstrom tower site on 57th Street, Mr. Barnett is building One57, a 1,004-foot tower. Extell has said two buyers have agreed to pay more than $90 million for penthouse apartments there, which would be a record price. On 57th Street and Park Avenue, CIM Group and developer Harry Macklowe are building an approximately 1,395-foot condo tower with a waffle-like exterior. "As with all skyscrapers, it's the economics that makes them possible, and it's a strong market," says Carol Willis, founding director of the Lower Manhattan-based Skyscraper Museum. "People who are willing to pay a great deal—millions and tens of millions for apartments in the sky—there's a market for that."

Extell chose Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill Architecture for the 57th Street tower after considering a number of avant-garde architects for the project. Those included Swiss designers Herzog & de Meuron, and New York-based SHoP Architects, one of the designers of the new Barclays Center arena in Brooklyn, according to people briefed on the selection process. But this summer, Extell secured a commitment from Seattle-based Nordstrom to build its first New York City location—a 285,000-square-foot store—on the site, and Nordstrom recommended the Chicago-based design firm, Mr. Barnett said.

Colin Johnson, a spokesman for Nordstrom, said it believes the architectural firm shares its vision for a top-quality design for the building, which is scheduled to open in 2018. "We want to have our best Nordstrom store in the best retail city in the world," Mr. Johnson said. "That means being part of a building that we hope will become an iconic part of the Manhattan landscape."

One challenge for Mr. Barnett may come from a rival development firm with similar plans. Just one block to the north, Vornado Realty Trust VNO +0.66%is planning to build a condominium tower that could obstruct many views from Extell's building, though the planned height is unclear. Mr. Barnett, however, stands to delay the timing of that building, 220 Central Park South. He controls the lease to a parking garage on the site that runs until 2018, thus having the ability to block Vornado from building in the short term.

Dale Dec 17, 2012 6:51 PM

I hope they can be persuaded to build this one in 11 months, like ESB.

Busy Bee Dec 17, 2012 7:03 PM

Quote:

the world’s tallest tower that reaches some 2,717 feet, more than a mile high
Umm... FAIL.

ThatOneGuy Dec 17, 2012 7:14 PM

^^ Math is hard

NYC GUY Dec 17, 2012 7:41 PM

Um sir you're a bit off only by about 2563 feet but that's it. lol

aquablue Dec 17, 2012 7:49 PM

I hope this tower doesn't end up like Trump Chicago in any way.

NYguy Dec 17, 2012 7:53 PM

Quote:

Plans for the building are moving forward at a time that a new type of skyscraper is beginning to emerge on the Manhattan skyline. For decades, office towers accounted for most of the towers built more than 600 feet high, while top residential apartments were generally found in low-slung Upper East Side cooperatives. But now a handful of developers are building very tall, slender luxury residential towers, betting that the wealthy will pay for great views.

Mr. Barnett, currently one of the city's most prolific developers, has been on the vanguard of this change. ...."As with all skyscrapers, it's the economics that makes them possible, and it's a strong market," says Carol Willis, founding director of the Lower Manhattan-based Skyscraper Museum. "People who are willing to pay a great deal—millions and tens of millions for apartments in the sky—there's a market for that."

This is what's driving these towers, and Barnett may have triggered a building war with his grabs for tallest residential tower in the city. I wonder if Vornado will try to reach heights with it's own tower, or settle for a lower tower with unobstructed views of Central Park.

One thing seems certain, Midtown is set for a dramatic shift in the way we see the skyline, with this tower, the Hudson Yards towers, 432 Park, etc. all scheduled for completion within the next 5 years. And if we've already had excitement watching the changes, it's been nothing like what we are about to see. :tup:

Dale Dec 17, 2012 8:00 PM

Aside: could the next mayor, depending on who wins, throw a monkey wrench into plans for taller and taller buildings ?

Crawford Dec 17, 2012 8:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale (Post 5941453)
Aside: could the next mayor, depending on who wins, throw a monkey wrench into plans for taller and taller buildings ?

THe NYC mayor doesn't have direct control over the city's zoning code.

In any case, under Bloomberg, there have been far more downzonings in NYC than upzonings.

Dale Dec 17, 2012 8:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 5941516)
THe NYC mayor doesn't have direct control over the city's zoning code.

In any case, under Bloomberg, there have been far more downzonings in NYC than upzonings.

I had assumed, perhaps wrongly, that his push for Midtown rezoning was an attempt by Bloomberg to cement a legacy as a 'skyscraper mayor.'

Crawford Dec 17, 2012 9:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale (Post 5941526)
I had assumed, perhaps wrongly, that his push for Midtown rezoning was an attempt by Bloomberg to cement a legacy as a 'skyscraper mayor.'

A mayoral administration has indirect sway over zoning in terms of appointments to the city planning commission. So in that sense, you're right that the mayor has significant influence. And certainly the Midtown East rezoning has strong support from City Hall.

But I don't think the rezoning has anything to do with skyscrapers. It's more concened with adding office space, because the city has huge complaints from companies that they can't find newer space in that district. Skyscrapers are the natural result, rather than the aim, of the rezoning.

And I would never call Bloomberg a "skyscraper mayor". There have been many skyscrapers proposed during his terms, but few had anything to do with his mayorality (except in the indirect sense; in that he has generally been a very good mayor and so there's a good business climate).

I don't think Bloomberg (or really any NYC mayor) spends too much time thinking about skyscrapers (either pro or con). Remember that we at SSP have different interests than 99% of the people out there.

Dale Dec 17, 2012 9:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 5941538)
A mayoral administration has indirect sway over zoning in terms of appointments to the city planning commission. So in that sense, you're right that the mayor has significant influence. And certainly the Midtown East rezoning has strong support from City Hall.

But I don't think the rezoning has anything to do with skyscrapers. It's more concened with adding office space, because the city has huge complaints from companies that they can't find newer space in that district. Skyscrapers are the natural result, rather than the aim, of the rezoning.

And I would never call Bloomberg a "skyscraper mayor". There have been many skyscrapers proposed during his terms, but few had anything to do with his mayorality (except in the indirect sense; in that he has generally been a very good mayor and so there's a good business climate).

I don't think Bloomberg (or really any NYC mayor) spends too much time thinking about skyscrapers (either pro or con). Remember that we at SSP have different interests than 99% of the people out there.

Gotcha, thanks for the clarification. And I'm actually relieved to learn that at least a mayor poses little threat to highrise development.

NYguy Dec 17, 2012 9:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 5941516)
In any case, under Bloomberg, there have been far more downzonings in NYC than upzonings.

That has been for the most part in neighborhoods, and in some cases, like Williamsburg, you get both up and downzoning. But in the city's business districts, the push has been to allow for larger development.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale (Post 5941526)
I had assumed, perhaps wrongly, that his push for Midtown rezoning was an attempt by Bloomberg to cement a legacy as a 'skyscraper mayor.'

The Midtown rezoning is Bloomberg;s push to keep the city's top business district - the Grand Central area - relevant to companies looking for modern office space. That's not only to remain competitive to other areas in and around the city (like Hudson Yards), but with cities around the world that have been building more modern office space at a pace ahead of New York's. The district around Grand Central was downzoned back in the 60's, making any prospect of building modern office space almost nonexistent.

As far as this tower goes, it can be built as high as the developer can reasonably build, meaning there is a limit to how many units they can squeeze out of the floor space. If designed within zoning guidelines like One57, it will need no approvals. If designed outside of zoning, like 15 Penn and the Tower Verre, special permits would be needed. However, I doubt Barnett would go that route because it is a 6 month process and nothing is guaranteed. Look for a building that fits within the zoning, but built as high as possible, with maybe some flourish at the top (not a spire).

Extell also has hands in some of the rezoning in the GC district...

Quote:

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2012/12/...x-deal-making/

One example includes Extell Development, which purchased a portfolio of parking garages last year including 138 East 50th Street, between Lexington and Third avenues. The city expects the site will be developed with a hotel that could be as large as 924,893 square feet. But first Extell would have to strike deals with hotel giant Starwood Capital Group, as well as the smaller players Ramosar Realty, San Carlos Building Corp., and Samson Management.

Onn Dec 17, 2012 11:37 PM

Adrian Smith isn't a bad choice to design! This probably means the tower will be more in line with Nordstrom's vision than Barnett's though. SOM is known for their more corporate/professional looking designs, but with all of the bells and whistles. Of course this is Adrian Smith, not the entire SOM team. The only project we know he is doing so far is the Jeddah Tower. Might be a good place to look for clues about what is to come.

http://www.constructionweekonline.co...mtowerview.jpg
http://www.constructionweekonline.co...mtowerview.jpg

Dale Dec 17, 2012 11:55 PM

Can't speak for New Yorkers, but I'm personally okay with 3,000'.

Onn Dec 18, 2012 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale (Post 5941747)
Can't speak for New Yorkers, but I'm personally okay with 3,000'.

2,000ft would even be okay. New York hasn't had anything that's really broken the sound barrier yet.

babybackribs2314 Dec 18, 2012 12:07 AM

3000' would ruin the skyline.

2000' would be OK as long as it's built after 2020 or so.

Come 2020, NYC will have at least a dozen (probably 20 or so) towers surpassing 1000 feet, with 5+ towers exceeding 1,300'. I think it would be nice to get ~5 other towers in the 1500' range before NYC sees anything up to 2,000 feet.

Even in Shanghai, their 2,100 foot tall tower is going to look bizarre/out of place (though the design is amazing). I think the only two locations where a 2,000' tower would be aesthetically OK are the HY or Midtown East.

I think the slow pace of NYC's rise in terms of highest roof height is actually a good thing and indicates things are being built out of demand rather than for show... 1 WTC, 2 WTC, 3 WTC, 15 Penn, and the HY North Tower are all around the same height, and I'm sure some of the other Hudson Yards towers will be similar...

ThatOneGuy Dec 18, 2012 1:27 AM

Who the hell wants a 3000 foot tower besides Arab billionaires with nothing better to do?
NYC needs quality buildings, not overstretched attention-seekers.

NYC GUY Dec 18, 2012 1:42 AM

So when the ESB was built it stood out.

scalziand Dec 18, 2012 2:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onn (Post 5941728)
Adrian Smith isn't a bad choice to design! This probably means the tower will be more in line with Nordstrom's vision than Barnett's though. SOM is known for their more corporate/professional looking designs, but with all of the bells and whistles. Of course this is Adrian Smith, not the entire SOM team. The only project we know he is doing so far is the Jeddah Tower. Might be a good place to look for clues about what is to come.

http://www.constructionweekonline.co...mtowerview.jpg
http://www.constructionweekonline.co...mtowerview.jpg

Other recent designs by Adrian Smith:

Jin Mao tower (Shanghai) 1999
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...r_von_oben.jpg

Pearl Tower (Guangzhou) 2009
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...rTower_Jan.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pe...rTower_Jan.jpg

Zifeng Tower (Nanjing) 2009
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...feng_Tower.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Na...feng_Tower.jpg

Chicago Trump 2009
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...2C_Chicago.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:20...r,_Chicago.jpg

Jupiter Mills and Elphinstone Mills Towers (Mumbai) U/C
http://img501.imageshack.us/img501/2307/jms01yo7.jpg

Wuhan Greenland Center (Wuhan) U/C 2016
http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/clas...%29AS%26GG.jpg
http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/buil...ilding_id=9671

Dragon Towers, Dream Hub (Seoul)
http://assets.inhabitat.com/wp-conte...-2-537x391.jpg
http://inhabitat.com/adrian-smith-go...eathable-skin/

An unbuilt complex in Dubai:
http://www.burjdubaiskyscraper.com/2...all-towers.jpg

Sears Tower Hotel
http://archpaper.com/uploads/image/Tower-Hotel.jpg
http://archpaper.com/news/articles.asp?id=3943




Adrian Smith rarely designs ugly towers, so it's a pretty sure thing we're in for a treat.

aquablue Dec 18, 2012 3:23 AM

It appears he has a propensity towards futuristic towers with an industrial edge and I like that. I just hope this isn't similar to the Trump Chicago which could happen. I'm not a fan of that tower. I'd prefer a tower without such obvious setbacks like the Trump and instead a slanting tower would be preferable.

BraveNewWorld Dec 18, 2012 3:53 AM

Quote:

the deisnger is best known for the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, the world’s tallest tower that reaches some 2,717 feet, more than a mile high

Embarrassing...

On the bright side, he is only off about 2500 ft! :haha:

Onn Dec 18, 2012 3:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aquablue
It appears he has a propensity towards futuristic towers with an industrial edge and I like that. I just hope this isn't similar to the Trump Chicago which could happen. I'm not a fan of that tower. I'd prefer a tower without such obvious setbacks like the Trump and instead a slanting tower would be preferable. What I do know is that we won't be getting any kind of HdeM artsy type twisting tower, etc..

Part of the reason for Trump Tower's angled setbacks was becuase of the strange shaped lot it was on. I think it's a great tower regardless, probably the best built in the US since the turn of the century (along with the Comcast Center). Trump Tower was also supposed to be a lot taller than it was, shortened because of 9/11.

Looking at the rest of his work, whatever Smith comes up with I'm sure it will be mind blowing. SOM may not have a track record as a creative genius, but they still have created many of the most iconic towers of all time. Creativity can sometimes go out of style quickly, a good design never does.

BraveNewWorld Dec 18, 2012 4:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onn (Post 5942062)
Part of the reason for Trump Tower's angled setbacks was becuase of the strange shaped lot it was on. I think it's a great tower regardless, probably the best built in the US since the turn of the century (along with the Comcast Center). Trump Tower was also supposed to be a lot taller than it was, shortened because of 9/11.

Looking at the rest of his work, whatever Smith comes up with I'm sure it will be mind blowing. SOM may not have a track record as a creative genius, but they still have created many of the most iconic towers of all time. Creativity can sometimes go out of style quickly, a good design never does.

Well said, you are also correct about Trump being shortened, it was originally going to be 2000m+

I also agree that Trump is the best tower built this century.

pico44 Dec 18, 2012 4:43 AM

Ha. Trump is not good. If we get something as bad as Trump Chicago here, that would a massive disappointment.

Although I am pleasantly surprised by some of those other proposals so fingers crossed.

sw5710 Dec 18, 2012 5:57 AM

Im just waiting for the design to come out. 1,550' + :)

khaizer007 Dec 18, 2012 6:09 AM

^^^ Yea, to each their own but there's nothing aesthetically pleasing about that Trump Tower. As far as best designed tower since the turn of the century in the US i'd take the Hearst tower or even NY by Ghery over that. As far as this tower, although I would've preferred Herzog & De Meuron to design it, I think Adrian Smith seems to be pretty good at designed really tall towers, but I hope for something more cutting edge considering the location of the building and how much it needs to stand out from the competition besides its height.

Onn Dec 18, 2012 6:17 AM

Trump Tower is the most "aesthetically pleasing" tower in Chicago. Hearst is nice but there's nothing that remarkable about it, Ghery's looks like a huge piece of twisted metal. I had hopes for the design but have come away underwhelmed. But to each his own...

NYC2ATX Dec 18, 2012 10:08 AM

I can't complain about the selection of Smith. We want our skyline to continue to stand up to the Asian Tigers, and it's clear by his catalog of projects that Adrian Smith knows how to design supertall towers that contemporary cities want in their skylines. Also, we can't really fret about not getting a Herzog & de Meuron skyscraper, because we're already getting a showstopper from them downtown at 56 Leonard Street...otherwise known as one of my favorite towers ever proposed in New York. :tup:


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.