SkyscraperPage Forum - NEW YORK | Central Park Tower (Nordstrom)| 1,550 FT

Viewing Page 304 of 407

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)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 8446702)

Barnett has a number of future supertall sites around Midtown.

If he wants to unseat Macklowe, he'll have multiple opportunities.

Which ones, other than his parcel on 8th just west of Times Sq.? I don't think that 5th and 46th will be a supertall.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMKeynes (Post 8446726)

Which ones, other than his parcel on 8th just west of Times Sq.? I don't think that 5th and 46th will be a supertall.

That Eighth Ave. site, the Fifth Ave. site, and an assemblage on West 57th.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 8446744)

That Eighth Ave. site, the Fifth Ave. site, and an assemblage on West 57th.

I hope that he builds something decent on 5th.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gramsjdg (Post 8446649)

If Tower Fifth doesn't get Barnett to break out the spire, nothing will.

All he needs is a modest 270' spire (shorter than originally proposed) to take the "crown" from Tower Fifth, 1 WTC and the CN Tower in one fell swoop.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 8446702)

Barnett has a number of future supertall sites around Midtown.

If he wants to unseat Macklowe, he'll have multiple opportunities.

All true, and there's still the possibility that Chase could top all of them. That hasn't been settled yet either, but pushed out of the news by Tower Fifth.

Anyway, I'm sick of all this blue...

• Video Link

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bs-c2GDgOiW/

https://scontent-lht6-1.cdninstagram...MDM0Mg%3D%3D.2

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bs_DyW0FK5c/

https://scontent-lhr3-1.cdninstagram...NjQyOA%3D%3D.2

Love the shot juxtaposing this blue giant next to the Green Giant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 8449779)

https://www.instagram.com/p/BsuIfJnlXaw/

https://scontent-lht6-1.cdninstagram...NTE4NA%3D%3D.2

I really hope that the Qatari group that bought the horrible, full-block hotel in Times Square tear it down. They were initially discussing renovating it. Talk about a once in a lifetime opportunity: a full block in TSq that can be emptied at will and instantaneously.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BtMJ_xNFCR0/

Quote:

The Department of City Planning is finally set to propose a text amendment to NYC's zoning resolution closing the "mechanical void loophole."

Currently, developers can push units into the sky by using stilts or mechanical floors that aren't deducted from the regulated floor area of the building. Building's like Central Park Tower, the future tallest roof in the city* has 350 feet of "mechanical space" below the luxury units overlooking Central Park. The result is apartments in the sky with unobstructed views, such as 220 Central Park South, that broke a record last week selling its penthouse for $238 million.

The proposed zoning amendment would have mechanical floors taller than 25 feet deducted from the building's overall floor area. To keep developers from just stacking 25-foot floors on top of each other, mechanical voids must be at least 75 feet away from another.

https://scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram...MTUyMw%3D%3D.2

https://www.instagram.com/p/BtMdrLEB3Au/

https://scontent-sjc3-1.cdninstagram...NzE0OA%3D%3D.2

https://scontent-sjc3-1.cdninstagram...MzMxMQ%3D%3D.2

Funny they have "the tallest residential building in the world" with the official signage. That's good and all but I'd give it a year or so before they have to take it down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayden (Post 8452789)

Funny they have "the tallest residential building in the world" with the official signage. That's good and all but I'd give it a year or so before they have to take it down.

That's only affixed to the scaffolding, not the structure. These luxury buildings don't skimp on the scaffolding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayden (Post 8452789)

Funny they have "the tallest residential building in the world" with the official signage. That's good and all but I'd give it a year or so before they have to take it down.

Yeah, it's just another piece of marketing. I don't think they'll care one way or the other in a year or two. We could be looking at another, taller residential tower going up in the same city, who knows?

We'll never see this version of the skyline...

https://centralparktower.com/
https://centralparktower.com/img/pos....jpg?version=3

George Buckingham

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4880/3...cab6c166_h.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4887/3...80ed44b9_h.jpg

More opinion...

https://www.architecturalrecord.com/...-tall-too-tall

Opinion: Living Tall, Too Tall

https://www.architecturalrecord.com/...jpg?1548778392

January 29, 2019
Page Cowley FAIA, FRIBA and Peter Samton, FAIA

Quote:

Like such other world capitals as London or Shanghai, New York City has been witnessing a disturbing boom in supertall skyscrapers. These extremely tall residential and office towers have been made possible by new technical developments. For example, residential construction benefits from high early-stage strength of high-performance reinforced concrete and pumpability coupled with slip and climb formwork, which saves money by reducing the construction time considerably. Where taller buildings used to be confined to commercial and financial sectors of the city, a new generation of supertall luxury apartment buildings have begun to infiltrate low and mid-rise residential areas. Several such towers now line West 57th Street in Manhattan, giving spectacular views of Central Park from the top apartments.

They can easily shoot up above their surroundings because the floor area ratio (FAR) zoning regulations do not necessarily limit height. Now with the ability to build higher with such ease, luxury apartments are being planned with ceilings that are twice the height of conventional standard apartments: a new 30-story apartment building today could be the equivalent height of a 60 story, older neighbor with the same allowable floor area, but much lower ceiling heights. Many of these new supertalls contain only one or two units per floor. None of them, of course, include affordable housing.

Quote:

While real estate economists say the trend to residential supertalls may be waning, because of over-supply of multi-million dollar units and the threat of a slowing economy, they are still some extraordinary transactions: last week, hedge fund tycoon Kenneth Griffin broke the record price for an apartment by paying $238 million for a penthouse on Central Park South in a not-yet-completed tower designed by RAMSA. More supertalls are under construction and others are in planning stages. On the Upper West Side of Manhattan, one example, on West 66th Street, is 775 feet high. Designed by Snøhetta and SLCE for Extell Development, it is shorter than the supertall qualifying height of 984 feet given by Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat but it is nearly twice the height of the tallest neighbors and a bit taller than the lofty Time Warner Center at Columbus Circle.

Recently announced are plans for a mixed office and residential tower just off Fifth Avenue on East 51st Street, which would rise to 1,551 feet, taller than the Empire State Building. It is designed by Moed de Armas & Shannon Architects and Gensler for developer Harry Macklowe, who built the new residential tower 432 Park Avenue by Rafael Viñoly. That 1,396 foot –high chimney-like structure used five double-height mechanical floors evenly spaced within the tower to gain more height, because mechanical spaces do not count as floor area under current rules. The new project, called Tower Fifth, in a mostly commercial area, is just north of St. Patrick’s Cathedral— which likely sold much of its 1.2 million square feet of transferrable air-rights to make this project possible. Although there are no height restrictions for this major insertion in Midtown, Macklowe may have to ask for waivers or special permits for approval. So its future may not be guaranteed.

Quote:

The problem with all this upward push on the skyline is its impact on density and character throughout the city. Tall New York has always been balanced by low New York. Many low-rise residential neighborhoods have maintained their appeal precisely because they are a counterpoint to the height and darkness of mid-town and the financial district. It is past time for New York’s Department of City Planning (DCP) to reassess unlimited height districts and “soft” sites (under-developed existing lots). The city needs to re-evaluate where supertall buildings would be suitable, and where they would be destructive to the existing neighborhoods.

And while a new plan is formulated to bring existing zoning rules up-to-date with the reality of New York today, the City Council should mandate a moratorium on any “as-of-right” supertall project. Both the Department of Buildings and City Planning need to evaluate fire and life safety, as well as the impact of this building type on adjacent properties with regard to straining infrastructure. It should also consider view corridors, the negative effects of wind tunnels, and, most important, shadows cast across parks, playgrounds and open space.

In addition, the term “as-of-right” needs to be redefined, along with tougher regulations regarding air rights transfers and lot mergers. Any proposed new tower development that far exceeds the average adjacent building height should be submitted to the DCP and the appropriate Community Planning Board for public review and comment.

Squint a bit and notice how the lineup between 53W53 and One57 looks looks a giant dragon..........

I literally shouted holy f*** when I looked at that last perspective. Simultaneously, as the photons hit my retina. (last image in post #6077 )

Its now my wallpaper.

Viewing Page 304 of 407