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)

BrownTown Jan 16, 2015 10:58 PM

Worrying about shadows makes no sense to me either. People go to the beach to get sun, they go to Manhattan to get a dense city. How often does a given point on the New York streets even get sun now? Unless the sun is very high in the sky or aligned perfectly down the east-west streets you're going to get shadows in most places. A given spot on the sidewalk likely averages an hour or two of sun a day and yet New York runs 24 hours a day just fine.

chris08876 Jan 16, 2015 11:54 PM

Its a very weak NIMBY argument. Often they will talk about shadows, and do all of these shadow studies. Usually, these NIMBYs tend to suffer dementia, and they only shadows they see, are from the hallucinations due to low acetylcholine! :tup:

Which also impairs their ability to understand that they live in a city, among many other things.

Quote:

De Blasio “has signalled no interest in curtailing development in any way”, says a disappointed St John.
This I like. I think at first we where very skeptical of DeBlasio, but he is almost on a Bloomberg level when it comes to developments. Very impressed so far. Poor St. John (he's not a saint btw; lies!) needs to realize that this is a skyscraper city. :koko:

Hudson11 Jan 17, 2015 12:32 AM

DeBlasio certainly is keeping a more watchful eye on development, but he doesn't want to curtail it as to halt the transformation of the skyline. He's more concerned with affordable housing and what each development means for the city. With 225 w 57th, we're getting a skyline altering icon and also a shiny new Nordstrom mall for New Yorkers and tourists to spend their money at, not far from Carnegie Hall and Central Park.

LAsam Jan 17, 2015 1:00 AM

Complaints by NYC residents about tall buildings being constructed? Now I've seen it all. If that kind of NIMBYism can happen in NYC, it can happen anywhere... and we've definitely got our share of it in LA.

vandelay Jan 17, 2015 1:19 AM

An architect should come up with a concept for a supertall tower with a heliostat that can redirect sunlight onto Central Park where there are shadows. That would be pretty amazing.

BrownTown Jan 17, 2015 6:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vandelay (Post 6878254)
An architect should come up with a concept for a supertall tower with a heliostat that can redirect sunlight onto Central Park where there are shadows. That would be pretty amazing.

And then it malfunctions and accidentally starts the whole park on fire. :hell:

Submariner Jan 17, 2015 4:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrownTown (Post 6878512)
And then it malfunctions and accidentally starts the whole park on fire. :hell:

"I believe this is a plot by the oligarchy to sit in their sky mansions and use concentrated beams of light to burn to death people living in Central Park, like a sociopath uses a magnifying glass on an ant" - Gale "skyscrapers are Satan" Brewer.

Guiltyspark Jan 17, 2015 5:20 PM

It is all how you word things.

Shaddows: bad, dark, depressing, scary
Shade: Cool, refreshing, protective

I for one think skyscrapers can provide great shade, like the thousands of trees in the park. :cheers:

mrnyc Jan 17, 2015 5:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vandelay (Post 6878254)
An architect should come up with a concept for a supertall tower with a heliostat that can redirect sunlight onto Central Park where there are shadows. That would be pretty amazing.

there is an apt bldg down in battery park city that does just that!

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/02/nyregion/2ink.html

gttx Jan 17, 2015 6:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc (Post 6878786)
there is an apt bldg down in battery park city that does just that!

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/02/nyregion/2ink.html

Or maybe this is the answer:

http://www.amusingplanet.com/2013/09...in-london.html

mmikeyphilly Jan 17, 2015 6:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gttx (Post 6878808)

People just aren't happy no matter what you do to please them. First, they bitch about tall skyscrapers making shadows and blocking the sun. WTF? Now, they bitch because someone can fry an egg on the sidewalk, because of the reflected Sun?? Simple solution, wear fricken sunglasses and park your car in an indoor garage so it doesn't melt! Isn't that easy? :runaway:

JayPro Jan 17, 2015 10:26 PM

Mmikeyphilly, meet Mr. New Yawk NIMBY.

Mr. NIMBY, Mr. Mmikeyphilly.

;)

NYguy Jan 18, 2015 2:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876 (Post 6878068)
I think you're overestimating people. All three apply. You'd be surprised how they can't even do that. Sometimes you even ask New Yorkers, and they are just as clueless.

Yes, sometimes people are just stupid, and could find the next block if pressed. But you can't blame it on the buildings. The average person probably wouldn't know the difference between the Empire State and the Chrysler. From various places in the city and the metro area, the towers can be used as a point of reference, but in Manhattan, I always say it's impossible to get lost (unless, like I mentioned, you're lost in a forest of trees and can't see anything). But stupid people prove me wrong everyday.


Quote:

Originally Posted by sbarn (Post 6878077)
Agreed. Plus anyone complaining about a distant tower from their balcony overlooking Central Park deserves a kick in the shin.

Yes he does.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Guiltyspark (Post 6878777)
It is all how you word things.

Shaddows: bad, dark, depressing, scary
Shade: Cool, refreshing, protective

I for one think skyscrapers can provide great shade, like the thousands of trees in the park. :cheers:

I've been saying that. On those hot summer days in the park, the shade is welcome indeed. But it's all overblown anyway. The park is heavily wooded, so you're going to be in shade more times than not anyway. And let's face it, this isn't sunny southern California.

It just shows you, when people can complain about a shadow over the park, just how privileged they are.

JustSomeGuyWho Jan 19, 2015 4:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6879331)
Yes, sometimes people are just stupid, and could find the next block if pressed. But you can't blame it on the buildings. The average person probably wouldn't know the difference between the Empire State and the Chrysler. From various places in the city and the metro area, the towers can be used as a point of reference, but in Manhattan, I always say it's impossible to get lost (unless, like I mentioned, you're lost in a forest of trees and can't see anything). But stupid people prove me wrong everyday.

Yeah, I don't understand how it is that difficult. North of downtown you largely have a grid of numbered streets and avenues (even if some of the avenues also have names). Avenues go north-south, streets go east-west. 20 avenue city blocks = 10 street city blocks = 1 mile. Pretty darn simple. Why anybody would need look up to use a building as a landmark is beyond me even if you could see it.

hunser Jan 19, 2015 3:34 PM

I just looked up Google Maps for elavation figures, for 217W57th it's 24.357m or 79.9ft (79' 11'').

So the parapet (according to the latest DOB filings) is 1,630ft (497m) EL and spire 1,855ft (565m) EL. Damn, this tower will have a massive impact on the skyline!

:cheers:

NYguy Jan 19, 2015 4:32 PM

I wonder what the top units in this tower will go for? Extell just broke a record with One57, and even that may not last for long. There's still so much unknown about this tower.


http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the...nyc-2015-01-18

The most expensive residence ever purchased in NYC

Jan 19, 2015


Quote:

A mystery buyer­ has set a New York record, paying more than $100 million for a duplex occupying the top floors—the 89th and 90th—of a skyscraper on “Billionaires’ Row.’’

The “incredibly secretive’’ buyer shelled out $100,471,452.77 for the residence on West 57th Street—the most anyone has ever paid for a city apartment, a source said.

Hudson11 Jan 19, 2015 5:00 PM

The main contender for breaking that record is probably Vornado's 220 Central Park South.

Onn Jan 19, 2015 7:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hunser (Post 6880570)
I just looked up Google Maps for elavation figures, for 217W57th it's 24.357m or 79.9ft (79' 11'').

So the parapet (according to the latest DOB filings) is 1,630ft (497m) EL and spire 1,855ft (565m) EL. Damn, this tower will have a massive impact on the skyline!

:cheers:

Wait what does this mean? Is this confirmed information?

Roadcruiser1 Jan 19, 2015 7:39 PM

No. It means that it's taller, because the ground it is sitting on is higher than the ground at sea level.

Onn Jan 19, 2015 8:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 (Post 6880955)
No. It means that it's taller, because the ground it is sitting on is higher than the ground at sea level.

The numbers are highly misleading then. Its best not confuse people here.


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.