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

Viewing Page 294 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 chris08876 (Post 8385280)

https://discourse-cdn-sjc1.com/busin...1_690x500.jpeg
Credit: Thomas Koloski

Nope it s at 1220ft right now this is what i think

Quote:

Originally Posted by faridnyc (Post 8385557)

Nope it s at 1220ft right now this is what i think

https://discourse-cdn-sjc1.com/busin...9edaa384b.jpeg
The corrected diagram. It's 13 floors above the mechanical level

Wow this is going to be tall!

Some reading material.

Via Layla Law-Gisiko,
Chairwoman, Central Park Sunshine Task Force :haha:
Manhattan Community Board 5

Quote:

To the editor:

Crain’s editorial advocating for an increase in shadows (“A misguided effort, beyond a shadow of a doubt,”) is a disappointment. It claims that a modest yet valuable bill introduced by Councilman Mark Levine to create a fact-finding task force will somehow increase construction costs. Facts and evidence matter: Gathering information will not increase the cost of anything.

Shadows are a winter issue, not a summer issue. As taught in science class, the earth’s inclination puts our Northern Hemisphere farther from the sun in the winter months, resulting in longer shadows that keep a shaded area 10 degrees colder than an area in sunlight. It can be the difference between using the park or not. All New Yorkers should have access to air and sunlight during all seasons.

There is nothing terribly new in advocating for access to sunlight. This is what prompted New Yorkers in 1916 to demand zoning laws—the first in the nation. Our environmental-review process considers shadow impact. The Midtown special district must comply with sky plane exposure requirements to guarantee access to sunlight—once again, nothing new or revolutionary. We’ve been at it for over a century. To say the least, these regulations have not prevented New York City from development.

Trying to link the benefits of megatowers to affordable housing is preposterous. Towers bordering Central Park South, built for the überwealthy, contain zero units of affordable housing. They have a very low dwelling-unit density, and, furthermore, they sit three-quarters empty.

The Real Estate Board of New York narrative, espoused by this publication only makes the case for greed—and a poor one at that. Don’t be afraid of your own shadow: Let Levine press for more information on the issue. New York can be prosperous and sunny

======================
https://www.crainsnewyork.com/letter...-cause-concern

I'm not sure there's necessarily anything incorrect there.

Quote:

Shadows are a winter issue, not a summer issue. As taught in science class, the earth’s inclination puts our Northern Hemisphere farther from the sun in the winter months, resulting in longer shadows that keep a shaded area 10 degrees colder than an area in sunlight.

So you're telling me that in the dead of winter, someone who would enjoy the park at that time would have an objection to it being 10 degrees cooler for the brief time that the shadows would have any effect at all? And that even if they did, they wouldn't simply move to another spot in the enormous playground that is Central Park? GTFOH.

Quote:

Don’t be afraid of your own shadow

And take your own freakin advice Law-Gisiko .

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

https://scontent-lht6-1.cdninstagram...NTk3MA%3D%3D.2

My latest video from today which also has this great tower appearing from this angle, by QUEENSNY121:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dqf-J16A9Y

^ The big boys prove their dominance from a distance.

Amazing

• Video Link

Viewing Page 294 of 407