SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Supertall Construction (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=323)
-   -   NEW YORK | Central Park Tower (Nordstrom)| 1,550 FT | 131 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=191095)

Dale Feb 13, 2014 10:19 PM

I'm confused. Will it be 1435 or 1424 ?

NYguy Feb 13, 2014 10:41 PM

There is an ongoing discussion about New York supertalls here...
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=194273



Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale (Post 6451141)
I'm confused. Will it be 1435 or 1424 ?

Barnett said 1,424, but it probably won't be that either.

Zapatan Feb 14, 2014 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6451186)
There is an ongoing discussion about New York supertalls here...
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=194273





Barnett said 1,424, but it probably won't be that either.

What makes you say that?

NYguy Feb 14, 2014 4:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 6451341)
What makes you say that?

That was a few months ago. I'm sure they've tinkered with the design as always, plus Barnett has an extra 6,000 sf to play with - not a lot, but it has to go somewhere.

Zapatan Feb 14, 2014 9:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6451703)
That was a few months ago. I'm sure they've tinkered with the design as always, plus Barnett has an extra 6,000 sf to play with - not a lot, but it has to go somewhere.

Wouldn't that be about half a floor?

NYguy Feb 15, 2014 1:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 6452872)
Wouldn't that be about half a floor?

Who knows...it could be an addition to an already existing penthouse, another level. To be sure, he will get his money's worth out of it. There's a reason for him getting it.

Blaze23 Feb 15, 2014 8:29 PM

Interesting read

NYC’s coming ‘supertowers’ are nothing to fear
http://nypost.com/2014/02/15/nycs-co...thing-to-fear/

Quote:

Who’s afraid of “supertowers” near Central Park?
Most of the city’s inflexible preservationists, ivory-tower urbanists, community “activists,” pandering politicians, architectural critics and architects themselves, except for those fortunate enough to design them.

The five ultra-tall towers rising or planned along 57th Street and Central Park South were conceived to sell megabucks “homes” to globetrotting gazillionaires.

On Wednesday, Manhattan Community Board 5 is sponsoring a “town hall meeting” at the New York Public Library Celeste Bartos Forum to discuss the scourge. The event flyer mentions, among other concerns, public space lost to “real estate encroachment,” shadows, traffic and “dangers to landmark buildings.”

Those who’d normally file lawsuits aimed at blocking the rise of 1,000-foot-plus towers a few blocks south of Central Park are particularly apoplectic because there was nothing they could do to stop them.
None required zoning changes, tax credits, special permits, landmark-demolition exemptions or size bonuses granted in exchange for public amenities.

Developers simply spent years and fortunes assembling sites and air rights to build as large and as tall as legally permissible without public approvals. That leaves the haters essentially baying at the moon.

The city’s most widely read architectural critics have unsurprisingly ganged up on the projects. The New York Times’ Michael Kimmelman calls for new zoning to prohibit future atrocities and condemns the ones underway as a “clutch of preening runway models, super-tall and skinny, the expensive playthings of Russian oligarchs and Chinese tycoons.”

Had today’s NIMBY culture been around in 1930, the Empire State Building — immensely taller and “out of context” with everything around it — would not have gotten out of the ground.
The new supertower field might or might not include another masterpiece. But as a lifelong New Yorker who hates the MetLife (former Pan Am) Building, laments the monotony of reflective glass curtain walls, and seethes to this day over the demolition of the original Penn Station, I find little to fear, and much to like, about the new giants.

Studies suggesting they’ll plunge Central Park into permanent Stygian gloom are based on December-at-4 p.m., worst-case moments and ignore that offending shadows will be even thinner than the towers’ pencil-thin profiles.
The only landmarks “danger” issue, meanwhile, seems to be that planned 115 W. 57th St. will slightly cantilever over the adjacent Art Students League, at a point several hundred feet above its roof.

It’s entirely possible that one or more of the new giants, all designed by distinguished architects, will deserve future landmark status — a truth to which most preservationists seem oblivious.

Far from forming a thicket in the sky, the detested 57th Street Four will stand fewer than one per block between Park Avenue and Broadway. They will lend a more distinct identity to the great street, which west of Fifth Avenue has devolved into a hodgepodge with too many vacant stores.

Unlike in London, where foreign zillionaires turn out the lights on whole blocks when they buy houses for annual drop-ins, our high-rise enclaves present a friendly, public-welcoming face. One57 will be anchored by a Park Hyatt Hotel with restaurants and lounges open to all. The city’s first Nordstrom department store will fill the first nine floors of 1,550-foot-tall 115 W. 57th St., and more stores are planned for 432 Park Ave. and 107 W. 57th St.

Only two of the giants are visible as of yet: Extell’s One57 (West 57th Street between Sixth and Seventh avenues) and CIM/Harry Macklowe’s 432 Park Avenue (on East 57th Street between Park and Madison avenues).
Poor One57, the pygmy of the lot at a mere 1,005 feet tall, is the haters’ favorite punching bag, due to the fact that it was first out of the ground and is nearest completion.

....I can’t wait to see more of Rafael Viñoly-designed 432 Park Ave., which is not yet halfway up. Its symphony of squares — the tower’s form itself, echoed in a pattern of 10-by-10-foot windows rising without interruption nearly 100 stories on its concrete face — promises an unthreatening, classical monumentality.

New projects may indeed block views and “overwhelm” a lower-rise street or neighborhood. But everyone choosing to live in Manhattan, not only in the privileged zone near Central Park, knows it’s a risk going in.

.......The “billionaires’ beanstalks” won’t make the rest of us wealthy. But however counter-intuitively, they make the city a richer place for everyone.

chris08876 Feb 15, 2014 9:37 PM

^^^
It is an interesting read. New York has always had the ultra rich. Even in the pre-1930's when all of this density was being constructed. I wonder what lead to the creation of a NIMBY state? Was old money just more capitalistic, and there offspring anti-capitalistic when it comes to development? That is what the NIMBY's come off as.

NYguy Feb 16, 2014 12:52 AM

Quote:

Those who’d normally file lawsuits aimed at blocking the rise of 1,000-foot-plus towers a few blocks south of Central Park are particularly apoplectic because there was nothing they could do to stop them.
None required zoning changes, tax credits, special permits, landmark-demolition exemptions or size bonuses granted in exchange for public amenities.

...Unlike in London, where foreign zillionaires turn out the lights on whole blocks when they buy houses for annual drop-ins, our high-rise enclaves present a friendly, public-welcoming face. One57 will be anchored by a Park Hyatt Hotel with restaurants and lounges open to all. The city’s first Nordstrom department store will fill the first nine floors of 1,550-foot-tall 115 W. 57th St., and more stores are planned for 432 Park Ave. and 107 W. 57th St.


Of course, the NIMBYs will dismiss all of that for now, but eventually will find themselves in one of the new stores.

NYguy Feb 18, 2014 5:15 PM

http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/2014...r-central-park

Open Forum Welcomes Debate on Skyscrapers Rising Near Central Park


By Mathew Katz
February 18, 2014


Quote:

A public forum on the gigantic new buildings springing up near Central Park sold out so quickly, the venue has been relocated to a theater that can fit more than 500.

Community Board 5's Wednesday night Town Hall on Central Park Supertowers — which had been scheduled to take place at the 143-seat Museum of Arts and Design Theater — will now take place at the Celeste Bartos Forum at the New York Public Library, officials said.

Nearly 500 people are expected to attend the discussion, which will bring together developers, architects, politicians and urban planners to discuss the looming skyscrapers and their impact on the neighborhood.

Among the hot-button issues expected to be discussed are fears about shadows being cast over the park, the need for new infrastructure to serve the towers and the potential implications for landmarked buildings in the area, organizers said.

The new towers include Extell's Development's One57, a 75-story skyscraper on West 57th Street where a duplex penthouse apartment sold for over $90 million in 2012. The tower — which already casts a large shadow on Central Park — became famous after crane working on it collapsed during Hurricane Sandy.

Several other massive skyscrapers are in the process of being built in the area, including 432 Park Ave., which at 1,398 feet will become the third-tallest tower in the country.

Extell's president, Gary Barnett, will participate in the panel, along with New York Landmarks Conservancy president Peg Breen, architect and urban planner Michael Kwartler, landscape architect Judith Heintz, Municipal Art Society executive directory Margaret Newman and former New York Times columnist Warren St. John. Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer will introduce the panelists.

The town hall will run for two hours, starting at 6 p.m. on Wednesday. Admission is free, but requires an RSVP on the Community Board 5 website.

NYguy Feb 20, 2014 12:25 AM

Two more permits...also looks to be 85 floors now.


http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=04

Quote:

PROVIDE HVAC SYSTEM AND PLUMBING WORK AS PER PLANS FILED.


http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=05

Quote:

PROVIDE UNDERGROUND PLUMBING CONNECTION AS PER PLANS FILED.

Zapatan Feb 20, 2014 12:34 AM

I assume the building is now shorter... that's a shocker

NYguy Feb 20, 2014 1:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 6459740)
I assume the building is now shorter... that's a shocker

Well, it shouldn't be.

Crawford Feb 20, 2014 2:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 6459740)
I assume the building is now shorter... that's a shocker

Why do you assume this?

Zapatan Feb 20, 2014 2:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 6459925)
Why do you assume this?


Because of the 85 instead of 88 figure but I guess 88 was for 1550 feet so that's okay then. Just kidding don't listen to me.

While I get really excited of the thought of a building in the US breaking Sears Towers roof height a ~1430 foot building is nothing to complain about... just wish the design weren't so weird.

baseball1992 Feb 20, 2014 3:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 6459964)
Because of the 85 instead of 88 figure but I guess 88 was for 1550 feet so that's okay then. Just kidding don't listen to me.

While I get really excited of the thought of a building in the US breaking Sears Towers roof height a ~1430 foot building is nothing to complain about... just wish the design weren't so weird.

They could also be reducing the floor count to increase ceiling height.

NYguy Feb 20, 2014 1:20 PM

These panderers are enough to make me vomit...

https://twitter.com/search?q=CPSupertowers&f=realtime

https://twitter.com/search?had_popul...=CPSupertowers

Skyguy_7 Feb 20, 2014 1:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6460368)

Ha, ridiculous. Just look at the icon of @saveCPSsunshine. It's a photo taken from the observation deck on one of those "sun-blocking supertowers." Pure hypocrisy.

wilfredo267 Feb 20, 2014 7:02 PM

This was posted today...

http://www.yimbynews.com/2014/02/app...-street.html/0

Zapatan Feb 20, 2014 7:12 PM

So it's back to 1550' apparently but with 85 floors... either there's a crown or those are some high ceilings


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:44 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.