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

Viewing Page 78 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 JayPro (Post 6316628)

@CCs77
Much apology due you If I neglected to give you proper credit. I saw the other name on SSC and used that. I usually don't post from other sites, hence my uncertainty with the credit-giving process. TBH I wasn't sure whether to ask the poster there for permission...or is giving credit on this side enough, i.e. Courtesy XYZ?

Anyway, I discovered from RObert Walpole that there's *a lot* more to be added in this section of the skyline than I thought, including some project designations I haven't hear of till just recently (Wanda, Michael Shvo, St, John's).

Don't worry, It's not a big deal. It was an honest mistake.
I just pointed out that I did it and I could post the newer one. :)

The Future of the Central Park Skyline

It's like begging for something (1000 footers) and finally getting them all at once. This will be central park in 20 years! Are we headed towards a glorious path or dangerous path?

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-d...152/FUTURE.jpg

What in the world would give anyone such an idea? And what's the thing with the thick mega-talls making One57 look like a pretzel stick?
SMH......
Well, if an answer is what's being asked for, than mine is "no".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duck From NY (Post 6315126)

I'm sure most of you would laugh at this, but 1715 Broadway is one of my favorite 3 buildings in this shot.

I'm shocked at how tall this and 432 Park will look.

2. I also really like the 1715 Broadway. :cheers:

Anyway, nice "render". :tup:

Great, so now the NY Post will put that silly rendering of megatalls on Central Park and declare that "This is coming next week OMG"

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE (Post 6316964)

Well, I don't know how will be the Central Park in 2020, but I hope that the skyline will be like this. ;)

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3709/1...cab533b8_o.jpg

^

We could use a spire like that.

Meanwhile, the push back against tall buildings begins...

http://mas.org/mas-testifies-at-land...t-57th-street/

MAS Testifies at Landmarks Preservation Commission on 215 West 57th Street

http://mas.org/wp-content/uploads/20...ague-of-ny.jpg

October 25th, 2013

Quote:

On October 22, after a long and lively public hearing, the Landmarks Preservation Commission voted (6-1) to approve a cantilever over the landmarked Art Students League building. The cantilever is part of Extell’s 215 West 57th Street development, a 1,400 foot tall building that will house a hotel and condos above Nordstrom’s. This building is essentially as-of-right except for the applications to cantilever over the landmark and restore storefronts on the landmarked 1780 and 1790 Broadway buildings.

Almost 30 people testified at the hearing. The opponents included MAS, the Landmarks Conservancy, HDC, Landmarks West, some neighborhood residents and individual members of the Art Students League (ASL). The speakers in favor included staff and members of ASL, a representative of the Hotel Union, AIA New York chapter, and a devoted Nordstrom’s shopper

MAS’ testimony emphasized our concern that there has been no public planning or review process for any of the six hyper tall towers to be located within a few blocks of each other along or near 57th Street. Each of the buildings is as-of-right, but used “excess” development rights from existing buildings elsewhere on the block. Consequently, there has been no environmental review for these projects, which would have disclosed to the public information regarding potential shadows on Central Park and conflicts related to transportation and construction.

Generally speaking, MAS supports as-of-right development but we believe that these 1,000+ feet tall towers are unintended consequences of older zoning that did not contemplate such tall heights, mid-block sites and small floor plates.

Understanding that LPC’s jurisdiction is quite narrow in this instance, MAS highlighted potential issues related to the proposed cantilever, including inadvertent environmental problems that storms, rain and snow could cause to the roof of the delicate and aged Art Students League building. We and others expressed concern about the effect of the glass tower on the light in the artists’ studios. There was concern about the effect construction would have on the programming at the landmark and possible loss of membership during that period. Many expressed concern about the visual intrusion of the cantilever over the landmark.

Those in favor of the project testified that the cantilever would be invisible and would not be detrimental to the landmark or the studios’ light; in support of the new department store; that the money that ASL would receive from Extell would be sufficient to support their programs and building well into the 21st century.

After the hearing, the Commission approved the cantilever, with a majority of the Commissioners (six present) stating that they believe that because the cantilever is almost 300’ from the street, it will not be visible in the same viewing plane as the ASL. One Commissioner, Michael Goldblum, voted against the cantilever.

We should start a write in campaign supporting these very buildings!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Submariner (Post 6317497)

We should start a write in campaign supporting these very buildings!

I don't think the City will go about "downzoning" the area like they have with residential neighborhoods. It is Midtown after all. But some people can't differentiate between height and size. These buildings will be tall, but they will be built using allowable space, even if that space is from another site. Because once air rights are transferred and built out, they can't go back. In other words, while this tower may be extra tall, the site that got rid of the air rights will remain squat forever. I would prefer that to a wall of 500 ft buildings where no light at all got through. So I don't see what all the fuss is about. It's just a kneejerk reaction to height.

So now anything over 1000 feet is a "hypertall" tower? seriously? jeeez...if only NY was getting some hypertalls :koko:

that spiral tower looks like something out of a las vegas strip parody of avant architecture.

new meme line: "sort of with banksy on this one"

^ no it looks like an early rendering of the chicago spire

What render are you talking about?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gramsjdg (Post 6317628)

So now anything over 1000 feet is a "hypertall" tower? seriously? jeeez...if only NY was getting some hypertalls :koko:

What do we qualify as a hypertall? 900m? maybe even 1200m? Sorry to go OT but I had to ask that. :)

I believe what grams just served us all is a healthy helping of well-played sarcasm. :multibow:

Of course the NIMBY's are worried about height instead of design. :rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by antinimby (Post 6318126)

Of course the NIMBY's are worried about height instead of design. :rolleyes:

As usual.

Quote:

Generally speaking, MAS supports as-of-right development but we believe that these 1,000+ feet tall towers are unintended consequences of older zoning that did not contemplate such tall heights, mid-block sites and small floor plates.

In other words, they don't mind if the buildings are short and squat, blocking out more light at the street level. If it reaches high, it must be bad. It's not enough to bitch about anything that needs to be approved before it can be built. Now even "as of right" developments are questionable - even though they are clearly within their right to exist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gramsjdg (Post 6317628)

So now anything over 1000 feet is a "hypertall" tower? seriously? jeeez...if only NY was getting some hypertalls :koko:

Read within the context of the article. Not everything is defined as you see it. "Hypertall" in that context is a reference to towers that are unusually taller than anything else in the area.

^thats ridiculous,the only thing they should be focused on is its design and how it will really affect the skyline ...

Assuming that he takes a hearty pro-development stance, the next Hizzoner should tell these trendoids to get bent and move their hipster-bohemian-WTF asses back to SoHo where their ilk has always belonged in the first place.
There they can bitch at Trump's 464' Gojira-scraper till their tongues fall out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayPro (Post 6318817)

http://i1287.photobucket.com/albums/...psb36b12be.jpg

Viewing Page 78 of 407