^ Don't take those statements seriously. He has to be joking. Let's just keep talking about New York, Central Park Tower, and how it fits our skyline.



https://www.instagram.com/p/Bkf7NMoA...bonnie.goldner

https://scontent-iad3-1.cdninstagram...35801600_n.jpg



https://www.instagram.com/p/BkgT8Sbn...ken-by=zereniz

https://scontent-iad3-1.cdninstagram...87590400_n.jpg

Spire talk all day, skylines need some diversity. While we have some needles, the fact is there are also huge boxes and nice crowns in the city. Another well lit spire would look great here. I actually liked the design for the render when this had a spire. Add some LED lighting and you might have something. No matter what, it wouldn't likely count towards official height unless they could prove it was "architectural" all along and not a late add. Still shocked the value engineered needle on 1WTC kept the official height.

A lot of politics was involved in that decision i.e. 1 WTC official height. It's pretty obvious its not a spire. But that's another discussion for another day.

Well, it's all subjective. The towers he posted and the skylines of major Chinese cities are not offensive to me. I wouldn't mind one in Manhattan.

A little hard to see here, but you get an idea of placement among the new giants....


https://www.instagram.com/p/BkoL9nsH...ul.newyorkcity

https://scontent-iad3-1.cdninstagram...60346624_n.jpg




https://www.instagram.com/p/BkoNS_0g...n-by=plmosti65

https://scontent-iad3-1.cdninstagram...23143424_n.jpg



https://www.instagram.com/p/Bkn6R_KA...curatedlife_40

https://scontent-iad3-1.cdninstagram...45128192_n.jpg




dannydalypix

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1802/4...6b00a23b_h.jpg



https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1802/4...58f71072_k.jpg

1550 Feet, that is exactly what the city needed. Not only to counter balance 432 park but also to put a signature tower on the skyline. Some may not like its design but, as for me, I find it quite nice : it will fit perfectly in the skyline, imposing and dominating. The New York skyscraper by definition.

So what floor are we up to now?

I never thought that Central Park Tower as a balance of 432 Park, rather a tower that needs to put One57 into perspective.
This will be a real treat from Central Park for sure.

PRO TIP: Don’t worry about shadows! :cool:

If you think that's the New York skyscraper by definition, you don't know much about New York skyscrapers. I don't think anyone would seriously look at this and define it as a New York skyscraper.
It's an OK skyscraper, and would probably fit in fine in other cities. But nothing says NY about it other than height, and for that you can look at 432 Park as well. Neither would be defined as
NY style skscrapers. Although, I will give you this - the supertall, superslim skyscraper is a type that will eventually be seen as one of a few types of NY skyscrapers,
simply because you will only see them going up in a handful of places.




JULY 1, 2018


1.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...070118_77b.JPG


2.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...070118_82b.JPG


3.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...070118_83b.JPG


4.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...070118_84b.JPG


5.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...070118_87b.JPG


6.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...070118_88b.JPG


7.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...070118_89b.JPG


8.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...070118_94b.JPG


9.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...070118_95b.JPG


10.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...70118_105b.JPG


11.
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...70118_118b.JPG

Even though the first tall boxes have been built in NYC/Chicago and that CPT (the ultimate box) has some setbacks, i agree that it's style is international.

But the fact that it will dominate (in a serious manner) the skyline like the ESB, Chrysler and the WTC did in their own time make it a "New York skyscraper by definition".

on the contrary 432 Park (even with its height) doesn't belong to that group. It could and should have been built somewhere else. It is a ridiculous tower, a bad joke that you have to endure on every picture.

Thank god CPT is not.

The trouble with being first is being unfairly criticized.
I applaud 432 Park for taking the bold, unapologetic lead.
Fortunately, Central Park Tower will have other super slim supertalls nearby already built.

the glass on this building is seriously,
unmistakably blue BLUE . .
so NYC's tallest is a distinctively blue glass box,
without a heroic spire . .
It is nice to look north on Broadway at 50th,
as I did today, and see a very tall blue building . .

guy 1 - "Hey, did you know that that's NYC's tallest tower ?". .
guy 2 - (dispassionately) "oh yeah? the blue one ? . . cool.". .
that, unfortunately is the entire conversation . .

[QUOTE=artspook;8240021]the glass on this building is seriously,
unmistakably blue BLUE . .

It's been said 1,000 times on here -- that is not the color of the glass! They haven't removed the protective covering -- the blue you see is the covering, not the glass underneath!

I hafta agree here.

Go to the Comcast TechCenter (PHL) thread and you'll see lots of mod-construction photos that show the exact same thing.

The 'blue' wrap on Comcast was only on the metal, in fact it's still there in a few spots.

looks nice...

The PROTECTIVE COVERING on this building is seriously, unmistakably, blue BLUE. In one of the pictures in the last couple pages, you can already see a small portion of the building where the covering is off and the grey glass is revealed.

Post # 5446, it looks like a portion of the covering on the lower base is off.

Will there be a hotel?

As others have said the covering is blue.