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)

JayPro Oct 3, 2014 4:36 PM

Why not lobby to have them anchor 200G?

NYguy Oct 4, 2014 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onn (Post 6754343)
I would be kind of shocked if that was just earlier design. It's clearly far superior to the pretty good design he has going now, if true.

It was an earlier design.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 (Post 6309616)
I spoke to a knowledgeable architect while touring ASGG's office today. He is working on the project and offered some valuable insight.

Then there was this beauty model. ASGG won their contract with this design for the Nordstrom tower- a mix of Tower Verre and One57. I was told construction would not have been feasible because of crane logistics. No use in wondering "what if" at this point.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/9I...g=w109-h299-no




http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/152984358/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157583033/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157583034/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/154475820/original.jpg




Quote:

Originally Posted by JayPro (Post 6754445)
Why not lobby to have them anchor 200G?

Just realized you're talking about tower 2. That's part of Westfield WTC also.

Onn Oct 4, 2014 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6755128)
It was an earlier design.

Well why did he let that design go? It was very much a great design.

NYguy Oct 4, 2014 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onn (Post 6755155)
Well why did he let that design go? It was very much a great design.

The reason from Skyguy_7:


Quote:

ASGG won their contract with this design for the Nordstrom tower- a mix of Tower Verre and One57. I was told construction would not have been feasible because of crane logistics.

Onn Oct 4, 2014 12:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6755165)
The reason from Skyguy_7:

Crane logistics. That rarely stops skyscrapers in many parts of the world today, but okay.

NYguy Oct 4, 2014 1:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onn (Post 6755175)
Crane logistics. That rarely stops skyscrapers in many parts of the world today, but okay.


Make of it what you will. The bottom line is, that version won't be built. Barnett clearly liked it, but it's just not to be.



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157583035/original.jpg

Crawford Oct 4, 2014 5:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onn (Post 6755175)
Crane logistics. That rarely stops skyscrapers in many parts of the world today, but okay.

Where else in the world do you have similar types of towers being built in similar urban environments?

Almost all supertalls worldwide outside of NYC are built as stand-alone structures. This tower is being built right in the middle of an existing block, as just another building in the urban ensemble.

The logistics around crane operation are very different when dealing with adjacent buildings. I could see a scenario where the unique environment puts limitations on the potential designs.

chris08876 Oct 4, 2014 8:56 AM

^^^^

Exactly. If we look at some supertalls, most of them are standalone. Pick a city and you are sure to find them. Exceptions of course, but not at the risk level presented in NYC. NYC is a very tricky environment for cranes. A lot can go wrong, and the risk is very high safety wise and also in terms of logistics.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...n_2886888c.jpg
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...m_2886884c.jpg
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...r_2886883b.jpg
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...1_2886894c.jpg
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...a_2886912c.jpg

Standalone, and not hugging or close by to an ajacent structure such as in Midtown.

Even in Shenzhen, most of the supertalls are away from other structures.

http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/l...dian/zhen5.jpg

Superblocks as they call them. :)

Onn Oct 4, 2014 1:30 PM

No, I totally understand what you guys are saying! I just don't think its impossible to do, even in an urban environment. Yes of course there are major challenges but its worth the trouble in my opinion. This is a pretty big site to be working in, there certainly isn't a lack of space for cranes.

Just my thoughts, I could be wrong.

gttx Oct 4, 2014 1:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onn (Post 6755508)
No, I totally understand what you guys are saying! I just don't think its impossible to do, even in an urban environment. Yes of course there are major challenges but its worth the trouble in my opinion. This is a pretty big site to be working in, there certainly isn't a lack of space for cranes.

Just my thoughts, I could be wrong.

It probably wasn't technical impossible. But it may have required a significant cost that they didn't want to deal with.

chris08876 Oct 4, 2014 1:55 PM

Cost probably had to do with it. Its possible, but like anything else, complexity demands money.

Onn Oct 4, 2014 2:09 PM

Yes, you're probably right on that. Its just such a shame to see the good design go. I think the current design is going to turn out great anyway, its just not quite to the level of that one. I can see why Barnett wants to keep the model around his office for show. :)

NYguy Oct 4, 2014 11:59 PM

Keep in mind that when the clip was filmed, that was the version of the tower Barnett intended to build. Other things have changed along the way, including Vornado's 220 Central Park South potentially blocking some views.

Perklol Oct 5, 2014 6:44 AM

He needs to build it somewhere. The TQ parcel, maybe?... :slob:

NYguy Oct 6, 2014 7:23 AM

That won't happen, but it'll be nice to see the finished product with the same sense of landmark that version had. They're already moving in the right direction in terms of the catilever treatment.



http://i.picasion.com/pic78/3e52a6d8...292fe300e2.gif



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157713309/original.jpg

ILNY Oct 7, 2014 5:03 AM

10.5.14

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3927/...e0dce7bf_b.jpg

NYguy Oct 7, 2014 5:45 AM

That's a pretty steep drop from 58th street.

fleonzo Oct 7, 2014 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILNY (Post 6758688)

If THAT's not the definition of "Under Construction" I don't know what is! :shrug:

MadhattersLT Oct 7, 2014 2:21 PM

They're still digging...

Submariner Oct 7, 2014 4:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fleonzo (Post 6758837)
If THAT's not the definition of "Under Construction" I don't know what is! :shrug:

It's site prep.

I get what you're saying and if it were up to me I would count this as "under construction" but the rules of this site dictate that full foundation work (or something to that effect) has to be going on before it can be considered under construction.


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:36 PM.

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