SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Completed Project Threads Archive (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=348)
-   -   NEW YORK | 111 W 57th St | 1,428 FT | 85 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=198228)

Design-mind Jan 13, 2015 8:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6870001)
It will be beautiful. It makes me wonder though, if this tower had come at an earlier time (like the Tower Verre), and needed city approvals, would Amanda Burden have considered it "worthy" of such heights?

Are you saying Amanda Burden is now out of the picture? :awesome:

hunser Jan 13, 2015 8:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Design-mind (Post 6873232)
Are you saying Amanda Burden is now out of the picture? :awesome:

For 111W Amabda Burden was never in the picture, as this is an as-of-right project.

sparkling Jan 13, 2015 9:10 PM

Rejoice guys, you might have fewer Russians to compete with for apartments in the building (or so implies this article)

With Ruble in Freefall, Russians Scramble to Dump Trophy Homes and Break Contracts

Polly Mosendz
01/13/15

Quote:

Russian buyers in Florida have looked past South Beach to apartments in the Miami suburbs, and the same demographic in New York recently shook their attachment to a 15 Central Park West address. “In the past they really concentrated on Central Park but they were priced out from that 57th Street corridor. Millionaires cannot afford it, you really need to be a billionaire,” said Tamir Shemesh, an associate broker at Corcoran who specializes in international buyers. Instead, their attention has turned to TriBeCa and Soho.


NYguy Jan 14, 2015 3:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Design-mind (Post 6873232)
Are you saying Amanda Burden is now out of the picture? :awesome:

Amanda Burden is no longer the at the head of City Planning, she was from the Bloomberg era. I always forget the guy who's in charge now, because he rarely makes news, which for the most part is a good thing.



Quote:

Originally Posted by sparkling (Post 6873329)
Rejoice guys, you might have fewer Russians to compete with for apartments in the building (or so implies this article)

With Ruble in Freefall, Russians Scramble to Dump Trophy Homes and Break Contracts

Polly Mosendz
01/13/15

I don't think it matters who buys the apartments. It's not like anybody is going to go up and check to see who's living there even if it did.

chris08876 Jan 14, 2015 5:08 PM

Crisper Rendering: (Original one in post #732)

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pb...20150109130148
Credit:
Rendering of 111 W. 57th St.
Photo by SHoP Architects.
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pb...20150109130148

jayden Jan 14, 2015 5:21 PM

Are there any renderings of how this will look from Hudson or East? I imagine it to appear more slender than 432 easily.

chris08876 Jan 14, 2015 5:24 PM

Theres this unofficial, fan made rendering, although hard to see, Nordstrom from this view will block it. Depending on the angle, you may be able to see it from this side, but as u get towards a linear line of sight with Nordstrom, it will be behind it.

http://i.imgur.com/rF41gW5.jpg
Credit; Xoltage ; http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpo...postcount=5386

jayden Jan 14, 2015 5:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876 (Post 6874326)
Theres this unofficial, fan made rendering, although hard to see, Nordstrom from this view will block it. Depending on the angle, you may be able to see it from this side, but as u get towards a linear line of sight with Nordstrom, it will be behind it.

http://i.imgur.com/rF41gW5.jpg
Credit; Xoltage ; http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpo...postcount=5386

Thanks!

Even with all of the new development, ESB seems like it will still maintain a good bit of its dignity. :P

sparkling Jan 14, 2015 5:29 PM

That's from north but still kind of gives an idea

http://www.yimbynews.com/wp-content/...10/217w572.jpg

1Boston Jan 14, 2015 6:49 PM

That crisper rendering has sold me that this will be my favorite skyscraper in the world. The design and materials are so unique, and it fits the city perfectly. These are just renderings though so it could be less magnificent once it's built, but I doubt that will happen.

chris08876 Jan 14, 2015 7:23 PM

Might I say that this looks like it could compete if not exceed Tower Verre in its design. Both are beauties that will rise at relatively the same time. One distinction is that this will also be one of the slimmest in the world. Probably number one, as I can't think of any other thin supertalls with these dimensions.

NYguy Jan 15, 2015 3:53 AM

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article...shatter-record

Nonunion West 57th St. spire aims to shatter record
A 1,400-foot tower on West 57th could signal the end of the labor's monopoly.



BY DANIEL GEIGER
JANUARY 14, 2015


Quote:

Standing 1,400 feet tall and only 60 feet wide, the hyperpricey condo spire rising at 111 W. 57th St. will make an indelible mark on New York, not just for its outlandish dimensions, but also because of how it was built—if it actually is.

The developers believe they can build the 80-story tower without union construction labor, which for decades has held a lock on erecting the very tallest skyscrapers. The unprecedented effort is already underway. In September, an in-house crew of construction managers and nonunion subcontractors began pouring the property's elaborate foundation. By the summer, the developers are planning to begin raising the tower's reinforced cast concrete frame with more nonunion personnel.

If the developers—a partnership between Michael Stern's JDS Development Group and Kevin Maloney—succeed with their plan, the property would rank, by a large margin, as the tallest and most complex ever built in the city without union labor. In the process, it could throw open the door for nonunion construction firms, which typically undercut their rivals' costs by as much as 20%, to compete for the most-sophisticated jobs.

"If they built that tower nonunion, it would be unprecedented," said Gary Barnett, the developer who started the ultra-tall building boom with luxury condo tower One57. "I think if they built it successfully, more developers doing projects of that size would have to take a look at going nonunion."

Construction union leaders insist that day will never come. They note that of the seven super-tall, pencil-thin residential buildings underway in Manhattan, only 111 W. 57th St. uses nonunion crews. And in an effort to keep it that way and perhaps force Messrs. Stern and Maloney to change their minds, unions have sporadically picketed the site for weeks and plan to continue to do so.

"If Mike Stern wants to run his mouth, that's fine, but I don't know how it's going to get built," said Gary LaBarbera, president of the Building and Construction Trades Council, an organization that represents 100,000 unionized construction workers in the city. "This is a needle in the haystack—an experiment more than anything else."

Maybe so, but Messrs. Stern and Maloney have done it before. In fact, they have done so repeatedly on a smaller but ever-increasing scale. In 2008, they purchased 212 W. 18th St. in Chelsea and converted the bulk of what was a Verizon telephone switching facility into a 24-story luxury condo called Walker Tower without the services of a single member of organized labor. That project became one of the most talked-about residential properties of the recent condo boom.
$51M vindication

In a stunning demonstration of just how far nonunion firms have come, last year one of the Walker Tower's penthouses sold for nearly $51 million. The price set a record for the area, and in doing so proved that nonunion workers can deliver apartments with a fit and finish capable of meeting the expectations of even the wealthiest and most discerning condo buyers from around the world.

Now, in addition to the projected $1 billion tower at 111 W. 57th St., Mr. Stern is building two large residential buildings, totaling 800 rental units, with nonunion labor on a blocklong development site between East 35th and East 36th streets next to the FDR Drive.

"JDS Development Group's mission is to see all of its projects through, from acquisition to completion, with utmost precision, and our affiliated JDS Construction division allows us to help control the construction process and guarantee the execution of our vision down to every detail," said Mr. Stern in a written response to questions.

While Mr. Stern easily ranks as New York's highest-profile nonunion developer, he has a growing amount of company. Flintlock Construction, a nonunion firm, for instance, has been at the vanguard of a group of contractors tackling increasingly complex projects. The company in recent years has built several properties more than 30 stories tall, a height that was once the purview of only highly skilled union workers.

"The job at 111 W. 57th St. is probably the most significant symbol to date that this industry needs to adjust its costs or risk the downward trend of losing more of the market," said Louis Coletti, president of the Building Trades Employers Association, a group that represents contractors that employ union construction workers.

Messrs. Coletti and LaBarbera agree, however, that nonunion job sites are statistically more dangerous because nonunion contractors don't provide the same training and supervision as the unions do. Mr. Coletti points to a recent BTEA study that found that 65% of stop-work orders issued by the city's Buildings Department and 75% of recorded fatalities on construction jobs nationally came on nonunion projects.

Buttressed by such concerns, Mr. LaBarbera's organization last year banded together with powerful labor unions 32BJ, the Hotel Trades Council and SEIU, which represents building workers, to roll out a publicity campaign against Mr. Stern. The coalition pointed out that Park Side Construction—one of the subcontractors working on the foundation at 111 W. 57th St.—had a worker killed by a falling concrete slab on a hotel project on West 37th Street last September. That job is being built by another developer.

"There are responsible and irresponsible developers, and we believe that Michael Stern is irresponsible," Mr. LaBarbera said.

While Mr. Stern insists that the safety record on his projects compares favorably with those done by developers using union workers, he may end up using a blend of nonunion and union workers for different components of the job.

In that scenario, some of the trickiest elements of building such a tall tower—like crane operation—could go union, while less-skilled work, such as painting and plumbing, could be done nonunion. That blend would be tricky because organized labor doesn't sanction so-called open-shop jobs, in which developers can pick and choose which portions will be done union.
Union subcontractors who work on those jobs essentially cast off their affiliation in order to do the work, effectively working nonunion by agreeing to the same wages and job rules as a nonunion contractor would.
"It used to be that union workers would put their tools down and walk off a job site if they saw nonunion workers there," Mr. Coletti said. "But that changed during the recession, when it became every man for himself."

Skyguy_7 Jan 15, 2015 4:34 PM

^Thanks for posting this article. Nonunion = No bueno. That's the ultimate corner cut. It's unlikely that the structural components would be built nonunion, but if it were so, I wouldn't feel safe in the tower.

Zapatan Jan 15, 2015 5:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 (Post 6875879)
^Thanks for posting this article. Nonunion = No bueno. That's the ultimate corner cut. It's unlikely that the structural components would be built nonunion, but if it were so, I wouldn't feel safe in the tower.

That's disturbing, this is NY not Dubai or China

NYguy Jan 15, 2015 9:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan (Post 6876039)
That's disturbing, this is NY not Dubai or China

I think you misunderstood what he's saying. But it's unusual to use non-union labor for big construction in New York. Maybe we'll see plenty of inflated rats accross the street.


Quote:

The unprecedented effort is already underway. In September, an in-house crew of construction managers and nonunion subcontractors began pouring the property's elaborate foundation. By the summer, the developers are planning to begin raising the tower's reinforced cast concrete frame with more nonunion personnel.

"If they built that tower nonunion, it would be unprecedented," said Gary Barnett, the developer who started the ultra-tall building boom with luxury condo tower One57. "I think if they built it successfully, more developers doing projects of that size would have to take a look at going nonunion."

Construction union leaders insist that day will never come. They note that of the seven super-tall, pencil-thin residential buildings underway in Manhattan, only 111 W. 57th St. uses nonunion crews. And in an effort to keep it that way and perhaps force Messrs. Stern and Maloney to change their minds, unions have sporadically picketed the site for weeks and plan to continue to do so.


Whatever the case, I'm very happy that two of my long awaited towers will begin the march skyward this year. I would be happy enough with just that, but there's so much more to watch.

Future BFFs?


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/158831320/original.jpg



Do we add another? And what about Nordstrom?


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/158831321/original.jpg

jackster99 Jan 15, 2015 9:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 (Post 6875879)
^Thanks for posting this article. Nonunion = No bueno. That's the ultimate corner cut. It's unlikely that the structural components would be built nonunion, but if it were so, I wouldn't feel safe in the tower.

JDS used non union labor to build the Walker Tower and that is possibly one of the highest quality, well built recent developments in the city.

I'm not being sarcastic, I'm just wondering if you can educate me. What does non union labor have to do with the build quality and/or structural integrity of a building?

BrownTown Jan 15, 2015 10:44 PM

I would expect most skyscraper enthusiasts to be in favor of using non-union labor. I'm sure we can all agree that part of the reason it's so hard to get a supertall built here is that labor costs are astronomically higher than other parts of the world. Anything to lower that cost would make more projects economically viable. Construction workers in New York make salaries that are incredibly high even by US standards. Unions purposefully limit the supply of labor in order to inflate their wages. I'm not trying to cheer anyone making less money, but it's just a fact that union labor is often much slower and more expensive than non-union.

NYguy Jan 16, 2015 1:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrownTown (Post 6876526)
I would expect most skyscraper enthusiasts to be in favor of using non-union labor. I'm sure we can all agree that part of the reason it's so hard to get a supertall built here is that labor costs are astronomically higher than other parts of the world.

Labor cost are a factor, but hardly a factor that determines whether a building is supertall. JDS didn't suddenly just change it's mind about the earlier tower because of labor, the site is suited to a tower of this type. New York is a labor town, and yes that can add to cost, but so does being in New York. The land is pricier. Materials can be pricy. But in New York you can also charge extraordinary prices for the built product. The developers aren't running to the poor house, and the city isn't short of development because of it.


Quote:

Messrs. Coletti and LaBarbera agree, however, that nonunion job sites are statistically more dangerous because nonunion contractors don't provide the same training and supervision as the unions do.

Mr. Coletti points to a recent BTEA study that found that 65% of stop-work orders issued by the city's Buildings Department and 75% of recorded fatalities on construction jobs nationally came on nonunion projects.


I think that is what Skyguy_7 was referencing. We all want safe buildings and safe construction sites, regardless of who is doing the work.


Quote:

While Mr. Stern insists that the safety record on his projects compares favorably with those done by developers using union workers, he may end up using a blend of nonunion and union workers for different components of the job.

In that scenario, some of the trickiest elements of building such a tall tower—like crane operation—could go union, while less-skilled work, such as painting and plumbing, could be done nonunion. That blend would be tricky because organized labor doesn't sanction so-called open-shop jobs, in which developers can pick and choose which portions will be done union.


Skyguy_7 Jan 19, 2015 3:48 AM

^Nailed it.

JustSomeGuyWho Jan 19, 2015 5:27 AM

Quote:

Messrs. Coletti and LaBarbera agree, however, that nonunion job sites are statistically more dangerous because nonunion contractors don't provide the same training and supervision as the unions do.

Mr. Coletti points to a recent BTEA study that found that 65% of stop-work orders issued by the city's Buildings Department and 75% of recorded fatalities on construction jobs nationally came on nonunion projects.
I don't know, the fatality statistic is pretty meaningless unless there is context around what percentage of construction jobs are union and what type of jobs these are. For example, I think it is safe to assume that the percentage of these fatalities related to road-work is pretty high. If 75% of the road-work jobs nationally are non-union and they account for 75% of the national fatalities on road-work jobs then there is no difference between union and non-union. Not really debating the safety of union vs non-union ... just railing against the use of meaningless or misleading statistics to support an argument.


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:57 AM.

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