The park is visible through the transparency of the crown. It'll be interesting to see how light bounces off of it. The unique design will create a spectacular sight during the morning, high noon, and evening sun positions.

and the NIMBYs will still bitch about the shadows. :haha:

I'm never going to say it again, but I've always had a serious problem with the way Gale Brewer is talked about on this forum. Here is a woman who has graduated from Columbia, is the mother to several adopted children and was elected to the esteemed office of borough president of Manhattan and yet the only comments I ever see are attacking her looks or calling her dumb. Children do that.

If you disagree with some of her policy decisions because you like tall buildings, fine - but you don't have to be a misogynist as you express that.

Maybe if she acted more like a Politician we wouldn't chide her for it. :haha:.

In a different light, she is acting like the "typical politician".

Gale's personal life is irrelevant; I'm not going to be talking about that. What is relevant is that she's the Manhattan Borough President, and her policies speak.

She's for preservation, but she's essentially against luxury housing; for one, that's ironic, but more importantly, her policy is a passive one, and her passive policy turns very misguided/ becomes knee-jerking when she, almost every time, sides with local NIMBYs, whom are typically always paranoid of any and all change. Yet, Gale claims she is supportive of more affordable housing; in order to satisfy the demands of the market, development on all levels is required. She's supportive of isolating affordable units within developments, as de Blasio's administration has been focusing on, but she is fearful of gated communities. Building more will only satisfy the demand. She is perpetuating the unaffordability of Manhattan, but claims to be solving the problem of Manhattan's unaffordability.

Personal attacks are always uncalled for, but constructive criticism of a politician's policy is always healthy. Take a look at her recent decisions:

http://manhattanbp.nyc.gov/html/home/home.shtml

Hear, hear.

Another height bump, now 1,428ft/435m! :cheers:

http://www.111w57.com/

http://i1287.photobucket.com/albums/...s.jpg~original

http://i1287.photobucket.com/albums/...0.jpg~original

http://i.imgur.com/6U2nlsP.jpg

Great shot, yikes!

For some reason I see Bruce Wayne living in this tower. :D

You could probably hang-glide to Harlem from that top. http://www.messentools.com/images/em...rts-big-04.gif

I wonder how long it will be before the tower scalers try to climb this tower once its finished in the future. We all remember that WTC1 footage, how nice it was. Hopefully they will make it easy and hire guards that sleep at night.

EPIC rendering.

Gosh, that is just beautiful! It's like a billion dollar sculpture that is commissioned by a bunch of billionaires. It makes One57 look like a short fat stump!

He absolutely could! Its Batman in Neo York... :haha:

Well originally One57 was supposed to be around 1,300 feet, but was cut down because of the recession and what not. But it was quickly outclassed by other taller projects after being complete. I don't think anyone knew things were going to get as hot as they have around 57th Street.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...postcount=1145

One57 deserves respect as it is the grandfather of the 57th Street boom. It was also revolutionary in terms of real estate sales. Commanding some of the highest prices at the time. Like anything else, overtime, it gets eclipsed, but its legacy will not be forgotten.

Thing is, its short lived in terms of its position. Soon after, 432 rose, and now, 8 or 9 plus supertalls and counting in stages that are close to rising from the deep holes that are being excavated. Filled with shadows at the moment, they will soon see light.

So many years from now, we could be saying that this is a stump. But the torch must be passed on to newer things. But this, and Verre are going to be the modern day Chrysler buildings. Most dramatic architecture seen in the city since the 20/30's.

^^^Yeah, I agree that One57 deserves respect as being the first. I just think that it's awesome that we've come to a point where it really isn't even one of the most impressive towers that we have on our minds for this city now.

Perhaps I was a bit harsh, but that still doesn't change the fact that I have a huge problem with someone who actively tries to stunt the growth and development of a huge, thriving city. NIMBY's are like parasites and there's no real logic behind their oppositions. If she hates skyscrapers so much why does she live in one of the world's top skyscraper cities? She can move to Nebraska whenever she wants.

I love how this thing just keeps inching up foot by foot. 435 meters is a great height. One57 will look short next to it but they complement each other very well.

Title should be changed to... NEW YORK | 111 W 57th St | 1,428 FT | 82 FLOORS.

Totally agree. The casual misogyny is really gross.

Misogyny? At the risk of getting off topic here, who is holding those views?

As long as I have been on this forum, there have been posters who complain about NIMBY's. NIMBY's take many forms; male, female, black, white, gay, straight, etc, and I have read countless posts denouncing everyone who holds those asinine views. The only reason why Brewer is brought up so much is because she is so outspoken in her beliefs. That her logic is horribly flawed only adds fuel to the fire.

Anyways, can we get back to the topic at hand (i.e. this tower)?

I second Submariner's confusion over the word "misogyny". How does the fact that she's a woman have anything to do with it? When Douglas Durst decided to cancel the radome on 1WTC people said equally nasty things about him.

I don't know the woman personally, maybe she's nice, maybe she's not. However, in a way I still feel like this city is still recovering from the 9/11 attacks and is in the process of mustering up the confidence to build taller buildings again, which is a wonderful thing. If someone tries to impede such wonderful growth, they are automatically a garbage person and borderline traitor who hates America. (I'm exaggerating a little on that last part but still.)

It shouldn't have anything to do with it - I made my point because I almost never see Gale Brewer brought up without some ugly comment about her appearance being made. Even otherwise reasonable policy critiques are usually preceded by some hot-headed and deeply personal remark.

Given that this is a forum populated by users interested in development and skyscraper construction, I'm of the opinion that any criticism of Mrs. Brewer should start and end with those concerns. Being assertive online is fine, but making nasty remarks that focus on someones appearance or gender undermines this community and its credibility.

I'm not here to stir the turd, so I'll leave it at that. Vive la différence.