Quote:
|
An image for this Christmas eve as we look forward to an even more exciting year next year....:cheers:
jeff.overs https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4591/3...a96ccfd1_b.jpg https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4591/3...87655bf9_h.jpg https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4591/3...9306aea8_k.jpg |
|
Quote:
The DSNY property probably has no chance of moving, as A. It's new, B. The zoning doesn't even allow for megadevelopment and C. It has a critical long-term use. |
Juat saying.....
But to this day it simply astounds me how that post-1974 classic, beautiful contrast between Gracie Mansion and 9 West 57th can stand up to the Park Lane Hotel's worst possible side. A lesser mini-assemblage would've beenutterly wrecked by it. |
The Park Lane hotel will be replaced down the line. I don't see it lasting another 10 years. The property itself is a prime candidate for a future tallest.
Ideally, as the current supply both present and u/c dries up, when a new cycle begins, it would be nice to see a high end residential (ideally mixed used with a hotel + condos atop) rise. Witkoff has plans for the site, the question is when it will all come to fruition. Right now they are on hold, as he shelved the plan back in 2016. But it can always be revisited. NY is fast approaching, in certain neighborhoods, the prospect where a super tall will yield a feasible profit under certain market conditions. Towers on average being proposed north of 34th Street have been reaching for the sky. Given the flurry of 800 ft towers. As opposed to the typical Midtown Plateau of 650 ft, the plateau is moving towards the 800 ft mark. NY will become the super tall capital in the next decade. I'd expect it to not be dethroned after that, as it is so built up, that super talls will be way more common. |
Comparing renders of this tower, which will be topped off sooner than it seems...
http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...WLnu4u.r16.jpg http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...NJPUEu.r18.jpg http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...JzIOGr.r19.jpg http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...3RDDP.r16c.jpg http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...JZkII.r18c.jpg http://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1/...eZjfn.r19c.jpg |
Guys, is 1550 figure still the highest occupied floor for this tower leaving room for the addition of crown or parapet to further push it to the equivalent in feet of 500 meters or is it by now for sure the final confirmed height of the actual structure itself?
|
Quote:
http://a4.pbase.com/o9/06/102706/1/1...Pa77Smf.c1.JPG http://a4.pbase.com/o9/06/102706/1/1...QkzeH0S.c3.JPG |
^^ aha, thanks a lot!
|
|
Quote:
|
its not the 1550’ on the schematic that’s intriguing, it’s the +1550’!
|
Quote:
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Looks like its 750-770 ft based on the reference to Time Warner. Also, this angle is beautiful because we can use 432 Park as the measuring stick. Now, keep in mind that 432 Park is back in the distance several blocks, so if we moved it to this parcel location (CPT one), it would appear taller than at its current position, but for the sake of mental exercise, let's use it as a measuring stick, and just add 150 ft to that. Also, Verre looks like it has a 100-120 ft more until top out. |
Quote:
Or is that presupposed? |
1,629' is the height factoring in elevation. From sea level, at 0', it will appear to be 1,629 ft. Similar concept with the ESB, which appears much taller due to the elevation or most of Midtown really, especially going towards 6th and 59th, in which there is an incline. Similarly you will see the decline as you walk down 5th towards the Flat Iron. The island itself is very hilly, and even part of Midtown you can see this. Washington Heights really gives you an appreciation for how hilly the island can be.
|
Ah....
Quite surprising given all the verticality we do see. I hope I'm still not asking the question you answered above but: Let's go on the assumption that 1500'+ mentioned in the document is the inferred height above street level, i.e. all documents of this type use height above street level as the benchmark. And let's apply the "topographical" condition you mentioned. Are they throwing in the + operator to suggest the possibility of an additionl design element...i.e. the spire oft-debated here? |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:18 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.