SkyscraperPage Forum - NEW YORK | Central Park Tower (Nordstrom)| 1,550 FT

Viewing Page 48 of 407

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)

I walk by the site quite often and they're taking down the last building, they're probably doing more work on the inside but you can see the building getting shorter and shorter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6192773)

:order:

This isn't about American money vs. Chinese money. Let's keep talking about the building please. You can continue your debate amongst yourselves (PM).

Another look at the building footprint...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/149309225/original.jpg

Seems like the building will have a pretty weird base (considering the landmarked facade, for the record), rendering the entire structure itself dramatic.

^432 Park has a weird shaped lot too, and we still ended up with a relatively simple box.

I guess the rule of thumb is that the lot/parcel is what the developers give the architects to play with;
and precisely how it's played with is the call of the ones with the toys in their hands.
The only stipulation that would obtain is "Stay in bounds."

Certainly, and Barnett has given every indication that this won't be a mere box, but rather something truly worthy of being a landmark.

Quote:

Originally Posted by scalziand (Post 6194984)

^432 Park has a weird shaped lot too, and we still ended up with a relatively simple box.

Ah, it's true about 432 P.A., but this one would have to have its footprint shrinked if it were to end up being a simple box. But reconsidering the mighty base, that's pretty unlikely, and like you said about Barnett's indication of this one not being a mere box, we're pretty much in for a treat!! :cheers:

There are definitely details we can use with which to make some educated guesses:

-- The Nordstrom store is going to make up a large 7-story podium, which will fill almost all of the site -- if I recall correctly, there will be a separate residents' entrance, but I can't remember which side it will be on.

-- Because it's residential and also from the FAR, we can infer that the main part of the tower will be relatively narrow, so at least it will be set back or tapered from the base.

-- The market for penthouses with impressive Central Park views is insane, so there's a financial incentive to maximize floor area in their highest units (which suggests to me that it probably won't taper too much at the top, if at all). And if it's rectangular or oblong, it would be oriented with the longest sides facing the Park.

-- AS+GG Architects seem to be on a curvy kick, with Kingdom Tower as a big notable exception. Almost none of their recent towers have setbacks (minus Trump Chicago), but almost all of their tall ones have wind-reduction elements incorporated seamlessly into the design; such as the open crown of Greenland Center, the disruptive skin of Imperial Tower Mumbai, or the three-winged shape of KT and Burj Khalifa. Adrian Smith has even gone on record saying that a three-wing design is ideal for residential, but it's possible the site isn't big enough for such a shape to be efficient.

-- Finally, AS+GG is also known for very literate, contextual, interpretive designs. Just see Jin Mao Tower for the best example: a series of Pagoda structures using a rule of "8" to repeat and re-iterate it all the way to the top, paying homage to classical Chinese design and numerology, in a brilliant, modern tower. Whatever they design will probably either reference a classic New York building type, or have some expressionist relationship to the Park.

If I was to venture a guess based on all this, I'd say we're likely in for a classic New York setback from the Nordstrom base, and a strong but simple vertical form, with rounded edges, and without a too much in the way of taper or setbacks on the way up. Probably a subtle crown. A spire would surprise me, unless it was seamlessly incorporated into the body of the tower, a la Burj or Kingdom Tower. If they went that route, the pinnacle could be significantly taller than the 1550' mark.

Anyone else want to venture a guess while we wait?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarshallKnight (Post 6195940)

Anyone else want to venture a guess while we wait?

I think your guesses are astute.

I've been wondering about the rounded/bulbous/organic building possibility and their propensity for that kind of work as well. Height aside, it seems that would be an easy way for it to stand out even further in the skyline (as Manhattan's primarily a collection of hard-angled, hard-edged buildings).

So AS+GG could come in rocking the boat that way, doing their own smooth sci-fi dildo thing, which would be cool. Or they could come in more context-minded and really react to the skyline. I'd love for them to go more the Tower Verre direction and riff really hard in their own way on a contemporary gothic aesthetic.

Whatever they bring to the table, it will definitely have a high-tech, progressive, sleek aesthetic. That's how they roll.

Keep in mind this is residential and not commercial. The building's floor plates and therefor the building itself cannot be as deep/thick as a commercial building might be. People like windows in their rooms and don't want dark back corners to their rooms either, especially in the price range these will go for.

View on the west side of the plot. I wonder how they will incorporate this building into the tower.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3821/9...fd254bbe_b.jpg

Demo is progressing. You can see changes since last week.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5444/9...585a6fdb_b.jpg

Per suggestion from JACKinBeantown..

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2894/9...454a03d5_b.jpg

What's going on with Vornado's CPS site?

^ There's a thread for that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by scalziand (Post 6192906)

^That part of the footprint is a landmarked building, so it's going to be preserved. 1780 Broadway is part of the site to give extra air rights to the project and to give frontage on Broadway, but the actual tower won't be on that particular parcel.

Only the facade will be saved. Earlier speculation was that it would ne a hotel entrance, but it will probably be another Nordstrom entrance, giving it a Broadway presence and 3 streetfront entrances. Additional residential and loading could go on the north.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILNY (Post 6197140)

Per suggestion from JACKinBeantown..

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2894/9...454a03d5_b.jpg

Not sure if Barnett has already incorporated this into the tower's footage, but it's another piece of the puzzle in place, though a very small one.

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ano-by-barron/

With Building’s Sale, Piano Row Will Lose Another Key

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...no-blog480.jpg

By JAMES BARRON
July 21, 2013

Quote:

Piano Row was, and is, a fast walk from other points on a pianist’s compass, like the Steinway & Sons showroom on West 57th Street. And once, before its bankruptcies in the 1990s, Baldwin had its showroom at the end of Piano Row. In June, Steinway sold its building and plans to move out by the end of 2014. It has not said where its new showroom will be.

Lately the block has had a gap-toothed look, because buildings on the north and south sides have been demolished to make way for new ones. On Sunday, one of the piano stores will leave the little building it has long occupied.

Carl Demler, the owner of the building and the store — Beethoven Pianos — said he was selling the building to the Extell Development Corporation, which bought the building next door several years ago and has recently torn it down. He said he would hand over the keys on Monday. He also said that he expected to move Beethoven Pianos into another storefront on Piano Row but had not signed a lease.

Notification in May of impending excavation:

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/150392778/original.jpg

Wouldn't this be a great design proposal for the site

I saw this elsewhere in another forum (see middle of the page)

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...194273&page=14

What is going on with that horrendous dark brown building (going towards One 57)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Submariner (Post 6214303)

What is going on with that horrendous dark brown building (going towards One 57)?

It's not horrendous, it just looks beat-up on its west side.

That's the Osborne, one of the oldest apartment buildings in Manhattan. It was built between 1883-85.

http://i1293.photobucket.com/albums/...b.jpg~original

http://i1293.photobucket.com/albums/...8.jpg~original

Viewing Page 48 of 407