While I certainly hope you're right, however I don't think the answer to this question is as absolute as you suggest. It depends on what kind of jurisdiction Landmarks has over this tower (i.e. how its situated on the site, how it incorporates the Steinway Building, etc). I've worked on a lot of Landmarks projects. Once they insisted on reviewing our building that was located immediately adjacent to a Landmarks district because it cast shadows within the district. I don't think this kind of situation will be the cast here given that an as of right tower was previously proposed here, however LPC can be unpredictable.


While the land use committee supported the proposal, the full CB still has to vote on (and hopefully approve) it. Furthermore, just because the CB supports a project, it doesn't mean Landmarks will approve it (although it helps). I once worked on a rooftop addition project in SoHo that got approval from the CB, only to then be rejected by Landmarks.

Anyway, fingers crossed that this is approved and built as planned. I think it looks amazing!

I'd think that as long as the building thay Landmarks is looking to protect remains untouched in any way, there shouldn't be any issue. This seems more so especially since everyone knows how much tax $$$ can be reaped from the tower's potential residents.
Besides, it would seem to me that civic groups/NIMBY's/6-to-1-half-a-dozen-to-the-other would be more likely to dismiss or vote down something...anything AAMOF...just because. Also, Sbarn mentions a project in SoHo that received the double moutza. NIMBYism seems to me much stronger there, as is evinced (for one thing) by the extremely conservative building height.
57th is a different kettle, though. Regardless, I dare whatever enclave of NIMBY's there are in this burgeoning corridor to challenge this tower's current status on whatever grounds they see fit to pull out of their fiber-holes.

I think the Nimby's just lost the war. The postcards of Central Park are all going to look different in a few years. The suspense lies in 225 W 57th street. There are yet to be renderings.

Transport yourself back in time, and witness a skyline where tall, thin towers dominate...


http://images.nypl.org/index.php?id=482701&t=w
http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypld...s=20&snum=&e=w


http://twistedsifter.files.wordpress...ck-pier-17.jpg
http://twistedsifter.com/2012/11/vin...attan-skyline/




You misunderstand. This tower doesn't need CB support at all, I mentioned it because the CB would normally be the NIMBY arm opposed to the development.

JDS has already filed permits for altering the landmark (only the lower portion of the building is landmarked), and has been cooperating with the LPC. It's more of a formality that they approve work there, but keep in mind also that Barnett's Nordstrom tower had issues with getting landmarks approval to do demo there. It has to be done right. And although integrated into the landmark building, JDS still owns the air rights, and can build as of right without the landmark. The landmark approval has more to do with what JDS plans for Steinway Hall.

I'll repost this article concerning the landmark building, which would now include some of the interiors as well...


http://www.citylandnyc.org/opulent-p...rk/#more-19787

Opulent Piano Retail Space Considered as a Potential Interior Landmark
Owner’s representative expressed support for designation; testified that landmark would be preserved in context of planned larger development.


http://www.citylandnyc.org/wp-conten...teinway-SM.jpg


07/31/2013




Filing for some initial work on Steinway....
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=01




http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/archives/70453

Keeping Up With the Super-Tall Joneses: SHoP Designs Another Manhattan Skyscraper

http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/...chpaper-01.jpg



September 9, 2013
Nicole Anderson



http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/...02-550x427.jpg


Seems the coloring is a little different here, but likely just the image...
http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/...chpaper-03.jpg

Slightly better view...


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/152270002/original.jpg

The one thing that bugs me here is how the facade all around looks almost laminated.

:previous: Is it just me, or does it look like the sections are slightly concave? Very cool wrinkle if that's true. And the apparent pinstripes are great.

I'm also not 100% sold on the design only because we have only seen this angle (honestly not a great first-reveal render), but I'm already salivating at the prospect of further reveals.

Nice design, this building will dictate new style in NYC - supertall superthin. Since there is harder to find big lots and small lots are more available I see more of this type of towers being build in the future. It already started with 432 Park ...more to follow. I will wait for final design and height though, just don't want to be disappointed like with Nortsdrom.

Just as I feared. A close up proved that I was correct. The only think that makes this building even halfway decent is the terracotta stripes. Otherwise it did be dead to me!!!!!!!!!!

To deviate briefly, Nordsrom's final design release will IMO only disappoint to the measure that the viewer's opinion has already been formulated from secondhand descriptions and his mind refuses to be changed.

In other words, if green and curvy--as 225's final look has been loosely described and construed by a few not exactly in the loop--reminds the viewer of a lasagna noodle with guacamole added for coloring, and that somehow forces an extrapolation to an envisioned final product, it IMO figures that the extrapolator won't like what he sees even before he sees it.

But color me 110% certain that the whole Landmarks Committee will greenlight this, as NYGuy's more detailed explanations of the convoluted processes involved bear out. I for one don't see how the dimensions of this structure interfere in any way with the one they're looking to protect. And it's not as if we're dealing with a Sauron's army of NIMBY's either, thank God...at least those at the mid-to-bottom level chain of command.
What's more, Amanda Burden and her bean-counters have kept a profile bordering flatline.

It looks that way, but hard to say for certain with that rendering.



That's what happens when you don't need a special permit. As a matter of fact, of all the tallest residential proposals under construction or nearing, only the Tower Verre needed to go through that long and torturous process. I think developers prefer to take the road with no roadblocks, save financing.


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/152270002/original.jpg

Yeah...I also seem to notice something about this tower's geometry that says SMH...S for scratch in confusion. It makes me want to keep going back to look for what it is.
PS: THey did a lousy superimposition job. It's all the more flagrant as the image gets blown up. "First public release image out the proverbial door" is no excuse. The finer details ought to be conspicuous at the outset.

I'm dying for a rendering from the Central Park side.

That's from the JDS Development group website "JDS Development Group is currently developing 105-111 West 57th Street, a luxury condominium tower and conversion of the landmark Steinway building. The property is located within walking distance of a wealth of New York City’s most notable leisure points of interests, including Central Park, Carnegie Hall, Radio City Music Hall, the Museum of Modern Art, and the world-famous Fifth Avenue and 57th Street shopping districts.

The project will offer both landmark conversion product and new modern product with shared recreation spaces and lobby, and will feature a large retail component. With frontage on 57th Street and 58th Street, the project will create a dramatic street presence and benefit from its prime Midtown location at the epicenter of Manhattan’s premier international shopping, tourist and commercial districts.

105-111 West 57th Street is a joint development with strategic partner Property Markets Group"
What do you think they mean by "shared spaces and lobby"- the Steinway will be incorporated into the new building thus allowing for a larger footprint or simply they will connect the two buildings with a door/doors

Renders will come. Remember how long it took before we got another rendering after that initial 432 Park render, which wasn't great.



http://jdsdevelopmentgroup.com/portf...t-57th-street/

They mean exactly what they say, the Steinway Hall building will be integrated into this development. The lower floors will be retail.

I'm intrigued by this design and look forward to more renderings.

To my eye, and only having this view, its form looks heavily influenced by nature/organic materials, specifically blades of grass or other long, thin leaves and stems. It makes sense that SHoP (and other firms) would look to nature for inspiration on how to engineer very thin yet strong structures, or at least reference them proportionally/aesthetically.

My theory about this influence could disappear once we get more angles of the building of course. :)

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3764/9...a356ed28_o.jpg

In my mind, it's been more of a giant bamboo stick. But the building itself will be sort of a giant spire. I think we will be seeing more of these super tall, super thin buildings.

I can only imagine the engineering that is going to go into this. A tower that is thinner then 432 park ave, and roughly or close to the height; its going to require an insane psi in the concrete.

I would say 14,000 psi minimum, maybe higher.

Here's an application of 19,000 psi 2 decades ago.
http://www.silicafume.org/pdf/reprints-hscjumps.pdf

Yeah I can see that. Kind of looks like a someone took a machete to one side in the jungle! :)

I'm excited to see all of the variations on this form factor. 432 Park is going to look chubby next to this waif!

Based on the renderings it looks like a waterfall. Almost like steps that seem to get shorter as the height increases. Has a slick and water-flowing facade to it.

To me it looks like they sliced out one of the middle sections of Jin Mao.

http://www.travlang.com/blog/wp-cont...ower_china.jpg
travlang.com

Imagine that tower, with the slim, stepped-back profile on the skyline...


jmarchena

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7419/9...a2a538f9_h.jpg



http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2840/9...b617d822_h.jpg

http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/download...a_landmark.pdf


STEINWAY HALL INTERIOR STRIKES A CHORD WITH THE LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION
First-Floor Reception Room and Hallway of Famed Piano Manufacturer’s Showroom on West 57th Street Named New York City’s 116th Interior Landmark


Sept. 10, 2013

I guess we're in an era in NY where super tall thin buildings will be the norm. Big foot print tall buildings like WTC & ESB will be no more.

I dont see why the Steinway Hall designation impacts this building? That building is beautiful and Steinway Hall needs to be preserved.

Hudson Yards and Manhattan West all have very large footprints. But I do see your point. I'd say Brooklyn is the key if you want large footprints. Manhattan is pretty much over built; well once those particular areas such as the west side are filled up. It will eventually spread to the other boroughs. But this is years and years of planning of course. The whole east side rezoning will generate massive towers.

To get apts with max views we may soon have somethig like this in midtown:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_V7IT9bKqNu...etsonsBldg.jpg

^Haha, and then we should wear neon clothes and have white hair. :)

poor one 57 will be blocked from the images above :( . but honestly the footprint needs to be bigger it looks like a pen

The WTC and ESB are office buidlings. You don't compare office with residential. Look to the office buildings being planned if you want large footprints.



It impacts this building because it is a landmarked building, or at least portions of it, and its being incorporated to make this a larger development. As far as being preserved, JDS is one developer that has a particular taste for preserving old buildings, and would probably be converting Steinway Hall even without the taller portion.

Walker tower has already been very successful...
http://jdsdevelopmentgroup.com/portfolios/walker-tower/

http://jdsdevelopmentgroup.com/wp-co...7-522x1024.jpg




And they are already on to the next conversion...
http://jdsdevelopmentgroup.com/portf...t-50th-street/


http://jdsdevelopmentgroup.com/wp-co...13/08/50th.jpg


http://jdsdevelopmentgroup.com/wp-co.../08/50st-4.jpg





http://nymag.com/arts/architecture/r...vidson-2013-9/

Giants in Our Midst
The first of the 1,000-footers stomps onto 57th Street.

By Justin Davidson
Sep 15, 2013

The Walker Tower is just so "wow."

^ It's great what they did there. I'm waiting to see the finer details of what they have planned here.

Here's how it shapes out here...


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/152531300/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/152531302/original.jpg

this building is the most interesting project ive seen in a while,its facade is different from your average modern blue tower,this adds diversity . The designs errupting out of the 57th street corridor are great :)

This is 785 8th ave (566ft). 107 will be more than twice as tall with almost the same width.

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2869/9...8bae8364_b.jpg

^thats crazy,does that include the footprint of the tower?

I've noticed the thinner they get, the more they look like there leaning side to side from the ground view. IDK maybe its just me but I feel a good wind would make it sway and be noticeable if standing right below it.

There's a new render that was posted over on Wired New York, showing the tower from the north. There doesn't seem to be a larger file at the moment.

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/attach...1&d=1380408793
Wired NY

looks classy. :)

The Verre Tower will complement this nicely. It kinda looks like it in the rendering, at least at first glance it shows hints of the tower Verre design.

Look at the Eastern flank. Seems like the tapering will be a very significant.

Almost didn't recognize One57 in that rendering, it looks small compared to this one...



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/152628565/large.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/152628565/original.jpg

I'm almost weeping for joy at this.
The CP-facing side is vertical. Wow...and I mean a good wow. Forgive me for pointing out the obvious; but this feature I honestly didn't expect given the first render we saw.

(This is, FAIn'P, London's 122 Leadenhall on a fad diet.) Edit: Scratch this; as the poor image quality didn't properly show the setbacks at the 57th side. My bad.

Now, if we can just have an ultra hi-res pic of this at least.....

^ Yes, I want that and a true profile rendering.

That view from the park is incredible.

Can you imagine this perspective, with a half-dozen or so supertalls in the general vicinity? Holy crap.

The tapering side might be to give each apartment a deck on the South facing side. Some of the top ones may be a bit windy though :p

SHOP posted a photo of a model for this project on their Instagram. It provides a new and very helpful angle for us.

http://www.shoparc.com/sites/default...0a1f91ab_8.jpg
SHOP

Do we have an angels singing emote?


Pretend this is singing: :angel:

I'm not really a fan of SHOP (except for the Barclays Center) but they're really winning me over with this tower and their twin building on the east side. This is going to look amazing with 432 Park!! Tho I do hope the Nordstrom tower does end up taller to punctuate the 57th street skyline. I really look forward to spending more time on the Great Lawn.