SkyscraperPage Forum

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)

Crawford Sep 11, 2014 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayPro (Post 6724536)
See, here's why where we're at in this whole process pisses me off no end now.

My issue is not with NYYIMBY, who has claimed to handle their end of this mess with the sort of professional integrity intrinsically demanded of them by the very jobs they have.

I don't know what your issue is with Extell, or NY Yimby, or the process in general. Developers are under no obligation to release anything regarding design. We already know the height, floorplans, and official filings.

That said, it's quite obvious that NY Yimby has the inside scoop on the building, and there's no reason to think that the released designs aren't accurate. There's also no reason to think that Extell doesn't 100% support the released designs.

And if they are slightly off in terms of final design, we'll know soon enough, so no point in really speculating.

ILNY Sep 11, 2014 1:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 6724771)
There's also no reason to think that Extell doesn't 100% support the released designs.

I was thinking about it, but it just does not make sense why he would "leaked" the design through the back door and would not take full credit for it.

wilfredo267 Sep 11, 2014 6:54 AM

This was posted at SSP by Londoniumlex. Nordstrom project is mentioned in page 17

http://www.surfacedg.com/files/ajlp_...es_offered.pdf

gramsjdg Sep 11, 2014 3:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilfredo267 (Post 6725130)
This was posted at SSP by Londoniumlex. Nordstrom project is mentioned in page 17

http://www.surfacedg.com/files/ajlp_...es_offered.pdf

Well, that description of the curtain wall design is certainly in line with NIMBY's latest renders...

JayPro Sep 11, 2014 3:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 6724771)
I don't know what your issue is with Extell, or NY Yimby, or the process in general...

It's just this waiting game...or maybe that no one wants to have the pressure put on them to run with the ball...as if whoever drops it the most wins.

But what do they (or would they) win? Perhaps my contempt for not handling this thing the way it should've been, case and point during the CB5 meeting?

And PS: having seen the item spoken of posted on SSC, I'd like to know why it was posted??? Is this another attempt at bringing yet another party involved into this PR train-wreck???

Crawford Sep 11, 2014 4:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayPro (Post 6725595)
I Is this another attempt at bringing yet another party involved into this PR train-wreck???

What "PR train wreck"? This is what I don't get.

This tower isn't being built to satisfy skyscraper geeks. There's no obligation to release anything, though the public filings tell us most of what we already know. And the NY YIMBY scoops have been enormously helpful in filling out the missing pieces.

wilfredo267 Sep 11, 2014 4:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gramsjdg (Post 6725523)
Well, that description of the curtain wall design is certainly in line with NIMBY's latest renders...

Even though l love what we've seen so far the 1,550ft quote intrigues me.:)

JayPro Sep 11, 2014 5:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 6725651)
What "PR train wreck"? This is what I don't get...

Okay; maybe I should've limited that description to the CB5 meeting; but I'll stick by my description of what it exactly was, given that:
A. Plenty of others here posted time and time again chiding Extell's presentation, calling it more or less the same thing as cold be deduced from my wording.
B. As bad a taste in my mouth as this kerfuffle left, I had IMHO every right to suspect that their handling of this whole thing going forward was susceptible to further missteps, one of them being IMO allowing a third party to insinuate itself into the matter, perhaps perhaps perhaps (my emphasis) as a means of repenting for what might've been considered by some as, indeed, a PR misstep.
That's how my calling this process a PR trainwreck came to be.

Quote:

This tower isn't being built to satisfy skyscraper geeks. There's no obligation to release anything, though the public filings tell us most of what we already know. And the NY YIMBY scoops have been enormously helpful in filling out the missing pieces.
My respectful rebuttal by sentence:

1. I certainly trust that this isn't suggesting that skyscraper "geeks"---as I suppose in whose number and company I seem to find myself---can't have have critical input into this subject. We're living in privileged times when the current building phase allows for something of this magnificent scope to rise skywards...many times over, as we're seeing in other projects too. The nerd and the realist should dance for joy with one another.

2. My usage of the phrase "for all intents and purposes" in the post that I think you might be referring to---i.e. when I suggested, "Why doesn't Barnett/SG just release the finished product now if we're in fact this close to a final product?"---was quite deliberate. I never anywhere else in this thread made outright demand for official drawings. Perhaps the tone and tenor of my recent posts might have lead to some kind of inference along these lines gaining traction; I don't know.

3. Now here's where I start to lose sight of things. This almighty tipster that NYYIMBY's using is either someone from Barnett and/or SG in a trust-based professional relationship with said e-pub ...or a freelancer with dubious credentials and affiliations whose working with YIMBY--and possible leakage of confidential/classified material from either Extell or SG--could have serious repercussions.
I don't know...Maybe the fact that neither of the aforementioned have said "Boo"---on anything, let alone this question---is the answer I'll have to learn to be satisfied with.

sbarn Sep 11, 2014 9:44 PM

Omg. This thread has taken a turn for the weird.

This probably isn't the FINAL design. It will probably look something like it though... there's no harm in these renderings. Extell has no obligation to release anything since this tower is "as of right".

JayPro Sep 11, 2014 10:28 PM

The fault is mine for the strange nature this thread has taken.

Maybe in my own parallel universe, building design and approval processes usually don't take thrice as long as those entailing the time from groundbreaking and excavation to actual construction above grade.

Or maybe I haven't actually looked into just saying a smaller piece on things, not beating a dead horse till I feel a need for everyone here to catch the smallest quark of my gist, and slowly backing away.

In either case, I think we all can agree that what we see right now is close enough to what we're gonna get that none of us will be too surprised......:notacrook:

NYguy Sep 11, 2014 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilfredo267 (Post 6725130)
This was posted at SSP by Londoniumlex. Nordstrom project is mentioned in page 17

http://www.surfacedg.com/files/ajlp_...es_offered.pdf

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilfredo267 (Post 6725663)
Even though l love what we've seen so far the 1,550ft quote intrigues me.:)


Disregard the height figure, that's what it was.

Here's a look at that for what it's worth.



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157342863/original.jpg

sbarn Sep 12, 2014 2:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6726270)
Disregard the height figure, that's what it was.

Here's a look at that for what it's worth.



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157342863/original.jpg

I bet that diagram shows a facade system for the Nordstrom base. From my experience (I'm an architect) those type of mullions are pretty uncommon on towers. We shall see I suppose...

ChiTownWonder Sep 12, 2014 2:24 AM

Why is this listed as proposed on the diagram page?:???:

Crawford Sep 12, 2014 3:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder (Post 6726498)
Why is this listed as proposed on the diagram page?:???:

This building has been u/c for almost two months now, and I'm specifically referring to the SSP rules for u/c.

I'm not getting why it hasn't changed status in SSP.

Hypothalamus Sep 13, 2014 6:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 6726551)
I'm not getting why it hasn't changed status in SSP.

It did change status when foundational construction began over the summer, and I remember that moment because hunser was happy to see both 1 WTC and 217 W 57 side by side in the supertall forum. Somebody intentionally moved it back to proposals. Maybe they don't want it to rise :haha:

KevinFromTexas Sep 13, 2014 7:13 AM

This is going to be one seriously awesome skyscraper. I cannot wait to see it rise.

They're still digging, guys. Just be patient. As soon as some foundations are placed then it'll be under construction officially.

Crawford Sep 14, 2014 7:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas (Post 6728126)
T As soon as some foundations are placed then it'll be under construction officially.

Again, foundation work began 2 months ago. By my reading of SSP rules, that means this building should be u/c.

Submariner Sep 14, 2014 11:16 PM

A somewhat off topic question, but while walking on 57th today, I passed by a very large vacant lot, on the south side of the street, near 57th and 6th. Does anyone know what is going on here? There doesn't appear to be any work going on, but I would think that such a large, cleared parcel would be absolute gold in this market.

Ryan81 Sep 15, 2014 3:52 AM

Really people....the status on this site doesn't make this building any more or any less under construction.....

sbarn Sep 15, 2014 4:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Submariner (Post 6729511)
A somewhat off topic question, but while walking on 57th today, I passed by a very large vacant lot, on the south side of the street, near 57th and 6th. Does anyone know what is going on here? There doesn't appear to be any work going on, but I would think that such a large, cleared parcel would be absolute gold in this market.

That site kills me. I wish they would combine it with the apartment building next door and build a mega tower...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan81 (Post 6729741)
Really people....the status on this site doesn't make this building any more or any less under construction.....

And this.

NYguy Sep 15, 2014 9:23 AM

^ I don't get it either.


There's no anti-NY thing going on. NY threads make up a lot of the activity here.

What we do have is a lack of active photography on sites. I'm sure there has been work going on. But clear evidence of construction speaks more than words.

chris08876 Sep 15, 2014 10:14 AM

^^^

In my honest opinion, I think we should have a balance of both photos and reading material to back up construction. This same issue plagued some of the Miami threads where there was written evidence of construction, but little pics. What we found out in the end was that many of them had be U/C for months, but where listed as proposed for a while.

NYguy Sep 15, 2014 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876 (Post 6729875)
^^^

In my honest opinion, I think we should have a balance of both photos and reading material to back up construction.

Photos. Photos. Photos.

Anyone can say, write, or type anything. Photos of actual construction are what they are. So get at it.

Submariner Sep 15, 2014 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbarn (Post 6729751)
That site kills me. I wish they would combine it with the apartment building next door and build a mega tower...



And this.

Even if they didn't take down the building adjacent to it (which if memory serves me correctly, that building should be taken down) the lot is still HUGE. Not enough air rights or something?

KevinFromTexas Sep 15, 2014 12:44 PM

All the photos I've seen of the site on Flickr and New York Yimby show them still digging as recently as August 30. I also checked Wired New York, nothing. Can't someone take a photo looking into the pit?

ILNY Sep 15, 2014 1:42 PM

^ This is my photo from August 30th. Not much has changed, they are still digging and blasting rock. It will take another 3-4 months before the site is fully excavated.

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5563/...eed43324_b.jpg

KevinFromTexas Sep 15, 2014 1:57 PM

That's what I was thinking. They won't be able to start foundations until the site is fully excavated. Digging is notoriously time consuming.

NYguy Sep 15, 2014 3:53 PM

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/150392780/original.jpg

My guess is that foundation work, or at least the start is included in the 20 month process.

sbarn Sep 15, 2014 5:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Submariner (Post 6729929)
Even if they didn't take down the building adjacent to it (which if memory serves me correctly, that building should be taken down) the lot is still HUGE. Not enough air rights or something?

True, it's a through block site, so must have lots of FAR. Sorry to go OT, but that site has always intrigued me...

newyorker Sep 17, 2014 12:35 AM

This is a response to a request for information about a parcel of land seen "while walking on 57th today"...

Could you be may be referring to a tower to be built by Michael Shvo? I'm not talking about the one proposed for downtown, but an even taller one on 57th.

Here's a link to a video I found on a Shvo tower page for skyscrapercity.com:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeGAUysXMrQ

N830MH Sep 17, 2014 2:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas (Post 6730001)
That's what I was thinking. They won't be able to start foundations until the site is fully excavated. Digging is notoriously time consuming.

Right, they have to be fully excavated and then they will start construction. They won't know for sure.

N830MH Sep 17, 2014 2:02 AM

Delete. double post.

Crawford Sep 17, 2014 2:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by N830MH (Post 6732505)
Right, they have to be fully excavated and then they will start construction. They won't know for sure.

I'm not a mod, but my understanding of SSP rules for u/c are that foundation piles are drilled. This started with 225 W57 back in July, and has been ongoing.

The excavation isn't fully completed, but the foundation piles have started drilling, and for months now. If that doesn't meet the SSP standard, then fine, but then a number of towers should be removed from u/c status, because they too have foundation piles drilled but not completed excavation, and are listed as u/c. Kingdom Tower is a prominent example.

KevinFromTexas Sep 17, 2014 8:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 6732554)
I'm not a mod, but my understanding of SSP rules for u/c are that foundation piles are drilled. This started with 225 W57 back in July, and has been ongoing.

The excavation isn't fully completed, but the foundation piles have started drilling, and for months now. If that doesn't meet the SSP standard, then fine, but then a number of towers should be removed from u/c status, because they too have foundation piles drilled but not completed excavation, and are listed as u/c. Kingdom Tower is a prominent example.

Technically drilling is just another form of digging. I'd say once the caissons go in, then they'll have actually started construction with something that will actually be part of the building. A hole in the ground isn't part of the building.

NYguy Sep 23, 2014 11:56 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/23/ny...mark.html?_r=0

A Tower Will Rise Next to, and Over, a Paint-Spattered Landmark


http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/...ster675-v3.jpg


SEPT. 22, 2014
By ARIEL KAMINER


Quote:

In a city built on unlikely juxtapositions, there may be no odder neighbors than the Art Students League, which occupies an ornate French Renaissance-style building at 215 West 57th Street, and the Nordstrom Tower, an ultramodern pillar, at least 1,500 feet tall, that will rise beside it.

Beside it, and above it, to be precise. Starting about 300 feet up, the eastern edge of the Nordstrom Tower will jut out 28 feet over the league’s 1892 home, which is a landmark, making this improbable piece of streetscape even more curious: the brash upstart reaching out to a fragile dowager for support.

Is the relationship a beneficial one? The answer, as they might say in one of the Art Students League’s drawing classes, is a matter of perspective.

Planned to be the tallest residential structure in the hemisphere, the tower belongs to a new class of buildings — most clustered in the area directly south of Central Park — so extravagantly vertical that a new term has been coined for them: not just tall but hypertall. Its top story will be higher than the top floor of 1 World Trade Center (but lower than its needle).

In 2005, the Extell Development Corporation paid the league $23.1 million for 136,000 square feet of air rights, part of the more than one million square feet it assembled from buildings in the area. Last year, the idea emerged to push the tower slightly off the edge of its pedestal; the shift allowed for a better floor plan for Nordstrom, the tower’s main retail tenant, and better views of the park for the tower’s residential tenants, as well as bigger and presumably more expensive apartments for them to live in.

For 6,000 additional square feet of air rights for the cantilever, Extell paid the league an additional $31.8 million. “They kind of got me back for the good deal I got years ago,” said Gary Barnett, Extell’s founder and president.



For 139 years, the Art Students League has opened its doors to all comers, from empty-nesters looking for a new hobby to celebrated painters, sculptors, printmakers and the like. The list of its most famous alumni reads like the index of an art history textbook, including Louise Bourgeois, Jackson Pollock, Georgia O’Keeffe and Ai Weiwei, an honoree at its coming gala. Most classes meet five times a week, for three and a half hours a day, and cost just $230 a month, which works out to about $3 an hour. More than 2,500 students are currently enrolled.



Designed by Henry Hardenburg, the architect of the Plaza and the Dakota, the league’s building is a time capsule. Classrooms look as they might have 50 or 100 years ago, with paint-spattered folding chairs that Lee Krasner might have sat on, arranged in a semicircle from which Norman Rockwell might have sketched a nude model.

Late-20th-century technology is not present, to say nothing of early 21st-century gadgets. As for phones, there are a couple of old wooden booths in the lobby, but they are used for storing human skeletons, a prop for anatomy studies.

It is all undeniably charming, but charm has its limits. “We need everything,” a teaching assistant told a visitor, unprompted. Not just equipment and supplies, she said. “Space. Air!”

For those who have pursued the deal with Extell, the giant next door represents a once-in-a-lifetime chance to multiply the league’s funds, to enrich its programs, to expand its classrooms, to renovate its home and to welcome more students than ever before.

“I want people to come in,” said Ira Goldberg, the league’s executive director, “and feel like it’s Jerusalem, walking into the past and feeling connected with history.”

But to a portion of the league’s members, the deal is a rip-off of skyscraping proportions. Last fall, a group that called themselves ASL Unite rallied opposition to the cantilever, arguing that the league’s leadership had fallen for a weak offer and unverified promises about the safety of the construction process, much of which would take place right over their heads.

“Do you really want to be under that?” asked Richard Caraballo, who has taken courses at the league since 2007. At One 57, another hypertall project by the same developer on another block of the same street, a crane came close to toppling over during Hurricane Sandy, snarling traffic and displacing neighbors.

In a members’ referendum last February, the majority of votes supported the sale, in part, Mr. Caraballo alleged, because the league had suppressed voter turnout. But the ensuing lawsuit went nowhere, and the deal went through.

Behind the discord is the implication that a powerful real estate player effortlessly outmaneuvered a dowdy old nonprofit. Mr. Barnett says the two organizations are not so different. “We share an ambition for great art and, in our case, great architecture, and we aspire to create beautiful buildings the same way their artists aspire to create beautiful objects,” he said.

In search of that beauty, the Extell construction workers have spent most of a year slamming heavy machinery into solid bedrock for the tower’s foundation. The hole is now about 80 feet deep at its deepest, and the drilling continues.


As Hardenburg’s building hides its elegant face behind scaffolds, art students have started to decorate the area in front of it. An Art Nouveau portrait, a bold geometric composition: “You want to get a sense of the league,” Mr. Goldberg said, “just walk down the street and see all these very different approaches to art-making.”

The building’s scaffolds will come down when the tower has gone up around it. “You know we’re an art school,” Mr. Goldberg said, enjoying the sight of the outdoor paintings. “Now, we’re a caged art school.”


http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/...ticleLarge.jpg

NYguy Sep 26, 2014 4:18 PM

Renders from www.cityrealty.com, posted in the Tower Verre thread...

Renders of the various towers along W. 57th...wish they would have included 1 Vanderbilt. There are no Hudson Yards towers in the renders.



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157562469/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157562470/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157562471/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157562472/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157562473/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157562474/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157562475/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157562476/original.jpg

Perklol Sep 26, 2014 4:20 PM

Thank you NYguy!! :cheers: :tup:

SkyscrapersOfNewYork Sep 26, 2014 4:38 PM

Imagine if 225's design was the Verre tower built up to this towers height?

njcco Sep 26, 2014 5:46 PM

Thanks, NYGuy! That is one exciting skyline. Cannot wait to see all of these beauties rise. Plus the new hotel where Rizzoli was and the one on East 60th Street, as well. A feast for the eyes!

King DenCity Sep 26, 2014 5:55 PM

Nordstrom seems a little too short in that render. But yes this will be a total shock to the eyes when all is finished and done.

NYguy Sep 27, 2014 1:36 AM

Heck, I wouldn't been happy with something like this...



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157583033/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157583034/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157583035/original.jpg



I'm sure they're working on putting the finest touches on this tower before final renderings are released. I hope it at least has a pretty "skin" to make up for what may be lost in the massing.

chris08876 Sep 27, 2014 1:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King DenCity (Post 6744937)
Nordstrom seems a little too short in that render. But yes this will be a total shock to the eyes when all is finished and done.

Its nuts that given the current height, it will give us a good idea of the dominance that the other supertalls will have. Sort of like a reference in terms of the skyline dominance for the other 1,350+ ft towers that will be going up soon.

Seeing how tall 432 Park Ave is and what a dominance it has on the surroundings, Nordstrom will shock us, and 1 Vanderbilt will be a nice addition. Even with the Midtown plateau, these towers will not become lost. Well, not yet.... this area seems to becoming supertall city.

King DenCity Sep 27, 2014 5:45 AM

Please... y not... I want ^^

NYguy Sep 30, 2014 9:38 PM

I never get sick of these, so some additional renderings taken from www.cityrealty.com



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642964/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642965/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642966/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642967/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642968/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642969/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642970/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642971/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642972/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642973/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/157642974/original.jpg

NYguy Oct 1, 2014 11:54 PM

Keeping an eye on this also...


http://therealdeal.com/issues_articl...nst-everybody/

Gary Barnett versus everybody

October 01, 2014
By Hiten Samtani


Quote:

...Barnett is, of course, building two mega skyscrapers on “Billionaires’ Row” on West 57th Street — the Christian de Portzamparc-designed One57 and the Nordstrom Tower at 225 West 57th Street, which is slated to be the tallest residential tower in the city. He’s also putting up a 68-story residential tower on the Lower East Side, and is angling to acquire a site that would let him develop a large condo on West 66th Street.

vandelay Oct 2, 2014 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6745548)


Now THAT is a tower I'd like to see on this site, not that boxy, black-striped abomination.

NYguy Oct 2, 2014 12:48 PM

^ Well, that's two of us.


http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-estate-master

Gary Barnett, Controversial Master of New York City Luxury Real Estate


http://images.bwbx.io/cms/2014-10-01...1__01__970.jpg


By Devin Leonard
October 02, 2014


Quote:

.....He’s plunging ahead with a plan for a second building on 57th Street whose spire could reach 1,775 feet, one foot shorter than One World Trade Center, and loom over One57 and its followers. “It’s basically like sticking an Empire State Building right at the bottom of Central Park,” says Warren St. John, a former New York Times writer who’s leading the opposition to the towers. “The shadow will extend over a mile north. It will stretch all the way across the park. That’s crazy.”

Onn Oct 2, 2014 2:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vandelay (Post 6752210)
Now THAT is a tower I'd like to see on this site, not that boxy, black-striped abomination.

Maybe that's Barnett's third arrow, his grand mega project. I agree, it looks like a great design and it clearly is not any of his current projects. Foreshadowing much? :D

And those renders of Nordstrom Tower are amazing! It achieves complete domination!

NYguy Oct 3, 2014 1:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onn (Post 6752364)
Maybe that's Barnett's third arrow, his grand mega project. I agree, it looks like a great design and it clearly is not any of his current projects. Foreshadowing much? :D


That was one of his earlier designs.


Meanwhile, Nordstrom apparently wants to open another Manhattan store of similar size (250,000 sf) Downtown. Don't know where they're going to find that space. Maybe they could anchor a tower 5. Who knows...


http://ny.racked.com/archives/2014/1...n_nyc.php#more

Nordstrom Reportedly Looking for Downtown Location


October 2, 2014
by Laura Gurfein


Quote:

Clearly Nordstrom doesn't want to be left out of the Financial District luxury retail boom. Sources tell WWD that the Seattle-based retailer is allegedly looking to open a 250,000-square foot store downtown, joining Saks Fifth Avenue and the scores of high-end names headed to Brookfield Place and Westfield World Trade Center.

"Nordstrom has been interested in Lower Manhattan for quite some time," someone involved in real estate told the paper, but "the problem is finding the amount of square footage they need."

Indeed, at that size, there's no space at Brookfield or Westfield WTC (By comparison, the Saks store at Brookfield will be 85,000 square feet). Addresses reportedly in consideration include: an Art Deco skyscraper at 1 Wall Street, "away from where most of the luxury retailers are landing;" the former American Stock Exchange site at 78 Trinity Place; and 23 Wall Street, across from the New York Stock Exchange.

Another possibility? The waterside mall at Pier 17—WWD says that developer Howard Hughes has been talking to the department store about a Las Vegas project, and could be gunning for this location as well.

Then again, their future location might not even exist yet. "It could be a development site that hasn't come to fruition yet," said the source, "something that's not so obvious."

Regardless of where Nordstrom ends up, it's very likely a long way off. The West 57th Street store of a similar size, slated for 2018, will likely open before the potential downtown store.

Onn Oct 3, 2014 3:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6754171)
That was one of his earlier designs.

I would be kind of shocked if that was just earlier design. It's clearly far superior to the pretty good design he has going now, if true.


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.