SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Completed Project Threads Archive (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=348)
-   -   NEW YORK | 111 W 57th St | 1,428 FT | 85 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=198228)

hunser Oct 23, 2015 3:01 PM

Lighting scheme (vertical LED strips):

http://www.6sqft.com/wp-content/uplo...ent-WSP-10.jpg

mdsayh1 Oct 23, 2015 3:56 PM

THIS BUILDING is spectacular. Finally a building worthy of all the praise that gets heaped around here. NY has been missing this type of bold stroke for so long. If it gets built as planned it will certainly warrant the high prices it will demand. Congrats NYC on getting incredible design and inspiration going again. Its been a long time coming.

xnyr Oct 23, 2015 7:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hunser (Post 7209133)
Lighting scheme (vertical LED strips):

You beat me to the punch; I was about to post that screen grab. :cheers:

There is clearly a passion to this design - to do something not seen before in our time and to do it with the best quality. Can't wait to see it realized in person.

chris08876 Oct 23, 2015 9:11 PM

Condos at 111 West 57th to have a total sellout of $1.5B

http://s13.therealdeal.com/trd/up/20...les-launch.jpg

Quote:

The developers behind 111 West 57th Street have been inviting a handful of top brokers from Billionaires’ Row to visit the supertall tower’s showroom ahead of an upcoming sales launch, when condos will hit the market starting at $16 million.

The state Attorney General’s office last week approved JDS Development and Property Markets Group’s condo offering plan, which projects a total sellout of $1.45 billion.

While the sales gallery inside the landmarked Steinway Building is still under construction, JDS and PMG are inviting brokers to a sneak peek. Apartments at the 60-unit, super-skinny tower will start at a price of $16 million, according to brokers who either visited the space or got the invitation.

One pointed out that when the Zeckendorfs launched sales at the nearby 520 Park Avenue earlier this week, they started with units at the same price point.

“It must be the magic number,” the broker said.

The 1,418-foot-tall tower will have a base-to-height ratio of 1:20 when it opens in 2018, wresting the title of Hong Kong’s Highcliff Apartments for the world’s skinniest residential building. :slob:

JDS and PMG – headed by developers Michael Stern and Kevin Maloney, respectively – secured a $725 million construction loan from AIG and Apollo Global Management in June, paving the way for construction to begin on the SHoP Architects-designed tower.
=====================
http://therealdeal.com/blog/2015/10/....Zk4lnlpY.dpuf

QUEENSNYMAN Oct 23, 2015 9:54 PM

So just asking is 1,418 feet to top floor? Or has it shrunk from 1.438, either way I love this tower!

chris08876 Oct 23, 2015 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QUEENSNYMAN (Post 7209757)
So just asking is 1,418 feet to top floor? Or has it shrunk from 1.438, either way I love this tower!

Should be the same height (to pinnacle/crown). Most likely as is the case with TRD, some height error. CTBUH lists it as 1,438 ft.

The top floor (highest occupied) is approximately 1180'. The chandelier component or crown is 200' or so.

photoLith Oct 24, 2015 2:41 AM

Why does it appear to be that the terracotta paneling seems to be not on all the way in that mockup? Hope they do a better job of attaching and or aligning the facade on the real tower.

WIGGLEWORTH Oct 24, 2015 6:06 AM

This tower has me nervous as to how it will turn out... if it holds true to the renders I will be very happy, but if not it could be a disaster...

mrnyc Oct 25, 2015 1:49 PM

just look at those beautiful mockups -- there is zero chance this will turn out to be a disaster.

BrownTown Oct 25, 2015 6:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc (Post 7210959)
just look at those beautiful mockups -- there is zero chance this will turn out to be a disaster.

It's seriously out of proportion. I'm sure there will be a lot of people who consider it a disaster.

Crawford Oct 25, 2015 6:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrownTown (Post 7211128)
It's seriously out of proportion. I'm sure there will be a lot of people who consider it a disaster.

True, but they're NIMBYs. They wouldn't be happy unless the building were four floors and built in Disneyesque ye olde architecture.

Roadcruiser1 Oct 25, 2015 7:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc (Post 7210959)
just look at those beautiful mockups -- there is zero chance this will turn out to be a disaster.

That depends. If they use low quality materials, or if they have no intention to align the building cladding properly then we are in trouble. For example 99 Church Street (30 Park Place) looked good in the renderings, but then they went with precast concrete instead of limestone. It turned out to be a disaster.

Crawford Oct 25, 2015 7:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 (Post 7211160)
TFor example 99 Church Street (30 Park Place) looked good in the renderings, but then they went with precast concrete instead of limestone. It turned out to be a disaster.

I think almost no one would agree with you on this.

30 Park Place might not be the best, but it's probably better than 95% of the highrises in the world. It's an urban-friendly design, very high quality materials, top architect, and fits well in the skyline. Possibly too derivative, though.

Almost no buildings are totally built with limestone. I can think of like four in recent years, all in NYC, and all with prices intended for billionaires. 30 Park Place is primarily a hotel, and I don't think there's one all-limestone hotel anywhere on earth in recent times.

chris08876 Oct 25, 2015 7:24 PM

This tower will be the gold standard that they will show to aspiring architects. Also, given its engineering, something that should be a reference towards skyscraper ingenuity. One for the books. No other project like it in the world.

WIGGLEWORTH Oct 25, 2015 8:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 (Post 7211160)
That depends. If they use low quality materials, or if they have no intention to align the building cladding properly then we are in trouble. For example 99 Church Street (30 Park Place) looked good in the renderings, but then they went with precast concrete instead of limestone. It turned out to be a disaster.

Exactly. You hit the nail on the head.
THAT is what worries me, the quality of the materials, so far the terracotta isn't looking as classy as I would've hoped.
One thing I cant be certain of is the Bronze. It looks good in the pictures but i haven't seen enough yet.

Submariner Oct 25, 2015 8:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 (Post 7211160)
That depends. If they use low quality materials, or if they have no intention to align the building cladding properly then we are in trouble. For example 99 Church Street (30 Park Place) looked good in the renderings, but then they went with precast concrete instead of limestone. It turned out to be a disaster.

Almost no one thinks that.

mrnyc Oct 25, 2015 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WIGGLEWORTH (Post 7211199)
Exactly. You hit the nail on the head.
THAT is what worries me, the quality of the materials, so far the terracotta isn't looking as classy as I would've hoped.
One thing I cant be certain of is the Bronze. It looks good in the pictures but i haven't seen enough yet.

of all the construction going on in the city, this tower has got to be among the least worrisome. you are completely forgetting who will be buying into this residence. the people who are the most discerning and quality conscious in the world.

BrownTown Oct 26, 2015 2:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 7211146)
True, but they're NIMBYs. They wouldn't be happy unless the building were four floors and built in Disneyesque ye olde architecture.

What does being a NIMBY have to do with proportions? This is building is like one of those 6ft tall runway models who weighs 110 pounds. Sure, some people like that, but others find it incredibly unhealthy looking. If it tapered up to the pinnacle that would be one thing, but the way it is now will make it an eyesore. Even being clad in pure cold wouldn't change that.

Crawford Oct 26, 2015 2:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrownTown (Post 7211400)
What does being a NIMBY have to do with proportions?

It has everything to do with proportions. NIMBYs don't like buildings that are "too tall".
Quote:

Originally Posted by BrownTown (Post 7211400)
This is building is like one of those 6ft tall runway models who weighs 110 pounds. Sure, some people like that, but others find it incredibly unhealthy looking.

I don't think there's even one NIMBY who would agree with this line of thinking. If the building were fatter, meaning it blocked more views, and would destroy landmarked buildings, they would be even angrier.

It would actually be impossible to have a fatter building, simply because landmarked buildings can't be demolished. The developer is using every last bit of air rights.

chris08876 Oct 26, 2015 3:48 PM

First world problems. Complaining about a super tall that most cities in the world would love to have. :haha:

This tower is iconic.


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.