Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876
The question is will it look iconic, and not an eye sore?
|
Not really a question, because to build that large, developers must go through an approvals process that requires design approval. While that may sound like a good idea, the fact remains
that it will be up the judgment of someone else (city planning) as to what looks good. And we know how well that worked out for the Tower Verre.
But one thing you can be certain of, it won't look like this:
The images here are random massings from cpc...
And forget about anything like this...
It could be something that more closely resembles one of these towers...to the extent that it will be a more "iconic" looking tower...
Another thing that is promising about these towers in the rezoning is that public use is being encouraged for the tops of these towers, to make up for a lack of public space below.
A new observation deck is likely a reality.
http://main.aiany.org/eOCULUS/newsle...ng-up-density/
Quote:
Each speaker focused on a different aspect of urban density. James von Klemperer, FAIA, principal at Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates,
defined urban density as more than a formula of mass over volume, but rather as a calculation of a number of factors including communication, habitation, and circulation.
...The panelists also agreed that an essential way to develop hyperdense cities is to increase public amenities. According to Hoang,
if housing regulations are rewritten to shrink the size of apartments, the size of shared spaces must be increased.
Von Klemperer made a similar point, comparing the public spaces in One Vanderbilt, a proposed Midtown tower by KPF, to the hollow
structures of the heart. The “void spaces” in this building will act as a necessary counterpoint, or safety valve, that will receive the
outflow of increased density.
|