NEW YORK | 655 Madison Ave | 1,162 FT | 74 FLOORS - Page 6

Busy Bee · #1 Posted **Apr 4, 2025, 8:55 PM**

Egg on face.

I'm in the wrong thread. I was talking about 574 Fifth Av.

NYguy · #2 Posted **Apr 5, 2025, 2:32 PM**

Yeah, this one will be built as-of-right. Extell rarely builds anything that requires ULURP, mostly because they build residential developments. It’s easier to fit residential towers into the city’s rigid zoning envelope. And far less time consuming, considering the full ULURP can run from 2-3 years.

ChiND · #3 Posted **Jun 17, 2025, 12:29 AM**

I hope that icons as magnificent as 350 Park rise on all of these sites.

Busy Bee · #4 Posted **Jul 8, 2025, 11:33 PM**

Cartwright!
...
...
...
Cartwright!

ChiND · #5 Posted **Jul 9, 2025, 8:08 PM**

As far as Bravo's allegations against Zeckendorf go, his view, indeed, will be blocked.

NYguy · #6 Posted **Jul 9, 2025, 9:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiND

As far as Bravo's allegations against Zeckendorf go, his view, indeed, will be blocked.

Not really, we went over that earlier in the thread. It would be a better argument if this tower stretched north to 61st Street, but it doesn’t (the massing).

Crawford · #7 Posted **Jul 9, 2025, 8:25 PM**

Yeah, I slightly prefer the 1,300 version, due to greater height and more interesting shape, but this seems fine too. As long as the details are nice, it will be another landmark supertall.

Also I hope this means the Barneys building gets redeveloped into a supertall residential tower. They've been sitting on that empty building since before the pandemic. Get moving already.

Zapatan · #8 Posted **Jul 9, 2025, 9:03 PM**

I wonder if 1,162' refers to the structural top, highest occupied floor or main roof.

Still cool though!

NYguy · #9 Posted **Jul 10, 2025, 12:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

I wonder if 1,162' refers to the structural top, highest occupied floor or main roof.

Bulkhead height. Construction permits often refer to occupied floor heights.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 As Of Right

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

The New York Lion · #10 Posted **Jul 9, 2025, 9:03 PM**

Another supertall for NYC.

Simply incredible.

Hudson11 · #11 Posted **Jul 9, 2025, 10:10 PM**

We can now see why the Zeckendorfs sued. lol!

ChiND · #12 Posted **Jul 10, 2025, 1:07 AM**

An 1,100 foot tower is great, but I suspect that it’s basically going to be a glass box. That would be disappointing.

NYguy · #13 Posted **Jul 10, 2025, 1:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiND

An 1,100 foot tower is great, but I suspect that it’s basically going to be a glass box. That would be disappointing.

Well, we haven't seen a design, so being disappointed by a massing is a stretch. Some of you need to learn patience. You can always be disappointed later.

ChiND · #14 Posted **Jul 10, 2025, 1:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

Well, we haven't seen a design, so being disappointed by a massing is a stretch. Some of you need to learn patience. You can always be disappointed later.

It seems that very frequently, the massing is extremely similar to the actual shape of the tower.

BK1985 · #15 Posted **Jul 10, 2025, 2:08 PM**

I’m still sort of shocked that 520 built all of those lot lining windows even though that is the “money shot”. They could have easily done false windows like 220cps.

NYguy · #16 Posted **Jul 10, 2025, 3:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiND

It seems that very frequently, the massing is extremely similar to the actual shape of the tower.

So you object to the massing of the tower.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BK1985

I’m still sort of shocked that 520 built all of those lot lining windows even though that is the “money shot”. They could have easily done false windows like 220cps.

Very few of those are actual, real windows (see 220 CPS).

It was previously reported that Chanel purchased the retail space for $450 million. The EAS states there will be about 209 employees at the store. There will also be about 650 people working in the office portion of the building.

BK1985 · #17 Posted **Jul 10, 2025, 4:06 PM**

Ah ok. Cool thanks. I couldn’t tell if those were false windows or not based off of the photos posted.

If it’s a glass building I think the current proposed massing makes sense, hopefully there is some sort of dynamic facade work/ sculpting going on. If it’s a more “classic” facade I think I would prefer the as of right massing given the opportunity for some dramatic terraces.

NYguy · #18 Posted **Jul 10, 2025, 4:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BK1985

Ah ok. Cool thanks. I couldn’t tell if those were false windows or not based off of the photos posted.

If it’s a glass building I think the current proposed massing makes sense, hopefully there is some sort of dynamic facade work/ sculpting going on. If it’s a more “classic” facade I think I would prefer the as of right massing given the opportunity for some dramatic terraces.

It’s all in the details. One thing we know, this tower will soar alongside 520 Park…

Still curious to see how the dynamic with 625 Madison will play out.

ChiND · #19 Posted **Jul 10, 2025, 5:09 PM**

520 is stunning.

Extell should go with Stern, as his work guarantees massive success. A glass box would be lame.

NYguy · #20 Posted **Jul 10, 2025, 5:25 PM**

I like architectural variety. That’s what makes the skyline so great. Stern is wonderful, but I don’t know that we need to copy/paste one right next to another one . That would be lame. Or not. I would have to see it first. But again, variety. A glass building wouldn’t eclipse 520 in the way another Stern would.