NEW YORK | 15 Penn Plaza (Hotel Penn) | 1,050 FT / 315 M | 52 FLOORS

[Dac150]

Though Merrill has gone through some changes since talks first opened up about them making a possible move to this tower; I wouldn’t count out the possibility of a Merrill / BofA multi tenant scenario. I anticipate that Merrill will retain some offices at the WFC, but I’m banking that they’ll look to move out their trading operations.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by JSsocal

Skyscrapers of New York: They are trading floors, where companies want very large floor areas. You'll notice 2 and 3 WTC have them.

Right, and the slightly taller version of this tower isn't planned to have any, which is why that version's tower and core is centered over the retail base.

Originally Posted by Alliance

I find its called capitalism.

Exactly the reason this tower should be built.

[Alliance]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Exactly the reason this tower should be built.

If it can be financed and leased, then I totally agree.

[NYguy]

It's why the great skyline keeps changing.

[OneWorldTradeCenter]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Even if this tower were to start the process of construction (demo, site prep) tomorrow, it wouldn't be ready before 2014.

Any work will not be started until an anchor tenant has been found. It's the same like Manhattan West or the American Commerce Center in Philadelphia. Well, I hope that one is going to be built, NYC needs more supertalls and more modern buildings.

[Roaming]

Built it!



http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/09/02/really_big_building_has_really_big_rendering.php#more

[RobertWalpole]

Nice tower!

[colemonkee]

I actually prefer the single-tenant version of this building over the multi-tenant one, even though it's shorter (though the difference between the two visually is really splitting hairs once you get above 1,100 ft. Beyond that it becomes purely a "my — is bigger than yours" contest.).

The tower rising out of the center podium works well when there are symmetrical setbacks on the tower itself, like the Empire State Building, where there are multiple "steps" drawing the eye up the tower. With the massing of this tower effectively being one smooth, very subtle curve at the top, having the tower rise from one end of the podium makes it feel stronger, almost like an image of a horse holding it's head high (though the head is grossly elongated in this example). It has a more powerful, symbolic motion to it, whereas the tower in the middle of a tiny pedestal just looks like a required setback.

Plus, a near 1,200 wall rising above 7th Avenue would be amazing. Far more amazing than one set back behind a 120-ft. glass podium.

Just my 2 1/2 cents.

[NYguy]

I like the single tenant version better because of the sheer wall above 7th. It could just as well end up being above 1,200 ft also when all is said and done.

[NYguy]

Let the bitchn continue...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/henry-j-stern/the-great-giveaway_b_703623.html
15 Penn Plaza: The Great Giveaway

Henry J. Stern.
President of New York Civic and Former New York City Parks Commissioner

...The Times quote in support of the proposed tower came from Mitchell L. Moss, a policy adviser to Mayor Bloomberg: "People don't come to New York to visit caves. They want the views, the height, the experience of tall buildings. Skyscrapers allow us to make the best use of a limited amount of land."

The opposition quote was a snippet from my testimony at the public hearing on the matter, in which I called the proposed 15 Penn Plaza: "An assault on the Empire State Building and the New York City skyline."

The subject deserves more attention than that fragment of a sentence. We write today to explain why we are opposed to the package of variances granted for this behemoth of a building.

...If it is built, the proposed Penn Tower would have 56% more bulk than the zoning code would have permitted without discretionary bonuses. That comes out to almost a million square feet of additional office space. The variances granted to the developer also eliminate the setback regulations typically required for buildings of this size, thereby aggravating the impact upon the skyline from the perspective of New Jersey. The glare from night lighting of the financial tenants will further impact the view of the iconic Empire State Building from the east.

...We believe that what happened in this case is a textbook example of unsound public policy, favoritism to a particular extremely well-connected developer, and lack of regard for the future of the commercial neighborhood around Penn and Moynihan Stations. To grant a massive upgrade to a property owner with no tenant, no financing and no immediate plans to build is premature and irresponsible. These valuable new rights will be for sale along with the property if the developer is unable or unwilling to build on the site.

Much attention has been paid to the Aqueduct racino and the unwholesome process used by the State of New York to select a developer. In this case, there is only one corporate developer. It is the value of the property, however, that is being changed by law to suit his particular demands. No one less well connected than the Vornado Realty Trust (owner of numerous major properties, including Bloomberg Tower) could play the system with such success and gain an unprecedented blank check for possible future development.

This is a case of the city making an extraordinary gift, probably worth hundreds of millions of dollars, to one of its richest and most influential developers. It is a top-down decision, clearly made at City Hall and not by the Planning Commission, which should have been embarrassed at the tricks they had to turn.

[NYonward]

^ It's preaching to the choir who search for things to complain about.

The developer has incredible incentive to complete the project and far less to let it go.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by tonyo

The developer has incredible incentive to complete the project and far less to let it go.

When the transformation of the area into a modern business district becomes evident (like the rebirth of Times Square) suddenly everyone will talk of the amazing "progess", as if they were for it the entire time. No one will come back and say, "well, you know what they should have done was leave that old hotel standing...".

[OneWorldTradeCenter]

The multitenant design is better, because it is taller than BofAmTower

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by OneWorldTradeCenter

The multitenant design is better, because it is taller than BofAmTower

I don't think that matters at this point. It could go either way in terms of which is taller. I believe the tallest this one could rise is about 1,225 ft (even the shorter version). Whatever tenant[s] signs on would go a long way towards determining which version of the tower would rise and just how high. One thing we do know is that they aren't allowed to put an antenna on top of the building.

[OneWorldTradeCenter]

Originally Posted by NYguy

I don't think that matters at this point. It could go either way in terms of which is taller. I believe the tallest this one could rise is about 1,225 ft (even the shorter version). Whatever tenant[s] signs on would go a long way towards determining which version of the tower would rise and just how high. One thing we do know is that they aren't allowed to put an antenna on top of the building.

Why aren't they allowed? Sorry if someone pointed that out earlier... I did not read all details of all posts....

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by OneWorldTradeCenter

Why aren't they allowed? Sorry if someone pointed that out earlier... I did not read all details of all posts....

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/cpc/100049.pdf
(p 45)

The Commission also points out that there would be no significant impact on skyline views because 15 Penn Plaza would be seen in distant views that already contain largescale tower buildings, and new developments in Hudson Yards will continue to add large towers
to the Midtown skyline. Additionally, and also as discussed in more detail in the FEIS, there would be no impact on views from the pedestrian level, because there are no major view shed corridors that would be blocked by 15 Penn Plaza.

The Commission further notes that interference of antenna-based transmissions is not unique and occurs as a consequence of New York City’s evolving built landscape; transmission interference can generally be managed through the use of technologies for filling transmission gaps without need to relocate a transmission site. Alternative transmission tower locations are also available in Manhattan.

Further, regarding a possible antenna on the top of the tower in either configuration, the rules of the Special Midtown District (Section 81-252) prohibit items, such as antennas, that would normally be allowed as “permitted obstructions.” Therefore an addition of an antenna would not be as-of-right and a modification of this application would need to be made to this Commission.

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Skyscraper Bloat


As soon as the economy perks up, Manhattan’s skyline is going to change, and when it does, the Empire State Building will lose its splendid isolation. The City Council recently okayed a 1,216-foot tower at 15 Penn Plaza to creep into competition with the icon of icons. More big, beefy skyscrapers are on the way. To get a sense of how the future skyline will look, check out the Bank of America Tower on Bryant Park, a bulky glass stele that executes a modest twist to lend itself an air of grace. For the new business behemoths, a few indentations or judicious asymmetries set off the taut seamlessness of their skins. The top of 15 Penn will curve slightly inward as if embarrassed by its massiveness. Vertical folds in the curtain wall on each façade and at each corner resemble slits in a satin gown worn by an elephant.

“The family of new buildings that are being proposed are fundamentally different animals ... they’re much bigger.”
—Rafael Pelli, 15 penn plaza’s lead architect

Why So Chunky

1. Financial firms require enormous trading floors. “Taller, slenderer buildings make for more handsome proportions,” notes T. J. Gottesdiener, managing partner at Skidmore, Owings & Merrill. “The Chrysler and Empire State Buildings are so handsome because they’re so tall and because they have such tiny floor plates.” It’s impossible for new skyscrapers not to suffer by comparison.

2. Large, populous floors in turn mean a few more high-speed elevators, which get packed into a thicker concrete core, fattening up the building.

3. Glass walls are necessary to keep the inner cubicles from feeling sepulchral, and besides, they offset higher cooling costs with thrifty lighting systems.

4. Floors are fourteen and a half feet apart, compared to ten feet in older skyscrapers, to allow for higher ceilings and sixteen-inch under-floor A/C ducts, meaning that 80 stories need a lot more height than they once did.

5. Because of the height of 15 Penn, Herald Square and much of the Penn Station area will be in shadow for an extra hour daily in the spring and summer.

6. The set-back look of Manhattan’s twenties skyscrapers was a function of the city’s 1916 zoning law. Aesthetically, the new ones look a bit more like the recent towers that have gone up in Asia.

THE BULKY SKYLINE ON ITS WAY

1,776 ft.
1 World Trade Center

1,216 ft.
15 Penn Plaza

1,137 ft.
3 World Trade Center

1,060 ft.
3 Hudson Boulevard

1,050 ft.
53W53rd

1,000 ft.
Carnegie 57

975 ft.
4 World Trade Center

http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/topic/67973/

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

—...another one...and now in Kuala Lumpur!


http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v608/nazrey/Another/ASEAN/12-1.jpg

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by SkyscrapersOfNewYork

http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/topic/67973/

I wish they would produce a true graphic for these pieces, something along the lines of what SSP has...

[Zapatan]

They missed 2WTC on that first diagram... but yea, NY has so much to look forward too, the skyline will be so beastly.