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

[Submariner]

Just garbage, all around.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by Submariner

Just garbage, all around.

Yea, as much as I try to force myself to like the new design(s), this and 2WTC are two of the biggest let downs in NYC history.

How could this even be more economically prosperous? Just looking at the building it seems it'd be far less.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Sky88

A best image of the tower from cityrealty.


http://www.cityrealty.com

Cool.

It's as I suspected, they're going with what's "hot" right now. Forget what you think you know about New York City office development, what was 10 years ago is no more. (Of course, the vast majority of NYC office space is decades old, and can still be used by someone). But this is top of the market office space we're talking about, and this design is purely a market driven concept. The traditionalists won't like it, for sure. I still wouldn't like this design in this particular location. Park Avenue would be better. But if we had to get something like this, at least make the top something more fitting for the city. I know we have the residential towers to make up for the big, boxy office buildings. But, still.

Now, if they built 2 identical versions, it would be a new WTC and take on a new dimension. But as is, it's a very big, very wide tower that isn't kind to the ESB. As a modern office tower in New York? I can clearly see it. As far as drawing tenants? Time will tell, same as with BIG's 2 WTC. But how long have Pelli's designs for 15 Penn and Foster's design for 2 WTC been around?

In the end, this may not end up being what get's built, but a variation of it is very possible.

[chris08876]

Those multiple lobbies look like they are taking a lot of space that could be used for other functionalities. Amenities are important, but it looks like too many. I think it might be a placeholder too. Hopefully whatever rises will use the max potential of the site. Location like this is not to throw away and just go 70%. It demands 100%!

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Cool.

As a modern office tower in New York? I can clearly see it. As far as drawing tenants? Time will tell, same as with BIG's 2 WTC. But how long have Pelli's designs for 15 Penn and Foster's design for 2 WTC been around?

I wonder how long that $62 psf will hold for. That is a big selling point, as the competition is HY, but the market can change a lot in a year. Price per square footage that is.

I still think next cycle. Right during the recovery that will occur when the next recession hits.

But I do hope this expansion continues. Record setting, but what goes up, must come down.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Those multiple lobbies look like they are taking a lot of space that could be used for other functionalities. Amenities are important, but it looks like too many. I think it might be a placeholder too. Hopefully whatever rises will use the max potential of the site. Location like this is not to throw away and just go 70%. It demands 100%!

I don't think there are too many lobbies, if you consider such a tower to be designed for multiple tenants. It's like every section is an individual tower. As opposed to being in one, big office tower, they would have their own towers basically. We know that was a factor in Pfizer signing on at the Spiral...

https://commercialobserver.com/2018/07/c...-together-the-pfizer-deal-at-the-spiral/

C&W’s Josh Kuriloff on How He Put Together the Pfizer Deal at The Spiral

BY LIAM LA GUERRE
JULY 24, 2018


Did they have any trepidation about being pioneers in Hudson Yards?

Well, first you have to have vision. Pfizer wanted to do something transformative for their workplace so they viewed it as an opportunity and what was very clear when we toured the various buildings in Hudson Yards was they actually wanted to curate and be the anchor tenant of a new building. They wanted to create what we refer to in the industry as a “building within a building.” They wanted to have an exclusive lobby experience. They wanted to have escalators go to a sky lobby [on the mezzanine level]. They wanted to have their own exclusive elevators so that when you came into the building, you felt that you were coming into the Pfizer building. And that’s what we curated for them with Gensler, with Tishman Speyer, [and] with the Pfizer design and construction teams.

So Tishman Speyer had no problem with building a completely separate lobby and elevator bank just for Pfizer?

It was a pretty intense negotiation, and then who pays for it was an intense negotiation.

But [Tishman] wanted to collaborate. They actually came up with great ideas, of how to accomplish this, like how to help create the experience with the sky lobby. We had issues with it because the escalators go to a mezzanine level and there were all kinds of issues with slab heights and we changed the design of [Tishman’s] lobby by creating the sky lobby.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Cool.

It's as I suspected, they're going with what's "hot" right now. Forget what you think you know about New York City office development, what was 10 years ago is no more. (Of course, the vast majority of NYC office space is decades old, and can still be used by someone). But this is top of the market office space we're talking about, and this design is purely a market driven concept. The traditionalists won't like it, for sure. I still wouldn't like this design in this particular location. Park Avenue would be better. But if we had to get something like this, at least make the top something more fitting for the city. I know we have the residential towers to make up for the big, boxy office buildings. But, still.

Now, if they built 2 identical versions, it would be a new WTC and take on a new dimension. But as is, it's a very big, very wide tower that isn't kind to the ESB. As a modern office tower in New York? I can clearly see it. As far as drawing tenants? Time will tell, same as with BIG's 2 WTC. But how long have Pelli's designs for 15 Penn and Foster's design for 2 WTC been around?

In the end, this may not end up being what get's built, but a variation of it is very possible.

I can see the appeal of "what's hot" or trying to be futuristic/ultra-modern but that doesn't mean the building has to be ass ugly (like this and 2WTC). Something like Shanghai Tower or WFC look very futuristic but also attractive.

I could see this next to central park, and it would look a lot better there IMO. It's way too close to the ESB with no real ability to compliment it.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

I can see the appeal of "what's hot" or trying to be futuristic/ultra-modern but that doesn't mean the building has to be ass ugly (like this and 2WTC). Something like Shanghai Tower or WFC look very futuristic but also attractive.

Never forget that what YOU call attractive/ass ugly may be VERY different from a tenants perspective (or anyone else in general). Vornado, like Silverstein, is going to build whatever the "fish" he attracts, the tenants, enables him to. You wanna build a Shanghai Tower? Fine, then find the tenants for it.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Never forget that what YOU call attractive/ass ugly may be VERY different from a tenants perspective (or anyone else in general). Vornado, like Silverstein, is going to build whatever the "fish" he attracts, the tenants, enables him to. You wanna build a Shanghai Tower? Fine, then find the tenants for it.

I know, they apparently have terrible taste (in my humble opinion) and it's unfortunate. If other people like the design then great, but I think it's an eyesore, and I'm probably not in the minority.

I agree that this building (and 2WTC) may be cooler from the inside, especially the terraces, layout etc. But at what price? Why not have a building that's awesome on the inside and out, instead of just the inside.

Then again, it's all a matter of opinion and what happens happens.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

I can see the appeal of "what's hot" or trying to be futuristic/ultra-modern but that doesn't mean the building has to be ass ugly (like this and 2WTC). Something like Shanghai Tower or WFC look very futuristic but also attractive.

But this is all subjective. I think BIG's 2WTC is much better than the Foster design, and I'm obviously not alone.

And this sky gardens proposal is much better than the Pelli design. Both the Pelli and Foster look generic/outdated.

Also, as a worker drone, I would LOVE to have outdoor space in my building. These types of spaces are highly sought after and companies will pay more psf.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

But this is all subjective. I think BIG's 2WTC is much better than the Foster design, and I'm obviously not alone.

And this sky gardens proposal is much better than the Pelli design. Both the Pelli and Foster look generic/outdated.

Also, as a worker drone, I would LOVE to have outdoor space in my building. These types of spaces are highly sought after and companies will pay more psf.

Sure, to each their own.

What about it aesthetically makes you think it's superior?

[NYguy]

Here it is again, in smaller format. This is where the new wave of office construction in New York is headed, or where it's been for anyone paying attention. That 15 Penn rendering is just a number of these type structures stacked on top of each other.


https://www.globest.com/2018/10/10/799-broadway-receives-187m-construction-loan/

799 Broadway Receives $187M Construction Loan
Developers proceed with plans to demolish the St. Denis hotel to build an office tower but community members voice concerns.

By Betsy Kim
October 10, 2018


The 12-story, 172,000 square-foot office tower will comprise 147,688 square feet of office space, 12,688 square feet of community space and 21,929 square feet of retail and a gym. Designed by Perkins+Will, the new building will have terraces on each floor, oversized glass windows and ceiling heights of 15 to 17 feet.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Here it is again, in smaller format. This is where the new wave of office construction in New York is headed, or where it's been for anyone paying attention. That 15 Penn rendering is just a number of these type structures stacked on top of each other.

Having the outdoor space is nice, and I think these types of designs (like a jenga tower) work okay for a low-rise building.

[NOPA]

It looks fine, however all that outdoor space seems like a waste given that there are exactly 12 nice days a year in NYC. Literally these spaces will not be used half the time; better suited for SoCal.

The worst offender hear is 2Penn Plaza. Talk about lipstick on a pig! Tear down entire Penn Station/Madison Square Park complex and start again.

[rgarri4]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Having the outdoor space is nice, and I think these types of designs (like a jenga tower) work okay for a low-rise building.

Exactly! This only works well as a wide low rise. That's this "trend" is, if you want to call it that. Copy pasting multiples of these on top of each other into a tall fat skyscraper just looks like shit. My guess is this is just a place holder. There are much more graceful ways of incorporating outdoor space into a skyscraper. This is not it.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by NOPA

It looks fine, however all that outdoor space seems like a waste given that there are exactly 12 nice days a year in NYC. Literally these spaces will not be used half the time; better suited for SoCal.

People from New York can handle cold weather, if anything, I could see the people from SoCal having a problem with it. But its one of the most desired amenities in New York right now, and not surprisingly since the city is so dense, and the nearest park/plaza may be blocks away. Nothing like outdoor space in your own building. You probably wouldn't wanna be out there in a blizzard, but how many of those do we get a year? In fact, even the high up outdoor observation decks are open year round, and I suspect the reason the deck at the WTC hasn't quite hit the numbers they expected is because it's lack of an outdoor deck.

Originally Posted by rgarri4

Exactly! This only works well as a wide low rise.

56 Leonard is one of the most striking skyscrapers in the city in recent years. I'm not gonna tell you this particular rendering is gorgeous, because it obviously needs work. But to say such designs only work in wide lowrises is not true. You could say a wide box at that height would be inappropriate for that location, and I would agree.

[Prezrezc]

Lose the flat roof.

Then we'll talk.

And when we do, I will sing this tower's praises....

"Meet 56 Leaonard's bigger badder bolder brother."

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by NYguy

56 Leonard is one of the most striking skyscrapers in the city in recent years. I'm not gonna tell you this particular rendering is gorgeous, because it obviously needs work. But to say such designs only work in wide lowrises is not true. You could say a wide box at that height would be inappropriate for that location, and I would agree.

56 Leonard is okay, I'm not crazy about it but it is cool in a way. That building at "only" 821 feet isn't overwhelmingly tall though or super prominent on the skyline, nor does it overshadow the ESB. The top also looks more normal than this one.

Originally Posted by NOPA

It looks fine, however all that outdoor space seems like a waste given that there are exactly 12 nice days a year in NYC. Literally these spaces will not be used half the time; better suited for SoCal.

Ha, I know you're kidding by NY is pretty nice about half the year. The winters can suck though, this is true. Maybe they'll have heat lamps?

[Zerton]

I do not like the jenga thing on a tower at all, even when Herzog & de Meuron designs it. Maybe I'm too old school, but imo it looks messy. I don't mind asymmetry but I like some sense of order.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Prezrezc

Lose the flat roof.

Then we'll talk.

And when we do, I will sing this tower's praises....

"Meet 56 Leaonard's bigger badder bolder brother."

I still think it's too bulky to be that close to the Empire State. That design is more fitting for Park Avenue, but not as a companion to the ESB. And anything would be better than that flat roof.