NEW YORK | 175 Park Avenue (Grand Hyatt) | 1,581 FT | 92 FLOORS

[rgarri4]

I love the transparency of the crown. I wasn't expecting that. will add more layers and change the profile depending on how you look at it. Someone asked if it will be lit and they said their still exploring options.

[chris08876]

I'd be curious what the overall lighting scheme would be, especially as it corresponds to the lattices. From base to crown, the lattices will extend. That in itself will make this stunning if those base lattices are anything to go by.

[chris08876]

This lady's voice is very irritating. Pain in the ass with her questions too.



Is it public?

Well...YES... read the damn slide B!

[NYC2ATX]

First takeaways..

The design overall is spectacular, 1000% a must-build. Only thing I would wish if I was a wishing man, is that the roof lattice crown be extrapolated higher and to a narrower point, so as to mirror One Vanderbilt and give a less stubby appearance on top. That said you could build it just like this and I would still be on board.

Also, the staircase connection to the upper roadway around GCT is fantastic and something that I feel should have always existed and want more of. Additionally, in observing the upper level lobby visible through the central window at the base, I ask myself: is this the beginning of an elevated terminal-area road network/ground level? A Chicago's upper & lower Wacker-type of arrangement is what I am seeing, with the original ground level becoming more of a sublevel and the present-day upper roadway level becoming the new outside ground level. While this seems like an extreme prediction now, I suspect climate change may originate cause for large portions of Manhattan being reassessed this way. You are also seeing this now in the High Line-level network of passageways slowly developing between Penn Station and Hudson Yards.

Two thumbs up!

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by rgarri4

I love the transparency of the crown. I wasn't expecting that. will add more layers and change the profile depending on how you look at it. Someone asked if it will be lit and they said their still exploring options.

Their options are it better be lit, lol.

[chris08876]

Somebody from the public is asking about shadow studies (of course lol of course).... they are saying they will look at that during environmental studies.

Timeline for environmental studies is Spring.

[NYguy]

This base is like some sort of grand stage, like you're expecting to see a great performance...

[chris08876]

Oh dear...

She wants them to scrap the base.

This lady has no idea what she is talking about. No concept of architecture.



She was also against 1 Vandy, and says it proudly too with her pre-existing face.

[chris08876]

I'm gathering that they are not a fan of the base.

Or really, the entrance.

They don't see it as "harmonious" with Grand Central.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by NYC2ATX

First takeaways..

Only thing I would wish if I was a wishing man, is that the roof lattice crown be extrapolated higher and to a narrower point, so as to mirror One Vanderbilt and give a less stubby appearance on top. That said you could build it just like this and I would still be on board.

Yep.

And that might just be what they'll do.

[chris08876]

Oh man... so just listening to the members of CB5 ramble on... I don't think they like this. They all seem unanimous.

Essentially, this parcel is not having a good relationship established with Grand Central.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by chris08876

I'm gathering that they are not a fan of the base.

Or really, the entrance.

They don't see it as "harmonious" with Grand Central.

Originally Posted by chris08876

Oh man... so just listening to the members of CB5 ramble on... I don't think they like this. They all seem unanimous.

Essentially, this parcel is not having a good relationship established with Grand Central.

A good thing its not up to them. The LPC will have to decide how good the base interacts with Grand Central. Frankly, it's above the CB level. They came prepared not to like it, it's what they do.

[chris08876]

^^^

Thanks goodness, because they all voted yes to deny on the question of "harmonious" relation with Grand Central.

[rgarri4]

Yeah its not being received very well.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by chris08876

^^^

Thanks goodness, because they all voted yes to deny on the question of "harmonious" relation with Grand Central.

Oh well. Next! On to approvals.

[Busy Bee]

What did these same people think of 1Vandy?

[chris08876]

Overall a very successful presentation. This tower is gem!

I think we are all happy!

[Hudson11]

current building = wall of green glass with an ugly smoke pipe up top.
I'm guessing nobody called CB5 out for BS on this being a much better base than the current existing one?

[NYguy]

^ Those morons don't get it.

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

What did these same people think of 1Vandy?

I don't recall exactly, but remember, there are different committees at the CB. That's why its a good thing they're only advisory. Most people on the earlier committees were in favor of the project. Tonight's committee was specifically focusing on Landmarks.

But the overall recommendation from the public space committee at CB5 was for approval of 1 Vanderbilt...

https://www.cb5.org/cb5m/resolutions/2018-july/resolution_3/

Originally Posted by chris08876

Overall a very successful presentation. This tower is gem!

I think we are all happy!

Yes, thanks for the extra renders. They didn't stream this meeting for some reason.

[NYguy]

Went back to dig this up from 1 Vanderbilt, resolution from CB5...

https://www.cb5.org/cb5m/resolutions/2014-july/resolution_on_report_from_sl/

Resolution on report from SL Green on the “Harmonious relationship” between the building at One Vanderbilt Avenue (42nd to 43rd Sts., Vanderbilt to Madison Avenues) and Grand Central Terminal

At the regularly scheduled monthly meeting of Community Board Five on Thursday, July 10, 2014, the following resolution passed with a vote of: 28 in favor, 9 opposed, 1 abstained, 2 present not entitled to vote.

.........RESOLVED, Community Board Five recommends approval of the harmoniousness report for the proposed building at One Vanderbilt, with the condition and understanding that the developer and his design and architectural team address the issues raised by Community Board Five and continue to work with Community Board Five, through a series of meetings, on a new iteration of the design to address our specific concerns.

And from LPC...


https://www.6sqft.com/landmarks-deems-s-...-appropriate-for-its-grand-central-site/

Landmarks Deems S.L. Green’s One Vanderbilt Tower ‘Appropriate’ for Its Grand Central Site, Others Not Happy

JULY 22, 2014
BY CARTER B. HORSLEY


The New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission held a hearing today on a proposal by S.L. Green to build a huge tower on the northwest corner of Vanderbilt Avenue and 42nd Street directly across from Grand Central Terminal. The proposal before the commission was an application for a “certificate of appropriateness” for a transfer of air rights from the former Bowery Savings Bank Building at 110 East 42nd Street between Park and Lexington Avenues.

The developers of S.L. Green made their moves by wooing Landmarks with renderings of Kohn Pedersen Fox-designed tower which would be 1,350 feet tall not counting a 100-foot-high spire—this is significantly higher than the Chrysler Building on the northeast corner of Lexington Avenue and 42nd Street and higher than all the supertalls in construction or planned for 57th Street.

.....The Historic Districts Council and the Society for the Architecture of the City testified today strongly against the S.L. Green plan. The council maintained that it “does not agree that the proposed design for One Vanderbilt shares a harmonious relationship with Grand Central Terminal.”

It said that it “fears that the cut-away feature in the base of 1 Vanderbilt is a hollow gesture to the grandeur of the Terminal, and it almost threatens to consume the shorter individual landmark.” The proposed base of the tower would have rakishly angled large window openings rising from west to east that unmistakably conjure Jaws gobbling Robert Shaw.

“A solid street-wall typical of this area of East Midtown would be a more appropriate fit,” the council’s statement continued, adding that the pre-war building at 51 East 42nd Street, also known as the Vanderbilt Avenue Building (architects Warren &Wetmore, 1912) that exists in the footprint of the proposed One Vanderbilt development “shares a true dialog with the Terminal, its longtime neighbor, and could be used instead of discarded.”