US skyscraper milestone: closing in on 100 towers over 800' tall - Page 8

ue · #1 Posted **Dec 21, 2021, 5:38 AM**

^ Out of curiosity, what do you think #3 in NA would have been circa 2010, if not Toronto? I agree it wasn't quite on the level of Chicago then, but Toronto has been solidly #3 for a while...which is impressive in its own way. Toronto also has had way more suburban high-rise clusters (both residential and office) for a long time, whereas Chicago just has the contiguous core skyline really.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doady

Chicago's skyline is along the waterfront, while Toronto's skyline is perpendicular to the waterfront, which might affect people's perception a bit.

That's been changing over the past 20 years, though. For sure the main orientation of high-rises is still north-south along the Yonge corridor, but it has been beefing up east-west too with Cityplace, the Harbourfront, Southcore, Corktown, various developments in the King West area and Financial District, and soon the Portlands.

Unfortunately the north-south orientation doesn't have many good places to view it from, aside from Riverdale Park and Chester Hill Lookout, although the latter is kind of far from things. An observatory from around Regent Park/St Lawrence/Eastern Queens Quay or somewhere near Bathurst St or Spadina between College and King would show the impressive expanse of Toronto's skyline better.

Steely Dan · #2 Posted **Dec 21, 2021, 3:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ue

^ Out of curiosity, what do you think #3 in NA would have been circa 2010, if not Toronto?

Back in 2010, I would have said that there wasn't a clear cut #3 skyline in NA.

Sure, Toronto had its thousands of 20 story commieblocks sprinkled about all over the metro area, but cities like LA and Houston had more impressive singular CBD clusters with greater numbers of taller buildings (500+ ft. and so on)

But over the past 12 years, Toronto has gone into hyperdrive and unquestionably distanced itself from the pack, moving from 3rd tier up to 2nd tier with Chicago. NYC is still alone within NA in the 1st tier.

MolsonExport · #3 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 5:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Back in 2010, I would have said that there wasn't a clear cut #3 skyline in NA.

Sure, Toronto had its thousands of 20 story commieblocks sprinkled about all over the metro area, but cities like LA and Houston had more impressive singular CBD clusters with greater numbers of taller buildings (500+ ft. and so on)

But over the past 12 years, Toronto has gone into hyperdrive and unquestionably distanced itself from the pack, moving from 3rd tier up to 2nd tier with Chicago. NYC is still alone within NA in the 1st tier.

agreed. well put.

Crawford · #4 Posted **Dec 22, 2021, 5:08 PM**

That's a pretty idiotic clip. There are no "half empty" NYC skyscrapers, and no tax breaks.

In fact, NYC skyscraper condos are taxed at rates multiples higher than non-core real estate. Mayors have been trying to equalize the taxes, so that a $1 million condo isn't taxed at 3x the rate of a $1 million house, but so far, there haven't been changes.

And no one would buy a condo at 432 Park as a "tax shelter". That would basically be the dumbest "tax shelter" on earth. You're paying the highest transfer taxes anywhere in the U.S., a "millionaires" tax, a special Manhattan surcharge, and now an additional tax for nonresident purchases.

Oh, and now there are really three transfer taxes - a NY State transfer tax (highest in the nation), the RPTT (a relatively new NYC-specific transfer tax, and only on luxury real estate in core areas), and a flip tax, if property is sold within a relatively short period of time. Also, the city and state will go after you on income taxes, regardless of where earned, based on the number of days you occupy your unit. And they'll check electricity usage and the like, just to be sure.

So if some random sheik or gangster is hiding his money in Manhattan RE, he's dumber than dirt. You can't even hide your purchase under LLCs anymore. Purchaser name is now public knowledge.

chris08876 · #5 Posted **Dec 22, 2021, 6:08 PM**

We just got Grand Hyatt approved.

1,575 ft, with massive bulk and a stellar design.

2nd tallest in the U.S. (first if we don't count spires).

Steely Dan · #6 Posted **Dec 22, 2021, 6:24 PM**

^ that is one girthy MoFo! it looks like it could swallow the chrysler building whole and not even show it.

"FU billionaire's row pencil towers, this is how you build a real NYC monster."

i love the neo-gothic crown. it's probably the next great NYC skyscraper to truly take the the torch from the ESB.

JManc · #7 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 4:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ that is one girthy MoFo! it looks like it could swallow the chrysler building whole and not even show it.

"FU billionaire's row pencil towers, this is how you build a real NYC monster."

i love the neo-gothic crown. it's probably the next great NYC skyscraper to truly take the the torch from the ESB.

It also compliments the Chrysler very well but it will never take the torch from the ESB. No matter how far it drops in ranking, it will always be NYC's quintessential skyscraper. Best looking building to come out of NYC in a long long while though.

Steely Dan · #8 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 4:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JManc

It also compliments the Chrysler very well but it will never take the torch from the ESB. No matter how far it drops in ranking, it will always be NYC's quintessential skyscraper. Best looking building to come out of NYC in a long long while though.

ESB has now fallen to 7th place (soon to be 8th) in NYC, and with the way the city keeps building 400+ meter towers, it'll most likely be pushed outta the top 10 sometime this decade.

But yeah, ESB is not just the most iconic skyscraper in NYC, it's the most iconic one on the planet, so perhaps this new tower won't exactly take the torch from it, but maybe more like share it a little bit.

Out of all of NYC's recent supertalls, this one feels to me like the one with the greatest potential for future "iconic" status because it hits all three of the big notes: height, girth, and stellar design.

The North One · #9 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 2:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford

That's a pretty idiotic clip. There are no "half empty" NYC skyscrapers, and no tax breaks.

You can choose to be delusional I guess, but the facts are all right there laid out in front of your face lol.

iheartthed · #10 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 4:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford

So if some random sheik or gangster is hiding his money in Manhattan RE, he's dumber than dirt. You can't even hide your purchase under LLCs anymore. Purchaser name is now public knowledge.

Depends on who they are hiding it from. Many rich foreigners buying NY real estate are trying to put assets out of the reach of their governments at home. This was a very common tactic of Russian oligarchs that wanted to hedge against falling out of Putin's good graces, but it hasn't been as popular since Obama put Russia on the sanctions list after Russia seized Crimea. Putting Russia on the sanctions list gave the U.S. government the ability to seize assets of any Russian citizen that it believed to be connected to the Russian government.

Innsertnamehere · #11 Posted **Dec 22, 2021, 6:36 PM**

I love how much it just completely dwarves the Chrysler Building. It's an awesome project.

MolsonExport · #12 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 5:42 PM**

ESB is the most iconic skyscraper on the planet.
The Chrysler building is the most beautiful skyscraper on the planet.

Crawford · #13 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 5:53 PM**

ESB also looks more dominant than its technical height, because it's 1,454 ft. to tip, and sits on top of a hill. It's also very bulky, with nearly 3 million square feet of space.

So from most angles, it still looks pretty dominant.

Steely Dan · #14 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 6:34 PM**

^ it also helps that, so far, none of the new 400+ meter towers have been built right next door to the ESB.

It still maintains decent prominence in its immediate environs.

That said, this is not the midtown skyline of 10 years ago.

Source: michael.soukup

chris08876 · #15 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 10:12 PM**

MolsonExport · #16 Posted **Dec 24, 2021, 6:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876

This list is fucking insane! Insane!!! WOW!

JManc · #17 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 8:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford

ESB also looks more dominant than its technical height, because it's 1,454 ft. to tip, and sits on top of a hill. It's also very bulky, with nearly 3 million square feet of space.

So from most angles, it still looks pretty dominant.

The ESB is an absolute monster. You really can't appreciate it until right next to it. It might be shorter than these new buildings but still looks more massive though Vanderbilt and that 1,575' building above will easily rival it.

chris08876 · #18 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 9:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JManc

The ESB is an absolute monster. You really can't appreciate it until right next to it. It might be shorter than these new buildings but still looks more massive though Vanderbilt and that 1,575' building above will easily rival it.

The elevation boost really helps, also the thickness of the spire and in general the crown. Really feels like 1454' versus the 1250'.

It's still the O.G. skyscraper. The one people stare at the most, even amidst all the other supertalls.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

ESB has now fallen to 7th place (soon to be 8th) in NYC, and with the way the city keeps building 400+ meter towers, it'll most likely be pushed outta the top 10 sometime this decade.

But yeah, ESB is not just the most iconic skyscraper in NYC, it's the most iconic one on the planet, so perhaps this new tower won't exactly take the torch from it, but maybe more like share it a little bit.

Out of all of NYC's recent supertalls, this one feels to me like the one with the greatest potential for future "iconic" status because it hits all three of the big notes: height, girth, and stellar design.

I agree with this. Even more I think than 1 WTC. 175 Park has a superior design.

We are looking at a national icon in the making.

But a lot in store. 350 Park and also, once the Park Lane Hotel gets redeveloped, that could be a jewel as well given the location. Prime Location!

It's a shame the issues with 2 WTC. That could of been great, but we shall see. The Foster design would of turned heads.

= = = = =

Miami will be getting its first super tall soon. This one is slated to rise and is happening.

Waldorf Astoria:

Credit: https://www.waldorfastoriadowntown.com/

JManc · #19 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 11:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876

Waldorf Astoria:

Credit: https://www.waldorfastoriadowntown.com/

That building is the architectural analogue to this:

Crawford · #20 Posted **Dec 23, 2021, 6:59 PM**

Right, and from that angle ESB also isn't gonna look as prominent because the Upper West Side is higher elevation than lower Midtown. ESB looks especially prominent from points south, in part because elevation is lower.

But obviously buildings play an even bigger role than elevation.