I have personally had enough of the mid-2000's architectural trope of bumping out portions of a square building. The silhouette this tower will cut is horrendous.
I bet within a decade or so there will be 6-7 towers of this height in Midtown. We already have 2 or 3 in development, and there are some MAJOR sites still unaccounted for.
Extell will want to top Macklowe, I have no doubt. He has three potential Midtown supertall assemblages: at 570 Fifth, another at 740 Eighth, and a third on Billionaires Row. I think one (or more) of these three will be a new tallest.
Then there's the giant assemblage across from Bloomingdales, the Park Lane site, and various sites in Hudson Yards and Midtown East.
+ MTA site, Pfizer site, 245 Park is for sale, the Colgate building on Park. No way any one of those last ten years. 1400' plateau in Midtown by 2030.
+ MTA site, Pfizer site, 245 Park is for sale, the Colgate building on Park. No way any one of those last ten years. 1400' plateau in Midtown by 2030.
Exciting times with those sites listed by you and Crawford.
I think it will become the norm in town because of land prices and just how built up the city is already in Manhattan. This is definitely an upwind trend that has been increasing in frequency. The good thing is that as existing office stock is either upgraded to nice Class-Am with large ceiling heights, we are bound to see more. Residential too!
^^This table is an excellent summary of the current 300+ m status. Just 10 years ago, NYC's tallest were dominated by very old buildings:
Empire State Building (1931): 381 m
Bank of America Tower (2009): 365.8 m
Chrysler Building (1930): 318.9 m
New York Times Tower (2007): 318.8 m
70 Pine Street (1932): 290.2 m
40 Wall Street (1930): 282.5 m
Citigroup Center (1977): 278.9 m
Trump World Tower (2001): 262.4 m
GE Building (1933): 259.8 m
CitySpire Center (1987): 248.1 m
One Chase Manhattan Plaza (1961): 247.8 m
4 Time Square (1999): 246.6 m
MetLife Building (1963): 246.3 m
I went to the ESB's upper (102nd floor) observation deck in June 2009 and remember feeling a little sad that most of the prominent buildings in the city were so old. The supertalls built since 2009 have drastically modernized NYC's skyline.
The ESB is on its way to not even being the 10th or 11th tallest. Which is f**** nuts when you think about it. Like you said, 10 years ago, nobody would of thought.
We also will look forward to the HY Phase II development which will be about the same square footage as Phase I. With that said, the proximity properties to HY will no doubt yield more super talls.
I think Phase II HY will see bulkier, but shorter towers (compensate with bulk), so I'm not getting my hopes up, but nevertheless, its still good news. The prospects to look forward to are the surrounding parcels.
Hopefully 2 WTC can land a tenant or a series of tenants. Silverstien has had a lot of leasing success, recently too, with 3 WTC, so if he could snag a couple of smaller tenants to meet the minimum commitment, might yield in it rising.
I hope that new building see's some revisions. I'm a believer that the tallest buildings that will have the most prominent impacts should have a traditional taper, or spire. It's just aesthetically pleasing. I understand its a trend, and while i dont love them, i have come to accept some of them, but even for a square box building thats pretty bad. Just very random and un-elegant. I feel there should be a higher barrier of sophistication for a massive 1500 foot tower, that will permanently change the skyline. Of course, its all subjective, but just my thoughts. 30 HY and 1 Vand are perfect examples of living up to their prominence.
Permitting data and trends. Note the focus on the outer boroughs in which a lot of the developments are residential base. Manhattan still holds the record and performance gains with respect to office square footage. Even with its density, the last 3 to 4 years have seen a "average american city x several magnitudes" in terms of office gains. The Big Apple is full of growth steroids, growing even bigger.
DO note the Bronx. The next boom spot. Watch out for Queens and the Bronx, exciting times!
Super-tall, super-skinny, super-expensive: the 'pencil towers' of New York's super-rich
By Oliver Wainwright
Feb 5, 2019
Quote:
A graphic showing 159 sites in Manhattan that could potentially accommodate a residential skyscraper of 600 ft or taller. Photograph: KPF Urban Interface
Quote:
The proposed 2022 skyline overlooking Central Park. Photograph: Andrew C Nelson
Quote:
There are millions of square metres of unused development rights remaining across New York, and around 100 sites that could still accommodate a super-tall tower.
Mas is tracking more than 100 proposals for super-tall towers (taller than 180 metres) in the pipeline, from a Russian-backed project at 262 Fifth Avenue – likely to block
views of the Empire State building from Madison Square Park – to 80 South Street, a vertiginous needle for Lower Manhattan, whose 426,000 sq ftof air rights account for
almost half its height. There are many more on the way. Brooklyn is the latest battleground and even Harlem is being touted as the next frontier.
__________________ NEW YORK is Back!
“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Prev
[/IMG]
Linear Mode
