NEW YORK | 53W53 (Tower Verre) | 1,050 FT / 320 M | 73 FLOORS - Page 109

Blaze23 · #**2161** Posted **Jul 4, 2014, 4:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

I agree. I often wonder if this proposal came a few years too soon. With all of the other taller towers now on the boards, they couldn't have made quite the same argument about the top in comparison with the ESB. Maybe it wouldn't have gotten the "chop" job. But I'm still excited to see this one rise, and its still taller than a lot of tallest in other places. And I still think it's the best of the bunch.

I'll never get over this chop job. But you're right, watching those other towers rise taller than TV with smaller floor plates in some cases and in almost identical vicinities makes the argument used back then completely idiotic, especially when it relates to the crown vis a vis the ESB, which was utterly outrageous.
But the masterpiece is being built and we got more than enough interesting projects going around the city to make up for it, not only in terms of height but in terms of great architecture, Steinway, the Pyramid, the WTC station, 56 Leonard.... So much I lose count. Great time to be in the city for sure.

UrbanImpact · #**2162** Posted **Jul 9, 2014, 4:25 PM**

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2014/0...orld_trade.php

Curbed is stating in the above article " Meanwhile, Jean Nouvel's Tower Verre, a.k.a. the MoMA tower, is slated to be 1,250 feet tall after a redesign last year that shortened it a tad. '

Is this true?!?!?

JayPro · #**2163** Posted **Jul 9, 2014, 4:49 PM**

That's news to me...unsubstantiated and uncorroborated news...unless Nouvel's camp can prove otherwise or Amanda Burden takes to the public forums to deny it.

gramsjdg · #**2164** Posted **Jul 9, 2014, 4:54 PM**

I wish.

The heights given in the article for 432 and Steinway are both off/not current, so that gives me reason to doubt the claim.

sparkling · #**2165** Posted **Jul 9, 2014, 5:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by UrbanImpact

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2014/0...orld_trade.php

Curbed is stating in the above article " Meanwhile, Jean Nouvel's Tower Verre, a.k.a. the MoMA tower, is slated to be 1,250 feet tall after a redesign last year that shortened it a tad. '

Is this true?!?!?

I will not take that seriously, I often visit the website and it's full of inaccuracies. To Curbed' credit though, they are often corrected after people point them out in the comments section.

hunser · #**2166** Posted **Jul 9, 2014, 5:22 PM**

That's a typo. Unfortunately, Tower Verre's height remains the same - 1,050ft.

NYguy · #**2167** Posted **Jul 9, 2014, 5:38 PM**

Revised filings still show 1,050 ft.

NYguy · #**2168** Posted **Jul 21, 2014, 11:13 AM**

July 20, 2014

ILNY · #**2169** Posted **Jul 22, 2014, 12:13 AM**

^Looks like demo has started.

ILNY · #**2170** Posted **Jul 29, 2014, 4:20 AM**

chris08876 · #**2171** Posted **Jul 30, 2014, 4:07 PM**

http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/or...78fc7a2b31.jpg

JayPro · #**2172** Posted **Jul 30, 2014, 6:05 PM**

What does not comply now?

scalziand · #**2173** Posted **Jul 30, 2014, 6:22 PM**

Nothing that didn't already not comply in the past, and have gotten variances for already.

JayPro · #**2174** Posted **Jul 30, 2014, 11:16 PM**

I'm sure you're right; but those "does not comply" phrases in the height & setback part had me a bit worried. They must've been printed before the necessary OK's were granted.
I don't know how to read these when in my view certain pieces of context for there being "non-complinace" don't seem to be there.
Then again, I'm prolly letting my propensity to over-analyze run amok.