HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2012, 10:08 PM
uaarkson's Avatar
uaarkson uaarkson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Back in Flint
Posts: 2,079
The towers are lame, but could be worse. At least they're not Jersey City bad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2012, 11:14 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post



Another rendering from....
http://www.ckdllc.com/?p=417


Somewhat the same, but it seems like there has been a "bulk up"...Very excited to see this get underway, though from the article below, I don't know what it means for one of my favorite shows.


http://observer.com/2012/10/greenpoi...-by-next-year/

Greenpoint Giant! Park Tower Group Building Two of First Ten Rental Towers By Next Year





By Matt Chaban
10/12/12

Quote:
It was about this time last year that The Observer had first heard that Greenpoint Landing, the just gigantic 10-building development at the mouth of Newtown Creek, was about to come back to life after having been forgotten following the building boom and subsequent collapse in North Brooklyn. “The project has been there a long time, but now the market is finally there,” one of the people involved in the project said at the time. It was predicted buildings would begin rising this year.

But here we are in October with nothing to show for it. Well, nothing but a blog post from Greenpointers hearing that work may just be beginning. The evidence? A message from the local councilman’s office and the apparent departure of the boardwalk from Boardwalk Empire that has been on one of the lots since the show debuted. But it’s true. While a year later than promised, The Observer has confirmed that the project is again underway.

“Park Tower Group intends to start with two rental towers, including affordable housing, towards the end of 2013,” Alfred Bradshaw, executive vice president of the firm, said in a statement. “Details of the plans have not been finalized.”





__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2012, 5:36 AM
untitledreality untitledreality is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,043
Such mixed feelings about this project. On one hand the extra residents will be a net positive for businesses in the area, investment in additional park space for Greenpoint, rid the area of huge swaths of vacant land and hopefully lead the push for increased service/capacity on the G.

On the other hand I cant help but feel anxious that Greenpoint will start down the slippery slope of losing its identity. This is a very tight knit community, one full of hard working Polish families who meticulously care for their property and neighborhood... and the new influx of young people who are looking for a culturally rich, safe, quiet, affordable neighborhood to reside in... and where it will head after this massive project who knows.

Its possible that the soulless glass filler towers are causing some of the anxiety, creating a nervousness as one imagines some disgusting, pompous architecture lining the shores... so hopefully the final designs will invoke a certain nostalgia for the area's industrial, broad shouldered past... instead of some bullshit glass 'globally ambiguous' design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2012, 2:14 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
I have absolute no knowledge of the area and its inhabitants, however all I can say is that this development is taking advantage of prime waterfront real-estate - as such property should be utilized. From what I can see in pictures, I don't see how such a development would damage the integrity of the area, but would rather enhance it and perhaps make it more desirable for future revitalization more inland.
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2012, 8:42 PM
untitledreality untitledreality is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dac150 View Post
I have absolute no knowledge of the area and its inhabitants, however all I can say is that this development is taking advantage of prime waterfront real-estate - as such property should be utilized. From what I can see in pictures, I don't see how such a development would damage the integrity of the area, but would rather enhance it and perhaps make it more desirable for future revitalization more inland.
Of course post industrial waterfront is underutilized... modern NYC will never again have the need for active piers along its entire coastline... thats really not the issue. The area should be developed and should allow for more people to enjoy the community, but how can you blend this new development into the existing neighborhood identity without just saying "fuck it, slap up a series of generic towers and lets call it a day" ...thats what needs to be addressed.

Greenpoint is already incredibly desirable, but desirable for different reasons than most of the "it neighborhoods" in NYC. It has continuous stability, North to South and West to East... inland is perfectly fine, the only areas that really need any work are the shorelines and the Northern portion of McGuinness.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2012, 9:43 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
Well based on the renderings it appears that there will be several public access points the waterfront, parks, etc. Again I'm not familiar with this area, however I frequent areas along the New Jersey 'gold coast' that have seen some revitalization over the last decade and such revitalization has done wonders for what used to be undesirable / underutilized areas. Granted I may not be comparing apples to apples, though I can't imagine that this development would damage the cultural identity of this neighborhood.

I suppose I'm curious now as to what your ideal alternative would be to this proposal?
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2012, 11:00 PM
babybackribs2314 babybackribs2314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UWS, Manhattan
Posts: 1,728
I don't think this is bad, and it's certainly better than what one would expect for the area. Much of Greenpoint is a brownfield site, and you have to take that into consideration before slamming this development, I think... you're not going to get starchitecture on a plot next to contaminated land (I'm fairly sure the Lumberyard site isn't actually part of the brownfield, but it's most definitely adjacent).

The Calatrava-designed bridge over Newtown Creek is a nice touch although it is generic (for his work) and I don't see it being used. Who wants to walk over a body of water--however large--that is basically a toxic waste dump?

I see the next major phase in the development of Greenpoint and LIC as involving a major clean-up of Newtown Creek and the adjacent industrial land, especially as both the Lumberyard project and Hunter's Point South come closer to completion.

Also: if you DO want starchitecture in Brooklyn, I would look to DoBro for the answer. Even the developments in Williamsburg are mostly generic (and remember Vinoly's awfully ugly plan for the Domino Site redevelopment? hopefully with the site changing hands a new master plan is selected). I think buildings like The Hub could surprise people, and the tallest Citypoint Tower could also be a knock-out if it is indeed built to 700 feet or more.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2012, 11:34 PM
Eidolon's Avatar
Eidolon Eidolon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by babybackribs2314 View Post
The Calatrava-designed bridge over Newtown Creek is a nice touch although it is generic (for his work) and I don't see it being used. Who wants to walk over a body of water--however large--that is basically a toxic waste dump?
Like you said yourself, I don't think that the creek will be like a toxic waste dump for much longer. Besides, the bridge connects Greenpoint to the other side of the creek which will allow people to get to the 7 train easily.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2012, 11:51 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Newtown Creek is already being cleaned. The most polluted portion (which is further down the creek, not here) was designated a Superfund Site a while ago.

There are already kayaking groups and other recreational boating uses on Newtown Creek. It will eventually be a normal urban waterway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2012, 12:38 AM
babybackribs2314 babybackribs2314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UWS, Manhattan
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Newtown Creek is already being cleaned. The most polluted portion (which is further down the creek, not here) was designated a Superfund Site a while ago.

There are already kayaking groups and other recreational boating uses on Newtown Creek. It will eventually be a normal urban waterway.
I would never ever kayak in Newtown Creek let alone the Hudson. Would you? That water is gross.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2012, 6:57 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by babybackribs2314 View Post
I would never ever kayak in Newtown Creek let alone the Hudson. Would you? That water is gross.
There are plenty of people who do and would.



Quote:
Originally Posted by untitledreality View Post
The area should be developed and should allow for more people to enjoy the community, but how can you blend this new development into the existing neighborhood identity without just saying "fuck it, slap up a series of generic towers and lets call it a day" ...thats what needs to be addressed.
There is way too much we don't know about this development, which is more than just highrises. If you say the highrises will destroy the "character" of the neighborhood as you see it, that may very well be true. However, knowing the City the way I do, where things can be different on a block by block basis, I don't see that this waterfront development would change the local to the point where the streets won't be recognizable. Brooklyn as a whole is already highly desirable, and as such there will always be the possibility of new development bringing in new people. Such is life in an ever growing, changing, and evolving city.
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2012, 12:09 AM
untitledreality untitledreality is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dac150 View Post
I suppose I'm curious now as to what your ideal alternative would be to this proposal?
It would be nice to see something that creates a gradient from the small scale fine grain existing urban fabric into higher/larger/denser structures along the water. Also to have architecture that relates to the identity of Greenpoint and acknowledges the shoreline's past as a gritty industrial area. The renderings create a white washed, anywhere USA vibe, that somehow these buildings should disassociate themselves from Greenpoint and to a greater extent, NYC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by babybackribs2314 View Post
Much of Greenpoint is a brownfield site, and you have to take that into consideration before slamming this development, I think... you're not going to get starchitecture on a plot next to contaminated land (I'm fairly sure the Lumberyard site isn't actually part of the brownfield, but it's most definitely adjacent).
You are taking my criticism the wrong way. By no means would I ever imagine "starchitecture" being a solution for this project... or even desirable. In fact I would like to see a reversion towards more rectilinear, tiered designs utilizing materials that age and have a direct connection to industrial Brooklyn. Work akin to that of Roman Williams or Williams Tsien is what I would be looking for.

And considering the crap that is unearthed ANYWHERE in NYC, every site is a contaminated brownfield site. the contamination just varies (and yes I am very aware of the Greenpoint superfund site... but that obviously isn't stopping this development team from wanting to pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the area)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
There is way too much we don't know about this development, which is more than just highrises. If you say the highrises will destroy the "character" of the neighborhood as you see it, that may very well be true. However, knowing the City the way I do, where things can be different on a block by block basis, I don't see that this waterfront development would change the local to the point where the streets won't be recognizable. Brooklyn as a whole is already highly desirable, and as such there will always be the possibility of new development bringing in new people. Such is life in an ever growing, changing, and evolving city.
I have no problem with high rises for the site, just the placeholder architectural style which seems to ignore its context... not just that of the waterfront, or Greenpoint, or even Brooklyn... but NYC on the whole.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2012, 12:28 AM
babybackribs2314 babybackribs2314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UWS, Manhattan
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by untitledreality View Post
It would be nice to see something that creates a gradient from the small scale fine grain existing urban fabric into higher/larger/denser structures along the water. Also to have architecture that relates to the identity of Greenpoint and acknowledges the shoreline's past as a gritty industrial area. The renderings create a white washed, anywhere USA vibe, that somehow these buildings should disassociate themselves from Greenpoint and to a greater extent, NYC.


You are taking my criticism the wrong way. By no means would I ever imagine "starchitecture" being a solution for this project... or even desirable. In fact I would like to see a reversion towards more rectilinear, tiered designs utilizing materials that age and have a direct connection to industrial Brooklyn. Work akin to that of Roman Williams or Williams Tsien is what I would be looking for.

And considering the crap that is unearthed ANYWHERE in NYC, every site is a contaminated brownfield site. the contamination just varies (and yes I am very aware of the Greenpoint superfund site... but that obviously isn't stopping this development team from wanting to pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the area)


I have no problem with high rises for the site, just the placeholder architectural style which seems to ignore its context... not just that of the waterfront, or Greenpoint, or even Brooklyn... but NYC on the whole.
All valid points.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2012, 2:00 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by untitledreality View Post
I have no problem with high rises for the site, just the placeholder architectural style which seems to ignore its context... not just that of the waterfront, or Greenpoint, or even Brooklyn... but NYC on the whole.
All we have are "vaguish" renderings that have been around for a while. We'll see what get's built. But as highrises, they're going to stand out, no doubt about that. Also, they're competing with a lot of developments here, so either they will go the more traditional route, or they will look for something a little more flashier that won't mesh with the current context as you see it. The way I see it, it's a massive waterfront development, and I only see the context of what is there now.
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2012, 4:19 PM
Antares41's Avatar
Antares41 Antares41 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bflo/Pgh/Msn/NYC
Posts: 2,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by untitledreality View Post
I have no problem with high rises for the site, just the placeholder architectural style which seems to ignore its context... not just that of the waterfront, or Greenpoint, or even Brooklyn... but NYC on the whole.
Hopefully, if the developers are smart, they will seek input from the resident in the area. Not whether these structures should be build, but to address the very points that you raised regarding "context". My first impression on look at the proposal is that they are clearly designed to make money and only money, but, there really is the potential to offer more to the area. There has to be a middle ground a win-win that satified all, it not always possible, but, I do fault people for not searching for it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2012, 1:08 AM
Sirus's Avatar
Sirus Sirus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 573
I live not more than 2 blocks from this development. I might be considered one of the "hipsters" already ruining the culture of the hood, but part of the reason I wanted to move to Greenpoint was the culture. The awesome mix of young and old, families and the feeling of a community. Something I really enjoy being part of. It'll be interesting to see how this project affects that.

The more immediate consequence will be the loss of our awesome view haha! Our building is one of the taller ones in the hood so we get an interrupted view of Midtown.
__________________
The Current
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2012, 2:36 AM
CCs77 CCs77 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 601
This is New York, that is used to have plenty of highrises, and not just in Manhattan, Downtown Brooklyn or LIC, but scattered in many areas of the outer boroughs, So I think it is not the problem wheter they buiild highrises or not, when you talk about blending with the context.
Anyway, besides the rendering are not very detailed, they do show that there are low rises in the side facing the neighborhood, with the highrises facing the water, which I think is a good thing to reduce the possible impact of the highrises in the neighborhood.
But the most important thing, is the quality of the architecture, it could be very modern looking, but if it is good quality, it would blend with the neighborhood well. (it is yet to be seen the architectural quality of these proposals) Another thing if it encourages the mix of uses, using retail in the ground level, that it seems to be the case.
Also I think that in the part facing the East River, it would be good if they do more of an "urban promenade" facing the water, and less of a park waterfront, that is already done south, at Brooklyn Bridge Park, and north, at Hunters Point South and LIC.

That is from the architectural point of view. Socially, the problem with this kind of development is that they tend to bring some more affluent residents, which is not bad per se, it even could be desirable, as the area tends to improve. But the downside is that the rents in those areas tend to spike, pushing the old residents out, which I think is not fair (that's why many times they oppose this developments)
I know the world isn't fair, but it would be good that they do these developments, which without doubt improve the area, but the traditional residents are not forced out by spiking rents.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2012, 7:30 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
It was the City that encouraged the development of towers along the waterfront in the first place, but to calm all fears of changing the neighborhood, like much of the rest of the City, plans have been put in place to resist much change.


Read through these documents to get a sense of how the City hopes to accomplish this through zoning.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/gre...on/index.shtml



And here's more on the waterfront zoning...
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/gre...overview.shtml


More specifically....
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/gree...ve_massing.pdf

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/gre...develop3.shtml
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2012, 10:14 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2012, 11:39 PM
tdawg's Avatar
tdawg tdawg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Astoria, NY
Posts: 2,935
wow that's an epic shot.
__________________
From my head via my fingers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Skyscraper & Highrise Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:21 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.