HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Supertall Construction


270 Park Avenue in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #4281  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 11:22 AM
Xing Lin's Avatar
Xing Lin Xing Lin is offline
Sydney
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
Also has anyone else wondered if Chase plans to hang their iconic logomark inside this diamond? Seems like it would be a good fit and would look pretty damn cool on the skyline IMO:


_


_
There were a couple of renderings that were leaked some time ago that showed that the crown lighting consists of a programmable LED matrix in vertical strips, similar to Manhattan West -- so it's practically possible to display a Chase logo (or anything they want to) up there, maybe something like this:


Leaked official rendering of the crown LEDs:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/nicol...734131712-eSWI
There was another rendering showing the eastern facade displaying an American flag, but unfortunately it was deleted and I lost my saved copy of it.

Last edited by Xing Lin; Feb 18, 2024 at 12:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4282  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 11:42 AM
ZSuede ZSuede is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2021
Location: Delaware
Posts: 49




Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4283  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 12:25 PM
SamLYNY's Avatar
SamLYNY SamLYNY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xing Lin View Post
There were a couple of renderings that were leaked some time ago that showed that the crown lighting consists of programmable LEDs in vertical strips, similar to Manhattan West -- so a Chase logo could be possible to display[...]
Leaked official rendering of the crown LEDs:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/nicol...734131712-eSWI
There was another rendering showing the eastern facade displaying an American flag, but unfortunately it was deleted and I lost my saved copy of it.
The plot thickens... I'd love to see what kind of designs are possible, the American flag sounds awesome!

Just looking back at some of the official and non-official renderings in terms of lighting, it is quite interesting...

The images taken from the official video from Foster + Partners really highlights how the the lighting could 'fade in' as it ascends the upper sections, which can't be seen as easily in their stills. I think it looks really nice.


Source

However, I have to say I still love the idea of the 'diamonds' being lit up as they rise into the sky, as can be seen in the older unofficial renderings from siniaevart on Instagram.



Though as we know, these are unofficial, and were done before the design was finalised, as can be seen in the setbacks and lack of vertical lighting elements towards the top.

A different rendering from siniaevart on Instagram shows a combination of the two, still using an older design for the building. (One I'm sure you will recognise Xing!)



Looking back at different people's interpretations of what lighting they envisioned for 270 Park was really interesting to see, even if they are unofficial/old.

I am excited to see this building light up the sky for real once it is finished!
__________________
Maybe we become New Yorkers the day we realize that New York will go on without us. - Colson Whitehead
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4284  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 1:54 PM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
JACKinBeantown
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 8,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
Also has anyone else wondered if Chase plans to hang their iconic logomark inside this diamond? Seems like it would be a good fit and would look pretty damn cool on the skyline IMO:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xing Lin View Post
There were a couple of renderings that were leaked some time ago that showed that the crown lighting consists of programmable LEDs in vertical strips, similar to Manhattan West -- so a Chase logo could be possible to display, maybe something like this:


Please no.
__________________
Hi.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4285  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 2:22 PM
Ottman Ottman is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2023
Posts: 28
That logo and chase is mainly their retail and credit card division. I doubt they would put that here, most likely JPMorgan Chase & co
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4286  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 2:53 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,175

___
__________________
Everything new is old again


Trumpism is the road to ruin
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4287  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 6:14 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by clubtokyo View Post
This is by far my favorite new skyscraper in the world. It's just so elegant, modern, detailed. Love everything about it!
It will be the favorite of a lot of people, especially if the lighting makes the features even more prominent at night.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Xing Lin View Post
There were a couple of renderings that were leaked some time ago that showed that the crown lighting consists of programmable LEDs in vertical strips, similar to Manhattan West -- so a Chase logo could be possible to display, maybe something like this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ottman View Post
That logo and chase is mainly their retail and credit card division. I doubt they would put that here, most likely JPMorgan Chase & co
Corporate logos are forbidden at the tops of skyscrapers.
__________________
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
     
     
  #4288  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 6:41 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,175
NYguy can you again produce the city regulatory language that supports this. I'm not necessarily doubting you but I would like to see the language of the law for myself.
__________________
Everything new is old again


Trumpism is the road to ruin
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4289  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 7:37 PM
SamLYNY's Avatar
SamLYNY SamLYNY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Corporate logos are forbidden at the tops of skyscrapers.
For good reason IMO. It's better for a building to have identity through its design rather than what logo is on the side. Without this law I bet the skyline would slowly start to look like Times Square.
__________________
Maybe we become New Yorkers the day we realize that New York will go on without us. - Colson Whitehead
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4290  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 7:59 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
NYguy can you again produce the city regulatory language that supports this. I'm not necessarily doubting you but I would like to see the language of the law for myself.
I’m not going to look that up because I don’t need it. It’s not a recent regulation.
__________________
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
     
     
  #4291  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 8:04 PM
SamLYNY's Avatar
SamLYNY SamLYNY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
NYguy can you again produce the city regulatory language that supports this. I'm not necessarily doubting you but I would like to see the language of the law for myself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamLYNY View Post
I believe it refers to Article 3 of the NYC Zoning laws, in this case specifically under Commercial District Regulations, sections 32-60 on 'sign regulations'. Though I may be wrong.
^Have you had any luck with this?
__________________
Maybe we become New Yorkers the day we realize that New York will go on without us. - Colson Whitehead
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4292  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 11:10 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,175
^Here's the entire relevant section copied and pasted. I'm sure the answer is in there somewhere but I don't know which one(s) speak most directly to it. My eyes were starting to cross reading the PDF:

Some regulation sections correspond with the zoning reform of 1961. The MetLife (Pan Am) Building opened in 1959 with two colossal PAN AM wordmarks facing north and south and two large globe logomarks on the east and west. I don't know if the 1961 rewrite forbid such signage or not as 1 Penn Plaza came after with it's large stylized 1 sign in 1972.

32-60 - SIGN REGULATIONS
LAST AMENDED
12/15/1961
32-61 - Definitions
LAST AMENDED
11/19/1987
Words in italics are defined in Section 12-10 or, if applicable exclusively to this Chapter, in this Section.
32-62 - Permitted Signs
LAST AMENDED
2/2/2011
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8
In all districts, as indicated, #signs# other than #advertising signs# are permitted subject to the provisions of the following
Sections:
Section 32-64 (Surface Area and Illumination Provisions)
Section 32-65 (Permitted Projection or Height of Signs)
Section 32-66 (Additional Regulations for Signs Near Certain Parks and Designated Arterial Highways)
Section 32-67 (Special Provisions Applying along District Boundaries)
Section 32-68 (Permitted Signs on Residential or Mixed Buildings)
Section 32-69 (Additional Sign Regulations for Adult Establishments)
However, notwithstanding any provision of this Section, flags, banners or pennants other than those that are #advertising
signs#, located on any #zoning lot# used primarily for #community facility# #uses# of a civic, philanthropic, educational or
religious nature, are permitted in all districts, as indicated, without limitation.
32-63 - Permitted Advertising Signs
LAST AMENDED
2/2/2011
C6-5 C6-7 C7 C8
In the districts indicated, #advertising signs# are permitted subject to the applicable provisions of the following Sections:
Section 32-64 (Surface Area and Illumination Provisions)
Section 32-65 (Permitted Projection or Height of Signs)
Section 32-66 (Additional Regulations for Signs Near Certain Parks and Designated Arterial Highways)
Section 32-67 (Special Provisions Applying along District Boundaries)
Section 32-68 (Permitted Signs on Residential or Mixed Buildings).
32-64 - Surface Area and Illumination Provisions
LAST AMENDED
2/27/2001
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8
In all districts, as indicated, all permitted #signs# shall be subject to the restrictions on #surface area# and illumination as set
forth in this Section, provided that the following #signs# shall be exempted from such restrictions on #surface area#:
#Illuminated# non-#flashing signs# other than #advertising signs# located in a window within a #building#, with a total
#surface area# not exceeding eight square feet on any #zoning lot# and limited to not more than three such #signs# in
any window.
For the purpose of determining permitted #surface area# of #signs# for #zoning lots# occupied by more than one establishment,
any portion of such #zoning lot# occupied by a #building# or part of a #building# accommodating one or more establishments
on the ground floor may be considered as a separate #zoning lot#.
No #illuminated sign# shall have a degree or method of illumination which exceeds standards established by the Department of
Buildings by rule pursuant to the City Administrative Procedure Act. Such standards shall ensure that illumination on any
#illuminated sign# does not project or reflect on #residences#, #loft dwellings# or #joint living-work quarters for artists# so as to
interfere with the reasonable use and enjoyment thereof. Nothing herein shall be construed to authorize a #sign with indirect
illumination# to arrange an external artificial source of illumination so that direct rays of light are projected from such artificial
source into #residences#, #loft dwellings# or #joint living-work quarters for artists#.
32-641 - Total surface area of signs
LAST AMENDED
12/15/1961
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8
In all districts, as indicated, the total #surface area# of all permitted #signs#, including non-#illuminated# or #illuminated signs#,
shall not exceed the limitation established for non-#illuminated signs#, as set forth in Section 32-642.
32-642 - Non-illuminated signs
LAST AMENDED
1/20/1965
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8
In all districts, as indicated, non-#illuminated signs# with total #surface areas# not exceeding those shown in the following table
are permitted:
District Maximum Surface Area
C3 50 square feet
C1 C2 Three times the #street# frontage of the
#zoning lot# (in feet), but in no event more
than 150 sq. ft. for #interior# or #through
lots# or 150 sq. ft. on each frontage for
#corner lots#.
C5-1 C5-2 C5-3 C5-5 Three times the #street# frontage of the
#zoning lot# (in feet), but in no event more
than 200 sq. ft. for #interior# or #through
lots# or 200 sq. ft. on each frontage for
#corner lots#.
C4 C5-4 C6-1 C6-2 C6-3
C6-4 C6-6 C6-8 C6-9
Five times the #street# frontage of the
#zoning lot# (in feet), but in no event more
than 500 sq. ft. for #interior# or #through
lots# or 500 sq. ft. on each frontage for
#corner lots#.
C8 Six times the #street# frontage of the
#zoning lot# (in feet), but in no event more
than 750 sq. ft. for each #sign#.
C6-5 C6-7 C7 No restrictions as to size
32-643 - Illuminated non-flashing signs
LAST AMENDED
12/15/1961
C1 C2
In the districts indicated, #illuminated# non-#flashing signs# are permitted with a total #surface area# (in square feet) not
exceeding three times the #street# frontage of the #zoning lot# in feet, but in no event shall the total #surface area# exceed 50
square feet for #interior# or #through lots# or 50 square feet on each frontage for #corner lots#.
32-644 - Illuminated or flashing signs in C4, C5-4, C6 or C7 Districts
LAST AMENDED
6/21/1973
C4 C5-4 C6 C7
In the districts indicated, #illuminated# or #flashing signs# with total #surface areas# not exceeding those shown in the
following table are permitted:
District Maximum Surface Area
(in square feet)
C4 C5-4
C6-1 C6-2 C6-3 C6-4
C6-6 C6-8 C6-9
Five times the #street# frontage of the
#zoning lot# (in feet), but in no event more
than 500 square feet for #interior# or
#through lots# or 500 square feet on each
frontage for #corner lots#.
C6-5 C6-7 C7 No restrictions as to size
However, in a C6-1A District, #flashing signs# are not permitted.
32-645 - Illuminated or flashing signs in C8 Districts
LAST AMENDED
4/8/1998
C8
In the district indicated, #illuminated# or #flashing signs#, other than #advertising signs#, and #advertising signs# with indirect
illumination, are permitted, provided that the total #surface area# of all such #signs# (in square feet) shall not exceed five times
the #street# frontage of the #zoning lot# (in feet) and that the #surface area# of each #sign# shall not exceed 500 square feet.
32-65 - Permitted Projection or Height of Signs
LAST AMENDED
12/15/1961
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8
In all districts, as indicated, all permitted #signs# are subject to the applicable regulations of this Section.
32-651 - Permitted projection in C6-5, C6-7 or C7 Districts
LAST AMENDED
4/8/1998
C6-5 C6-7 C7
In the districts indicated, except as otherwise provided in Section 32-653 (Additional regulations for projecting signs), no
permitted #sign# shall project across a #street line# more than eight feet.
32-652 - Permitted projection in all other Commercial Districts
LAST AMENDED
4/8/1998
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6-1 C6-2 C6-3 C6-4 C6-6 C6-8 C6-9 C8
In the districts indicated, except as otherwise provided in Section 32-653 (Additional regulations for projecting signs), no
permitted #sign# shall project across a #street line# more than 18 inches for double- or multi-faceted #signs# or 12 inches for all
other #signs#.
32-653 - Additional regulations for projecting signs
LAST AMENDED
2/27/2001
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8
In all districts, as indicated, permitted #signs# other than #advertising signs# may be displayed as follows:
(a) Non-#illuminated signs# may be displayed on awnings or canopies permitted by the Administrative Code, with a #surface
area# not exceeding 12 square feet and with the height of letters not exceeding 12 inches. Any commercial copy on such
#signs# shall be limited to identification of the name or address of the #building# or an establishment contained therein.
(b) #Signs# may be displayed on marquees permitted by the Administrative Code, provided that no such #sign# in a district
other than a C6-5, C6-7 or C7 District shall project more than 48 inches above nor more than 12 inches below such
marquee.
32-654 - Height of signs in C8 Districts
LAST AMENDED
12/15/1961
C8
In the district indicated, permitted #signs# shall not extend to a height greater than 40 feet above #curb level#, provided that
non-#illuminated signs# or #signs with indirect illumination# may extend to a maximum height of 58 feet.
32-655 - Height of signs in all other Commercial Districts
LAST AMENDED
1/20/1965
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7
In the districts indicated, no permitted #sign# shall extend above #curb level# at a height greater than the following:
Districts Maximum Height
(in feet)
C1 C2 C3
C5-1 C5-2 C5-3 C5-5
25
C4 C5-4 C6-1 C6-2 C6-3 C6-4
C6-6 C6-8 C6-9
40
C6-5 C6-7 C7 No restriction as to height
32-656 - Height of signs above roof
LAST AMENDED
1/20/1965
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6-1 C6-2 C6-3 C6-4 C6-6 C6-8 C6-9
In the districts indicated, no #sign# displayed from the wall of a #building or other structure# shall extend above the parapet
wall or roof of such #building or other structure#, except that a vertical #sign#, the horizontal width of which, parallel to the
wall, does not exceed 28 inches, may extend no higher than 15 feet above the roof level.
32-657 - Roof signs
LAST AMENDED
4/8/1965
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6-1 C6-2 C6-3 C6-4 C6-6 C6-8 C6-9
In the districts indicated, no #signs# shall be permitted on the roof of any #building#.
32-66 - Additional Regulations for Signs Near Certain Parks and Designated Arterial
Highways
LAST AMENDED
2/27/2001
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8
In all districts, as indicated, all permitted #signs# are subject to the applicable regulations of this Section.
For the purposes of this Section, arterial highways shall include all highways that are shown on the Master Plan of Arterial
Highways and Major Streets as "principal routes," "parkways" or "toll crossings," and that have been designated by the City
Planning Commission as arterial highways to which the provisions of this Section shall apply.
32-661 - Additional regulations for signs other than advertising signs
LAST AMENDED
2/27/2001
C6-5 C6-7 C7 C8
In the districts indicated, and within 200 feet of an arterial highway or a #public park# with an area of one-half acre or more, no
permitted #sign# that is within view of such arterial highway or #public park# shall exceed 500 square feet of #surface area#.
Beyond 200 feet from such arterial highway or #public park#, the surface area of such #signs# may be increased one square foot
for each linear foot such #sign# is located from the arterial highway or #public park#.
Upon application, these requirements shall be waived, provided that the Chairperson of the City Planning Commission certifies
that:
(a) such waiver is limited to a single, non-#flashing sign# that is located on a #zoning lot# not less than one and one-half
acres; and
(b) all other permitted #signs# located on such #zoning lot# that are subject to the provisions of this Section conform with
all the #sign# regulations applicable in C1 Districts.
32-662 - Additional regulations for advertising signs
LAST AMENDED
2/27/2001
C6-5 C6-7 C7 C8
In all districts, as indicated, no #advertising sign# shall be located, nor shall an existing #advertising sign# be structurally altered,
relocated or reconstructed within 200 feet of an arterial highway or of a #public park# with an area of one half acre or more, if
such #advertising sign# is within view of such arterial highway or #public park#. For the purposes of this Section, arterial
highways shall include all highways which are shown on the Master Plan of Arterial Highways and Major Streets, as "principal
routes," "parkways" or "toll crossings," and that have been designated by the City Planning Commission as arterial highways to
which the provisions of this Section shall apply. Beyond 200 feet from such arterial highway or #public park#, an #advertising
sign# shall be located at a distance of at least as many linear feet therefrom as there are square feet of #surface area# on the face of
such #sign#. However, in all districts as indicated, the more restrictive of the following shall apply:
(1) Any #advertising sign# erected, structurally altered, relocated or reconstructed prior to June 1, 1968, within 660 feet of
the nearest edge of the right-of-way of an arterial highway, whose message is visible from such arterial highway, shall
have legal #non-conforming use# status pursuant to Section 52-83, to the extent of its size existing on May 31, 1968.
(2) Any #advertising sign# erected, structurally altered, relocated or reconstructed between June 1, 1968 and November 1,
1979, within 660 feet of the nearest edge of the right-of-way of an arterial highway, whose message is visible from such
arterial highway, and whose size does not exceed 1,200 square feet in #surface area# on its face, 30 feet in height, and 60
feet in length, shall have legal #non-conforming use# status pursuant to Section 52-83, to the extent of its size existing on
November 1, 1979. All #advertising signs# not in conformance with the standards set forth herein shall terminate.
32-663 - Advertising signs on waterways
LAST AMENDED
2/27/2001
No moving or stationary #advertising sign# shall be displayed on a vessel plying waterways adjacent to #Commercial Districts#
and within view from an arterial highway. For the purposes of this Section, arterial highways shall include all highways that are
shown on the Master Plan of Arterial Highways and Major Streets as "principal routes," "parkways" or "toll crossings" and that
have been designated by the City Planning Commission as arterial highways to which the provisions of this Section shall apply.
For the purposes of this Section, #advertising sign# is a #sign# that directs attention to a profession, business, commodity,
service or entertainment conducted, sold or offered elsewhere than upon the premises of the vessel and is not #accessory# to a
#use# on such vessel.
32-67 - Special Provisions Applying Along District Boundaries
LAST AMENDED
4/8/1998
C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8
In the districts indicated, and within 100 feet of the #street line# of any #street# or portion thereof in which the boundary of an
adjoining #Residence District# is located, or which adjoins a #public park# of one-half acre or more, no #advertising sign# that
faces at an angle of less than 165 degrees away from such #Residence District# or park boundary shall be permitted and all other
#signs# facing at less than such an angle shall conform with all the #sign# regulations applicable in C1 Districts as set forth in
Sections 32-62 through 32-68, inclusive, relating to Sign Regulations.
__________________
Everything new is old again


Trumpism is the road to ruin
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4293  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 11:12 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 5,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Corporate logos are forbidden at the tops of skyscrapers.
In NY? There are several, MetLife, Comcast, Salesforce etc. all have logos in midtown.

Maybe I'm in a minority but I think an animated Chase logo would look cool up top.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4294  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2024, 11:17 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,175
^ The argument being made is that those signs are grandfathered in and would not be allowed in new construction under current regulations. Examples being MetLife in the same spots as the old Pan Am signage and Comcast Peacock in the old RCA and GE spots.

And yes it would look cool.
__________________
Everything new is old again


Trumpism is the road to ruin
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4295  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2024, 12:40 AM
SamLYNY's Avatar
SamLYNY SamLYNY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
^ The argument being made is that those signs are grandfathered in and would not be allowed in new construction under current regulations. Examples being MetLife in the same spots as the old Pan Am signage and Comcast Peacock in the old RCA and GE spots.

And yes it would look cool.
I think if done tastefully it could work quite well…but I think it’s very unlikely that any kind of corporate signage will be used.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ottman View Post
That logo and chase is mainly their retail and credit card division. I doubt they would put that here, most likely JPMorgan Chase & co
And as it has been mentioned, in the unlikely event they are permitted to add corporate signage, the ‘logo’ they are most likely to use wouldn’t be the Chase logomark that Xing and I have added to renders.

It is an interesting idea though, and perhaps during design stages they considered something that skirts the line between corporate signage and dynamic lighting - although at this stage it‘s purely speculation.

Personally, I would rather this building be known as ‘270 Park’ or even ‘The JPMorgan Building’ over ‘The Chase Building’, but that’s just nitpicking.
__________________
Maybe we become New Yorkers the day we realize that New York will go on without us. - Colson Whitehead

Last edited by SamLYNY; Feb 12, 2024 at 12:51 AM. Reason: Wording
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4296  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2024, 12:50 AM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,175
^I have to disagree. If they were allowed to have signage AND they pursued it including to have it approved when it wasn't allowed I think it absolutely would be the famous Chase logo. It's not like they are gonna hang "JP Morgan Chase & Company" all they way up there.
__________________
Everything new is old again


Trumpism is the road to ruin
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4297  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2024, 12:58 AM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,175
Also SamLYNY, welcome to the forum. I hope you enjoy chatting around these parts.

FYI though, when you make an edit you're under no obligation to say why ("wording"), and basically no one does, I know I don't, but also know one cares either way. Also, you have 5 minutes to make edits to a post without the post showing a record of an edit being made.
__________________
Everything new is old again


Trumpism is the road to ruin
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4298  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2024, 1:47 AM
SamLYNY's Avatar
SamLYNY SamLYNY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2023
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
^I have to disagree. If they were allowed to have signage AND they pursued it including to have it approved when it wasn't allowed I think it absolutely would be the famous Chase logo. It's not like they are gonna hang "JP Morgan Chase & Company" all they way up there.
That’s fair, and I definitely agree that the Chase logo would fit best, anything else logo-wise would just look silly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
Also SamLYNY, welcome to the forum. I hope you enjoy chatting around these parts.

FYI though, when you make an edit you're under no obligation to say why ("wording"), and basically no one does, I know I don't, but also know one cares either way. Also, you have 5 minutes to make edits to a post without the post showing a record of an edit being made.
Thanks! I’ve been a lurker for a fair while (especially since the ridiculous but loveable 432 Park Ave.). I regret not joining sooner, reading through the threads on OV, billionaire’s row and Hudson Yards is great! I could’ve provided some photo-updates…

I appreciate the advice - it is always welcome.
__________________
Maybe we become New Yorkers the day we realize that New York will go on without us. - Colson Whitehead
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4299  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2024, 2:19 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
In NY? There are several, MetLife, Comcast, Salesforce etc. all have logos in midtown.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
^ The argument being made is that those signs are grandfathered in and would not be allowed in new construction under current regulations. Examples being MetLife in the same spots as the old Pan Am signage and Comcast Peacock in the old RCA and GE spots.

Correct, and it's not an argument being made. The city makes the rules. Frankly, I think it's a good one. New York City has way to many corporations to allow company logos all over. Imagine Hudson Yards with logos across the tops of those massive skyscrapers. Tacky. Lighting, on the other hand, only enhances the skyscrapers.
__________________
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
     
     
  #4300  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2024, 9:06 AM
Ahoi's Avatar
Ahoi Ahoi is offline
Mulan M.
 
Join Date: Feb 2022
Posts: 217


Fortunately, New York's newest skyscraper icon won't have a logo, because this sign would disfigure the building.
__________________
Xiyang Lou (Versailles of the east)
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 > Supertall Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:10 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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