HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 2:10 AM
prageethSL's Avatar
prageethSL prageethSL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Tomorrowland
Posts: 11
Not a big fan of this design . Looks like they are repeating the 432 park design with minor changes .
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 2:13 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,191
Hopefully Chase uses the taller/thinner option. Then Midtown will have three 1500 ft+ towers, and NYC will have the four tallest towers on earth outside of Asia.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 2:18 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by prageethSL View Post
Not a big fan of this design . Looks like they are repeating the 432 park design with minor changes .
I don't know about that...


Quote:
The proposed building will require billions of dollars to build and includes an expensive and energy-efficient facade rarely seen in the United States


Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Hopefully Chase uses the taller/thinner option. Then Midtown will have three 1500 ft+ towers, and NYC will have the four tallest towers on earth outside of Asia.
The only problem I have with that is neither of the 3 (as far as we know) will have an extra peak (spire, crown, even a large antenna). But I'm still excited, especially as this one would have an observation deck and some sort of outdoor slide. Thrills!
__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“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
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 2:34 AM
JMKeynes's Avatar
JMKeynes JMKeynes is online now
In the long run...
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: SW3
Posts: 1,319
Despite the height, the design sucks. I’ll pass.
__________________
"Men will still say, 'This was their finest hour.'"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:03 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,140
Imagining the tower rising here in this shot...


https://www.instagram.com/p/BsvFu10B0Bq/





Quote:
-An 85-foot-high glass lobby would stretch from 52nd Street to 51st Street, where the entrance would dramatically frame the side-street doors to St. Patrick’s. Escalators would lead to the lower levels, restaurants, shops and elevators for the observatory.

-A glass-walled public auditorium would sit above the lobby and look onto the top of St. Patrick’s.

-The office tower itself, however, would step back from St. Patrick’s, rising on 52nd Street atop two stems or stilts, near 400 feet above the sidewalks. The 96-story tower is designed as a sleek shaft until it reaches the top, where a two-level slab juts out from the northern and southern sides of the building, before the tower resumes its ascent.

-The proposed building would cantilever about 100 feet over the Look Building and 300 feet above an adjoining landmark, the John Peirce house, which will almost certainly spark criticism from preservationists.



I'm imagining something similar to Citigroup from street level, but I could be off...



https://adri99blog.wordpress.com/type/image/
__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“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
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:13 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
The only problem I have with that is neither of the 3 (as far as we know) will have an extra peak (spire, crown, even a large antenna).
True, which is why Midtown needs a new signature tower. None of these towers are the new ESB; that designation will have to wait.

But it's coming. We'll eventually get a new focal point for Midtown, probably at 2,000 ft.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:20 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 28,962
If we look at the rendering, assuming this tower is at scale with One Vandy, IDK if this is 1 mil-sqft. I think it may be more.

It looks way to bulky compared to 1 Vandy @ 1.6-1.7 mil-sqft.

And it has a higher floor count too. This has to be more than a mil-sqft. Unless the rendering is not to scale because the foot print for this development I don't believe is anywhere near the Vandy footprint.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:24 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
If we look at the rendering, assuming this tower is at scale with One Vandy, IDK if this is 1 mil-sqft. I think it may be more.

It looks way to bulky compared to 1 Vandy @ 1.6-1.7 mil-sqft.
But if it has much higher ceilings, and more space between floors, it could be bigger than 1 Vandy while having less leasable square ft. Chrysler Building has like 1.2 million square ft. of leasable space but is tiny compared to these towers, because space was built different back then.

Also, we don't know the size. We've only been told over 1 million sq. ft. And keep in mind there's no space near street level, unlike Vanderbilt. The bulk is basically all above 400 ft.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:24 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 28,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
True, which is why Midtown needs a new signature tower. None of these towers are the new ESB; that designation will have to wait.

But it's coming. We'll eventually get a new focal point for Midtown, probably at 2,000 ft.
I think its coming in time. NY seems to go the route of plateaus. Its becoming somewhat common for towers over 1398 ft to be proposed or rise. A lot of the super talls built or u/c have around that figure in Midtown. Its a slow accession upwards.

What I'm leading to is we'll probally see something within 1600-1700, than 1700-1800, before see see a solid 600m tower.

I hope I'm wrong, and a developer with guts and an ego goes for the coveted 600m group.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
But if it has much higher floorplates, and space between floors, it could be bigger than 1 Vandy while having less leasable square ft. Chrysler Building has like 1.2 million square ft. of leasable space but is tiny compared to these towers, because space was built different back then.

Also, we don't know the size. We've only been told over 1 million sq. ft. And keep in mind there's no space near street level, unlike Vanderbilt. The bulk is basically all above 400 ft.
True. Yeah because I was also thinking that it might be negative if its too big. Just because of the commitments that would be needed for it to make sense. Like if this was 2 mil-sq ft, I would not be as confident given the competition for office tenants versus 1 mil-sqft or close to it. Unless they throw in some other functionalities aka mixed used.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:24 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
True, which is why Midtown needs a new signature tower. None of these towers are the new ESB; that designation will have to wait.

But it's coming. We'll eventually get a new focal point for Midtown, probably at 2,000 ft.
I think that's inevitable. Maybe it will come in the redevelopment of the Penn Station area, who knows. But the skyline is starting to look like an army of supertalls. I still say that if either of the trio of potential 1,500 ft towers had a large spire or spike of some kind, they would definitely be more of a focal point above the other towers.





Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
If we look at the rendering, assuming this tower is at scale with One Vandy, IDK if this is 1 mil-sqft. I think it may be more.

It looks way to bulky compared to 1 Vandy @ 1.6-1.7 mil-sqft.

And it has a higher floor count too. This has to be more than a mil-sqft. Unless the rendering is not to scale because the foot print for this development I don't believe is anywhere near the Vandy footprint.
I don't know if that floor count is an actual floor count, or just what they are going with. It says the office tower really won't begin until about 400 ft, if I'm reading that correctly. It probably has a lot of mechanical space as well.

On another note, I'm wondering why the building stops just a foot higher than CPT. Is Macklowe trolling Barnett somehow? Who knows.
__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“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
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:26 AM
Hudson11's Avatar
Hudson11 Hudson11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
On another note, I'm wondering why the building stops just a foot higher than CPT. Is Macklowe trolling Barnett somehow? Who knows.
Take note of the very particular framing of the rendering and there's your answer.

__________________
click here too see hunser's list of the many supertall skyscrapers of New York City!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:35 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,140
Maybe some bad blood leftover from the One57/432 Park days....
Maybe Macklowe wasn't pleased with the idea of CPT taking the spotlight from 432.
Maybe it's all in my head, lol. But Barnett still has some developments of his own in the area still to come.
I would love to see an epic skyscraper war.
__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“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
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:38 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Maybe Macklowe wasn't pleased with the idea of CPT taking the spotlight from 432.

Maybe it's all in my head, lol. But Barnett still has some developments of his own in the area still to come.
Yup. Extell won't like being topped. I think they'll have a "response" in due time.

Barnett wants to be the skyline king of Midtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:45 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
Life enthusiast
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Barcelona, NYC, California
Posts: 4,003
It would be cool if the CPT crown could be extended or sloped in a certain way, then maybe transition into a spire.

I agree that (hopefully) Barnett will have none of it (the being topped that is)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:46 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 28,962
As the fight between Barnett and Macklowe rages on, in the shadows, JDS's Michael Stern is devising a superior tower, armed with the heavy ammunition, SHoP architects.

Vinoly is like a small 22 Caliber, where SHoP is a thermobaric missile. While I'm at it, I guess Kaufman would be akin to a dirty bomb. Just poisons the landscape anywhere his towers grow.

Praise Jesus this is not a Kaufman design. Can you imagine what a 1,551 ft Kaufman design would be like?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:52 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,140
Quote:
Mr. Macklowe boasted that his observatory would be the highest of the six existing or planned observatories in the city.

Daniel Garodnick, a former city councilman who played a key role in the city’s rezoning of East Midtown for taller towers, was taken aback by Mr. Macklowe’s plan.

“This project goes way beyond what is allowed to be built,” Mr. Garodnick said, “and it needs to be carefully scrutinized in a detailed public review.”

Mr. Macklowe was undaunted. He contended that his project “validates the wisdom” of the city’s rezoning.

“Tall buildings are a reality,” he said. “The days of restrictions on buildings are really over. This is a building that’s never been built before, a 21st-century building.”

Somebody put Garodnick back in the box. I like Macklowe's spirit.


The area has been zoned for a FAR of 18. I'm not sure of the exact size of the combined footprint. But maybe it's going through ULURP because it has a greater FAR.


__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“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
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:55 AM
Saturnian1 Saturnian1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 7
If JPMorgan ends up proposing their tower's actual design with a roof taller than 1551', do you think this tower will end up taller too? If we got the 1556' massing as the design, it would be nice to have this bumped to 1557'.

I wouldn't be surprised if this tower's design and/or height change (I would assume they won't try to make it shorter if they want to have the tallest roof in the hemisphere, so I would consider 1551' to be the minimum height if approvals go well). The rendering looks very rough, and the cladding isn't detailed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:57 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
Life enthusiast
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Barcelona, NYC, California
Posts: 4,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturnian1 View Post
If JPMorgan ends up proposing their tower's actual design with a roof taller than 1551', do you think this tower will end up taller too? If we got the 1556' massing as the design, it would be nice to have this bumped to 1557'.

I wouldn't be surprised if this tower's design and/or height change (I would assume they won't try to make it shorter if they want to have the tallest roof in the hemisphere, so I would consider 1551' to be the minimum height if approvals go well). The rendering looks very rough, and the cladding isn't detailed.
The figures for JPMorgan's tower don't include a parapet etc.

I also don't know if they're going with the 1560' version (1,400' seems to be what they want)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 4:10 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturnian1 View Post
I wouldn't be surprised if this tower's design and/or height change (I would assume they won't try to make it shorter if they want to have the tallest roof in the hemisphere, so I would consider 1551' to be the minimum height if approvals go well). The rendering looks very rough, and the cladding isn't detailed.
It's very possible that the height could change, as well as some design features. The good news is that they've been very cooperative with potential critics of the design.


Quote:
Mr. Macklowe is asking for special permits, zoning changes and approvals to build a tower in East Midtown that is 66 percent bigger than would be allowed under the current zoning.

...In the hope of gaining city approval, Mr. Macklowe and his team — Dan Shannon of Moed de Armas & Shannon Architects and Gensler, a second architecture firm — shoehorned their tower onto the site in an attempt to mitigate its impact on the surroundings. They have also held preliminary meetings with the city’s Planning Department, the Landmarks Preservation Commission and with members of the local community board with the hope of quelling potential opposition.
Quote:
While the tower's height seems certain to trigger backlash from some development watchdogs, at least one appeared amenable to the design - a potentially encouraging initial sign for a project that must pass through a public review. An executive at the Municipal Art Society, which is based in the Look Building directly next door to the planned skyscraper, said that the construction of such spires were exactly what the 2017 rezoning of East Midtown was meant to spur.

"MAS is not anti-development and not against tall buildings," said Tara Kelly, a vice president at the organization, who said Macklowe plans to give the group a more detailed presentation on the planned tower next week. "At first blush, this tower makes sense."
__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“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
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 5:22 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 28,962
Crisper Rendering (larger/sharper Resolution)


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 > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:16 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.