HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

    

53W53 in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram
New York Projects & Construction Forum
            
View Full Map

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #921  
Old Posted Sep 5, 2009, 9:37 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 13,303
Are the crazy beams structural, or merely superficial?
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #922  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2009, 1:47 AM
JSsocal JSsocal is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 631
Structural, and thats what I think makes it so cool
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #923  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2009, 1:59 AM
Hed Kandi's Avatar
Hed Kandi Hed Kandi is offline
+
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,071
This tower is the epitome of "Gotham City" or everything that NYC is. It must be built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #924  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2009, 2:51 PM
mrnyc mrnyc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,992
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Where've you been? They're already out...
oh, but you know the for real rats will take good care of entertaining those nimby rats during the construction phase.

it will serve them right for their whining and ridiculous attempts to delay the complete awesomeness that is this tower. haha.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #925  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2009, 3:29 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
In this economy it isn't getting built any time soon
Don't be so sure.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #926  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2009, 11:54 AM
theWatusi's Avatar
theWatusi theWatusi is offline
Resident Jackass
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Your Mom's House
Posts: 11,702
This thread is for discussion about the Tower Verre, not the number of supertalls under construction, not general discussion about NIMBYs, not discussion about the WTC or number of supertalls in Chicago.

Stay on topic.
__________________
"...remember first on me than these balls in airports" - MK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #927  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2009, 1:00 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 37,809
http://www.observer.com/2009/real-es...-amanda-burden

The Week of Amanda Burden



By Eliot Brown
September 7, 2009

Quote:
The giant wave of end–of–second–Bloomberg-term land-use approvals is making its way to the halls of 22 Reade Street, as the Department of City Planning, led by the powerful Amanda Burden, is tackling a mass of major planned developments this week.

Here’s a quick rundown of what's on tap:

Jean Nouvel/MoMA/Hines 53rd Street Tower — The planned 1,250-foot tower, designed by Pritzker Prize winner Jean Nouvel, is up for a vote before the City Planning Commission on Wednesday. Here in the process Ms. Burden can—and has been known to—change the shape and/or height of projects. (Recently, she changed the design, and lobbed a story off, of David and Jed Walentas’ Dock Street building in Dumbo.) Will she feel the need to adjust the famous Frenchman’s design?
Tomorrow is the big day for City Planning approval...
__________________
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
     
     
  #928  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2009, 8:26 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
El Barto
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: East Coast to Cali
Posts: 3,432
Well... good luck Tower verre, and NYC.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #929  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2009, 10:16 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 37,809
Must be a joke...
http://www.observer.com/2009/real-es...99s-moma-tower

Amanda Burden to Chop 200 Feet Off Nouvel’s MoMA Tower

By Eliot Brown
September 8, 2009

Quote:
“The commission notes that the proposed design of the building is exemplary and that the building … would be a strong addition to the city and its architecture.

However the commission believes that the applicant has not made a convincing argument that the design of the tower’s top, with the uppermost 200 feet of the building, merits being in the zone of the Empire State Building’s iconic spire, making the building the second tallest building in New York City.



“It appears that less attention has been paid to this portion of the building, … in particular the commission is not satisfied with attempts at incorporation mechanical equipment into the tower top, which results in a tower top with a highly visible mechanical equipment.”
__________________
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
     
     
  #930  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2009, 10:48 PM
AlexYVR's Avatar
AlexYVR AlexYVR is offline
In Love With YVRthing
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago:Vancouver
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Must be a joke...
http://www.observer.com/2009/real-es...99s-moma-tower

Amanda Burden to Chop 200 Feet Off Nouvel’s MoMA Tower

By Eliot Brown
September 8, 2009
Heart = dropped, and I'm from 3000 miles away.
__________________
WWJJD?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #931  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2009, 10:54 PM
Hed Kandi's Avatar
Hed Kandi Hed Kandi is offline
+
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,071
?

Quote:
“The commission notes that the proposed design of the building is exemplary and that the building … would be a strong addition to the city and its architecture.

However the commission believes that the applicant has not made a convincing argument that the design of the tower’s top, with the uppermost 200 feet of the building, merits being in the zone of the Empire State Building’s iconic spire, making the building the second tallest building in New York City.



“It appears that less attention has been paid to this portion of the building, … in particular the commission is not satisfied with attempts at incorporation mechanical equipment into the tower top, which results in a tower top with a highly visible mechanical equipment.”

If Nouvel goes back and redesigns that top portion, is there a chance it could be approved?

Last edited by NYguy; Sep 8, 2009 at 11:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #932  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2009, 11:13 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 37,809
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hed Kandi View Post
?

If Nouvel goes back and redesigns that top portion, is there a chance it could be approved?
We'll have to wait and see what the actual vote and reasoning is for approval/disapproval.
__________________
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
     
     
  #933  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2009, 12:46 AM
sbarn sbarn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,039
While I completely disagree with Burden's position... this doesn't surprise me too much. Often developers will overstate the height / bulk of a tower in anticipation that it will get downsized.

Last edited by NYguy; Sep 9, 2009 at 1:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #934  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2009, 1:08 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 37,809
Just a warning, any attempts to inflame this thread will be deleted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbarn View Post
While I completely disagree with Burden's position... this doesn't surprise me too much. Often developers will overstate the height / bulk of a tower in anticipation that it will get downsized.
Again, we'll have to wait until we see the reasoning and restriction on the design, and whether or not this tower can even be built as it with the reduced height, or whether the developer will have to revert to the as-is option. Remember, the special permits the developer was seeking both had to do with lower levels of the tower, not the top.

Quote:
the commission believes that the applicant has not made a convincing argument that the design of the tower’s top, with the uppermost 200 feet of the building, merits being in the zone of the Empire State Building’s iconic spire.....

“It appears that less attention has been paid to this portion of the building, … in particular the commission is not satisfied with attempts at incorporation mechanical equipment into the tower top, which results in a tower top with a highly visible mechanical equipment.”
Makes little sense, considering the as-of-right version is the one the Planning Commision wanted to avoid.


Another look at the as-of-right building, and the proposed 1,250 ft tower:



Mechanical space at the top; don't know what more you could do with that...




__________________
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
     
     
  #935  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2009, 1:32 AM
Antares41's Avatar
Antares41 Antares41 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bflo/Pgh/Msn/NYC
Posts: 1,975
Sounds like the ball is in Nouvel's court. I imagine they will try to justify the 200ft in question before acquiescencing to any changes. Looks like they are in the typical back and forth negotiation that usually occurs with a project of this magnitude. Nothing is final at this point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #936  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2009, 1:39 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
El Barto
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: East Coast to Cali
Posts: 3,432
Well just because this bimbo amanda burden wants the towers top cut off doesn't necessarily mean it will happen though. The news is always looking for a story after all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #937  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2009, 1:59 AM
sbarn sbarn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Well just because this bimbo amanda burden wants the towers top cut off doesn't necessarily mean it will happen though. The news is always looking for a story after all.
Why would a developer be spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, on the approvals stage of a project that they don't think will happen??
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #938  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2009, 2:07 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 37,809
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antares41 View Post
Sounds like the ball is in Nouvel's court. I imagine they will try to justify the 200ft in question before acquiescencing to any changes. Looks like they are in the typical back and forth negotiation that usually occurs with a project of this magnitude. Nothing is final at this point.
If the height reduction is a conditional approval of the permits, it would result in a bulkier tower, a blow to the NIMBYs as well. The developer would have to fit the Museum/residential/hotel space into a shorter tower.

http://www.artsjournal.com/culturegr...ing_repor.html

Quote:
News Flash: City Planning Report Decapitates Nouvel’s MoMA Monster


NY City Planning Commissioner Nathan Leventhal


You go, Nat!

It was NY City Planning Commissioner Nathan Leventhal who publicly raised the question about the elephant-in-the-skyline during last month's hearing on the planned MoMA/Hines tower, designed by architect Jean Nouvel.

It was the simplest of queries from a sophisticated interlocutor---the former president of Lincoln Center, whose early career included a stint as the city's Commissioner of Rent and Housing Maintenance...

if all goes as expected, the City Planning Commission tomorrow will vote to lop 200 feet off Nouvel's soaring ambitions.

At the commission's review session today, which I attended, Edith Hsu-Chen, director of City Planning's Manhattan office, read these excerpts from the CPC's draft report on the MoMA/Hines project:


In particular, the Commission is not satisfied with the attempts at incorporating mechanical equipment into the tower top, which results in a tower top with highly visible mechanical equipment. Therefore, as a condition of its approval and to minimize adverse effects on the character of the surrounding area, the Commission is modifying the application to reduce the height of the building to 1,050 feet.
__________________
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
     
     
  #939  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2009, 2:52 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
El Barto
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: East Coast to Cali
Posts: 3,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbarn View Post
Why would a developer be spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, on the approvals stage of a project that they don't think will happen??

huh? No I meant it doesn't mean a height decrease will necessarily happen, I didn't mean the building wouldn't be built (I still don't think it will but that's another story...)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #940  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2009, 2:56 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
El Barto
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: East Coast to Cali
Posts: 3,432
Quote:
In particular, the Commission is not satisfied with the attempts at incorporating mechanical equipment into the tower top, which results in a tower top with highly visible mechanical equipment. Therefore, as a condition of its approval and to minimize adverse effects on the character of the surrounding area, the Commission is modifying the application to reduce the height of the building to 1,050 feet.

Dear god these people are Nazi's
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 4:36 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.