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

[AusTex]

So in New York a building can be approved then morph into something entirely different? I thought the massing and architectural skin is approved. If a project can morph then what is the point of all the required meetings/approvals?

[rich_200]

That other ugly design reminds me of this one in Amsterdam, so it's not even unique.

[CGII]

Instead, the commission's support seemed to lie squarely with Nouvel, so long as the tower being proposed was the one that got built. The chief concern was not so much how the tower might change to address community concens as how it could stay the same, ensuring that Nouvel’s designs and none others, even variations by the architect, would be implemented. Some called it “shrink wrapping” the design, a necessary precaution, it seemed, as so many high-profile projects have fallen through of late.

That's one of the most refreshing things I've heard from the NY architecture culture in a long, long time.

Originally Posted by rich_200

That other ugly design reminds me of this one in Amsterdam, so it's not even unique.

You're only looking at it superficially. What you posted above is a normal building that has been given an eccentric facade treatment, but this Tower Verre alternative is a complete rethinking of the skyscraper not simply as a vertical expression of its program, but rather as an interactive, vertical village that creates a unique experience to the visitor by dispersing its program over the height of the tower. Therefore the resemblance is purely superficial, just because it 'reminds' you of 'this other one' somewhere else, doesn't mean 'it's not even unique.' Your critique highlights, however, one of the key things one needs to take into account when scrutinizing architecture; you cannot judge a building simply on its exterior appearance.

That said I don't think it's a wise alternative to the Tower Verre and anyone who respects their credibility should be very aware that this is just a design exercise, not a serious proposal. As an exercise I respect the ideas it brings to the table and find it very interesting, but I would not support it as a proposal. Jean Nouvel's Tower Verre is the only Tower Verre under consideration; the only changes made from that design will be whether or not a few extra stories will be added to the top depending on whether or not zoning provides for the extra height.

For those who are still afraid:

THE BECKMANN DESIGN IS NOT A PROPOSAL. IT IS AN EXERCISE UNAFFILIATED WITH MOMA.

[antinimby]

Originally Posted by austex

So in New York a building can be approved then morph into something entirely different? I thought the massing and architectural skin is approved. If a project can morph then what is the point of all the required meetings/approvals?

Zoning laws in this city DO NOT care about design. Their only concern is the size, height, and other zoning envelopes, such as setbacks, lot coverage, curb cuts, etc. of a building.

The only time they care about the architecture is when there is a proposal in a historic district. Then, the Landmarks Commission will scrutinize over the tiniest details.

From one extreme to the other.

[JDRCRASH]

I don't know if it was mentioned here, but a rendering of this tower is shown on the front cover of a skyscraper book:

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by austex

So in New York a building can be approved then morph into something entirely different? I thought the massing and architectural skin is approved. If a project can morph then what is the point of all the required meetings/approvals?

Buildings only need approval only when something other than what the lot is zoned for is proposed. In this case, they sought approval to transfer development rights from two sites, and to overide certain zoning regulations in regard to setback and frontage (street level appearance). Final approval comes from the City Council, though it could again go back to the mayor/bp under certain conditions.

The proposal stands as is, nothing else is proposed for the site other than the as-of-right design posted a few pages back.

[AtlantaMustang]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

I don't know if it was mentioned here, but a rendering of this tower is shown on the front cover of a skyscraper book:

I have an older version of that book, with the chrysler building on the front. Exactly the same just different pic

[StarScraperCity]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

I don't know if it was mentioned here, but a rendering of this tower is shown on the front cover of a skyscraper book:

I own that one. Attractive cover, I must say.

[JDRCRASH]

Indeed, and they even talk about the Chicago Spire and Burj Dubai. It's pretty up-to-date.

[Dac150]

Originally Posted by AtlantaMustang

I have an older version of that book, with the chrysler building on the front. Exactly the same just different pic

Got that book for Christmas a few years back, was my first skyscraper book. This was pre my discovery of SSP, hence it provided me with my first real knowledge of skyscrapers.

[drumz0rz]

I'm sure some of you have read The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand? Nouvel kinda reminds me of the main character, Howard Roark in that the building should be built exactly as he designed it, without any influence or thought from anyone else. And I agree.

[NYC2ATX]

Originally Posted by drumz0rz

I'm sure some of you have read The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand? Nouvel kinda reminds me of the main character, Howard Roark in that the building should be built exactly as he designed it, without any influence or thought from anyone else. And I agree.

So funny you mention that, I'm in the middle of that book right now. It's great so far...and yes I see the comparison.

[New Skyline]

Isn't today Judg(e)ment day for Tower Verre?

[scalziand]

Originally Posted by New Skyline

Isn't today Judg(e)ment day for Tower Verre?

One in a succession of them.

[Thymant]

This is taking to long. How complicated can this actually be, otta they approve it or they dont.

[sbarn]

Originally Posted by Thymant

This is taking to long. How complicated can this actually be, otta they approve it or they dont.

This is par for the course for developing in NYC, but particularly when public approvals are required. The Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) has a strict schedule of 7 months.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by sbarn

This is par for the course for developing in NYC, but particularly when public approvals are required. The Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) has a strict schedule of 7 months.

Right. If they wanted to proceed with the smaller version (left) now, they could. But the special permits must be approved (in regards to distribution and setbacks) to allow the tower to morph into the great form we anticipate...

[Starsky]

Originally Posted by ()_T

LoL! I don't know what to say.











Link

This is the type of thing I'm talking about. I mean the people who like Modern Art and Libeskind/Gehry buildings like this stuff, but it looks like a malignant growth on a health city! Why not just build a normal building, than shoot it up with a 50 cal machine gun, splosh it with rainbow paint, then call it a masterpiece.

[NYguy]

BTW, look at this blatant misrepresentation of the TV at last months city planning hearing...(posted on curbed.com)

[Zerton]

Haha I like the cloud effect. They do a bad job hiding how cool the shape of the tower is though.