HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


125 Greenwich Street 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
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2013, 3:32 PM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,506
Technically, it IS below Canal Street...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2013, 9:37 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by StoOgE View Post
In what world is this tower in Tribeca?
In the world of the community board, I suppose. Technically, Tribeca is tthe "triangle below Canal St, but I forget exactly where it ends. Anyway, the reconnection of Greenwich St was to reconnect the neighborhood, and Silverstein used the Greemwich St addresses for his WTC towers to capitalize on that.
__________________
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
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2013, 10:52 PM
franktko's Avatar
franktko franktko is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Montréal
Posts: 1,297
Boundaries
Vesey St. to Canal St., Broadway to Hudson River

http://nymag.com/realestate/articles...ds/tribeca.htm
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2013, 11:11 PM
StoOgE StoOgE is offline
Resident Moron
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by scalziand View Post
Technically, it IS below Canal Street...
So is Staten Island
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2013, 2:36 PM
Eidolon's Avatar
Eidolon Eidolon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 697
Rafael Vinoly's Early Design for 22 Thames Street Revealed
Friday, July 19, 2013
by Curbed Staff


Quote:
A day after Tribeca Citizen first noted that 432 Park Avenue's Rafael Vinoly was the new architectural mastermind behind a rumored 60-story rental building at 22 Thames Street, Vinoly's team (along with representatives for owners Fisher Brothers and the Witkoff Group) presented the project at a Community Board 1 meeting last night with a few more surprises in tow. Surprise #1: the developer actually has the right to build an 85-story building on the site, which would put 22 Thames in a dead heat for height with, oh, just about most of the neighboring World Trade Center complex. That height prompted an audible "holy shit" from attendees at the CB 1 meeting, and that's where surprise #2 comes in: the developers are asking for a variance to build a smaller, 70-story structure instead.
Quote:
Demolition of the existing building at 22 Thames Street is already underway, though, and the building is projected to open by the spring of 2017, leaving CB1 residents visibly nervous about the potential for further overcrowding and nightmarish traffic circulation, as multiple other residential construction projects continue toward move-in day.
I don't really know what to make of it. It's lost the insteresting facade of the previous design and the developers seem reluctant to give it enough height to make it stand out.

I'm still cautiously optimistic that the facade will be redone, it might get taller or if the skyscraper gods are in a good mood, both! It is some time until shovels hit the dirt here after all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2013, 2:40 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,780
I wish they would go with the 85 floor version, which would push the tower above 1,000 ft. and really add to the skyline.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2013, 2:51 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
I wish they would go with the 85 floor version, which would push the tower above 1,000 ft. and really add to the skyline.
Exactly my thoughts. Another 700 - 900 footer will simply be lost in the Lower Manhattan forest.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2013, 3:51 PM
Onn Onn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The United States
Posts: 1,937
85 stories please! As far as the facade goes, that's like the world's worst rendering. Wait until we have some better shots before judging. To me that almost looks like a Google Earth representation model for scale purposes only.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2013, 5:11 PM
MarshallKnight MarshallKnight is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 154
Has Vinoly learned nothing about releasing a shoddy early render?

Well, hopefully the cladding is nice. When they talk about "articulation," that seems to suggest some sort of special detail. It's going to be highly visible at the corner of the memorial plaza, so you'd think they would go all out on an iconic design. A tall, slender tower could complement the 20s-30s gems, if done right. But if it's going to be bland, I'd prefer the shorter version.

Anyway, it sounds like the community board prefers the shorter one, and the developers may be able to get more bang for their buck if they're allowed to build larger floorplates on a shorter design. I guess we'll just have to wait till September and see the better renders.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2013, 4:51 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post

Anyway, it sounds like the community board prefers the shorter one
, and the developers may be able to get more bang for their buck if they're allowed to build larger floorplates on a shorter design. I guess we'll just have to wait till September and see the better renders.
If it were up the community boards and local NIMBYs, the New York skyline would be stagnant, i.e. dead. It's really beyond me how anyone can oppose an 85- storey supertall building which will be adjacent to 4 supertalls ... aka the new WTC! I mean it's not like Lower Manhattan is famous for its lowrises ffs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2013, 5:21 PM
DCReid DCReid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunser View Post
If it were up the community boards and local NIMBYs, the New York skyline would be stagnant, i.e. dead. It's really beyond me how anyone can oppose an 85- storey supertall building which will be adjacent to 4 supertalls ... aka the new WTC! I mean it's not like Lower Manhattan is famous for its lowrises ffs.
NIMBYs also must realize or may not care to realize that short, boxy, and fat buildings block the sky and cast more shadows than tall thin buildings. So let them have another short fat box that takes up the entire block.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2013, 7:25 PM
reencharles's Avatar
reencharles reencharles is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 274
Please, build the 85-story, please! This community board is pathetic. With so many super tall in this area (WTC complex) they will complain to the construction of another? If you can build 4, can build 5.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2013, 8:50 PM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,047
Let's just wait till the process revs up a bit and see how NIMBYism is dealt with here.
Lord knows we've got other projects Downtown either ready to go or on the verge, both to keep us occupied till the next bit of news here is released..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2013, 9:16 PM
StoOgE StoOgE is offline
Resident Moron
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro View Post
Let's just wait till the process revs up a bit and see how NIMBYism is dealt with here.
Lord knows we've got other projects Downtown either ready to go or on the verge, both to keep us occupied till the next bit of news here is released..
Are there even NIMBYs in Lower Manhattan to complain?

I work at 1 Liberty and if I stay past 6:00 everything is closed other than a McDonalds and Burger King.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2013, 10:10 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by StoOgE View Post
Are there even NIMBYs in Lower Manhattan to complain?

I work at 1 Liberty and if I stay past 6:00 everything is closed other than a McDonalds and Burger King.
That will soon change. All the new residential will make it more lively. The area near the historic waterfront is full of nightlife.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2013, 10:49 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro View Post
Let's just wait till the process revs up a bit and see how NIMBYism is dealt with here.
NIMBYism won't have any affect on this building. They can already build as of right; the public approvals are for certain adjustment to the footprint and use.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Jul 21, 2013, 11:25 PM
babybackribs2314 babybackribs2314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UWS, Manhattan
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
That will soon change. All the new residential will make it more lively. The area near the historic waterfront is full of nightlife.
Hmm. Disagree.

The seaport has horrible nightlife and it isn't for New Yorkers - lots and lots of tourists, and that's all. But those are the only people who go to the Seaport, anyways, because it's basically like a mini-Disney main street.

The FiDi is changing but despite adding something on the order of 10-20K residents since 9/11, it remains dead at night. Many buildings are converting and several are rising, and the aggregate effect will eventually make it livelier, but I think the people moving there are part of the problem - and the lack of nightlife.

Many in the FiDi are families, especially if you cross over to BPC - which is totally sterile and not a real place. These people are in bed by 8PM etc as well, and don't exactly contribute to vibrancy; the vast majority of FiDi yuppies also have real careers and lack the Bohemian lifestyle that gives rise to nightlife like you see in the East Village or Williamsburg - they party in the Meatpacking, if they party at all.

Finally, on a tangent, it's irritating that Curbed used the Tribeca Citizen as a source when YIMBY noted this development over two weeks ago - whatever - but Curbed is a bad aggregator with no original content. What a glorious photo of the renderings, btw - you can't see anything at all.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2013, 6:55 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,914
The views to the north will be pretty much the WTC, while the views east will be the rest of the financial district. I wish they would with the taller version, adding the distinction of being the tallest residential Downtown. That would give it a little more something.


http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/2013...d-trade-center

70-Story Skyscraper Could Rise Next to World Trade Center





By Irene Plagianos
July 19, 2013

Quote:
Representatives from real estate giant Fisher Brothers, who bought the property in 2012 for $87.5 million, along with their architecture firm, Rafael Vinoly Architects, presented their preliminary plans to members of Community Board 1 Thursday, seeking CB1’s support for a zoning variance for the project.

Under the current zoning, the developers could build an 85-story tower rising more than 1,000 feet, but they would prefer to construct a shorter, wider tower that would better “fit into the context of the neighborhood," make for more spacious apartments and not obstruct the nearby 1,776-foot One World Trade Center, said Alex Adams, a Fisher Brothers project executive.

The zoning variance would allow Fisher Brothers to reduce the required setback of the building — the space between the edge of the property and the street — from 20 feet to about 10 to 13 feet, allowing them to make a wider building.


The tower will have about 450 apartments, with 20 percent of them reserved for affordable housing, Adams said. The bottom floor will house commercial spaces.

Fisher Brothers will give a more detailed presentation to CB1's Financial District Commitee in September and will seek CB1's advisory approval for the zoning variance then. The city would have the final say over any zoning change.

Adams said he hopes to open the tower by September 2017
__________________
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
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2013, 10:30 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
Quote:
Under the current zoning, the developers could build an 85-story tower rising more than 1,000 feet, but they would prefer to construct a shorter, wider tower that would better “fit into the context of the neighborhood," make for more spacious apartments and not obstruct the nearby 1,776-foot One World Trade Center, said Alex Adams, a Fisher Brothers project executive.
Fail x3.
1. The higher you go, the better views you get. And the best view sells $$$, as can be witnessed with One57, 432 PA etc.
2. A 1000 footer won't obstruct 1WTC! ##
3. Building a shorter tower means missing the opportunity of making a mark in the Lower Manhattan skyline. As we all know, a 700 footer will be lost in the sheer mass.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2013, 10:40 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
I was just thinking ... hopefully that mentality of not obstructing / diminishing 1WTC because it's an 'icon' won't last for long. Taller and bigger towers in Lower Manhattan are needed and should be built / planned as soon as the WTC complex is completed. Otherwise the skyline would be - once again - stagnant.
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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:43 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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