HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

    

Central Park Tower 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
     
     
  #1061  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2013, 9:46 PM
jackster99 jackster99 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 169
^Sorry I don't think I quoted that/copied and pasted it correctly, but you all get the idea

More from James over at SSC:

Hi all,


Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
Thanks for the info. Do you work for Extell or the architect (or the gc)? Can you describe the design?

Yes, kind of. I work for a company providing consulting and insurance services for Extell Development Company. Renderings were shown to a colleague of mine who then presented me the facts.

The tower will have a curvy shape, with some setbacks. Cladding will mimic the green of Central Park. Also, the structure as a whole will be topped off by a magnificent crown which will be illuminated at night.

Last edited by jackster99; Sep 3, 2013 at 9:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1062  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2013, 10:41 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
El Barto
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: East Coast to Cali
Posts: 3,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eveningsong View Post
So true. Everyone will have to wait until official numbers are released.
Well we know the tower will be no taller than 1250 feet so what do we have to wait for?


This design better be good...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1063  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2013, 11:17 PM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,047
Again, does it not seem suspicious to any one of you who might be sulking right now that:
A) This height "information"--"bombshell announcement", if you like--was posted on our main competitor's page, out of pure ether, by someone who had not once before posted anything anywhere on the entire website?
and
B) This chap asserted with more than a bit of audacity to have garnered the information from blueprints?

Blueprints, people. Having seen this post myself, I can safely inform the board membership here that this chap said nothing of how these alleged blueprints were accessed by him. Nor made he any mention of a firm he might've claimed to represent, i.e. by whom these blueprints are held supposedly under lock and key.

Now...The conclusion I make from all this is that publicizing details of blueprint held by a firm, without said firm's expressed permission, ain't too kosher...especially since there seems to be no idea of who this info leaker is or who he's affiliated with. In short, I don't see much in the way of legitimacy in this story.

2 plus 2. Just saying...........and BTW/FTR, I still call shenanigans.

Last edited by JayPro; Sep 3, 2013 at 11:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1064  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2013, 11:22 PM
Perklol's Avatar
Perklol Perklol is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Well we know the tower will be no taller than 1250 feet so what do we have to wait for?


This design better be good...
I am so sorry to ask this but .... who knew of this 1250 ft. height? Since when?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1065  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2013, 11:45 PM
MarshallKnight MarshallKnight is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro View Post
Having seen this post myself, I can safely inform the board membership here that this chap said nothing of how these alleged blueprints were accessed by him. Nor made he any mention of a company or firm he might've claimed to represent and, by extension, to whom these alleged blueprints are held by.
Well, actually:

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesDL
I work for a company providing consulting and insurance services for Extell Development Company. Renderings were shown to a colleague of mine who then presented me the facts.
Not that I'm claiming any of this is true -- and even if it is, it's secondhand, so it's still smart to assume a "wait and see" posture until we have something official. But JamesDL did cite a source.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1066  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 12:42 AM
UTEPman UTEPman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro View Post
Again, does it not seem suspicious to any one of you who might be sulking right now that:
A) This height "information"--"bombshell announcement", if you like--was posted on our main competitor's page, out of pure ether, by someone who had not once before posted anything anywhere on the entire website?
and
B) This chap asserted with more than a bit of audacity to have garnered the information from blueprints?

Blueprints, people. Having seen this post myself, I can safely inform the board membership here that this chap said nothing of how these alleged blueprints were accessed by him. Nor made he any mention of a firm he might've claimed to represent, i.e. by whom these blueprints are held supposedly under lock and key.

Now...The conclusion I make from all this is that publicizing details of blueprint held by a firm, without said firm's expressed permission, ain't too kosher...especially since there seems to be no idea of who this info leaker is or who he's affiliated with. In short, I don't see much in the way of legitimacy in this story.

2 plus 2. Just saying...........and BTW/FTR, I still call shenanigans.
I think it's more likely that it would come from someone outside the forum, seeing as how nobody on these forums have ever claimed to be close to the project.

Perhaps it's a person who occasionally visits the site, or has seen it before in passing and decided to post with their inside info.

I hope you're right though
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1067  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 1:22 AM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,047
It would seem that the discussion concerning this tower is letting fly with some interesting details, indeed...and, admittedly, rather to my chagrin and dismay.
A post made by a forumer named JamesDL reads as follows (BTW former SSP colleague Robert Walpole is a frequent participant in the thread where the post below is found):
Quote:
Hi all,
Yes, kind of (Edit: In answer to a forumer's question as to wether he worked for either Extell or the architect of record/GC..whatever that means.) I work for a company providing consulting and insurance services for Extell Development Company. Renderings were shown to a colleague of mine who then presented me the facts.
The tower will have a curvy shape, with some setbacks. Cladding will mimic the green of Central Park. Also, the structure as a whole will be topped off by a magnificent crown which will be illuminated at night.
You won't be disappointed.
I just realized that 225 West 57th Street will be 3 feet taller than the Empire State Building. I think that's a big step forward and we should be thankful.
And btw, the building's name has not been chosen yet.
Regards,
James
Apparently to substantiate this, it seems that none other than the Gray Lady herself, aka the New York Times, released an article back in June:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/re...gTFsI13vHl2yxQ

A salient snippet:
Quote:
“Building tall is not about bragging rights,” he said recently, during a conversation in the nondescript conference room of his offices on Third Avenue; he was wearing slacks and a mock turtleneck. “What drives the building is design, the views, the economics.” He built One57 to its full height “because we couldn’t get in all the air rights any other way — once you have it, the ability to build it, I didn’t want to just throw it away.”
Still, deciding a building’s height is a judgment call, and “there have been times that I had air rights but I didn’t end up using them,” he said. Extreme height adds time and uncertainty to a project, as well as construction costs. One57, for instance, was waylaid when Hurricane Sandy snapped off a crane boom and left it dangling far above the street. Mr. Barnett is weighing these considerations for his Nordstrom property, he said, and said he may choose to forego the full 1,550 feet."
(NB: As for the above quote, it seems to have been debated somewhat at length on this thread; but I'm not sure as I've been attending to family matters lately.)

Yet another article from an e-pub called Iconeye.com, entitled "Towering Ambition", reads thus:
Quote:
"The title of the world’s highest has moved to the eastern hemisphere, where it appears it will remain for some time. The US could once finance high-rise marvels that were symbols of its economic and political ambition and success; as both demonstrations of power and the solution to the densification of urban centres. But could the gargantuan architectural gestures of the east make an re-appearance in the post 9/11 west?
Smith is unsure, but sees an opportunity in two cities: “London and New York, because they are such international cities, could build towers of this size. There are deep pockets that want to be in those locations if you have the right site,” he says. “In New York, there is a re-emergence of super-tall towers, but they have a very small footplate. There is one we are working on that is 1,200ft (366m). (Editor's emphasis)"
So perhaps this is true. We shall see......

Last edited by JayPro; Sep 4, 2013 at 1:34 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1068  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 1:22 AM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,099
I believe the guy. People that come and leak info out like that really have no reason to lie and he sounds very legitimate.

Anyway, it is disapointing but if the design is great then that is the saving grace. I'd rather have a shorter, great looking building than a taller, boring box or even ugly eyesore.

I'm just guessing but do you think we can blame Nordstrom for the change in height? I mean, Extell had a HdM design that went to 1550 ft but when Nordstrom came on board, they ask to change the design, the architect firm and now we see the height has changed as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1069  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 2:07 AM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,047
BTW, apologies are due to Jackster99 who posted the exact same details from the design (semi-)leaker as I just did. It was not my intention take undue credit for discovering some new revelation.
Just call me a day late and a dollar short.........
PS: Judging on this information, why they would put up a mere 36' crown (1,253-1,217 if those are the measurements they're going by) is somewhat odd.

One more point and I'm done. If this redaction in height is true, than I suggest that this tower will be just a bit taller than the top of 1WTC's mech floor facade vents. It'll also be taller than One57 than one might perceive.

Last edited by NYguy; Sep 4, 2013 at 12:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1070  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 2:44 AM
Perklol's Avatar
Perklol Perklol is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,460
Thank you for providing a link to those articles. It seems like it will be 1253 ft after all...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1071  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 2:51 AM
sbarn sbarn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,042
The design sounds promising, but a 300 ft haircut is quite disappointing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1072  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 3:56 AM
jd3189's Avatar
jd3189 jd3189 is online now
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 3,684
Well, the potential was good to think about as it lasted.
__________________
There is only one corner of the universe you can be certain of improving, and that's your own self.
-Aldous Huxley

Continue improving until the end.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1073  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 5:21 AM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,047
I don't see any reason TBH to call it a height decrease, since the figure presented (1550) has been perceived from the start--at least by me...and, quite frankly, should've been by all of us as a hedge against extreme overconfidence--as a hypothetical maximum.
It ought not to have been put out as a conclusive number carved out of a pair of tablets that someone brought down from an exalted summit where the face of God Himself can be seen, and the eyes of the beholder don't melt out of their sockets.
It would be safer--if not necessarily better, or in any way satisfying--to lowball it, especially since Mr. Barnett himself was the one who suggested that in the first place.

Last edited by JayPro; Sep 4, 2013 at 5:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1074  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 12:21 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 38,193
Again, I'll remind everyone that this is not the supertall discussion thread.



Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro View Post
I don't see any reason TBH to call it a height decrease.
Except the only reason, because it would be a height decrease if it turns out those are the actual numbers. There's no way around that, even if Barnett always insisted the height wasn't final. If it doesn't reach 1,550 ft, it is a height decrease.



Quote:
Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
I believe the guy. People that come and leak info out like that really have no reason to lie and he sounds very legitimate.

Anyway, it is disapointing but if the design is great then that is the saving grace. I'd rather have a shorter, great looking building than a taller, boring box or even ugly eyesore.
It's not so far fetched, especially when, as I've said, we were expecting this tower to be 1,250 ft before Barnett revealed taller plans. If we had a rendering of the tower at the taller height, and suddenly 300 ft was cut off, it would be more disappointing. I just don't find myself getting too worked up about it, or caring for the reduction. Of course I would take the taller tower, but I don't suspect that Barnett will be finished with the Manhattan skyline, even after this tower. Something curvy, and glassy sounds about like what you would expect from this firm. I would prefer a "blue" tower to a "green" one though, especially with One57 so close.
__________________
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
     
     
  #1075  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 3:06 PM
jackster99 jackster99 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro View Post
BTW, apologies are due to Jackster99 who posted the exact same details from the design (semi-)leaker as I just did. It was not my intention take undue credit for discovering some new revelation.
Just call me a day late and a dollar short.........
PS: Judging on this information, why they would put up a mere 36' crown (1,253-1,217 if those are the measurements they're going by) is somewhat odd.

One more point and I'm done. If this redaction in height is true, than I suggest that this tower will be just a bit taller than the top of 1WTC's mech floor facade vents. It'll also be taller than One57 than one might perceive.
Oh no problem at all JayPro. I think in everyone's excitement/astonishment at this news, we were probably all rushing over to SSC in order to discover if JamesDL had leaked any new information.

I also have a few points about this tower that I've noticed.
First of all, in regards JamesDL over at SSC leaking that this tower will have green cladding, I think it even further strengthens his insider knowledge, considering Adrian Smith's love for making his towers contextual. Since the green cladding is supposed to pay homage to Central Park, that sounds pretty contextual to me.

Also, in regards to this thing's height of 1253 feet (if it is indeed true), I think the reaction here and over at SSC just goes to show how spoiled we have all become in recent years. Just 6 years or so ago news of a 1253 foot tower would have been mind boggling, instead now we just moan that its not as tall as 432 park avenue or as tall as it could have been. We also have to remember that if those permits with the 1550 foot height had never been discovered or filed, then this height wouldn't even be news and would confirm what we would have been suspecting all along.

Finally, in regards to Extell filing the 1550 foot permits and then not following through on that does seem a little strange. But it occurred to me, perhaps Barnett did that as a bargaining chip for when this 1253 foot version is unveiled? I know this tower is being built as of right, but even still, at this height and so close to central park, its bound to make some enemies when it gets unveiled. But perhaps when that happens, Barnett can just say "look guys, I could have built this baby 300 feet taller (see permits), so consider this 1253 foot version my gift to you. But don't piss me off to much, because I might change my mind and create an even bigger shadow over your favorite place to tan!"

Last edited by NYguy; Sep 5, 2013 at 12:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1076  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 3:26 PM
King DenCity's Avatar
King DenCity King DenCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: With Your Pancakes :|
Posts: 507
I don't trust it.

The previous info was 1550' to the highest occcupiable floor and their was rumors of going even higher, Barnett also has seemed hellbent on building the tallest tower in Manhattan and the USA by roof height.
And who takes that long to build a tower of that height? The ESB was built in a little over a year not the almost 6 years of this project. I have met people like this before and they say things that either they want to be true or the say the opposite to mess with people, when in fact this guy probably has no ties to the company or the project at all. Even So, If we're gonna believe rumors here then remember the "Big New Supertall Announcements This September" that have been floating around.

In short, Bull $**T. :|

Last edited by King DenCity; Sep 4, 2013 at 3:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1077  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 3:59 PM
Onn Onn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The United States
Posts: 1,937
Just wait until we hear more from Extell itself, formers have jumped the gun before on such rumors. It's possible the height could go either way, it all depends if Extell want's to admit that 432 Park is tallest residential building in the city and taller than its own towers. It's funny how this guy popped up right after someone posted an old article on SSC that the tower would be around 1,200 feet. Seems a little suspicious to me!

Last edited by Onn; Sep 5, 2013 at 1:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1078  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 4:12 PM
King DenCity's Avatar
King DenCity King DenCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: With Your Pancakes :|
Posts: 507
^And Fake
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1079  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 4:45 PM
Perklol's Avatar
Perklol Perklol is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,460
Green cladding?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1080  
Old Posted Sep 4, 2013, 5:19 PM
King DenCity's Avatar
King DenCity King DenCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: With Your Pancakes :|
Posts: 507
^Don't trust it, everything seems fishy and it seems like this guy got what he wanted... attention.

PS. Suddenly going from no spire or crown to having them? Let's be realistic people, these are the same guys who designed Kingdom Tower and Burj Khalifa... Don't u see some inconsistency?
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 2:19 AM.

     

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