NEW YORK | 111 W 57th St | 1,428 FT | 85 FLOORS - Page 76

toxteth o'grady · #**1501** Posted **Dec 30, 2015, 7:33 PM**

This is the second NYC project I've heard of that is having personnel issues. Labor shortage in the city? The BLS statistics for NY say 160,000 new jobs have been created in the past year. Still not enough?

Crawford · #**1502** Posted **Dec 30, 2015, 7:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by toxteth o'grady

This is the second NYC project I've heard of that is having personnel issues. Labor shortage in the city? The BLS statistics for NY say 160,000 new jobs have been created in the past year. Still not enough?

There are no personnel issues in this project. The tower portion cannot be built until the landmarked building is readied, so there will limited work on the tower for the next few months.

And construction jobs in NYC are extremely lucrative and very difficult to obtain. Assuming salaries/benefits remain high, there will never be a shortage of NYC construction workers.

artspook · #**1503** Posted **Dec 30, 2015, 10:05 PM**

yo Chris - about that Dec 27th post -
decadent "solid alabaster bathtubs" in the clouds ? . .
and where exactly can “lots of fluted glass” be found ? . .
Are we talking Champaign glasses pushed through terra-cotta walls ? ? . . .
. . it may be innovative & futuristic . . but how do "all the walls disappear" ? . .
and what's this "scenario with Bette Midler riding around in a wheelchair,
wearing a mermaid outfit” amongst "Leather and lamé curtains" ? ? . .
What cockamamie planet are we discussing here ? . .

chris08876 · #**1504** Posted **Dec 31, 2015, 5:46 AM**

A lot of the material is mined rock and stone. Specialty type. Different types of granite and gneiss with different compositions of crystals (% ratio of total rock). Fluted glass is a special aesthetic method for glass that is blown (glass for windows that is, not glass that the hipsters blow when they want to stay up for days.

).

Its a high quality project, with high quality interiors. All of the towers, from 432 to One57 have amazing interiors. When clients are paying the net worth of whole towns for a unit, the apparatus that one uses to shower matters. Every grain matters.

Besides towers, off topic, but you should check out the stuff that goes into a Rolls Royce. The wood alone is 20k +. Like towers, the cars for the rich share uncustomary materials.

artspook · #**1505** Posted **Jan 1, 2016, 3:04 AM**

oh Beulah - peel me a grape.

NYguy · #**1506** Posted **Jan 6, 2016, 1:36 AM**

http://urbanismvsmodernism.blogspot.com/

Brandon Nagle

mrnyc · #**1507** Posted **Jan 6, 2016, 6:07 PM**

i hope to eventually see a mock up of the facade like they has for the wtc and some other bldgs. i think the facade is so interesting.

scalziand · #**1508** Posted **Jan 6, 2016, 6:24 PM**

^Like this one?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Downburst

SHoP posted an image of the facade mockup on their Instagram. It looks stunning:

Instagram

mrnyc · #**1509** Posted **Jan 9, 2016, 1:18 AM**

^ awww yeah -- i guess i missed that -- would be great to see in person!

hunser · #**1510** Posted **Jan 11, 2016, 2:56 PM**

New York YIMBY

http://www.yimbynews.com/2016/01/why...year-ever.html

jbermingham123 · #**1511** Posted **Jan 12, 2016, 2:15 AM**

^ its so thin that it makes that NYYIMBY render look like an optical illusion

Larry King · #**1512** Posted **Jan 17, 2016, 12:52 AM**

so is this project actually going to happen or what? is jds still trying to go non-union for majority of the work?

RobEss · #**1513** Posted **Jan 17, 2016, 1:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry King

so is this project actually going to happen or what? is jds still trying to go non-union for majority of the work?

Yes and, unfortunately, yes.

Kumdogmillionaire · #**1514** Posted **Jan 17, 2016, 5:08 AM**

Something about the skinniness of these so many of New York's new supertalls is off-putting. Can't explain it

Busy Bee · #**1515** Posted **Jan 17, 2016, 3:50 PM**

I think there's a lot of that sentiment, myself included. I do think there's a risk of these super skinny supertalls, or SSS

, looking like chimneys on the skyline and not being bulky enough to lend to a graceful profile. I've said it before, I just wish they could have gotten the property to the west of Steinway and make the tower twice as wide, but looks like that wasn't meant to be.

I think over time it won't be as jarring and will be viewed as being awe inspiring because of its slenderness.

Kumdogmillionaire · #**1516** Posted **Jan 18, 2016, 1:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

I think there's a lot of that sentiment, myself included. I do think there's a risk of these super skinny supertalls, or SSS

, looking like chimneys on the skyline and not being bulky enough to lend to a graceful profile. I've said it before, I just wish they could have gotten the property to the west of Steinway and make the tower twice as wide, but looks like that wasn't meant to be.

I think over time it won't be as jarring and will be viewed as being awe inspiring because of its slenderness.

I really hope you are right about the towers aging well with the skyline, because they are certainly have a quite a jarring effect. Chimneys on the skyline describes them perfectly right now

Crawford · #**1517** Posted **Jan 18, 2016, 4:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

IChimneys on the skyline describes them perfectly right now

Industrial chimneys are circular and not necessarily fat or thin. They don't really resemble any of the new skinny supertalls.

It's true that aesthetic preferences are subjective, but from an urban planning and street level perspective there's no question the skinny towers are far preferable than fat towers, because they preserve the streetscape, aid in historic preservation and keep the diverse building stock. Fat buildings are generally anti-urban.

patriotizzy · #**1518** Posted **Jan 19, 2016, 8:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford

Industrial chimneys are circular and not necessarily fat or thin. They don't really resemble any of the new skinny supertalls.

It's true that aesthetic preferences are subjective, but from an urban planning and street level perspective there's no question the skinny towers are far preferable than fat towers, because they preserve the streetscape, aid in historic preservation and keep the diverse building stock. Fat buildings are generally anti-urban.

I think it's an easy argument. All one has to do is look up picture of NYC's downtown skyline from the early twentieth century and compare it to today. It's a far superior skyline when it was composed of the skinny towers.

Busy Bee · #**1519** Posted **Jan 19, 2016, 9:01 PM**

Yeah but 111's footprint has got to be less than a quarter of any of the classic downtown towers.

NYguy · #**1520** Posted **Jan 20, 2016, 2:59 AM**

^ You people keep forgetting that this is an extension of an existing building.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

Something about the skinniness of these so many of New York's new supertalls is off-putting. Can't explain it

I don't know what you are talking about, but there is only one right now. And of the group we will get, they are primarily focused on one street. And the New York skyline is obviusly
much more than that street. Meanwhile, the city will keep building the supertall and bulky office towes that will throw more of a shadow than any "slim" supertall.

As far as I'm concerned, the city needs the slimmer towers to return the skyline to it's peak glory days, and we are witnessing the natural evolution of the city's skyline. Not every city will
build the thin towers, but New York can and will. The skyline can absorb it.

This building in particular, with it's setbacks will be a dramatic addition, especially when viewed from the ground.

Comparing aspect ratio to current world's tallest...

JANUARY 16, 2016