NEW YORK | One57 (Carnegie 57) | 1,005 FT | 75 FLOORS - Page 22

Lecom · #**421** Posted **May 26, 2010, 2:33 AM**

Rough massing/potential building envelope at 1,005 ft

image credit: me

SkyscrapersOfNewYork · #**422** Posted **May 26, 2010, 2:38 AM**

wow bold statements,i hope they keep their word

uaarkson · #**423** Posted **May 26, 2010, 2:48 AM**

They're setting themselves up for a world of criticism.

Lecom · #**424** Posted **May 26, 2010, 2:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by uaarkson

They're setting themselves up for a world of criticism.

Especially if some NIMBY stumbles upon this thread, sees my amateur Photoshop, takes it for face value and then throws a tantrum about how they are going to build a giant black rectangular tower on the site.

RoldanTTLB · #**425** Posted **May 26, 2010, 4:15 AM**

Boy I hope it goes vertical soon, because it is NOT an easy site to photograph...

scalziand · #**426** Posted **May 26, 2010, 4:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lecom

Especially if some NIMBY stumbles upon this thread, sees my amateur Photoshop, takes it for face value and then throws a tantrum about how they are going to build a giant black rectangular tower on the site.

Or the one that I guestimated from the DOB filing earlier.

Nice to hear that construction will step up a notch in a couple weeks, as I assume that's what going vertical means.

tdawg · #**427** Posted **May 26, 2010, 11:10 AM**

amazing. Can't wait to see a rendering.

NYguy · #**428** Posted **May 26, 2010, 12:37 PM**

Picked up a copy of today's Times because I knew there had to be a rendering now that things are in place...

Quote:

Originally Posted by RoldanTTLB

Boy I hope it goes vertical soon, because it is NOT an easy site to photograph...

Activity should really pick up in the next few weeks...

Quote:

“We’re going vertical in the next three weeks,” said Mr. Barnett, chief executive of Extell Development. Sounding a little like the developer he is one-upping, he said, “We think it’ll be the nicest project ever built in New York.”

UrbanImpact · #**429** Posted **May 26, 2010, 1:05 PM**

Nothing special, just tall.......maybe a different view will change my mind. Thanks for staying on top of it NYguy!

uaarkson · #**430** Posted **May 26, 2010, 1:11 PM**

The cladding and detailing had better be drop-dead gorgeous, because that just looks like some stacked boxes to me.

pico44 · #**431** Posted **May 26, 2010, 1:20 PM**

Ugh. What a disappointment. Should'a hired Nouvel.

OneWorldTradeCenter · #**432** Posted **May 26, 2010, 1:21 PM**

Well, the new name.... but at least: the project is going forward, good news. NYC needs more 1,000+ footer!

OneWorldTradeCenter · #**433** Posted **May 26, 2010, 1:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

Picked up a copy of today's Times because I knew there had to be a rendering now that things are in place...

Activity should really pick up in the next few weeks...

Will it look like this?

Wheelingman04 · #**434** Posted **May 26, 2010, 1:30 PM**

I think it looks pretty good. Hopefully we can see more renderings from different angles pretty soon.

pico44 · #**435** Posted **May 26, 2010, 1:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneWorldTradeCenter

Will it look like this?

The NY Times tends not to get things wrong. I expect it to look like this. Even if the materials are top notch, there's no getting around the lobby being downright uninspired. Whats with the frilly little glass treatment above the two little doorways?

ugh

OneWorldTradeCenter · #**436** Posted **May 26, 2010, 1:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wheelingman04

I think it looks pretty good. Hopefully we can see more renderings from different angles pretty soon.

I hope that as well. Then we can expect to see drawing in the diagrams soon...

Hamilton · #**437** Posted **May 26, 2010, 1:52 PM**

It definitely is a disappointment, but something tells me we can't blame de Portzamparc for that. Gary Barnett is, like many developers cut from the same cloth (Moinian, for instance), completely and utterly lacking in class.

He built some cheap, cheesy, tacky towers on the Upper West Side complete with faux brick-colored metal panels going up the building in stripes and a boxy design. Responding to furor over their construction, Barnett completely honestly replied that that he didn't understand why the neighbors would be complaining, given that he had gifted them an architectural gem. Speaking of which, his Gem Tower is just as tacky and boxy.

That's the type of developer that can make even a talented architect design uninspired drivel.

sbarn · #**438** Posted **May 26, 2010, 2:16 PM**

I feel like its a bit too soon to rush to judgment on this one... I need to see more renderings.

NYguy · #**439** Posted **May 26, 2010, 2:20 PM**

Hmmm, I've been reading the comments here, as I try to wrap my own head around the design. When the Tower Verre was released, we got a view of it from a similar angle, and that worked in favor of the tower due to its shape. This tower seems to be much bulkier than I thought it would be (particularly for a residential), so that angle won't work as well in its favor. One thing that hits me is it's not the "unusual" building Barnett made it out to be. In fact, it looks very much like a New York skyscraper, a classic 30's tower. What I need to see is the building as a whole, and how it fits into the rest of the skyline. Overall though, I'd say it's a solid 1,000 footer...

canadate · #**440** Posted **May 26, 2010, 2:26 PM**

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/0...y_revealed.php