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

[WhatTheHeck5205]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Yet again, what would an untamed NYC look like? One that is a sandbox for developers ambitions and dreams?

An “untamed” NYC would probably be very bland and boxy and not even remotely as appealing as it sounds. Zoning laws determine the overall shape and massing of a building, which is equally, if not more important than facade ornament in determining a building’s architectural identity. The setback shape of the ESB, Chrysler and every other prewar tower in NYC—exactly the style this tower seeks to emulate—are the direct result of zoning restrictions. The same goes for the plazas of the Seagram, Lever House and other midcentury towers, as well as the shape of 53W53, Hudson Yards, Bjarke’s pyramid and literally every other major tower of this cycle. So while I’d absolutely be in favor of eliminating height limits on at least part of the site, as the 1916 zoning code did, under no circumstances should we abandon the zoning code entirely.

Imagine if NYC were to abandon all zoning laws. 99% of new buildings would likely be giant shoeboxes built right up to the lot line on all sides. Only the most high-end developments would sacrifice potential floor area for the sake of design. This would leave us with something like the Equitable Building as the best case scenario—worst case, the XYZ Buildings on 6th Ave, repeated ad infinitum. The end result would be much less Coruscant and much more Judge Dredd—and NYC would likely lose much of its appeal in the public’s imagination.

So, not trying to pick a fight, I just gotta remind everyone of the positive impact zoning laws—especially setback, sky-exposure plane and light court requirements—have had on design. For that reason, I wouldn’t suggest eliminating them—or God forbid, NYC will start to look like Houston

(Nothing against Houston btw, they just have absolutely no zoning laws at all and their boxy af skyline shows it).

[NYguy]

Let's stick to the topic please...



https://www.instagram.com/p/BldZyfmB...eamazingknight

[TechTalkGuy]

That’s a very nice sky!
The glass façade is turning out really good so far.

[NYguy]

Danny Daly

[Prezrezc]

Is that crane at the far left the one for 425 Park?

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by Prezrezc

Is that crane at the far left the one for 425 Park?

Yes.

[photoLith]

I wish that ugly mid century terd in front of 432 Park Place could be torn down and that ugly black mid century one to the right as well. They really destroy the view from Central Park. But that will never happen because a huge trend in preservation has been to landmark crap like that recently. Nobody ever is going to think towers like that are beautiful and should be preserved except for a small minority of preservationists wrapped up in that trend.

Anyways, this recent batch of supertalls far exceeds any of those mid century modernist fat block towers.

[TechTalkGuy]

This tower will bring balance to the Central Park skyline.
It gets tiring hearing the rants and grunts over 432 Park.

[WhatTheHeck5205]

Originally Posted by photoLith

I wish that ugly mid century terd in front of 432 Park Place could be torn down and that ugly black mid century one to the right as well. They really destroy the view from Central Park. But that will never happen because a huge trend in preservation has been to landmark crap like that recently. Nobody ever is going to think towers like that are beautiful and should be preserved except for a small minority of preservationists wrapped up in that trend.

Anyways, this recent batch of supertalls far exceeds any of those mid century modernist fat block towers.

Proof once again that a good chunk of the SSP population may be skyscraper enthusiasts, but have very little knowledge of actual architecture beyond the standard “wahhh anything other than art deco=bad” view repeated in the tourist guidebooks. Of course they’re not nearly as elegant as art deco towers—no one is saying that they are—but many midcentury modern buildings have plenty of architectural merit in their own right. The little one next to 432 (I assume you’re referring to 450 Park, the one with the “grid” facade) is one of the best midcentury buildings on Park Avenue and should absolutely not be messed with in any way (the site is too small and too close to 432 to build anything substantial anyway).

As for the mirrored black one to the right of 432, that’s Trump Tower, and I’m absolutely in agreement that it should be torn down.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by WhatTheHeck5205

Proof once again that a good chunk of the SSP population may be skyscraper enthusiasts, but have very little knowledge of actual architecture beyond the standard “wahhh anything other than art deco=bad” view repeated in the tourist guidebooks.

Not only that, but if SSP were around 40-50 years ago, they would all be calling for the mass-demolition of prewar towers, because those were almost universally considered "ugly/outdated" back then. Now it's the postwar era's turn.

The building in question is by one of the most famous architects of the era and lavishly sheathed in marble. It's also one of the most valuable office and retail towers on the planet (including supposedly the highest grossing retail space on earth - the Apple store beneath the tower). It isn't going anywhere.

[ILNY]

[NYguy]

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bl3GRJwH...by=alex.mirlas





https://www.instagram.com/p/Bl25YPWlGBQ/?taken-by=bh384

[chris08876]

Credit: FC

[NYguy]

JULY 31, 2018


1.



2.



3.



4.



5.



6.



7.



8.



9.



10.



11.



12.



13.



14.

[pico44]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Mostly a crown and mechanical space.

Looks like we're four floors above the second setback. Still a way to go

Insane

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by pico44

Looks like we're four floors above the second setback. Still a way to go

Insane

It is. This tower just looms as an insanely tall and thin building. I can't even wrap my mind around what the full tower will look like. People will be amazed.

[WhatTheHeck5205]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Not only that, but if SSP were around 40-50 years ago, they would all be calling for the mass-demolition of prewar towers, because those were almost universally considered "ugly/outdated" back then. Now it's the postwar era's turn.

The building in question is by one of the most famous architects of the era and lavishly sheathed in marble. It's also one of the most valuable office and retail towers on the planet (including supposedly the highest grossing retail space on earth - the Apple store beneath the tower). It isn't going anywhere.

Unfortunately I suspect you’re right about that. And good lord, I didn’t realize PhotoLith was proposing to knock down the GM Building! I though they were referring to the small black tower at the SW corner of 57th & Park, directly next to 432 (which is also better than average for the postwar period, imo). The GM is so significant architecturally, and such a skyline-defining building from the park, that I don’t see how someone could want to get rid of it. Happily though, as you pointed out, no one is planning to.

Back on topic somewhat, there’s no doubt in my mind that the vertical pinstriping effect of the GM Building must have at least partially influenced SHoP in their designs of the E/W facades of this tower.

[NYguy]

https://www.instagram.com/p/BmBknCIH...=fcjhnewyork01

[TechTalkGuy]

This tower is so skinny, how will an elevator fit inside?
There is no way an elevator can reach the pinnacle.

[photoLith]

Will this be the worlds skinniest supertall?