daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy (aug.2, 2013) | DMCA policy | flipboard magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Skyscrapers > Proposed Skyscrapers



Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 11th, 2013, 01:25 AM   #161
iamtheSTIG
Registered User
 
iamtheSTIG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham - The city of Robin Hood
Posts: 1,925
Likes (Received): 820

'affordable'....
to all those multimillionaires
iamtheSTIG está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old December 11th, 2013, 02:23 AM   #162
sbarn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC & Bay Area
Posts: 1,020
Likes (Received): 378

I am trying to like this tower but I just can't. The height is great, but the design is seriously an 880 foot extrusion clad in glass. I'm all for minimalist, but to me this is just brainless. Hopefully it grows on me.
sbarn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2013, 02:36 PM   #163
dexter2
Pijcie piwa z BŁ!
 
dexter2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Łódź
Posts: 10,772
Likes (Received): 3013

I see clear references to old WTC cladding. This is gonna look great with WTC4.
__________________

Bo gdzie byś nie był i jak by cię nie przyjęli
Nigdy nie będziesz się czuł jak na Obiecanej Ziemi

Łódź - Remonty kamienic i zabytków - 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013

Łódź w Remoncie na facebooku! - - - - - NYC & EastCoast USA!

streetscapeer liked this post
dexter2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 11th, 2013, 11:08 PM   #164
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 45,383
Likes (Received): 5511

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertpunk View Post
22 Thames May Become Downtown's Tallest Residential Tower

The last render has it pulling up just shy of 4 WTC (nice to see 3WTC making a cameo appearance ). 960-970 ft? And it looks like one of the Agency Buildings at the Empire State Plaza in Albany.
Because it's so thin, it will look tiny compared to the massive tower that 4WTC is.
I hope it will be as shiny as 4WTC. The renders suggest it will.
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2014, 06:40 AM   #165
towerpower123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Howell/Newark, NJ
Posts: 279
Likes (Received): 344

Excavation is Underway!

Thames Street is closed for a crane, the site safety crews are a pain, the site is walled off, but thankfully they can't figure out how to fully seal those gates.

[IMG]image hosted on flickr

22 Thames by towerpower123, on Flickr[/IMG]

This is finally happening!
__________________
See my Flickr Album at http://www.flickr.com/photos/92886975@N06/

Check out my blog for a critique of Modernist urban planning. Its full of pictures!
http://urbanismvsmodernism.blogspot.com/

desertpunk, iamtheSTIG liked this post
towerpower123 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2014, 06:44 AM   #166
ThatOneGuy
User That Is Registered
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Constanța
Posts: 11,364
Likes (Received): 6570

Hopefully this will finish faster than that Kaufman hotel nearby that is taking ages.
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 3rd, 2014, 11:18 PM   #167
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,622
Likes (Received): 3000

Viñoly’s design for 22 Thames bests the original proposal by Selldorf:

Architecture Review


The newer blueprint for the Fisher Brothers and Witkoff tower is ‘purely’ radical
http://therealdeal.com/issues_articl...urely-radical/

Quote:
It is not often appreciated that, in addition to the usual choice between “conventional” and “unconventional” architecture in New York City, there are, in fact, two further options: the “unconventionally conventional” and the “conventionally unconventional.” Both can be found in the design plans put forward for 22 Thames Street in Lower Manhattan.

For $150 million, Fisher Brothers acquired the site, where a 10-story, decidedly conventional Beaux-Arts building circa 1900 stands. Fisher Brothers and the Witkoff Group now plan to tear that building down and erect a 400-unit residential high-rise, a stone’s throw from the World Trade Center site.

From the beginning, there was no question that the developers of 22 Thames Street would build something tall. The question was whether to build something super-tall and super-thin, or something slightly shorter — but still lofty — and broader. Initially the developers were leaning toward the latter option, in the interests of harmonizing with the surrounding architecture. The design they floated was by Annabelle Selldorf, a renowned and sought-after architect who has been most active in Chelsea in recent years.

But a few months ago, the developers changed architects and enlisted Rafael Viñoly to design something very tall and very thin. In fact, the massing of this new project, which is still pending approvals, so closely resembles that of Viñoly’s high-profile under-construction 432 Park Avenue, which is already near the half-way point of its ascent, that it is hard to imagine that the Uptown building did not weigh heavily on the developers and cause them to rethink the design.

The choice of Viñoly is clearly the right one. He is, in the case of 22 Thames, unconventionally conventional, whereas Selldorf has proven herself to be just the opposite: conventionally unconventional.

Each of the architects’ blueprints for 22 Thames includes a tower on a base. But the base seems weightier in Selldorf’s design, and the tower that rises above it is squatter. As is usually the case with her designs, the principal interest resides in the treatment of the external surface. Her sense of décor is decidedly unconventional, in the simple sense that most architects have not chosen to follow her lead, and also in that she often seems to be pulling some sequence of formal motifs out of her hat in the hope that they will all coalesce into something wonderful.

Unfortunately, that does not usually happen. At 22 Thames Street, Selldorf devised a surface treatment that looked rather too much like a two-tone accumulation of beads, some glazed, some solid, all of them irregularly deployed across the surface and rising over a glazed and luminous base. Most of these beads were one-story, though some, for no apparent reason, were two. The result looked odd and quirky and so “unconventional,” but in a way that somehow remained comfortably within the confines of licit rebellion.

Put another way, the design looked the way conformists might imagine architectural rebellion to look.

By contrast, Viñoly’s design turned that equation on its head. If you are not really paying attention, you might think that the design, like the one he created for 432 Park, was — in every respect except its height — a conventional, even boring, specimen of Neo-Modernism. The pattern is simple and geometric; there is no trace of that syncopated rhythm that so many contemporary architects favor. There are no curved lines to be seen, and the cladding looks as though it could have been conceived for any number of Skidmore Owings and Merrill office towers conceived from 1970 to the present.

But there is far more to the building than that. In a certain sense, one can best understand Viñoly’s designs by applying to them the standards of art criticism, especially those of sculpture, rather than the more usual criteria that apply to architecture.

The closest analogies to 432 Park and 22 Thames are the sculptures of Sol LeWitt and Jackie Windsor, as well as the paintings of Agnes Martin, acts of conceptual art from the 1970s. Or, from slightly earlier, the Minimalist sculptures of Donald Judd and Tony Smith. In the latest design — which could be modified depending on input from city officials — the Downtown building rises up in almost freakish slenderness, a monolithic tower as pure, in its way, as that alien artifact that descended to Earth in Stanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey.”

That is to say that Viñoly has purged his surfaces of all adornment or distraction, until the very pertinacity and discipline of his design — in one sense so conventional — bursts through to a design as strikingly original as anything built in Manhattan in over a generation.

Immediately to the east of the main tower is a slab of almost wafer-thinness that looks as though it provides some structural support to the tower. It rises from the ground all the way to up the tower’s summit and then surpasses it by about 100 feet. And yet, I am willing to wager a good amount of capital that it serves no structural function at all: it has been included entirely on the basis of the way it looks, and it looks very good indeed. If that shaft surpasses 937 feet, it will make 22 Thames the tallest residential building in Lower Manhattan, surpassing Silverstein Properties’ 30 Park Place, which is now under construction.

At its base is a structure that resembles the one Selldorf designed, even though it is more perfectly cubic, and thus more satisfying to the eye. The shaft of the tower, to judge from the renderings, is striated by the long rows of windows that rise in uninterrupted bays from the base to the summit. This element as well adds subtle visual interest that belies that initial sense of conventionality that the building eagerly projects.

In the most general terms, the formal elements of 22 Thames recall those of 432 Park in their uniform simplicity. And both projects achieve great and memorable beauty through their obedience to those premises. But whereas the Uptown building is almost Neo-Brutalist in its joyous parade of raw concrete, the Downtown building, perhaps out of respect for its architectural context, embraces the conventionality of the glass curtain wall that abounds in this part of the island. If only the other buildings in its vicinity looked as good as this promises to be when completed.
__________________

ThatOneGuy liked this post
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 01:20 AM   #168
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 1836




V.S.




Personally, I'm partial to Selldorf's design. Did this tower receive a height increase?
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 01:25 AM   #169
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 582
Likes (Received): 370

Man, that criticism really wasn't fair to Selldorf's design. The double-height paneling sections weren't random -- there was one double-height floor in the entire thing.

I don't find the Viñoly design exciting, and it's largely because of the weird "spire/panel" that the author lauds. If the whole thing were actually a solid block like the 2001 obelisk, I might like it better. But Trump World Tower already got a jump on that years ago.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 01:34 AM   #170
ThatOneGuy
User That Is Registered
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Constanța
Posts: 11,364
Likes (Received): 6570

Both are nice
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 03:19 AM   #171
RobertWalpole
SSP is provincial!
 
RobertWalpole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,028
Likes (Received): 2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
Man, that criticism really wasn't fair to Selldorf's design. The double-height paneling sections weren't random -- there was one double-height floor in the entire thing.

I don't find the Viñoly design exciting, and it's largely because of the weird "spire/panel" that the author lauds. If the whole thing were actually a solid block like the 2001 obelisk, I might like it better. But Trump World Tower already got a jump on that years ago.
The author is so phoney and full of it. This design is lame.
__________________
Unlike a certain American skyscraper site, SSC is sophisticated and international.
RobertWalpole está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 03:24 AM   #172
ThatOneGuy
User That Is Registered
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Constanța
Posts: 11,364
Likes (Received): 6570

Just because he likes the current design more doesn't mean he's full of it. It's not like what he said was wrong. Some people can't see the beauty of simplicity, but that's their problem. Don't insult those who can.
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 04:30 AM   #173
JohnFlint1985
I love New York
 
JohnFlint1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New York - New Jersey
Posts: 14,034
Likes (Received): 3634

I like the latest design a bit more. if it only has another 60-100 ft...
__________________
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.” Thomas Jefferson
"We Shall Never Surrender." Winston Churchill
“Not all those who wander are lost.” J.R.R. Tolkien
"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious." Oscar Wilde
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

iamtheSTIG liked this post
JohnFlint1985 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 07:05 AM   #174
Manitopiaaa
Illuminati Leader
 
Manitopiaaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA - Latin America
Posts: 2,590
Likes (Received): 2038

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy View Post
Just because he likes the current design more doesn't mean he's full of it. It's not like what he said was wrong. Some people can't see the beauty of simplicity, but that's their problem. Don't insult those who can.
And just because the other forumer disagrees that means he can't see the beauty of simplicity? That sounds just as petty.
__________________
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
-John Kenneth Galbraith
Manitopiaaa no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 08:10 AM   #175
tim1807
faster than buildings
 
tim1807's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Den Helder
Posts: 8,537
Likes (Received): 2318

The new design by viñoly looks good, but the original design was magnificent.
tim1807 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 08:35 AM   #176
ThatOneGuy
User That Is Registered
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Constanța
Posts: 11,364
Likes (Received): 6570

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manitopiaaa View Post
And just because the other forumer disagrees that means he can't see the beauty of simplicity? That sounds just as petty.
Calling the author 'full of it' for describing why minimalism has beauty would kind of imply that, yeah.
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2014, 10:27 AM   #177
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 582
Likes (Received): 370

I don't know if I'd say he's 'full of it,' but the author was pretty transparently making exaggerated statements about the original design, undercutting it unfairly in service of his "unconventional conventionalism" argument -- which isn't all that radical anyway. He just wanted to make a splash by badmouthing a widely liked old design, when he could have instead focused on the positives of the new one.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
new york

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 03:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu