daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Supertalls

Supertalls Discussions of projects under construction between 300-599m/1,000-1,999ft tall.
» Proposed Supertalls



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old September 15th, 2013, 05:40 PM   #2381
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Is that wondering inside info?
__________________
-------------------------



Hudson Yards mega development Map: June 2015
http://i.imgur.com/FVrYwpy.jpg
(click again once inside to enlarge the map)
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 15th, 2013, 05:53 PM   #2382
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrykus View Post
I just noticed there are two stars next two the height of 225 at ctbuh. Two stars means minimum height so I guess in this case ctbuh doesn't know much more than we do - if the height was definitive and confirmed I'm sure they wouldn't mark it this way.
CTBUH had officially listed 225 at 1550 but now has been down graded and asterisk added next to the height. They definitely acted on info directly from the source, but the asterisk is intriguing meaning they were told of o possible increase.

The only other project for NY listed on CTBUH with an asterisk is 107W57 listed at 1200 but we all know what it will be now.

So I hope at least Extell decides to make the crown a little higher to make this an even 1300 ft at least and call it a day.
__________________
-------------------------



Hudson Yards mega development Map: June 2015
http://i.imgur.com/FVrYwpy.jpg
(click again once inside to enlarge the map)
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2013, 06:03 PM   #2383
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vertical_Gotham View Post
CTBUH had officially listed 225 at 1550 but now has been down graded and asterisk added next to the height. They definitely acted on info directly from the source, but the asterisk is intriguing meaning they were told of o possible increase.
James told us there's no way for increasing in height. So if both James and ctbuh have proper source something is clearly wrong in the picture, don't you think?

So I stand to my interpretation. I say they took the height from this thread but because it's not confirmed yet they dubbed it "minimal height" in case it wouldn't be true.

But hey I couldn't be more happy to be proven wrong on this one as I have absolutely nothing against height increase. That being said even though the height is very likely decreased I hope no renders will be released because that will be final confirmation for that fat.
__________________
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CComingSoon/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C

patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2013, 06:13 PM   #2384
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrykus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vertical_Gotham View Post
CTBUH had officially listed 225 at 1550 but now has been down graded and asterisk added next to the height. They definitely acted on info directly from the source, but the asterisk is intriguing meaning they were told of o possible increase.
James told us there's no way for increasing in height. So if both James and ctbuh have proper source something is clearly wrong in the picture, don't you think?

So I stand to my interpretation. I say they took the height from this thread but because it's not confirmed yet they dubbed it "minimal height" in case it wouldn't be true.

But hey I couldn't be more happy to be proven wrong on this one as I have absolutely nothing against height increase. That being said even though the height is very likely decreased I hope no renders will be released because that will be final confirmation for that fat.
Actually James explicitly stated the 1253ft includes the crown, and the design is final.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesDL View Post
Hi all,

new renderings for 212/225 West 57th Street will be released by the end of September.
The tower was in redesign in the last couple of months by Adrian Smith & Gordon Hill.
The height will be listed as 1217'4'' (blueprints), and officially as 1253 feet (including the crown).

All I can say is, it will be a very fine tower and a gift to the evolving Manhattan skyline.

Regards,
James
__________________
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CComingSoon/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C

patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2013, 07:38 PM   #2385
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vertical_Gotham View Post
Is that wondering inside info?
No. It's pure speculation.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2013, 07:45 PM   #2386
Wbino49
Registered User
 
Wbino49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: NJ..I know...
Posts: 285
Likes (Received): 246

I have two thoughts on this tower.

1. Why would the Nordstrom give up the opportunity to be attached to the tallest building in the city?
Everyone remembers the Sears tower, but can the average Joe name the forth tallest tower in Chicago?

2. Could the possible height reduction be a result of Nordstrom having a planed opening by set date..and an additional 300 feet would mean the tower would still be UC?
Wbino49 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2013, 07:46 PM   #2387
-Corey-
Je suis tout à vous
 
-Corey-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 16,218
Likes (Received): 5222

Lack of Money?
__________________

๏̯͡๏๏̯͡๏

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
-Corey- no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 15th, 2013, 11:09 PM   #2388
Hudson11
Stuck on the Cross Bronx
 
Hudson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 9,518
Likes (Received): 22527

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wbino49 View Post
I have two thoughts on this tower.

1. Why would the Nordstrom give up the opportunity to be attached to the tallest building in the city?
Everyone remembers the Sears tower, but can the average Joe name the forth tallest tower in Chicago?

2. Could the possible height reduction be a result of Nordstrom having a planed opening by set date..and an additional 300 feet would mean the tower would still be UC?
the second one makes sense, Nordstrom is the anchor after all, not the developer.
Hudson11 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 02:37 AM   #2389
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

The height reduction most likely occurred in connection with the alignment for 220 CPS.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 03:40 AM   #2390
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53449

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wbino49 View Post
I have two thoughts on this tower.

1. Why would the Nordstrom give up the opportunity to be attached to the tallest building in the city?
Everyone remembers the Sears tower, but can the average Joe name the forth tallest tower in Chicago?
There was never an actual Sears store in the Sears Tower so unless the tower is given the Nordstrom name I don't think those kind of aspirations are at play. Nordstrom has never been ostentatious with any of its stores and they don't have a ' trophy tower complex' like Sears did (forumers in Seattle would love it if they did).

Quote:
2. Could the possible height reduction be a result of Nordstrom having a planed opening by set date..and an additional 300 feet would mean the tower would still be UC?
Maybe. There's costs associated with failing to open on time. But Nordstrom alone wouldn't affect the height of the tower. I think Walpole is closer to it: redistributing the mass may have affected how high they could go. (I still believe it was for economic reasons)
__________________
We are floating in space...
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 03:45 AM   #2391
N.Y.C.H
Registered User
 
N.Y.C.H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: NorthEast
Posts: 352
Likes (Received): 407

I was dissapointed about the height, but i thought about it. This one shorter then expected, 220 CPS taller then expected.. at least maybe lol
N.Y.C.H no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 04:21 AM   #2392
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Quote:
... I think Walpole is closer to it: redistributing the mass may have affected how high they could go. (I still believe it was for economic reasons)
That's what I think happened here. I believe that Extell's tower Will rise as far west as possible, and Vornado's Will rise as far east as possible. Also, the 1, 500 feet might only have been necessary if Vorn ado built right in front of Extell, which clearly is not happening. While Nordstrom may have gotten shorter, I expect that 220 CPS will get a lot taller than was initially envision ed.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 05:03 AM   #2393
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

The height is ok, but nothing special. I think NYC should have a 500m plus tower soon.
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 06:41 AM   #2394
rencharles
We will never forget
 
rencharles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 579
Likes (Received): 93

Two weeks to October...
rencharles no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 07:56 AM   #2395
JohnFlint1985
I love New York
 
JohnFlint1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New York - New Jersey
Posts: 15,621
Likes (Received): 6558

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wbino49 View Post
I have two thoughts on this tower.

1. Why would the Nordstrom give up the opportunity to be attached to the tallest building in the city?
Everyone remembers the Sears tower, but can the average Joe name the forth tallest tower in Chicago?

2. Could the possible height reduction be a result of Nordstrom having a planed opening by set date..and an additional 300 feet would mean the tower would still be UC?
simple - money. each additional floor is more expensive than the previous one. the most economically perfect building is 300 meters. Everything above it is pure desire of the developer to show off. Some exceptions are attributed to residential towers that can have higher number of floors and still be economically feasible, but office ones... so far once you cross 300 meters it becomes so expensive that it is hardly making profit.
__________________
RIP QuantumX & Desertpunk

"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
JohnFlint1985 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 11:06 AM   #2396
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

I also believe that's simplest and most reasonable explanation for it. I noticed many people here believe the developer in ny should go as tall as air rights and permits allow him to go but they seems to ignore the fact every next taller floor doesn't cost the same but more so the increase in cost of the tower is geometrical! One can argue that construction of taller apartments will be financed by higher asking prices, but those surely can't rise forever. Would an 500m tall apartment sell easily for say $500m? What about floors between 400m and 500m. All of them very likely would need to be sell for at least $100m. I wonder if there is enough incredibly reach sheiks in the world to make it feasible
__________________
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CComingSoon/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C

patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 01:31 PM   #2397
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,613
Likes (Received): 28170

Given the high prices for which these apartments are sold, I'm sure there is still a huge margin if they build taller, regardless the increasing construction costs per floor.
I doubt if we'll ever see a penthouse of 500M, but who knows...
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 03:57 PM   #2398
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Offereins View Post
Given the high prices for which these apartments are sold, I'm sure there is still a huge margin if they build taller, regardless the increasing construction costs per floor.
I doubt if we'll ever see a penthouse of 500M, but who knows...
And yet no tower (build or proposed) is getting anything close to 500m mark. On the other hand we have several around 400m - it really looks like a current limit for ny skyscrapers. Take One57 - it's top penthouse at 380m goes for around $100M. Now imagine what would need to be the price for an apartment 100 meters above that
__________________
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CComingSoon/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C


ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 06:50 PM   #2399
Vito Corleone
Moderator
 
Vito Corleone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: New York - Chicago
Posts: 311
Likes (Received): 323

I updated the CTBUH building page for 225 W 57th to show it as an exact height now. The minimum height button was left on by mistake. Of course nothing is official yet until we see some drawings. Sorry for the confusion.
Vito Corleone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 16th, 2013, 07:05 PM   #2400
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

So no potential height increase as I thought. Can you tell as if the source for the height change was ssc, ssp or ctbuh inside source?
__________________
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CComingSoon/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C

patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
217 west 57th street, 225 west 57th street, central park south, cps, extell, new york, nordstrom tower, nyc, supertall

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

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 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