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 October 25th, 2013, 01:51 AM   #3201
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6489

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrykus View Post
Very much in denial too But enough about this city vs city crap. Can we get this thread back on track?
Hey!! Did you just hit me on my balls?
__________________
-------------------------



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 October 25th, 2013, 01:55 AM   #3202
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

bizzare question to get... I don't know, would you like it?
__________________
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 October 25th, 2013, 03:00 AM   #3203
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

King of the world!

__________________
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 03:41 AM   #3204
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

[QUOTE=MarshallKnight;108244872]Unfortunately you can't manufacture those extra 500-800 years of history.** NYC is, as far as world cities go, comparatively young, and it's doing what it does best, which is building up, looking forward and doing so in its particularly pragmatic way. That's its character. Paris and London are beautiful, but they're also at times (especially Paris) trenchantly anti-progress. And it's understandable, because they've got more history to preserve. But London isn't Paris isn't New York, and all the better for it. Embrace the diversity.


**Unless you're in China. Then you build a mini-Cambridge ... [Quote]


I happen to love London, but it is by no means an ancient metropolis. In 1500, London's population was 50, 000. In 1600, London's population was 200, 000. NY, by contrast, had only a few thousand people by 1620s.

In any event, the overwhelming majority of London was built in the 1800s and 1900s, as was NY. NY in 1920 looked very similar to London. Sadly, a lot of NY was redeveloped. Fortunately, much of NY remains as it looked long ago, but in some areas, like Midtown, the low rise structures were largely razed.

This is 5th Ave and 51st St in the early 1900s.





5th by the Park:



A lot of these structures still exist on the side streets and, to a lesser degree, on the avenues.

__________________

Last edited by RobertWalpole; October 25th, 2013 at 01:15 PM.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 05:34 AM   #3205
addo1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 4
Likes (Received): 0

when will groundbreaking begin
addo1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 07:11 AM   #3206
t94
Registered User
 
t94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 844



The rendered skyline doesn't include Tower Verre as a heads up.
t94 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 12:36 PM   #3207
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Tour Verrre is little compared to the big three
__________________
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 October 25th, 2013, 01:08 PM   #3208
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
I happen to love London, but it is by no means an ancient metropolis. In 1600, London's population was 200, 000. The overwhelming majority of London was built in the 1800s and 1900s, as was NY. NY in 1920 looked very similar to London. Sadly, a lot of NY was redeveloped. Fortunately, much of NY remains as it looked long ago, but in some areas, like Midtown, the low rise structures were largely razed.

This is 5th Ave in the early 1900s.




Very Sad.
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 01:22 PM   #3209
Dancing Banana
Registered User
 
Dancing Banana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Zürich
Posts: 615
Likes (Received): 278

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
King of the world!

thats definitely not what i would call a balanced skyline. somehow its gonna look dull. there need to be much more 300m+ towers that have mass. the tower to the left just looks wrong...
__________________
ONE WORLD
one dancing banana

KlausDiggy liked this post
Dancing Banana no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 01:56 PM   #3210
Bolzeng
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,943
Likes (Received): 2793

Without Verre.

Bolzeng no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 02:10 PM   #3211
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

It also lacks HY North and 1 Vanderbilt, which will balance it further. There are many more towers of 900 feet or more, which are not pictured, that will balance the skyline further; they include:

1. Steinway (1,350')
2. HY North 1,350'
3. 1 Vanderbilt (1,200'+)
4. Verre (1,050')
5. E-tower (950'),
6. Coach (905')
7. 22 Thames (875')
8. 425 Park (900'+)
9. 220 CPS (920')
10.30 Park (940')
11. 2 Hudson Blvd (1000'+)
12. Sherwood (1000' +)
13. 360 10th (900'+)
14. Girasole (1, 000'+)
15. 650 Madison (900' +)
16. Park Lane (900'+)
17. MTA (900'+)
18. St. John's site (900'+)
19. 80 South St. (1, 000'+)
20. 3 WTC
21. 225 W 57th
22. One 57


N.Y. is in the midst of a supertall boom that's changing the skyline. Who even knows what unknown towers are planned (e.g., Wanda Group's announcement should come soon). The king of skylines is adding more jewels to it's crown.

In any event, it's an amazing image that was created. I don't know which poster did it, but it's great work.
__________________

bozenBDJ, jconyc, Vertical_Gotham liked this post

Last edited by RobertWalpole; October 25th, 2013 at 10:22 PM.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 03:30 PM   #3212
MrSlippery519
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 179
Likes (Received): 36

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dancing Banana View Post
thats definitely not what i would call a balanced skyline. somehow its gonna look dull. there need to be much more 300m+ towers that have mass. the tower to the left just looks wrong...
That picture does not include the other 10+ developments that are in the 800-1100ft range. The skyline will look fine
MrSlippery519 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 03:39 PM   #3213
SMCYB
Registered User
 
SMCYB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,164
Likes (Received): 1714

Actually I think 432 Park does look a little skinny in that mockup. It's height:width ratio should be 15:1.
SMCYB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 05:59 PM   #3214
Funkyskunk2
Registered User
 
Funkyskunk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 619
Likes (Received): 808

I just want to point out that 225 looks to be 1550ft there and 432 is way too skinny.
__________________

Vertical_Gotham liked this post
Funkyskunk2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 06:02 PM   #3215
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Yes that's true. That's proves my point. If this end up 434 it will be even fatter in comparison to it's height. But even in that render it looks big compared to other two.

That also suggest the white "skinny" model is the 1550ft version of the tower.
__________________
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 October 25th, 2013, 06:05 PM   #3216
Funkyskunk2
Registered User
 
Funkyskunk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 619
Likes (Received): 808

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrykus View Post
Yes that's true. That's proves my point. If this end up 434 it will be even fatter in comparison to it's height. But even in that render it looks big compared to other two.
I'm fairly sure that was done in photo shop not a model. Without a model you can't be sure you have the dimensions right. This has 3x the far of 432 if I recall correctly. It will be a solid tower.
Funkyskunk2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 06:37 PM   #3217
CCs77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,116
Likes (Received): 2445

Hello, I am the one that made that image, effectively, it was made in photoshop.
But don't take it to seriously, it is not like it's supposed to be a veracious representation of the skyline (and it can't be, since we don't even have a final design for 225W57th yet) I made it just for fun, to see, more or less, how the skyline will look like in a few years and I published it on the One57th thread.

BTW, in the image 225W57th is about 1550 ft as somebody pointed out, and yes, 432 Park should be thicker.
__________________

Vertical_Gotham, Funkyskunk2 liked this post

Last edited by CCs77; October 25th, 2013 at 06:42 PM.
CCs77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 06:47 PM   #3218
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by Funkyskunk2 View Post
I'm fairly sure that was done in photo shop not a model. Without a model you can't be sure you have the dimensions right. This has 3x the far of 432 if I recall correctly. It will be a solid tower.
You got me wrong. I was referring to this white model in second part of my post. Both the white model and CCs77's rendering seems to be of the same proportion hence my conclusion that the white model must be the 1550ft version too as CC just explained that his model is also of the same height.

__________________
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


Funkyskunk2 liked this post
patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 06:48 PM   #3219
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6489

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCs77 View Post
Hello, I am the one that made that image, effectively, it was made in photoshop.
But don't take it to seriously, it is not like it's supposed to be a veracious representation of the skyline (and it can't be, since we don't even have a final design for 225W57th yet) I made it just for fun, to see, more or less, how the skyline will look like in a few years and I published it on the One57th thread.

BTW, in the image 225W57th is about 1550 ft as somebody pointed out, and yes, 432 Park should be thicker.
Nice! Could you put Tower Verre in there?? you know... just for kicks?
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2013, 06:50 PM   #3220
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6489

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrykus View Post
the white model must be the 1550ft version too as CC just explained that his model is also of the same height.
how do you estimate it to be 1550ft? the white model.
Vertical_Gotham 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 03:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

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

tech management by Sysprosium