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 27th, 2013, 05:03 AM   #3241
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 Simfan34 View Post
The idea that we that we should somehow be "thankful" for getting a particularly tall tower and that it, by virtue of its superlative height and its consequences for the construction of other tall towers, can brush aside any concerns of subpar design, is not only misguided, but dangerous.

We live- or at least I live- in New York, not China, where the national obsession appears to be constructing things for the sole purpose of garnering superlatives of dubious origin (the world's "largest steel framework sculpture", anyone?), and I am glad of it. I do not like tall towers for the numbers they provide- height, floors, number of supertalls- but rather the statement they make, the addition to the skyline.

I'm not passing judgement on the building's design, I haven't seen it properly. What am I saying is that its height cannot excuse a poor design; indeed, it necessitates a good one! If it is to be prominent, then surely you can all agree it should be aesthetically pleasing. The idea that such a building should somehow be conservative in design is at odds with its total lack of a conservative presence, no matter how staid the design it will stick out because it is so tall.

Furthermore, I'd disagree strongly with the idea that put forth by SomeKindOfBug, that:



That's simply untrue. New York is far more dissonant architecturally than any of those cities. I mean look at lower Manhattan, with its Beaux-Arts towers, its Art Deco skyscrapers, modernist, post modernist. It's very dissonant- yet it works. Who would say the Woolworth Building, 40 Wall Street, the American International Building, Chase Manhattan Plaza, 60 Wall Street, or the World Trade Center, both new and old, are "conservative" or "contextual"? New York's strength is its architectural diversity.

Those other cities fall short because the architects are working within the same framework, and their failures are less to do with lack of conservatism than the inherent failures of the modernist language of design. There was a little dessine by Leon Krier that I think encapsulated the idea quite well:


The historic and diverse framework, the mass of New York's building stock, enables further diversity and innovation in a way modernism's stock of square towers does not. That's one reason why we need to keep on building new buildings in a traditional style, because it is with them you can have dissonance without discord. It's why London's City, with it's "Shard", "Gherkin", "Cheesegrater", and "Walkie-talkie", despite their own dissonance, remains aesthetically pleasing in a way many others are not. It's a sort of recursive NIMBYism, that supposes there is a requirement towards staid architecture, and it's why I think you see American skyscrapers these days are more staid than ones in Asia. The most egregious example is the victory of Pelli's design for the Transbay Tower over SOM's fantastic scheme. Tall buildings have a right, if not a requirement, to be innovative and assertive. Otherwise, it's a bit like a big... err... thing... that...uh... can't... I'm sure you get what I'm saying. It's big and there but ultimately disappointing and useless.

The building is not meant to be a "stepping stone" to taller ones, and if that's what you get from it, that it simply serves to open the door to other buildings then you're admitting it doesn't have much merit on its own. And that's a travesty. New York deserves more than that. Again, I'm not saying I dislike the building- I simply haven't seen enough of it to pass judgement on it- but I think it's not right to "give it a pass" because it's tall. That, if anything, would banalise New York to something more akin to Dubai or whatnot.
Very well said!!!
Trouble with today is that
1. developers are too obsessed with height and in the process forget about the style of the building. we sacrifice really nice building simply because they are not tall enough to generate the profit a developer may get from an esthetically dull, but cash rich building.

2. too many of us here only interested in height. give us something 2000 ft tall and people will start having orgasm just by reading about it. in the meantime it can be incredibly ugly stick in the sky.

3. IMHO is you are building a skyscraper building it means you are making a statement. And it better be worthy of this great city because honestly we have loads of nothing special glass boxes all over the place. No one will cheer for new ones like these. On the other hand all over the world ESB and Chrysler building remain high standards for the skyscrapers. Why is that? Because they don't have just height - they have enormously potent style that is as deathless as pyramids in Egypt. We all should at least try to be more assertive yet stylish about what we put in our skyline.
__________________
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

Troopchina, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
JohnFlint1985 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old October 27th, 2013, 05:16 AM   #3242
t94
Registered User
 
t94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 844



Thank goodness that rhetoric doesn't apply to this skyscraper, because this one has a solid design.
__________________

Mahogany, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
t94 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2013, 12:11 PM   #3243
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by t94 View Post


Thank goodness that rhetoric doesn't apply to this skyscraper, because this one has a solid design.
You seems to be the only lucky one who actually seen it (the design). Care to show it to the rest of us so we can judge by ourselves?
__________________
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


Simfan34, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2013, 03:55 PM   #3244
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

I look forward to seeing the final design and details of this tower. I believe it will be amazing. It appears that Extell will add the extra height.

Extell knows that it must hit a home run with the design because it Will be competing head-to-head with 220 CPS, 45 E 60th, Park Lane, and maybe 650 Madison, all of which have better locations. It also will compete directly with Steinway (which has a better Location and an awesome design) and Verre (which has an arguably better location and an awesome design).

Unlike One57 and 432 Park, there will be a lot of competition for sales for this tower. Thus, Extell knows that it needs a landmark.

Do people recall the 1, 000 foot box that was to rise on the prairie?

The details made this box appealing. I guarantee that people would have scorned the massing model as boring. (Those who are honest, at least.)
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post

Last edited by RobertWalpole; October 27th, 2013 at 04:39 PM.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2013, 04:48 PM   #3245
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,593
Likes (Received): 28160

I would welcome a Waterview like design here. Sort of a 2nd chance.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2013, 05:20 PM   #3246
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

We know from the models that it will be nothing like that. It has numerous setbacks, indentations on the facade, and it will be 500' taller.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2013, 05:26 PM   #3247
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,593
Likes (Received): 28160

I know.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2013, 05:43 PM   #3248
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

Can't wait to see the design unveiled either! Robert, you said they adding the height... you mean greater than the announced 1,423 ft? Thought that since they won the cantilever argument with the Landmarks Commission they were not going to need to add height. Needless to say though, another awesome design would just be gravy since all the new buildings in the area will have an iconic, distinctive New York look all their own. Gotta be patient with other developments as it will take time, but Manhattan on October 27, 2023 is going to be absolutely awesome!
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2013, 11:15 PM   #3249
t94
Registered User
 
t94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 844

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrykus View Post
You seems to be the only lucky one who actually seen it (the design). Care to show it to the rest of us so we can judge by ourselves?
The way I look at it is that you either get the streamlined, minimalist design shown by the massing model,(which as I've repeated, is not that bad.)

Or you get something with a bit more flair that I'm sure the architects will think out thoroughly.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post

Last edited by kanye; October 28th, 2013 at 11:16 PM.
t94 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2013, 02:02 AM   #3250
Funkyskunk2
Registered User
 
Funkyskunk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 619
Likes (Received): 808

It would be pretty clever. Claim you would have to build higher without the cantilever to help convince a vote in favor, then just build it as tall as you want since it is as-of-right and the vote was supposed to only about the cantilever.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Funkyskunk2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2013, 03:23 AM   #3251
Simfan34
Complainer-in-Chief
 
Simfan34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 11,884
Likes (Received): 2461

Quote:
Originally Posted by patrykus View Post
You seems to be the only lucky one who actually seen it (the design). Care to show it to the rest of us so we can judge by ourselves?
Like I said I don't know what the design is going to be. I was responding more to the rhetoric I was hearing that was downplaying the issue of the quality of the design, or the lack thereof.
__________________
(Don't forget Ethiopia and NYC, too!)

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Simfan34 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2013, 04:09 AM   #3252
Subsequence
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 198
Likes (Received): 50

......
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post

Last edited by Subsequence; March 8th, 2017 at 04:49 PM.
Subsequence no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2013, 05:22 AM   #3253
JohnFlint1985
I love New York
 
JohnFlint1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New York - New Jersey
Posts: 15,621
Likes (Received): 6558

all right gentlemen, lets just sit tight and wait for the renders and hope that they are better then the ones we saw at the start. Extell has all it needs to build something extraordinary and jaw dropping. If it does - its name will be forever in NYC history. If it doesn't - no one will be shy to call it anything but a looser.
__________________
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

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
JohnFlint1985 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2013, 05:24 AM   #3254
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 t94 View Post


Thank goodness that rhetoric doesn't apply to this skyscraper, because this one has a solid design.
IMHO it is a half baked nothing special, that is trying to become something very special. I hope it will.
__________________
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 October 28th, 2013, 05:27 AM   #3255
Simfan34
Complainer-in-Chief
 
Simfan34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 11,884
Likes (Received): 2461

Quote:
Originally Posted by Subsequence View Post
It would be a gift to the city if Gary Barnett builds a 1550 ft + tower.
An attractive 1550+ tower.
__________________
(Don't forget Ethiopia and NYC, too!)

Subsequence, L.A.F.2. liked this post
Simfan34 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 03:55 AM   #3256
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

For entertainment purposes. Enjoy!

Shadows Over Central Park
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/29/op...park.html?_r=0
__________________
-------------------------



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 October 29th, 2013, 05:52 PM   #3257
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Breaking news!! New image released by AS+GG!

I'm on d bus now. Lol

What u fellas think about this? Kinda looks like 2 Hudson Blvd (Girasol) a bit IMO.


http://www.citylandnyc.org/approved-...udents-league/

Skyscraper to be built as-of-right, but requires Landmarks to review and approve its impact on adjacent individual landmark. On October 22, 2013, the Landmarks Preservation Commission voted to issue a certificate of appropriateness to Extell Development, despite one dissenting vote, to allow a portion of a new planned tower to cantilever over the individually landmarked American Fine Arts Society building, located at 215 West 57th Street in Midtown Manhattan. The tower, which is intended to rise to over 1,400 feet, will house a Nordstrom department store at its base, and residences and a hotel above the store. The French Renaissance-style landmark building has been continuously occupied by the Art Students League of New York since its construction in 1892.

The cantilevered portion of the building would be visible from multiple street vantages. The cantilever would extend 28 feet into the landmark lot, approximately one-third of the lot. The section intruding into the air above the Art Students League would start at 290 feet above the street and 195 feet above the roof of the art school, which is equivalent to “20 stories of air.” The cantilever would be set back 80 feet from the street wall.

At the public hearing, Gary Barnett of Extell stated that the project, which would constitute “a significant addition to the New York City skyline,” would create over 1,300 jobs and generate over $1 billion in tax revenue for the City over 20 years. Barnett said the proposal would in no way detract from the landmark. Preservation Consultant Bill Higgins argued that the cantilever and the landmark would “exist in different planes of urban experience.”

Architect Gordon Gill, of Adrian Smith and Gordon Gill Architecture, said the glass-faced building would be composed of cantilevers, including a “sky lobby” 139 feet above the street. He said the cantilever over the landmark would give the building “a sense of scale” and a “modulation of the texture” of the otherwise sheer side façade. Gill said the transparent façade of the new building would provide “a contrast” to the stone-clad landmark, and “add texture and animation to the street.”

A representative of Manhattan Community Board 5 recommended a denial of the certificate, stating that the tower would be the second-tallest building in Manhattan and the cantilever would set a poor precedent. Ronda Wist of the Municipal Art Society argued that Landmarks should withhold approval until Extell instituted a protection plan for the Art Students League. She also testified that the new building’s all-glass façade would not relate well to the masonry landmark, and that a study of the project’s impact on the already congested neighborhood is required. The New York Landmarks Conservancy’s Alex Herrera also spoke in opposition, calling the cantilevered section a “huge mass hovering over the Art Students League.” One member of the League testified that the project would block natural light from entering the building through its rooftop skylights. Some area residents expressed concerns about safety, noting that a crane collapse had previously occurred at an Extell construction site, with one comparing the construction of the cantilever to a “sword of Damocles.”

Executive Director of the Art Students League Ira Goldberg said the funds from the League’s sale of its air rights to Extell would ensure the school’s longevity and allow it to make improvements. Goldberg attested that the project’s impact on the building would be minimal. Rick Bell, Executive Director of the New York chapter of the American Institute of Architects, praised the design of the planned tower, and said it would not negatively affect the landmark, and that the unique characteristics of the site and the project would prevent it from setting a precedent. A representative of the Hotel Trades Council spoke in favor, saying the project would create “quality middle-class jobs.”

Landmarks Counsel Mark Silberman advised the Commissioners that Landmarks’ purview was limited to the project’s impact on the landmarked site, particularly the appropriateness of the cantilever. Silberman also advised that the Commission was not reviewing the design and scale of the planned tower.

Chair Robert B. Tierney recommended approval of the application, finding that it would have “negligible impact to the landmark site,” and noting that the project would be a benefit to the City and the art school. Concurring, Commissioner Libby Ryan concurred said the project would disrupt the complete perception of the landmark. Commissioner Diana Chapin found the cantilever to be an integral component of the proposed new structure, which would read as “part of the larger urban skyscape” that it did not impinge on the landmark. Commissioner Roberta Washington suggested that the cantilever be reduced so that it projects less into the landmarked site.

Commissioner Michael Goldblum did not find the proposal appropriate, determining that it did not reach the standard for architecture on an individually designated site. He said the impact of the project on the landmark was mitigated by the height of the cantilever, but the landmarked building would still be negatively affected. He also noted that the cantilever was not necessary for the development of the neighboring parcel.

The Commission voted to award the plan a certificate of appropriateness, with Commissioner Goldblum dissenting.

LPC: The American Fine Arts Society, 215 West 57th Street, Manhattan (14-9057) (Oct. 22, 2013) (Architect: Adrian Smith and Gordon Gill Architecture).
__________________
-------------------------



Hudson Yards mega development Map: June 2015
http://i.imgur.com/FVrYwpy.jpg
(click again once inside to enlarge the map)

Chad, hunser, Munwon, dexter2, Manitopiaaa and 6 others liked this post

Last edited by Vertical_Gotham; October 29th, 2013 at 05:58 PM.
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 05:56 PM   #3258
Chad
Kickimus Gluteus Maximus
 
Chad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 37,354
Likes (Received): 3628

holy shit
__________________
You have the right to remain silent, everything you say will be misquoted and used against you in the forum

-Imate pravo da ćutite, sve što budete rekli može i biće upotrebljeno protiv vas na forumu

You know you love me. XOXO.
Chad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 06:14 PM   #3259
Munwon
Registered User
 
Munwon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Busan
Posts: 3,438
Likes (Received): 3183

AMAZING!!!!
Munwon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 06:15 PM   #3260
t94
Registered User
 
t94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 844



That looks a bit similar to the Chow Tai Fook Guangzhou, which is one of my favorite skyscraper designs of all time.
t94 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 09:11 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