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 December 22nd, 2013, 06:52 PM   #3581
Ghostface79
Registered User
 
Ghostface79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,536
Likes (Received): 4604

Point taken, the height argument is one of the weakest in terms of architecture. I can name countless smaller structures over some of the banal supertalls that seem to get most of the attention.
Ghostface79 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old December 22nd, 2013, 06:52 PM   #3582
germantower
i ♥ NY
 
germantower's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,447
Likes (Received): 1153

Dude, NYC and Manhattan in particular has a plateau of 800 feet and only supertalls really stick out at this point. Even One57 gets lost in the mass of skyscrapers from specific POV like "Top Of The Rock". Everything to a height of 250m is barely a gamechanger in this town.

There are a lot beautiful building in the pipeline and recently built. Like GEM tower, 7 Briant Park and the BofA tower to name a few finished buildings, and One57, Verre, Steinway, HY etc which will come.

Ultimativly this city needs some height to get a balanced look. And this city is the only way where it seems profitable to build supertall. Otherwise, no one would do so. Also the thiness of the towers results from the uniqueness of the grid and what plots have enough FAR and or are to be sold.

Look at how interestingly One57 and placed onto it´s unusually shaped plot. It speaks NYC. There are quite a few of these L shaped building across town.

I mean, i respect everyones opinions, but i really don´t see anything reasonable in your statements. Sorry.

This entire boom screams NYC. Just saiyng.
__________________
more SHoP less BIG

Last edited by germantower; December 22nd, 2013 at 06:57 PM.
germantower no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2013, 08:38 PM   #3583
baavaz17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 22
Likes (Received): 8

In my opinion, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Dubai, and all those other Asian cities can build all 1500+ feet buildings they want but most of the buildings they build are hardly distinguishable from all the others in their skyline and have barely noticeable designs. New York, on the other hand, builds buildings that aren't as tall as the Asian cities but our buildings have beautiful and distinguishable designs that are world recognizable.
__________________

Riley1066, -Corey- liked this post
baavaz17 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2013, 06:16 AM   #3584
L.A.F.2.
Georgia Tech
 
L.A.F.2.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,406
Likes (Received): 5307

Quote:
Originally Posted by germantower View Post
Are you RobertWalpole´s son? (sorry i had to)
Nah, Robert died several hundred years ago.
__________________

Sirius2.0 liked this post
L.A.F.2. no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2013, 06:38 AM   #3585
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/23/ar...ref=arts&_r=1&
__________________

-Corey-, Sirius2.0, Subsequence liked this post
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2013, 01:42 PM   #3586
Lowkey Lion
Registered User
 
Lowkey Lion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 117
Likes (Received): 64

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
I love New York, but some of its people will never cease to amaze me.

It's the capital of the free world, and we have people wanting to dictate what a PRIVATE developer does with his/her building.

I am from the South. I have a very laissez-faire attitude. That said, why do the people who claim to want to fix our housing shortage/affordable housing issue cling to positions that are counterproductive to their goal?

The only way to build is up.
Lowkey Lion no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2013, 03:06 PM   #3587
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Here's a glimpse of the CP view that the units in the first 950' will have.

image hosted on flickr

ILNY
__________________
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2013, 04:02 PM   #3588
Nonoka
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Munich
Posts: 365
Likes (Received): 254

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowkey Lion View Post
I love New York, but some of its people will never cease to amaze me.

It's the capital of the free world, and we have people wanting to dictate what a PRIVATE developer does with his/her building.

I am from the South. I have a very laissez-faire attitude. That said, why do the people who claim to want to fix our housing shortage/affordable housing issue cling to positions that are counterproductive to their goal?

The only way to build is up.
[offtopic]
Sorry to wake you up from your dreams, but the time the world could be considered a free world has been gone long ago, not only in the US, but also in pretty much all other places in the world.
Merry Christmas to you!
[/offtopic]
Nonoka no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2013, 05:08 PM   #3589
CCs77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,113
Likes (Received): 2436

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowkey Lion View Post
I love New York, but some of its people will never cease to amaze me.

It's the capital of the free world, and we have people wanting to dictate what a PRIVATE developer does with his/her building.

I am from the South. I have a very laissez-faire attitude. That said, why do the people who claim to want to fix our housing shortage/affordable housing issue cling to positions that are counterproductive to their goal?

The only way to build is up.
It has nothing to do with freedom. It is not that people are messing with how he decorates his apartment. It is a Huge tower that somehow affects the life of everyone living in the city. I am not against this tower, but I think it is good the developer gives something in return for what he is taking away (such as sunlight) Not to mention these are multimillion dólar residences, the y wont lower a bit housing prices.

I guess You wont complain if Your next door neighbor makes parties all nights, after all, he can do whatever he wants in his own house, doesn't he?
CCs77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2013, 06:58 PM   #3590
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

This is not news! This piece is about changing the heart and minds of NYC about development. I always thought the Times is only engaged with reporting the news.

Many people would kill to live in the city and if they end up living here in the city they must know there is a large price to pay. Obviously the biggest price to pay is noise.

From a chorus of children playing, neighbors playing music, crazies shouting, cars honking, emergency response sirens to construction noise… this is all a given being in the city.

Honestly if one can’t take these nuances of the city, then maybe they should reassess their priorities and maybe think of living further away from the epicenter. But many choose the city despite this because the positives heavily outweigh the negatives. #people know what they signed up for

I’m really set dead against what this author is suggesting and it is troubling for many reasons.

To protect people from shadows is a total crap.

If a buyer buys a lower unit in the back end of the apt building, they should do their due diligence and expect that one day their view will be blocked and the shadows will take over.

There is a reason lower units and rear facing unit’s trades with a major discount. In effect what I’m saying is you get what you pay for and this is so true choosing where you live in the city.

Just because a person chooses a certain place to live because they got a great deal does not mean they can all of the sudden have rules changed for their benefit.

The whole Shadows casting in Central Park is not really a big deal! Their argument and they try to portray that the shadows would be a permanent tattoo in the park for 365 days of the year and they make it sound like all of central park will be permanently covered. #bullshit.

One57, imo is an awesome tower and if a rule is in place, this design we see would not exist and we would have a very conservative style approved.

Just imagine… people complain a design suffers because the developer is only concerned about $$. Guess what after it is dumbed down by the developer it would be dumbed down even more by public review and then we get the Gene Kauffmans of the world.

The problems is that many people could really care less what rises amongst them because people are involved only with their lives and concerned how their lives are affected.

Neighbors effected near construction would care, architecture snobs and preservationist. Preservationist has the time and the resources because this is what they do and you can expect them to exploit this for their own advantage. They are more vocal than the silent majority in development issues. They will use this to wear down the developers right to build in the city with lousy arguments such as this and scare away potential taller development away in this city. I know If I was a developer maybe I just might think of building my project in Chicago vs. NYC to avoid all the garbage.

Of course inhabitants within the city wants to improve their quality of life just as I do, but NYC is NYC for a reason and these Disney loving people that already lives in the city would all be too happy to have not their world rocked and turned upside down by these projects. (I love Disney too)

Believe me they would care less if another development would occur ever again in this city and their preference is status quo to preserve their way of life.
__________________

Eric Offereins, Sirius2.0, L.A.F.2. liked this post
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2013, 09:08 PM   #3591
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,593
Likes (Received): 28160

The problems with nimby's is that they don't care about facts. Emotions and perceptions are their way.
__________________

Vertical_Gotham, L.A.F.2. liked this post
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 24th, 2013, 09:14 AM   #3592
anrsbes.charles
Registered User
 
anrsbes.charles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 23
Likes (Received): 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
In this article, the authors intention is clear. He intends to drum up phony outrage to accomplish his goal, which is to have government extend more regulation over private enterprise and private property.

His advocacy of view corridors is laughable. Not going to waste my time on that one. I love tall buildings and NYC architecture, I'm a born and raised New Yorker; and I believe this place is the greatest. What makes it that way is that each firm that wants a skyscraper built can for the most part do it their way.

If people of the authors opinion were in charge 100 years ago, NYC would be a collection of non-expressive uniformity and it's almost a certainty that ESB and Chrysler would never exist, for they would probably be considered too high, dangerous or offensive to someone.

Last edited by anrsbes.charles; December 24th, 2013 at 03:43 PM.
anrsbes.charles no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 24th, 2013, 02:58 PM   #3593
Twopsy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 70
Likes (Received): 68

There are already more view corridors than in most other cities. Almost every street from east to west is a view corridor across the whole island. And you can also watch along the Avenues for many miles.
Twopsy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 24th, 2013, 05:34 PM   #3594
SomeKindOfBug
Registered User
 
SomeKindOfBug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,042
Likes (Received): 1035

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Offereins View Post
The problems with nimby's is that they don't care about facts. Emotions and perceptions are their way.
Eh, when it comes to most Nimby issues it's all aesthetics anyway. There's no 'fact' when it comes to how a building looks.

A certain amount of conservatism has kept New York from becoming a scattershot mess like Shanghai or Dubai.

All it requires is a smart zoning policy and some sane heads at the top of the pile. I think New York has that in spades. It's not just a city with stunning buildings, it's a stunning city altogether. I think Nimbys have had a role in that. They can be frustrating at times, most times even, but I'd still like to keep them around.

As for the issue of view corridors, that's neither here nor there. London has incredibly strict policies on sightlines to St Pauls, to the extent that new buildings are shaped to accommodate. But St Pauls is a vital part of the character of the city. It's one of the most recognizable buildings in the world, let alone the city. So protecting view corridors can, and often is, a responsible move. It's not always conservative bullshite.

When it comes to New York, I think there should be an element of protectionism for important landmarks, and the views of them. Obviously, this shouldn't stifle all growth, but that doesn't mean the opposite mindset is valid either. 'Build anything, build everything' leads to a lot of problems and isn't the mature response to yet more Nimby nonsense.

What we need is a balance, between protecting the old and developing the new. And New York already has that. This is a non issue because in actuality, in the real day-to-day running of the city, this is all bluster. Nobody's building a giant middle finger overlooking Central Park. Nor is anyone being prevented from achieving something new because of overzealous Nimby propaganda. When you've got literally dozens of supertall and tall skyscrapers going up in the city, you know something is going right.
__________________

Subsequence liked this post
SomeKindOfBug no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 24th, 2013, 06:26 PM   #3595
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,340
Likes (Received): 3585

This. Balance. Extremely well stated. I'm a bit too hungover to add anything articulate, but it does seem like the crowd on this forum would appreciate the idea of collective ownership of the skyline, and that it's worth protecting because it is in itself a landmark. Fortunately, and to counter the author's point and agenda, it does seem like the systems in place work fine from this standpoint.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 24th, 2013, 06:37 PM   #3596
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,593
Likes (Received): 28160

Quote:
What we need is a balance, between protecting the old and developing the new. And New York already has that.
I agree 100% and this is one of the things that make NY so special.

But that is not the point I was trying to make. I have seen great projects fail because nimby's came with their own facts lies and won because they had good public relations ans good connections.
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 25th, 2013, 04:08 PM   #3597
æthær
Registered User
 
æthær's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 77
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by baavaz17 View Post
In my opinion, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Dubai, and all those other Asian cities can build all 1500+ feet buildings they want but most of the buildings they build are hardly distinguishable from all the others in their skyline and have barely noticeable designs. New York, on the other hand, builds buildings that aren't as tall as the Asian cities but our buildings have beautiful and distinguishable designs that are world recognizable.
I'd be pleased if you showed me a skyscraper taller than 1,500 feet which looks hardly distinguishable from its surrounding, because I actually can't think of one. With Jin Mao, SWFC and Shanghai Tower, Shanghai has some of the most experimental and innovative supertall designs, and they've already become a landmark with a very high recognition value. Dubai has also developed its own very unique style with all those amazing buildings like Burj al Arab, Burj Khalifa, Princess Tower, etc.

Shenzhen doesn't yet have any supertalls taller than 1,500 ft, however, the ones currently under construction include some epic designs which I am really looking forward to see completed.

It's the booming Asian cities which are diversifying their skylines and pulling out some of to most extreme designs. American and especially European cities are more keen to preserve the old look of the skyline, or are at least hesitant to build exotic designs. I am not saying that I like Asian skylines more than Western skylines, however, it's very shallow to say that Asian cities are giant forests of identically looking buildings.
__________________

L.A.F.2., Sirius2.0 liked this post
æthær no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 26th, 2013, 01:51 AM   #3598
600West218
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,734
Likes (Received): 1574

From Christmas day:

image hosted on flickr

Untitled by 600West218, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Untitled by 600West218, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Untitled by 600West218, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Untitled by 600West218, on Flickr
600West218 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 26th, 2013, 03:05 AM   #3599
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 Lowkey Lion View Post
I love New York, but some of its people will never cease to amaze me.

It's the capital of the free world, and we have people wanting to dictate what a PRIVATE developer does with his/her building.

I am from the South. I have a very laissez-faire attitude. That said, why do the people who claim to want to fix our housing shortage/affordable housing issue cling to positions that are counterproductive to their goal?

The only way to build is up.
This article is a typical crap from NIMBYs world. I only agree with one thing - if something gets build and it is such a tall building - design should be an outstanding example of urban skyscraper. not a third rate bs. Out of 4 tower in planning/building in 57th street only future "Stairs to the sky" is a unique and truly great design. I am not even discussing its engineering aspects which are marvelous.

432 Park is a tall, high quality nothing special design. Future Extell Norstrom tower is a mediocre design at best. 57 Carnegie is OK, but once again not something extraordinary.

So if the result of this public outcry will be a better design worthy of NYC and its fabulous skyscraper traditions - it is a very good thing. If all of this will end up with another approval process due to someone being jealous that another rich guy will buy himself a penthouse - it is complete BS. City needs to attract more of these high end people. Let them buy as much as possible. Let developers build as much as possible and as tall as possible. But please please please - make it something jaw dropping akin to ESB which is even today, 80 years later, is a revelation in architecture.
__________________
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

4npower, Sirius2.0 liked this post
JohnFlint1985 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 26th, 2013, 01:53 PM   #3600
generalscarr
Registered User
 
generalscarr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 333
Likes (Received): 425

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnFlint1985 View Post
This article is a typical crap from NIMBYs world. I only agree with one thing - if something gets build and it is such a tall building - design should be an outstanding example of urban skyscraper. not a third rate bs. Out of 4 tower in planning/building in 57th street only future "Stairs to the sky" is a unique and truly great design. I am not even discussing its engineering aspects which are marvelous. 432 Park is a tall, high quality nothing special design. Future Extell Norstrom tower is a mediocre design at best. 57 Carnegie is OK, but once again not something extraordinary. So if the result of this public outcry will be a better design worthy of NYC and its fabulous skyscraper traditions - it is a very good thing. If all of this will end up with another approval process due to someone being jealous that another rich guy will buy himself a penthouse - it is complete BS. City needs to attract more of these high end people. Let them buy as much as possible. Let developers build as much as possible and as tall as possible. But please please please - make it something jaw dropping akin to ESB which is even today, 80 years later, is a revelation in architecture.
The general public has no business in judging architecture. People's taste usually suck, they're uneducated, they tend to only appreciate and love what they already know and oppose to anything new. There's so much whining on this forum about towers being too minimal, having no twists, ornaments, crowns, spires and not looking like the ESB. It's a boring argument. We're in the 21 century, not the '30s. New York needs versatility and bold moves. And that is actually what we're getting right now. We don't need an approval process.
"The camel is a horse designed by committee"
NYC doesn't need some committee deciding whether a design is worthy of being built or not.
NYC needs new visions and controversy not mediocracy.
Saying 432 is a nothing special design is like the stereotypical uneducated museum goer criticizing a Mark Rothko painting...'my kid could paint this'
This doesn't mean that you have to like any of the non Art Deco towers. But they have as much right to be on the NY skyline as the ESB or the Chrysler.
__________________

Eric Offereins liked this post
generalscarr 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 07:00 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