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 > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



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 March 29th, 2012, 11:57 PM   #1621
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastern37 View Post
No...I think you may actually be in the minority Most people like a well balanced skyline, not a skyline with a few tall thin buildings sticking up above the rest. I like the idea of this tower but the more renders I see of it in the skyline it just looks more an more out of place.
No, it is hardly out of place in Manhattan, of all places! However, I'm one who likes the Burj Dubai, which stands out over twice as tall as its surroundings, a far more extreme example. CN tower + Tokyo Sky Tree also improves those skylines even though it is not in scale with each city's skyline.

A balanced skyline is only interesting to me if it is very tall and shaped well. I don't like the current plateau effect in Manhattan, so this tower's signature improves the skyline 10 fold in my eyes, despite any imbalance.
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old March 30th, 2012, 01:10 AM   #1622
Loqy Lion
BANNED
 
Loqy Lion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 13
Likes (Received): 6

Why are we arguing?


It's New York City, baby!

Capital of the world!
Loqy Lion no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2012, 01:32 AM   #1623
iloveclassicrock7
Vigilant Citizen
 
iloveclassicrock7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,311
Likes (Received): 246

Lets hope they change the design of this, because it will hurt the skyline. Using a simple square design can look beautiful for buildings like the AON tower or the world trade center, but this is way too thin.
iloveclassicrock7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2012, 02:04 AM   #1624
Eastern37
Optimist
 
Eastern37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Townsville
Posts: 6,496
Likes (Received): 3047

Quote:
Originally Posted by aquablue View Post
No, it is hardly out of place in Manhattan, of all places! However, I'm one who likes the Burj Dubai, which stands out over twice as tall as its surroundings, a far more extreme example. CN tower + Tokyo Sky Tree also improves those skylines even though it is not in scale with each city's skyline.

A balanced skyline is only interesting to me if it is very tall and shaped well. I don't like the current plateau effect in Manhattan, so this tower's signature improves the skyline 10 fold in my eyes, despite any imbalance.
I like how the BK looks in the skyline too, but the difference is that's a nice elegant design where as this is "box"! It's just not right......
Eastern37 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2012, 04:29 PM   #1625
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2012/03/...dential-tower/

CIM, Macklowe submit plans for city’s tallest residential tower
March 29, 2012 06:30PM



Charles Garner, principal at CIM, and the proposed tower at 440 Park Avenue (center)
CIM Group and New York developer Harry Macklowe are making strides towards building the tallest residential building in New York City at the Drake Hotel site at 440 Park Avenue. They filed a plan examination request for the building, one of the first steps towards getting a development off the ground, with the Department of Buildings, according to a DOB filing dated March 26.
The California-based real estate investment trust filed its plans for an 82-story condominium tower for review to DOB, which will check if its plans are in compliance with building code, a DOB spokesperson confirmed, saying an examiner had not yet reviewed the filing. The filing cites the height of the building as 1,397 feet in total, which would make it the tallest residential building in the city; for comparison’s sake, One57, Extell Development’s planned condo tower on 57th Street will be 1,004 feet tall upon completion in 2013 and the Empire State Building, the tallest structure in the city, is 1,453 feet in height.

As previously reported, CIM, (which acquired the site for $305 million last year), and Macklowe plan to erect a slim condo and retail complex designed by Uruguayan-born architect Rafael Vinoly at the site. It is slated to have 128 units and 12-foot high ceilings. The $1 billion project will include a 5,000-square-foot driveway, golf training facilities and private dining and screening rooms, according to previous reports.

Neither CIM nor Macklowe immediately responded to requests for comment.
— Katherine Clarke
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2012, 05:57 PM   #1626
spectre000
Moderator
 
spectre000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 7,906
Likes (Received): 5170

More height and less floors, hmmm. I look forward to someone finding the DoB docs for confirmation.
spectre000 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2012, 06:49 PM   #1627
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastern37 View Post
I like how the BK looks in the skyline too, but the difference is that's a nice elegant design where as this is "box"! It's just not right......
Yawn. Many people actually like box deigns you know? I find their minimalism works very well when done correctly. This is just great and won't ruin the skyline, what utter BS that is.

The argument that a tall boxy and thin tower like this would ruin the skyline is absurd. Complete and utter baloney.
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2012, 06:57 PM   #1628
Bruce.Tenmile
Registered User
 
Bruce.Tenmile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Denver, UK
Posts: 391
Likes (Received): 44

Yeah some people do like boxy designs; I like certain boxy towers, but this is just too ridiculously thin. I don't think it will 'ruin' the skyline, but based on all that we've seen, there's no way in hell it's going to improve it, and because it's so tall, it'll be very hard to ignore.
Bruce.Tenmile no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 30th, 2012, 11:25 PM   #1629
iloveclassicrock7
Vigilant Citizen
 
iloveclassicrock7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,311
Likes (Received): 246

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce.Tenmile View Post
Yeah some people do like boxy designs; I like certain boxy towers, but this is just too ridiculously thin. I don't think it will 'ruin' the skyline, but based on all that we've seen, there's no way in hell it's going to improve it, and because it's so tall, it'll be very hard to ignore.
Totally Agree, Do people not realize how bad this is architecturally ? Its just a tall box, it doesn't even have a special design, its a 4 sided box thats it. It also just has a glass facade, this is the most unoriginal building over 300m ever. Why don't they get a great architect to build something great here ? If this was 200m people would be saying how boring the design is, but since its really tall, people are crazy about it...

Also, im not saying that boxy designs can't be good, but this is extremely thin.

Also, it will replace the ESB, one of the most beautiful tower ever built, as midtown's tallest building.

Last edited by iloveclassicrock7; March 30th, 2012 at 11:32 PM.
iloveclassicrock7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2012, 12:02 AM   #1630
Funkyskunk2
Registered User
 
Funkyskunk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 619
Likes (Received): 808

Quote:
Originally Posted by iloveclassicrock7 View Post
It also just has a glass facade, this is the most unoriginal building over 300m ever.
Its supposed to have a metal grid on the outside kinda like the twins did.
Funkyskunk2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2012, 12:12 AM   #1631
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Quote:
Originally Posted by iloveclassicrock7 View Post
Totally Agree, Do people not realize how bad this is architecturally ? Its just a tall box, it doesn't even have a special design, its a 4 sided box thats it. It also just has a glass facade, this is the most unoriginal building over 300m ever. Why don't they get a great architect to build something great here ? If this was 200m people would be saying how boring the design is, but since its really tall, people are crazy about it...

Also, im not saying that boxy designs can't be good, but this is extremely thin.

Also, it will replace the ESB, one of the most beautiful tower ever built, as midtown's tallest building.
Lots of planned towers in the Hudson Yards and 15 Penn will be taller than the ESB.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2012, 12:17 AM   #1632
iloveclassicrock7
Vigilant Citizen
 
iloveclassicrock7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,311
Likes (Received): 246

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
Lots of planned towers in the Hudson Yards and 15 Penn will be taller than the ESB.
Thats true, but this one has a bad design, and will stick out like a sore thumb
iloveclassicrock7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2012, 02:03 AM   #1633
yankeesfan1000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,235
Likes (Received): 560

Quote:
Originally Posted by iloveclassicrock7 View Post
Thats true, but this one has a bad design, and will stick out like a sore thumb
I'm not a huge fan of what we've seen thus far either, but I don't think it's too much to ask to keep a relatively open mind until we see actual renders. The quality of the materials is going to be exceptional given the clientele they'll be courting, so a metal grid facade with a nice polished look and high quality glass could actually be very striking and iconic.

What we've seen are basic massings, so calling this building ugly is incredibly premature.
yankeesfan1000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2012, 02:13 AM   #1634
iloveclassicrock7
Vigilant Citizen
 
iloveclassicrock7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,311
Likes (Received): 246

Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000 View Post
I'm not a huge fan of what we've seen thus far either, but I don't think it's too much to ask to keep a relatively open mind until we see actual renders. The quality of the materials is going to be exceptional given the clientele they'll be courting, so a metal grid facade with a nice polished look and high quality glass could actually be very striking and iconic.

What we've seen are basic massings, so calling this building ugly is incredibly premature.
Yeah, I will wait and see the final design before judging this
iloveclassicrock7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2012, 08:20 AM   #1635
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by iloveclassicrock7 View Post
Yeah, I will wait and see the final design before judging this

People should stop talking about 'thinness' as being a bad thing. This is NYC, if you want major height on these parcels, you have to go thin due to strict zoning laws. There isn't any other option. Also, given the fact that living space must be maximized and regular to attract buyers (who I'm sure would not appreciate an irregular floor plan), it makes sense that this is what we end up with.

Last edited by aquablue; March 31st, 2012 at 08:32 AM.
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2012, 07:30 PM   #1636
spectre000
Moderator
 
spectre000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 7,906
Likes (Received): 5170

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=01

DoB filing, states height of 1,397 ft and 82 floors. Height/floors could still be higher if there only going by highest occupied.
spectre000 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2012, 08:37 PM   #1637
Arawooho
Registered User
 
Arawooho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 266
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by spectre000 View Post
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=01

DoB filing, states height of 1,397 ft and 82 floors. Height/floors could still be higher if there only going by highest occupied.

Seems legit O.O
This could just break 1,400 ft. Especially considering it can possibly go to 1,700 max.
Arawooho no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2012, 08:45 PM   #1638
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

but this thing is suppose to have flat roof, right? So I doubt the difference between highest occupied and actual height will be that dramatic.
__________________
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 March 31st, 2012, 08:48 PM   #1639
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,494

I'm liking this tower less and less. I love box designs, but this building is horrific. It's not iconic, it's not memorable, it's just...there. I seriously hope they choose a good facade/cladding to make up for the terrible renders I've seen so far...
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2012, 09:20 PM   #1640
iloveclassicrock7
Vigilant Citizen
 
iloveclassicrock7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,311
Likes (Received): 246

Quote:
Originally Posted by aquablue View Post
People should stop talking about 'thinness' as being a bad thing. This is NYC, if you want major height on these parcels, you have to go thin due to strict zoning laws. There isn't any other option. Also, given the fact that living space must be maximized and regular to attract buyers (who I'm sure would not appreciate an irregular floor plan), it makes sense that this is what we end up with.
Its not the fact that its thin, its the fact that its thin and just a box, i will hold my judgement till I see the facade though. For example, this tower below is thin, but also beautiful.
iloveclassicrock7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
new york city, new york project, park avenue, 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 07:06 PM.


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