NEW YORK | 425 Park Ave | 209m | 687ft | 41 fl | Pro

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by RobertWalpole

Kanto, you're a good guy, but you must be the only person who regards these inverted scissor towers of 300 and nearly 400m to be boring.

These towers are like blades thrusting into the sky. I don't consider them mediocre. Then again, Kanto has always been the one to want massively tall buildings of a boxy nature, from what I've read of his comments over the years. I disagree, and consider such towers a welcome addition to NYC's boxy landscape. The contrast with the surroundings will be sharp as a blade.
.

[JohnFlint1985]

Originally Posted by RobertWalpole

It would be nice if this had exterior elevators on the eastern facade.

honestly - pretty boring design... nothing inspiring really

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by JohnFlint1985

honestly - pretty boring design... nothing inspiring really

Maybe, but it is one hell of a lot more inspiring than what was there Also, compared to most 60 and 70 style buildings, it also is far superior. The only real highlight for me is the nice use of a plaza and the bracing.

[L.A.F.2.]

The plaza is very nice.

[desertpunk]

Bloomberg Pushes a Plan to Let Midtown Soar


NYT

London, Tokyo and other metropolises have created central business districts with forests of skyscrapers in recent years, seeking to meet the needs of globe-trotting corporate tenants. But New York’s premier district, the 70-block area around Grand Central Terminal, has lagged, Bloomberg officials say, hampered by zoning rules, decades old, that have limited the height of buildings.

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg wants to overhaul these rules so that buildings in Midtown Manhattan can soar as high as those elsewhere. New towers could eventually cast shadows over landmarks across the area, including St. Patrick’s Cathedral and the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel. They could rise above the 59-story MetLife Building and even the 77-story Chrysler Building.

Mr. Bloomberg’s proposal reflects his effort to put his stamp on the city well after his tenure ends in December 2013. Moving swiftly, he wants the City Council to adopt the new zoning, for what is being called Midtown East, by October 2013, with the first permits for new buildings granted four years later. His administration says that without the changes, the neighborhood around Grand Central will not retain its reputation as “the best business address in the world” because 300 of its roughly 400 buildings are more than 50 years old. These structures also lack the large column-free spaces, tall ceilings and environmental features now sought by corporate tenants.

The rezoning — from 39th Street to 57th Street on the East Side — would make it easier to demolish aging buildings in order to make way for state of-the-art towers. Without it, “the top Class A tenants who have been attracted to the area in the past would begin to look elsewhere for space,” the administration says in its proposal.

The plan has stirred criticism from some urban planners, community boards and City Council members, who have contended that the mayor has acted hastily. They said they were concerned about the impact of taller towers in an already dense district where buildings, public spaces, streets, sidewalks and subways have long remained unchanged.

Mr. Bloomberg has encouraged high-rise development in industrial neighborhoods, including the Far West Side of Manhattan, the waterfront in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, and in Long Island City, Queens. But with the proposal for Midtown, which is working its way through environmental and public reviews, he is tackling the city’s commercial heart. “Unlocking the development potential in this area will generate historic opportunities for investment in New York City,” Deputy Mayor Robert K. Steel said.

The initiative would, in some cases, allow developers to build towers twice the size now permitted in the Grand Central area. The owner of the 19-story Roosevelt Hotel at Madison and 45th Street could replace it with a 58-story tower under the proposed rules. Current regulations permit no more than 30 floors.

Administration officials acknowledged that the current market for new office buildings across Manhattan was relatively weak. For example, a 40-story office tower at 11 Times Square, at 42nd Street and Eighth Avenue, which was completed in 2010, is still not full. But the officials said major changes in zoning were intended to make it possible to build when demand returned, as history suggests it inevitably will. In promoting the proposal, the administration has repeatedly stressed that Midtown Manhattan needed to keep pace with business districts in other world capitals. And New York does compete with London for some financial firms.

But many of New York’s prominent corporations, law firms and other businesses are not about to decamp for a spectacular skyscraper in Hong Kong anytime soon. Part of the obsession with taller buildings is about prestige and worldwide bragging rights, for size and architectural supremacy.

By the city’s estimates, the new towers would be home to an additional 16,000 employees in a neighborhood that now has 230,000 office workers. That could strain the Lexington Avenue subway line, which runs through Grand Central and is already operating well above capacity. “Massive new buildings could be constructed,” said Michael B. Gerrard, an environmental lawyer working with the Municipal Art Society to review the proposal. “They’re proceeding at a breakneck pace,” he said, referring to Bloomberg aides. “The administration wants to get all this done before the gate closes.”

[...]

[generalscarr]

Here's a study for how a megatall would look in midtown Manhattan. There's a lot of talking here about how NY needs one, and I guess with the rezoning around Grand Central it could become possible to build towers this size but I think it'd be a little too early for sg this big. You'd want a few of those ~1500 footers first, so it doesn't look totally out of place...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabcs/7934958036/

[ZZ-II]

Originally Posted by generalscarr

Here's a study for how a megatall would look in midtown Manhattan. There's a lot of talking here about how NY needs one, and I guess with the rezoning around Grand Central it could become possible to build towers this size but I think it'd be a little too early for sg this big. You'd want a few of those ~1500 footers first, so it doesn't look totally out of place...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabcs/7934958036/

I've seen this study a while ago already. Though the design is not perfect...it would look great in the skyline .

[RobertWalpole]

Rem Koolhaas had the best proposal.
http://observer.com/2012/10/unveilin...oning/#slide28

Anyway, here's Foster's tower from the east:

[dexter2]

Surprisingly... Hadid's project was the best I think (with Rem's)! So she can design with context after all. Nice to know.

And those interiors...

[RobertWalpole]

I wonder if the 687 foot height includes the crown.

Norman Foster's proposed redesign of 425 Park Avenue was the victor in a four-starchitect face-off to determine the future of the blah brick and glass building between 55th and 56th streets. Developer L&L Holdings will begin work on Foster's design in 2015, and it should be done in 2017. While we wait for it to begin construction, Foster's design and the three runners-up, by Rem Koolhaas, Zaha Hadid, and Richard Rogers, are on display at the Municipal Art Society's Summit for New York City. We got our hands on the renderings, so let's hold our own face-off, shall we? Above, some new looks at Foster's design, "a tapered steel-frame tower rising to meet three illuminated sheer walls." The 41-story, 687-foot building has low, medium, and high-rise tiers "defined by a landscaped terrace with panoramic views across Manhattan and Central Park," according to the exhibition materials by Foster + Partners. "The core is placed to the rear, where glazed stairwells reveal long views towards the East River, while at street level, there is potential for a large civic plaza with significant works of art."

[patrykus]

I'm personally glad foster's design has been chosen. Zaha's proposal wasn't bad and I wouldn't mind it build somewhere in ny but for me organic designs doesn't quite fit into the ny skyline. Koolhaas's design was also something that surely wouldn't destroy the skyline but still being just an average glass tower that would fit well somewhere in wtc or Hudson yards complex. Foster's proposal truly says New York and the interiors and skygardens are incredible. Some pictures:

[dexter2]

'Ogranic' part of the project wouldn't be visible in the skyline. 2/3 of this tower is a really nicely cladded box.




Fits just great!

A pity it wasn't chosen

[patrykus]

As I said it isn't bad. I even say I quite like it as for organic architecture. I just think it's right behind foster's proposal IMO. As for the interiors I have no doubt. Foster is winner here. Straight lines all the way!

Btw seems like Zaha don't have much lack in skyscraper sector. Does any of her skyscrapers got build? I feel like she proposes many towers but they often got rejected or never build. I guess it's due to the complexity of those structures. It looks like every piece of panel fabricated for her towers has to be unique in shape and that sure isn't cheap.

[yankeesfan1000]

Na, she doesn't have anything in New York. I think Foster's design was best also. Although the fins on top are far too tall from this angle, but I'm knitpicking a building that probably won't be built anyway. The developer will probably just wait for the upzoning so they can build something much taller.

[Kanto]

Originally Posted by RobertWalpole

Rem Koolhaas had the best proposal.
http://observer.com/2012/10/unveilin...oning/#slide28

Anyway, here's Foster's tower from the east:

From this angle, with those 3 blades far more visible the design looks much better than from the street. Also, thanks to a higher up view of them it doesn't look fat (fatness is by far my biggest objection against the Hudson Yards), as it did in the view up from the street

[patrykus]

Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000

The developer will probably just wait for the upzoning so they can build something much taller.

But still designed by Foster, right? Maybe even just taller version of winner design.

[Kanto]

If it would be just a taller version of the current design, then Foster would be a probable choice, however, if they would want a new design, they would most probably start a new competition

[Hudson11]

Rem Koolhaas' tower would have been an instant icon

[Þróndeimr]

Some better renderings of OMA's proposal, taken from the article about the design on ArchDaily.

Illustration by OMA


Illustration by OMA


Illustration by OMA


Illustration by OMA

[RobertWalpole]

Originally Posted by patrykus

But still designed by Foster, right? Maybe even just taller version of winner design.

L&L's CEO stated in one of the many articles today that he's not waiting for the rezoning.