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 June 3rd, 2014, 03:16 AM   #1041
Hudson11
Stuck on the Cross Bronx
 
Hudson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 9,513
Likes (Received): 22498

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowkey Lion View Post

I will be very sad to see The Roosevelt go. The world doesn't produce structures like that anymore. That said, I would still trade it for another 1,200+ footer.
I agree.
Hudson11 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 3rd, 2014, 04:52 AM   #1042
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,054
Likes (Received): 1863

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowkey Lion View Post
1 Vanderbilt will be magnificent.

The 341 Madison assemblage is alright, but I'll trade it for another 1,200+ footer.

I will be very sad to see The Roosevelt go. The world doesn't produce structures like that anymore. That said, I would still trade it for another 1,200+ footer.
I guess it's a little sad but if it means a 1200+ foot beautiful building I'm totally okay with that.

NY will always have old gems that won't go anywhere, (at least not during our lifetime, maybe like 1000 years from now who knows)
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 06:20 AM   #1043
Manitopiaaa
Illuminati Leader
 
Manitopiaaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Alexandria, Nova, The Crown Commonwealth of Virginia (see sig)
Posts: 4,424
Likes (Received): 10268

That's what we'll keep saying until there's just a few left. Even if every old building got destroyed minus 1, I suspect we'd still see people on SSC saying, "we'll still have 1 left." I'm sure if every old building went away, we'd have people cheering and crowing about New York not being a museum city. I'm cool with crappy old buildings going away. The Roosevelt is an icon however:





It is from 1924, the golden era of New York architecture. I wouldn't trade it for another supertall, certainly not of subpar design like 1 Vanderbilt. So if that's what we are going to get there (another lazy supertall), I say keep the Roosevelt. There's enough space for supertalls on sites that aren't iconic.
__________________


Atlanta (6,451,262) - Boston (8,176,376) - Chicago (9,882,634) - Cleveland (3,483,311) - Dallas (7,673,305) - Denver (3,470,235) - Detroit (5,318,653) - Houston (6,972,374)
Los Angeles (18,688,022) - Miami (6,723,472) - Minneapolis (3,894,820) - New York (23,689,255) - Orlando (3,202,927) - Philadelphia (7,179,357) - Phoenix (4,661,537)
Portland (3,160,488) - San Diego (3,317,749) - San Francisco (8,751,807) - Seattle (4,684,516) - Tampa (3,032,171) - Washington (9,665,892)

citybooster, Nonoka liked this post
Manitopiaaa no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 06:36 AM   #1044
Ghostface79
Registered User
 
Ghostface79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,536
Likes (Received): 4604

The ideal solution would be for 341 Madison to purchase the Roosevelt air rights and build a massive tower. Besides the Roosevelt is one of the buildings that might be landmarked along with the rezoning there's hope it will be saved and will sell its air rights to another project.
I also wouldn't trade it for another 1200 footer especially when there's another one just down the block. Now an iconic 1500-1600+ footer, I'll take it.
__________________

Manitopiaaa, citybooster liked this post
Ghostface79 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 06:44 AM   #1045
Manitopiaaa
Illuminati Leader
 
Manitopiaaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Alexandria, Nova, The Crown Commonwealth of Virginia (see sig)
Posts: 4,424
Likes (Received): 10268

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordArthurWellesley View Post
The overwhelming majority of Manhattan is old and will never be touched. Old buildings between 42nd and 57th, However, are in danger.
Yes, but old buildings aren't monolithic. I've seen old buildings in Soho and I've seen old buildings in Midtown. They are not the same. Frances Tavern and the Rockefeller Center are both "old", but nobody is going to say we can bulldoze the Rockefeller Center because we'll still have the Frances Tavern. They represent completely different stories in the historical arc of New York.

Their grace isn't in their age but in their aesthetic. As you said, we don't build like that anymore. So the answer isn't safeguarding old buildings but safeguarding old building of merit. And merit begins by acknowledging that old buildings shouldn't be grouped together but seen as individual parts of the tapestry that is New York. If in 2100 they want to bulldoze Kaufman residentials, you won't see me arguing for preservation just because they are old.
__________________


Atlanta (6,451,262) - Boston (8,176,376) - Chicago (9,882,634) - Cleveland (3,483,311) - Dallas (7,673,305) - Denver (3,470,235) - Detroit (5,318,653) - Houston (6,972,374)
Los Angeles (18,688,022) - Miami (6,723,472) - Minneapolis (3,894,820) - New York (23,689,255) - Orlando (3,202,927) - Philadelphia (7,179,357) - Phoenix (4,661,537)
Portland (3,160,488) - San Diego (3,317,749) - San Francisco (8,751,807) - Seattle (4,684,516) - Tampa (3,032,171) - Washington (9,665,892)

citybooster, SomeKindOfBug liked this post
Manitopiaaa no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 06:47 AM   #1046
JohnFlint1985
I love New York
 
JohnFlint1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New York - New Jersey
Posts: 15,621
Likes (Received): 6558

The Roosevelt need to go on protected list. They should do this asap!
__________________
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

Manitopiaaa, citybooster liked this post
JohnFlint1985 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 06:55 AM   #1047
Manitopiaaa
Illuminati Leader
 
Manitopiaaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Alexandria, Nova, The Crown Commonwealth of Virginia (see sig)
Posts: 4,424
Likes (Received): 10268

Seriously, what does the Landmarks Preservation Commission even do?
__________________


Atlanta (6,451,262) - Boston (8,176,376) - Chicago (9,882,634) - Cleveland (3,483,311) - Dallas (7,673,305) - Denver (3,470,235) - Detroit (5,318,653) - Houston (6,972,374)
Los Angeles (18,688,022) - Miami (6,723,472) - Minneapolis (3,894,820) - New York (23,689,255) - Orlando (3,202,927) - Philadelphia (7,179,357) - Phoenix (4,661,537)
Portland (3,160,488) - San Diego (3,317,749) - San Francisco (8,751,807) - Seattle (4,684,516) - Tampa (3,032,171) - Washington (9,665,892)
Manitopiaaa no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 07:01 AM   #1048
RegentHouse
City Development Shitlord
 
RegentHouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,213
Likes (Received): 769

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy View Post
Too much old stone is also lame. Some nice contrasting glass across from the Station would be a great juxtaposition, imo.
However, most of the surrounding is stone, and it would stick out terribly based on the renders. Even the Pan Am/MetLife Building is more ubiquitous and subtle at street level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manitopiaaa View Post
Seriously, what does the Landmarks Preservation Commission even do?
They're busy protecting shit like the following:

http://ny.curbed.com/uploads/Screen%...54.59%20AM.jpg


"http://ny.curbed.com/uploads/After%20-%20429%20East%2064th%20Street.jpg
__________________

Manitopiaaa liked this post

Last edited by RegentHouse; June 4th, 2014 at 01:50 AM.
RegentHouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 07:40 AM   #1049
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Well it's on the list that has been identified as a candidate to landmark within the zone and it could very well because of its history being one of the last remnants of the old terminal city of GC so there is historical value.

As a prospective buyer I would not touch this for development if this will have a good chance getting designated. It's best like Ghost said is for the current owner to sell its valuable air rights for another development nearby.

However, there is a chance that this doesn't get designated because everything on the list identified just cannot be landmarked. The preservation id'd at least a dozen sites and they are just playing the numbers game hoping to get 3 or 4 from that list designated.

If no designation, then I hope the developer can do a Hearst Tower or something truly iconic should they decide to build from scratch. It doesn't necessarily need to be 1300' + if the context and design is right.

The best example I can give was the old Drake Hotel, although that is open to ones interpretation but for me 432 PA with its sheer height and it's simple shape has made it worth it for me. It's simple but it's unique to NYC. So in that regard it's iconic enough for me. I know there would be disagreements with my point of view with 432 PA. Anyway Now we have one of those, let's just not have another one of those.

The Vanderbilt Tower is nice too but something needs to be better than it for something to rise at the Roosevelt site IMO to be worth it.
__________________
-------------------------



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

Last edited by Vertical_Gotham; June 3rd, 2014 at 08:49 AM.
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 08:05 AM   #1050
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

1 Vanderbilt: High on Grand a Central
http://nypost.com/2014/06/02/1-vande...grand-central/

Quote:
That’s a beaut of a plan the city and SL Green came up with for 1 Vanderbilt, a 65-story tower likely to be anchored by TD Bank, which would spearhead the long-term rezoning of all of East Midtown.

At a stroke, it would bring the Grand Central Terminal area a new skyscraper for the first time in decades. It would dramatically reverse the perception that companies have ceased setting up their headquarters in the area even as many have moved out.

But will it win the blessings of Community Board 5, the City Council, especially of Council member Dan Garodnick, who killed an earlier rezoning scheme?

What about Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer, a micro-manager who imposed a confusing tangle of storefront rules on the Upper West Side?

And even if all hands love the 1 Vanderbilt plan, how long might it be before the bankers could move into their fancy new digs?

The proposal was rolled out with fanfare last week. City Planning Commission chair Carl Weisbrod hopes to begin the public review process in the fall and see it approved by spring.

Weisbrod is a master at getting things done. In the first test of his new role, he successfully steered the Domino Sugar site project in Williamsburg through the City Council after a few tweaks to the original plan.

But Midtown Manhattan’s a tougher animal, with innumerable special-interest groups and “stakeholders” all squealing for a say. The city and SL Green clearly intend a full-court press: The project is being represented by BerlinRosen, the influential public relations/consulting firm that helped Bill de Blasio win the mayoralty.

The plan would replace the whole block bounded by Madison and Vanderbilt Avenues and East 42nd and 43rd streets, now occupied by four midsize prewar structures, with a 1,200-foot-tall, 1.6 million-square-foot tower designed by Kohn Pedersen Fox.

It would be twice as large as current zoning allows. To fully exploit new size rules for Vanderbilt Avenue, SL Green would need to transfer air rights from 110 E. 42nd St., the former Bowery Savings Bank building it owns nearby, and deliver a $200 million package of public benefits in and around the new tower.
Unlike the aborted rezoning scheme proposed under former Mayor Michael Bloomberg, which called for developers to pay into a city-managed District Improvement Fund, the “Vanderbilt Corridor” proposal would not require developers to pay the city.

Rather, SL Green would pay for and create the promised public improvements, to be worked out in consultation with city agencies and the community. The tower could not be occupied until those amenities were actually finished and put in use.

But first, the four buildings now on the block, comprising more than 1 million square feet, must be emptied of office and retail tenants — which can’t be done overnight.

Next, they must be demolished. Brewer recently said she wants Landmarks Preservation Commission review to demolish buildings 50 or more years old; all four structures went up in the 1920s.

Then, given the complexities of Midtown infrastructure, completion of the public amenities could be years away, even if SL Green were to start work in late 2015.

The upgrades would include a direct underground connection to Grand Central Terminal, a ground-floor public lobby including a train arrival and departure board on the 43rd Street side, and a pedestrian plaza between 42nd and 43rd streets.

Plus, unspecified pedestrian-flow improvements in the overcrowded Grand Central subway station require cooperation with the MTA.

So, while 1 Vanderbilt has been described as the “fast-track” portion of the larger-scale rezoning eventually planned for the whole 73-block East Midtown district, it might be a track with lots of yellow lights along the way.
__________________
-------------------------



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

iamtheSTIG liked this post
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 08:57 AM   #1051
Manitopiaaa
Illuminati Leader
 
Manitopiaaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Alexandria, Nova, The Crown Commonwealth of Virginia (see sig)
Posts: 4,424
Likes (Received): 10268

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vertical_Gotham View Post
Well it's on the list that has been identified as a candidate to landmark within the zone and it could very well because of its history being one of the last remnants of the old terminal city of GC so there is historical value.

As a prospective buyer I would not touch this for development if this will have a good chance getting designated. It's best like Ghost said is for the current owner to sell its valuable air rights for another development nearby.

However, there is a chance that this doesn't get designated because everything on the list identified just cannot be landmarked. The preservation id'd at least a dozen sites and they are just playing the numbers game hoping to get 3 or 4 from that list designated.

If no designation, then I hope the developer can do a Hearst Tower or something truly iconic should they decide to build from scratch. It doesn't necessarily need to be 1300' + if the context and design is right.

The best example I can give was the old Drake Hotel, although that is open to ones interpretation but for me 432 PA with its sheer height and it's simple shape has made it worth it for me. It's simple but it's unique to NYC. So in that regard it's iconic enough for me. I know there would be disagreements with my point of view with 432 PA. Anyway Now we have one of those, let's just not have another one of those.

The Vanderbilt Tower is nice too but something needs to be better than it for something to rise at the Roosevelt site IMO to be worth it.
I thought they designated 32 sites as potential landmarks. Either way, I'm hopeful it can be designated. Why would the Landmarks Preservation Commission only approve a quarter of the nominations if they all have merit? Would the City Council or DeBlasio really object to preservation?
__________________


Atlanta (6,451,262) - Boston (8,176,376) - Chicago (9,882,634) - Cleveland (3,483,311) - Dallas (7,673,305) - Denver (3,470,235) - Detroit (5,318,653) - Houston (6,972,374)
Los Angeles (18,688,022) - Miami (6,723,472) - Minneapolis (3,894,820) - New York (23,689,255) - Orlando (3,202,927) - Philadelphia (7,179,357) - Phoenix (4,661,537)
Portland (3,160,488) - San Diego (3,317,749) - San Francisco (8,751,807) - Seattle (4,684,516) - Tampa (3,032,171) - Washington (9,665,892)
Manitopiaaa no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 11:06 AM   #1052
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

Quote:
Originally Posted by RegentHouse View Post
However, everything surrounding is stone, and it would stick out terribly based on the renders. Even the Pan Am/MetLife Building is more ubiquitous and subtle at street level.



They're busy protecting shit like the following:

http://ny.curbed.com/uploads/Screen%...54.59%20AM.jpg


[URL="http://ny.curbed.com/uploads/After%20-%20429%20East%2064th%20Street.jpg"[/URL]
Seriously, if the Landmarks Preservation Council really has designated crap like those two buildings as landmarks the whole council is a farce. Looking at the Roosevelt it just is so grand and connected to the brilliant age of architecture it can't be just sacrificed for a soaring new tower. If ANYTHING should be landmarked its that huge block long picture postcard from grand New York.

Like others have said, sell their air rights to 341 Madison's developers and build another iconic new tower there. The Drake may have passed without a real fight and the soaring elegance of 432 Park may well be as VG says worth the tradeoff... but not losing the Roosevelt Hotel as well.
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 06:04 PM   #1053
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manitopiaaa View Post
I thought they designated 32 sites as potential landmarks. Either way, I'm hopeful it can be designated. Why would the Landmarks Preservation Commission only approve a quarter of the nominations if they all have merit? Would the City Council or DeBlasio really object to preservation?
Actually you're right. I did not realize that much had been identified! I sadlyexpect those buildings identified to get designated at a low clip however.

The preservation has these guidelines that they go by that not everyone agrees with such as the latest example, the Rizzoli.

The really good ones had already been landmarked in this zone in their minds thus the ones on the list obviously had been low priority IMO.

I also think Landmarks recognize they can't save all because what this important business district means to the city just like Bill D B's admin decided not to push affordable housing in this district. All parties recognize the building stock is old and upgrading is needed to stay competitive. Midtown East would not be gaining a new tenant in TD Bank if a new tower is not proposed.

While the majority in this city will and are being protected, unfortunately Midtown is viewed as a different animal and will be in danger. Things will just have to be reviewed carefully and reasonably in a case by case basis.

Since, a portion of the MER had been identified for fast tracking, the Roosevelt will definitely be on the hook as the first ones to be looked at so we shall see what happens to it. It has history, but does it have enough architectural significance to be tabbed as per guidelines. That is the question.

The owners that have buildings on the list are against having their buildings designated for obvious reasons and I would not be surprised to hear news at some point that some of the buildings has been stripped architecturally by the time landmarks reviews some of the buildings. Lol.
__________________
-------------------------



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 June 3rd, 2014, 10:32 PM   #1054
Manitopiaaa
Illuminati Leader
 
Manitopiaaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Alexandria, Nova, The Crown Commonwealth of Virginia (see sig)
Posts: 4,424
Likes (Received): 10268

And according to some reports, Landmarks was supposed to render verdicts in April. It's June now and crickets.
__________________


Atlanta (6,451,262) - Boston (8,176,376) - Chicago (9,882,634) - Cleveland (3,483,311) - Dallas (7,673,305) - Denver (3,470,235) - Detroit (5,318,653) - Houston (6,972,374)
Los Angeles (18,688,022) - Miami (6,723,472) - Minneapolis (3,894,820) - New York (23,689,255) - Orlando (3,202,927) - Philadelphia (7,179,357) - Phoenix (4,661,537)
Portland (3,160,488) - San Diego (3,317,749) - San Francisco (8,751,807) - Seattle (4,684,516) - Tampa (3,032,171) - Washington (9,665,892)
Manitopiaaa no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2014, 10:49 PM   #1055
Manitopiaaa
Illuminati Leader
 
Manitopiaaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Alexandria, Nova, The Crown Commonwealth of Virginia (see sig)
Posts: 4,424
Likes (Received): 10268

doublepost
__________________


Atlanta (6,451,262) - Boston (8,176,376) - Chicago (9,882,634) - Cleveland (3,483,311) - Dallas (7,673,305) - Denver (3,470,235) - Detroit (5,318,653) - Houston (6,972,374)
Los Angeles (18,688,022) - Miami (6,723,472) - Minneapolis (3,894,820) - New York (23,689,255) - Orlando (3,202,927) - Philadelphia (7,179,357) - Phoenix (4,661,537)
Portland (3,160,488) - San Diego (3,317,749) - San Francisco (8,751,807) - Seattle (4,684,516) - Tampa (3,032,171) - Washington (9,665,892)

Last edited by Manitopiaaa; June 4th, 2014 at 08:29 AM.
Manitopiaaa no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2014, 03:01 AM   #1056
RegentHouse
City Development Shitlord
 
RegentHouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,213
Likes (Received): 769

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vertical_Gotham View Post
Well it's on the list that has been identified as a candidate to landmark within the zone and it could very well because of its history being one of the last remnants of the old terminal city of GC so there is historical value.
Most of Warren and Wetmore's Terminal City still exists, but has been insensitively renovated and added on to the point that much is nondescript and monolithic. East 43rd Street is their only building which hasn't been reclad, both the base and high-rise extension.

Quote:
If no designation, then I hope the developer can do a Hearst Tower or something truly iconic should they decide to build from scratch. It doesn't necessarily need to be 1300' + if the context and design is right.
The Tokyo Station area executed an fantastic plan which preserved the Rationalist architecture 1929 former Tokyo Central Post Office into a new tower.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...jpg?uselang=ja


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...jpg?uselang=ja

It complements the historic station extraordinarily well.
__________________

Eric Offereins, MarshallKnight liked this post
RegentHouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2014, 03:11 AM   #1057
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,339
Likes (Received): 3585

That's exactly what I'm hoping to see more of. Although I'm going to cross my fingers that the Roosevelt's air rights get applied to another massive tower.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2014, 07:28 AM   #1058
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

I did read today that even with an aggressive push to get this plan through review closest we'd get to an official okay of the Panning Board would be next spring. SL Green has to oversee a very intensive rebuilding of infrastructure too before it can occupy 1 Vanderbilt Place, meaning they can build it but won't be able to open the tower until the work is done, so they better get hopping asap,. And there is the matter of demolition of the structures already there which cover according to Steve Cuozzo in the Post one million square feet and clearing the building of tenants and razing(not to mention maybe architectural fans start calling for the landmark designation of the current structures, some of which are pretty nice). It will take a LOT of work to get this through, though I am hopeful it can include the 341 Madison project and somehow saving the Roosevelt Hotel.
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2014, 07:32 AM   #1059
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,479

I bet once the building is finished the old hotel will be forgotten.
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2014, 02:57 AM   #1060
Hudson11
Stuck on the Cross Bronx
 
Hudson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 9,513
Likes (Received): 22498

shit happens.

this was a vision for the tower, it's much taller than 1VP will end up being. The height to the spire might not be much shorter though. The vision is ~1400ft. I also wonder if they still plan on turning the Metlife building into a Chia Pet.

__________________

MarshallKnight liked this post
Hudson11 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
1 vanderbilt, 51 e.42nd st., midtown, new york, 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 09:42 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