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 > Skyscrapers

Skyscrapers Discussions of projects under construction between 200-299m/650-999ft tall.
» Proposed Skyscrapers



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 July 20th, 2013, 11:47 PM   #101
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

I like the new design It looks good, unlike the ugly 56 Leonardish previous design.
__________________
The Outbreak: A free browser online strategy game. Build up your town and compete with other towns economicaly and militarily.
http://www.the-outbreak.com/

Zaz965, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 24th, 2013, 06:11 AM   #102
Shakkur98
Registered User
 
Shakkur98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Columbia, South Carolina
Posts: 293
Likes (Received): 271

Wonder how tall this will actually be since it has a major height increase, looks like 1WTC, and 432 Park Avenue might have some competition
__________________

Kanto, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post

Last edited by Shakkur98; July 24th, 2013 at 06:28 AM.
Shakkur98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2013, 06:16 AM   #103
Shakkur98
Registered User
 
Shakkur98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Columbia, South Carolina
Posts: 293
Likes (Received): 271

Here's a little recent picture of the Demolition at 22 Thames Street fromhttp://newyorkyimby.com/2013/07/demo...es-street.html on July 3rd
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post

Last edited by Shakkur98; July 24th, 2013 at 06:29 AM.
Shakkur98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2013, 06:33 AM   #104
Hudson11
Stuck on the Cross Bronx
 
Hudson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 9,533
Likes (Received): 22576

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shakkur98 View Post
Wonder how tall this will actually be since it has a major height increase, looks like 1WTC, and 432 Park Avenue might have some competition
well at 70 floors it's 841 feet. add 15 more floors i'd put it at around 1020 ft. Thats a rough estimate. It's not getting the height increase though. Not as of now.
There appears to be a rendering of it in the skyline with the WTC in the background they showed, i hope they release it.

70 Story skyscraper could rise next to World Trade Center



Quote:
Under the current zoning, the developers could build an 85-story tower rising more than 1,000 feet, but they would prefer to construct a shorter, wider tower that would better “fit into the context of the neighborhood," make for more spacious apartments and not obstruct the nearby 1,776-foot One World Trade Center, said Alex Adams, a Fisher Brothers project executive.

The zoning variance would allow Fisher Brothers to reduce the required setback of the building — the space between the edge of the property and the street — from 20 feet to about 10 to 13 feet, allowing them to make a wider building.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post

Last edited by Hudson11; July 24th, 2013 at 06:46 AM.
Hudson11 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2013, 08:29 PM   #105
hunser
Steinway to Heaven |¦┆┊
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Wien
Posts: 1,837
Likes (Received): 5031

http://tribecatrib.com/content/22-th...-manhattan-sky



Quote:
The thin, rectangular building, slated to open in spring 2017, will either soar 1,100 feet at 85 stories or 960 feet at 70 stories. Developer Fisher Brothers is applying for a city zoning variance to build it at the lower height and make up for the loss of square footage by providing shallower setbacks—stepped recesses from the building’s street front—than the law allows.

A shorter, wider structure, with a maximum of 450 residential units, would be less costly to build, Alex Adams of developer Fisher Brothers told Community Board 1’s Quality of Life Committee last week. (In its variance application to the city’s Board of Standards and Appeals, the developer is claiming that the “as-of-right” building presents an economic hardship.)

The lower building would not visually compete with the nearby 4 World Trade Center and the other skyscrapers on and near the WTC site, said Jim Herr of Viñoly Architects, the project’s designers. The taller building, in contrast, “really interrupts the rhythm of the master planning and the massing of the entire Trade Center site,” he said.

Responding to a board member’s criticism that the design was “banal” and “undistinguished,” Adams indicated that there are limited design options for a building on a narrow (9,000-square-foot) site and, also, that aspects of the design are still a work in progress. “I don’t want to present this in any way, shape or form as a finished product,” he said, “but I think this is clearly the direction that we’d like it to head in.”

As a lesson from Hurricane Sandy, the buildings’ mechanicals, he said, will be installed in higher floors. The ongoing demolition of the site’s current building is expected to be finished by September. Construction of the new building would then begin next spring.
Please not another near - supertall! We already have 4WTC ffs!
Also, that argument with not obstructing / interfering with the WTC is redundant.

Anyway, thread title should be changed to 960ft / 293m.

Last edited by hunser; July 24th, 2013 at 08:36 PM.
hunser no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2013, 08:35 PM   #106
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53453

Half the WTC development is already so f*cking banal, who cares if these guys build their sliver higher? NYC going full potato...
__________________
We are floating in space...

ChuckScraperMiami#1, Zaz965 liked this post
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2013, 08:52 PM   #107
hunser
Steinway to Heaven |¦┆┊
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Wien
Posts: 1,837
Likes (Received): 5031

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertpunk View Post
Half the WTC development is already so f*cking banal, who cares if these guys build their sliver higher? NYC going full potato...
Not only that but that mentality of not obstructing / diminishing the new WTC complex, because it's an 'icon', is very dangerous. Hopefully it won't last for long so developers won't be afraid to build equally tall or even taller towers in Lower Manhattan.
hunser no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2013, 09:14 PM   #108
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Who cares if it interrupts the master planning. This is outside of the WTC master plan!

Seriously I hope this or other future Super-tall projects in lower manhattan will not face the kind of problems that One Penn Plaza faced because it would block the view of the Empire State Building.

Lower Manhattan needs to RISE and needs to be on par with the skyline of midtown.

Question..

Whenever 30 Park Place, 22 Thames, 101 Murray St, 80 South, WTC Tower 3 and Tower 2 gets built.

Would you think the Downtown skyline could take over Midtown Manhattan skyline of today?? (Minus 432 PA, Hudson Yards & Nordstrom Tower)
__________________
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2013, 09:30 PM   #109
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

Herr's comment in that article made my blood boil in pure rage! I have no problem with people who excuse the WTC's ignoring of height, I have nothing against people who actually like it, but I truly hate people who bow down to it and who, because of a ruined WTC rebuilding, want to ruin the rest of lower Manhattan's development. If I would be Vinoly I would fire Herr the moment I would hear or read Herr saying this

As a great Jedi Master once said: "Who is more foolish, the fool, or the fool who follows him?"
__________________

hunser, Zaz965, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2013, 10:09 PM   #110
nycaddict
Registered User
 
nycaddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 182
Likes (Received): 135

honestly, from what i see of the current renderings, id rather this just be a filler than a tower that stands out of the skyline. but yah, the idea that the rest of the city must be capped because of the wtc and ESB is oppressive.
__________________

Kanto, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
nycaddict no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2013, 11:44 PM   #111
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Another article.

Rafael Viñoly Offers A Glimpse of Proposed 70-Story Tower
http://blog.archpaper.com/wordpress/...836#more-66836

Quote:
Rafael Viñoly Architects has unveiled plans for a new 70-story residential tower located just a small block from the World Trade Center at 22 Thames Street. The developers are looking to replace the 10-story, former American Stock Exchange building with an 870-foot skyscraper
Quote:
Under the existing zoning, the developers have the right to construct an 85-story tower. However, the company unexpectedly has decided to build a shorter, wider tower better suited for the area. The layout would create space for more spacious apartments and not block the neighboring 1,776-foot One World Trade Center. The skyscraper would act as a transition between the soaring World Trade Center and the low-rise masonry buildings on Greenwich Street.
Quote:
The requested zoning variance would reduce the required setback of the building from 20 feet to 10 or 13 feet, allowing for a wider building. While the number of apartments in the building may change, at least 20 percent will be set aside for affordable housing.
Quote:
In the fall, Fisher Brothers will supply a more comprehensive presentation to CB1’s Financial District Committee when it seeks advisory approval for the zoning variance. The city will make the ultimate decision regarding the zoning amendment.

A Fisher Brothers representative has revealed a completion goal of September 2017, if all goes as planned.
__________________

Kanto, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 24th, 2013, 11:55 PM   #112
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 04:24 PM.
Subsequence no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 25th, 2013, 12:05 AM   #113
hunser
Steinway to Heaven |¦┆┊
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Wien
Posts: 1,837
Likes (Received): 5031

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanto View Post
Herr's comment in that article made my blood boil in pure rage! I have no problem with people who excuse the WTC's ignoring of height, I have nothing against people who actually like it, but I truly hate people who bow down to it and who, because of a ruined WTC rebuilding, want to ruin the rest of lower Manhattan's development. If I would be Vinoly I would fire Herr the moment I would hear or read Herr saying this

As a great Jedi Master once said: "Who is more foolish, the fool, or the fool who follows him?"
Hate is a strong word, but yes I feel your pain. Our current hope is 80 South Street, which should rise to 1,018 feet. Eventually, one tower has to break the WTC plateau so others won't be scared to do the same.
hunser no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 25th, 2013, 04:53 AM   #114
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertpunk View Post
Half the WTC development is already so f*cking banal, who cares if these guys build their sliver higher? NYC going full potato...
If onky it were shorter, 22 Thames would be perfect for Chicago since it's a glass box.
__________________
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 25th, 2013, 05:13 AM   #115
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53453

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
If onky it were shorter, 22 Thames would be perfect for Chicago since it's a glass box.
http://www.houstonarchitecture.com/h...11#entry428094

Says it all.
__________________
We are floating in space...

ChuckScraperMiami#1, Zaz965 liked this post
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 26th, 2013, 06:13 PM   #116
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,344
Likes (Received): 3593

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanto View Post
Herr's comment in that article made my blood boil in pure rage! I have no problem with people who excuse the WTC's ignoring of height, I have nothing against people who actually like it, but I truly hate people who bow down to it and who, because of a ruined WTC rebuilding, want to ruin the rest of lower Manhattan's development. If I would be Vinoly I would fire Herr the moment I would hear or read Herr saying this

As a great Jedi Master once said: "Who is more foolish, the fool, or the fool who follows him?"
Guys, they WANT the lower height. But only if they can maximize the size of their floor plates. That's what they're applying for, and so they have to convince the Community Board to allow it. I don't think Vinoly nor Herr nor the developers gives a damn about disrupting the "rhythm of the WTC." They're pandering to nimbyism so they can get their shorter, thicker, more profitable tower.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 26th, 2013, 07:29 PM   #117
iamtheSTIG
Registered User
 
iamtheSTIG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham - The city of Robin Hood
Posts: 4,246
Likes (Received): 4545

I'm not overly bothered if this building turns out to be 'only' 292m instead of the 85 storey proposal... I mean its just 6 metres shorter than 4wtc which itself sticks out from the skyline quite abit!

Don't get me wrong the 85 floor proposal would be my prefered option, but I'm not complaining as to which one eventually gets built
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
iamtheSTIG está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 27th, 2013, 05:16 PM   #118
KillerZavatar
also known as Wally
 
KillerZavatar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Düsseldorf
Posts: 11,352
Likes (Received): 8243

havn't seen this one before, looks very nice
__________________

Zaz965, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
KillerZavatar está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 29th, 2013, 12:19 AM   #119
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,723
Likes (Received): 28365

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
Guys, they WANT the lower height. But only if they can maximize the size of their floor plates. That's what they're applying for, and so they have to convince the Community Board to allow it. I don't think Vinoly nor Herr nor the developers gives a damn about disrupting the "rhythm of the WTC." They're pandering to nimbyism so they can get their shorter, thicker, more profitable tower.
In the end it's not the architect but the developer who decides about the height.
It would be cool to have more supertalls here. I would like to see a render of this tower and the WTC to see
if it really disrupts the "rhythm of the WTC."
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 29th, 2013, 03:27 AM   #120
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,344
Likes (Received): 3593

That's what I'm saying. The developer wants the lower height. The architects are just feeding the CB some BS about aesthetics that will get them to grant the change.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
125 greenwich, 22 thames, new york

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 09:00 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