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 > 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 January 26th, 2014, 07:41 PM   #41
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,343
Likes (Received): 3590

My understanding is that they could raze it to street level and keep the foundation. But of course, building on top of an existing foundation presents limitations and complications of its own. I agree that the developers will probably try to combine plots to create a new, taller tower instead.
MarshallKnight está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 15th, 2014, 10:19 PM   #42
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

The View on Real Estate: Steve Witkoff on Helmsley Park Lane


Talks about shadow effects and what could be in store for the Park Lane site.

So if they are going to build a new tower, Witkoff says their tower can be very tall but says they will not build as tall.

He says a 100-110 story tower is way too tall. Therefore, if I could ask him one question..

My question would be... is 90 stories acceptable???
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2014, 10:37 PM   #43
#99
Registered User
 
#99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 227
Likes (Received): 368

How tall would he be allowed max?
#99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2014, 10:58 PM   #44
Funkyskunk2
Registered User
 
Funkyskunk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 619
Likes (Received): 808

As far as I know the only restriction is the 2000 ft national faa height limit.
Funkyskunk2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2014, 11:50 PM   #45
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

Sounds like he's no Shvo (lol, remember his tower boasts?). It won't happen for several years at least, it will be mixed condo/ hotel likely. He's being careful but will build I think something great for the area. It does seem the dreaded shadow effect is really minimal and overstated as a problem. Gathering by what he says it will be supertall but maybe not quite the 432 Park/ Steinway/ Nordstrom building heights... say in the 1,050-1,150 ft area and 75-85 stories tops. I'm good with that!
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 03:34 AM   #46
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

I hope so.... yep since isn't it right overlooking the park, while the others are a short distance away? Hey, 1,300-1,350 ft works well for me too! LOL, as long as it's not Hudson Spire! Seriously though even we may have to wait 2-5 years down the line it's going to be worth it as I feel it's going to get the respect for being in such a perfect location it will be a city icon!
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 03:39 AM   #47
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,054
Likes (Received): 1863

Just because it won't be 100 storied doesn't mean it won't be very tall, 225w 57th street and 432 are ~90 stories and are in the 430 meter range.

But this guy is kind of weird, what's wrong with living in a 100 story building? It's not really that much taller than an 80 or 90 story building. Who really notices the difference?
__________________

Kanto, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 03:46 AM   #48
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
Just because it won't be 100 storied doesn't mean it won't be very tall, 225w 57th street and 432 are ~90 stories and are in the 430 meter range.

But this guy is kind of weird, what's wrong with living in a 100 story building? It's not really that much taller than an 80 or 90 story building. Who really notices the difference?
Yeah, he is a bit but he did say he wanted to be liked, too and building like 1,500 or so and going 100 stories was something that might get him bad press. So long as it's in the 1,100-1,350 ft range I'm good with that. Mostly I'd like just a great design that will be regarded as not only a Central Park icon but a city one.
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 03:52 AM   #49
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,054
Likes (Received): 1863

Quote:
Originally Posted by citybooster View Post
Yeah, he is a bit but he did say he wanted to be liked, too and building like 1,500 or so and going 100 stories was something that might get him bad press. So long as it's in the 1,100-1,350 ft range I'm good with that. Mostly I'd like just a great design that will be regarded as not only a Central Park icon but a city one.
What? Why? I really fail to understand some people's logic.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 04:37 AM   #50
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,343
Likes (Received): 3590

I'm not sure how I 'd feel about a 400m tower right on CPS, but I suppose they might do something like 220 and place a lower building directly on the Park, with the tower behind.

I appreciate what the guy is saying about not trying to stir things up, but then you look at 111 W. 57th -- they're building between 1350-1400 ft. and they've gotten nothing but praise for how they've conducted their business. A very tall tower is not necessarily going to upset the public, as long as they sense their concerns are being considered (in the case of 111, JDS and SHoP went out of their way in the preservation of Steinway Hall).

Anyway, the location is terrific, and I hope the design reflects that. At a minimum, this will provide a visual bridge between the 111/One57/217/220 cluster and 432 Park, but I'm hoping for a really phenomenal tower that can serve as the centerpiece, maybe even the pinnacle, of the CPS skyline.
MarshallKnight está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 06:23 AM   #51
RegentHouse
City Development Shitlord
 
RegentHouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,216
Likes (Received): 770

Is the new skyscraper going to be called "Park Lane," or even a hotel for that matter? I would rename the thread "Park Lane Redevelopment" or better yet, "Helmsley Park Lane Hotel Redevelopment" considering this hotel itself stole the name of a former hotel appropriately on Park Avenue until the 1960s.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
RegentHouse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 01:15 PM   #52
iamtheSTIG
Registered User
 
iamtheSTIG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham - The city of Robin Hood
Posts: 4,242
Likes (Received): 4537

Maybe they'll make it just shy of the ESB? Just to please the crowd?
I'd be happy with 370-80m, would slot in between both the ~300m and ~430m crowds of towers quite nicely

Also I can see what he means with the tower not going to be 100+ storeys, all of the other 57th street towers have a layer of shorter towers in front of them giving a great stepping back of towers from old to new
__________________
Aspiring property developer with major ambitions

Check out my Instagram

Nottingham Interactive Development Map

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
iamtheSTIG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 08:47 PM   #53
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,054
Likes (Received): 1863

I don't understand why he doesn't want to build over 100 stories? He has the opportunity to build the tallest next to the park, why not take it?

What happened to the desire to build tall? It could still be profitable at that height in this location too.



Anyway enough of my rant, I'll be happy with another tower, I sound like a supertall spoiled New Yorker.
__________________

Kanto, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 08:53 PM   #54
#99
Registered User
 
#99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 227
Likes (Received): 368

Id prefer this tower to be the same size as the other supertalls popping up, yeah he could take it to the top but 1,000ft ish is A OK.
__________________

Eric Offereins liked this post
#99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 09:14 PM   #55
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,054
Likes (Received): 1863

Quote:
Originally Posted by #99 View Post
Id prefer this tower to be the same size as the other supertalls popping up, yeah he could take it to the top but 1,000ft ish is A OK.
But why not have a signature tower?

There will already be three buildings in the 1400 foot range and at least two or three more in the 1000 range next to the park.
__________________

Kanto, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 09:15 PM   #56
LCIII
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Live in NYC, heart in Seattle
Posts: 7,712
Likes (Received): 2713

Would be a shame if the only thing standing between us and another +/- 1400' beauty is his fragile ego and desire to be loved by NIMBYs.
__________________

Kanto liked this post
LCIII no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 09:18 PM   #57
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,656
Likes (Received): 28201

I like the fact that he prefers quality of living over pure height. I'm pretty sure it wille be supertall though.
__________________

iamtheSTIG, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 09:19 PM   #58
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,343
Likes (Received): 3590

Yeah, I'd be okay if they maintained the sense of stepping back towards the highest towers: Lowrises directly on CPS, with 900-1000 footers on the 58th Street Side, and the 1400 footers behind that on 58th/57th. It's a dramatic incline (especially compared to the way it used to rise, from the CPS buildings towards the Midtown plateau) but I think it's more aesthetically pleasing than the tallest towers rising directly on top of the Park.
__________________

iamtheSTIG, Eric Offereins liked this post
MarshallKnight está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 09:54 PM   #59
#99
Registered User
 
#99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 227
Likes (Received): 368

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
But why not have a signature tower?

There will already be three buildings in the 1400 foot range and at least two or three more in the 1000 range next to the park.
Because New York already has ESB, Chrysler and 1WTC.

Unless your a skyscraper fan you probably wouldn't take much notice of a super signature tower, I have people on my Facebook that take photos and cut out the top of One57 and have been asked what is that building when referring to the Chrysler.

Just my opinion that another tower of similar size will compliment NY much better than a F off tower that frankly not many will care about.
#99 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 11:57 PM   #60
DannyR2713
another Registered User
 
DannyR2713's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: New York City
Posts: 481
Likes (Received): 698

First and foremost I hope its a great design for its prime location; height comes second
__________________
DannyR2713 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
36 cps, cps, nyc, park lane hotel

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 06:04 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