NEW YORK | The GiraSole | 323m | 1060ft | 72 fl | App - Page 4

Ebola · November 2nd, 2007, 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by koolkid

how's this for a boom?

Well that doesn't show that the boom was also downtown; it gave us amazing towers not only like Mrs. ESB, but also towers like 40 Wall Street, all trying to be a WTB.

This current boom will still be much larger, though...

I just really don't like the name of this new supertall.

***soup or man*** · November 2nd, 2007, 05:34 AM

Even though the name GiraSole sounds like some sort of foot medicine, I really love this tower. This is how to make a gracefull, classy building. Simple, clean, and modern through and through. I love it.

Ebola · November 2nd, 2007, 05:38 AM

100% true. ^ I couldn't agree more. The new towers in this area are making me hard. I really think that this one has a lot of beauty; it is what Maki quasi-failed to do for 4WTC.

ElVoltageDR · November 2nd, 2007, 05:39 AM

DAMN!!! This thing came out of nowhere! And what a looker too. It's about time developers woke up and started to exploit the Far West Side. The area is just loaded with places that could be developed.

***soup or man*** · November 2nd, 2007, 05:42 AM

O deng..I realized that this thing has a slight twist. I love that surprise.

EnDleSsWaLtZ · November 2nd, 2007, 06:16 AM

Wow, such a great proposal. I think it will fit into the New york skyline very nicely.

Ebola · November 2nd, 2007, 06:21 AM

^I'm not sure, but I think it's approved since people say that there are many pieces of heavy machinery preping the site already. This may be the fastest supertall in NY history.

DAMN I m good · November 2nd, 2007, 06:22 AM

WOW !!! This tower is so nice , I am really impressed

This is going to give a fresh taste to NY !

FM 2258 · November 2nd, 2007, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LLoydGeorge

How do you say that?

In addition to the Empire State Building, there are two buildings under construction whose roofs -- not spires -- exceed 1,300 feet (i.e., WTC 1 and 2), one building whose roof exceeds 1,150 feet (i.e., WTC 3), one whose roof exceeds 1,000 feet (i.e., WTC 4), and one whose roof is about 950 feet (i.e., B of A). In addition, the Chrysler's roof -- not the spire -- is about 950 feet, and the roofs on 40 Wall and 80 Pine Exceed 900 feet.

Moreover, several 1,000+ foot buildings are planned around Penn Station and MSG.

meh....I don't like the new WTC project, I still want the old towers back. New York is mainly a mid-rise city with the tallest buildings cheating with spires.

New York needs some Dubai sized buildings. It's New York.

Anyway not to get off topic but this will be a perfect addition to the New York City skyline.

Ebola · November 2nd, 2007, 06:34 AM

NY doesn't need shit to compare to Dubai, and it ain't no freaking "mid-rise city." Not even counting spires, by 2012, NY will have over 25 buildings with roofs over 800'. Without the WTC and all these planned supertalls, anyone with a brain will tell you that it is of a better quality and much more dense. Just because no buildings with a roof over 1,600' are in view doesn't mean it won't happen.

Notice how this project came from no where.

ramvid01 · November 2nd, 2007, 06:39 AM

[QUOTE=FM 2258;16236450]..New York is mainly a mid-rise city with the tallest buildings cheating with spires.
QUOTE]

Auston might be a mid-rise city but New York? You need to get your head checked.

jak3m · November 2nd, 2007, 02:04 PM

I like the name GiraSole haha, even though it sounds like a foot medicine.

I love the building but i dislike the Sherwood one.:/

New York will shine again!

LLoydGeorge · November 2nd, 2007, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FM 2258

meh....I don't like the new WTC project, I still want the old towers back. New York is mainly a mid-rise city with the tallest buildings cheating with spires.

New York needs some Dubai sized buildings. It's New York.

Anyway not to get off topic but this will be a perfect addition to the New York City skyline.

Chicago is mainly a midrise city. As I said, NY has way more buildings between 700 and 800 feet than any city. Only, HK comapares to it.

ElVoltageDR · November 2nd, 2007, 02:34 PM

Again with the 'cheating' spires... please I'm getting so sick and tired of hearing that crap.

***LoKeY*** · November 2nd, 2007, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soup or man

Even though the name GiraSole sounds like some sort of foot medicine, I really love this tower. This is how to make a gracefull, classy building. Simple, clean, and modern through and through. I love it.

Girasole means Sunflower in Italian

(it's read Girasolae btw)

chjbolton · November 2nd, 2007, 06:47 PM

Sorry but... It's just OK. The inside will be wonderful, no doubt, but the exterior design would need a bit more extravagance.
Plus, two (nice-ish) boxes right next to each other will look a bit too stocky.
What makes a skyline great is indeed high and density, but shape and height differences (hell!!... even spires sometimes...) are healthy for the general look. And even more importantly, a cetain amount of space between the most predominant buildings of a city only helps them to come out even better.

Look at Dubai (at the moment and apart from Burj Dubai) and compare it to say... Frankfurt. A huge skyline with a quasi-continuous 300 meter roof is not better than smaller (still big though) but better 'organised' buldings.
It's my opinion only. But Chicago is close to perfection due to the reasons explained above.

So yeah! Go for the big boxy green one NY, but careful not to just create a cluttered glass wall just for the sake of it.
Hopefully, the rest of the Hudson Yard development will help to bring some harmony into what's heading for a rushed pack of common-looking buildings.

krull · November 2nd, 2007, 07:34 PM

That is how NYC does it. If you want buildings seperated by parks or plazas and not right next to eachother, then you can keep loving your Dubai way of building things. NYC has been building like this for decades and it will still do it like that. They want to use as much space as possible and not waste any square feet. I love these type of skyscrapers canyons that it creates in the city.

Both of these towers will be actually seperated by a green boulevard...

One is on Site 1 facing 10th Ave and the GiraSole tower will be facing 11th Ave.

romanamerican · November 2nd, 2007, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jak3m

I like the name GiraSole haha, even though it sounds like a foot medicine.

I love the building but i dislike the Sherwood one.:/

New York will shine again!

Don't think it actually ever stopped shining (even during the '29 crisis new york built wonderful skyscrapers (like the rockfeller complex).

I think this building is actually a great addition, it has that simple design but very futuristic without the excessive use of glass, similar in a way to the new york times building.
I love it, and it wont be an isolated tower (looking at the great projects that are planned).
Great New York, this was really a nice surprise!

econ_tim · November 2nd, 2007, 09:05 PM

reminds me a little of the fed in boston

LLoydGeorge · November 2nd, 2007, 09:08 PM

I respect your opinion, but how does a 1,000 foot tower with a torqued, twisting body and luminous glass resemble a 350-400 foot concrete box?

November 2nd, 2007, 05:34 AM	#62
*soup or man* Diamondz... Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Chicago, Illinois Posts: 3,385 Likes (Received): 35	Even though the name GiraSole sounds like some sort of foot medicine, I really love this tower. This is how to make a gracefull, classy building. Simple, clean, and modern through and through. I love it. __________________ My strap on my vibrator about to bust a rhyme no violator. I feel myself I'm a masturbator.

November 2nd, 2007, 05:42 AM	#65
*soup or man* Diamondz... Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Chicago, Illinois Posts: 3,385 Likes (Received): 35	O deng..I realized that this thing has a slight twist. I love that surprise. __________________ My strap on my vibrator about to bust a rhyme no violator. I feel myself I'm a masturbator.

November 2nd, 2007, 06:22 AM	#68
DAMN I m good sould have been kazaaam ! Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: brussels Posts: 323 Likes (Received): 0	WOW !!! This tower is so nice , I am really impressed This is going to give a fresh taste to NY ! __________________ Kazaaam my miniville

November 2nd, 2007, 06:47 PM	#76
chjbolton chjbolton Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: London, Paris, Munich Posts: 736 Likes (Received): 0	Sorry but... It's just OK. The inside will be wonderful, no doubt, but the exterior design would need a bit more extravagance. Plus, two (nice-ish) boxes right next to each other will look a bit too stocky. What makes a skyline great is indeed high and density, but shape and height differences (hell!!... even spires sometimes...) are healthy for the general look. And even more importantly, a cetain amount of space between the most predominant buildings of a city only helps them to come out even better. Look at Dubai (at the moment and apart from Burj Dubai) and compare it to say... Frankfurt. A huge skyline with a quasi-continuous 300 meter roof is not better than smaller (still big though) but better 'organised' buldings. It's my opinion only. But Chicago is close to perfection due to the reasons explained above. So yeah! Go for the big boxy green one NY, but careful not to just create a cluttered glass wall just for the sake of it. Hopefully, the rest of the Hudson Yard development will help to bring some harmony into what's heading for a rushed pack of common-looking buildings. __________________ B O L T O N

November 2nd, 2007, 07:34 PM	#77
krull In Time Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: New York City Posts: 3,148 Likes (Received): 3	That is how NYC does it. If you want buildings seperated by parks or plazas and not right next to eachother, then you can keep loving your Dubai way of building things. NYC has been building like this for decades and it will still do it like that. They want to use as much space as possible and not waste any square feet. I love these type of skyscrapers canyons that it creates in the city. Both of these towers will be actually seperated by a green boulevard... One is on Site 1 facing 10th Ave and the GiraSole tower will be facing 11th Ave. __________________ * In addition to the 61 percent who say they love the Big Apple, another 22 percent say they "like" New York. Fifteen percent have mixed feelings, and only 2 percent describe their feelings toward the city as "dislike" or "hate." - In record numbers, city's residents say they 'love' New York

November 2nd, 2007, 05:38 AM	#63
Ebola BANNED Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: New York City Posts: 1,651 Likes (Received): 0	100% true. ^ I couldn't agree more. The new towers in this area are making me hard. I really think that this one has a lot of beauty; it is what Maki quasi-failed to do for 4WTC.

November 2nd, 2007, 05:39 AM	#64
ElVoltageDR Happy to be here Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 2,647 Likes (Received): 13	DAMN!!! This thing came out of nowhere! And what a looker too. It's about time developers woke up and started to exploit the Far West Side. The area is just loaded with places that could be developed.

November 2nd, 2007, 06:16 AM	#66
EnDleSsWaLtZ Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Chicago, La Grange IL Posts: 456 Likes (Received): 1	Wow, such a great proposal. I think it will fit into the New york skyline very nicely.

November 2nd, 2007, 06:21 AM	#67
Ebola BANNED Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: New York City Posts: 1,651 Likes (Received): 0	^I'm not sure, but I think it's approved since people say that there are many pieces of heavy machinery preping the site already. This may be the fastest supertall in NY history.

November 2nd, 2007, 06:34 AM	#70
Ebola BANNED Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: New York City Posts: 1,651 Likes (Received): 0	NY doesn't need shit to compare to Dubai, and it ain't no freaking "mid-rise city." Not even counting spires, by 2012, NY will have over 25 buildings with roofs over 800'. Without the WTC and all these planned supertalls, anyone with a brain will tell you that it is of a better quality and much more dense. Just because no buildings with a roof over 1,600' are in view doesn't mean it won't happen. Notice how this project came from no where.

November 2nd, 2007, 06:39 AM	#71
ramvid01 Registered User Join Date: May 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 754 Likes (Received): 0	[QUOTE=FM 2258;16236450]..New York is mainly a mid-rise city with the tallest buildings cheating with spires. QUOTE] Auston might be a mid-rise city but New York? You need to get your head checked.

November 2nd, 2007, 02:04 PM	#72
jak3m Registered User Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: UK Posts: 279 Likes (Received): 0	I like the name GiraSole haha, even though it sounds like a foot medicine. I love the building but i dislike the Sherwood one.:/ New York will shine again!

November 2nd, 2007, 02:34 PM	#74
ElVoltageDR Happy to be here Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 2,647 Likes (Received): 13	Again with the 'cheating' spires... please I'm getting so sick and tired of hearing that crap.

November 2nd, 2007, 09:05 PM	#79
econ_tim Registered User Join Date: May 2006 Location: New York City Posts: 155 Likes (Received): 0	reminds me a little of the fed in boston

November 2nd, 2007, 09:08 PM	#80
LLoydGeorge BANNED Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,035 Likes (Received): 0	I respect your opinion, but how does a 1,000 foot tower with a torqued, twisting body and luminous glass resemble a 350-400 foot concrete box?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode