Midtown W. | General Developments Updates/Compilation - Page 4 - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > North American Skyscrapers Forum > United States > Northeast and MidAtlantic > Local Forums > New York City > Manhattan


Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


View Poll Results: Which do you like?
Brookfield Properties 25 65.79%
Extell Development Company 2 5.26%
Tishman Speyer Properties and Morgan Stanley 0 0%
Related Companies 7 18.42%
Durst Organization and Vornado Realty Trust 4 10.53%
Voters: 38. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 22nd, 2007, 05:39 PM   #61
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,913
Likes (Received): 6967

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnFlint1985 View Post
they are picking which one right now and possible it will start next year - it is right near the midtown and no one wants to lose an opportunity to make money
already next year? wonderful
ZZ-II no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old November 24th, 2007, 01:33 AM   #62
Ebola
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,658
Likes (Received): 94

When it's all done, it will be like adding two or three skylines from medium-large-sized US cities to NYC's skyline.
Ebola no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2007, 05:13 PM   #63
New Jack City
User
 
New Jack City's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,634
Likes (Received): 63

Hudson Yards - HUGE PROJECT

The bids: Which do you like?

Brookfield Properties
Architects Skidmore Owings & Merrill; Thomas Phifer & Partners; SHoP Architects and Diller Scofidio + Renfro; Kazuyo Sejima + Ryue Nishizawa; Handel Architects




Extell Development Company
Architect Steven Holl Architects




Tishman Speyer Properties and Morgan Stanley
Architects Helmut Jahn and Peter Walker




Related Companies
Architects Kohn Pedersen Fox, Robert A.M. Stern, Arquitectonica
Financial Partner Goldman Sachs




Durst Organization and Vornado Realty Trust
Architects FXFowle and Pelli Clarke Pelli

















Thanks to Krull and Kosi!

Last edited by desertpunk; February 24th, 2013 at 11:15 AM.
New Jack City no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old November 24th, 2007, 06:10 PM   #64
Tazmaniadevil
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 333
Likes (Received): 1

Unbelievable potential, and if it was in Chine or Dubai, it would be built. But NYC is subject to all sorts of problems in getting these type of projects built, so I wonder what will be built. Look at the WTC site. If that had been in other countries, these buildings would have already been erected.
Tazmaniadevil no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2007, 07:25 PM   #65
urbanaturalist
Registered User
 
urbanaturalist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 572
Likes (Received): 78

They all look pretty good. Except, I'm not really feeling the boxy shaped buildings. I like the curved buildings. Besides that, any of the projects that protect the complete integrity of the highline is a great thing. I'm definitely feeling all the open space themes. Also, I like the fact that there are thousands of residential units intertwined in the project.
urbanaturalist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2007, 09:09 PM   #66
Don Omar
Bark twice if in Milwauke
 
Don Omar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nueva York
Posts: 487
Likes (Received): 39

need better pictures of the other proposals other than Brookfield
__________________
Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens and Staten
From the Battery to the top of Manhattan
Asian, Middle-Eastern and Latin
Black, White, New York you make it happen

- Beastie Boys
Don Omar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2007, 09:27 PM   #67
3tmk
Rusty Robot
 
3tmk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Floor 7½
Posts: 10,794


oooooooohhhhh, me likey mucho gusto!

I vote for Brookfields!
__________________
3tmk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2007, 09:35 PM   #68
Don Omar
Bark twice if in Milwauke
 
Don Omar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nueva York
Posts: 487
Likes (Received): 39

harsh review from the NYTimes

In Plans for Railyards, a Mix of Towers and Parks


LARGE-SCALE MAKEOVER The West Side railyards.

By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF
Published: November 24, 2007
nytimes.com

The West Side railyards are the kind of urban development project that makes builders dance in the streets. A footprint bigger than Rockefeller Center’s and the potential for more commercial and residential space than ground zero: what more could an urban visionary want?

So the five proposals recently unveiled by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to develop the 26-acre Manhattan railyards are not just a disappointment for their lack of imagination, they are also a grim referendum on the state of large-scale planning in New York City.

With the possible exception of a design for the Extell Development Company, the proposals embody the kind of tired, generic planning formulas that appear wherever big development money is at stake. When thoughtful architecture surfaces at all, it is mostly a superficial gloss of culture, rather than a sincere effort to come to terms with the complex social and economic changes the city has been undergoing for the last decade or so.

Located on six square blocks between 30th and 33rd Streets and 10th Avenue and the West Side Highway, the yards are one of the few remaining testaments to New York’s industrial past. Dozens of tracks leading in and out of Pennsylvania Station carve through the site. A string of parking lots and old industrial buildings flanks the tracks to the south; the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center is a block to the north. To build, developers first will have to create a platform over the tracks, at an estimated cost of $1.5 billion; construction of the platform and towers has to take place without interrupting train service.

City officials and the transportation authority, which owns the railyards, have entertained various proposals for the site in recent years, including an ill-conceived stadium for the Jets. The current guidelines would allow up to 13 million square feet of commercial, retail and residential space; a building to house a cultural group yet to be named; and a public park.

All five of the development teams chose to arrange the bulk of the towers at the northern and southern edges of the site, to minimize disruption of the tracks below, and concentrated the majority of the commercial towers to the east, and the residential towers to the west, where they would have views of the Hudson River.

But none of the teams have fully explored the potentially rich relationship between the railyards and the development above them, an approach that could have added substance to the plans. Nor did any find a successful way to come to terms with the project’s gargantuan scale.



The proposal by the Related Companies would transform the site into a virtual theme park for Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, the developer’s main tenant. The design, by a team of architects that includes Kohn Pedersen Fox, Arquitectonica and Robert A. M. Stern, would be anchored at its eastern end by a 74-story tower. Three slightly smaller towers would flank it, creating an imposing barrier between the public park and the rest of the city to the east.

The plan also includes a vast retail mall and plaza between 10th and 11th Avenues, which could be used by News Corporation for advertising, video projections and outdoor film and concert events — a concept that would essentially transform what is being hailed as a public space into a platform for corporate self-promotion.



A proposal by FXFowle and Pelli Clarke Pelli for the Durst Organization and Vornado Realty Trust is slightly less disturbing. Following a similar plan, it would be anchored by a new tower for Condé Nast Publications to the north, and a row of residential towers extending to the west. Sinuous, elevated pedestrian walkways would wind their way through the site just above the proposed public park. The walkways are meant to evoke a contemporary version of the High Line, the raised tracks being converted into a public garden just to the south. But their real precedents are the deadening elevated streets found in late Modernist housing complexes.



By comparison, the proposal by Tishman Speyer Properties, designed by Helmut Jahn, at least seems more honest. The site is anchored by four huge towers that taper slightly as they rise, exaggerating their sense of weight and recalling more primitive, authoritarian forms: you might call it architecture of intimidation. As you move west, a grand staircase leads down to a circular plaza that would link the park to a pedestrian boulevard the city plans to construct from the site north toward 42nd Street.

Mr. Jahn built his reputation in the 1980s and ’90s, when many modern architects were struggling to pump energy into work that had become cold and alienating. Over all, the design looks like a conventional 1980s mega-development: an oddly retro vision of uniform glass towers set around a vast plaza decorated with a few scattered cafes. (In a rare nice touch, Mr. Jahn allows some of his towers to cantilever out over the deck of the High Line, playing up the violent clash between new and old.)



Another proposal, by Brookfield Properties, is an example of how real architectural talent can be used to give a plan an air of sophistication without adding much substance. Brookfield has included a few preliminary sketches of buildings by architectural luminaries like Diller Scofidio & Renfro and the Japanese firm Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa, but the sketches are nothing more than window dressing. The proposal includes a retail mall and commercial towers along 10th Avenue, which gives the public park an isolated feel. A hotel and retail complex cuts the park in two, so that you lose the full impact of its sweep.



For those who place urban-planning issues above dollars and cents, the Extell Development Company’s proposal is the only one worth serious consideration. Designed by Steven Holl Architects of New York, the plan tries to minimize the impact of the development’s immense scale. Most of the commercial space would be concentrated in three interconnecting towers on the northeast corner of the site. The towers’ forms pull apart and join together as they rise — an effort to break down their mass in the skyline. Smaller towers flank the site’s southern edge, their delicate, shardlike forms designed to allow sunlight to spill into the park area. A low, 10-story commercial building to the north is lifted off the ground on columns to allow the park to slip underneath and connect to 33rd Street.

The plan’s most original feature is a bridgelike cable structure that would span the existing tracks and support a 19-acre public park. According to the developer, the cable system would reduce the cost of building over the tracks significantly, allowing the density to be reduced to 11.3 million square feet from 13 million and still make a profit. The result would be both a more generous public space and a less brutal assault on the skyline. It is a sensitive effort to blend the development into the city’s existing fabric.

But what is really at issue here is putting the importance of profit margins above architecture and planning. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority could have pushed for more ambitious proposals. For decades now cities like Barcelona have insisted on a high level of design in large-scale urban-planning projects, and they have done so without economic ruin.

By contrast, the authority is more likely to focus on potential tenants like News Corporation and Condé Nast and the profits they can generate than on the quality of the design. A development company like Extell is likely to be rejected outright as too small to handle a project of this scale, however original its proposal. (In New York dark horse candidates often find that ambitious architectural proposals are one of the few ways to compete with bigger rivals.)

This is not how to build healthy cities. It is a model for their ruin, one that has led to a parade of soulless developments typically dressed up with a bit of parkland, a few commercial galleries and a token cultural institution — the superficial gloss of civilization. As an ideal of urbanism, it is hollow to its core.


The Metropolitan Transportation Authority owns the yards.
__________________
Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens and Staten
From the Battery to the top of Manhattan
Asian, Middle-Eastern and Latin
Black, White, New York you make it happen

- Beastie Boys

Last edited by Don Omar; November 24th, 2007 at 09:43 PM. Reason: more pictures
Don Omar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2007, 09:36 PM   #69
charmedone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 414
Likes (Received): 91

i pretty much like all the desinges but i really hope this gets built it may take some time but im sure it will get built
charmedone no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2007, 09:37 PM   #70
Don Omar
Bark twice if in Milwauke
 
Don Omar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nueva York
Posts: 487
Likes (Received): 39

In Plans for Railyards, a Mix of Towers and Parks


LARGE-SCALE MAKEOVER The West Side railyards.

By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF
Published: November 24, 2007
nytimes.com

The West Side railyards are the kind of urban development project that makes builders dance in the streets. A footprint bigger than Rockefeller Center’s and the potential for more commercial and residential space than ground zero: what more could an urban visionary want?

So the five proposals recently unveiled by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to develop the 26-acre Manhattan railyards are not just a disappointment for their lack of imagination, they are also a grim referendum on the state of large-scale planning in New York City.

With the possible exception of a design for the Extell Development Company, the proposals embody the kind of tired, generic planning formulas that appear wherever big development money is at stake. When thoughtful architecture surfaces at all, it is mostly a superficial gloss of culture, rather than a sincere effort to come to terms with the complex social and economic changes the city has been undergoing for the last decade or so.

Located on six square blocks between 30th and 33rd Streets and 10th Avenue and the West Side Highway, the yards are one of the few remaining testaments to New York’s industrial past. Dozens of tracks leading in and out of Pennsylvania Station carve through the site. A string of parking lots and old industrial buildings flanks the tracks to the south; the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center is a block to the north. To build, developers first will have to create a platform over the tracks, at an estimated cost of $1.5 billion; construction of the platform and towers has to take place without interrupting train service.

City officials and the transportation authority, which owns the railyards, have entertained various proposals for the site in recent years, including an ill-conceived stadium for the Jets. The current guidelines would allow up to 13 million square feet of commercial, retail and residential space; a building to house a cultural group yet to be named; and a public park.

All five of the development teams chose to arrange the bulk of the towers at the northern and southern edges of the site, to minimize disruption of the tracks below, and concentrated the majority of the commercial towers to the east, and the residential towers to the west, where they would have views of the Hudson River.

But none of the teams have fully explored the potentially rich relationship between the railyards and the development above them, an approach that could have added substance to the plans. Nor did any find a successful way to come to terms with the project’s gargantuan scale.



The proposal by the Related Companies would transform the site into a virtual theme park for Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, the developer’s main tenant. The design, by a team of architects that includes Kohn Pedersen Fox, Arquitectonica and Robert A. M. Stern, would be anchored at its eastern end by a 74-story tower. Three slightly smaller towers would flank it, creating an imposing barrier between the public park and the rest of the city to the east.

The plan also includes a vast retail mall and plaza between 10th and 11th Avenues, which could be used by News Corporation for advertising, video projections and outdoor film and concert events — a concept that would essentially transform what is being hailed as a public space into a platform for corporate self-promotion.



A proposal by FXFowle and Pelli Clarke Pelli for the Durst Organization and Vornado Realty Trust is slightly less disturbing. Following a similar plan, it would be anchored by a new tower for Condé Nast Publications to the north, and a row of residential towers extending to the west. Sinuous, elevated pedestrian walkways would wind their way through the site just above the proposed public park. The walkways are meant to evoke a contemporary version of the High Line, the raised tracks being converted into a public garden just to the south. But their real precedents are the deadening elevated streets found in late Modernist housing complexes.



By comparison, the proposal by Tishman Speyer Properties, designed by Helmut Jahn, at least seems more honest. The site is anchored by four huge towers that taper slightly as they rise, exaggerating their sense of weight and recalling more primitive, authoritarian forms: you might call it architecture of intimidation. As you move west, a grand staircase leads down to a circular plaza that would link the park to a pedestrian boulevard the city plans to construct from the site north toward 42nd Street.

Mr. Jahn built his reputation in the 1980s and ’90s, when many modern architects were struggling to pump energy into work that had become cold and alienating. Over all, the design looks like a conventional 1980s mega-development: an oddly retro vision of uniform glass towers set around a vast plaza decorated with a few scattered cafes. (In a rare nice touch, Mr. Jahn allows some of his towers to cantilever out over the deck of the High Line, playing up the violent clash between new and old.)



Another proposal, by Brookfield Properties, is an example of how real architectural talent can be used to give a plan an air of sophistication without adding much substance. Brookfield has included a few preliminary sketches of buildings by architectural luminaries like Diller Scofidio & Renfro and the Japanese firm Kazuyo Sejima & Ryue Nishizawa, but the sketches are nothing more than window dressing. The proposal includes a retail mall and commercial towers along 10th Avenue, which gives the public park an isolated feel. A hotel and retail complex cuts the park in two, so that you lose the full impact of its sweep.



For those who place urban-planning issues above dollars and cents, the Extell Development Company’s proposal is the only one worth serious consideration. Designed by Steven Holl Architects of New York, the plan tries to minimize the impact of the development’s immense scale. Most of the commercial space would be concentrated in three interconnecting towers on the northeast corner of the site. The towers’ forms pull apart and join together as they rise — an effort to break down their mass in the skyline. Smaller towers flank the site’s southern edge, their delicate, shardlike forms designed to allow sunlight to spill into the park area. A low, 10-story commercial building to the north is lifted off the ground on columns to allow the park to slip underneath and connect to 33rd Street.

The plan’s most original feature is a bridgelike cable structure that would span the existing tracks and support a 19-acre public park. According to the developer, the cable system would reduce the cost of building over the tracks significantly, allowing the density to be reduced to 11.3 million square feet from 13 million and still make a profit. The result would be both a more generous public space and a less brutal assault on the skyline. It is a sensitive effort to blend the development into the city’s existing fabric.

But what is really at issue here is putting the importance of profit margins above architecture and planning. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority could have pushed for more ambitious proposals. For decades now cities like Barcelona have insisted on a high level of design in large-scale urban-planning projects, and they have done so without economic ruin.

By contrast, the authority is more likely to focus on potential tenants like News Corporation and Condé Nast and the profits they can generate than on the quality of the design. A development company like Extell is likely to be rejected outright as too small to handle a project of this scale, however original its proposal. (In New York dark horse candidates often find that ambitious architectural proposals are one of the few ways to compete with bigger rivals.)

This is not how to build healthy cities. It is a model for their ruin, one that has led to a parade of soulless developments typically dressed up with a bit of parkland, a few commercial galleries and a token cultural institution — the superficial gloss of civilization. As an ideal of urbanism, it is hollow to its core.


The Metropolitan Transportation Authority owns the yards.
__________________
Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens and Staten
From the Battery to the top of Manhattan
Asian, Middle-Eastern and Latin
Black, White, New York you make it happen

- Beastie Boys

Last edited by Don Omar; November 24th, 2007 at 09:45 PM. Reason: more
Don Omar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2007, 10:41 PM   #71
Don Omar
Bark twice if in Milwauke
 
Don Omar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nueva York
Posts: 487
Likes (Received): 39

Hudson Yards Development: Guaranteed Green



by: Alec Appelbaum
11/19/07
nymag.com

You may have seen a bunch of renderings of potential designs for the land above the Hudson Yards in this morning's papers. But as one of the teams' lead architects pointed out to us, "The challenge is, your eye immediately goes to the buildings, but it's unlikely any of the buildings are going to look like this. That's the challenge to the MTA, to boil down fundamental issues for the public." So instead, we're giving you one of the images that probably will find its way into reality if its team is selected — one for the long, narrow green space looking eastward from the Durst/Vornado proposal. That might just be the glass arc over the proposed Moynihan Station that you see in the distance.
__________________
Brooklyn, Bronx, Queens and Staten
From the Battery to the top of Manhattan
Asian, Middle-Eastern and Latin
Black, White, New York you make it happen

- Beastie Boys
Don Omar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 25th, 2007, 03:04 AM   #72
Bond James Bond
Licence to kill.
 
Bond James Bond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
Posts: 9,749

Either Brookfield or Vornado/Durst would be fine with me. Although I do kinda like the freaky shape of the towers in the Extell plan.



Bond James Bond no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 25th, 2007, 05:09 AM   #73
thryve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,344
Likes (Received): 23

Brookfield is by far the best.

Extell is my second favourite, it's pretty darn good too.
thryve no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 25th, 2007, 06:51 AM   #74
Ebola
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,658
Likes (Received): 94

Quote:
Originally Posted by thryve View Post
Brookfield is by far the best.

Extell is my second favourite, it's pretty darn good too.
I agree. I think that Extell isn't well liked because of their gloomy renderings. Their main triplet tower has more observation space than any other building and I feel that it would add a lot of character even though people aren't happy about the top now. The clone towers are nice too and have wind turbines, and NY doesnt have any clone towers that I know of so I think it will be okay; it's not like the Sunslice towers are supertall clones. The plan also uses skyscrapers to help support a bridge.
Ebola no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 25th, 2007, 05:48 PM   #75
New Jack City
User
 
New Jack City's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,634
Likes (Received): 63

Brookfield:

http://www.brookfieldpropertieshudsonyards.com/#/HOME

Extell:

http://www.extelldev.com/hudsonyards.php

Others don't have online sites.
New Jack City no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 25th, 2007, 11:02 PM   #76
JohnFlint1985
I love New York
 
JohnFlint1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New York - New Jersey
Posts: 15,714
Likes (Received): 6685

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vrysxy View Post
1300ft = 396 meters
1300 you should divide by 0.3 - is about 430 -- if I am not mistaken
__________________
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
JohnFlint1985 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 25th, 2007, 11:23 PM   #77
gothicform
Bossman
 
gothicform's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: s****horpe
Posts: 31,431
Likes (Received): 14298

3.28 feet to a metre. 396 is correct.
gothicform no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 26th, 2007, 01:21 AM   #78
Saigoneseguy
Vivat capitalismus
 
Saigoneseguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Saigon
Posts: 5,328
Likes (Received): 108

The Pelli Clarke proposal is best imo.
__________________
' ' Sài Gòn không bao giờ ngủ - Vì tiền không bao giờ đủ '
Saigoneseguy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 26th, 2007, 01:53 AM   #79
JohnFlint1985
I love New York
 
JohnFlint1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New York - New Jersey
Posts: 15,714
Likes (Received): 6685

Quote:
Originally Posted by gothicform View Post
3.28 feet to a metre. 396 is correct.
Thanks, got it
__________________
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
JohnFlint1985 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 26th, 2007, 03:49 AM   #80
Westsidelife
LAL | LAD | LAK
 
Westsidelife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,477
Likes (Received): 168

While this project is certainly amazing and unbelievably HUGE, the one drawback is that it's not akin to how the rest of Manhattan is growing. I favor more organic growth -- much like the way the rest of Midtown grew, which was over time.

Anyways, I voted Brookfield. This will be an AMAZING project to monitor. This type of flashy development for the Westside is long overdue, IMO. Congrats.
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Westsidelife no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


Reply

Tags
hudson yards, huge project, new york, nyc, related

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



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us