NEW YORK | Central Park Tower | 472m | 1550ft | 98 fl | Com

5054155 Views 11080 Replies 894 Participants Last post by meliksah, 15 d ago

dnobsemajdnob

Discussion Starter · Nov 11, 2009 (Edited by Moderator)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HK999 said:
Nordstrom Tower to Become World's Tallest Residential Building at 1,775 Feet

http://newyorkyimby.com/2014/07/nordstrom-tower-to-become-worlds-tallest-residential-building.html/1#

===============================================================================================

Preliminary massing renderings ahead of finalized design.

===============================================================================================

225 West 57th Street - Extell - Hotel / Condo - by Adrian Smith and Gordon Gill

http://ny.curbed.com/tags/225-west-57th-street

NYC Department of Buildings
Work Permit Data
Premises: 217 WEST 57 STREET MANHATTAN Filed At: 217 WEST 57 STREET MANHATTAN
BIN: 1080870 Block: 1029 Lot: 19 Job Type: A3 - ALTERATION TYPE 3

View Permit History | Printable (PDF) version of this Permit
Job No: 110436644 Fee: STANDARD
Permit No: 110436644-01-EQ-SH Issued: 06/08/2010 Expires: 04/01/2011
Seq. No.: 02 Filing Date: 06/08/2010 RENEWAL Status: ISSUED
Work: Proposed Job Start: 01/21/2009 Work Approved: 01/20/2009
ALTERATION TYPE 3 - CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT - SIDEWALK-SHED
INSTALLATION OF 122 LINEAR FEET OF HEAVY DUTY SIDEWALK SHED FOR BUILDING
DEMOLITION, FILED SEPARATELY. LIVE LOAD 300 PSF. SIDEWALK SHED SHALL COMPLY WITH
CHAPTER #33 OF THE 2008 CODE. NO CHANGE IN USE, OCCUPANCY OR EGRESS UNDER THIS
APPLICATION.

Electrical Application Number for Shed Lighting: Z120397
Use: COM - COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - OLD CODE Landmark: NO Stories: 12
Review is requested under Building Code: 2008

all pics from WNY:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Drone view of site at 0:30

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Early history:

The following map shows the sites of the two projects being developed on West 57th Street by Extell Development.

155-157 W 57th, which is the subject of another thread (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=776476 ), is shown in red. Its companion tower, 225 W 57th, which is the subject of this thread, is shown in orange.

225 W 57th is a far larger site. Therefore, since 155-157 W 57th will exceed 330m, it is likely that 225 W 57th will be much larger.

Lofter1

See less See more

3

Reactions: 5

1241 - 1260 of 11081 Posts

ZZ-II

· #1,241 · Feb 24, 2013

NYCrulz said:
Am i the only one wishing a box for this proposal?
If I were priviliged to choose a design for this thing, I wouldn't get hurt with another Hearst tower with that freaking figure for Midtown.

I don't want a box like 432 park ave, but i want simple and elegant design with straight lines.

Reactions: 2

L.A.F.2.

· #1,242 · Feb 24, 2013

NYCrulz said:
Am i the only one wishing a box for this proposal?
If I were priviliged to choose a design for this thing, I wouldn't get hurt with another Hearst tower with that freaking figure for Midtown.

We've already got 432 Park going up in Midtown, and only 150 ft. shorter. For this one I'd like to see something more like SWFC or ICC. I like the contrast between a more historical Midtown East and a cutting edge Midtown West. So, in my opinion, a somewhat simple design with great cladding would be awesome. I hate when the tallest towers in a city are also the most dramatic because they try to hog all the attention in the skyline. :cheers:

Reactions: 2

HK999

· #1,243 · Feb 24, 2013

Something like the Shanghai Tower would look terrible here, and I'm not a big fan of boxes.
Just ask yourself this: do you really want a spiral, somehow asymmetric, clumsy, yet very organic (+transparent cladding) tower to be the future tallest? Hell, I don't.
Let other cities have their "futuristic" towers, which are constantly in danger of becoming outdated. Some already are.

Reactions: 1

L.A.F.2.

· #1,244 · Feb 24, 2013

^^ I said SWFC, not Shanghai Tower.

Reactions: 2

HK999

· #1,245 · Feb 24, 2013

L.A.F.2. said:
^^ I said SWFC, not Shanghai Tower.

I know, it's not directed to you.

Just saying that a simple, yet elegant and classy design would be perfect.

Reactions: 1

L.A.F.2.

· #1,246 · Feb 24, 2013

^^ Oh, my mistake.

Reactions: 2

tim1807

· #1,247 · Feb 24, 2013

No round tower please, one curved side is nice though ( 17 State st or Goldman Sachs ) and maybe a roof like a stairway shape. With the highest part on the south side, would look great from CP.

Reactions: 2

MarshallKnight

· #1,248 · Feb 24, 2013

RobertWalpole said:
What about the Lipstick, Goldman, 919 2nd Ave, 750 Lex, 1261 2nd Ave., and One State Street. They are just some of the many curvy towers in Mahattan, and I love them all. To each his own though.

Mmm, there are more of them than I guess I'd realized, although only One State and Goldman are particularly prominent on the skyline. I like Goldman a lot, for the reasons stated above -- it relates to its surroundings and expands on that context in an interesting, modern way. Some of the others look pretty dated to me.

aquablue said:
A building shouldn't always have to pay homage to classic NY architecture.

I totally agree with this, that it shouldn't necessarily have to, but I also think there are degrees of innovation, and dropping something in here that utterly ignores its context would be a mistake. And, referencing classic architecture doesn't have to mean being constrained by it. I think we can all recognize that Tower Verre's proportions and profile were largely inspired by the Chrysler Building -- and yet there is nothing like that tower anywhere in the world. In my own perfect world, 225 W. 57th would have copped Nouvel's design and made it 1550 ft. Or, barring that, something that similarly combines the gothic and the hyper-modern.

I guess my main thought here is: a lot of futurist buildings wind up looking goofy. For all its height and impressive design characteristics, I think Shanghai Tower, for instance (and obviously mostly based on renders at this point) doesn't feel as powerful as it might if it lost the curviness. Shanghai WFC, by contrast, plays it a little more conservatively, but still sneaks in a long, graceful curve and that oculus which has some cultural significance. It's a smart, elegant, relatively simple and exceedingly powerful tower.

Anyway, that's more than my two cents.

See less See more

Reactions: 1

600West218

· #1,249 · Feb 25, 2013

Well, they moved the excavators:

Untitled by 600West218, on Flickr

Untitled by 600West218, on Flickr

Untitled by 600West218, on Flickr

See less See more

3

Reactions: 3

RobertWalpole

· #1,250 · Feb 25, 2013

I noticed that last week. They also boarded up MW and are proceeding with interior demo before they take it down.

Reactions: 2

600West218

· #1,251 · Feb 25, 2013

I really, really wish they would kick into high gear on this.

BTW, RW, do you know what is going on with the huge lot right across 58th St from this one? Its a big construction site but I have no idea what it is.

Reactions: 1

RobertWalpole

· #1,252 · Feb 25, 2013

That huge lot is actually a series of lots that had small buildings that were razed recently, inclu ding 220 CPS.. Vornado owns 2 of them, but Barnett bought the one that separates them from 220 CPS to thwart any air rights transfer.

This is how it looked six months ago.

See less See more

Reactions: 2

600West218

· #1,253 · Feb 25, 2013

RobertWalpole said:
That huge lot is actually a series of lots that had small buildings that were razed recently, inclu ding 220 CPS.. Vornado owns 2 of them, but Barnett bought the one that separates them from 220 CPS to thwart any air rights transfer.

Did Barnett by it so that no tall building could go up between 225 57th and Central Park? If so, that is slick :lol:

Reactions: 1

RobertWalpole

· #1,254 · Feb 25, 2013

In that photo, you can see two buildings (which recently were razed) that Vtornado owns, and to the east of them is an empty lot (which Extell owns), and to the east of that is the south side of Virnado's 220 CPS (in which Extell holds the lease to the basement garage). Extell bought interests in both properties to box in Vorn ado.

Reactions: 2

NYCrulz

· #1,255 · Feb 25, 2013

This building will poke the sky to a terrifying height, we all know that well.
The discussion started probably from 350m which crept upto 381m at one time. Then it assured the tearing off of 400m mark and then it was supposed to rival Park Avenue and wonderfully, it wrapped up well at 472m, now that it's prone to go beyond 500m.
The trend seems historic and we're all overwhelmed.
But will we really drift into happiness, in the long run??
Well, i'm saying so because it's a residential tower and it isn't supposed to have an observation deck(as much as i come to know yet). What's more if we didn't get to ride the building's top without an observation deck!
I think this bulding will be tasteless, without a deck for public.
Anything to say, guys!!!

Reactions: 1

Eric Offereins

· #1,256 · Feb 25, 2013

SO which building will be razed? This one with the netting?

600West218 said:
Well, they moved the excavators:

Untitled by 600West218, on Flickr

Reactions: 2

usafarid

· #1,257 · Feb 25, 2013

NYCrulz said:
This building will poke the sky to a terrifying height, we all know that well.
The discussion started probably from 350m which crept upto 381m at one time. Then it assured the tearing off of 400m mark and then it was supposed to rival Park Avenue and wonderfully, it wrapped up well at 472m, now that it's prone to go beyond 500m.
The trend seems historic and we're all overwhelmed.
But will we really drift into happiness, in the long run??
Well, i'm saying so because it's a residential tower and it isn't supposed to have an observation deck(as much as i come to know yet). What's more if we didn't get to ride the building's top without an observation deck!
I think this bulding will be tasteless, without a deck for public.
Anything to say, guys!!!

yeah after break 500m,in the following discussed is to break 600m .if it happening it will be amazing

Reactions: 1

RobertWalpole

· #1,258 · Feb 25, 2013

Eric Offereins said:
SO which building will be razed? This one with the netting?

Yes.

Reactions: 2

JD47

· #1,259 · Feb 25, 2013

usafarid said:
yeah after break 500m,in the following discussed is to break 600m .if it happening it will be amazing

So whats the chances of any of that happening, anyone?

Reactions: 1

HK999

· #1,260 · Feb 25, 2013

JD47 said:
So whats the chances of any of that happening, anyone?

Pretty much zero, because New York doesn't build trophy towers which make no sense economically. No demand - no construction, simple as that.

Maybe after 2020 there will be one serious megatall proposal, probably a mixed - used tower with a roof height of ~1800 feet, plus a spire which will bring the building over 2000 feet.

Reactions: 1

1241 - 1260 of 11081 Posts