SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   Supertall Construction (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=323)
-   -   NEW YORK | The Spiral (509 W. 34th) | 1,041 FT | 66 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=184944)

King DenCity Jan 11, 2014 12:54 AM

OMG, I'm loving it! This sure is one to keep your fingers crossed about!

supertallchaser Jan 11, 2014 12:55 AM

im drooling

Submariner Jan 11, 2014 1:09 AM

I had asked in the other thread, but could someone do a rough diagram of this building to see how it might compare with other buildings in the city?

Blaze23 Jan 11, 2014 2:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gramsjdg (Post 6402332)
Forget MOMA, scale up the original (1155 ft) Tower Verre design to 1800 ft and use that here.

That sure would be amazing! No tower deserves the title of "King of New York" more than TV. But on the bright side we're still getting TV and who knows, something exciting my pop up on this site.
The West side is really on a roll, I wouldn't be surprised if that area ended up with the tallest tower in the city; loving it!

Sky88 Jan 11, 2014 10:11 AM

I think this tower will be 2000ft tall. For now it is only one possible idea, but I think it's finally time for New York to break the taboo of having a 2000ft tower.

It 's time for change. :tup:

Some images from Funkyskunk2 (skyscrapercity.com)

THE HUDSON SPIRE

http://i.imgur.com/Ku2MAIX.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/eYSTZsO.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/6ZmQqQl.jpg

NYguy Jan 11, 2014 1:26 PM

^ Since everything else at the Hudson Yards is becoming too similar in height, a standout tower would be very welcome there.


Quote:

Now that the Rosenthals are selling, Ryan, a senior vice president at Sherwood Equities who manages the company's acquisitions and sales, said it, too, will consider selling its parcel to either the buyer of the Rosenthal land or another purchaser.

Together the two sites could allow for an 1,800-foot mega-tower nearly 2.5 million square feet in size—what would be the tallest, and one of the largest, buildings in the city. Most of that structure would have to be for commercial use under the area's zoning, either office or hotel space, but it also could contain a substantial residential component as large as 400,000 square feet.


I think it's likely that the Sherwood portion would be sold as well, since they won't really be able to build the tower that was planned. I think marketing the site as a potential home for New York's tallest tower is meant to appeal mostly to foreign investors (or a developer) who have been snapping up trophy towers in Manhattan at an increasing rate.

King DenCity Jan 11, 2014 3:14 PM

Man, if this became a possibility I might just die. :)

antinimby Jan 11, 2014 6:08 PM

This is hardly any great big revelation. That half block site was always slated for 2.5 msf except now we find out that Sherwood did not own that whole site like we were all lead to believe.

That rendering is just what could be built in theory and we all know how those tend to end up. Let's not get too excited here fellas.

Dac150 Jan 11, 2014 7:53 PM

Certainly ambitious, though keep in mind the key and reoccurring word is 'could'. Curious to see how this pans out.

nyc15 Jan 11, 2014 10:27 PM

very nice to see a megatall in new york city , i think houdson is the nice pleace for this

Submariner Jan 11, 2014 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nyc15 (Post 6403182)
very nice to see a megatall in new york city , i think houdson is the nice pleace for this

It might be an easier sell here too. I'd imagine getting a 1800+ foot tower would be a near-impossible sell along 57th street, midtown or even downtown. Hudson Yards is virgin territory - not nearly as many NIMBY's around :D

NYguy Jan 12, 2014 1:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by antinimby (Post 6402956)
This is hardly any great big revelation. That half block site was always slated for 2.5 msf except now we find out that Sherwood did not own that whole site like we were all lead to believe.

That rendering is just what could be built in theory and we all know how those tend to end up. Let's not get too excited here fellas.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150 (Post 6403038)
Certainly ambitious, though keep in mind the key and reoccurring word is 'could'. Curious to see how this pans out.


Obviously, it's just an idea. The building was always going to be tall, sure. But when was the last time you saw a piece of real estate being marketed as a possible home for New York City's tallest? I don't recall ever seeing that, or it at least being publicly known. I think it's at least being marketed that way for a reason, to be attractive enough to the right buyer who just might want to have a site where such a tower could be built. Let's face it, they're not all over the place. I can even see Sherwood staying on as a partner with a new developer to build such a thing. And it's not inconceivable that the concept is something they had already given thought to.

The Hudson Yards is the future of New York, it's pretty much all new, all the time. In other parts of Manhattan, the new integrates with the old. But I can at least see someone wanting to make a splash here. And I say why not, go for it. Of course, that doesn't mean anyone will. But is Manhattan attractive enough now for such a thing to become possible? Most certainly.


http://www.crainsnewyork.com/apps/pb...creen&maxh=360

NYC4Life Jan 12, 2014 2:28 AM

Good lord, these will be perhaps the greatest collection of towers for one single site anywhere. Ambition is growing and so are the tenants, only a matter of time.

Onn Jan 12, 2014 3:13 AM

That's the one thing that gives me a lot of optimism for this project and Manhattan West. So far Related's Hudson Yards project has been bringing in the big name tenants (Time Warner/Coach/L'Oreal). If the momentum keeps up it seems likely other large companies will seriously consider Hudson Yards to call home. I think this is due both to the excitement factor surrounding the new development and the feeling of needing to get away from other hustle and bustle "tourist" areas of the city. Related does have some advantages over its competitors though, including a tax break and a large pool of tenants to pull from. Manhattan West has the potential to do just as well though in my opinion. Not saying other areas of the city should be neglected in favor of Hudson Yards, but Hudson Yards does seem to have the momentum on its side right now.

Dac150 Jan 12, 2014 3:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 6403313)
And it's not inconceivable that the concept is something they had already given thought to.

One of multiple concepts I'm sure are in consideration. It's likely the most exciting concept, though I wonder if it's the most realistic. Nevertheless, I'm anxious to read more details as they emerge.

Hypothalamus Jan 12, 2014 4:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150 (Post 6403387)
Nevertheless, I'm anxious to read more details as they emerge.

Same-- is the property on the market now as we speak? I think it will sell for a fortune. If I remember correctly, 511 West 35th Street, one of the lots on the block to the north, sold last month for a hefty amount-- went on the market for $75M and sold for $88M. That one had 500k air rights or about a potential 1M combined with the lot next to it. My point is a 2.5M potential air right property may go sky high, literally!

Crawford Jan 13, 2014 5:23 AM

If this is built at 1,800+ ft. then hopefully it will push Related to build taller on the western railyards.

The fact that they're planning thin residential on the western railyards means we could have much taller buildings in phase II of their development.

And same goes for the other property owners in the area. This should be a start to an incredible skyline.

Crawford Jan 13, 2014 5:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Submariner (Post 6403215)
It might be an easier sell here too. I'd imagine getting a 1800+ foot tower would be a near-impossible sell along 57th street, midtown or even downtown. Hudson Yards is virgin territory - not nearly as many NIMBY's around :D

I'm not sure what you mean by this comment. NIMBYs are irrelevant when a tower is as-of-right.

If anything, 57th Street would be an easier place to build such a tower, because the residential values are much higher.

And NIMBYs are opposed to all development. It makes no difference if the building is 1,800 ft. or 180 ft., if there's an opportunity to block a development, they will do so.

gramsjdg Jan 13, 2014 5:36 AM

When you have a high density supertall cluster, super-thin is the only way to go...

NYC GUY Jan 13, 2014 3:56 PM

:slob::slob:Is this a serious?? Cause I just felt a jump of excitement.


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.