SkyscraperPage Forum - NEW YORK | The Spiral (509 W. 34th) | 1,041 FT

Viewing Page 21 of 87

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)

- Completed Project Threads Archive (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=348)

- - NEW YORK | The Spiral (509 W. 34th) | 1,041 FT | 66 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=184944)

Terraced Tower Is Set to Rise Near the High Line
08 Feb 2016

Quote:

At the northern end of the High Line, Tishman Speyer is aiming to extend the park’s wild, natural beauty 65 stories into the air.
The developer plans to build a $3 billion-plus office tower in the Hudson Yards district that will feature cascading terraces decked with foliage, atriums with ceilings as high as 23 feet and a glass facade. Conceptual designs for what is being called the Spiral will be formally unveiled Monday, launching the process of finding an anchor tenant.

Designed by renowned Danish architect Bjarke Ingels, the skyscraper has an outdoor terrace on every tenant floor with an adjacent atrium. A glass wall will separate the spaces.
“This punctuates the High Line as the dot on the end of the question mark,” said Mr. Ingels, referring to the building in relation to the curve of the transformed elevated freight line. “This linear urban garden climbs higher and higher from the High Line to the skyline, if you like.”
The Spiral will rise 1,005 feet at 66 Hudson Blvd, filling the block between West 34th and West 35th streets and 10th Avenue and Hudson Park and Boulevard. It will have 2.85 million square feet, with about 27,000 square feet devoted to retail shops.
...
Tishman Speyer is looking to pre-lease about 30% of the building to obtain construction financing. The company already has secured more than $1 billion in equity from a group of international investors and has received approval for a 25-year tax abatement worth about $170 million, tapping into the incentives the city provides to developers in the district.

http://canmua.net/data_1/terraced-to..._Li9oMydGH.jpg

http://canmua.net/data_1/terraced-to..._35P9pOT3i.jpg

I defended BIG on wtc 2, but this is a joke. You have all those air rights and you build a building that is so incredibly simple and boring. This site had so much potential.

Ingels really needs to quit trying to incorporate plants and trees into his designs. They just don't go together. Parks are on ground level for a reason, not in the sky.

Bummer. :( Only 1,005' for nearly 3 million square feet, I expected more from Tishman tbh. What a waste of potential. Towers with such a huge square footage are megatalls in other cities ...

Its official,he can't design supertalls. Hopefully this goes the way of WTC 2.

Firstly, how does this building clearly exceed the 1000' mark and not get called a supertall via subjective refusal?

Secondly, how does a similar Madison Avenue proposal involving greenage in the sky find itself pined for six ways to Saturday next, yet this beauty is panned for essentially the same reason?

I'm gratified at least to see that Bjark's design here hasn't been flat out called on the carpet, as I see no relationship at all between this render and Bjark's for 250G.

2¢.

Ingels has to be the most overrated skyscraper architect. This and 2 WTC. He just doesn't understand how to build with the city. just makes buildings that stick out terribly. Even his tetrahedron i think is very ugly.

^He's very alternative and has a lot of "wow" factor. Somehow that's what's in style right now.

Theres not even a proper crown...

And precisely why must every skyscraper of putative distinction have to have a crown, hmmm? ;)

I would like the design more if the spiral kept going another 300 feet. Till it was just a small square at the top. Put a 200 foot spire on top of that and that would be a better design.

It's not bad, but at that height and location (where practically everything will be a supertall), it won't stand out. We could seriously be getting a problem here where even the supertalls on the west side don't create a stunning skyline for lack of peaks. Makes you appreciate those thin supertalls elsewhere in Manhattan. SHoP's tower will likely be higher, but it's at the southern end of the Hudson Yards skline.

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopo...al9n-3-web.jpg

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopo...al9n-2-web.jpg
http://m.nydailynews.com/life-style/...icle-1.2523975

The Ritz in Bangkok looks much better than this overweight monstrosity.

Reminds me of the Tower of Babel—can't say I dig that.

I'm glad they are calling it conceptual at the moment. Needs more refinement. Not a terrible idea, but will be lost, especially with the equally bulky 3 Hudson and 50 Hudson, towers that will be slightly higher and stan directly accross the street.

http://www.dezeen.com/2016/02/08/the...bjarke-ingels/

https://static.dezeen.com/uploads/20...zeen_936_7.jpg

https://static.dezeen.com/uploads/20...zeen_936_5.jpg

https://static.dezeen.com/uploads/20...zeen_936_1.jpg

https://static.dezeen.com/uploads/20...zeen_936_0.jpg

What a f*cking joke

On it's own it would be okay but I thought something good was actually getting built on this site. Never get your hopes too high I suppose.

I feel like i'm taking crazy pills when reading these comments. This building is absolutely lovely. One thing I do agree with is that it should be taller. If it wrapped up for another ring making it around 1200-1300 feet tall it would be a gem

If they can't build it at least 50 feet taller, then I suggest it be one of the centerpieces in the Phase II aspect of the overall scheme.

The tower's website is up: http://thespiralny.com/home/

Viewing Page 21 of 87