NYC Architecture and Development

393b40 said:
SOM really loves those swoopy metal tendril bases for some reason. Very similar design to their losing Transbay Tower proposal in SF.
Click to expand...
This was designed by Heatherwick Studio, not SOM.
Very much in line with their other work. Usually has a pod-like, sculpted motif of holding trees.
1000-trees-heatherwick-studio-china-architecture-photography_dezeen_2364_hero2.jpg

Heatherwick+Studio+Skyscraper+Luxury+Elevator+Singapore+EDEN+Pool+View.jpg
 
Bananarama said:
This was designed by Heatherwick Studio, not SOM.
Very much in line with their other work. Usually has a pod-like, sculpted motif of holding trees.
Click to expand...

Not sure we are talking about the same thing?

newyorkyimby.com

1,600-Foot Tall Project Commodore Fully Unveiled, at 175 Park Avenue in Midtown East, Manhattan - New York YIMBY

Renderings from SOM reveal RXR Realty and TF Cornerstone's 1,600-foot-tall, 83-story 175 Park Avenue, aka Project Commodore, in Midtown East.
newyorkyimby.com
 
Bananarama said:
Oh my bad! I thought you were replying to the new post from F Line yesterday.
Click to expand...

Yea sorry, I should have been more clear. Was just browsing through here and saw the proposal and was like "that has to be SOM... that's SOM's thing" and then I clicked the link and confirmed my suspicion.
 
Someone is still paying the server bills for Wired NY, but the place has been effectively dead as an active discussion forum for 5+ years now. For a while it became Curbed NY, then I heard maybe newyorkYIMBY.com's forums but I've never visited there.
 
bigpicture7 said:
Can we get one of these? Maybe in the Seaport, Charlestown, or East Boston?

www.nytimes.com

A New $260 Million Park Floats on the Hudson. It’s a Charmer. (Published 2021)

Little Island, developed by Barry Diller, with an amphitheater and dramatic views, opens on Hudson River Park. Opponents battled it for years.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
Click to expand...
The money poured into this one park could have fixed up and built endowments for so many other parks all across the city, but a single rich guy couldn't call all the shots that way so we get this park that looks good in pictures but is barely accessible.
 
found5dollar said:
The money poured into this one park could have fixed up and built endowments for so many other parks all across the city, but a single rich guy couldn't call all the shots that way so we get this park that looks good in pictures but is barely accessible.
Click to expand...

Honestly, to respond to you & F-Line: I just whimsically plopped this here from a "this looks really pretty / wish we had some of that aesthetic" standpoint. I don't disagree one bit about yours and F-Line's point about resiliency and other higher priorities. Peace to that.

I was, however, loosely thinking of the many abandoned piers and drydocks that we have just sitting here. There've been discussions about installing parks on those spaces that are sitting there rotting anyway. I agree with the concern about not displacing other higher priorities.

I'll just file this in the "that looks cool" department in my cluttered brain.
 
bigpicture7 said:
I was, however, loosely thinking of the many abandoned piers and drydocks that we have just sitting here. There've been discussions about installing parks on those spaces that are sitting there rotting anyway. I agree with the concern about not displacing other higher priorities.
Click to expand...
Underutilization of dockspace is mostly explainable by:
  • Structural issues, and lack of funding for repairs absent some future revenue-generating function. Zoom up close; a lot of Boston's unused docks/wharves are really not in great shape and have lots of little structural things that need work even if they're in alright shape as whole-parcels. Public parks are thus going to struggle more fundraising for that than private devs who opt to include a spruced up public wharf.
  • Environmental remediation cost. Some of those things hosted unspeakably dirty industrial activities in their past lives. It's not always trivial to put patios and plantings over a worn surface thoroughly saturated to its base in oil slick.
Plus zoning red tape is going to ding some candidate sites harder than others. All told it's a lot more complicated than simply parking an unused city lot as temporary greenfield. Most of the dockspace that could be parked that easily has already been spoken for. The rest have some degree of associated maint costs that pure non-revenue public open space isn't going to be able to self-fundraise for...and probably requires a chancier public-private partnership w/ revenue-generating private component to get done.
 
Massachoicetts said:
Does NYC have an equivalent of ArchBoston?
Click to expand...
This San Fran one is good too.

San Francisco YIMBY

San Francisco YIMBY is the go-to resource for cutting-edge information on new development in San Francisco. Covering construction and public works projects from ideation through completion, YIMBY keeps the pulse of the city’s real estate, architecture and construction trades.
sfyimby.com
 
Massachoicetts said:
Does NYC have an equivalent of ArchBoston?
Click to expand...

This is where most of the WiredNY people migrated to (at least originally):
It's less intelligent (i.e., less likely to focus on design quality vs. skyscraper height) than WiredNY was in its heyday. It's less intelligent than ArchBoston too for that matter.
It's still the best show around for NYC, and more intelligent than YIMBY from what I've seen. YIMBY is just a total skyscraper-phallus fanboy slumber party - any critical eye is shot down in the name of Develop!Develop!Develop!
 
Welp I had myself an old fashioned NYC weekend, crashing on vanshnookenraggen's Brooklyn couch and then getting the bright idea to drive into Manhattan and find parking there. On the way I passed this thing which is looking slightly above average by today's standards

51230598805_47106c7f18_b.jpg


51229528416_93767ab71a_b.jpg
 
kz1000ps said:
Welp I had myself an old fashioned NYC weekend, crashing on vanshnookenraggen's Brooklyn couch and then getting the bright idea to drive into Manhattan and find parking there. On the way I passed this thing which is looking slightly above average by today's standards

51230598805_47106c7f18_b.jpg


51229528416_93767ab71a_b.jpg
Click to expand...

That's 340 Flatbush by ShoP Architects. One of the most beautiful modern skyscrapers in the country in my opinion.

18TOWER-2-superJumbo.jpg
 
Oops I didn't mean to imply I didn't know what it was, although the name it's now going by for marketing purposes is 9 DeKalb. The renderings are sexy but I'm not totally sold on the real world product yet. Here's hoping its impact on the skyline is yuge.
 
Over from the bushwick/bed-stuy/williamsburg areas I'm always, in 9 Dekalb catches some major view corridors (like looking down Mytrle ave). I've also been working down in Brooklyn Heights for the past few months and it completely transforms the physical and psychological shape of a major chunk of downtown. When it opens Albee square will become even more of a major hub than it already is.
 
Also, I took this pic back in March but it kinda shows how much this building aligns with the weird street grids in the area.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20210308_195704_934.jpg
    IMG_20210308_195704_934.jpg
    642.3 KB · Views: 164
I think the problem I have with this building is that the facade is too dark or maybe it that there isn't enough contrast between the glass and non-glass material. Hopefully it turns out better once its all finished.
 
Also, I took this pic back in March but it kinda shows, how much this building aligns with the weird street grids in the area.
Click to expand...
Also, this pic very beautiful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top