New York Times Tower - 620 Eighth Avenue @ W. 41st Street - by Renzo Piano

**sfenn1117** · June 7th, 2006, 12:53 PM

It would be a terrible move by Ratner. Is cost that much of an issue for the glass screens? Is he not making a large enough profit on this project? Give me a break. The screens were an integral componet of the tower as a whole, imo. It will be a lost opportunity.

He might as well nix the spire too, which will now look even more ridiculous.

**ZippyTheChimp** · June 7th, 2006, 01:13 PM

That quote only states that the garden will be eliminated, but we have already begun to villify Ratner for being a cheapskate in removing the crown and the spire.

**NYatKNIGHT** · June 7th, 2006, 01:52 PM

I wonder how much a rooftop garden costs.....

**londonlawyer** · June 7th, 2006, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by ZippyTheChimp

That quote only states that the garden will be eliminated, but we have already begun to villify Ratner for being a cheapskate in removing the crown and the spire.

The quote is not clear. Your interpretation is reasonable, and I hope that it's correct.

**Citytect** · June 7th, 2006, 05:24 PM

It seems to me that the quote is primarily about the rooftop garden. Therefore, the reference to the "extensions of the building's glass curtain wall" is simply there for descriptive value. The author is describing what the garden would have been like not reporting the loss of the building's crown. It would be much more newsworthy if the crown was eliminated. I don't think that information would be hidden in a reference to to the garden.

**RS085** · June 8th, 2006, 05:47 PM

what i got from the quote was that only the garden is eliminated. not gonna lie, a bit disappointed here. and since were on the subject, will the double floor on top be lit up? ive seen some renderings showing it. big plus if it is.

**RS085** · June 8th, 2006, 05:48 PM

**evil_synth** · June 9th, 2006, 10:59 PM

Just a question on the final height when it is completed: WiredNewYork says it's going to be 1142 ft., and so does emporis (last I checked), and someone on Wikipedia had it as 1042 ft. I corrected it (or so I thought) but a couple days later I was looking through Wikipedia and someone changed it back to 1042 ft. am I missing something on the height?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Tower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tallest..._New_York_City

**NoyokA** · June 9th, 2006, 11:11 PM

Originally Posted by evil_synth

Just a question on the final height when it is completed: WiredNewYork says it's going to be 1142 ft., and so does emporis (last I checked), and someone on Wikipedia had it as 1042 ft. I corrected it (or so I thought) but a couple days later I was looking through Wikipedia and someone changed it back to 1042 ft. am I missing something on the height?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Tower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tallest..._New_York_City

1,042 is the correct height.

**RS085** · June 10th, 2006, 02:14 AM

ssp and emporis have it listed at 1,046ft...

and i just clicked those links.......wiki also says 1,046ft.

The transparent glass tower, designed by Renzo Piano, will rise 748 feet (228 m) from the street to its roof, but the exterior curtain wall will extend 92 feet higher to 840 feet (256 m), and a mast will extend up to 1,046 feet (319 m).

**panderson** · June 10th, 2006, 02:42 AM

If the glass crown had been eliminated, would Forest City Ratner still be featuring renderings WITH the crown on its website (http://www.newyorktimesbuilding.com). I don't think so. And is it possible that cutting the crown would have merited only this one back-handed mention in a single newspaper article? Very doubtful. You're misreading the Times article and, I might add, going to pieces over nothing.

That said, it is too bad the garden was eliminated -- it sounded like it would have been a breath-taking space. But I presume the building's tenants would be the only people allowed up there. If I'm not mistaken, there will be a public garden at ground level, in roughly the center the low-rise portion of the building. From the diagrams it appears it will be accessible from the entrances on 40th and 41st Streets.

**Dagrecco82** · June 11th, 2006, 01:34 PM

As of June 10th.

**kz1000ps** · June 11th, 2006, 02:42 PM

Hot shots -- definitely right-mouse-click quality.

In the first shot, notice how Times Square Tower's slanted black "crown" breaks the difference in height between NYTimes and Conde Nast near perfectly. I was hoping for one more "X" worth of floors, but it apparently has topped out, and the main body does nothing to stick out from the Midtown Mass.

Add another 6-7 stories of height for the crown and it will peak out enough, but I wonder how transparent it will be. I wonder this because if it is mostly opaque, it will look like a continuation of the building, and thus people will "read" the tower as being taller, above the plateau, than the other possibility. If not, it will add to the clutter of the skyline, e.g., Conde Nast's broadcasting structure -- not good IMO.

I guess it's all up to BOA now. And recalling this image..

..I think it will do the trick.

**RS085** · June 11th, 2006, 02:48 PM

BOA? of course. Its on its way.

As for the NYTimes, it has topped out technically, based on floors, since the remaining is a double, then the mighty crown. It should stand out enough. Im seeing the double floor on top being completely lit in the renderings.