Page 3 of 52 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 772

Thread: Proposed: 80 South Street - Lower Manhattan

  1. #31
    Forum Veteran krulltime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manhattan - UWS
    Posts
    4,208

    Default

    It is so different than anything you find in NYC...hmmm :shock:

    I LOVE IT!!! Build it!

    Do you guys notice those 2 lines holding the cubes...I hope they light up at night all the way to the top! Then it will be a perfect tower. :wink:

  2. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pottebaum
    It looks so much taller than 835 feet in the renderings to me!
    The renderings are deceptive in that there are not really any tall buildings around the tower. Depending on the camera angle, you could make this thing look taller than even the Freedom Tower.

  3. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NYatKNIGHT
    Jasonik, that part of the island is about 10 feet above sea level (NY Harbor and the East River are sea level). In fact, South Street extended into the river.

    FYI, most Manhattan skyscrapers are between 15 and 80 feet above sea level, and the highest point on Manhattan (north of the GW Bridge) is 265'.

    The WTC was about 15' above sea level, remember the bathtub was built to keep the Hudson River out.
    I remember reading about certain borough datums, and from the WTC memorial competition I learned that the wtc site is at approximately 315'.

    Taken from: http://www.pobonline.com/CDA/Article...,91036,00.html
    I have found the source of my confusion.

    "Most of the work in New York City, however, is tied to a specific borough datum. In Manhattan for example, the Manhattan vertical datum is 2.75' above mean sea level at Sandy Hook. Transit Authority vertical datum is 100.1' above the Manhattan vertical datum. Similarly, the Port Authority vertical datum is 297.347' above NGVD 29. The Transit Authority and Port Authority, with tunnels well below sea level, use these datums so engineers and surveyors can work in positive numbers."

    NGVD 29 = National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929

    This doesn't explain the height differential, but a good factoid nevertheless.

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    297

    Default

    Heh.

    Well, this will give me a good reason to shut up about One New York Place for a while! :lol:

    I love it in a strange way, and a bold move like this will only bring more buildings Downtown...

    I feel complete. :wink:

  5. #35

    Default

    Another dramatic Calatrava residential tower: Turning Torso

  6. #36

    Default

    The building looks decent from the front and sides, but what about the back? It looks like there will be a skinny empty wall from the first rendering.

  7. #37
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Garden City, LI
    Posts
    1,778

    Default

    Maybe the cultural space at street level could be a mini-Guggenheim. Hey, it's pretty much on the East River.

  8. #38

    Default Re: Residential Calatrava Tower on South Street

    Quote Originally Posted by dbhstockton

    I love it!!!

  9. #39

    Default

    Perhaps not every preservationist would agree that a structure reaching 1,000 feet at the tip of its mast would complement a nearby precinct of 19th-century countinghouses.
    Perhaps not, but its another peak on the skyline!

  10. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ddny
    The building looks decent from the front and sides, but what about the back? It looks like there will be a skinny empty wall from the first rendering.
    The east elevation will show the cubes stacked in checkerboard fashion, except that they will overlap each other by the width of the core. You won't see the core at all.

    From the west, the short side of the core rectangle will be visable, and you will see the cubes cantilevered out from the core. I think it will be dramatic.

  11. #41

    Default

    I have a feeling that the thing is not going to get built. Would be awesome if it was, though.

  12. #42

    Default

    Really? I think just the opposite.

    It's as-of-right.
    Not bulky, and won't flood the area with too many residents (2 big NIMBY issues).
    Easily marketable.
    Positive statements from CB1 chair.

    Did the developer's timing of the project release take advantage of the architect's sudden popularity in New York?

  13. #43

  14. #44

    Default

    Is there anything in that lot now?

  15. #45
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,298

    Default

    Read the article. It says.

Page 3 of 52 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Is the South Bronx Hip?
    By ASchwarz in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: March 16th, 2015, 09:58 PM
  2. Fading Into History: The Jewish Lower East Side
    By Kris in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: September 8th, 2014, 09:44 PM
  3. Barretto Point Park in the South Bronx
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 4th, 2008, 01:02 AM
  4. A Stroll in Lower Manhattan
    By ddny in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2003, 10:40 AM
  5. Manhattan Leads a Surge in Lower-Cost Hotels
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 8th, 2002, 01:00 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software