January 5th, 2017
I find this tower very underwhelming for its location. The crown should make the currently plain shape look good, but, notwithstanding the limestone, the facade is boring and lacks Stern’s usual great details.
I have to agree with you so far Walpole, other than the materials and overall slenderness, through actual tower itself is currently very bland. The facade is very flat and generic so far, the window formation and overall facade appears to be a lighter toned version of the brown mid-rise in your last photo.
Where’s the subtle detailing and indentations adding depth and interest? The central section doesn’t appear to protrude from the rest of the the build acting as a large pillaster, as renders initially implied.
The shorter structure fronting Central Park looks fantastic, however the tower not so much. Let us hope that things will improve with further progress and that the eventual crown will turn things around.
I agree, Stig.
The difference between this and Stern’s tower rising simultaneously at 520 Park is significant. The latter is much nicer.
IMO, I think 520 is the closest reincarnation to a 20’s pre war residential. It just screams the Great Gatsby when I see it.
I’m inclined to agree that 520 is much nicer when it comes to the facade and how it interacts with the surroundings.
I agree, 520 PA is much more beautiful and detailed than 220 CPS. Let’s hope the crown makes up for it.
To me Stern is not a great architect. 15 CPW is a pretty good design that was a great marketing bonanza. I suspect other developers are simply trying to cash in on the cachet created by that building. His designs have not progressed very much if at all in the post-15 buildings. Doing classical work is fine; there are many gems in the city including some tall ones. But Stern now seems stuck in a predictable mode that’s getting a bit mundane.
Thomas said he found some documents indicating a 1,033 ft height. IDK if this is a super tall. Anybody know?
Ok I found this. It does state 1,033 ft…
Am I reading this right, does this state 1,033 for the actual structure and not factoring elevation. I think I’ll start dance if this is a super tall?
The 1,033 is the elevation according to the diagram. The elevation at this site is aproximately 77.4 ft, which makes the building height to be 956 ft
It says it in the diagram below: