# VISION: Edison Tower - New York



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

> *TOWERPLANTS™*
> 
> *The idea *
> Facing an ever-growing world population going along with less and less energetic resources and tremendous ecological decline, Frank Jendrusch had already in the early Nineties the idea of constructing vertical cities with autonomic energy supply. Especially in the Middle and Far East, there is an emerging trend to build more and more higher and greater buildings be it for reasons of prestige or in order to satisfy the growing demand for living and working space.
> ...


http://jendrusch.de/towerplants-website2014/

http://www.jendrusch.de/edisontower-aktuell/



> *MAGNETICALLY LEVITATING ELEVATORS COULD RESHAPE SKYLINES
> THEY GO UP, DOWN, AND ALL AROUND
> By Loren Grush Posted April 14, 2015*
> 
> ...


http://www.popsci.com/elevator-will-reshape-skylines


----------



## Hudson11 (Jun 23, 2011)

yeah... no. never going to happen.

> NEW YORK | Edison Tower | 1310m | 4298ft | 296 fl | VISION


----------



## auriuset (Apr 27, 2015)

this is too hysterical.


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

^^ I agree that this is an extremely ambitious project and I too have doubts whether this will be eventually be built. However it was proposed by a developer and itps special elevator technology is already in the prototype stages, so I do think this is a proposal, not a vision :cheers:


----------



## Jay (Oct 7, 2004)

seems legit... 


hno:


----------



## Eric Offereins (Jan 1, 2004)

April fools day is over 3 weeks ago Kanto.


----------



## scalziand (Oct 18, 2007)

I take it this is a subtle request for a VISION section.


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

Eric Offereins said:


> April fools day is over 3 weeks ago Kanto.


Trust me, I am just as skeptical as you are. But a proposal is a proposal, no matter how improbable it might seem (and I agree that this does seem improbable) :cheers:


----------



## KillerZavatar (Jun 22, 2010)

saw this tower before. it was added on SSP a bit ago and i was interested and looked at the proposal on their website. it's a really nice vision. and an overkill one with that, we are going back to old tokyo vertical city levels of crazyness it looks like.


----------



## Luminare (Apr 23, 2015)

Overindulgent and overkill. I'm sure the sustainability ideas are sound, but they really need to work on the aesthetics. If you are going to have something that massive...it better look spectacular and not look like a humongous monolith. It also seems a little arrogant having it on its own island in the middle of the Hudson. An interesting idea, but I think this is way to much of a leap from something like the Burj or Kingdom to this!


----------



## CCs77 (Jul 30, 2008)

This is just a vision. 

I am not sure, but it seems to be "proposed" to be built on Governors Island. You can't have a serious proposal if you don't even own the land where you are proposing it. It is virtually imposible that they give up the island, an historical site and national monument dependant both of the City and State of New York _and_ the Federal Government, already being developed as a public park, to build this. If they are "proposing" it on a new island, it is equally improbable since they won't give permission for a new island on the New York Bay or the Hudson, because of the ecological consequences (and again, they don't own the land, or the water, in this case)

This is not more than an advertising to show wath they supposedly could do. They might or might not ending up building something like this, somewhere, but certainly, not this, not there.


----------



## seb.nl (Jan 29, 2010)

If you look really closely at the renders you'll notice how this is never going to happen. 

(which is a good thing)


----------



## Dubai Skyscraper (Jul 7, 2009)

Lightyears from being a serious proposal. Even SkyCity seems more likely to be build :|


----------



## hunser (Nov 25, 2008)

Edison? Won't work ... should be named Tesla Tower. 

:smug:


----------



## baseball1992 (Aug 8, 2013)

I'll take "Things that will never happen" for $500, Alex.


----------



## citybooster (Jan 1, 2013)

I really appreciate vision and daring but this is TOO much, at least for the near future. But it's not an insane idea, just nowhere near practical enough at the moment. New York City in 2,300, 2,400 A.D.? Then we might be able to consider it more likely. There could well be visionary buildings actually built, even maybe a 2,000 ft megatall not too far in the future but this is so massive I just don't see how logistically we're anywhere close to this being possible in our lifetime, or even next few generations.


----------



## Funkyskunk2 (Sep 6, 2011)

Oh kanto I thought you had mellowed out and left your eccentricities behind.


----------



## ZZ-II (May 10, 2006)

The idea is interesting, no doubt. But it'll stay just a vision, so this thread will be moved.


----------



## ThatOneGuy (Jan 13, 2012)

Looks like a modernized Ryugyong Hotel


----------



## City-of-Platinum (Jun 27, 2014)

Sorry, but the island is a park now so It will never happen. Also, FAA limits. Remember those? That is just the beginning of the problems with this funny proposal. For example, first up, we must examine the problems of bird collisions for instance, that would surely be a deal breaker, lol!


----------



## Funkyskunk2 (Sep 6, 2011)

City-of-Platinum said:


> Sorry, but the island is a park now so It will never happen. Also, FAA limits. Remember those? That is just the beginning of the problems with this funny proposal. For example, first up, we must examine the problems of bird collisions for instance, that would surely be a deal breaker, lol!


I can't believe these are your reasons. 

The largest buildings in nyc are something like 4 million square feet. This building covers a mile or 27,878,400 square feet. Multiply by 296 floors and you are looking at billions of square feet. How can buildings like this even be proposed as a vision? I don't get it. Talk about a mile high tower for your new elevators, a building this large makes no sense.


----------



## City-of-Platinum (Jun 27, 2014)

Funkyskunk2 said:


> I can't believe these are your reasons.
> 
> The largest buildings in nyc are something like 4 million square feet. This building covers a mile or 27,878,400 square feet. Multiply by 296 floors and you are looking at billions of square feet. How can buildings like this even be proposed as a vision? I don't get it. Talk about a mile high tower for your new elevators, a building this large makes no sense.


It was a subtle joke actually.... 

However, the park thing of course is the #1 reason. Sorry to be captain obvious, but no land = no project whatever the other unrealistic challenges are.. 

Why are you so serious? This is a joke thread anyway. I can't believe you thought the bird thing was serious hno:


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

Funkyskunk2 said:


> Oh kanto I thought you had mellowed out and left your eccentricities behind.


LOL, I didn't propose this building, I merely reported about it. A reporter quoting somebody else isn't the author of the words he is quoting :cheers:

Trust me, I am just as skeptical as you are and I do think this proposal is unrealistic for today's age and won't be built, however this subforum is for all proposals, not just for the realistic ones (and this is a very unrealistic proposal in my opinion, as I said in my previous two posts) :cheers:


----------



## perxper (Apr 23, 2015)

not really building
only immagination


----------



## City-of-Platinum (Jun 27, 2014)

Kanto said:


> LOL, I didn't propose this building, I merely reported about it. A reporter quoting somebody else isn't the author of the words he is quoting :cheers:
> 
> Trust me, I am just as skeptical as you are and I do think this proposal is unrealistic for today's age and won't be built, however this subforum is for all proposals, not just for the realistic ones (and this is a very unrealistic proposal in my opinion, as I said in my previous two posts) :cheers:


It's not realistic in NYC, but I could see it happening in a rich state where space and population density is a concern - think a far east country or perhaps even a gulf nation. Even a small skyscraper wouldn't be built on governors island due to it becoming a new park.


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

^^ I think currently it isn't realistic anywhere in the world, but in like a half century this might become realistic. By that time I don't think New York would have any less of a chance than a ME country. The US is the richest and most prestigeous contry in the world and it has built WTBs for over a century, so I don't think a new WTB is impossible in NYC. I wouldn't be surprised if in the next decade a realistic WTB is proposed for NYC (of course I would expect something only slightly taller and larger than the Kingdom Tower, nothing as huge as this unrealistic proposal) :cheers:


----------



## City-of-Platinum (Jun 27, 2014)

Won't happen.. Manhattan doesn't require such tall office towers given the multi-market nature of the USA. Luxury demand is not going to be enough to fuel such a risky development. Costs will remain too high. Risk too High!


----------



## SkyLinePana (Apr 28, 2015)

Yeah this would be a straight up archeology.

but if we can have the phoenix towers and that azerbianjan one, we can have this here.


----------



## Hed_Kandi (Jan 23, 2006)

I found the architect's inspiration.


----------



## Hudson11 (Jun 23, 2011)

since we're posting less than possible visions...


http://www.vasilyklyukin.com/architecture/towers/topsexytowernyc/


----------



## Uaarkson (Feb 11, 2009)

lmao


----------



## bodegavendetta (May 5, 2014)

That guy's website is gold. 

"In our life, another beautiful woman can appear. She will meet you on evenings and accompany you to work on mornings and won’t arouse jealousy." hahaha


----------



## dexter2 (Apr 5, 2009)




----------



## City-of-Platinum (Jun 27, 2014)

That should be built for the Fashion District. It might breath some life back into that drab area and make it worth visiting.

I'll take his swan Yacht too.. I hope it can fly.


----------



## KillerZavatar (Jun 22, 2010)

yeah sure, dubai is totally building a half naked woman statue.


----------



## City-of-Platinum (Jun 27, 2014)

I heard an architect instructor once say that cliche's and recognizable human features in architecture are a cardinal sin. This guy didn't get the message.


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

City-of-Platinum said:


> Won't happen.. Manhattan doesn't require such tall office towers given the multi-market nature of the USA. Luxury demand is not going to be enough to fuel such a risky development. Costs will remain too high. Risk too High!


No place in the world requires such tall office towers. Such buildings are built as signature towers and landmarks, not as profitable office buildings. However never underestimate what impact a signature tower might have on a city. Signature towers will always be the cherry on the city cake, so I think it is very well possible that some developer in the future might decide to crown NYC with a new signature tower, but as I said before, it won't be this proposed tower :cheers:

Btw ROFLMAO, that leg building is priceless. It could be called the World Porn Center :hilarious


----------



## City-of-Platinum (Jun 27, 2014)

Hed_Kandi said:


> I found the architect's inspiration.


It looks like the architectural equivalent of the Bugatti Veyron. :lol:


----------



## City-of-Platinum (Jun 27, 2014)

Kanto said:


> No place in the world requires such tall office towers. Such buildings are built as signature towers and landmarks, not as profitable office buildings. However never underestimate what impact a signature tower might have on a city. Signature towers will always be the cherry on the city cake, so I think it is very well possible that some developer in the future might decide to crown NYC with a new signature tower, but as I said before, it won't be this proposed tower :cheers:
> 
> 
> Btw ROFLMAO, that leg building is priceless. It could be called the World Porn Center :hilarious


There is no need for the tallest building in NYC and therefore it won't be built. NY has no need for a tower that will sit empty, it builds if demand is available.. Signature or not, the costs and risk are too high for any kind of 'cherry on top'. I can see taller towers, but the probability of a tallest is very small if the following problems are not sorted out:

Land cost, labor cost, risk of global slowdown, primary demand coming from overseas luxury buyers, regulatory, NIMBY, etc. 

The hurdles are just too big. In 50 years the tallest will be even taller than the current crop. NY can't compete with other cities n more favorable countries on these issues.

Emerging markets will mature = cheaper luxury investments abroad and less demand in NYC for luxury high rises.
Far cheaper and easier to build show piece towers in other countries, and that will remain unless political systems are completely changed in many of these countries.


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

^^ Yet despite all of this New York has been producting WTB after WTB after WTB for over a century. If it was possible in the 20th century, why would it not be possible in the 21st century? All of the things you listed didn't stop them back then, so why would they necessarily have to stop them now? :cheers:


----------



## Hindustani (Jul 9, 2004)

Hudson11 said:


> yeah... no. never going to happen.
> 
> > NEW YORK | Edison Tower | 1310m | 4298ft | 296 fl | *NIGHTMARE*


Now corrected.

This is like a worse nightmare ever.


----------



## Blue Flame (Jul 29, 2009)

It's not so much that the design is ugly as it is ludicrously disproportionate. The design could be halfway decent if it were about a quarter of the planned height, and about an eighth of the planned width. 
But regardless, I don't think this has much, if any chances of being built.


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

^^ I agree, the height to width ratio is suited for a highrise, maximally a skyscraper, definitely not a WTB megatall. I think the height would be very well achievable until 2030, but the width makes the proposal very unrealistic. With this height it would have to be of a comparable width to the Burj Khalifa, or the Kingdom Tower in today's age. I am certain that buildings like this proposal will be common one day, but that day will be quite a few decades in the future. With today's technology I just don't see this happening :hmm:


----------



## DubaiM (Nov 10, 2013)

And if this monster would be build, it would take forever! It looks like one floor of the Edison Tower is as large as 100 floors of Burj Khalifa's. Imagine how long it will take to build one floor of those and then more than 200 similar hno:
And just imagine the costs of the project :nuts:
The completion would be many, many decades away..


----------



## maksnikiforov (Apr 19, 2015)

Yep, this building is ugly, but he is veeeery huge, he is giant! This is an unbelievable plus for a building


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

^^ Agreed, the design is ugly, but hell, I'd gladly take any design if it's 1 310 meters tall :drool:


----------



## Cieślak (May 3, 2015)

1310m | 4298ft woot  Cool!


----------



## K.S.A (May 19, 2010)

MONSTROUS


----------



## Kanto (Apr 23, 2011)

> *The maglev elevators are the key element in the future of vertical cities*
> 
> ‘ve seen around here a couple of projects vertical cities, that they remain in that, in appealing to many and impossible for other projects, but they bring us a possible approach how we will live in the coming years due to lack of space especially in large cities.
> 
> ...


http://tufronteo.com/the-maglev-elevators-are-the-key-element-in-the-future-of-vertical-cities/


----------



## desertpunk (Oct 12, 2009)

A: This is a vision.

B: Not going to happen.

C: This one is off to the Architecture forum so it can be discussed there.


----------



## SkyLinePana (Apr 28, 2015)

how about you move some other threads to vision as well then?


----------



## Clarknt67 (4 mo ago)

Someone just included this in a 2022 YouTube video as forthcoming. But yeah never gonna happen. An odd dilemma that only a place like NYC would have demand for this much building, but there are no land options. You might find a square mile to build it in a place like Detroit but you would never fill it with sufficient tenants. Maybe in 100 years.

it seems to presume it will take up the entirely of Governors Island which will not happen for many reasons. The transfer of the land from Fed To State ownership forbid permanent residency on the island, which is why it’s a park and cultural playground. Regardless of legal hurdles there is political hurdles of destroying a park and national monument which would receive massive pushback. Also 65% of the islsnd is landfill and I don’t see how it it could support all that weight and not just slide into the New York Harbor. Bracing it on bedrock of the harbor floor would be insanely difficult and expensive.

Building it its own island is a pipe dream.


----------

