NEW YORK | 432 Park Avenue (Drake Hotel dev.) | (1,396) FT / 432 M | 89 FLOORS - Page 69

NYguy · #**1361** Posted **Apr 2, 2012, 11:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayPro

Is the 1,003' height for that tower "official" by the majority of accepted definitions; and do the DOB filings reflect this?

The DOB height is a specific point in the building, not the total height of a structure. So, in the case of One57, its still 953 ft to that point. Of course, the total height of that building will be 1,005 ft, but remember that the upper space is not occupied. Here's the latest filing for One57, which is still listed at 953 ft.
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=01

gramsjdg · #**1362** Posted **Apr 3, 2012, 3:46 AM**

Given that fact, 1420 ft or even somewhat more is entirely realistic for a roof height.

MrSlippery519 · #**1363** Posted **Apr 4, 2012, 2:40 PM**

There is a nice little note on the webcam now...cant wait to see this start rising.

They are unloading a ton of dirt today so far, anytime I have looked at the cam more trucks are pulling in and our

gramsjdg · #**1364** Posted **Apr 4, 2012, 7:00 PM**

I say they should just go for it and break the Sears tower roof height, which, not counting the equipment shed on top is like 1442' or so...

25 more feet ought to do it...

Eidolon · #**1365** Posted **Apr 4, 2012, 7:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gramsjdg

I say they should just go for it and break the Sears tower roof height, which, not counting the equipment shed on top is like 1442' or so...

25 more feet ought to do it...

Assuming the height difference between the DOB filing and the final roof height (52 feet) is the same in One57 and 432 Park, then this building would have a roof height of 1449 feet.

Guiltyspark · #**1366** Posted **Apr 5, 2012, 2:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gramsjdg

I say they should just go for it and break the Sears tower roof height, which, not counting the equipment shed on top is like 1442' or so...

25 more feet ought to do it...

1. They don't care about roof height.

plinko · #**1367** Posted **Apr 5, 2012, 4:13 AM**

It's totally amazing to me that so many forumers think that the height of a tower is just some arbitrary number that the can architects pick or haphazardly manipulate.

The only place off the top of my head where that has ever happened was with the new OneWTC Tower. And that 'symbolic' height isn't even the correct one (measured from the lowest entry).

Zapatan · #**1368** Posted **Apr 5, 2012, 4:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by plinko

It's totally amazing to me that so many forumers think that the height of a tower is just some arbitrary number that the can architects pick or haphazardly manipulate.

The only place off the top of my head where that has ever happened was with the new OneWTC Tower. And that 'symbolic' height isn't even the correct one (measured from the lowest entry).

Buildings can add height before they start construction, it happens in Asia all the time. Who do you think chooses the height? It's the developer and architects etc. who are usually given a height range, they can make it however tall they want. And with a 1700 foot limit they may as well just pass Sears to have the US's second highest building. I'm assuming the DOB lists 1397 as the top floor, so hopefully it will.

gramsjdg · #**1369** Posted **Apr 5, 2012, 5:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by plinko

It's totally amazing to me that so many forumers think that the height of a tower is just some arbitrary number that the can architects pick or haphazardly manipulate.

The only place off the top of my head where that has ever happened was with the new OneWTC Tower. And that 'symbolic' height isn't even the correct one (measured from the lowest entry).

Well, what about the height battle between the ESB and Chrysler which resulted in modifications after the buildings were under construction?

NYguy · #**1370** Posted **Apr 5, 2012, 5:40 AM**

A little patience folks. All will be confirmed at some point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

And with a 1700 foot limit they may as well just pass Sears to have the US's second highest building.

I don't think they're concerned about that. For one thing, it's in another town. The original WTC and Sears Tower were built with the realization that increased height would make them the tallest, but that's not a concern now. Also, if they simply wanted a "second" tallest, a spire would do the trick.

NYguy · #**1371** Posted **Apr 6, 2012, 11:38 AM**

www.432park.com

Quote:

On September 26th we began excavating the construction site for 432 Park Avenue.

Simultaneously, we strategically installed cameras overlooking the site so that our friends and supporters would be able to watch our extraordinary building taking shape.

Well, we thank you. Now give us some extraordinary renderings!

(cam shot, April 6, 2012)

NYguy · #**1372** Posted **Apr 7, 2012, 12:39 AM**

Inevitable complaint:

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Ov...key=0001509232

04/02/2012

Quote:

FOR THE PAST TWO THREE MONTHS, CONSTRUCTION AT 440 PARK AVE BEGINS AT 6AM AND REACHES 110 - 120 DB(A) ALMOST IMMEDIATELY THIS IS A SEVERE VIOLATION OF THE CURRENT NOISE CODE

88madri · #**1373** Posted **Apr 7, 2012, 1:22 AM**

Look at this....

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Co...allbin=1035772

ParkCorridor · #**1374** Posted **Apr 7, 2012, 8:02 PM**

As a nearby neighbor, I'm hoping this thing gets built, but I still haven't heard that financing has been secured by CIM. Anyone know?

NYguy · #**1375** Posted **Apr 11, 2012, 1:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ParkCorridor

As a nearby neighbor, I'm hoping this thing gets built, but I still haven't heard that financing has been secured by CIM. Anyone know?

Haven't heard a word on financing. They'll probably begin construction before getting full financing though, a process similar to the rise of One57. Anyway, they are blasting again, so haven't been able to check out the cam.

sbarn · #**1376** Posted **Apr 12, 2012, 4:42 AM**

I made another photomontage demonstrating the evolution of the NYC skyline over the next few decades. I went a little crazy with this one, including some visionary proposals. It is pretty incredible how much of an impact 432 Park has on the skyline. EDIT: I may have made this tower a bit too tall in this one however...

Original Photo Source: ill-padrino www.matthiashaker.com

599GTO · #**1377** Posted **Apr 12, 2012, 6:16 AM**

Great job!!

What a transformation! Hopefully it looks like that way before 2030.

How about 56 Leonard?! 99 Church Street too!

NYguy · #**1378** Posted **Apr 12, 2012, 7:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 599GTO

How about 56 Leonard?! 99 Church Street too!

Won't have much of a visual impact from that vantage point. Anyway, another cool mockup. Since they haven't released any official renderings, it's nice to get a look at some skyline impact.