HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Supertall Construction

    

432 Park Avenue in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram
New York Projects & Construction Forum
            
View Full Map

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1341  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2012, 7:47 PM
sbarn sbarn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,824
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquablue View Post
No, I think that is the new tower going up in Guangzhou (500m). It is quite the looker though, ain't it?
Actually it was completely made up... I just hacked away at a rectangle in photoshop until I got a shape I kinda liked, ha.

EDIT: just checked that out... funny it does look similar.

Last edited by sbarn; Mar 30, 2012 at 8:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1342  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 5:29 AM
babybackribs2314 babybackribs2314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UWS, Manhattan
Posts: 1,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
Apparently not -- unless there are unoccupied mechanical floors at the top. We'll need to see the DOB filings.
They originally reported 1327 but I retweeted them as the DOB filings have been for either 1,380 or 1,397, and it has been changed. I think one of those two figures will end up being the height although it could obviously still change...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1343  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 2:07 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 28,529
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ial-tower.html

CIM, Macklowe to Build Tallest New York Residential Tower

By Oshrat Carmiel
Mar 30, 2012

Quote:
CIM Group and developer Harry Macklowe are planning to build a Manhattan residential tower that would be the tallest in New York City.

Macklowe and Los Angeles-based CIM intend to build an 82- story, 1,397-foot (436-meter) building at the site of the former Drake Hotel on Park Avenue. The plan was included in permit applications for a sprinkler system and fire alarm filed this week with the New York City Department of Buildings.

The developers previously filed plans to build a six-story, 88-foot building on the site, according to city records. Those papers haven’t been updated to reflect the new size of the tower, according to Ryan FitzGibbon, a department spokeswoman.

“They’ve indicated on subsequent applications that the height of the new building will now be 82 stories,” FitzGibbon said in a telephone interview. “However, they have not yet amended the new building plans nor have these subsequent filings been approved.”


______________________________________


http://www.observer.com/2012/03/440-...-trade-center/

432 Park Avenue Will Reach 1,397 Feet, Taller Even Than the World Trade Center

By Michael Ewing 3/30

Quote:

As of right now, New York by Frank Gehry is the tallest residential building in New York. That might change early next year when (or if) 70 Pine is fully converted, but even if that doesn’t happen, One57 will gladly take the lead in the fall of 2013.

The lot on the corner of 57th Street and Park Avenue has been speculated to be the new home of the toothpick tower and recent document filings have confirmed the plan for the mammouth residential building, the Real Deal discovered:

CIM Group and New York developer Harry Macklowe are making strides towards building the tallest residential building in New York City at the Drake Hotel site at 440 Park Avenue. They filed a plan examination request for the building, one of the first steps towards getting a development off the ground, with the Department of Buildings, according to a DOB filing dated March 26.

The filings noted the building height as 1,397 feet tall. Putting that in perspective, One57 will only be 1,004 feet tall. Jean Nouvel’s tower for MoMA is taller, but not by much: 1,050 feet, after being knocked down from 1,250 feet by the City Planning Commission. And, depending on how one measures, taller than the Empire State Building (also 1,250) if one ignores the spire (1,453 feet).

Also looks like typical filing, so 1,397 ft may not be the final height.

__________________
Love NEW YORK?

Visit New York's icon. See the City of shores. Walk the Streets of Manhattan.
The evolving skyline, NY Skyscrapers & Construction

Last edited by NYguy; Mar 31, 2012 at 2:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1344  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 4:08 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,393
This press coverage is very positive!
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1345  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 5:33 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
Gotham City
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 2,760
Quote:
Jean Nouvel’s tower for MoMA is taller, but not by much: 1,050 feet, after being knocked down from 1,250 feet by the City Planning Commission.
I'm still upset about this, shame on CPC!

---------------

On topic: It looks like 432 PA will be around 1,400' in the end, so there shouldn't be any severe height changes- which is a good thing.
__________________
In Mathematics We Trust
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1346  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 5:46 PM
Arawooho's Avatar
Arawooho Arawooho is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 99
Looks great for the tower, as long as we get a new highest roof height in NY, I will be happy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1347  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 6:04 PM
CHAPINM1's Avatar
CHAPINM1 CHAPINM1 is online now
Fight Crime/ Shoot back
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Las Vegas, NV/ New York, NY
Posts: 1,302
NOT to be splitting hairs, but I bet people will still label this a 1,400 foot tall structure even though it may be 1,397 feet. Take the Bank of America Tower which is really 1,198 feet, yet all across the land is hailed as a 1,200 foot structure...
__________________
NYC born/ Twin Cities raised.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1348  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 6:11 PM
RobertWalpole RobertWalpole is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,911
It's amazing that, in a recession, NY has 5 supertalls under construction or about to begin construction (i.e., One57, 1 WTC, the Coach Tower, 432 Park Ave., and 4 WTC, which -- in effect -- is a supertall), and several more likely on the immediate way (i.e., the HY North Tower, 225 W57th, and Torre Verre)!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1349  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2012, 10:05 PM
Jelly Roll Jelly Roll is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: NJ/NYC
Posts: 1,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
It's amazing that, in a recession, NY has 5 supertalls under construction or about to begin construction (i.e., One57, 1 WTC, the Coach Tower, 432 Park Ave., and 4 WTC, which -- in effect -- is a supertall), and several more likely on the immediate way (i.e., the HY North Tower, 225 W57th, and Torre Verre)!!!!
NYC is not in a recession.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1350  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2012, 1:15 AM
Zerton's Avatar
Zerton Zerton is offline
Ω
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,412


It looks like there will be large void spaces throughout the tower. That will be very interesting.
__________________
If all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed, if all records told the same tale, then the lie passed into history and became truth. -Orwell
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1351  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2012, 1:49 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 28,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHAPINM1 View Post
NOT to be splitting hairs, but I bet people will still label this a 1,400 foot tall structure even though it may be 1,397 feet. Take the Bank of America Tower which is really 1,198 feet, yet all across the land is hailed as a 1,200 foot structure...
As with any case, it depends on where the height is measured from (bofa), but its still to early here to say exactly what the height will be until the design is revealed or we've seen some drawings. Those DOB filings often don't reveal what will be the final height of a building. Take for example One57. We've known for a while now what the actualy height is, yet some in the media are still using the DOB height as a reference...


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ial-tower.html

Quote:
At 1,397 feet, the tower would surpass a residential property Extell Development Co. is building on West 57th Street. That one is planned to reach 953 feet, FitzGibbon said. The Extell site is slated to be New York’s tallest residential building when it’s completed next year.

__________________
Love NEW YORK?

Visit New York's icon. See the City of shores. Walk the Streets of Manhattan.
The evolving skyline, NY Skyscrapers & Construction
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1352  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2012, 2:38 AM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 927
Question

This other 953' tower....this seems new to me. Are there any details aside from what you posted above? And is true as to their calling it already UC?

Pls forgive my ignorance....the amount of stuff here to keep an eye on is overwhelming.

Thx
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1353  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2012, 3:05 AM
yankeesfan1000 yankeesfan1000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: 10014
Posts: 1,122
Read NYGuys post. It's about media sources not agreeing on heights, or getting the height wrong, so that 57th St tower you're asking about is One57. Bloomberg just got the height number wrong.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1354  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2012, 12:44 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 28,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro View Post
This other 953' tower....this seems new to me. Are there any details aside from what you posted above? And is true as to their calling it already UC? Pls forgive my ignorance....the amount of stuff here to keep an eye on is overwhelming. Thx
Yeah, it's under construction. It's the tower known as "One57" and it will be 1005 ft. The 953' height is the DOB height. I just used it as an example of DOB filings not always revealing a buildings total height. That could be the case here as well, we just have to wait and see when plans are revealed.
__________________
Love NEW YORK?

Visit New York's icon. See the City of shores. Walk the Streets of Manhattan.
The evolving skyline, NY Skyscrapers & Construction
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1355  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2012, 6:35 PM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 927
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Yeah, it's under construction. It's the tower known as "One57" and it will be 1005 ft. The 953' height is the DOB height. I just used it as an example of DOB filings not always revealing a buildings total height. That could be the case here as well, we just have to wait and see when plans are revealed.
Ah.......I do seem to recall quite a bit of consternation going on here when they announced the project that would become One57 as 953'. Everyone assumed--and rightly so--that it would be a 1000-footer to begin with.

I'm not quite sure why the height would change one way or another this far into the construction process...then again, I don't do these DOB filings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1356  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2012, 6:58 PM
NewYorker2009 NewYorker2009 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New York City, New York
Posts: 264
1,397' is an awkward height. It reminds me of prices when something is being sold for $13.95 or $13.99 but it's really $14.00. This Tower should surpass 1,400'. Besides, I thought the spire/antenna atop One World Trade counted to make it "America's Tallest." The media is making it out to be like 432 Park is going to be New York City's Tallest building although it will have the highest roof.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1357  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2012, 12:48 AM
plinko's Avatar
plinko plinko is offline
them bones
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Santa Barbara adjacent
Posts: 6,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewYorker2009 View Post
1,397' is an awkward height. It reminds me of prices when something is being sold for $13.95 or $13.99 but it's really $14.00. This Tower should surpass 1,400'. Besides, I thought the spire/antenna atop One World Trade counted to make it "America's Tallest." The media is making it out to be like 432 Park is going to be New York City's Tallest building although it will have the highest roof.
Because contrary to forumer belief, architects almost never design buildings to specific heights, but do so to get the proportions and details they want and are structurally economical. You don't just get to add three feet somewhere...it costs money and could make the building parapet look out of whack. Reality doesn't really work out to always having pretty round numbers.
__________________
Even if you are 1 in a million, there are still 7,000 people just like you...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1358  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2012, 1:53 AM
NewYorker2009 NewYorker2009 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New York City, New York
Posts: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by plinko View Post
Because contrary to forumer belief, architects almost never design buildings to specific heights, but do so to get the proportions and details they want and are structurally economical. You don't just get to add three feet somewhere...it costs money and could make the building parapet look out of whack. Reality doesn't really work out to always having pretty round numbers.
Well yeah I considered that costs would have something to do with it. I don't think an extra 3 feet would make the parapet of the building look out of whack because come on 3 feet is nothing. However, if costs were such a problem then this Tower wouldn't even be reaching anywhere near 1,397' so making it top 1,400' shouldn't matter. I mean I'm sure they have a specific budget they plan to stick to so the height they chose is what it will be. Anyway, I think 1,397' is a reasonable number so I know it will do wonders for the Manhattan Skyline, especially Midtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1359  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2012, 11:15 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 28,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro View Post
I'm not quite sure why the height would change one way or another this far into the construction process...then again, I don't do these DOB filings.
I'm quite sure the 1397 ft height is accurate for what it's a reference to, as is the 953 ft height for One57. Keep in mind though that the DOB height numbers aren't a reference to the total height of a structure. In some cases it could be right on, but its usually not the source for total height. But even if the accurate height is 1,420 as we have here, its only a 23 ft difference. Visually, it wouldn't matter much.
__________________
Love NEW YORK?

Visit New York's icon. See the City of shores. Walk the Streets of Manhattan.
The evolving skyline, NY Skyscrapers & Construction
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1360  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2012, 6:49 PM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 927
@NYGuy:

Thanks for the info; but in one of my increasingly frequent moments of confusion I was questioning the final DOB height filings with One57 in mind. I understand your point that this particular building's final height wouldn't make a difference in any case.
My question should have been (and really should belong in the One57 thread):

Is the 1,003' height for that tower "official" by the majority of accepted definitions; and do the DOB filings reflect this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
   
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Supertall Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:02 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.