HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive


    432 Park Avenue in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3201  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2013, 11:24 PM
THE BIG APPLE's Avatar
THE BIG APPLE THE BIG APPLE is offline
Khurram Parvaz
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 2,424
^ I'd say in 20 years 1400 ft will be the norm that 700-900 ft is today, and in 20 years 700-900 ft will be the fillers that the 400-500 footers are today.
     
     
  #3202  
Old Posted Feb 2, 2013, 11:47 PM
khaizer007 khaizer007 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 58
^^^ that's a given!
     
     
  #3203  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2013, 5:54 PM
OrionDay2012's Avatar
OrionDay2012 OrionDay2012 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Twin Cities
Posts: 22
Smile Window Size

Quote:
Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE View Post
The blueprint on the right seems to have smaller spaces than the one on the left.
That's because it's not a blueprint, it's a sketch. The main difference being that a blueprint or a structural plan will contain all of the necessary size and location dimensions, and these days are mostly made using CAD software. I think what you are comparing is a "layer" from the blueprint (CAD), and a sketched plot plan. (Plot plans show locations of nearby structures, elevation and property lines.) the best way to determine anything regarding window size would be with prints showing column size and location dimensions on both.
     
     
  #3204  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2013, 7:06 PM
eMKay eMKay is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onn View Post
First of all, the windows do not increase in size at 432 Park ascends, they are all one size. Second, don't say the design in uninspiring before its even complete. Vinoly is a highly renowned and prestigous architect.
Looks to me like the evidence proves you wrong.
     
     
  #3205  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2013, 8:44 PM
Guiltyspark's Avatar
Guiltyspark Guiltyspark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 937
I hate to disagree with you Big Apple Guy. But the windows don't increase in size on the way up. How could they? the dimensions of the building don't change an neither do the number of windows. The picture you posted show windows that are all the same size...
     
     
  #3206  
Old Posted Feb 3, 2013, 8:48 PM
Mr. Lion's Avatar
Mr. Lion Mr. Lion is offline
King
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guiltyspark View Post
I hate to disagree with you Big Apple Guy. But the windows don't increase in size on the way up. How could they? the dimensions of the building don't change an neither do the number of windows. The picture you posted show windows that are all the same size...
Only way it could work is if the columns became progressively narrower at each successive floor. Many buildings reduce the volume of steel in the columns at each higher floor because the higher up you go, the less support you need and the extra material becomes dead weight. However I don't see enough evidence either way to come up with a conclusive "yes or no" on this matter right now
__________________
Make your own future.
     
     
  #3207  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2013, 2:00 AM
THE BIG APPLE's Avatar
THE BIG APPLE THE BIG APPLE is offline
Khurram Parvaz
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 2,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guiltyspark View Post
I hate to disagree with you Big Apple Guy. But the windows don't increase in size on the way up. How could they? the dimensions of the building don't change an neither do the number of windows. The picture you posted show windows that are all the same size...
Just look at the pic on the last page (of the building). The windows on the bottom are apparently smaller than the windows higher up. Also look at the footprint of the lobby compared to a penthouse floor higher up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Lion View Post
However I don't see enough evidence either way to come up with a conclusive "yes or no" on this matter right now
Neither do I, BUT with the evidence available I say yes. But I could be wrong. As you said we need a rendering of the entire building to make a final conclusion.
     
     
  #3208  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2013, 3:21 AM
Cro Burnham's Avatar
Cro Burnham Cro Burnham is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: delco
Posts: 2,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guiltyspark View Post
I hate to disagree with you Big Apple Guy. But the windows don't increase in size on the way up. How could they? the dimensions of the building don't change an neither do the number of windows. The picture you posted show windows that are all the same size...
An engineer should clear this up.

But I do know it is typical for the piers in concrete frame buildings to get narrower (and frequently for windows to get bigger, conversely) the higher up they are:

1) because the higher piers bear less load and can be smaller

2) because it is necessary to reduce building weight bearing down on lower structural components, so higher components need to be as light as possible.

Remember back to the famous masonry-framed Monadnock Building in Chicago: the brick walls are something like 16 feet thick at the base:


http://www.columbia.edu/cu/gsapp/BT/EEI/HISTORY/monad2.jpg

The Chicago forumers are usually very informed about this kind of stuff. Maybe one of them can chime in.
     
     
  #3209  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2013, 4:04 AM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,506
The columns near the top may not need to be as strong as the columns at the base, but they are going to be made out of weaker concrete, so height might not reduce their size very much.

Cool floorplans of the Monadnock, BTW.
     
     
  #3210  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2013, 1:16 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE View Post
^ I'd say in 20 years 1400 ft will be the norm that 700-900 ft is today, and in 20 years 700-900 ft will be the fillers that the 400-500 footers are today.
I wouldn't be so certain about that either.




(February 4, 2013)



www.432park.com



www.432park.com
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #3211  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2013, 2:39 PM
Ed007Toronto Ed007Toronto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 381
Isn't it exciting to have all this technology today to be able to watch a tower like this grow.
     
     
  #3212  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2013, 4:24 PM
uaarkson's Avatar
uaarkson uaarkson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Back in Flint
Posts: 2,079
For sure. This project has the best webcams of any project I've followed since I joined this site.
     
     
  #3213  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2013, 5:18 PM
Tall guy 31 Tall guy 31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 109
Silly Q from a person who has no knowledge of architecture, highrise buildings etc... Since they will soon be pouring concrete at the first floor (the webcams show the rebar process is almost done on 1 side of building). Does this building have the same amount of concrete thickness per floor and core as WTC1 has?? Thanks for any answers.
     
     
  #3214  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2013, 5:42 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall guy 31 View Post
Silly Q from a person who has no knowledge of architecture, highrise buildings etc... Since they will soon be pouring concrete at the first floor (the webcams show the rebar process is almost done on 1 side of building). Does this building have the same amount of concrete thickness per floor and core as WTC1 has?? Thanks for any answers.
432 PA uses 14000 PSI, whereas 1WTC's bottom structure has 16000 PSI.
     
     
  #3215  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2013, 6:43 PM
CCs77 CCs77 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cro Burnham View Post
An engineer should clear this up.

But I do know it is typical for the piers in concrete frame buildings to get narrower (and frequently for windows to get bigger, conversely) the higher up they are:

1) because the higher piers bear less load and can be smaller

2) because it is necessary to reduce building weight bearing down on lower structural components, so higher components need to be as light as possible.

Remember back to the famous masonry-framed Monadnock Building in Chicago: the brick walls are something like 16 feet thick at the base:
Aparently, they are doing something similar here. Two floorplans of the apartments, one of a small units, presumible of the lower floor, and a full floor apartment, that should be in the upper floors. As yo can see, the width of the columns seems the same, but they are clearly less "thick" in the full floor apartment







Uploaded with ImageShack.us
     
     
  #3216  
Old Posted Feb 4, 2013, 11:12 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed007Toronto View Post
Isn't it exciting to have all this technology today to be able to watch a tower like this grow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by uaarkson View Post
For sure. This project has the best webcams of any project I've followed since I joined this site.

I have to agree that this has helped in the excitement for this project. Rather than waiting for someone to drop by, you can see for yourself the action in real time. I wish more high profile developments in Manhattan would do the same.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #3217  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2013, 12:05 AM
QUEENSNYMAN QUEENSNYMAN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Queens, New York
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
I have to agree that this has helped in the excitement for this project. Rather than waiting for someone to drop by, you can see for yourself the action in real time. I wish more high profile developments in Manhattan would do the same.
Agreed
     
     
  #3218  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2013, 2:02 AM
NewYorkDominates's Avatar
NewYorkDominates NewYorkDominates is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 864
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
I have to agree that this has helped in the excitement for this project. Rather than waiting for someone to drop by, you can see for yourself the action in real time. I wish more high profile developments in Manhattan would do the same.
__________________
"I went too a restaurant that served breakfast at anytime, so i ordered french toast during the renaissance."-Who else?
     
     
  #3219  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2013, 3:20 PM
marcatio's Avatar
marcatio marcatio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 121
Originally Posted by NYguy
I have to agree that this has helped in the excitement for this project. Rather than waiting for someone to drop by, you can see for yourself the action in real time. I wish more high profile developments in Manhattan would do the same


Agreed, and educational as well. This is the kind of stuff that normally is not acessible to see, especially as the structure rises. There is much more action visible via the cam, that is not visible from the ground. And, even if you were standing across the street from the project, you couldn't see what is happening above.

NYguy, you are right: I wish more Manhattan high-profile projects did this sort of thing, using webcams to record the progress in real time.
     
     
  #3220  
Old Posted Feb 5, 2013, 4:54 PM
Ed007Toronto Ed007Toronto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 381
More and more projects are using webcams. Love it.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:56 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.