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
     
     
  #4181  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2013, 10:48 PM
MarshallKnight MarshallKnight is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 154
Okay okay okay, someone want to explain how this works:
From THE REAL DEAL
Quote:
Macklowe, CIM plan another $85M penthouse at 432 Park
Developers have chopped total units while boosting overall price to $2.89B
July 09, 2013 04:00PM
By Adam Pincus

Not content to simply break the record for the tallest residential tower in New York City, the developers of 432 Park Avenue are seeking to further capitalize on the project’s height. Macklowe Properties and California-based CIM Group, which are jointly developing the luxury condominiums, want to slice the top-floor penthouse into two units atop the 1,396-foot-tall building, according to plans filed with the New York Attorney General’s office.
Additionally, the developers plan to cut the number of apartments to 125 units from 141 units, while increasing the total sale price to $2.892 billion from $2.875 billion, the plans show...

The overall height of the Rafael Vinoly-designed tower, which is still under construction, remains the same — albeit with an additional floor. The total amount of residential space will grow to 412,637 square feet, up from 405,190 square feet in the April filing, the latest amendment reveals.
The developers created the new 96th floor by apparently using extra high ceilings in the former 95th floor unit.


“The addition of floor slabs within Residential Unit 95 has created a new floor 96… making Residential Unit 95 single height,” the filings said.
The new unit 96 received its floor area from two units on the 45th floor, which will now be used for mechanical purposes, the filing says...

The developers have two methods for counting floors: “construction,” which is the true number of stories, and “marketing,” which is the number associated with the apartments being sold. For example, there is no 13th floor. Currently, 432 Park Avenue is slated to have 84 construction floors; the top floor for marketing purposes is 101, according to the most recent offering plan. But the amendment shows 85 construction floors and identifies the top marketing floor as 102.

The developers did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In addition, the plans reveal for the first time that the upper nine apartments — floors 85, 86, 88 and 91 through 96 — will have wood-burning (as well as gas) fireplaces, a rarity in new high-rise construction.

The plan calls for other creative adjustments to the building, including removing floors 72, 82 and 87. That gives double-height ceilings to the two apartments each on floors 71 and 81, and the five-bedroom floor-through unit on the 86th floor, priced at $73.5 million...
Full article here.
     
     
  #4182  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2013, 10:52 PM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
Okay okay okay, someone want to explain how this works:
From THE REAL DEAL

Full article here.
They are just shrinking the floor height of the original top floor to match. Nothing really.
     
     
  #4183  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2013, 10:58 PM
MarshallKnight MarshallKnight is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 154
Ahh, so I think the article has it backwards, when it says: "The developers created the new 96th floor by apparently using extra high ceilings in the former 95th floor unit." It should say something like, "...by apparently eliminating extra high ceilings..." Right?

So now the penthouse, which was double-height, is single-height?
     
     
  #4184  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2013, 11:39 PM
sterlippo1 sterlippo1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Sonoma County
Posts: 1,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalifese View Post
this must be one of the most architecturally boring buildings EVER. just sayin'.
come on! it's gonna scream NEW YORK!
     
     
  #4185  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 12:35 AM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post

So now the penthouse, which was double-height, is single-height?
Bingo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ILNY View Post
Will the concrete frame be cleaned? It looks dirty.
Those aren't stains or dirt. The weather was rather cold when those floors were poured, and it affected how the concrete cured, causing the discoloration. Nothing short of painting or replacing the concrete is going to clean that up, and both options are out of the question.
     
     
  #4186  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 12:36 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
Ahh, so I think the article has it backwards, when it says: "The developers created the new 96th floor by apparently using extra high ceilings in the former 95th floor unit." It should say something like, "...by apparently eliminating extra high ceilings..." Right?

So now the penthouse, which was double-height, is single-height?
Should have been more like "the extra high ceilings..."

But whatever the case, it doesn't matter. They're still getting buckets of money for that space up there.


Quote:
“The addition of floor slabs within Residential Unit 95 has created a new floor 96… making Residential Unit 95 single height,” the filings said.

The new unit 96 received its floor area from two units on the 45th floor, which will now be used for mechanical purposes, the filing says.
__________________
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.
     
     
  #4187  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 12:48 AM
MarshallKnight MarshallKnight is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 154
All I can say is, when you're talking about $95MM, the difference between double- and single-height is pretty huge.
     
     
  #4188  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 2:28 AM
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
ThatOneGuy ThatOneGuy is offline
Come As You Are
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Constanta
Posts: 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalifese View Post
this must be one of the most architecturally boring buildings EVER. just sayin'.
Yes, that's why there's so much controversy over it, right?
     
     
  #4189  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 4:39 PM
sw5710 sw5710 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,519
Core jump. Now 356'
     
     
  #4190  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 5:34 PM
Hed Kandi's Avatar
Hed Kandi Hed Kandi is offline
+
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,164
The exposed concrete looks terrible, like something out doldrums of the Brutalist era. A sheer embarrassment for New York!
     
     
  #4191  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 6:40 PM
MarshallKnight MarshallKnight is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hed Kandi View Post
The exposed concrete looks terrible
The splotchy bits where the concrete didn't cure properly aren't as prominent further up the tower -- but I think they're going to have to do something about it. It's too bad, because I think the idea of the exposed concrete was pretty inspired (and looks killer in the renders), but you can't have your bajillionaire tenants embarrassed by the flaws in their lavishly expensive building.
     
     
  #4192  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 8:43 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
So the official floor count is now 90?
     
     
  #4193  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 9:03 PM
Tedious Tedious is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Buffalo, NY
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by scalziand View Post
Bingo.



Those aren't stains or dirt. The weather was rather cold when those floors were poured, and it affected how the concrete cured, causing the discoloration. Nothing short of painting or replacing the concrete is going to clean that up, and both options are out of the question.
From my understanding, the concrete will *eventually* cure completely, getting rid of the discoloration. You could be right though, I guess.
     
     
  #4194  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 9:04 PM
MightyYoda MightyYoda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 445
Could you stain the concrete or would it not apply the same on a vertical surface? Seems that a subtle stain would be the best solution to keep the raw appeal of the concrete and clean up any blemishes.
     
     
  #4195  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2013, 10:59 PM
Patrick's Avatar
Patrick Patrick is offline
Desert Dweller
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 4,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalifese View Post
this must be one of the most architecturally boring buildings EVER. just sayin'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLksuGUY View Post
If you are going to post, try and make it more interesting then just your short slander of a project.
Well it's not like he doesn't have a point, this building is dull as dirt!

However as much as I would love to hate on this building because of it's uninspiring design and demolition of The Drake, I think this building is completely necessary for the New York City of the 21st Century. This building is a huge game changer and will inspire many future New York buildings to aim higher than the Freedom Tower, something I originally thought would not happen for decades after it's completion.

Also does anyone else notice that this building is literally in the same place as the imaginary supertall skyscraper in the ending of 2001's Vanilla Sky? What a crazy coincidence, the movie practically predicted this skyscraper!
     
     
  #4196  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2013, 12:22 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick View Post
Well it's not like he doesn't have a point, this building is dull as dirt!
You're entitled to your opinion, but I suspect you're of the "it's a box, therefore it's dull" crowd, which is IMO completely ridiculous. It sounds like my parents complaining about contemporary art whenever they don't understand it.

There is nothing inherently dull about a box, nor is there anything inherently creative about some weird, twisty, spire-laden building. It depends on the building.
     
     
  #4197  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2013, 2:06 AM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
JACKinBeantown
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 8,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick View Post

Also does anyone else notice that this building is literally in the same place as the imaginary supertall skyscraper in the ending of 2001's Vanilla Sky? What a crazy coincidence, the movie practically predicted this skyscraper!
Pretty close. Add about 500 feet and it's right there.


http://thefunambulistdotnet.files.wo...anilla-sky.jpg
__________________
Hi.
     
     
  #4198  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2013, 11:11 AM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,016
Per DOB filings the floor count is 96. Thread title should be changed.
     
     
  #4199  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2013, 11:57 AM
franktko's Avatar
franktko franktko is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Montréal
Posts: 1,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown View Post
Pretty close. Add about 500 feet and it's right there.
Au contraire; 432 will be about 150 feet taller than ESB and a bit lower than the top of ESB's antenna. This movie tower is too tall.
     
     
  #4200  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2013, 12:35 PM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
JACKinBeantown
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 8,850
Yes, by about 500 feet.

They're jumping the exterior forms to level 20.
__________________
Hi.
     
     
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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:06 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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