daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old March 6th, 2012, 03:28 AM   #1541
dexter2
Pijcie portera z BŁ!
 
dexter2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Łódź
Posts: 17,640
Likes (Received): 18843

Stunning project! I disagree that NYC needs no more boxes. Manhattann's grid is perfect for them, above that boxes are symbol of this city... And two of them are lost...
I'd say that NYC needs no more crappy blue glass. And postmodernism from 90's...



Material on facade is as important as shape of the building. That's why this render:



Looks so much better than that one:




And this than that.
__________________

Bo gdzie byś nie był i jak by cię nie przyjęli
Nigdy nie będziesz się czuł jak na Obiecanej Ziemi

Łódź - Remonty kamienic i zabytków - 2010, 2011, 2012
Łódzkie absurdy drogowe - ŁAD na Facebooku!

NYC & EastCoast USA!

Last edited by dexter2; March 6th, 2012 at 04:04 AM.
dexter2 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old March 6th, 2012, 06:10 PM   #1542
DinoVabec
Worldwide
 
DinoVabec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In the clouds
Posts: 5,900
Likes (Received): 752

Quote:
By Steve Cuozzo
March 6, 2012


Substantial, visible progress may not come so quickly at CIM Group’s Drake Hotel project, its mammoth planned development with frontage on Park Avenue and on East 56th and 57th streets. In recent weeks, CIM quietly inked a $70 million mortgage on part of the L-shaped assemblage with iStar CP investors, and incorporated it into a $100 million mortgage-spreader agreement with iStar on the entire site. But there’s still no timetable, hotel or retail user or rendering for a tower that might soar to 1,300 feet.

Meanwhile, CIM and partner Harry Macklowe appear to be putting the squeeze on a retailer that won’t give up a valuable corner of the site. CIM recently finished demolishing five retail townhouses on East 57th Street, but jeweler Jacob & Co. continues to hang onto its five-story building at No. 48, the assemblage’s eastern end. (Jacob did sell air rights to CIM, a transaction that appears in the mortgage-spreader agreement.)

In recent weeks, earth-movers have been noisily active on the lot where the townhouses stood — right next to Jacob’s building. As we’ve reported, CIM would love to add the Jacob site to its existing 100 feet of retail frontage, although it can build without it. Even as CIM seeks construction financing as well as a hotel anchor, it’s also bought out owners and leaseholders of the other retail townhouses — most recently of Buccellati at No. 46, which moved to Madison Avenue. To get more frontage, it even bought Turnbull & Asser’s former home at 42 E. 57th St. and moved the menswear emporium into No. 50.

Retail sources told us CIM will first erect a two-story “jewel box” for a store tenant at the Park Avenue/56th Street corner with 2,700 square feet on each floor. (Go figure: it filed plans for a six-story building there last year.) Supposedly the structure would include a 12,000 square-foot concourse (basement) that would connect underground to the project’s 57th Street retail component. On 57th Street, we’re told, the first, double-height retail floor would have 7,600 square feet; the third floor, 8,000 square feet; and floors four-six, 9,500 square feet each.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/busines...AXpk4IoVMB0kDK
__________________
There are two rules for success:
1. Never tell everything you know.
-Roger H. Lincoln
DinoVabec no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 6th, 2012, 10:58 PM   #1543
luci203
Registered User
 
luci203's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,129
Likes (Received): 1202

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
The drawings were submitted solely in connection with the retail base. Nothing has been filed with respect to the actual tower, which makes sense because CIM can still acquire nos. 36 and 48.
Quote:
12 ft (3.7 m) high ceilings
So with 89 fl, it will have around 1068 ft (329m), wich sound more realistic.

At 420m, 89fl, the celling would be 15.5 ft (4.7m) wich is very high, even for office towers, not hotels or residentials.
__________________
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says W T F...

Last edited by luci203; March 6th, 2012 at 11:08 PM.
luci203 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 6th, 2012, 11:48 PM   #1544
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

But don't forget that these are very luxurious residences that are closer to a palace than to an average flat so that 4.7 meter figure doesn't look strange to me
__________________
The Outbreak: A free browser online strategy game. Build up your town and compete with other towns economicaly and militarily.
http://www.the-outbreak.com/
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 12:10 AM   #1545
GunnerJacket
Oh look - a doughnut!
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicken City, GA
Posts: 8,126
Likes (Received): 3197

Quote:
Originally Posted by dexter2 View Post
This is me pausing to cry for the people who must see these things everyday.

Done. Carry on.
__________________
"How can anybody be enlightened? Truth is after all so poorly lit."
GunnerJacket no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 02:51 AM   #1546
Arawooho
Registered User
 
Arawooho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 266
Likes (Received): 68

It would be pretty funny if the height for 432 park was 432 meters. Too bad at this time it will be 12 meters short of that.
Arawooho no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 06:39 AM   #1547
spectre000
Moderator
 
spectre000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 7,906
Likes (Received): 5170

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arawooho View Post
It would be pretty funny if the height for 432 park was 432 meters. Too bad at this time it will be 12 meters short of that.
Well as some have relentlessly pointed out, we can't say for absolute certain what the final height is. Things can change if CIM acquires more parcels. I really can't see the reason for a building with a 432 address needing or wanting to be 432 meters. The US doesn't use the metric system, even if many buyers will be foreigners, it just seems really pointless.
spectre000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 03:32 PM   #1548
MrSlippery519
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 179
Likes (Received): 36

Quote:
Originally Posted by luci203 View Post
So with 89 fl, it will have around 1068 ft (329m), wich sound more realistic.

At 420m, 89fl, the celling would be 15.5 ft (4.7m) wich is very high, even for office towers, not hotels or residentials.
You forgot to add in the concrete/steel/etc between the floors, this building will have 12ft high ceilings plus add in 3 feet or so per floor, we are right back to the number people keep saying.

I think people are going to be surprised when they see how tall this ends up being...if they acquire a few more building it will be even higher.
MrSlippery519 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 03:36 PM   #1549
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Quote:
Originally Posted by spectre000 View Post
Well as some have relentlessly pointed out, we can't say for absolute certain what the final height is. Things can change if CIM acquires more parcels. I really can't see the reason for a building with a 432 address needing or wanting to be 432 meters. The US doesn't use the metric system, even if many buyers will be foreigners, it just seems really pointless.
THat's the point. THe address is not 432 Park. 432 Park is an existing building located one block to the south. The developers are from Israel, and the architect is South American. Both use metric.

Moreover, the architect himself stated that the tower is 1,400 feet tall. It's actually somewhat higher, and depending upon what happens with 36 and 48 E 57th St., it may exceed 432m.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 03:38 PM   #1550
luci203
Registered User
 
luci203's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,129
Likes (Received): 1202

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanto View Post
But don't forget that these are very luxurious residences that are closer to a palace than to an average flat so that 4.7 meter figure doesn't look strange to me
It should...

The Pentominium have 4.2 m and we are talking about all +600 sqm, penthouse-like apartments.

I know everyone is caught into a "Dubai Fever" where everything have to be big, huge, gigantic, where a +300m seem so small. 3.7m is way bigger than an average flat (and the only fugure that I actually read), and a @300m is way more realistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSlippery519 View Post
You forgot to add in the concrete/steel/etc between the floors, this building will have 12ft high ceilings plus add in 3 feet or so per floor, we are right back to the number people keep saying.

I think people are going to be surprised when they see how tall this ends up being...if they acquire a few more building it will be even higher.
Of course, you could dream that a @400m monolith will be aproved.
__________________
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says W T F...
luci203 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 03:56 PM   #1551
MrSlippery519
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 179
Likes (Received): 36

Quote:
Originally Posted by luci203 View Post
Of course, you could dream that a @400m monolith will be aproved.
I was simply correcting your math, if this building is in fact 89 floors and it has 12 ft ceilings it would be a lot taller than 1068ft. At minimum it would be (12 ft + 3) x 89 = 1335ft

We will all find out sooner than later
MrSlippery519 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 04:22 PM   #1552
luci203
Registered User
 
luci203's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,129
Likes (Received): 1202

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSlippery519 View Post
I was simply correcting your math, if this building is in fact 89 floors and it has 12 ft ceilings it would be a lot taller than 1068ft. At minimum it would be (12 ft + 3) x 89 = 1335ft

We will all find out sooner than later
And why would it have 3ft between floors?

True, it can have 3 ft if they mesure the dropped ceiling (usually office towers) but they don't mention anything about dropped ceiling.

Even a 1 ft (30cm) of concrete slab is huge (they don't have to hold tanks there).

Generally speaking a concrete residential highrise is 7-8" slabs, office are 9-10" and hotels somewhere in between.

Parking slabs are thicker, up to 12"

The WTC center had floors only 4 inches think, made of light weight concrete.

So at maximum it will be (12 ft + 1) x 89 = 1157ft (if they don't change floor numbers or height)

They might want to build a +400m tower, but I doubt it will be aproved... so they will have to compromise.
__________________
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says W T F...
luci203 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 04:35 PM   #1553
HK999
University of HK / 香港大學
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hong Kong SAR / 香港特區
Posts: 3,389
Likes (Received): 336

This tower doesn't need any approval, it's an "as of right"- development.
__________________
Sapientia et Virtus 明德格物
Industrial Organization, MSc
HK999 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 05:06 PM   #1554
MrSlippery519
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 179
Likes (Received): 36

Quote:
Originally Posted by luci203 View Post
And why would it have 3ft between floors?

True, it can have 3 ft if they mesure the dropped ceiling (usually office towers) but they don't mention anything about dropped ceiling.

Even a 1 ft (30cm) of concrete slab is huge (they don't have to hold tanks there).

Generally speaking a concrete residential highrise is 7-8" slabs, office are 9-10" and hotels somewhere in between.

Parking slabs are thicker, up to 12"

The WTC center had floors only 4 inches think, made of light weight concrete.

So at maximum it will be (12 ft + 1) x 89 = 1157ft (if they don't change floor numbers or height)

They might want to build a +400m tower, but I doubt it will be aproved... so they will have to compromise.
Fair enough I have no idea what the actually floor to floor height would be however it's much more than just the slab, plumbing, electrical, duct work are all added into the equation. Fact is we really have no idea what this will end up being....however what we do know is that it does not need approvals for height.

Someone mentioned a while ago there was even plans to have a 1700ft+ tower assuming they could acquire all the buildings needed. I think the absolute minimum this tower will end up is 1300ft.
MrSlippery519 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 10:54 PM   #1555
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,491

Why do I find this tower going up very unrealistic?
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2012, 11:11 PM   #1556
tim1807
faster than buildings
 
tim1807's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Den Helder
Posts: 10,325
Likes (Received): 5334

It's easier to say that the maximum is 1500 f.
tim1807 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 8th, 2012, 12:01 AM   #1557
RobertWalpole
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,607
Likes (Received): 2508

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy View Post
Why do I find this tower going up very unrealistic?
Why? There's enormous demand, and they're working constantly. This is not a certain city in the middle of the U.S.
RobertWalpole no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 8th, 2012, 03:06 AM   #1558
greencitizen144
Registered User
 
greencitizen144's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Austin/Round Rock
Posts: 165
Likes (Received): 66

What is the most current render? I found several that makes it look like a big stick.
greencitizen144 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 8th, 2012, 03:22 AM   #1559
Blue Flame
Get Silly!
 
Blue Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lexington,KY
Posts: 2,369
Likes (Received): 575

Quote:
Originally Posted by greencitizen144 View Post
What is the most current render? I found several that makes it look like a big stick.
That's the most current render.
__________________
A cynic is nothing but a realist with experience.
Blue Flame no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 8th, 2012, 04:22 PM   #1560
jconyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 416
Likes (Received): 168

They are continuing a pour along the 56th street this morning...nice ballet going on with the buckets from one excavator to another. Strange that they are not pouring right over the edge as before. Looks as though they are waiting on either permits or contract to start excavating under the former townhouses as work has stopped now that demo is completed.
jconyc no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
new york city, new york project, park avenue, supertall

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 03:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu