HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #821  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:03 PM
TREPYE TREPYE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Either way, it would be no worse than 432 Park or Central Park Tower.
This is true.

Those 2 went really out of their way to demoralize the spirit of good architecture.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #822  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:16 PM
ChiND ChiND is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2023
Posts: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by TREPYE View Post
This is true.

Those 2 went really out of their way to demoralize the spirit of good architecture.
I think that Central Park Tower is beautiful.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #823  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:19 PM
ChiND ChiND is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2023
Posts: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
This tower will have a footprint (53,000 sf) more than double the 25,000 sf footprint of 343 Madison or 250 Park. Vanderbilt and Roosevelt have footprints of about 43,000 sf. 270 Park, with the entire block, has a footprint of 80,000 sf.



Thanks. How many buildable square feet does the 405-417 Park site have? Since the floor plates would be pretty small, I assume that something somewhat tall and slender could rise there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:00 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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