NEW YORK | One Vanderbilt | 1,401 FT | 58 FLOORS

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

68 floors but 1,400 feet? What a goofy building. Is half of it non-occupied architectural design?

We go over this all the time. All of the current crop of supertall residential or office towers going up in the city use higher floor designations because of the relative height in comparisond to your average skyscraper.

Here's an actual breakdown of the floors for this one here...
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/BS...de=ES684858651



• Video Link



• Video Link



• Video Link

[Kumdogmillionaire]

Very bizarre.... should lead to some epic office and open spaces though I guess. Seem inefficient as all hell, but I'm not complaining!

[sbarn]

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

Very bizarre.... should lead to some epic office and open spaces though I guess. Seem inefficient as all hell, but I'm not complaining!

Given the crown and spire, the top occupied floor of this building will likely be around 1200 feet. If you factor in mechanical transfer levels and a taller ground / lobby floor that works out to about 15 ft per floor. Structure and ductwork will occupy a portion of that 15 feet, so ceiling heights may be around 12 feet in the office space. That's pretty standard for a modern office tower.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

Very bizarre.... should lead to some epic office and open spaces though I guess. Seem inefficient as all hell, but I'm not complaining!

yep, ie., an 11k sq ft restaurant on the lower levels w/110ft high ceilings:

http://nypost.com/2017/04/17/daniel-...grand-central/

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by Hudson11

It's actually 58 real floors.

Yeah, pretty pathetic really, but I guess it's all about perception with buildings like this and not reality.

[aaron38]

Above grade already? I clicked on this expecting to still see a big hole. Impressive.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire

Very bizarre.... should lead to some epic office and open spaces though I guess. Seem inefficient as all hell, but I'm not complaining!

Originally Posted by BrownTown

Yeah, pretty pathetic really, but I guess it's all about perception with buildings like this and not reality.

You people.

It's a 1.6 msf office tower. Nothing inefficient about it. They could have given us a 1.6 msf box, but that's not what the developer wanted. They wanted to spend the extra money on an iconic office tower for the skyline, and that's what they have done. So when developers don't spend to make buildings more impressive, people complain. Give a little more to get more out of a building, and they still complain. Anyway, there's much more going on with this tower than I suppose you can imagine, given the significance of it.

[The Best Forumer]

Either way... it's going to be a nice looking tower.

[NYguy]

https://www.instagram.com/p/Baz-b85F...ckommendedfood

[TouchTheSky13]

Looks like they're altering the crown again.

https://newyorkyimby.com/2017/11/one...-redesign.html

[NYguy]

https://www.6sqft.com/one-vanderbilt...ighest-in-nyc/

One Vanderbilt’s outdoor observation deck may tie for highest in NYC


NOVEMBER 1, 2017
BY DANA SCHULZ

Nearly a year ago, developer SL Green confirmed that their 1,401-foot supertall One Vanderbilt, set to be the city’s second tallest building behind One World Trade Center, would boast a 1,020-foot observation deck, which would have made it the third-highest indoor-outdoor observatory in the city after the forthcoming 1,100-foot deck at 30 Hudson Yards and the 1,050-foot deck at the Empire State Building (One World Observatory is at 1,250 feet, but it’s not outdoors). However, new details and diagrams uncovered by NY Yimby show that it may actually stand at 1,100 feet, tying for the city’s highest.

Other than the possible height increase, the most significant new detail is that the observation deck’s glass may appear quite different in color than the rest of the tower due to the fact that it will use non-reflective glass.

Architects at Kohn Pedersen Fox are also considering several options for the deck’s configuration and the indoor portion’s window layout and size.

As of last year, Montreal-based GSM Project was heading up planning for the observation deck. The firm is responsible for the decks at Dubai’s Burj Khalifa (the world’s tallest building) and London’s Shard Tower. At the time, KPF president and project architect Jamie van Klemperer said the deck would be a “four-part contrapuntal structure will feature a transparent topper” that will function as “a public event space and observatory.”

Already feeling massive.



• Video Link



• Video Link

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by NYguy

You people.

It's a 1.6 msf office tower. Nothing inefficient about it. They could have given us a 1.6 msf box, but that's not what the developer wanted. They wanted to spend the extra money on an iconic office tower for the skyline, and that's what they have done. So when developers don't spend to make buildings more impressive, people complain. Give a little more to get more out of a building, and they still complain. Anyway, there's much more going on with this tower than I suppose you can imagine, given the significance of it.

Well look, I get that some clients want a fancy looking building and all, but I also don't like the idea that it's MY money paying for it through all sorts of fees on every financial product known to man. I'm not sure who exactly the occupants of this building would be, but I think it's entirely fair to ask why an OFFICE building needs to be so opulent. If it's a residential buildings then fine, but if I see my bank spending such outrageous prices for floorspace I might just switch banks because clearly those guys are taking me to the cleaners if they can afford all that.

[chris08876]

^^^

I get what your saying, but I don't think the bank is at fault. If anything, you want to know where a lot of our money goes, on a daily basis, more than just bank fees, and thats to the MTA and Port Authority NJ/NY. Those people are incompetent and our money, funds their overly expensive, horrific timetables for goals type of shenanigans. And what do we get? Poor service and a system that is running over capacity, with solutions that seem to never come. At least soon that is.

At least Vanderbilt is moving along, and at a relatively quick pace. A project whos development timetable seems reasonable. Unlike the MTA or Port Authority.

We can say what we want with financial institutions, but they understand time is money, and the quicker a project is a complete, less costs.

So in terms of getting a project through the soft cost stage and onto the hard, the Vanderbilt team I feel did a great job, even amidst the bs with Grand Central at first.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

Well look, I get that some clients want a fancy looking building and all, but I also don't like the idea that it's MY money paying for it through all sorts of fees on every financial product known to man.

I'm not sure who exactly the occupants of this building would be, but I think it's entirely fair to ask why an OFFICE building needs to be so opulent. If it's a residential buildings then fine, but if I see my bank spending such outrageous prices for floorspace I might just switch banks because clearly those guys are taking me to the cleaners if they can afford all that.

Your money aint paying for anything. The office building is "oppulent" as you put it because that is what the developer is paying for. Furthermore, the developer is paying for many transit improvements for the subway and connections to the commuter rail lines to get this tower built. So yes, it needs to be as oppulent as hell. You can always take your money elsewhere.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

W I'm not sure who exactly the occupants of this building would be, but I think it's entirely fair to ask why an OFFICE building needs to be so opulent.

It's a fair question, but the answer is obvious. This building is one of the most expensive towers in the largest and most important business district on the planet.

It obviously isn't marketing office space to Barb's Vacuum Cleaner Repair of Muncie, IN; it's going to be extremely profitable financial service tenants, like basically all the high-end Manhattan towers. "Normal" commercial space users aren't searching for space in trophy Manhattan buildings.

And actually, this isn't close to the most expensive or opulent building. 425 Park Ave. is significantly more expensive, with even higher ceiling heights. Some of the newer buildings downtown, especially in the Meatpacking, are also much more expensive.

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

Well look, I get that some clients want a fancy looking building and all, but I also don't like the idea that it's MY money paying for it through all sorts of fees on every financial product known to man. I'm not sure who exactly the occupants of this building would be, but I think it's entirely fair to ask why an OFFICE building needs to be so opulent. If it's a residential buildings then fine, but if I see my bank spending such outrageous prices for floorspace I might just switch banks because clearly those guys are taking me to the cleaners if they can afford all that.

Some office tenants do indeed pay a premium for "trophy towers", but for the same reasons that some firms pay more for class-A vs class-B space.

TD Bank has a financial (fiduciary) responsibility to it's shareholders to maximize value. TD may have rightly justified this lease by saying that the office layout, it's location in the heart of midtown, and it's proximity to a major transit hub, are all ways that they can improve performance.

Bear in mind that 1 Vanderbilt isn't even the priciest office in the city. They could have spent more for arguably worse office space (the GM building, for example).

Think of it this way: $20 in extra fees helped you, personally, by allowing for the construction of a beautiful super tall in the heart of the city

[BrownTown]

I don't want to get into a Political discussion, but anyone who thinks the financial industry is looking out for the interests of their clients is just hopelessly naive. These people don't produce anything of value, they just try to skim a little bit off the top of everyone else's work.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by BrownTown

I don't want to get into a Political discussion, but anyone who thinks the financial industry is looking out for the interests of their clients is just hopelessly naive. These people don't produce anything of value, they just try to skim a little bit off the top of everyone else's work.

Amen,

[NYguy]

^ Who cares. This isn't a "bank" tower, it's an office building with an observation deck.

Originally Posted by Crawford

It's a fair question, but the answer is obvious. This building is one of the most expensive towers in the largest and most important business district on the planet.

Yeah, we touched on that earlier.



https://www.etfa-mag.com/news/manhat...nts-29569.html

Manhattan's Newest Office Tower To Be Among Priciest For Tenants

OCTOBER 18, 2016

SL Green Realty Corp.’s One Vanderbilt skyscraper, which had a groundbreaking ceremony Tuesday, is expected to have rents that would make it among the priciest office buildings in New York City when it’s completed in 2020.

The building, at Madison Avenue and 42nd Street just west of Grand Central Terminal, is likely to attract tenants paying about $150 a square foot on average, SL Green Chief Executive Officer Marc Holliday said in an interview Tuesday at the construction site. Rents near the top of the 58-story building probably will be around $200 a square foot, said Steven Durels, SL Green’s chief leasing officer.

Such prices would make One Vanderbilt similar in cost to midtown Manhattan’s most expensive office towers, including the General Motors Building. Rents for top-tier office space in Midtown averaged $88.72 a square foot at the end of the third quarter, according to data from brokerage Savills Studley.

The One Vanderbilt rent projection is “pretty much consistent with what the best buildings are getting today, only we’re talking 2020 dollars, and what will be, I believe, the best building in Manhattan,” Holliday said.

...“The marketing process is really going to kick off in earnest in the second half of ’17, and throughout ’18 and ’19,” Holliday said. “The building is programmed for what we expect will be tenants ranging in size from anywhere from 50,000 feet to 250,000 feet. That’s what we think the typical tenant” will be.

Meanwhile, we've reached the fifth floor....


https://www.instagram.com/p/BbAP6Enn...one_vanderbilt

The #OneVanderbilt superstructure is well-above grade and the steel has now reached the fifth floor with Ironworkers erecting about 35 steel beams and columns every day. Thanks to our partners in labor, especially the Ironworkers, Operating Engineers, Carpenters, Electricians, Plumbers, Concrete Trades, Masons, Lathers, Laborers, and Teamsters for their incredible work to date on NYC’s next landmark. (photo: Max Touhey)

[TREPYE]

Originally Posted by NYguy

https://www.6sqft.com/one-vanderbilt...ighest-in-nyc/

One Vanderbilt’s outdoor observation deck may tie for highest in NYC


NOVEMBER 1, 2017
BY DANA SCHULZ




















Already feeling massive.



• Video Link



• Video Link

Oh man, I was kinda hoping the observatory was on the eastern side, not the western side. The real prize there was to see the unprecedented views of the Chrysler’s epic top up close!