175 Park will shine even more.
6 Likes
For those that are not opening the article
It’s sort of difficult to tell what happened, but it seems like the floor area was redistributed to mechanical zones, which explains how it got shorter. That or they were unable to get all the floor area they wanted through ULURP, which is also a definite possibility.
13 Likes
sheesh
This city refuses greatness. As much as I dislike large banks, their power is only reason we got an icon in 270 Park Avenue.
5 Likes
I don’t consider this a downsize unless the rentable square footage changed and I don’t think it did.
The floor count hasn’t changed much, if at all and this is basically what happened to 175 Park where it was approved at a generous max envelope (1600+) and then the team developed the plan to fit up to that envelope as needed for a profitable design.
I don’t see any reason why they would downsize the rsf of a building given a strong office market. Basically Citadel said “we only need 20 foot floor heights - 23 feet is excessive!”.
3 Likes
I will continue to cope until an official press release. It’s depressing to see this happen constantly.
1 Like
I’ve come to realize that whenever a building’s page gets a lot of replies in a short period of time its either because a render dropped or something disappointing happened. In this case, something disappointing may have happened (Height reduction).
9 Likes
172ft lost. The tower got Silversteined!
6 Likes
i thought it was being marketed as midtowns new tallest skyscraper? At 1413 feet is would plateau the skyline with 270 and one vanderbilt and 432 all being around the same range
5 Likes
It would be third in the current lineup, and depending on different proposals barely top 5 by the time it’s completed
1 Like
So what are the chances this is just an initial filing and will grow once it goes through the process?
Well there’s not really anymore processes that this will go through anymore now that ULURP is completed. DOB resubmissions will come as needed, but like any tower/project, this will change as it continues to go through the other phases into/through construction documents. Though it’s not really likely that it will grow back to the 1575’ that was depicted in the initial ULURP filing. It could also get shorter, there’s no reason to think it would only just grow with changes.
I wouldn’t consider this an initial filing with DOB though, theyve probably had several at this point.
2 Likes
Honestly, all I really care about is that 175 Park maintains its height and design
9 Likes
Cleaned up thread. Stay on topic.
I recommend waiting for more info to solidly confirm any sort of reduction.
5 Likes
I’m fine with either height it’s just such a tease when they flirt with the 1600 barrier
2 Likes
-60.49’ (1473.67 - 60.49 = 1413.18) confirms the 1413’ DOB zoning update from the article.
So its highly likely that the new height as of now is 1413’
2 Likes
So 1413’ to top of occupied floor and 1473’ to top of parapet?
And 1590’ was the old height to top of parapet???
No, 1413 to top of parapet, the snippet JRF shared is being measured from AMSL, the building is 60.49’ above AMSL, the math was to show the height difference to confirm the DOB 1413 figure, which measures to top of parapet.
The original height to top of parapet was 1575’, the max envelope was 1586’, it was never taller than the max envelope or the 1575’.
9 Likes
