Does nobody remember Towering Inferno?

>> The group commissioned SBI Consultants, an engineering firm, to study mechanical and structural issues. Initial findings showed that 73 percent of mechanical, electrical and plumbing components observed failed to conform with the developers’ drawings, and that almost a quarter “presented actual life safety issues,” Mr. Slinin wrote.

Yikes.

Also, corporations should be required to file their beneficial owners, not just a legal point of contact. The US talks a big game about closing offshore loopholes, prying open various islands to permit our tax auditors and bank regulators to unravel what they must -- all fine & well -- but the reality is, to the rest of the world, *we* are by far the biggest haven for oligarchs and cheaters.

Re: 432 Park. We know people whose friends bought super expensive apartment on a high floor and then spent a whole lot more money installing free floating walls to counter the building’s sway

How do free floating walls counter a building’s sway? Isn’t the building going to sway anyways?

But the walls of the rooms you’re in won’t

The craziest thing in the above-cited article was the fact that one woman's $82,000 maintenance delinquency was equal to twice the average income of a person living in the Bronx!!!!!!!! That is one of the most anachronistic things I've read.

ph41, were the walls (majorly) cracking from the swaying?

I loved the part where they use everyone's pantyhose (back when people still wore them) to make a rope. And yes, to think with a project this expensive they cut corners on engineering is appalling.

I wonder if there has ever been a large project that was handed off from the developer to the new board where everybody was happy. My only experience with a new condo was in Chicago almost two decades ago and it was the same thing, just with the decimal points shifted over a few places and many fewer floors.

Quite a bit has been written on the engineering work done to reduce the sway at this building. The link below discusses how the optimal solution would have been a 8-story tall, 1200-ton pendulum, but they instead came up with two 3-story tall, 600-ton pendulums instead.

https://rwdi.com/en_ca/projects/432-park-avenue-tuned-mass-dampers

I do remember that movie, a classic '70s flick along with the Poseidon adventure etc..

I've never had any desire to live up on an extremely high floor. I was friendly with the leFrak family, so when I moved into gateway plaza and battery Park City they offered me a top floor, I politely declined and took the 4th floor!

>Ino - don’t know but when you’ve paid +$65mm don’t think you should have to worry about that and/or remediate on your own dime

*shrug*

You’re paying $65M to live in an engineering marvel. 90’ x 90’ floorplate at 1400’ in the sky. Should they have used a bigger mass damper? Probably. But these buildings are going to sway, creak, and/or sound possessed in high winds. That’s what you’re signing up for. Maybe 432 Park was done particularly poorly, but they all have such issues.

Ha!

I'm having a hard time believing that this is new news. There have been reports of construction defects from the beginning. And the NYTimes article is

Here's one from 2015. https://www.6sqft.com/rafael-vinolys-432-park-reportedly-showing-cracks-in-its-1400-foot-facade/

This particular issue is quite telling since the entire exterior of the building is a frame system that comprises the building's lateral system. It's specific purpose is to hold the building upright and limit sway when exposed to wind, equake, etc. loads. If the building is swaying so much that finishes are cracking and pipes are being bent to the point of breaking, there is a serious design/construction issue. Pure negligence.

I wonder why the NYTimes has decided to write this article now. Did someone from the inside approach them? Why is there no lawsuit? Did the statute of limitations run out? Someone is clamoring for attention.

The NYTimes article is misleading, anyways. Curbed at least got several other experts to opine, many of which you offer a differing, and more correct, opinion.

https://www.curbed.com/2021/02/skyscraper-supertall-432-park-problems-html.html

The link in the Curbed article to the Hancock in Chicago is worth clicking and listening to. That's what a well-made supertall is *supposed* to sound like. The Hancock has an average floorplate of 28,000 sq ft and occupies most of a city block. 432 is taller and has floorplates of under 5000 sq ft. So of course its sway will be worse.

And as Curbed points out, once a building is sold, it's sold, and buyers have zero recourse for faulty construction. In other words, you will get screwed.

I remember one of my friends' parents who lived in a very tall building on the west side in the 50s or 60s? Somehow they determined the 'sick feeling' she was suddenly getting in her new apartment, was from the gentle swaying that the building did. This was many many years ago so I don't remember all the specifics, but this thread reminded me of that.

To your point, @George, I used to work on the 18th/19th floors a 80-sty office tower in Manhattan that was built circa 1930. We had two floors with convenience stair between the two that circled around a two-story-tall "chandelier" which was basically just glass balls on very long strings. I have videos of the chandelier swaying on very windy day. The structure of the building also creaked a bit. And we were only on the 18th/19th floors - image the effects at the 80th! Anyways, my point is that some movement and noise is to be expected while the structure does it's job.

If anyone fancies high rise living, here's what you can get for under $1 million in the 91st floor there, with commons and taxes under $3000. Total closing costs inclusive of both buyer and seller fees are under $20k.

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/175-E-Delaware-Pl-APT-9108-Chicago-IL-60611/3850558_zpid/