NEW YORK | 432 Park Avenue (Drake Hotel dev.) | (1,396) FT / 432 M | 89 FLOORS - Page 53

Zapatan · #**1041** Posted **Feb 5, 2012, 4:01 PM**

The good thing is, it's still too small in that rendering^

Look at pictures of Sears compared to some of the 800 footers in Chicago, it's kind of like that.

DrNest · #**1042** Posted **Feb 5, 2012, 4:02 PM**

Love that picture RobertWalpole. It shows perfectly how wonderful this tower will fit into the skyline.

I find it a tad curious that it's called 432 Park when it's being constructed on 440 Park Ave, and 432 Park Ave is a block south. I can perceive that causing some confusion. However, simple solution would be to add another 8m height and call the tower 440 Park!

RobertWalpole · #**1043** Posted **Feb 5, 2012, 4:24 PM**

It's called 432 Park bec it's 432m tall.

DrNest · #**1044** Posted **Feb 5, 2012, 4:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertWalpole

It's called 432 Park bec it's 432m tall.

I meant to add in my previous comment I get that reason. But I still find it curious that it's 432 Park with the potential for confusion with the actual address.

Zapatan · #**1045** Posted **Feb 5, 2012, 4:43 PM**

[edit]

DrNest · #**1046** Posted **Feb 5, 2012, 5:13 PM**

Editing an earlier post after someone had commented towards it would alter the flow of the thread. And still wouldn't address the point I was making about postal address confusion.

babybackribs2314 · #**1047** Posted **Feb 5, 2012, 7:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertWalpole

I look forward to this!

That rendering definitely looks a little small, but still gets the point across.

Alone, this will be quite a standout (and a bit of a sore thumb), but envision the same render with 5-10 similar towers in the 57th street corridor (skinny little things that top out in the 1,200-1,500' range). That's how the picture is going to look in 2025, and I do think the effect of so many 'spindly' towers rising on the skyline will end up being quite beautiful and dramatic, with that neighborhood taking on a 'Coruscant' look for the first time.

What people here are also forgetting is that the immediate vicinity of 432 is going to be rezoned fairly soon, likely paving the way for viable office supertalls in Midtown East. The neighborhood already has the Chrysler (and Bloomberg/Citibank both come close to the 1k mark), so office buildings that tall are certainly in-demand and viable for the neighborhood... any nearby office colossus could neuter 432's skyline impact as well.

reencharles · #**1048** Posted **Feb 6, 2012, 3:04 AM**

^^ I agree with you. In 10 years, this vision will change much.
It will be amazing. I'm hoping this new rezoned is approved in Midtown East.

patriotizzy · #**1049** Posted **Feb 6, 2012, 6:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

agreed, how people can complain about a 1420 foot flat topped tower in NYC is beyond me, the city has plenty of great design already, so the height will do the skyline wonders.

Really? The city has plenty of great design already, so lets just build boxy buildings. Did you honestly think it through when you wrote this? I don't mean to sound like a troll. I'm just trying to rationalize the love for this building.

Zapatan · #**1050** Posted **Feb 6, 2012, 10:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by patriotizzy

Really? The city has plenty of great design already, so lets just build boxy buildings. Did you honestly think it through when you wrote this? I don't mean to sound like a troll. I'm just trying to rationalize the love for this building.

I'm not saying it shouldn't have been better looking, but height alone is a thing of beauty in my opinion. There are beautiful old buildings all over NYC, I don't mind if there's a silver, 430+ meter box on the skyline, it will help raise the average height, which is a very good thing.

DrNest · #**1051** Posted **Feb 7, 2012, 1:24 AM**

This building at half, or even two thirds it's proposed height wouldn't be anything special. But the height will definitely add to the skyline in a very positive way.

Zapatan · #**1052** Posted **Feb 7, 2012, 12:54 PM**

Agreed, I can't believe some people think design is everything and height is nothing. It's a SKYSCRAPER forum for pete's sake

Design is important, but if you have a 300 foot tall gorgeous tower in NYC no one will see it. This tower will dominate.

hunser · #**1053** Posted **Feb 7, 2012, 2:16 PM**

^^ Yeah, at this point only height should matter. If it were up to me this one should even break the 500m+ mark.

Render by Funkyskunk2:

88madri · #**1054** Posted **Feb 7, 2012, 3:57 PM**

Oh no.. !! The webcam is offline

MrSlippery519 · #**1055** Posted **Feb 7, 2012, 4:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 88madri

Oh no.. !! The webcam is offline

Ya I noticed that this morning as well...kinda sucks hopefully was just a mix up and it will be back online sooner than later.

1Boston · #**1056** Posted **Feb 7, 2012, 7:36 PM**

i think the cladding and the height are going to be the strong points for this tower. and yea what happened with the webcam, it looks like another website took its spot?

Dac150 · #**1057** Posted **Feb 7, 2012, 7:45 PM**

Wow, it's really thin from that angle . . almost too thin.

aquablue · #**1058** Posted **Feb 7, 2012, 7:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150

Wow, it's really thin from that angle . . almost too thin.

I disagree. The thinness in one of the trump cards of this building. It is impressive in height yet doesn't dominate or destroy the streetscape due to bulk. I.e, you can still see the sky, and that is important for Park Avenue. You don't want Park Avenue being a massive dark canyon IMO.

Dac150 · #**1059** Posted **Feb 7, 2012, 8:32 PM**

^^^ In some respects it already is - perhaps I find the building sort of 'awkward' because it doesn't jive with that trend.

aquablue · #**1060** Posted **Feb 7, 2012, 8:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150

^^^ In some respects it already is - perhaps I find the building sort of 'awkward' because it doesn't jive with that trend.

Sure, it is a canyon, but the sky is still quite visible and there is decent light due to the width of the avenue. Most buildings are not very tall. A 400+m monster tower would dominate and overpower the openness of this avenue.