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

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by JACKinNYC

Because there's nothing special about them. Yes, form follows function... but the form of a box looks boring. A box is the most economical use of space, but I'd rather look at a Van Gogh painting than the box it came in.

Japanese cities are full of boxy skyscraper buildings and houses. You don't hear anybody complaining about that. In fact, all you hear is praise for the zen-like nature inspired minimalist designs that the Japanese produce and how it is a reflection of their cultural values. Many peopel like and can appreciate minimalism for what it is and see beauty in such forms. In fact, there is a lot of beauty in the simple straight lines of this tower and the repetition of its facade squares. It has a bahaus look or corbusien look to me.

Oh, and how is this building out of place? It is just a taller (and better) version of many of the dull boxes that surround it. It suits its purpose perfectly. A tower Verre-like tower would not have the same usable space and interior flexibility. People who like to buy these extremely expensive apartments probably appreciate the boxy nature, so that the buildings walls don't impose on their interior space.

[ThatOneGuy]

^^Indeed. Minimalism is quite underrated for an architectural style.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy

^^Indeed. Minimalism is quite underrated for an architectural style.

I agree. Although not a flash tower, it will be impressive, especially with the squares lit up at night.

[WanderingQueen]

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

Yeah and the Twin Towers were two big boxes. Yet I don't see people complaining about them.

I'm just guessing that you must not have been very old (or born) at the time they were built - and for many years thereafter. Lots of people HATED the WTC specifically because the design was so boring. Amazing how the catastrophic loss of a thing increases its value.

[Roadcruiser1]

Originally Posted by WanderingQueen

I'm just guessing that you must not have been very old (or born) at the time they were built - and for many years thereafter. Lots of people HATED the WTC specifically because the design was so boring. Amazing how the catastrophic loss of a thing increases its value.

No I was alive when they were still standing and I loved them even back then. So simple, so elegant, but yet so dominant. 432 Park Avenue will have the same sort of reflection on people.

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

Yeah and the Twin Towers were two big boxes. Yet I don't see people complaining about them.

A lot of people thought they were pretty boring architecturally, myself included. They had some style, but were essentially boxes with very narrow windows. (Is there an emoticon for "unroll eyes"?)

The lit windows will look good at night, but that's always the case at night. The outer boringness gets darkened away and the inner light shines through.

And its height will be extremely impressive. And even though it won't be a plain glass box (the most boring) it will still be a glorified box.

I understand that many people like boxes, and more power to you. You're going to enjoy this one. As will I (just not its boxiness).

[plinko]

Originally Posted by JSsocal

^^you're joking.. all I am saying is if you gave any other big name architect a crack at this building then they'd design something better, or at least more interesting then this monotonous twig that robert venturi has come up with.

Without knowing the design and economic constraints, it's not possible to say that another architect could have come up with something better.

And Venturi has nothing to do with this project...

------------------------------------------------------------------

I haven't made up my mind at all about this building (I usually wait until I can see it in person), but the armchair architect crowd in here is getting stale - 'My three year old nephew could have done better!' Well, there was a reason he (or you, or me) wasn't asked to...

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Oura

It looks out of place because it's out of scale compared to the nearby buildings, because it's on a midblock site, because it doesn't fill the L-shaped plot, and because it will leave the blank walls of all the nearby buildings visible like a Kaufman special..
Add to that, that they could have kept the facades of the townhouses instead of destroying them.

I find it interesting that you would not think the townhouses out of place and scale - surrounded by all of the skyscrapers as they were. As far as fitting the plot, study the diagram. The base could wrap around the lot (as many skyscrapers do) and it wouldn't change the basic shape of the tower. And as far as being taller than the nearby buildings, well yeah, that's the very nature of skyscrapers - sometimes they are taller or much taller than their neighbors. It's why the best skylines have a variety of heights. BTW, the Empire State didn't become known as the marvel that it is because it blended in so well with it's neighbors.

This building will be tall, it will be slender and sleek. But overall it will be just another peak on the everchanging skyline of Manhattan.

[FMIII]

Originally Posted by NYguy

I don't know what you mean by "out of place". If it's a reference to height, it may help you to know that's the point of it. As far as design, it's no more out of place than any other skyscraper in the City. You can either like it or hate it, but it can't really be called out of place.

I like this tower, and if it had been built closer to the East river between Citicorp and Trump World Tower, I wouldn't have written "out of place". Unfortunately, it's not the case.

[eseninobrandon]

building looks like robot arms apartments.

[TechTalkGuy]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, this is (currently) my favorite project in NYC right now !!

I love the design so much -- it's original, has no cheating spire, has an awe inspiring design with a repeating pattern of boxes that just looks good.

It blends into the skyline perfectly.
The skyline looks awesome when the surrounding towers that are shorter enhance the sleek, slenderness of 432 Park Avenue.

What would be even more awesome is more towers just like this, showing up in random locations throughout the city.

We have enough brown apartment towers that all look alike -- this is a breath of fresh air !!

[ParkCorridor]

If it seems out of place, it will likely be less so once 425 Park is rebuilt and the rest of Park Avenue rezoned and updated. 432 will bring more residential into the mid 50's, which i'm greatly looking forward to.

[TechTalkGuy]

I want to add that New York City is a city of skyscrapers.
I see no reason whatsoever why anyone would not enjoy this new tower.

Granted, you might be jealous if you live in one of those old brown apartment towers that simply blend in because they all look alike, but at least when you view the skyline, you will be delighted with something new!

As for the critics, all towers have critics.
For example, the Hearst Magazine Tower has a pleasant repeating design that charms it's way to greatness.

Then we have the NY Times Tower, another highly criticized tower that has a repeating design that just looks good.

But instead of comparing other highly criticized designs, let's all agree to enjoy this new tower!

[Arawooho]

Originally Posted by fish

I want to add that New York City is a city of skyscrapers.
I see no reason whatsoever why anyone would not enjoy this new tower.

Granted, you might be jealous if you live in one of those old brown apartment towers that simply blend in because they all look alike, but at least when you view the skyline, you will be delighted with something new!

As for the critics, all towers have critics.
For example, the Hearst Magazine Tower has a pleasant repeating design that charms it's way to greatness.

Then we have the NY Times Tower, another highly criticized tower that has a repeating design that just looks good.

But instead of comparing other highly criticized designs, let's all agree to enjoy this new tower!

I agree. i almost do not care about the design of this because what's important here is that it's new.

[NYC2ATX]

there's no doubt about it, this tower is monolithic, and to some that's unwelcoming or off-putting, but its facade will save it I feel. The square windows and visible nickel mullions are a welcome break from the pane glass facades it seems every single tower constructed nowadays has. I mean after a certain point, how much variety can you get from glass curtain walls? I'm more eager for the new age of NY towers this building will usher in. Consider that, though 40 Wall Street seemed to be ahead of the curve and setting a standard in the late 20s..it led to the Chrysler and Empire State Buildings following close after. This tower is just a preview of all the awesomeness to come.

PS: not for nothing, but I don't know why some people need to be so arrogant and condescending on this forum. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, this is supposed to be a forum for open and friendly discussion.

[Brian Dino Vabec]

NYGuy, can you give us link to those DOB fillings on the previous page?

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by fish

But instead of comparing other highly criticized designs, let's all agree to enjoy this new tower!

Good point. I will enjoy watching it go up. I'm obviously not crazy about the design, but I love its height, its crazy skininess, and the impact it will have on the skyline. It will be lots of fun to watch it rise!

[ib2010]

At a 21 to 1 (height to width), it would be pretty hard to introduce any meaningful "bends" to the structure. They already are being quite "bold" at managing wind effects. I'm a fan of such aggressive projects.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by FMIII

if it had been built closer to the East river between Citicorp and Trump World Tower, I wouldn't have written "out of place". Unfortunately, it's not the case.

Again, you've failed to show why it is "out of place". It's as much taller than Trump World Tower than it is some of if its own neighbors. Same for Citicorp. There's a reason those towers stand out on the skyline.

Originally Posted by Brian Dino Vabec

NYGuy, can you give us link to those DOB fillings on the previous page?

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/BS...de=ES370941419

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by ib2010

At a 21 to 1 (height to width), it would be pretty hard to introduce any meaningful "bends" to the structure. They already are being quite "bold" at managing wind effects. I'm a fan of such aggressive projects.

it's about 14.5 to 1, don't know where you got the 21 figure.

93.5 feet wide and 1398 feet tall = about 14.5 to 1 ratio