NEW YORK | 432 Park Avenue (Drake Hotel dev.) | (1,396) FT / 432 M | 89 FLOORS - Page 46

THE BIG APPLE · #**901** Posted **Jan 8, 2012, 5:58 PM**

TWT has a rectangular footprint, and this is closer to a square. Plus TWT is much better looking for a Costas design, and the height is perfect. Believe me if TWT was anywhere near this buildings height the skyline would've been destroyed in 10 years ago. Buildings aren't supposed to soar this high unless the design is spot on. So far I'm only disappointed with this future NYC supertall, which is among many beautiful one's either U/C or proposed. One57, Verre, twin Hudson Yards etc.

Dac150 · #**902** Posted **Jan 8, 2012, 7:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE

Plus TWT is much better looking for a Costas design, and the height is perfect. Believe me if TWT was anywhere near this buildings height the skyline would've been destroyed in 10 years ago. Buildings aren't supposed to soar this high unless the design is spot on.

I don't get where you're coming from . . . you throw these statements out there that make no sense.

And stop being so judgmental when there's really nothing yet to judge.

NYguy · #**903** Posted **Jan 8, 2012, 9:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150

I'm confident financing will be attained . . . from what I've read CIM has a goooood relationship with their financiers.

It's a good chance they will start construction without full construction financing, similar to what happened with One57. The southside excavation is moving along nicely, and when the townhouses are demolished we'll get excavation there. Then we'll see what's happening while also waiting for permits to be filed for the entire building. That will be a sign that CIM intends to move forward.

Juanses · #**904** Posted **Jan 9, 2012, 12:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford

Thank you!

Again, folks, there is no released design. There are only basic massings and renderings, and it's foolish to make architectural comments based on a massing.

If we cannot discuss the rendering "as if" the current rendering is the final rendering than why post a rendering at all...?

NYguy · #**905** Posted **Jan 9, 2012, 8:16 PM**

Today's cam shot, 3:10 pm

www.432parkavenue.com

NYguy · #**906** Posted **Jan 11, 2012, 8:49 PM**

Jan 11, 3:45 pm

www.432park.com

Dac150 · #**907** Posted **Jan 11, 2012, 8:56 PM**

They're chipping away little by little.

SD_Phil · #**908** Posted **Jan 12, 2012, 2:58 AM**

Hopefully this hasn't been asked recently but...assuming demolition and excavation proceed without delays (a small if?) what's the timetable here for actual foundation work to begin?

NYguy · #**909** Posted **Jan 12, 2012, 8:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SD_Phil

assuming demolition and excavation proceed without delays (a small if?) what's the timetable here for actual foundation work to begin?

Personally, I believe foundation work will begin by the end of the year. Everything so far seems to suggest it, but we'll see.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...415136636.html

Quote:

The plans for the project, named 432 Park Ave., call for 128 condos with more than 12-foot high ceilings; a 5,000 square foot, partially covered, driveway to ensure privacy; and amenities like golf training facilities and private dining and screening rooms. The total price tag: more than $1 billion.

There is no scheduled completion date, and the project still faces challenges amid an uncertain economic and market environment. Crucially, CIM needs a construction loan of as much as $700 million. That isn't an easy type of financing to obtain these days, with European banks cutting back because of their debt problems and only a small handful of U.S. banks willing to lend.

Avi Shemesh, a CIM founding principal, said the firm is confident it will get a loan. "We have longstanding relationships with lenders," Mr. Shemesh said. "We anticipate our construction financing to be in place well in advance of any sort of deadline."

NYguy · #**910** Posted **Jan 12, 2012, 4:46 PM**

Today's shot, 11:45 am

www.432park.com

NYguy · #**911** Posted **Jan 13, 2012, 4:29 PM**

This is starting to look more and more like the One57 site did early on in construction. I thought we were as low as we were going to go here. But I was watching the cam, and suddenly the digging began again on the east...

(Jan 13, 11:00 am)

www.432park.com

Rey88 · #**912** Posted **Jan 13, 2012, 4:58 PM**

432 Park Avenue: is official - 432.8 meter / 1420 feet tall

http://buildingdb.ctbuh.org/building...lding_id=13227

babybackribs2314 · #**913** Posted **Jan 13, 2012, 5:07 PM**

WOOT WOOT!

I was ambivalent about the design at first but whoever did the diagram here improved my opinion a million times over; it actually makes the building look quite fantastic (conservative, but fantastic). It will be very good having a supertall with a facade that is more than just glass!

http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=94370

NYC is not only getting a NEW tallest residential, but a tower with a roof height GREATER than the new WTC... and the WTC isn't even done!!

Oura · #**914** Posted **Jan 13, 2012, 5:44 PM**

Height doesn't make everything.

Towersteve · #**915** Posted **Jan 13, 2012, 6:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oura

Height doesn't make everything.

I agree but I'm glad in this instance it surpasses the roof height of 1 WTC. I didn't want 1 WTC to be a reason to not build a super or megatall in NYC just as the Empire State Building's height was part of the reasoning behind the height reduction of Tower Verre. Not that this guarantee's people will use 1 WTC to stall big projects but people can always respond there already is a building taller than that.

Brian. · #**916** Posted **Jan 13, 2012, 6:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

This is starting to look more and more like the One57 site did early on in construction. I thought we were as low as we were going to go here. But I was watching the cam, and suddenly the digging began again on the east...

Looks like pouring those walls to shore up the foundations of the adjacent buildings was to go deeper.

Eidolon · #**917** Posted **Jan 13, 2012, 7:01 PM**

On a slightly unrelated note, how long do you believe it will be until we get a building with a 500M+ roof in NYC?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towersteve

I agree but I'm glad in this instance it surpasses the roof height of 1 WTC. I didn't want 1 WTC to be a reason to not build a super or megatall in NYC just as the Empire State Building's height was part of the reasoning behind the height reduction of Tower Verre. Not that this guarantee's people will use 1 WTC to stall big projects but people can always respond there already is a building taller than that.

Beat me to it.

hunser · #**918** Posted **Jan 13, 2012, 8:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey88

432 Park Avenue: is official - 432.8 meter / 1420 feet tall

http://buildingdb.ctbuh.org/building...lding_id=13227

I don't think those figures are final. We have to wait for an official release, and also for the official floor count which CTBUH doesn't have.

Dac150 · #**919** Posted **Jan 13, 2012, 9:13 PM**

Agreed - we have a ways to go before finalized figures are released.

THE BIG APPLE · #**920** Posted **Jan 13, 2012, 11:26 PM**

dudateles

This view will change in a few years don't you think.