NEW YORK | 432 Park Avenue (Drake Hotel dev.) | (1,396) FT / 432 M | 89 FLOORS - Page 64

aquablue · #**1261** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 12:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertWalpole

Are you really oblivious to the fact that a site on 57th and Park is not very valuable? Also, a 1,400 foot tower is not mundane.

No.. given its so valuable, I would have thought a better design could have happened. Then I realized, yes, the location is an excuse to NOT have a fancy design: I.e, you do not need to attract people to live here by using architecture as a selling point. Actually, perhaps a sedate design is more attractive to the target market.

Roadcruiser1 · #**1262** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 2:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aquablue

No.. given its so valuable, I would have thought a better design could have happened. Then I realized, yes, the location is an excuse to NOT have a fancy design: I.e, you do not need to attract people to live here by using architecture as a selling point. Actually, perhaps a sedate design is more attractive to the target market.

Again people I will point it out. There were successful boxes before this box.

Zapatan · #**1263** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 3:06 AM**

crazy to think this buildings roof is going to be higher than those towers... even if its only by 10 feet or so, still, this thing is going to dominate.

Roadcruiser1 · #**1264** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 3:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

crazy to think this buildings roof is going to be higher than those towers... even if its only by 10 feet or so, still, this thing is going to dominate.

The only difference between 432 Park Avenue and the Twin Towers is the girth and width. 432 Park Avenue is half of the width and girth of the Twin Towers which is 100 feet by 100 feet while the Twins were 200 feet by 200 feet. So this building is extremely close to being comparable to the Twin Towers by itself.

Zapatan · #**1265** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 3:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

The only difference between 432 Park Avenue and the Twin Towers is the girth and width. 432 Park Avenue is half of the width and girth of the Twin Towers which is 100 feet by 100 feet while the Twins were 200 feet by 200 feet. So this building is extremely close to being comparable to the Twin Towers by itself.

Yea it's basically just one of the twins after going on a diet for a while, but I was mostly talking heightwise.

Shouldn't the title be changed to 1,380 feet as well?

RobertWalpole · #**1266** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 3:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Yea it's basically just one of the twins after going on a diet for a while, but I was mostly talking heightwise.

Shouldn't the title be changed to 1,380 feet as well?

Why change the title to 1,380 when no permits have been filed for the tower that say it will be that height and the architect describes it as taller than that?

Zapatan · #**1267** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 3:53 AM**

uuh yea so anyway, this building has air rights to 1420 feet but that doesnt mean it will end up exactly that tall. The official height listed in the media is now 1380, which is more than fine by anyone's standards. Not saying it's the final height, but for now that's all we know.

plinko · #**1268** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 4:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford

And there isn't anything released beyond some basic renderings (and even those aren't confirmed), so it's useless to make definitive statements about the quality of design.

This obviously needs to be re-iterated again and again for the learning impaired.

And this building is nothing like, and has few (if any) similarities to the old WTC, except that it has 4 sides and is really tall.

I for one can't wait to see Vinoly's final constructed design.

Zapatan · #**1269** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 4:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by plinko

And this building is nothing like, and has few (if any) similarities to the old WTC, except that it has 4 sides and is really tall.
.

Yea I was just comparing the height

plinko · #**1270** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 4:34 AM**

^I wasn't talking to you specifically...

Zapatan · #**1271** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 4:42 AM**

I know, but some people only compare the two just due to the height and the fact that they are both boxes... it's kind of a defense against those who bash this tower I guess.

NYguy · #**1272** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 7:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE

15 CPW sold out because of the DESIGN.

Even if that were completely true (and it isn't, the name should give it away), it would have nothing to do with what's going on here. It should also be pointed out again that the site itself has limits designwise. Obviously they are reaching for height, another appeal to those looking for it. But there are very strict guidlines for building design in New York. What you have here is basically a tower designed to fit in "as of right", that is, without the need to go before planning to get a special permit (and risk having the height chopped down like the Tower Verre, which needed special permits for its unique design). As we've seen with the One57 building, the architect worked within the zoning for that site to achieve that design - no approvals needed. The only thing standing in the way here would seem to be the financing. And this thing could be under construction before they even have it. (Again, see One57).

RobertWalpole · #**1273** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 10:46 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

uuh yea so anyway, this building has air rights to 1420 feet but that doesnt mean it will end up exactly that tall. The official height listed in the media is now 1380, which is more than fine by anyone's standards. Not saying it's the final height, but for now that's all we know.

Incorrect. The architect lists it on LinkedIn as taller than that. I think that he knows better than you.

Crawford · #**1274** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 2:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

uuh yea so anyway, this building has air rights to 1420 feet but that doesnt mean it will end up exactly that tall.

There are no height limits based on air rights. They could build 2,000 ft. if they wanted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

The official height listed in the media is now 1380, which is more than fine by anyone's standards. Not saying it's the final height, but for now that's all we know.

The media have reported a ton of different heights, and your height figure isn't from the media, but from a DOB filing.

But DOB filings aren't definitive either, and you can't take a DOB filing for height as a proxy for building height.

Zapatan · #**1275** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 3:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford

There are no height limits based on air rights. They could build 2,000 ft. if they wanted.

The media have reported a ton of different heights, and your height figure isn't from the media, but from a DOB filing.

But DOB filings aren't definitive either, and you can't take a DOB filing for height as a proxy for building height.

Fair enough, wasn't there originally a 1700 footer planned here?

MrSlippery519 · #**1276** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 6:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Fair enough, wasn't there originally a 1700 footer planned here?

It all comes down to what properties they acquire, if they wanted to or could get more yes it could very well end up that height.

Zapatan · #**1277** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 7:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSlippery519

It all comes down to what properties they acquire, if they wanted to or could get more yes it could very well end up that height.

If it did... that would be just awesome, or even if it just broke 1420 feet. Either way, this thing is gonna be huge.

NYguy · #**1278** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 10:18 PM**

One thing for certain is that it'll be tall, probably the tallest in Midtown. No need to split hairs over exact numbers at this point.

Roadcruiser1 · #**1279** Posted **Mar 16, 2012, 10:28 PM**

One thing for certain is that 432 Park Avenue will stand out. You can be anywhere in New York City and you will be able to see it because it will stick out.

NYguy · #**1280** Posted **Mar 20, 2012, 2:10 PM**

Cam shot from today (March 20, 2012)