NEW YORK | 432 Park Avenue (Drake Hotel dev.) | (1,396) FT / 432 M | 89 FLOORS - Page 84

Roadcruiser1 · #**1661** Posted **May 30, 2012, 2:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by eseninobrandon

they have a cam?

can u gimme a link?

http://www.432park.com/?a8541238

Onn · #**1662** Posted **May 30, 2012, 2:36 AM**

Quote:

"CIM, the Los Angeles-based private equity fund, has been out looking for partners in its project, and in recent months circulated a packet in which it and its advisers at Citigroup sought to cobble together more than $100 million from investors putting in at least $1 million each."

Being built with true American capitalist grit, love it! No government mumbo jumbo here.

lakegz · #**1663** Posted **May 30, 2012, 4:30 AM**

can anyone here pretend to be a wealthy industrialist investor so we can get our hands on one of these packets asap?

hunser · #**1664** Posted **May 30, 2012, 7:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onn

Being built with true American capitalist grit, love it! No government mumbo jumbo here.

Yeah, this will go up in no time. No politicians, PA and Durst to screw things up.

MAYRICH | Hitachi 850's & Hitachi 800 triple boom von Vin Schiano auf Flickr

NYguy · #**1665** Posted **May 30, 2012, 11:06 AM**

The best part of yesterday's news, which was a pretty good day for skyscraper news in New York is below...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj
CIM Group Romps on Both Coasts
L.A. Firm Is Selling Hollywood Hotel, Nearing Financing for New York Project.

May 29, 2012
By CRAIG KARMIN And ELIOT BROWN

Quote:

A Los Angeles-based real-estate investor that has been an aggressive buyer in New York is selling a prime Hollywood hotel and a downtown Manhattan lot as it edges closer toward completing financing for its $1.2 billion project on Park Avenue.

CIM Group is expected to close in June on the financing for its planned 1,395-foot residential tower on the site of the old Drake Hotel in Midtown, according to people familiar with the matter. Designed by Rafael Vinoly, it would be one of the largest Manhattan projects to proceed since the downturn.

Ed007Toronto · #**1666** Posted **May 30, 2012, 1:18 PM**

Great news!

TechTalkGuy · #**1667** Posted **May 31, 2012, 4:12 AM**

This tower is one of my favorites, so far.

TechTalkGuy · #**1668** Posted **May 31, 2012, 5:41 AM**

I strongly believe that 432 Park Avenue to be the most photographed building in the city (Central Park, East River, Hudson River, Top of the Rock, Empire State Building Observatory, etc.) -- you name it !!

Eidolon · #**1669** Posted **May 31, 2012, 5:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fish

I strongly believe that 432 Park Avenue to be the most photographed building in the city (Central Park, East River, Hudson River, Top of the Rock, Empire State Building Observatory, etc.) -- you name it !!

I think that the WTC complex will be the most photographed one in NY becaue that area has so much history (good, bad and terrible) that 432 Park will lack, mostly for the better in my opinion.

Not saying that this one won't go unnoticed though, it will be the new king of the city by roof height, at least until 225 W57th gets moving.

sterlippo1 · #**1670** Posted **May 31, 2012, 10:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eidolon

I think that the WTC complex will be the most photographed one in NY becaue that area has so much history (good, bad and terrible) that 432 Park will lack, mostly for the better in my opinion.

Not saying that this one won't go unnoticed though, it will be the new king of the city by roof height, at least until 225 W57th gets moving.

no building is or will be photographed more than 1WTC or ESB, even this beauty, ain't gonna happen

NYguy · #**1671** Posted **May 31, 2012, 10:37 AM**

They start early here....(May 31, 2012)

www.432park.com

Ed007Toronto · #**1672** Posted **May 31, 2012, 1:42 PM**

Great shot.

NYguy · #**1673** Posted **May 31, 2012, 2:05 PM**

I'll just post this because it's similar, but over in the 225 W. 57th thread, a model of one of the potential designs of that tower shows a very similar concept of the sky gardens/floating tower design that will be built here.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...&postcount=182

NYguy · #**1674** Posted **Jun 1, 2012, 8:45 PM**

http://archpaper.com/news/articles.asp?id=6079

Sky's The Limit
New York playing catch-up on super tall residential skyscrapers.

Matt Shaw
6/01/12

Quote:

Residential towers streaking up over 1,000 feet represent the latest phenomenon in New York’s storied skyscraper history. Of the world’s 49 completed buildings over 1,000 feet, only 12 are residential, mostly in Dubai or Asia. Two, the Hancock Center and Trump International, are in Chicago. Not to be outdone, New York has broken ground on two of four planned supertall residential towers. Russia’s ultra-wealthy investing class are providing some of the fuel for take-off, as it is estimated that as much as five percent of their foreign investment is directed into American real estate, much of it super-luxe apartments. In fact, when a trust fund in the name of Dmitry Rybolovlev’s daughter Ekaterina purchased the penthouse at 15 Central Park West, it drove the price of the penthouse at Extell Development’s 90-story One57 up from $98.5 million to a cool $110 million.

Article already outdated....

Duck From NY · #**1675** Posted **Jun 2, 2012, 2:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trvlr70

I hooked up with a Swissair flight attendant there a long time ago on a layover. Great memories. Sorry it's gone!

Yeah the Drake was definitely nice, but 432 will make up for it. And lol, was this back when flight attendants were stewardesses?

CoolCzech · #**1676** Posted **Jun 2, 2012, 1:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duck From NY

Yeah the Drake was definitely nice, but 432 will make up for it. And lol, was this back when flight attendants were stewardesses?

What do you think "flight attendants" are today, NASA flight engineers?

Chicago103 · #**1677** Posted **Jun 3, 2012, 4:53 AM**

Why do all these contemporary buildings have such freaking low floor counts?! This is a flat roofed residential or mostly residential building taller than the World Trade Center (the old which had 110 floors), I mean this thing should have 110 floors easily. The John Hancock Center in Chicago has 100 floors and it is only partly residential and only 1,127 feet tall. Something just irks me about an all residential flat roofed building (no spire, etc.) only having 89 floors. Is this because luxury buildings these days demand super high ceilings that people didn't demand in the 1960's and 1970's or what?

uaarkson · #**1678** Posted **Jun 3, 2012, 4:55 AM**

Man, who cares? It makes no difference to us how many floors it has.

Crawford · #**1679** Posted **Jun 3, 2012, 5:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago103

Is this because luxury buildings these days demand super high ceilings that people didn't demand in the 1960's and 1970's or what?

Yes, this is the primary reason.

Apartment buildings from the late 50's through the early 90's had very low ceilings. Since then, ceiling heights have risen, especially in superluxury projects.

This is a big reason why your typical 60's-70's apartment tower has a tough time competing with prewar and newer buildings.

Zapatan · #**1680** Posted **Jun 3, 2012, 6:32 AM**

Yea there are big sky gardens too in this one, that's a factor.

It also could be 89 floors to the top apartment with a few mechanical ones, maybe in the low 90's

I wonder if they will advertise it as higher though like One57 does with its "90" stories

which is pretty dumb