NEW YORK | 432 Park Avenue (Drake Hotel dev.) | (1,396) FT / 432 M | 89 FLOORS - Page 59

scalziand · #**1161** Posted **Feb 24, 2012, 1:32 PM**

Incidentally, that model also shows that 41 and 42 are staying.

RobertWalpole · #**1162** Posted **Feb 24, 2012, 10:24 PM**

There's an article on the Real Deal which states that Jacob withdrew a lawsuit against CIM. I wonder if he's selling now. There was a plan for this tower to rise to 1,700 feet tall depending upon the acquisition of additional properties (i.e., Jacob's building and No. 36).

gramsjdg · #**1163** Posted **Feb 25, 2012, 7:47 AM**

1700 feet at the current floorplate size/width?

RobertWalpole · #**1164** Posted **Feb 25, 2012, 11:26 AM**

I don't know that, but I do know that, depending upon the acquisition of additional properties along 57th St. (e.g., nos. 36 and Jacob), there was a plan to reach 1,700.

scalziand · #**1165** Posted **Feb 25, 2012, 3:39 PM**

I wouldn't mind seeing 36 go. It was one of the dumpier townhouses.

RobertWalpole · #**1166** Posted **Feb 25, 2012, 4:25 PM**

I agree. Plus, 36 has a vacate order with the DOB which suggests to me that it's structurally unsound. Surprisingly, however, the fashion company still seems to be in the second floor.

babybackribs2314 · #**1167** Posted **Feb 25, 2012, 10:06 PM**

I would prefer this at 1700 if that's still possible. While 1,432' is great, a roof that high would be ridiculous, and I couldn't imagine the prices the upper units would sell for (it would also be well above the new WTC and the tallest in the Western Hemisphere to roof

).

Besides that, it would put more pressure on 225W57th to go further up (IMO). The competition is being driven by views at this point, and the money is certainly there. If it had the same proportions as One57 something ~1,250 would seem likely, but if they went with something more slender, who knows?

If only the MoMA tower were still planned at 1,250'... Even still, the impact of all of these will be very dramatic on the Midtown skyline. Will make for a nice panorama with the new West Side and Downtown skylines come 2020.

1Boston · #**1168** Posted **Feb 26, 2012, 1:53 AM**

If they're going with the same design, i dont know if i would want it to be that high. It would look so weird being that high and that slender, and just being a box. And i feel like it wouldn't be safe being that high and the slender, but im not an expert.

jd3189 · #**1169** Posted **Feb 26, 2012, 2:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by babybackribs2314

I would prefer this at 1700 if that's still possible. While 1,432' is great, a roof that high would be ridiculous, and I couldn't imagine the prices the upper units would sell for (it would also be well above the new WTC and the tallest in the Western Hemisphere to roof

).

Why we need to go up that high? Why not just pass the Sears' roof, something 1 WTC isn't trying to do? Not to say it can't happen,but it will look very out of place if that happens.

RobertWalpole · #**1170** Posted **Feb 26, 2012, 2:45 AM**

They don't care about competing with the Sears Tower. They care about maximizing views that generate revenue.

aquablue · #**1171** Posted **Feb 26, 2012, 2:54 AM**

I doubt they get any where near 1700 feet. However, I wouldn't mind

. Just not this design.

THE BIG APPLE · #**1172** Posted **Feb 26, 2012, 5:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd3189

it will look very out of place if that happens.

It already looks VERY very out of place at the current moment. I say REDESIGN (I know it's not happening).

gramsjdg · #**1173** Posted **Feb 26, 2012, 7:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd3189

Why we need to go up that high? Why not just pass the Sears' roof, something 1 WTC isn't trying to do? Not to say it can't happen,but it will look very out of place if that happens.

Heck, if it ended up being 1432 ft, it would only need 19 ft more to pass Sears.

Zerton · #**1174** Posted **Feb 27, 2012, 8:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertWalpole

I don't know that, but I do know that, depending upon the acquisition of additional properties along 57th St. (e.g., nos. 36 and Jacob), there was a plan to reach 1,700.

Have they since acquired said properties?

RobertWalpole · #**1175** Posted **Feb 27, 2012, 11:37 AM**

Not to my knowledge, but I would not be surprised if they do.

NYguy · #**1176** Posted **Feb 28, 2012, 7:18 PM**

Today's cam shot...

www.432park.com

Dac150 · #**1177** Posted **Feb 28, 2012, 8:19 PM**

Awesome progress - I know that's a repetitive comment, however it's true.

hunser · #**1178** Posted **Feb 28, 2012, 9:13 PM**

Looks like concrete pouring...

Dac150 · #**1179** Posted **Feb 28, 2012, 9:14 PM**

It's very interesting - aside from the location it's as if we're reliving the prep / construction of One57. The early progression of One57 is very similar to the current progression of this project.

hunser · #**1180** Posted **Feb 28, 2012, 9:22 PM**

^^ True that. Also, there hasn't been any official render released so far , just like with One57. We'll probably be in the early contruction stages and at the same time still be without a render...
Another interesting note: tower will probably start actual contruction without being fully funded, again the same as One57.