Taste is subjective, every few years someone comes along and builds something that people love or hate and over time everyone can’t see the city without it. Most of the critics hated the Empire State Building when built but we can’t picture NY without it today. Not every critic or citizen will love every building that goes up and people who don’t have or can’t afford will always fine fault in anything expensive until they come into money then their opinion changes. The one thing most people don’t realize is that NY is all about change, sometimes the old needs to work with the new; everyone says that 432 Park is out of scale but 15 years from now it may not even be in the top 25 tallest building in the city. people are complaining about 1400 foot buildings and 20 years from now we’ll have new things to complain about “I can’t believe that buildings 2800 feet tall or 3000 feet tall” and people will complain instead of appreciating the art form which is Architecture. With all of that being said Metropolitan Tower is STILL my favorite building, I love the D line (the 9’ ceilings are a flaw) and 432 PARK is another great building that will stand the test of time. There are several Macklowe buildings I would love to live in if I could afford to but I can’t, as of yet but when my time comes I’ll be there…200 East 59th street is looking good I love the E Line (anything that gives me a great view of the Chrysler Building {which is my favorite office building} is a plus)...Tomorrow!
432 Park did not need any variances because of the purchase of air rights from the surrounding buildings. I believe it could have been even taller, but Macklowe did not want to go beyond the new World Trade Center.
Yes, the building is ugly as sin and a blot on the skyline. But legally, I don't know how it could have been stopped.
Yes, the building is ugly as sin and a blot on the skyline. But legally, I don't know how it could have been stopped.
Ugly is as ugly does.
Sad!
Sad!
The question we should be asking is what the value of the land on which these buildings sit is. And then we should be collecting some significant portion of the annual rental value of that land as NATURAL PUBLIC REVENUE.
Macklow and Trump, et al., are not the ones who make the land value. Rather, it is the presence of all who live in, work in, and spend their tourist dollars there who make those sites worth what they are.
We don't need to tax the value of the building at all -- and shouldn't -- if we tax the rental value of the site on which it sits, even moderately. Say, let the building owners keep 25% of the rental value, and treat the other 75% as the natural source for the public revenue necessary to support all the public goods and services we now fund from taxes on sales and wages and buildings.
3-story buildings in 10-story neighborhoods would disappear. 10-story buildings in 30-story neighborhoods would be torn down and replaced with three times the housing. 30-story buildings in 50-story neighborhoods would give way ...
Who benefits? Those who want housing. Those who want jobs.
And most of those buildings would also provide some commercial space at street level and perhaps a level or two above that. Plenty of space for services and entrepreneurs.
Strikes me as a win-win situation, except perhaps for the land speculators. But land speculators have never earned an honest dollar by their inactivity.
Macklow and Trump, et al., are not the ones who make the land value. Rather, it is the presence of all who live in, work in, and spend their tourist dollars there who make those sites worth what they are.
We don't need to tax the value of the building at all -- and shouldn't -- if we tax the rental value of the site on which it sits, even moderately. Say, let the building owners keep 25% of the rental value, and treat the other 75% as the natural source for the public revenue necessary to support all the public goods and services we now fund from taxes on sales and wages and buildings.
3-story buildings in 10-story neighborhoods would disappear. 10-story buildings in 30-story neighborhoods would be torn down and replaced with three times the housing. 30-story buildings in 50-story neighborhoods would give way ...
Who benefits? Those who want housing. Those who want jobs.
And most of those buildings would also provide some commercial space at street level and perhaps a level or two above that. Plenty of space for services and entrepreneurs.
Strikes me as a win-win situation, except perhaps for the land speculators. But land speculators have never earned an honest dollar by their inactivity.
2
Will The New York Times please do some columns on who owns the land beneath the ugly behemoths springing up here and there? Might be interesting.
4
Not just who owns the land, but how much they collect in ground rent each year, and how and when it resets.
And then we should consider just what those landowners have done to deserve something more than the rental value of the land the day they bought the land from the previous landowner. Likely the land has risen in value since that date --- and for reasons that have NOTHING to do with activity on the part of the landowner, and EVERYTHING to do with all the rest of us who live in, work in and visit NYC.
There is a very strong argument for a very old idea: treat the annual rental value of our land -- yes, OUR land, as in "This land is OUR land;" they aren't making any more of it, and we all depend on access to it -- as our COMMON TREASURE, the source of NATURAL PUBLIC REVENUE -- inexhaustible, and not taking from any person, corporation or trust anything that they can rightfully claim as something they created. WE CREATE THAT VALUE, and we ought to be collecting it, every year, every month, as our common revenue source, to fund all the public goods and services that maintain and increase that annual value.
Very old idea. Very wise idea. Very administrable tax.
We ought to all understand it, and decide whether it is to the common good -- as I think it is -- or whether it is to let that annual land value accumulate in private, corporate, trust and university pockets.
Which is better for the common good? Which is better for the economy? Which is just?
And then we should consider just what those landowners have done to deserve something more than the rental value of the land the day they bought the land from the previous landowner. Likely the land has risen in value since that date --- and for reasons that have NOTHING to do with activity on the part of the landowner, and EVERYTHING to do with all the rest of us who live in, work in and visit NYC.
There is a very strong argument for a very old idea: treat the annual rental value of our land -- yes, OUR land, as in "This land is OUR land;" they aren't making any more of it, and we all depend on access to it -- as our COMMON TREASURE, the source of NATURAL PUBLIC REVENUE -- inexhaustible, and not taking from any person, corporation or trust anything that they can rightfully claim as something they created. WE CREATE THAT VALUE, and we ought to be collecting it, every year, every month, as our common revenue source, to fund all the public goods and services that maintain and increase that annual value.
Very old idea. Very wise idea. Very administrable tax.
We ought to all understand it, and decide whether it is to the common good -- as I think it is -- or whether it is to let that annual land value accumulate in private, corporate, trust and university pockets.
Which is better for the common good? Which is better for the economy? Which is just?
1
I wish 432 Park hadn't taken the form it did. The zoning laws should have been changed to reflect the technology that produced this building, which deliberately sacrificed footprint for height, which is out of context and visually intrusive for many people. But, this is not new. Ask Robert A M Stern about what 200 Park (built as Pan Am, now Met life) did to vistas looking down Park Avenue (of up from below 42nd Street. It miniaturized the elegant New York Central Building that was designed to bestride the avenue when it was developed. Now, looking south from Carnegie Hill I see two eyesores. Nevertheless, none of this should produce the apocalyptic rants and a historical political hysteria that have come into these comments.
I know you folks in NYC love your Central Park. Hopefully you will enjoy the remaining sunshine, as in the near future it may be replaced with shadows. My question, and I'm quite certain I know the answer, do the powers that be in NYC represent the interests of those living in NYC, or are they scrounging for every last dollar they can get by selling out to the ultra wealthy from around the globe? As an outsider who has visited and enjoyed your city, I feel I am witnessing the selling of your city to the highest bidder. Shame on you for allowing this to happen.
4
"...do the powers that be in NYC represent the interests of those living in NYC, or are they scrounging for every last dollar they can get by selling out to the ultra wealthy from around the globe?"
If you ask that question, you already, very definitely, know the answer.
Do the words fraud, waste, corruption, abuse ring a bell?
If you ask that question, you already, very definitely, know the answer.
Do the words fraud, waste, corruption, abuse ring a bell?
2
Pathetic.
Beyond Sad!
Beyond Sad!
1
As a designer who has lived in New York City for 48 years, I can say that 432 Park Avenue has ruined NYC's skyline. It is an atrocity in terms of it's design and lack of respect for it's context. Um hello, zoning? Landmarks? Oh right, money. I forgot. Absolutely shameful. I get sick every time I look down Park Avenue--a giant middle finger from the Macklowe family to this great city.
5
When you stand on Park Ave in the Upper east side and look Down Town and see 432 Park Avenue, I'm sorry but it just looks so out of place. It actually throws off the balance of Park Avenue. I guess to Mr. Macklowe size matters.
1
Sure Macklowe is sucking up to Trump. Who better to halt US Treasury investigations of international dictators and drug kingpins who park their ill-gained millions in luxury NYC properties like his, apartments that are most of the time left unoccupied. You'd better concentrate on the here and now, Harry. Because I don't think you're going to be very well-received in the hereafter.
3
All of our real estate moguls -- who, admittedly, have helped make our city the most important and wonderful city on earth -- will benefit from Mr. Trump's new tax "reforms" -- several provisions of which will give him, and them, extraordinary tax breaks. They don't need them.
And that's just for starters.
It's a pity that most Americans aren't readers. It's a pity that they don't read history. My father who, from the age of 17 (having received parental permission after Pearl Harbor) lived during World War II on a destroyer escort until Japan surrendered, made all of us read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by age 13.
We grew up knowing the signs of fascism when we saw them.
Is Mr. Trump what Americans really wanted? Did they truly not see through him? Do they still believe him? And why didn't those supposedly well-read liberals take him seriously? Wow.
And that's just for starters.
It's a pity that most Americans aren't readers. It's a pity that they don't read history. My father who, from the age of 17 (having received parental permission after Pearl Harbor) lived during World War II on a destroyer escort until Japan surrendered, made all of us read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by age 13.
We grew up knowing the signs of fascism when we saw them.
Is Mr. Trump what Americans really wanted? Did they truly not see through him? Do they still believe him? And why didn't those supposedly well-read liberals take him seriously? Wow.
3
The 432 Park building is like a conversation that went on too long. It's twice as high as it should be and looks awkward in the skyline. Also, like the lost World Trade Center towers, there is no sense of its scale. The law said when it had to stop rising, and that's where it did. Completely arbitrary. I no longer live in NYC, so to hell with all those builders and their insatiable lust for wealth and power. They deserve each other.
2
432 Park is the ugliest building in Manhattan. A monstrous blot on a wonderful landscape. What were the city planners thinking?
3
Money. What else?
No wonder Macklowe likes Trump; they really do share the same taste – bad. The architectural graffiti that is 432 Park is worse than the subway graffiti of the 70s and 80s because it will be around until someone has the grace to tear it down. Fortunately, it can be ignored if one walks on the side of the street that hides it from view. In Central Park, you can find a bench so you don’t have to look at it. And if it ends up in a picture you take, well, thank goodness for Photoshop.
Macklowe appears to have all of the "charm" of Trump -- NONE.
He praises the 1% surrounding Trump, thinks Tillerson who is in bed with Putin because of oil will "be good for the country" and he says that Trump is an "honorable" man in his business dealing. Yes, honorable men often stiff their vendors and contractors and declare bankruptcy in order to evade paying their bills as Trump has done numerous times.
Disgusting person -- just like Trump -- dumps his wife of 57 years for another woman and sues his son -- get over yourself old man -- you are the epitome of a greed driven egomaniac who over values himself and his accomplishments -- a few non-descript buildings in New York.
He praises the 1% surrounding Trump, thinks Tillerson who is in bed with Putin because of oil will "be good for the country" and he says that Trump is an "honorable" man in his business dealing. Yes, honorable men often stiff their vendors and contractors and declare bankruptcy in order to evade paying their bills as Trump has done numerous times.
Disgusting person -- just like Trump -- dumps his wife of 57 years for another woman and sues his son -- get over yourself old man -- you are the epitome of a greed driven egomaniac who over values himself and his accomplishments -- a few non-descript buildings in New York.
24
Most of Macklowe's success is based on increased globalization and the returns going to the top 1%. As marks of status, to diversify their portfolios and possible launder ill gotten gains they choose to put the money into luxury condos in big international cities. Its ironic that if I cross the Mexican American border with $10,000 cash I legally have to claim it. However, if I buy a luxury condo for $80 million cash no one asks any questions-Money laundering with limited liability companies to disguise the owners. One would think those gains should be progressively taxed or redistributed in their home countries within reason. Poor Chinese, Russian and Arabian people deserve not to have these national assets looted from their countries. Rich arrogant guys like Macklowe reap the rewards. God bless America!
15
An abomination. Should have been challenged by the city planners and the pols, but of course they failed to do their jobs and now we have the monstrosity at 57th and Park. At least the pols were recompensed for their acquiescence. Here in my (newer) home town here are strict height limitations on such new construction. D.C.'s buildings may all be squat and boxy, but at least we do not have to live in their shadows,
6
not to mention the buildings on 45 street, that he had torn down, without city permission, in the dead of night.
6
One bedroom apartments starting at over $2 million on east 59th street. For the privilege of living nearly at the ramp for the Ed Koch (59th Street) Bridge and enjoying that traffic at your front door every day.
11
Re: 200 East 59th Street
What real estate genius would would sheathe the lower floors in "basket weave cladding," instead of taking advantage of one of the city's busiest retail locations?
What real estate genius would would sheathe the lower floors in "basket weave cladding," instead of taking advantage of one of the city's busiest retail locations?
8
"'Once you’re no longer here, you’re no longer here,” he said. “So the degree of satisfaction is now.'" - What a horribly sad, empty way to live one's life. If it can, indeed, be considered "living". Sounds like Mr. Macklowe could be qualified, under the new rules, to be the 46th President of the United States.
7
As always in these responses a group of jealous people finding some thing to always complain about. Wawa, wawa, wawa. Get a life people. Every writer here should know its all about money and power in New York. Its not going to change and no one is willing to change it. Just remember Democrats run this town, the liberal elites all talk and no action. Just political bribes and payoffs.
5
These real estate moguls make me really miss Steve Jobs, who's mentioned at the end of this article as a foil of sorts to Mr. Macklowe. What have Macklowe, Trump, and the other real estate kings given us? Huge edifices for the rich. Nothing that represents any kind of innovation in our culture, technology, or democracy. Gosh, they even make me miss Robert Moses, also an imperial builder, but at least he pursued a vision that he thought was for the public good.
32
obviously you cant afford one
obviously you need to bash those who can
i have 2
and will BUY for cash a 3rd condo for my kid,,,a surprise
obviously you need to bash those who can
i have 2
and will BUY for cash a 3rd condo for my kid,,,a surprise
I don't see how anyone could live in that horrible new apartment on 432 Park -- it is so tall and straight. It ruins the skyline of NYC -- in fact, when asked what that building is, I give them the finger and say it is the "f...you building". Mr. Macklowe should have thought twice about this one.
9
The view from inside is somewhat different. Have you seen the photos?
200 East 59th is just another rectangle. If I was married for 57 years to him I would also sign the divorce papers. Nobody wants to be with a square.
10
As someone who does (modest) construction for a living, I take exception to the language often found in this kind of article. The caption under the first picture reads that "Harry Macklowe built 432 Park". No he didn't, nor did Donald trump ever build anything at all during his life time; thousands of people did it for them. The Macklowe and Trumps of the world never broke a sweat in the comfort of their designer suit.
31
Just one more example of the extreme differences between the 1% and the rest of us. I wonder if Macklowe has ever stopped to smell the flowers, "...lay down where the wood drake rests in his beauty on the water, and the great heron feeds...."
8
$82,000,000.00 apartments ... just we what we need.
Harry's version of Make New York Great Again.
Harry's version of Make New York Great Again.
13
How did this horrible, junky-looking, skinny, over-sized building pass muster with any zoning board, especially considering its prime location at 57th and Park and how it messes up the skyline?
19
obviously, someone got a nice present!
1
Bribes? Corruption?
So this is the man responsible for ruining the Manhattan skyline with the ugliest tall box of a building. So it makes sense that he would be so pleased with donald and his cabinet and Bannon and Kushner.
17
“I’ve never had a bad deal,” he said. “I’ve only had good deals that, because of timing, haven’t worked out.”
Isn't the definition of a good deal one that works out? Sigh, Trump alternative facts seeping into the fabric.
Isn't the definition of a good deal one that works out? Sigh, Trump alternative facts seeping into the fabric.
19
It's delusion. When you get to the point where your greed allows you to end up in a lawsuit with your own child over real estate, you have clearly lost all perspective on what's important in life. Everything is reduced to a "deal". That's also how he ends up saying “The cabinet he’s put together is, for the first time, full of outstanding people, all sophisticated business people, and you’ve not had that before in our lifetime”. Willful blindness to the truth. Carson? DeVos? Perry?
1
Approves of Trump and his "once-in-a-lifetime, sophisticated business" cabinet, check.
Builds 432 Park - the tallest, least inspiring misfit skyline hacker in the Western Hemisphere - check.
Leaves wife of 57 years for another; sues own son - check.
Unconcerned with impact/legacy, as the "time for satisfaction is now" - check.
But Harry somehow still comes across here as a pretty genial guy. Good for him.
Just wish he hadn't sold out the proportional balance of the city's skyline like that, an $87 million penthouse at our aesthetic expense.
Builds 432 Park - the tallest, least inspiring misfit skyline hacker in the Western Hemisphere - check.
Leaves wife of 57 years for another; sues own son - check.
Unconcerned with impact/legacy, as the "time for satisfaction is now" - check.
But Harry somehow still comes across here as a pretty genial guy. Good for him.
Just wish he hadn't sold out the proportional balance of the city's skyline like that, an $87 million penthouse at our aesthetic expense.
17
There is nothing to be proud of here..feeding global plutocrats with expensive digs in NYC...easy target. Have any of his buildings taken advantage of any tax incentive for including units of "affordable" housing? What is the percentage of "owned" but vacant since many of the apartments are really pied a terres. What has been the impact of this chronic low density on retail shops on the block?
11
Not only is 432 Park ugly, it messes up New York's skyline. It is so out of character with the surrounding neighborhood that I have to wonder how it ever got approved by the municipal authorities.
11
Money and power are how it got approved.
And it won't be a misfit once the skyline is full of such buildings...which is what we're headed for.
And it won't be a misfit once the skyline is full of such buildings...which is what we're headed for.
1