NEW YORK | 574 5th Ave (Extell) | 567 FT | 32 FLOORS - Page 23

ChiND · #**441** Posted **Mar 21, 2025, 10:50 PM**

I saw Cuozzo's article but was too disgusted to mention it. The design got worse. This lame KPF design and KPF's lame glass box at 343 Madison are disappointing. Is KPF declaring war on NYC with their mundane boxes?

Here's a great comment from the Post's article: "Building looks like a good fit for IKEA - simple, cheap and boring."

HyperPower · #**442** Posted **Mar 21, 2025, 11:12 PM**

We need to accept the fact that buildings between 200 - 300 meters in New York are pretty much just boxy filler at this point.

Busy Bee · #**443** Posted **Mar 21, 2025, 11:18 PM**

#InstantBonerKiller

NYguy · #**444** Posted **Mar 22, 2025, 1:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiND

I saw Cuozzo's article but was too disgusted to mention it. The design got worse. This lame KPF design and KPF's lame glass box at 343 Madison are disappointing. Is KPF declaring war on NYC with their mundane boxes?

Here's a great comment from the Post's article: "Building looks like a good fit for IKEA - simple, cheap and boring."

The people who comment on that website are brain dead morons. You shouldn’t want to put yourself in league with that.

Nothing about the design of this building is terrible.

Hudson11 · #**445** Posted **Mar 22, 2025, 2:23 AM**

Nothing about it is great either. It's infill for Manhattan. Not at all a worthy sequel to the Gem Tower.

streetscaper · #**446** Posted **Mar 22, 2025, 6:40 AM**

I'll post here what I posted on another forum

Sorry to be a debbiedowner, but the true urbanist in me much prefers what was here before. I could probably sit on a bench across 5th ave and admire this scene below for hours and not get bored. So much detail, so much urban conversation happening. This new project will result in an overall poorer pedestrian experience imo.

The whole retail frontage needed a little TLC (and maybe a little bit more upscale retailers), and that would’ve catapulted this strip to S-tier… but the finely-grained pedestrian experience just has such a powerful allure that even as is/was, I’d prefer walking by it then this one-note full frontage of same-same-same, glass-glass-glass,…

To be clear, I still think this is a fairly decent design, but on maybe half the lot would have been miles better imo!

NYguy · #**447** Posted **Mar 23, 2025, 4:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hudson11

Nothing about it is great either. It's infill for Manhattan. Not at all a worthy sequel to the Gem Tower.

It may not be great to you, and that's ok. But the complaints about this tower as if it is a horrible design are just ridiculous. This is a nicely designed tower, and will be a great addition to Fifth Avenue.

By the way, this is a tower that has more in touch with Fifth Avenue architecture than the Gem Tower, which thankfully isn't located on Fifth.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisk...62605/sizes/l/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jag988...61487/sizes/l/

https://www.betsysphotos.com/gardens...e-architecture

ChiND · #**448** Posted **Mar 23, 2025, 12:43 PM**

This tower needs at least another setback and some extra cutouts to give it some flair. I preferred the earlier version. The overwhelming consensus is that the current iteration is a dud per se that’s more mundane than Pathmark-brand vanilla ice cream.