NEW YORK | Tower Fifth | 1,556 FT | 96 FLOORS

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Your subjective opinion. I believe, given the developer and architect, it will be stunning, and a landmark.

It's objectively horrible.

But all things considered, a city "design board" would be even worse.

[Duck From NY]

Originally Posted by NYguy

And your point would be?

That Academy Award winning director Mel Gibson and Teen Choice Award winning actor Vince Vaughn agree with me and wish there were a design approval process for the Midtown East rezoning.

Originally Posted by NYguy

Which is why we can't have a panel of "people" deciding what's good and bad for the skyline of the city.

Having a panel of people approving designs is not an impossibility. It would be more accurate to say that you personally wouldn't like it.

Originally Posted by NYguy

when it would ironically be just the opposite.

Your subjective opinion

Originally Posted by NYguy

Remember when she decided that the Tower Verre just didn't cut it at a greater height? Well, it was her decision to make.

This is what I like to call "small sample size theater." You need to learn and understand the difference between New York in 2009 and New York in 2019. The market is different, the post-9/11 fear of tall buildings is gone, and lopping off 200 feet from a 1,250 foot tower so as to not outshine the ESB simply wouldn't happen seeing as how the ESB has been surpassed in height by 4 (and counting) buildings since then.

Originally Posted by NYguy

Developers have enough hoops to jump through just surviving the approvals process.

So eliminate some of the other hoops instead. These aren't poor, fledgling, upstart developers just trying to put food on the table for their families. In fact, they're a highly nepotistic cabal/cartel with massive influence and they get tons of sweetheart deals from the government. Either way, they'll be making bank.

Originally Posted by NYguy

Whether we get good buildings or bad, it needs to be left in the hands of the architects and developers who are designing and building these towers. Not people who may be pushing to meet their own agendas.

It is my opinion that these buildings are essentially public art since a) architecture is an art form + b) the buildings have elements that are prominently visible to the public. You may disagree, but that's my opinion, and one of the things I love about SSP is the rich tapestry of diverse opinions that can be found here.

Originally Posted by Crawford

Your subjective opinion. I believe, given the developer and architect, it will be stunning, and a landmark.

I don't know why you and NYguy have this burning desire to remind people that taste in aesthetics is subjective, and right before giving your own subjective opinions to boot! I'm not too big on "muh individualism" so I think design approval should be a part of the process because most of the millions of people that will have to see this grotesque tower every day will think it's ugly. Londoners and Parisians are surely grateful that such is the case for their cities/metros; they'd hate to have a bunch of blue and/or concrete boxes punishing their eyes on a daily basis. INB4 "this is New York, you don't know how things work here."

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by Duck From NY

That Academy Award winning director Mel Gibson and Teen Choice Award winning actor Vince Vaughn agree with me and wish there were a design approval process for the Midtown East rezoning.



Having a panel of people approving designs is not an impossibility. It would be more accurate to say that you personally wouldn't like it.



Your subjective opinion



This is what I like to call "small sample size theater." You need to learn and understand the difference between New York in 2009 and New York in 2019. The market is different, the post-9/11 fear of tall buildings is gone, and lopping off 200 feet from a 1,250 foot tower so as to not outshine the ESB simply wouldn't happen seeing as how the ESB has been surpassed in height by 4 (and counting) buildings since then.



So eliminate some of the other hoops instead. These aren't poor, fledgling, upstart developers just trying to put food on the table for their families. In fact, they're a highly nepotistic cabal/cartel with massive influence and they get tons of sweetheart deals from the government. Either way, they'll be making bank.



It is my opinion that these buildings are essentially public art since a) architecture is an art form + b) the buildings have elements that are prominently visible to the public. You may disagree, but that's my opinion, and one of the things I love about SSP is the rich tapestry of diverse opinions that can be found here.



I don't know why you and NYguy have this burning desire to remind people that taste in aesthetics is subjective, and right before giving your own subjective opinions to boot! I'm not too big on "muh individualism" so I think design approval should be a part of the process because most of the millions of people that will have to see this grotesque tower every day will think it's ugly. Londoners and Parisians are surely grateful that such is the case for their cities/metros; they'd hate to have a bunch of blue and/or concrete boxes punishing their eyes on a daily basis. INB4 "this is New York, you don't know how things work here."

I agree with this person.

If it weren't for the mayor of London canning the Tulip, London would have a heinous amusement park attraction on its skyline for generations to come. There is a fine line between an interesting design like Gherkin and an outrageous, carnival-esque stick with a bulge like the Tulip. The Mayor of London, and his advisors, knew the line was not to be crossed for fear of irreparable damage to London's image (a city that takes itself seriously). Design review boards could Spare us the crap while still letting adventurous designs through as long as they are good designs. These folks will have more ability to determine that than us amateurs.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Submariner

It's objectively horrible.

But all things considered, a city "design board" would be even worse.

Yes it would. The horrors of what they would do to any interesting design would blow you away.



Now to read through this....

Originally Posted by Duck From NY

That Academy Award winning director Mel Gibson and Teen Choice Award winning actor Vince Vaughn agree with me and wish there were a design approval process for the Midtown East rezoning.

And they'd be just as wrong.

Having a panel of people approving designs is not an impossibility. It would be more accurate to say that you personally wouldn't like it.

This is what I like to call "small sample size theater." You need to learn and understand the difference between New York in 2009 and New York in 2019. The market is different, the post-9/11 fear of tall buildings is gone, and lopping off 200 feet from a 1,250 foot tower so as to not outshine the ESB simply wouldn't happen seeing as how the ESB has been surpassed in height by 4 (and counting) buildings since then.

So eliminate some of the other hoops instead. These aren't poor, fledgling, upstart developers just trying to put food on the table for their families. In fact, they're a highly nepotistic cabal/cartel with massive influence and they get tons of sweetheart deals from the government. Either way, they'll be making bank.

It is my opinion that these buildings are essentially public art since a) architecture is an art form + b) the buildings have elements that are prominently visible to the public. You may disagree, but that's my opinion, and one of the things I love about SSP is the rich tapestry of diverse opinions that can be found here.

I don't know why you and NYguy have this burning desire to remind people that taste in aesthetics is subjective, and right before giving your own subjective opinions to boot! I'm not too big on "muh individualism" so I think design approval should be a part of the process because most of the millions of people that will have to see this grotesque tower every day will think it's ugly. Londoners and Parisians are surely grateful that such is the case for their cities/metros; they'd hate to have a bunch of blue and/or concrete boxes punishing their eyes on a daily basis. INB4 "this is New York, you don't know how things work here."

Sorry, but you get no points. We didn't need a design board to get the likes of the Empire State or the Chrysler Building. One of the best skyscrapers we have, 53w53 barely survived a run in with those hoops. Our great skyline got where it is, not with design by panel. And yes, I"ll keep reminding you of that until your better judgment absorbs it.

[Duck From NY]

Originally Posted by NYguy

And they'd be just as wrong.

Don't your acolytes here on the message board always tell us that taste in architecture is subjective? Tsk tsk tsk.

Originally Posted by NYguy

Sorry, but you get no points.

Points? Is there some kind of token system where you pay people to not voice their displeasure over ugly boxes? That would explain a lot given the dozens of messages I've received from other users on here bemoaning their inability to express their opinions without you deleting or editing their comments.

Originally Posted by NYguy

We didn't need a design board to get the likes of the Empire State or the Chrysler Building.

Bwahahahaha. You're comparing two different universes. Virtually every building built before World War 2 had hand-crafted flourishes and complex textures and so forth. Times change, and in this time period we could sure use a design board. Why do you think Londoners have warmed up to skyscrapers all of a sudden? It's because the Cheese Grater and the Gherkin don't resemble your precious, darling boxes.

Originally Posted by NYguy

One of the best skyscrapers we have, 53w53 barely survived a run in with those hoops. Our great skyline got where it is, not with design by panel. And yes, I"ll keep reminding you of that until your better judgment absorbs it.

Apparently you didn't fully read my comment. What you're doing is 'small sample size theatre.' There's no law of the universe that says all government regulators would act in the same way, have the same intentions, or be composed of the same people. A better-conceived review board would have likely forced the developer of 53W53 to have those crossbeams stick out beyond the glass, which would have looked better, ala Chicago's John Hancock. You seem to have difficulty with nuance, context, and black and white thinking, and I'll keep reminding you of that until your outsized ego absorbs it.

P.S. London's Review Panel never would have let that scumbag Durst pocket the $20,000,000 instead of putting the spire on WTC1, regardless of whether the Port Authority, the Governor of NY, and federal funding were involved.

[TK2001]

I haven't been following on this one so much, but it really needs a redesign. If you design a tower with the same exterior style as 432 park and lazily put the tower one a skyscraper with lazily stacked boxes at the top, it's not even worth building. I simply cannot see how people think this design is great, a fatter and random 432 Park esque should never see the light of day

[TK2001]

Image taken and edited by me

[Zapatan]

Ha nice (the rendering I mean, the building is still ugly)

Will it really be that wide? The top kind of reminds me of Abeno Harukas tower in Osaka Japan, albeit uglier. It'll be cool from the inside though.

Here's to hoping they keep the height (or go higher) and tweak the design a bit.

[matt19215]

Please, no

[chris08876]

Its 432 Park just replicated and expanded. The final design won't look like that, won't be a fatter 432 Park.

[JMKeynes]

I don’t think that the design will change, Chris. This POS is hideous.

[jsbrook]

Man, what an ugly POS new Yorkers and visitors will be stuck looking at. That is until the JPMorgan analog of the 22nd Century tears it down in 2110 for a replacement 3,000 ft building.

[TK2001]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Ha nice (the rendering I mean, the building is still ugly)
Will it really be that wide?

Thanks! And I counted 14 window on the south face so that's how I found out to make it that wide. Let's hope this design we see is actually a placeholder

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Its 432 Park just replicated and expanded. The final design won't look like that, won't be a fatter 432 Park.

Right, he did just copy 432 but it does give you an idea. It'll be better than that but probably not by a lot.

The original renderings make it look okay minus the jutting out, but remember how many people hated the Twin Towers when they were built, yet they still became icons.

If this actually gets built, being able to look at two 1,550+ rooftops (along with CPT) from a few angles will have a really cool effect in Midtown.





.

[citybooster]

I hope there's an improvement. Right now looks like a fatter 432 Park with a funky hat on top.

[BXFrank]

I love it, these tall towers always look better when done. New York is not a conservative city with a signature skyline anymore, is a city that is never done, it’s an architecture’s playground, any crazy tower design could set the trend and believe it or not it might get lost next to other giants that will be rising next to it.

[chris08876]

I'm holding judgement until better renderings are released.

[The Norwegian]

What I said earlier is even more true with this render. I hope they keep most of the design and similarity with 432. This pair looks beautiful! The tower itself is ugly as sin though

Originally Posted by The Norwegian

While I don't like the design of this in itself, it will complement 432 park avenue nicely, which also has a design I despise. Together they will look a lot better than what they do individually. It really redeems 432. Therefore I'm actually excited for this one and hope this to a large degree is the final design.

[TK2001]

Originally Posted by The Norwegian

This pair looks beautiful!

Just this in the skyline would be worse, but in my opinion the exterior of 432 is just underwhelming with the raw concrete and Gucci trash can inspired design. Replicating that on a fatter tower is just god awful...but I will admit I like the slim size of 432 and its lighting at night

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by The Norwegian

What I said earlier is even more true with this render. I hope they keep most of the design and similarity with 432. This pair looks beautiful! The tower itself is ugly as sin though

Hahaa, that's ridiculous. Two wrongs don't make a right.

It will be double the ugly rather than half.


If it were me putting up the tower, I'd just hire the person who did Wheelcok Square in Shanghai, I think that a simple angular tower like that would fit in great here. Also, a dose of modernity would be nice on midtown's skyline.