daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old June 10th, 2012, 02:22 AM   #2441
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,571

The thing is, the boxy 60s and 70s buildings are incredibly useful and more practical, as opposed to the old buildings, unfortunately.
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 10th, 2012, 02:30 AM   #2442
kingsc
Registered User
 
kingsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 2,761
Likes (Received): 199

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikonov_Ivan View Post
Why it is not special? Can you find another building in the world with shape like this? I think that it is so special because it is very simple.
This building is as boring as this question is. but as I said before, "I don't mind them building it".
__________________
My site
Entertainmentcove.weebly.com
kingsc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2012, 03:14 AM   #2443
yankeesfan1000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,236
Likes (Received): 563

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnapan View Post
You don't have to live in a particular city to see that demolishing a beautiful building to erect another when there are plenty of ugly alternatives to demolish is stupidity.

Well done to NYC that many buildings are protected, but in no way does that excuse the vandalism that has taken place.

Many cities across the world are poorer for the appalling planning decisions that have taken place in the name of progress. Take Dublin. At first glance you'd think it had been the unfortunate victim of a Nazi bomber raid, but then you find out that the hideous in-fill which has replaced stunning streetscapes in various streets was all the work of the locals.

Plenty of cities in the US would beg for just a little of the class which has just been erased in the name of progress, yet NYC - like most cities - is in no way short of sites more appropriate for demolition to make way for the new.

Coming out with this crap about people not being able to hold a view on this vandalism if they don't live there is pretty pathetic. Why bother?
Right, but you do have to live in the city to truly put stuff like this in perspective. To appreciate how much of the city's architecture dates from a similar period, and how much of the city is historically protected. People like to use this and 15 Penn as some sort of over arching proof that NY doesn't care about its past and will soon look generic, while ignoring the incredible amount of the city that's protected, and in areas like where I live, how mindboggingly difficult it is for a developer to build anything at all, even stuff that is incredibly standard. Community Boards whine and moan about everything. Getting things built in large areas of New York requires the approval of an unprecedented amount of individuals, and councils/boards.

The system clearly isn't perfect. Drake's will be lost in the process, but I don't think NY gets enough credit for how well it balances preservation and development. It's also important to realize that in the largest business district in the world, Midtown Manhattan, it's unrealistic to expect it to be kept an architectural museum. If the Drake were anywhere else, it would've been landmarked, but again Midtown is the engine of the city, and it needs to be allowed to grow.

And frankly, I do think the position of NYers on this subject carry more weight than non NYers, because we have a much more vested interest in NY maintaining it's status along with London, as the true capitals of the world. As an actual taxpayer, and resident, I think it's fair to say that, again, I have more riding on NYs economic future than a resident of Portland or Jacksonville or somewhere else, and that includes a mix of preservation and development.

This same mindset could have been taken during the boom of the roaring 20s, or after the second WW between 1950 and 1960 when NY built roughly as much office space in that decade than exists in the entire CBD of Chicago. Where would NY be if it hadn't been allowed to grow at the remarkable paces it did during those periods?

Last edited by yankeesfan1000; June 14th, 2012 at 06:10 PM.
yankeesfan1000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2012, 10:40 AM   #2444
moustache
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,161
Likes (Received): 707

Old skyscrapers ( < 60 ) are uniques, beautifull and rare in the world. To destroy them, is a shame.
moustache no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2012, 01:59 PM   #2445
sweet-d
Registered User
 
sweet-d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chengdu
Posts: 1,612
Likes (Received): 265

@yankeesfan1000:

Thanks for posting this.

Last edited by erbse; June 10th, 2012 at 09:50 PM.
sweet-d no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2012, 03:54 PM   #2446
raider12
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 450
Likes (Received): 128

^
agree, it was very well done

Last edited by erbse; June 10th, 2012 at 09:49 PM.
raider12 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2012, 06:51 PM   #2447
cnapan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 126

Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000 View Post
Right, but you do have to live in the city to truly put stuff like this in perspective. To appreciate how much of the city's architecture dates from a similar period, and how much of the city is historically protected. People like to use this and 15 Penn as some sort of over arching proof that NY doesn't care about its past and will soon look generic, while ignoring the incredible amount of the city that's protected,
Well I understand your point, but it doesn't apply to me because I've already mentioned that NYC does well - in general - in preserving a lot of the things which make it special. On other threads where people slag off the planning restrictions in parts of London, I've pointed out that NYC has precisely the same sorts of controls in place in many areas.


Quote:
It's also important to realize that in the largest business district in the world, Midtown Manhattan, it's unrealistic to expect it to be kept an architectural museum.
I'm not arguing that it should be. I'm just pointing out that there are plenty of buildings that nobody would miss at all if they got knocked down, and it is therefore a shame to demolish in preference buildings that actually give the street some character and soul.

I suspect here that the decision is driven mainly by the hope of optimising the eventual price of the apartments by ensuring a good address and picking a site which is cheap to purchase and demolish in preparation for the new construction. Developers will (understandably) always try to do this - anywhere on earth. It doesn't necessarily make it right.


Quote:
If the Drake were anywhere else, it would've been landmarked, but again Midtown is the engine of the city, and it needs to be allowed to grow.
Again, that's possibly the case, though I just want to restate that I'm not arguing for Midtown to not be allowed to grow. Midtown has not run out of shabby alternative sites ripe for redevelopment, has it?

Quote:
And frankly, I do think the position of NYers on this subject carry more weight than non NYers, because we have a much more vested interest in NY maintaining it's status along with London, as the true capitals of the world.
Firstly, I don't think it makes any difference to New York's status whether it chooses to demolish nice buildings or not. Its status is a function primarily of the size of population, the culture that thrives in the area and it's unique built environment, which though long ago stopped being the tallest, remains one of the most interesting. So please don't worry

London's status is simply a product of precisely the same sorts of things. Neither city is in any danger of losing status, and success in one city makes no difference to the other, and vice-versa. Have a bit more confidence in your home town!

Quote:
As an actual taxpayer, and resident, I think it's fair to say that, again, I have more riding on NYs economic future than a resident of Portland or Jacksonville or somewhere else, and that includes a mix of preservation and development.
That's fair enough. But I don't agree with the idea that NYC's economic prosperity is threatened by not being allowed to knock down nice buildings.

Quote:
This same mindset could have been taken during the boom of the roaring 20s, or after the second WW between 1950 and 1960 when NY built roughly as much office in that decade than exists in the entire CBD of Chicago. Where would NY be if it hadn't been allowed to grow at the remarkable paces it did during those periods?
Er, NYC is building a vast amount of office space *today*. I'm not arguing that buildings shouldn't be built. I'm just arguing that it *is* possible to have your cake and eat it. You can build new things and preserve good buildings.

Incidentally, in my country at least, often the skin of old buildings is incorporated into new developments so that new buildings can effectively be built without disrupting the streetscape. Why can't this be an option in such situations?
cnapan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2012, 06:54 PM   #2448
Arawooho
Registered User
 
Arawooho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 266
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000 View Post
Right, but you do have to live in the city to truly put stuff like this in perspective. To appreciate how much of the city's architecture dates from a similar period, and how much of the city is historically protected. People like to use this and 15 Penn as some sort of over arching proof that NY doesn't care about its past and will soon look generic, while ignoring the incredible amount of the city that's protected, and in areas like where I live, how mindboggingly difficult it is for a developer to build anything at all, even stuff that is incredibly standard. Community Boards whine and moan about everything. Getting things built in large areas of New York requires the approval of an unprecedented amount of individuals, and councils/boards.

The system clearly isn't perfect. Drake's will be lost in the process, but I don't think NY gets enough credit for how well it balances preservation and development. It's also important to realize that in the largest business district in the world, Midtown Manhattan, it's unrealistic to expect it to be kept an architectural museum. If the Drake were anywhere else, it would've been landmarked, but again Midtown is the engine of the city, and it needs to be allowed to grow.

And frankly, I do think the position of NYers on this subject carry more weight than non NYers, because we have a much more vested interest in NY maintaining it's status along with London, as the true capitals of the world. As an actual taxpayer, and resident, I think it's fair to say that, again, I have more riding on NYs economic future than a resident of Portland or Jacksonville or somewhere else, and that includes a mix of preservation and development.

This same mindset could have been taken during the boom of the roaring 20s, or after the second WW between 1950 and 1960 when NY built roughly as much office in that decade than exists in the entire CBD of Chicago. Where would NY be if it hadn't been allowed to grow at the remarkable paces it did during those periods?
Amazing post man. Amazing post. I envy you.
Arawooho no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2012, 09:40 PM   #2449
yankeesfan1000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,236
Likes (Received): 563

First off, I want to thank you fellow forumers for the very kind words.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnapan View Post
...I suspect here that the decision is driven mainly by the hope of optimising the eventual price of the apartments by ensuring a good address and picking a site which is cheap to purchase and demolish in preparation for the new construction. Developers will (understandably) always try to do this - anywhere on earth. It doesn't necessarily make it right.

Again, that's possibly the case, though I just want to restate that I'm not arguing for Midtown to not be allowed to grow. Midtown has not run out of shabby alternative sites ripe for redevelopment, has it?
A lot of what makes this building economically feasible is its location. CIM paid $305M for the site so, which doesn't include cost of demolition, etc, so it was always a very valuable site. And there are certainly many sites in Midtown that are underdeveloped or I would have rather seen developed, but again this building is all about location. Take it off Park Ave or 56th St, and it's a less desirable spot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnapan View Post
Firstly, I don't think it makes any difference to New York's status whether it chooses to demolish nice buildings or not. Its status is a function primarily of the size of population, the culture that thrives in the area and it's unique built environment, which though long ago stopped being the tallest, remains one of the most interesting. So please don't worry

London's status is simply a product of precisely the same sorts of things. Neither city is in any danger of losing status, and success in one city makes no difference to the other, and vice-versa. Have a bit more confidence in your home town!

That's fair enough. But I don't agree with the idea that NYC's economic prosperity is threatened by not being allowed to knock down nice buildings.
Short term I agree, NY will remain unrivaled on this side of the Atlantic. But with almost 90% of Manhattans commercial real estate predating 1970, there has to exist some sort of breaking point. Where businesses say, yes we want to be in NY but if we can only afford space from the 1920s that's not compatible with modern technology, isn't energy efficient, etc, when do they say enough is enough, and move to brand new buildings in Stamford, or Jersey City, or even Phily or Boston? The same can be said for high end residential. The immense prices that are being commanded by Extell at One57 are a product of not only high demand, but also extremely limited supply for truly modern units that were built from the ground up to be for the wealthiest people in the world.

Obviously, the sort of migration I eluded to would take decades, and would require just immense amounts of capital to shift out of NY, and I think it's more likely that Benedict Arnold wins the 2012 election. However, I think what's made NY so unique is its incredible ability to continue to look decades into the future and shape its own destiny, Eerie Canal, and the Commissioners Plan of 1811 as a couple of biggies. NY has such a huge advantage as of today, but it's important to not take that for granted and assume that it will always be there, and in order to remain on top, we need more modern space. I don't think you're making that assumption, but I think we're just disagreeing on how the city should be allowed to grow or how this new space should be incorporated into the New York of today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnapan View Post
Er, NYC is building a vast amount of office space *today*. I'm not arguing that buildings shouldn't be built. I'm just arguing that it *is* possible to have your cake and eat it. You can build new things and preserve good buildings.

Incidentally, in my country at least, often the skin of old buildings is incorporated into new developments so that new buildings can effectively be built without disrupting the streetscape. Why can't this be an option in such situations?
What you're suggesting has actually been done at the Hearst Tower in Midtown, but the base of the building was landmarked which is why the new building was built around it. Unfortunately, it's just cheaper for a developer to simply demolish an entire building, as opposed to keeping the 20th century facade and then building a new building around it.

The city could certainly do things to promote that. Though I'd imagine their sentiment is, if it's worth saving, it would be landmarked.

Again, it's a fine line. There was a lot of rambling in this post, and I hate to keep taking this thread off topic. But if we can have two threads in the Architecture section about rebuilding the Twins, I think maybe one on preservation should be created to continue the discussion.

Last edited by yankeesfan1000; June 10th, 2012 at 09:47 PM.
yankeesfan1000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2012, 08:55 PM   #2450
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3547

Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000 View Post
Right, but you do have to live in the city to truly put stuff like this in perspective. To appreciate how much of the city's architecture dates from a similar period, and how much of the city is historically protected. People like to use this and 15 Penn as some sort of over arching proof that NY doesn't care about its past and will soon look generic, while ignoring the incredible amount of the city that's protected, and in areas like where I live, how mindboggingly difficult it is for a developer to build anything at all, even stuff that is incredibly standard. Community Boards whine and moan about everything. Getting things built in large areas of New York requires the approval of an unprecedented amount of individuals, and councils/boards.

The system clearly isn't perfect. Drake's will be lost in the process, but I don't think NY gets enough credit for how well it balances preservation and development. It's also important to realize that in the largest business district in the world, Midtown Manhattan, it's unrealistic to expect it to be kept an architectural museum. If the Drake were anywhere else, it would've been landmarked, but again Midtown is the engine of the city, and it needs to be allowed to grow.

And frankly, I do think the position of NYers on this subject carry more weight than non NYers, because we have a much more vested interest in NY maintaining it's status along with London, as the true capitals of the world. As an actual taxpayer, and resident, I think it's fair to say that, again, I have more riding on NYs economic future than a resident of Portland or Jacksonville or somewhere else, and that includes a mix of preservation and development.

This same mindset could have been taken during the boom of the roaring 20s, or after the second WW between 1950 and 1960 when NY built roughly as much office in that decade than exists in the entire CBD of Chicago. Where would NY be if it hadn't been allowed to grow at the remarkable paces it did during those periods?
Although I'm no NY resident, I 1000% agree with you. There must be a balance between preserving the old and developing the new. In my opinion the Drake is an acceptable loss for an iconic landmark tower like 432 Park
__________________
The Outbreak: A free browser online strategy game. Build up your town and compete with other towns economicaly and militarily.
http://www.the-outbreak.com/
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2012, 09:11 PM   #2451
JD47
Registered User
 
JD47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dublin
Posts: 3,849
Likes (Received): 306

That tower looks great. Midtown really is something else and the balance there is good between modern buildings and old one's. I cant wait to see this one rise and it will be really enjoybale to watch just like 1WTC is.
JD47 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2012, 09:27 PM   #2452
Dang13
Registered User
 
Dang13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Brooklyn, NYC
Posts: 20
Likes (Received): 0

Thin buildings usually tend to look taller than they actually are, so this one should look way too tall, which is good... , is it actually in construction yet? or are they just moving stuff around in the site?
Dang13 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2012, 09:32 PM   #2453
HK999
University of HK / 香港大學
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hong Kong SAR / 香港特區
Posts: 3,389
Likes (Received): 336

It's officially U/C. Check the webcam for progress.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000 View Post
Couldn't agree more, with you too Ajaypp. The people who complain NY is destroying its historic past have no concept of just how much of NYs buildings date from the first half of the 20th century and earlier, and how many of those buildings are landmarked. NYC has more historic landmarks than 40 States in the US combined. Walk an average block in New York and the majority of the buildings you encounter are at least 50 years old.

But an overwhelming majority of those people don't live here, or have never been here, so you can't really blame them I suppose.

As for this building, I find it incredibly ironic that some claimed this building has no wow factor, yet in the same sentence acknowledge they're talking about a 426 meter building with toothpick like proportions. This will be a NY icon when finished. The combination of height and dimensions are ludicrous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000 View Post
Right, but you do have to live in the city to truly put stuff like this in perspective. To appreciate how much of the city's architecture dates from a similar period, and how much of the city is historically protected. People like to use this and 15 Penn as some sort of over arching proof that NY doesn't care about its past and will soon look generic, while ignoring the incredible amount of the city that's protected, and in areas like where I live, how mindboggingly difficult it is for a developer to build anything at all, even stuff that is incredibly standard. Community Boards whine and moan about everything. Getting things built in large areas of New York requires the approval of an unprecedented amount of individuals, and councils/boards.

The system clearly isn't perfect. Drake's will be lost in the process, but I don't think NY gets enough credit for how well it balances preservation and development. It's also important to realize that in the largest business district in the world, Midtown Manhattan, it's unrealistic to expect it to be kept an architectural museum. If the Drake were anywhere else, it would've been landmarked, but again Midtown is the engine of the city, and it needs to be allowed to grow.

And frankly, I do think the position of NYers on this subject carry more weight than non NYers, because we have a much more vested interest in NY maintaining it's status along with London, as the true capitals of the world. As an actual taxpayer, and resident, I think it's fair to say that, again, I have more riding on NYs economic future than a resident of Portland or Jacksonville or somewhere else, and that includes a mix of preservation and development.

This same mindset could have been taken during the boom of the roaring 20s, or after the second WW between 1950 and 1960 when NY built roughly as much office in that decade than exists in the entire CBD of Chicago. Where would NY be if it hadn't been allowed to grow at the remarkable paces it did during those periods?
Great posts. Always nice to see an input from an actual NYer.
__________________
Sapientia et Virtus 明德格物
Industrial Organization, MSc
HK999 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2012, 10:10 PM   #2454
cnapan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 126

Well I do love a well argued debate, but putting my reservations about the demolition aside, the one thing that intrigues me about this building is the ratio of height-to-per-floor-area.

It looks like a huge stick. I wonder how much it'll move about at the top in a high wind.

Are there any buildings which are apartments (rather than being TV masts!) which have a larger height-to-per-floor-area ratio?
cnapan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2012, 10:24 PM   #2455
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3547

Since it'll have a concrete core and there'll be a dampener in it too I don't think it will sway much. Though I'm not a pro in engineering so I could be wrong
__________________
The Outbreak: A free browser online strategy game. Build up your town and compete with other towns economicaly and militarily.
http://www.the-outbreak.com/
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2012, 10:26 PM   #2456
moustache
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,161
Likes (Received): 707

Quote:
Coming out with this crap about people not being able to hold a view on this vandalism if they don't live there is pretty pathetic. Why bother?
People have no taste and dont care about the beauty of things.
moustache no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2012, 10:36 PM   #2457
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,571

Heh. Get used to more buildings like these, because space is running out and people are starting to build thinner and taller.
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 11th, 2012, 10:55 PM   #2458
Arawooho
Registered User
 
Arawooho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 266
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy View Post
Heh. Get used to more buildings like these, because space is running out and people are starting to build thinner and taller.
Wow, i never thought of that one. It does make sense though.
Arawooho no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2012, 01:05 AM   #2459
cnapan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 126

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arawooho View Post
Wow, i never thought of that one. It does make sense though.
This building doesn't have anything to do with need. Nobody who can afford to live in the tower is going to be short of places to live, and very tall buildings like this can only be viable by finding clients willing to pay eye-watering prices for spectacular views of the park. As has already been discussed, there are plenty of other places where this tower could be placed, but the address is important in the search for people willing to pay the amount of money needed to turn a profit.

That isn't to say it shouldn't be built. I'd love to be able to afford the one at the top (so long as it doesn't sway too much!)
cnapan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2012, 05:34 PM   #2460
jconyc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 417
Likes (Received): 169

Quote:
Originally Posted by moustache View Post
People have no taste and dont care about the beauty of things.
Sorry to disappoint you but I very much care about the beauty of things and this is my neighborhood we are talking about.
I am in the business of beauty.
There seems to be a lot of cynics on this site.

My point about being here in New York is that unless you have lived with the buildings and street scape you are talking about you cannot discuss them with any true authority. I would not presume to try and tell a Parisian or a Londoner whether a building was appropriate to their neighborhood without going there myself and learning the environment. You are certainly entitled to your opinion...but New york is a very large and complex place and to say all developers are driven by solely greed is just ignorant and cynical. I know some of these developers personally and even though they are tough businessmen (you have to be to accomplish anything in New York) they really do care passionately about this city and it's architecture.
jconyc no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
new york city, new york project, park avenue, supertall

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium