Reply With QuoteTo be honest Midtown is nothing but a bunch of buildings that dont stand out except Empire, its bulky and tight
Or Hong Kong.Originally Posted by BrooklynRider
To be honest Midtown is nothing but a bunch of buildings that dont stand out except Empire, its bulky and tight
I disagree. Conde Nast is very noticeable from all angles, as is MetLife; the Chrysler Building not so much, because it's too far on the East Side to be seen adequately from the Hudson. If you choose to count South Midtown, then you can definitely add the splendidly-isolated buildings of Madison Square, which are also visible from most angles.
Don't forget Citicorp, Bloomberg, and Trump World Tower.
Towering over Mies
02.16.2006
A proposed office tower by Norman Foster, 610 Lexington Avenue, would
rise adjacent to the iconic Mies van der Rohe–designed Seagram Building.
Mies van der Rohe’s Seagram Building may be getting a new neighbor, in the form of a slender, nearly 700-foot-tall highrise building from Lord Norman Foster. The project, spearheaded by RFR Holdings, is planned for the site of an old YWCA on the same block, at 610 Lexington Avenue at the corner of 53rd Street. To build the project, RFR is seeking to transfer unused air rights from the 1957 modernist icon in order to build a tower with 80 to 90 condominiums and a 45- to 50-room hotel.
The Seagram Building’s design has been heralded for its dramatic use of a large plaza which sets the building back nearly 90 feet from the sidewalk. As a result, the Seagram only uses part of its site. The building, at 375 Park Avenue, is not built to the maximum height allowable by zoning laws. RFR is a high-profile real estate firm headed by Aby Rosen and Michael Fuchs. The company owns the Seagram Building and the Lever House, among other properties in the city. The New York Post reported in January 2005 that Rosen and Fuchs paid $31.5 million for the YWCA property.
So far, the project has won approval from the Landmarks Preserveration Commission, a plan that stipulates maintenance standards for the Seagram as part of the transfer. The developers are now seeking approval from the Department of City Planning to waive a setback rule so that the tower could rise as one continuous slab, set back 10 feet from the street. Despite the fact that 610 Lexington Avenue will be nearly 200 feet taller than its neighbor, it is unlikely to cast shadows on the Seagram due to its slender shape and distance from the Mies building. RFR also insists that the tower will be barely visible from Seagram’s plaza.
“When you look at the Seagram building from 53rd Street, the form is that of a shaft and a bustle,” said Michael Sillerman, legal counsel to RFR, noting that Seagram looks like one slender tower but hides a complex at its base. “The process [transfering of air rights] allows us to mirror that bustle-and-shaft design.”
Andrew Yang
www.archpaper.com
I agree.
Midtown is a blob of 500-800 story towers that don't stand out accept for the occasional Citicorp Building just "barely" rising above the peaks.
It's very hard to appreciate the buildings in Midtown as all are roughly the same height.
If the ESB were further north in Midtown it wouldn't be so symbolic in the skyline either.
For a building to truly stand out at this point in Midtown it would either have to be at least 1,100 or right on the rivers edge.
...or be of superior architecture, which in this case, it is not.
Why must this be another box???
How much longer will this nightmare/plague/curse/hex/jinx go on?
Did this city do something really terrible in a previous life or what?
It doesn't seem to matter who or how great the architect is or where they come from.
When they come here and see all these boxes, they seem to immediately catch the New York BOX Syndrome [Warning: highly contagious for architects--put on blindfold immediately upon entering the city].
"Geez, there are a gazillion boxes here, so I think I'll just add another one"!
Last edited by antinimby; February 17th, 2006 at 03:26 PM.
I feel your pain antinimby...
I expected a shape that is a little more intriguing. Now I just hope it is beautifully executed- fine tuned in it's details as the Seagram Building is. The clear glass and light color will make a nice contrast with it at some angles. This one is personal for me- I will see it from my window.
It could have something to do with it being located next to the world's most famous box...
Is the Hearst a box? Is Calatrava's South Street tower a box? Is the Freedom Tower a box? Is the Bank of America tower a box? Is the Park Avenue South tower a box? Is Gehry's downtown tower going to be a box?
3 out of the 6 you mentioned are only proposals and may never be built. The fourth, the Freedom Tower is still uncertain. On the other hand I can name a bunch of completed and/or UC buildings that are boxes: 7 WTC, TWC, Bloomberg, Orion, 310 E. 53rd, TS Tower, 5 TS, Lehman Brothers Broadway building, One Sutton Place North, 200 Chambers St., The Link, 6-12 Barclay St., Tower 31, 40 Mercer (Jean Nouvel), any of Trump's Riverside buildings, 505 Fifth Ave., 300 Madison Ave., 2 Gold St. and so on. There are a ton more both big and small that I can't think of right off-hand but you get the idea.
The Freedom Tower is uncertain? maybe delayed, but more certain than ever.
He means the design, not the building itself.
Well...either way, in NY nothing is ever for certain.
As for the FT--although technically not a box--I don't know why but it just feels like one to me.
But a bet that any new building will be a box, is a safe one.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks