Another French Fry Skyscraper in New York? [Poll]

[Duke87 1,070]

We've already got one very tall and very thin building going up at 432 Park Ave and it's kinda hideous.

 

Someone's looking to build another one that's even taller.

 

I suppose if you only have a small parcel of land available you might as well make the most of it, but man, just looks off, doesn't it?

[Compdude787 916]

We've already got one very tall and very thin building going up at 432 Park Ave and it's kinda hideous.

 

Someone's looking to build another one that's even taller.

 

I suppose if you only have a small parcel of land available you might as well make the most of it, but man, just looks off, doesn't it?

I really wish we could have a building being built that's just as beautiful as the Empire State Building. Art deco is one of my favorite design styles. The Empire State building, I'm sure, was despised by people at that time, but it had a complex look to it that's missing in buildings today. Another thing that I've always liked about it is its spire and how everything converges on that as you go higher up the building. The Chrysler Building, built around the same time, also exemplifies the beauty of Art Deco-style buildings.

 

432 Park Ave just looks boring, and this new Nordstrom Tower has an asymmetrical look to it that makes it look like it's going to topple over. I thought buildings like this should be designed in such a way that makes them look structurally sound. Talk about symmetry! Oh, and then there's the 111 W 57th Street building under construction, which looks super skinny (and it'll be the skinniest building in the world upon completion) and I don't know how it would survive a hurricane. It has setbacks that make it get skinnier as it gets higher, but it too lacks symmetry.

 

It's great that New York City is now undergoing a new wave of construction, but could we just have some nicer looking buildings, please?

[__A 792]

We've already got one very tall and very thin building going up at 432 Park Ave and it's kinda hideous.

 

Someone's looking to build another one that's even taller.

 

I suppose if you only have a small parcel of land available you might as well make the most of it, but man, just looks off, doesn't it?

What. 432 Park Ave doesn't even look like it's new... At least NYC is getting nicer buildings than Melbourne

[jmsepe 2,039]

What can I say after Art Deco and Post Modernism comes Minimalism.    Honestly though, I don't seem to have problems with those two buildings and in fact I like the way Manhattan is undergoing the glass transition. 

[MandelSoft 2,774]

Wait, what? Is NYC construction buildings Hong Kong style with all these pencil towers? I agree that these buildings look quite off in New York...

[Mr Saturn64 742]

Nordstrom, 432 and another building I can't happen to remember the name of are ugly, but Hudson Yards is the hands down worst construction project in New York.  It's a bunch of glass triangles that not only are oddly designed, but block the view of the Empire State Building from the river.  Sorry, couldn't help but rant there.

[jmsepe 2,039]

Really? Oh, I have a dissenting opinion, for me Hudson Yards looks actually cool. 

[clhigh7 583]

It makes sense that the developer is trying to make the most of the small piece of land they have, especially when the prices in Manhattan are doing nothing but going up....

that is such a hideous building though!

[Sabretooth78 808]

I think they look "off" and they don't convey much in the way of stability the way buildings like 1 WTC or ESB do - it "looks" like a good stiff breeze would knock it over.

 

And yeah, they're not art deco.  I think it's time for a glass art deco supertall, and I think NYC is the perfect place for it.

[Zelgadis 638]

The Park Avenue one is rather dull, for sure.

 

Artist renderings of the Nordstrom are interesting, but one has to wait to see what it looks like in real life before rendering a final opinion.

 

Still... whatever. New York has a phenomenally ugly skyline anyway, so it would be quite a feat to make it look worse. The w2w buildings on the ground are far more interesting than most of what's poking up into the sky. (Emphasis: most. Not all.)

[TekindusT 3,809]

Am I the only one around here who actually likes those projected buildings?

New York has always been the place where new architectural styles and tendencies have been showcased since the elevator was invented. The ESB, both WTCs, the MetLife Building (formerly Pan Am building), the Woolworth... They were all controversial on their time because they were breaking the established model. In my opinion, the city should keep this spirit, despite that where the supertall architecture is now in the east.

[jason w 14]

I'm really surprised that there is enough demand for expensive housing like this. Are all the other high rises filled up, or is this just a scheme to make money and there isn't much demand? I know in places like Dubai and many Chinese cities, tall buildings like that get built, but then they don't get filled up all the way or they sit completely empty. I hope these don't end up like that.

[Snugies 91]

Looks cool! want to see cities like New York continuing to receive modern architecture. I was worried the architecture of New York was never going to leave the early 20th century. History is just that HISTORY no point in living in past glories!  

[Mr Saturn64 742]

Really? Oh, I have a dissenting opinion, for me Hudson Yards looks actually cool.

I don't like the design, but I hate it because it blocks the view of the ESB. Otherwise, id be fine with it somewhere else.

[Duke87 1,070]

I'm really surprised that there is enough demand for expensive housing like this. Are all the other high rises filled up, or is this just a scheme to make money and there isn't much demand? I know in places like Dubai and many Chinese cities, tall buildings like that get built, but then they don't get filled up all the way or they sit completely empty. I hope these don't end up like that.

 

The market for residential real estate in New York City is ravenous. Anyone building apartments will have no trouble at all filling them.

 

What's interesting, though, is that despite this, the market for commercial real estate in New York City is stagnant. People need more apartments but seemingly not more offices. This reflects three trends:

1) A lot more people work remotely than used to ever be possible. You don't need an office if you work from home.

2) Within offices and such, the squeeze has been on to minimize the amount of space each employee has in order to save on real estate costs. These days you're special if you have your own cubicle.

3) With all sorts of operations going paperless you don't need room to store physical files like you used to.

[TekindusT 3,809]

 

I'm really surprised that there is enough demand for expensive housing like this. Are all the other high rises filled up, or is this just a scheme to make money and there isn't much demand? I know in places like Dubai and many Chinese cities, tall buildings like that get built, but then they don't get filled up all the way or they sit completely empty. I hope these don't end up like that.

 

The market for residential real estate in New York City is ravenous. Anyone building apartments will have no trouble at all filling them.

 

What's interesting, though, is that despite this, the market for commercial real estate in New York City is stagnant. People need more apartments but seemingly not more offices. This reflects three trends:

1) A lot more people work remotely than used to ever be possible. You don't need an office if you work from home.

2) Within offices and such, the squeeze has been on to minimize the amount of space each employee has in order to save on real estate costs. These days you're special if you have your own cubicle.

3) With all sorts of operations going paperless you don't need room to store physical files like you used to.

 

 

Is there a tendency of people going to live in Manhattan and commuting to suburban business or industrial parks to go to work? It is quite a common thing here in Berlin, does it happen in NYC? 

[SteveMSim 275]

 

 

I'm really surprised that there is enough demand for expensive housing like this. Are all the other high rises filled up, or is this just a scheme to make money and there isn't much demand? I know in places like Dubai and many Chinese cities, tall buildings like that get built, but then they don't get filled up all the way or they sit completely empty. I hope these don't end up like that.

 

The market for residential real estate in New York City is ravenous. Anyone building apartments will have no trouble at all filling them.

 

What's interesting, though, is that despite this, the market for commercial real estate in New York City is stagnant. People need more apartments but seemingly not more offices. This reflects three trends:

1) A lot more people work remotely than used to ever be possible. You don't need an office if you work from home.

2) Within offices and such, the squeeze has been on to minimize the amount of space each employee has in order to save on real estate costs. These days you're special if you have your own cubicle.

3) With all sorts of operations going paperless you don't need room to store physical files like you used to.

 

 

Is there a tendency of people going to live in Manhattan and commuting to suburban business or industrial parks to go to work? It is quite a common thing here in Berlin, does it happen in NYC? 

 

 

Actually, in the U.S., the opposite has been true in the second half of the 20th Century.  But a new trend has been emerging, especially among younger people, for workers to live close to their jobs.  In New York, real estate has always been at a premium, which is why it was a pioneer in skyscraper development.  For the second half of the 20th Century, workers lived in the increasingly expanding suburbs and commuted to the central city to work, which reflected a nationwide trend.  But with commutes now stretching into hours, the banality of vast cookie cutter suburbs, and the increasing costs in transportation and real estate, workers, especially younger ones, are now choosing to live in the central cities close to their jobs.  I think the construction of these residential towers reflect that trend.

[9gruntsand1hammer 3,198]

How about this thin building which they are planning to build next to the World Trade Center.

125 Greenwich Street.

Source: http://newyorkyimby.com/2014/09/revealed-125-greenwich-street-to-stand-1356-feet-rivaling-one-world-trade-center.html

[Mr Saturn64 742]

How about this thin building which they are planning to build next to the World Trade Center.

125 Greenwich Street.

Source: http://newyorkyimby.com/2014/09/revealed-125-greenwich-street-to-stand-1356-feet-rivaling-one-world-trade-center.html

ugh. That's all I can say about that.

[MushyMushy 3,618]

That thing next to the new WTC is hideous. I'm sorry...

 

I think that french fry really takes away from the amount of thought put into the design of some of the WTC buildings - it's just a bland, boring glass box.

 

 

Also...

Looks cool! want to see cities like New York continuing to receive modern architecture. I was worried the architecture of New York was never going to leave the early 20th century. History is just that HISTORY no point in living in past glories!  

 

While I'm not against modern architecture (I like big tall glass skyscrapers!), I really don't like french fries. They look very weak, and are almost always just a squared off rectangle. It's only OK for a building to be like that if it is relatively small or is of a more ornate style (i.e. Art Deco old NY style...). Besides that, It's more resource-efficient to just build a larger residential tower block than multiple french fry (pencil) towers to get the same number of units. Why? Think of it this way: less walls to build, and less tower cranes needed (you only need one or two for a tall building with a big footprint, but you'll need one for every french fry). Besides that, a bigger building gives you more room to add some actual style to it.

[Compdude787 916]

That thing next to the new WTC is hideous. I'm sorry...

 

I think that french fry really takes away from the amount of thought put into the design of some of the WTC buildings - it's just a bland, boring glass box.

 

 

Also...

Looks cool! want to see cities like New York continuing to receive modern architecture. I was worried the architecture of New York was never going to leave the early 20th century. History is just that HISTORY no point in living in past glories!

 

While I'm not against modern architecture (I like big tall glass skyscrapers!), I really don't like french fries. They look very weak, and are almost always just a squared off rectangle. It's only OK for a building to be like that if it is relatively small or is of a more ornate style (i.e. Art Deco old NY style...). Besides that, It's more resource-efficient to just build a larger residential tower block than multiple french fry (pencil) towers to get the same number of units. Why? Think of it this way: less walls to build, and less tower cranes needed (you only need one or two for a tall building with a big footprint, but you'll need one for every french fry). Besides that, a bigger building gives you more room to add some actual style to it.

I completely agree with you 100%.

[Duke87 1,070]

Is there a tendency of people going to live in Manhattan and commuting to suburban business or industrial parks to go to work? It is quite a common thing here in Berlin, does it happen in NYC?

 

Somewhat, in varying degrees. You do get people commuting from Manhattan to The Bronx, Queens, and Brooklyn, although they are far outnumbered by people going the other way,

 

Commuting from Manhattan to outside the city is less common. People who commute to the suburbs from the city usually live in the outer boroughs - people heading to Long Island from Brooklyn and Queens, people heading to Westchester from The Bronx, and people heading to New Jersey from Staten Island.

 

Intersuburban commuting is also common. A lot of people both live and work in New Jersey or Connecticut.

 

 

 

True, residential demand is supported by people moving to NYC from elsewhere, not by birth rates. But it's not just people moving in from the suburbs. Indeed, the suburbs are also growing. The new people are coming from other parts of the country and other parts of the world.

[mrsmartman 200]

Skyscrapers should blend well with the surrounding environment. In this way, 125 Greenwich Street looks better than 432 Park Avenue.

 

The Three Towers

 

Perhaps the urban planners in Shanghai copied the idea from Lower Manhattan when they designed the new financial district.

Whether it looks good or not is up to your aesthetic perception.

 

There is also a serious problem in Hong Kong that large buildings block air flow to surrounding buildings. This style can improve the view of the tenants, thus maximizing developers' profit.

http://archive.hkgolden.com/view.aspx?message=3014193&page=1&highlight_id=0

[Sabretooth78 808]

While I'm not against modern architecture (I like big tall glass skyscrapers!), I really don't like french fries. They look very weak, and are almost always just a squared off rectangle. It's only OK for a building to be like that if it is relatively small or is of a more ornate style (i.e. Art Deco old NY style...). Besides that, It's more resource-efficient to just build a larger residential tower block than multiple french fry (pencil) towers to get the same number of units. Why? Think of it this way: less walls to build, and less tower cranes needed (you only need one or two for a tall building with a big footprint, but you'll need one for every french fry). Besides that, a bigger building gives you more room to add some actual style to it.

 

Agreed.  They are almost entirely devoid of character.  As if that wasn't bad enough, 125 looks entirely out of balance with the rest of the ultimate WTC complex.

[SteveMSim 275]

Many of these buildings which plans are announced never get built.  They either don't get approval by the city, don't get financial backing from investors, the builders go broke, or their plans are just too far-fetched.  There are other reasons buildings don't get built, but the reasons already stated are the most obvious. Emporis has a section on skyscrapers that were planned but were never built in New York alone.  The same is true with other cities.

 

 

[Mr Saturn64 742]

So true.  Did you know Philly was to have a 1,500 foot skyscraper, making it taller than Willis Tower?  Never built.  (Don't worry, we're getting a 1,100 foot on the same spot!)

 

Something tells me not all will be built.  Some of the microscopically thin ones won't be built. 

[Thin White Duke 4,072]

I don't mind the architectural style itself. What bothers me is how unproportional these buildings are. While I don't think they will, it looks like they'll sway violently in the wind. I don't like that one bit. 

[SteveMSim 275]

If someone wants to design and build a tall, thin skyscraper, this is how to do it:

 

Mather Tower, Chicago.

[Compdude787 916]

If someone wants to design and build a tall, thin skyscraper, this is how to do it:

 

[snip]

Mather Tower, Chicago.

It is good to be reminded that our problems and concerns are nothing new.

[jmsepe 2,039]

Haha. Nice find Steve. Looks like architecture itself continues to evolve without our consent.