That’s the Wired New York spirit. I agree.
2 Likes
It works until it doesn’t.
1 Like
I never said I didn’t like your post 
im only critical when I see wrong and/or outdated information being shared and im grateful for your appreciation to my contributions but I’m only critical in this instance because I know I’ve mentioned countless times that 1. This building is not unique or inventive at all just because it has a side core 2. The floor plates are not column free and we can physically see that/them and 3. We dont know if the building will have only 3 window bays on the N/S sides, but we know that they are not unobstructed because of said columns blocking the interior view.
Answering Roberts question from yesterday for clarification that you’ve slightly answered, we only know that the east side will have the aluminum cladding and portholes (though much fewer in number), but visually we don’t know if it will follow the same appearance of the renders, we dont know how the N/S side will looks because of the columns, though they could appear the same, and we dont know what the west side will look like because of the punchouts in the side. I apologize robert that I made it seem that I was referring to the design being absolutely wrong, I was only referring to how the quote makes it seem like the design is so visionary (which its not and thats not an opinion matter), but it does still retain aspects that are not correct anymore.
Infoshare, I respect anyones ability to share their thoughts about developments, architecture, etc since its a forum after all and I enjoy reading some of your commentary, but I simply don’t like when wrong or outdated info is mentioned anywhere here (the forum in general) because it seems to spread like wildfire. I’m just a critical person, as designers and architects actually have to be, but only when it comes to facts being challenged and/or when opinions are based on incorrect facts. 
I want people to understand/learn things.
5 Likes
I don’t particularly love this building but it is different enough with the structure and cladding. Imagine being across from this building in the morning and the sun’s rays are reflecting directly into your apt.
I don’t know why, but I thought of this:
I’m hoping the aluminum isn’t that reflective. And I think the issue with the Walkie-Talkie was also the shape. At worst it should be a terrible glare.
1 Like
I agree with this sentiment, if it’s not fully polished, I expect it to be semi-polished in finish, which should still have a glare. However, because it is not glass, it shouldn’t concentrate a single point of the sun in any one direction and should disperse it, but it will still definitely cause a glare no matter what, just not one that would melt things, etc.
1 Like
Yeah, the shape was the problem there, and with that one in Vegas. Almost any concave reflective surface of sufficient size is going to have that issue unless it’s oriented so it never gets direct sunlight.
2 Likes
The Hubris here is hard to take; but I will be nice about it anyway. Please realize you can not be a self appointed ‘guardian of truth’ on this forum because “you don’t like” wrong or outdated information posted here.
You are free to state your objections to my posts; but going forward I will exercise my right to ignore those objections. I am sorry you object to some of my posts, but I believe it would be better for you to ignore those comments rather than chastise those who post things that you don’t like.
Also, I believe the article I posted from “Architect Magazine” is making some worthwhile commentary about this building - if it is not all completely true/correct is not really important. I do not need to see only FACTS posted here: contributions of ideas, theories, and attitudes and opinions are all of great value too. I hope there are those who agree…
5 Likes
Opinions are based on what facts people choose to believe, I never said anything about people not being able to say what they want or share what they want, I literally said, I want people to base/form their opinion’s based on factual information, that is, the type of opinions which are informed by facts, because Architecture is subjective, some opinions can not be based on facts. Do not skew my words or think I am some prideful arrogant person just because I like to share informative information or can’t interpret everything that everyone is saying/thinking.
Posting old articles that do hold incorrect information is important because it leads to people believing things that are not true anymore, like the fact that the article (which is from 2017) mentions that this building is integrating itself with the neighboring 260 Fifth Ave building, which it is not.
I can say this building is ugly, because I think it is and I know that there are others that both agree and disagree, that is an opinion that can’t be based in fact because it is using the subjective nature of architecture, but when one forms an opinion based on the factual side of architecture with false information, that is what I want to discuss to try and understand why the opinion is formed. Just because I want to understand something that I don’t that someone else has said doesn’t mean I’m conceited, as you are very clearly implying yet trying to sound nice about.
Neither are any (and I mean any) of my posts a response to something I don’t like because I don’t respond to those posts at all, the jargon filled posts I respond with like this one, I am literally trying to understand the post, it has nothing to do with my disliking of the actual contents of the posts.
6 Likes
Even with a blank wall, I’m kind of curious too how they’ll implement it with whatever material they’ll go for.
2 Likes
That blank wall is my favorite feature of this design: it contains the elevator/stair/mechanicals. I think it will be left raw concrete. This vertical “spine” was a design master stroke IMHO - it is sort of a physical ‘racing stripe’ that add visual interest. The idea of making that component of this building a separate external element was a very cool move.
Here is a nice 3D look at the entire building.
2 Likes
I disagree. So, let’s agree to disagree. If the owners/moderators of the side see something they think is harmful, not OK - they will remove the content as they see fit.
We can all sort out the good/bad, true/false at the end of the day - it is all useful input.
What matters to me is a lively exchange of ideas & information; and you have here offered that opportunity - so thanks. 
2 Likes
They had the same problem with the Disney concert hall glaring into apartments across the street. They had to alter the finish. I don’t think they will have the same problem here, the surface is not very big and it’s an office building across the street.
4 Likes
Lol hey now, don’t forget that minus the height difference the plan dimensions of the building used to be slightly bigger, so atleast it won’t cover it by the little amount more. 
They’re still taking their sweet time installing the safety cocoon, but it seems like they will leave it in the unconventional way it is appearing, only having the real assembly in front of the open north and south portions, and the netting framework on the solid concrete portions.
4 Likes
You’ll have to be pretty close to 27th St for this to completely block ESB.
don’t agree, but made me laugh, so have this ‘like’
6 Likes
:clap…
3 Likes