NEW YORK | 262 Fifth Ave | 860 FT | 60 FLOORS

Who’s we? I like this project


Yes, I am loving this project. One particular favorite feature: this facade is ULTRA high quality, and no doubt ULTRA expensive. Those shimmering, multi-faceted, metallic tiles are stunning.


My main focus for architecture that I find appealing is that the design is simply uniqueness. I don’t think there’s a tower just like this, and I’m liking the reality more than the rendering. That cladding is awesome imo


this POS belongs in a New Rochelle office park, not obstructing the views of the greatest skyscraper in history



The ESB had its day and it’s not like this skinny thing makes the ESB unviewable from everywhere.

I too like this building.


This building will most likely be well received from the general public: simply because it is pretty, glitzy, and something special - but let’s also look “Beyond the surface”.

I like this particular ‘functional feature’ of the architectural design.
“The building has a single vertical core, which will hold all the formation mechanisms (elevators, exit stairs, etc.), allowing the apartments to have customizable open floors with large areas overlooking the city’s panorama.”

The above quote taken from the website of GUALINI - the company providing products/service for the facade. They mention many other interesting functional features of the building on their website: but this ‘open floor plan’ is my favorite.


For those lucky enough to live there, the views will be quite nice. Another cool feature for residents will be that there is only one unit per floor.

1 Like

For those who are complaining about the ESB being “blocked”, I am sure theres plenty of other vantage points to view the ESB.

I think this tower is cool and hope to see it finished and what it looks like at night.


“I am sure theres plenty of other vantage points to view the ESB.”

Us folks that hate this building have heard this argument ad nauseam! We already know this!

Our constant rebuttal is that this particular vantage point (from Madison Square Park, the Flatiron, lower Fifth Ave) was one the most special vantage points. We’re talking top 3 vantage points for many people. It was the #1 for me.

There are other buildings that have gone up recently that block ESB from other vantage points, but the reason there hasn’t been article after article written about them - like this building has - is because they aren’t as special as this particular vantage point in a lot of people’s view.


It’s a little jarring how skinny this tower is. Snapped this photo this afternoon


Its weird that this building appears as skinny as it does since it still has a lower height to width ratio than 111W57th does.

But im certain this is just a result of a camera/phone lens. The building has never really looked narrow in person to me personally or atleast not as much as your snap depicts.

It looks like theres a depression in the top of the crown, I wonder if a BMU will be put here. This building is so strange, theres no indication of a location for cooling towers or water towers anywhere and I wonder if thats because the building only has 26 or whatever units…


Kind of ironic to me to hear such NIMBYism on a YIMBY website.


It’s all relative I guess. I’m sure you and others who approve of 262 5th Ave would be opposed to the destruction of the Empire State building to put up a 3000 foot skyscraper. And I’m sure there would be more extreme maniacs calling you and those others NIMBYs out of spite.

Nobody is completely Yimby


Just because it’s an aesthetic net negative (in my opinion) doesn’t mean it overall should not have been built – there’s presumably the economic benefit of the billion-dollar properties created, the jobs created in constructing it etc., and just the fact that there’s no justifiable legal reason to stop it. But there’s nothing wrong with acknowledging that a formerly great view is now covered up by a pretty ordinary tower.

It’s going to be the same argument but even more contentious when 260 South blocks the Empire State Building from DUMBO.


Fair enough. A 3000’ mega tall would be pretty sweet but not at the expense of the ESB.


The question raised here is: “contentious” to who, and how many. The “reasonable person” concept used in the law is an objective standard used to establish guilt/innocence or liability.

When it comes to Architectural Aesthetics I apply the “average person” standard. Would the ‘average person’ find this building aesthetically offensive, or attractive, or maybe simply be indifferent to the aesthetics.

The only method to determine this is statistical: do most, or a majority of the general public find a particular building aesthetically ‘negative’ or ‘ugly’ or ‘unattractive’. That is the question I ask, for that is what matters most where the standards of ‘architectural aesthetics’ are in question.

I truly believe that if a survey were taken of the ‘General Public’ this building would be deemed either attractive, or simply ordinary. In other words, this building would not be deemed “contentious” or “ugly” by the vast majority of the general public. This of course remains unconfirmed until such a survey of the general viewing public is taken. :woozy_face: :thinking:

The idea that this building (or the sight lines) is “contentions” applies only to a fringe group of Architectural Enthusiasts, Civic Activists, and NIMBY’s. A ‘highly vocal’ minority that is not at all representative of the “General Public”.

I’m no social researcher so I don’t know how one would pull this off, but I bet that you could get some interesting trends just by tracking how many Instagram photos from this intersection are taken and posted before and after 262 Fifth is built – my layman’s prediction is that the amount would drop off significantly as it’s no longer such a ‘Kodak Moment’ composition, just the ESB barely peeking from behind a forgettable (for non-skyscraper fans) glass tower. Maybe contentious is not the right word for it, but it’s palpable that something aesthetically special was lost here.



Yes, that woud be one method. I apply a typical method used in statistics called “random sample”.

I ask my Grandmother, my neighbor, my friends, my brother, and some random people I may meet on the street. I ask a Basic quesiton: do you find the architectural design of X building attractive, pretty, ugly, not-not nice, average, unattractive, ordinary, ect. The ‘random sample’ I take will be statistically congruent with the general population: or at least that is what I remember from Statistics 101. :wink:

I am in agreement with you that this building (and the sight lines) is a contentious subject. I also agree that many find this building to be an aesthetic “net negative” . I only wanted to make the point that those {opinions} are very much in the minority. The vast majority of folks in DUMBO or NYC will not find anything ‘contentious’ about this building or the sight lines - that was my main point for what it is worth.

Thanks for the exchange.