I agree, would’ve been much better suited to a low-rise, human-scale build
3 Likes
5 Likes
I personally believe their should be more view protections in place
6 Likes
This could be the last straw.
2 Likes
i quite like the metlife buidling now that its not the tallest in the area
1 Like
Who would be in charge for what views get protected? Is it a committee of local residents? 
I’m not for or against the idea of protecting certain views only because a city like NYC is constantly changing. In the next hundred years, I can’t even fathom the number of supertalls that will pop up across NYC once buildings from the 19th / 20th century reach their “end-of-life”. Whether any are affordable for the average person is a whole other debate 
Had 262 Fifth Ave been some breathtaking design that was THE best in the world (and it wasn’t a “deposit box in the sky” as some put it), would people still be as divided over its placement? Imagine THE most awe-inspiring, jaw-dropping building ever at this spot (vs what we got)… is it still an issue?
5 Likes
Well yeah for me mostly it’s because it’s ugly af and not worthy of that spot. If it was something iconic I wouldn’t really care. I’ve said previously in this thread, I don’t even think the design is that bad. It’s primarily the location of said design is what irks me. There is a place for that building in this city, just not there.
7 Likes
it was better when it wasn’t there at all
10 Likes
Yes, This statement I can fully agree with based on my own criteria for “artful architecture”. I make a distinction between the ‘applied arts’ (buildings, cars, graphic design, etc’) and the ‘fine arts’ (painting, sculpture, etc.) and therefor an fully accept the design of a new building that is “not that bad”.
There are different ‘standards of proof’ or a different criteria applied in law between ‘criminal cases’ and ‘civil cases’ - I tend to judge the aesthetic merits of the ‘applied arts’ with this less strict criteria of a civil case. 
I offer this explanation only because I do see this architectural is not ICONIC, or Capital A architecture: but it is “not that bad”. 
I stand by my admiration for this ‘worthy’ architectural addition to the NYC skyline. 
2 Likes
This is the fruit of the failure of passing the greater NoMad historic district law.
2 Likes
how i feel after eating a salad
10 Likes
I fully expect to see this portrayed in every dystopian film until the end of the decade. Has a very 3 body problem aesthetic going on.
12 Likes
Big dump of this monstrosity.
If the porthole windows aren’t going to be finished with a rounded out version of the tin foil nonsense, oh god…
19 Likes
Dump being the operative word -
2 Likes
Interesting update from the FU 262 account
3 Likes
