Flip the East tower around and I’m actually very into it (see the above discussion about visual balance and “interlocking” towers).
2 Likes
I think Tower Fifth is beautiful. What don’t you like about it?
1 Like
Not Nickfloyo but I just find it boring. The top observation deck is nice but the main body looks like a copy paste from 432 park, which doesn’t look good either. Idk just my thoughts on the matter. We’ll see if it even gets built tho, the Venezuelans don’t look like they want to sell and Macklowe really wants their building.
1 Like
I do not like Tower Fifth because it looks weird to me. The way its shaped makes it looks like a skinny at the base and deformed at the top 432 park Ave. Im not a fan of the “looks like it’s leaning over” look for tall skyscrapers. The only thing that looks appealing about it is the over the edge observation deck but they could have definitely found a more appealing way of incorporating that in. I don’t mind seeing a new skyscraper there but it can’t be that just that tall rectangle building with the weird thing at the top
“Affirmation” Tower is a clear verbal message; and perhaps the weird look is a formal architectural manifestation of that same message. Classical Architectural form is ‘normal’ and ‘pleasing’ and - NOT weird looking - because it is founded on ‘Traditional’ norms of physical beauty. Perhaps that is the purpose here with Affirmation Tower - to ‘disrupt’ our idea of what is “weird” and what is ‘beauty’.
The very notion of ‘turning things upside-down’ is the point of equity in society. I find the design of this building to be both exciting and attractive on its own design merits: but the philosophical and societal implications are also quite compelling.
9 Likes
That tower is not beautiful nor pretty to look at. I can understand the backlash against buildings like 432 Park Ave or Central Park tower but at-least they fit the skyline. Both Affirmation tower and tower fifth are ugly. This forum is the only place I’ve seen positive reviews about these two buildings going up and that’s not a good look. I don’t mind trying something different but buildings like those two only ruin the skyline instead of making it look even more iconic. I am black myself and I find the building design disappointing. They can do better than that.
9 Likes
Well we agree on 432 Park: another of my favorites. I can understand someone not liking this building, but to say it will “ruin the skyline” is something I find hard to comprehend.
What is wonderful about Architecture is everyone can have their own opinion; because here we are not discussing matters-of-fact. I do respect your opinion!
11 Likes
I have mixed feelings about Affirmation Tower. Like a number of other buildings with broader tops than bottoms, it lacks balance to me. Big at the top is not always bad. Sometimes it fits with the overall aesthetic of the building. While this one is not as bad for me as the one at 91st and Broadway, I can see why some dislike it. It exudes a bit of show off engineering. On the other hand, that sort of look might be totally appropriate given its African American creation. That community has every right (duty?) to make proclamations about itself. Maybe this one will grow on me if and when it begins to rise out of the ground. I look forward to watching the progress.
2 Likes
This building is beautiful. The design is one-of-a-kind and unique. The modern New York skyline should represent the many different styles of the era. This will also be one of the tallest in the city. There is nothing bad about this project except that the height could always be even taller!
7 Likes
I agree. This looks amazing.
Also, amazing engineering often makes an otherwise ordinary building extraordinary.
9 Likes
I actually like the open rectangle building. In fact if the top overhung the sides it might be even better. That would be an example for me of a cantilever project that has a strong aesthetic coherence.
2 Likes
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I respect that. Just me personally, I don’t like how it stands or looks in the area.
2 Likes
I can see that.
In that respect, I’m one of the few people that loved BiG’s 2 WTC.
1 Like
I’m glad this is going up over on the westside, I think the area is more ideal for a design like this unlike the WTC site.
1 Like
4 Likes
I’m all for the what this building stands for. But man, I’m so sick of stacked box buildings.
10 Likes
From the article…
“At 1,663 feet, the 90-story building would be taller by floor height than One World Trade Center, but shorter by spire height. Mr. Peebles said this was done out of respect. “Nearly 3,000 people lost their lives there, so we have to be mindful of that,” he said.”
So in 2489, the tallest building in New York City will still be One World Trade Center?
3 Likes
Repost from my comment on ssp.
“It’s an excuse is what it is. The “reason” why towers don’t surpass the height of 1WTC has absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. It has to do with air rights, zoning, and money.”
Sure, there may be “some” developers, or architects that feel that may but it’s not the majority or anywhere close to it.
Developers can acquire more air rights. Apply for special permit from the city to build taller. There is nothing stopping higher construction.