It also might make it more difficult to tear down the adjacent building when that time comes. Could also be a fire dept. regulation.
Maybe Stache but I suspect not. To build directly on top of the old building may require so much work to the old building that the developer may need to hire y and redo it. But that would require a buyout that neither may want. I donât think itâs a code issue. There was a cantilever building that went down to the old one on Broadway in the 70s I think.
1 Like
On the good/better/best scale of aesthetics - this rates a solid GOOD. 
Itâs a tale of two cities all on one block.
1 Like
Exactly. What is the paradox in the âtale of two citiesâ? One might ask!
One notable line in âA Tale of Two Citiesâ can be found in this opening line: âIt was the best of times, it was the worst of timesâ.
That comment highlights the simultaneous existence of prosperity and sufferingâŚ
Nice observation Stache⌠
1 Like
Wow this one got hit with the ugly stick.
4 Likes
They are definitely not shy about the cantilever.
1 Like
I think itâs a bit jarring because the render didnt really show the stark transition between the gray and white panels, so it was hard to see where the white (as it exists now) would stop but it seems like an awkward decision to have stopped it where it was stopped.
The soffit of the cantilever being bumped out past the facade is also not nice.
I feel like all recently designed cantilevered buildings in the city have no idea how to properly resolve the cantilever in the design, there are only a few that do somewhat of a good job in integrating the cantilever into the design.
3 Likes
This is another example of a cantilever engineer showing off technical prowess at the expense of architectural talent. itâs awful.
2 Likes
Iâm not a big fan of cantilevered buildings but this one isnât bad.
How can you NOT be a fan of this building?
LOL, just kidding - I know what you mean.
Those odd protrusions on NYC towers always compromise the Architectural integrity of the overall form factor. My understanding is the purpose of the cantilever is to squeeze out a bit more usable square footage from the zoning lot - an unfortunate compromise.
BTW - I have 4 other posts on this thread. Please click on my inforshare tag above to see all other comments/links/photos. A follow on my IG account would be nice. 
1 Like
My main issue with cantilevers like this one is the void between the old building and the hang over structure. There are settings where the new structure extends all the way down to the building below. That can work well to integrate the architecture of the new and old. But these hangover cantilevers are almost impossible to make aethetically pleasing. To me, they are are almost always ugly.
2 Likes
That gap - as I understand it - is one of those form-follows-function inevitabilities of âmodernâ architecture. The âprogram requirementsâ drive these decisions; in this case some such requirement created that odd gap below the cantilever.
I donât care for the look either. This was an unfortunate compromise, that only happens occasionally where we see a section of the building awkwardly hangiing over a neighboring building.
Even when the cantilever on the new building âextends all the way downâ it looks CaCA⌠
BTW. This short video is expounds on the various principals of modern, traditional, and post-modern architecture. Enjoy.
