Quote:
Originally Posted by JSsocal
Bwaaah, excuse me BLIGHT?
Besides being a really great tower, I can think of several towers in the Central Park south neighborhood that would constitute as BLIGHT, and Carnegie tower is not one of them. How about the tower neighboring carnegie 57 for starters?
|
Its not really blight as in a surface lot or an unsalvageable building, but for something thats trying to make its presence known, its pretty repulsive in my book.
Metropolitan Tower? Its by far the most solid of the 3. Simple, unique forms. Its not trying to be anything its not and succeedes. Its classic, erratic overuse of spandrel don't really make it an exceptional tower, but at least its visually appealing and dynamic. Its actually motivated me to stop and to look at it. Carnegie Hall tower has the same problems Metroplitan Tower does, but with skittles-vomit colors, square pomo windows and nothing but a facade of vapid decoration on the same flat boring form. Little downtown Italian brownstones don't go up 60 stories and they were never meant to. No one is fooled (except for the AIA apparently). The only thing interesting about it is its proximity to Metopolitan Tower.
City Spire is no better either, not to mention its horrible integration into the block. I seriously cant believe Pelli and Jahn actually got away with designing these things. Its not even that they're just tolerated, they're celebrated. Its actually infuriatingly incomprehensible to me. What a gross misuse of talent. New York deserves better; luckily this tower is promising.