Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDude
These buildings are already "spire-thin" to begin with.
|
It's not a matter if being "thin", it's the exclamation point on the dramatic skyline. 432 Park Avenue is certainly thin, but it's the most boring way to crown this magnificent skyline. Put anything on top, and it's a different tower. The Steinway Tower will be thin, but it is a spire unto itself as it tapers and "feathers" into nothing.
This building is fine as it is for lesser skylines, but NY deserves and demands dramatic icons. It's why all the great towers that crowned our skyline over the years didn't simply rise into the sky and quit. It's why people are still bitchin about the removal of 3 WTC's spires, even though it sits in the shadow of the most dominant spire of them all. The original Twins were forgiven (mostly) because they served as counters to each other. Just one of those towers alone however, would have been a different matter.
Barnett said early on there would be no spire, and an earlier version of this tower didn't have one, but it did have that tapered peak that separates the taller, distinguished towers from the mass of boxes that make up the vast majority of the skyline.
I don't expect we will get a spire here, but it certainly needs one.