Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy
In other words, the MAS would like to cut down the height of tall buildings. It is ironic that an organization supposedly so dedicated to preserving the qualities of New York would be so vested in killing one of its best known and most visible qualities, the skyline.
|
I understand some of the concerns that the Municipal Arts Society brings up, I just think that they are going about it all wrong. NY Magazine recently wrote a piece on the Affordable City (link copied below for those interested) in which it stated that building costs in NY were twice that of Chicago, attributing a material amount of those costs to permit processes. The last thing we need in this city is more of that.
At the same time, however, I am enraged that Extell can alter the skyline with the garbage they have planned at 255 W 57th while Torre Verre has been stunted from making the impact that it deserves. These kinds of missed opportunities make it hard for me not to sympathize with those that would like to see greater public control over the city's most prominent projects. People come from all over the world to see our skyline, it's one of the primary factors that make NY such a desirable place to live and visit. As such, the aesthetic appeal (or lack thereof) of these towers has a real economic impact on the city and thus the public at large.
A developer is only going to spend extra money on a project when it will yield greater rents/sales prices. Unfortunately, tenants generally don't care that much how their buildings look from the outside (at least not enough to pay much more per square foot), they just care about the views they will enjoy. Over time, though, all buildings will enjoy greater views/prices if everyone avoids putting up bad quality designs. It's a classical tragedy of the commons problem where the incentives of the individual are misaligned with the costs to the group--think of it as a type of visual pollution.
The way to fix it is to create a commission that rewards quality design with a grant of additional air rights (similar to what is proposed for the re-zoning of midtown east, but applied throughout the city and on an ad hoc basis) and thus incentivize developers to create projects that benefit everyone. Under such a system, a developer would voluntarily choose to apply to an architecture board for the grant of air rights in lieu of (or in addition to) buying air rights from other sources. The basic idea is that the most prominent building in any neighborhood should be beautiful. This would apply equally to granting an extra 50 feet of height to a landmark-worthy design in Soho as it would to granting an extra 350 feet to a massive tower in midtown.
None of this would prevent an ugly as of right tower from going up, but it would at least allow for better quality architecture to eventually swallow it up.
http://nymag.com/news/features/affordability-2014-1/
Prev
Linear Mode
