It’s a little late to be protesting now that the buildings are up. The time to raise concerns was during the planning phase, and IIRC that was exactly what happened, at least when the Time Warner (née “AOL-Time Warner,” snicker) towers at Columbus Circle were initially proposed. It’s not like shadows are an afterthought to a competent architect, and there are enough wealthy people who use the park that their voices will be heard.
Also, reflective buildings seem to tend towards melting whatever they are reflecting on to these days. It could, I suppose, solve the homeless problem though.
1 Like
Access to light is not a new problem in Common Law but due to cheap modern lighting it is less frequently thought of than in centuries past. There is the additional consideration here that the owner of the property being deprived of an existing access to light is the government.
Better to have towers that cast shadows than towers that focus the sun and melt cars…
1 Like
Oh I know that. But the ones who spend time complaining about zoning regulations…
They suck less than many others; but in some cases (like this one) they suck in a manner similar in kind though not in degree.
The ‘meh, screw the little people and the public resources, somebody important has an interest here!’ school is that of kleptocrats, oligarchies, and generally shoddy rule of law and weak institutions of governance the world over.
Is it undeniable that the squalid masses of Scenic Niger Delta are way more squalid? Certainly. Is the same flavor of rot a large part of why they live in a morass of dysnfunctional drilling operations and are seeing basically none of the proceeds? In large part.
The US has much more eroding to do than many places; but it would be wise to avoid mistaking the existence of what hasn’t eroded for evidence of stability.
6 Likes
In fairness to reflective buildings generally; both the ones currently known for their death-ray properties were the…problem children… of Rafael Viñoly, who apparently is too award-winning to bother with questions like ‘might building a 57 story parabolic reflector in not-particularly-cloudy Nevada pose a glare risk?’ and ‘The last time I used that shape, they nicknamed the result ‘the death ray’. Should I consider a different plan?’
3 Likes
Maybe it’s destined to be a new office complex for the Jeffers Corporation.
1 Like
Does it even make sense to be homeless in Manhattan these days? The cost of living affects them too.Wouldn’t it make more sense to use the spare change to go to Jersey or Queens?
If you’re going to be destitute you might as well have a spacious park and some nice views. I suspect that’s one reason there are so many homeless people here in San Francisco.
And San Diego. Of course, besides the views, there’s the benefit that winters don’t kill you if you tend to sleep outside.
2 Likes
If I was homeless I’d try to find the nicest neighborhood possible to crash in. Nobody is going to knife you in your sleep for a half-eaten pack of doughnuts if you’re in Bel Air.
Except that it is the adherence to the rule of law which makes the first world the first world. And from where I am standing it seems like some people have decided that the the rule of law is a dispensable commodity and with a little money and lots of handshaking you should be able to circumvent it. I left Communist Hungary with my parents in 82 for the free west, where milk and honey flowed and freedom was real!
I loved it so much that for all my sins got an MA in American Studies! When I studied in the 90s we learnt that
-
The founding fathers cared so much about democracy that they made sure Capitol Hill is accessible to all Citizens–especially the Library of Congress, where in the old days you could just walk in!
-
The citizens of New York City took civic pride in creating Central Park and making sure that it can never ever be encroached upon by development and is enjoyed by all in perpetuity!
Well those principles are now long gone. The last time I was in DC getting near Capitol Hill could have made climbing over the Berlin Wall look easy and Central Park is now up for grabs–and no, I wouldn’t want to take a stroll in the shade of an 85 storey building–substantially different from walking in the shade of a tree, where the leaves are dancing to the breeze.
So dear Americans, could you do us a favour for those of us who have gone to great length to join you in the “free world”, could you at least go back to pretending that democracy and civic pride are still values you subscribe to?
3 Likes
If you don’t like shadows from big buildings, don’t live in Manhattan.
(I live in Manhattan.)
Just when was this golden age when Americans and our leaders were law-abiding square dealers? I have heard several different decades mentioned, but a brief perusal of actual headlines from those times reveals corruption and thuggery worse than anything we have today. Possibly communist Hungary was worse - I’ll take your word for it. But some people think plundering the third world is what makes the first world the first world.
Sorry, big misunderstanding! I wasn’t singing the praise of a Golden Age. No doubt there was enough corrupt wheeling and dealing going on among the founding fathers as much as a century later in Manhattan.
But back then they at least still cared about symbolism and about how these things looked! It wasn’t that they weren’t corrupt just that they took some effort not to LOOK corrupt! It’s a small but crucial difference!
As to the third world of course I agree but the big difference back in the day between the second (as I think we used to be called) and the first was the rule of law. And that has certainly been eroded systematically in the last twenty years! Terrorism….
Surely you can like big buildings and their shadows and like Central Park without shadows at the same time.
In the line with your argument you might as well do away with the whole park. After all it is such a waste of potential development opportunity.
1 Like
…and a Jeffers good morning to you, too!
Interesting, given the argument in the SF real estate discussions going on (Tech industry vs. sane rent prices) seems generally focused on the need to build larger buildings (or more buildings in the least). I suppose the need here is better zoning such that garganto-sized buildings like the one pictured should be located away from the park, instead of right on its border. Seems like poor zoning and not enough public interest during the planning phase (or not enough public notification).
I’m not too clued-up on the situation in New York, but in London there’s a lot of talk about wealthy Russian oligarchs doing just that. And with real estate prices in fancypants parts of town on the permanent rise, I’d imagine it’s happening all over the world. Renting is just an irritant and a constant upkeep.
