Chicago/New York city similarities and differences (food, live, state)

[dcb175]

Originally Posted by 2020's YouTube Vlog

I guess it's a matter of taste, but I disagree that more of those hideous buildings will improve the NYC skyline. They are boring and ugly, which is kind of an accomplishment in its own way.

Agreed, and more importantly, they destroy the street level even more than the skyline because they sit 75% empty most of the year.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by 2020's YouTube Vlog

I guess it's a matter of taste, but I disagree that more of those hideous buildings will improve the NYC skyline. They are boring and ugly, which is kind of an accomplishment in its own way.

What? Outside of 432 Park and Central Park tower maybe, which ones are ugly? Or boring?

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by dcb175

Agreed, and more importantly, they destroy the street level even more than the skyline because they sit 75% empty most of the year.

How does that destroy street level? 75% empty supertall will still generate the same amount of activity as a 10 story building. Its not like 57th street is lacking pedestrian activity in the first place.
If anything, these buildings are very good for the city. NYC gets to collect huge property taxes from a building whose residents live in Dubai or London and who do not use any city services or infrastructure.

[cpomp]

Originally Posted by Gantz

What? Outside of 432 Park and Central Park tower maybe, which ones are ugly? Or boring?

Originally Posted by Gantz

How does that destroy street level? 75% empty supertall will still generate the same amount of activity as a 10 story building. Its not like 57th street is lacking pedestrian activity in the first place.
If anything, these buildings are very good for the city. NYC gets to collect huge property taxes from a building whose residents live in Dubai or London and who do not use any city services or infrastructure.

Yes. People are making up reasons to be mad. And Central Park Tower (one of the "75% empty supertalls") is anchored by a 7-story Nordstrom, and 432 Park on the 57th St. side is anchored by high-end retailers, hardly destroying the street level.

And there are some stunning new supertalls in Manhattan such as 1 Vanderbilt, JP Morgan Tower (U/C), 30 Hudson Yards, and 220 Central Park South.

I bet similar negative arguments were made 100 years ago when the Chrysler Building and Empire State Building were being built. New / change usually sparks negative emotions.

[SixthCoordinate]

Originally Posted by cpomp

Yes. People are making up reasons to be mad. And Central Park Tower (one of the "75% empty supertalls") is anchored by a 7-story Nordstrom, and 432 Park on the 57th St. side is anchored by high-end retailers, hardly destroying the street level.

And there are some stunning new supertalls in Manhattan such as 1 Vanderbilt, JP Morgan Tower (U/C), 30 Hudson Yards, and 220 Central Park South.

I bet similar negative arguments were made 100 years ago when the Chrysler Building and Empire State Building were being built. New / change usually sparks negative emotions.

Or the Eiffel Tower

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by cpomp

Yes. People are making up reasons to be mad. And Central Park Tower (one of the "75% empty supertalls") is anchored by a 7-story Nordstrom, and 432 Park on the 57th St. side is anchored by high-end retailers, hardly destroying the street level.

And there are some stunning new supertalls in Manhattan such as 1 Vanderbilt, JP Morgan Tower (U/C), 30 Hudson Yards, and 220 Central Park South.

I bet similar negative arguments were made 100 years ago when the Chrysler Building and Empire State Building were being built. New / change usually sparks negative emotions.

Yeah, same with 111 West 57th St.
Considering what is being built everywhere else, these are all literally world class.

[masssachoicetts]

Originally Posted by Gantz

Yeah, same with 111 West 57th St.
Considering what is being built everywhere else, these are all literally world class.

WORLD CLASS!

But no, in seriousness, these kill ground level and take away from the city. Albeit their height, they look like they can be in Anywhere USA:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7541...8192?entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7536...8192?entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7651...8192?entry=ttu

Now, there a slew of new buildings I am working with on the Upper East Side that have character and are 'world class'. Not these glass boxes that sit 75% empty, that the city is actively losing money on each day.

Although I think Hudson Yards is uncreative, its not really immense gentrification since there was nothing there. The way I look at it, as long as it keeps gentrification to Brooklyn, Below 14th Street and LIC, I am okay with it. As long as this doesn't fuel further displacement in the city.. it's chill. But it is a bit rich to say it's 'world class' when they quite literally... glass boxes with uncreative ground levels. It's giving very tall Seaport District in Boston or Navy Yard in DC.

Also, keep in mind, my POV is from a 26 y/o City/State worker who actively opposes gentrification with the rest of people my age and grabs lunch on Dyckman. I'm not some 35 year old tech worker/software engineer who is living in Williamsburg, Brooklyn who fancies the West Village on Friday's for $15 mixed drink happy hours. Those people probably love this. Two very very different NYC's. You can't argue with people in a different socioeconomic/racial/ethnic class as you and call them wrong. Just realize people have different opinions based on the New York/area around NYC they live in. Also- Don't say I am picking on the world class best city in the world or what not, because most of my last few posts have been on this point about Boston too.

[cpomp]

Originally Posted by masssachoicetts

WORLD CLASS!

But no, in seriousness, these kill ground level and take away from the city. Albeit their height, they look like they can be in Anywhere USA:
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7541...8192?entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7536...8192?entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7651...8192?entry=ttu

Now, there a slew of new buildings I am working with on the Upper East Side that have character and are 'world class'. Not these glass boxes that sit 75% empty, that the city is actively losing money on each day.

Although I think Hudson Yards is uncreative, its not really immense gentrification since there was nothing there. The way I look at it, as long as it keeps gentrification to Brooklyn, Below 14th Street and LIC, I am okay with it. As long as this doesn't fuel further displacement in the city.. it's chill. But it is a bit rich to say it's 'world class' when they quite literally... glass boxes with uncreative ground levels. It's giving very tall Seaport District in Boston or Navy Yard in DC.

Also, keep in mind, my POV is from a 26 y/o City/State worker who actively opposes gentrification with the rest of people my age and grabs lunch on Dyckman. I'm not some 35 year old tech worker/software engineer who is living in Williamsburg, Brooklyn who fancies the West Village on Friday's for $15 mixed drink happy hours. Those people probably love this. Two very very different NYC's. You can't argue with people in a different socioeconomic/racial/ethnic class as you and call them wrong. Just realize people have different opinions based on the New York/area around NYC they live in. Also- Don't say I am picking on the world class best city in the world or what not, because most of my last few posts have been on this point about Boston too.

A few nitpicks with your examples in order...

1. The first picture is the closest to a blah street level, but I am old enough to remember that area when it was a no-mans land. Hudson Yards is an engineering marvel and has improved the area (the extended high-line is nice), but I agree the final product leaves a bit to be desired from a traditional legacy city experience.

2. 5 Manhattan West (East side of 10th Ave) is an older building that was in awful shape until about 10 years ago, no windows or activation on 10th Ave. Now, yes it is glass, but also anchored by a Whole Foods and a lot of street planters, adding much needed greenery.

3. The last picture of 57th Street, I'm not seeing how the building you called out (One57) detracts from the street, nor does it look like a tower in anywhere USA. 57th Street has long been anchored by tall buildings of varying architectural styles, and One57 also houses a very busy Park Hyatt hotel, not just condos. An example of poor street level use is the motor-court at 432 Park on 56th Street.

And OT... I get it, you are young, smart, opinionated, valid feelings about development/gentrification, but your comments can come off as unkind and generalized, and ironically sometimes a tone of superiority. As an FYI, I likely fall into the category of New Yorkers you loathe, but I don't compartmentalize people based on their economic status or chosen neighborhood. A word of kind advice is to be more forgiving of differences, especially in New York, which has long been a magnet for young people of all types seeking various experiences.

[masssachoicetts]

Originally Posted by cpomp

A few nitpicks with your examples in order...

1. The first picture is the closest to a blah street level, but I am old enough to remember that area when it was a no-mans land. Hudson Yards is an engineering marvel and has improved the area (the extended high-line is nice), but I agree the final product leaves a bit to be desired from a traditional legacy city experience.

2. 5 Manhattan West (East side of 10th Ave) is an older building that was in awful shape until about 10 years ago, no windows or activation on 10th Ave. Now, yes it is glass, but also anchored by a Whole Foods and a lot of street planters, adding much needed greenery.

3. The last picture of 57th Street, I'm not seeing how the building you called out (One57) detracts from the street? 57th Street has long been anchored by tall buildings of varying architectural styles, and One57 also houses a very busy Park Hyatt hotel, it's not just a condo tower. A poor example of street level use is the motor-court for 432 Park on 56th Street.

Also, kind of OT... I get it, you are young, smart, opinionated, valid feelings about development/gentrification, but your comments can come off as unkind and generalized, and ironically sometimes a tone of superiority. As an FYI, I likely fall into the category of New Yorkers you loathe, but I don't negatively compartmentalize people based on their economic status or chosen neighborhood. A word of kind advice is to be more forgiving of differences, especially in New York, which has long been a magnet for young people of all types seeking various experiences.

Totally get your points and understand them.

However, it would be way less aggressive, if anytime someone didn't nitpick NYC, a slew of people I 'loathe' come attacking posters. We absolutely can have these conversations, but simply calling Hudson yards 'sterile', which it is, gained 3 NYC posters to attack the person who made the comment. If you don't agree, say that. But don't say people are just trying to find a reason to hate NYC. Because that simply is not true. It's a two way street, we are just providing feedback.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by masssachoicetts

Totally get your points and understand them.

However, it would be way less aggressive, if anytime someone didn't nitpick NYC, a slew of people I 'loathe' come attacking posters. We absolutely can have these conversations, but simply calling Hudson yards 'sterile', which it is, gained 3 NYC posters to attack the person who made the comment. If you don't agree, say that. But don't say people are just trying to find a reason to hate NYC. Because that simply is not true. It's a two way street.

Then why are you quoting me? I didn't attack anyone for calling Hudson Yards sterile, nor was I quoting a post talking about Hudson yards.
Also, don't make it personal.