10 units? 29m each? Don't get me wrong, I feel Calatrava's work can be stunning, but the moral side of me sees all sorts of red flags over this. I think it is an interesting piece of architecture, yes. But is it even realistic thinking to build something like this. Not realistic in the sense of "can this be built?" Of course it can, and from the looks of it, they are taking orders. I guess where is the proof that this is needed, what is the purpose? What good does this do besides add to the notion that architected spaces are only for an elite class. I mean, 29M for a townhouse goes beyond building for the rich, these people are beyond rich seeing as this probably will not be their first/primary home. It boggles the mind really. Though, quite fun to think about. My hope is that creating this prototype would lead to advances in this technique in order to apply it on a different scale for a different slice of society, but I have great doubts about that. Still, it is damn interesting to look at and imagine.
I dont like it all that much.. I find it worrysome that ten individuals can plaster their identities on a city using a 40-storey building.. looming over a sprawling city, looking out from your 20-meter-side glass cube.. very anti-urban, anti-human.
Also, I very much doubt the structure is as adventurous as it seems.. for one thing, Calatrava's work tends to be structurally dishonest at times, and if i were a developer, i wouldn't want one of my $29mil 'townhouses' suspended 200m in the sky, by nothing but a few slender, tapering steel toothpics.
Wow. I will say very cool. But, it is kind of disgusting in its sheer opulence. No one should own that. Not in the communist hippy sense, but just gross. I don't know. I just kind of have a sickened response to the idea of that. You're are right, 10 people with such a control over the skyline. Sure there is the Trump Tower, but that's not the same. Some neat ideas and cool view though. I like how it says there is staff to cater to your every need. I wonder if they can bring you Thai she-male hookers and sushi from the fugu on the hood of a 1964 Porche with a white tiger behind the wheel? For $29 million, you better believe it!
Last week I attended a Calatrava lecture/interview at the New School put on by the New York Times, and the man was allowed to ramble on about how much he loves the philanthropic nature of architecture, how we as a profession provide functional and, often, beautiful spaces for people to live their lives in. His whole schtick is pseudo-humanism, elevating and ennobling mankind with his perfectly engineered, pristine white structures. To anybody who has actually ever given any thought to the realities of human existence, both on an individual and a societal level, Calatrava's work, especially manifest in this UTTERLY ridiculous west-side tower, is the opposite of humanist, embodying nothing but the empty "perfection" of his beloved engineering and misguided notions of pure beauty.
while I can't say that I love the project, from any point of view, a few things to keep in mind:
1. It's the developer (client) that chooses what will get built, not the architect
2. I can't think of any significant piece of archtiecture, throughout history, that wasn't made for the elite. It's just been publisized here.
I do think it's a good point that so few should control the skyline, but we also have to think that this is less impact visually (or less obstructing) than a solid building of the same height. Obviously, the developers sat down with their calcs and determined they could build a big, typical, solid building, or make a smaller one but charge more.
There are plenty of other penthouses that are going for more - I believe SOM's AOL/Time Warner's penthouse went for 70million.
Just things to consider, I think I am kinda in the middle. Manhattan, in general, I think is the epitome of real estate insanity (followed closely by Miami, LA, Vegas).
actually, in a funny sort of way, i do think the coliseum was made for the elite ... it helped the rich and powerful keep the regular people distracted from just how badly they were being screwed
as for this new tower by Calatrava, i'm ok with a few really rich folks spending a great deal of their money so they can show off ... keeping that money in circulations helps keep the rest of use regular folks employed ... and, if they want to spend their money, they can spend it on some nice architecture or they can spend it on some crap ... i vote for nice architecture (especially since it's not my money)
Jan 29, 06 4:22 pm ·
·
[Roman citizens, ie, those that were allowed inside the walls of Rome, were not exactly "regular" people, but somewhat priviledged people in their own right. The Circus of Flaminus, which was originally outside the walls of Rome, was built by Flaminus as a public gesture.
Is all philanthropy a way for the elite to distract the non-elite?
The Games, De Spectaculis, of ancient Rome most times had a sacred, pseudo-religious purpose in that the games were performed as part of a funeral, a celebration of life onto death, you might say.]
well, despite the insanity of the marketing, i think it is a damn beautiful building--i wonder if the final construction will seem as light as the model? for all of the other $29m spots in ny, that'd be on the top of my list...
i'm never going to live in this tower ... doubtful if anybody here will either ... but, i may get to look on this tower someday and experience something of its (possible) beauty and (possible) contribution to NYC
garpike says "architecture is for the rich" ... maybe the rich get to own and live in architecture if they wish to do so ... but, if it's really "architecture", then we all get to experience it and benefit from it, much as we do with Saarinen's St. Louis Arch or Gehry's Bilbao Museum or Pei's National Gallery ... none of us get to live or work in any of those places
the rich can afford to live in ugly towers or they can afford to live in beautiful towers ... damn, they've got to live somewhere, so why not support the idea of building something great for them to occupy
i agree with stone ... let's put that money to work in support of better buildings
Hummm....maybe it will keep a few New York Socialites from venturing up to my neighborhood, and driving our housing stock out of range for most working people like myself.
Hummm....maybe it will keep a few New York Socialites from venturing up to my neighborhood, and driving our housing stock out of range for most working people like myself.
architects aboslutely decide what they build. if some obscene developers comes into your office with either a pile a shit that he wwants to build or a really expensive, obscene slender piece of shit, you send him on his way. architects do make choices folks. don't srug off your ethics (and agency).
an ungodly wealthy undividual is under no obligation to temper his or her taste any more than a plain old wealthy individual, or a middle-class individual, or a poor person.
your average American 'poor' individual with 3 TV sets isn't morally obligated to send 2 to a dirt-poor third-world individual.
one generally purchases the highest quality food, electronics, housing, automobile, etc. that one can afford, unless sacrificing in one area to 'buy better' in another area.
i don't buy a cheap imitation diamond when i can afford the real thing.
It is the developer that decides the pricing ... The architect simply designs the building !! ..
Tell me ... picture this:- A developer comes to you and asks you to design a building in central New York which would be a Landmark and something the whole world would notice ( because of how much the newyork skyline is publicised). But hey, there a catch.... each unit in the building would be priced 30 million and above!! ..
would you pass up on the design, citing moral reasons?? ... C,mon .. don't kid yourself..
Don't shoot the Architect over the pricing. Chances are he had nothing to do with it... he wouldn't even be able to own one of them.
I love how you can't download the plans. But have to email for them. I just did, saying I was interested in a unit, I hope they send me a glossy package, maybe even a free plane ticket to NY. HA. But in all seriousness. Its kind of a cool idea, buy a plot of land in a good location, make 10 SSUPPER over the top residences that will attract the .0001% of the world population that can afford it, and build a crazy building. Better than the standard of building the cheapest building possible and selling off the condos to the plebs.
ridiculous. this is the project that made me start to hate calatrava. lucky for him, his mentality is stuck in the mid-20th century like most 'upscale' consumers . the interiors look frighteningly generic for such an extraordinarily scaled project. it's so corny how they toss those mies chairs into every 'upscale' setting in new york. this project will be a good, colossally expensive specimen of generic new york luxury.
you just know that someone is going to use one of those units for the setting of some 'reality tv' show.
I found a RARE pic of the courtyard! So I don't get it, does one unit consists of the whole cube??? so its like 4 stories high one unit, and for $29 mil its not that bad! Its pretty cheap even!
I expect my unit to have railings which at least come close to meeting code, a door to access those stairs, but I guess after dropping 29 (really) large on some real estate I wouldn't have enough cash left over to buy even one piece of designer furniture.
Come on render monkeys, entourages aren't just for the future occupants.
its at least more intresting than the normal fair, and why not for the rich? is not as if new york has until now been the preserve of democratic architecture for the masses, nor that ostentatious wealth is generally hidden away from the new york streets...
caltrava is the new Richard Morris Hunt, doing his version of fifth avenue, but more...um...vertical.
what's the big deal?
personally calatrava's stuff generally leaves me cold, too gattica-esque for my taste. but i do like this one; for no particular reason.
only thing i wonder about is how the hell anyone could use the balconies with the winds i imagine blowing round the tower. is that even feasible?
i wonder what the cost of construction will be for these things, i'm guessing at just around 200 million?(figuring 100 mill or 30% profit on 29mil x 10)
jump is right...althought i am not a fan of Calatrava's one-liners(cant say im really fond of this one too), but the way most people are reacting here makes me feel that everyone on this thread specializes in low-cost housing and sustainable design.
I think he is just playing off the ostentatious Mantattan culture, and talking about the manhattan skyline, this is much better than most of the concrete office buildings one sees from the harbor
there is an inelastic demand for ultra-high-cost housing -- ten stupid ultra-rich people will blow 29-50 million just to say they did on this purblind piece of crap. calatrava rolled a gutter ball on this one. this really, really sucks.
Beats the generic bronze box du Trump. Why the hell not? Or lets just fill up Manhattan with undistinguished granite-clad 30-40 story towers and be done with it.
Anyone, rich or poor, who desires this level of conspicuousness is in need of help. I can see TV shows like Big Brother buying one of these for their show.
but come on i am sure the vanderbilts laid down much more when they did their thing on fifth avenue and now its just history. seriously. the money aspect is the least interesting thing to criticise with the project.
so many talented and bright architects on this site and the main criticism of a world class architect's latest bit of fluff is "i don't like it cuz the purchade price is too high...?"
surely there is more to talk about than that...;-)
really, i think the whole "architecture as the last word in conspicuous consumption" is the most interesting thing about the project. i mean, calatrava's work usually has enough smutty appeal to hold your interest for 5 minutes, but this thing is really a dog- as lazy and self-indulgent a project as i can remember at the moment. . . . not that there is anything wrong with stacking boxes, but i think there are better ways to do it. . .
although jump has a point. the vanderbilts were spending a lot more money a century ago to build even more stylistically and conceptually flat dwellings. hunt just didn't go as tall.
well, one thing if certian. People that don't like this, that are architects, will be enough to keep the debate/complaining alive and guarantee this building to be extremely highly published and visited.
This will keep people at least thinking about alternative architecture. I mean, what hi rise building, anywhere in the US, comes even close to challenging the norm?
almost all the proposals for the WTC .. even the selected one from Danny boy's stable..
the reason why i appreciate this project is because it redefines the form and aesthetics of a skyscraper.
so I have to say that I agree with you when you say "This will keep people at least thinking about alternative architecture"
Calatrava's highrise residential in New York !!
I think it's just beautifull !!! I love it.
excellent play of geometry and space.
website's excellent too ... go into the main area and check out the conceptual process.
http://www.80southstreet.net
but the damn thing is so freaking expensive !!!! 29 million for one unit !!!
damn ... and i was thinking of geting 4 units ...
ooo ... and i just noticed some corb chairs in the interior visuals !!
damn, that's beautiful. 29M for a townhouse :)
you mean mies chairs?
29m, make's me more scared about a realestate plunge, eh?
YEP sorry ... mies chairs ....
10 units? 29m each? Don't get me wrong, I feel Calatrava's work can be stunning, but the moral side of me sees all sorts of red flags over this. I think it is an interesting piece of architecture, yes. But is it even realistic thinking to build something like this. Not realistic in the sense of "can this be built?" Of course it can, and from the looks of it, they are taking orders. I guess where is the proof that this is needed, what is the purpose? What good does this do besides add to the notion that architected spaces are only for an elite class. I mean, 29M for a townhouse goes beyond building for the rich, these people are beyond rich seeing as this probably will not be their first/primary home. It boggles the mind really. Though, quite fun to think about. My hope is that creating this prototype would lead to advances in this technique in order to apply it on a different scale for a different slice of society, but I have great doubts about that. Still, it is damn interesting to look at and imagine.
I dont like it all that much.. I find it worrysome that ten individuals can plaster their identities on a city using a 40-storey building.. looming over a sprawling city, looking out from your 20-meter-side glass cube.. very anti-urban, anti-human.
Also, I very much doubt the structure is as adventurous as it seems.. for one thing, Calatrava's work tends to be structurally dishonest at times, and if i were a developer, i wouldn't want one of my $29mil 'townhouses' suspended 200m in the sky, by nothing but a few slender, tapering steel toothpics.
Wow. I will say very cool. But, it is kind of disgusting in its sheer opulence. No one should own that. Not in the communist hippy sense, but just gross. I don't know. I just kind of have a sickened response to the idea of that. You're are right, 10 people with such a control over the skyline. Sure there is the Trump Tower, but that's not the same. Some neat ideas and cool view though. I like how it says there is staff to cater to your every need. I wonder if they can bring you Thai she-male hookers and sushi from the fugu on the hood of a 1964 Porche with a white tiger behind the wheel? For $29 million, you better believe it!
horrid
Last week I attended a Calatrava lecture/interview at the New School put on by the New York Times, and the man was allowed to ramble on about how much he loves the philanthropic nature of architecture, how we as a profession provide functional and, often, beautiful spaces for people to live their lives in. His whole schtick is pseudo-humanism, elevating and ennobling mankind with his perfectly engineered, pristine white structures. To anybody who has actually ever given any thought to the realities of human existence, both on an individual and a societal level, Calatrava's work, especially manifest in this UTTERLY ridiculous west-side tower, is the opposite of humanist, embodying nothing but the empty "perfection" of his beloved engineering and misguided notions of pure beauty.
while I can't say that I love the project, from any point of view, a few things to keep in mind:
1. It's the developer (client) that chooses what will get built, not the architect
2. I can't think of any significant piece of archtiecture, throughout history, that wasn't made for the elite. It's just been publisized here.
I do think it's a good point that so few should control the skyline, but we also have to think that this is less impact visually (or less obstructing) than a solid building of the same height. Obviously, the developers sat down with their calcs and determined they could build a big, typical, solid building, or make a smaller one but charge more.
There are plenty of other penthouses that are going for more - I believe SOM's AOL/Time Warner's penthouse went for 70million.
Just things to consider, I think I am kinda in the middle. Manhattan, in general, I think is the epitome of real estate insanity (followed closely by Miami, LA, Vegas).
[So the Coliseum in Rome was made for the elite?]
actually, in a funny sort of way, i do think the coliseum was made for the elite ... it helped the rich and powerful keep the regular people distracted from just how badly they were being screwed
as for this new tower by Calatrava, i'm ok with a few really rich folks spending a great deal of their money so they can show off ... keeping that money in circulations helps keep the rest of use regular folks employed ... and, if they want to spend their money, they can spend it on some nice architecture or they can spend it on some crap ... i vote for nice architecture (especially since it's not my money)
[Roman citizens, ie, those that were allowed inside the walls of Rome, were not exactly "regular" people, but somewhat priviledged people in their own right. The Circus of Flaminus, which was originally outside the walls of Rome, was built by Flaminus as a public gesture.
Is all philanthropy a way for the elite to distract the non-elite?
The Games, De Spectaculis, of ancient Rome most times had a sacred, pseudo-religious purpose in that the games were performed as part of a funeral, a celebration of life onto death, you might say.]
goddamn Flower Duet playing on the website??!?!?!!?!? puh-leez...
well, despite the insanity of the marketing, i think it is a damn beautiful building--i wonder if the final construction will seem as light as the model? for all of the other $29m spots in ny, that'd be on the top of my list...
I like the public message of this tower:
Just a friendly reminder: Architecture is for the rich.
Don't get me wrong, though. The built tower will get plenty of ooohs and aaahs from lay crowd and the architect crowd alike.
i'm never going to live in this tower ... doubtful if anybody here will either ... but, i may get to look on this tower someday and experience something of its (possible) beauty and (possible) contribution to NYC
garpike says "architecture is for the rich" ... maybe the rich get to own and live in architecture if they wish to do so ... but, if it's really "architecture", then we all get to experience it and benefit from it, much as we do with Saarinen's St. Louis Arch or Gehry's Bilbao Museum or Pei's National Gallery ... none of us get to live or work in any of those places
the rich can afford to live in ugly towers or they can afford to live in beautiful towers ... damn, they've got to live somewhere, so why not support the idea of building something great for them to occupy
i agree with stone ... let's put that money to work in support of better buildings
Hummm....maybe it will keep a few New York Socialites from venturing up to my neighborhood, and driving our housing stock out of range for most working people like myself.
Hummm....maybe it will keep a few New York Socialites from venturing up to my neighborhood, and driving our housing stock out of range for most working people like myself.
architects aboslutely decide what they build. if some obscene developers comes into your office with either a pile a shit that he wwants to build or a really expensive, obscene slender piece of shit, you send him on his way. architects do make choices folks. don't srug off your ethics (and agency).
pure smut.
i approve of its formal and moral aesthetic.
an ungodly wealthy undividual is under no obligation to temper his or her taste any more than a plain old wealthy individual, or a middle-class individual, or a poor person.
your average American 'poor' individual with 3 TV sets isn't morally obligated to send 2 to a dirt-poor third-world individual.
one generally purchases the highest quality food, electronics, housing, automobile, etc. that one can afford, unless sacrificing in one area to 'buy better' in another area.
i don't buy a cheap imitation diamond when i can afford the real thing.
just keep your distance, distant.
As was said before ....
It is the developer that decides the pricing ... The architect simply designs the building !! ..
Tell me ... picture this:- A developer comes to you and asks you to design a building in central New York which would be a Landmark and something the whole world would notice ( because of how much the newyork skyline is publicised). But hey, there a catch.... each unit in the building would be priced 30 million and above!! ..
would you pass up on the design, citing moral reasons?? ... C,mon .. don't kid yourself..
Don't shoot the Architect over the pricing. Chances are he had nothing to do with it... he wouldn't even be able to own one of them.
i wont buy one unless they rotate, like those spinning noughts and crosses things in playgrounds.
I love how you can't download the plans. But have to email for them. I just did, saying I was interested in a unit, I hope they send me a glossy package, maybe even a free plane ticket to NY. HA. But in all seriousness. Its kind of a cool idea, buy a plot of land in a good location, make 10 SSUPPER over the top residences that will attract the .0001% of the world population that can afford it, and build a crazy building. Better than the standard of building the cheapest building possible and selling off the condos to the plebs.
ridiculous. this is the project that made me start to hate calatrava. lucky for him, his mentality is stuck in the mid-20th century like most 'upscale' consumers . the interiors look frighteningly generic for such an extraordinarily scaled project. it's so corny how they toss those mies chairs into every 'upscale' setting in new york. this project will be a good, colossally expensive specimen of generic new york luxury.
you just know that someone is going to use one of those units for the setting of some 'reality tv' show.
lol .. the reality tv show should be ..
"the next playboy bunny" - i sure would watch that :D
this is beautiful design, i wonder if it is also energy efficient? thank you rich people!
I found a RARE pic of the courtyard! So I don't get it, does one unit consists of the whole cube??? so its like 4 stories high one unit, and for $29 mil its not that bad! Its pretty cheap even!
Yep ... thats how it is ...
The roof of the unit below yours turns out to be your balcony..
and each unit has 4 stories !! ...
I expect my unit to have railings which at least come close to meeting code, a door to access those stairs, but I guess after dropping 29 (really) large on some real estate I wouldn't have enough cash left over to buy even one piece of designer furniture.
Come on render monkeys, entourages aren't just for the future occupants.
wow lots of hostility to the calatravian.
its at least more intresting than the normal fair, and why not for the rich? is not as if new york has until now been the preserve of democratic architecture for the masses, nor that ostentatious wealth is generally hidden away from the new york streets...
caltrava is the new Richard Morris Hunt, doing his version of fifth avenue, but more...um...vertical.
what's the big deal?
personally calatrava's stuff generally leaves me cold, too gattica-esque for my taste. but i do like this one; for no particular reason.
only thing i wonder about is how the hell anyone could use the balconies with the winds i imagine blowing round the tower. is that even feasible?
i wonder what the cost of construction will be for these things, i'm guessing at just around 200 million?(figuring 100 mill or 30% profit on 29mil x 10)
jump is right...althought i am not a fan of Calatrava's one-liners(cant say im really fond of this one too), but the way most people are reacting here makes me feel that everyone on this thread specializes in low-cost housing and sustainable design.
I think he is just playing off the ostentatious Mantattan culture, and talking about the manhattan skyline, this is much better than most of the concrete office buildings one sees from the harbor
high class porn
there is an inelastic demand for ultra-high-cost housing -- ten stupid ultra-rich people will blow 29-50 million just to say they did on this purblind piece of crap. calatrava rolled a gutter ball on this one. this really, really sucks.
ochana, man that is funny.
you arnt scottish are ye? damn if you don't talk just like me grandmuther.
poor santi.
ochona,
purblind isn't the first word you've added to my vocabulary.
thanks again.
Beats the generic bronze box du Trump. Why the hell not? Or lets just fill up Manhattan with undistinguished granite-clad 30-40 story towers and be done with it.
Anyone, rich or poor, who desires this level of conspicuousness is in need of help. I can see TV shows like Big Brother buying one of these for their show.
However, i admire its purity and spectacle.
big brother couldn't afford it.
but come on i am sure the vanderbilts laid down much more when they did their thing on fifth avenue and now its just history. seriously. the money aspect is the least interesting thing to criticise with the project.
so many talented and bright architects on this site and the main criticism of a world class architect's latest bit of fluff is "i don't like it cuz the purchade price is too high...?"
surely there is more to talk about than that...;-)
I'm sure ol' Hugh Hefner could afford it .... imagine !! .. lol
on a serious note:- I agree with jump
really, i think the whole "architecture as the last word in conspicuous consumption" is the most interesting thing about the project. i mean, calatrava's work usually has enough smutty appeal to hold your interest for 5 minutes, but this thing is really a dog- as lazy and self-indulgent a project as i can remember at the moment. . . . not that there is anything wrong with stacking boxes, but i think there are better ways to do it. . .
although jump has a point. the vanderbilts were spending a lot more money a century ago to build even more stylistically and conceptually flat dwellings. hunt just didn't go as tall.
mmmm,
stylistically and conceptually flat architecture...with horses
hunt and calatrava both enjoyed standing beside big nondescript objects.
well, there you go then...
i don't think hunt would approve of calatrava. no, i'm sure of it. . .
well, one thing if certian. People that don't like this, that are architects, will be enough to keep the debate/complaining alive and guarantee this building to be extremely highly published and visited.
This will keep people at least thinking about alternative architecture. I mean, what hi rise building, anywhere in the US, comes even close to challenging the norm?
I am liking it more and more.
trace....
almost all the proposals for the WTC .. even the selected one from Danny boy's stable..
the reason why i appreciate this project is because it redefines the form and aesthetics of a skyscraper.
so I have to say that I agree with you when you say "This will keep people at least thinking about alternative architecture"
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.