Pessia Goldberg
IDC 4001H – Prof. Maciuika
03/10/14
The latest trend in skyscraper development centers on making the new buildings taller and thinner than ever. This allows for more new construction as additional apartments are added to the tops of skyscrapers instead of to the packed city streets. While this definitely makes sense from an architectural perspective – maximizing the finite space in New York City – I’m not sure that I agree with the implications that come along with these new, thinner buildings.
One thing that troubles me is that the architects of these skyscrapers seem solely focused on pleasing the wealthiest of their clientele. The architects themselves say that the reason slender skyscrapers make for some very expensive real estate is because they “bespeak exclusivity and luxury.” The higher you go, the better the view, the more it costs. The One57 building, with views of Central Park, is already in contract for its $90 million penthouse. But if a main reason for moving buildings up instead of out is to maximize space for the ever-growing New York population to expand, then how is this helping to solve the problem? Already, there is very expensive real estate available for those who can afford it, but there’s not much to be found for residents of lesser means. Now, all these super-slender skyscrapers are doing is creating even more space for the wealthy to buy up, while not solving the problem of the extremely high cost of living in New York.
Another thing that I wonder is: how high is too high? I thought that the One Madison building was pretty impressively thin with a base to height ratio of 1:12. But it turns out that the proposed tower at 111 West 57th Street is going to have a slimness ratio of 1:23! While the engineering of these buildings has been very well planned, with interior flexibility and wind tunnels built into the towers, I am still not sure what the height limit is. At some point, I’ve got to believe that such a measly base could not support an extra-tall tower.
