Share this on Facebook
download .zip with all pictures
>it is devoid of character and adds nothing to the urban fabric.
>It’s a panopticon to gaze from, not something that adds to the view
Slow down, Foucault. Yeah, it’s going to have some great views…
>It has no sense of its place
Disagree. Fine, make it into a metaphor for income inequality or whatever — even though, honestly, I think you’re stretching on that too. Park Avenue has been home to the elite for over a century, so I really just don’t get the venom that this building is subjected to on this website. It’s like they built this tall building and it finally made you realize that people this rich exist.
I just don’t buy your architectural criticisms, but fine, that’s completely subjective. It’s a minimalist structure that avoids ornamentation, but it’s also not without some interesting visual features, most of which haven’t been revealed because the building *isn’t even finished*. IMO the most interesting feature will be that the building will be broken up into segments that ‘float’ on top of each other. You can start to get an idea of how this will look [here](https://www.flickr.com/photos/dodichi/21608914435/). Otherwise, does it stick out? Absolutely. But it won’t for long, and I think that’s a good thing. Midtown has been a plateau of boxy black office buildings since the 60s, so it’s good that there will be a few more peaks.
>This title says it all: Why Billionaires Don’t Pay Property Taxes in New York: It’s the extreme end game of a tax code that shifts the burden from owners to renters, and from the wealthy to the poor
Yep, this is a problem, but it’s a problem that the city created itself with misplaced good intentions via the [421a tax abatement](http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2015/06/12/new_yorks_great_421a_debate_the_uncertain_future_of_trading_affordable_housing_for_tax_breaks.php), which allows developers to incorporate a percentage of affordable housing in their buildings in return for *temporary* tax breaks. The intent here was not just to subsidize affordable housing, but to create a greater diversity of incomes in wealthier neighborhoods. I’m of the opinion that such a policy just doesn’t make sense, and that instead it would make more sense to skip the abatement and just direct the tax revenue to subsidized housing in neighborhoods where people who live there will actually be able to afford a trip to the grocery store.
And let’s not exaggerate and say that these billionaires pay ‘nothing’ in property taxes. Their effective rates are lower because of these programs, and what they will pay is insignificant to their overall wealth, but they’re still going to be paying significantly more than the average New Yorker.