@C caymer Except we'd risk having smog from industries and slaughterhouses glued to residential areas, and streets would be pitch black thanks to shadows from buildings. Traffic at rush hour wouldn't get worse, it would become impassable. Not to mention that half the claims you're making are either random or beyond stretched. You can invest money into a comprehensive public transit system an achieve the same effect, especially in the current economic climate. There's 0 guarantee that you'd see a decrease in obesity given American consumerism is at the root of the problem, and the cost of building wouldn't magically go away. Megalopolises like the one in Japan follows their own building guidelines to accomodate and work their population, and people are in shape because the culture, eatinghabits and socialized healthcare promotes healthy living (your oublic healthcare costs more if your BMO is above a certain threshold). If anything you'd risk skewing the cost of prime real-estate by a mile because you'd have more markets for "luxury" properties in an effort to escape the sardine-can layout of the city. You seem to overlook some of the other problems Asian cityscapes have; the sheer density of population in such a small area. It leads to plenty of other issues and hurdles (you wanna see what constitutes "appartments" in some parts of China? It's a large cage with hole covers). We'd have to completely overhaul road convetions and draft a new set of regulations on roads if we wanted to keep this theoretical city safe and effective, all to offset the change, and we'd just come back to square one. City planning ain't perfect but this wouldn't be a real workable solution. Also how is it unconstitutional?
C caymer I don’t know what Asia you’re talking about, but every major Asian country has zoning similar to the US. The difference is Asian cities tend to be denser and more expensive to live in. I really hope that this is bait
C caymer You’re assuming so much here. Let’s add that lions and tigers will cohabitate with people and no longer kill other animals for food. There’s nothing about zoning that is unconstitutional. Cities and states have the right to organize how their cities grow. Telling us that zoning is the obstacle to every problem in the world is just nuts.
How did the Egyptians build the pyramids? 🇰🇵 *just so you know, Ik how they built them. I’m asking this bc of the context of the question. I’m referring to the fact that ancient history is way earlier than 1915 and they still built advanced structures.
In the 1970s, some art historians mistakenly thought that NYC's characteristic building outlines were due to just to aesthetics and a trend to copy Mayan pyramids, just because they looked good. Nope.
I have noticed NewYork's buildings went inword as it went up but I never knew it was because of zoning laws. Also, Some places have laws for having so much ground area wrather it's parks or what ever around a tower.
Nacho TV Actually if you ever get to walk around the area the equitable building and Wall Street area has a distinct feeling to it, like walking in a canyon. If you than compare that to other areas like empire state, grand Central or WTC etc. it feels much less massive.
wow , I visited Manhattan from Australia a few months ago and I looked back at the photos I took from the empire state building roof top and I had always notice how the older sky scrappers were shaped distinctively from the newer sky scrapers and now I found the answer. NYC is such a fascinating place and I look forward to returning there some time soon and I want to see a college marching band too.
The amount of work that has gone into this four minute long video is substantial. So pleasing to watch. You made it look so simple and perhaps, that's the sign of excellent content. Thanks! Keep going!
So instead of setting fixed height limits, NYC zoning law offered a simple but workable algorithm that helped developers decide where and how tall to build. I love it!
We don't mind more supertalls because it makes the city nicer. It's not the super talls its the landlords though... they're greedy and not just that... they turned manhattan into a rich city which isn't bad and but isn't good too... good things? More money goes to MTA... we really need to lower congestion in the subways and we should build more subways under subways... right? I mean we need more trains and space... and now the bad thing? You can't be middle class just to even live in a suoertall...
The only problem is that the apts in 432 Park Avenue and other supertall buildings are multi-million dollar ones. When you build a supertall the immense view is a huge selling point. No way a developer isn't going to tap into that value to hike up their prices. What we need are zoning regulations for income as well as type of building. A lot of apts near where I live are income controlled meaning you can't live there if you make over x amount. This ensures that there are affordable options for people who live on fixed or low incomes. I know people freak out whenever someone mentions public housing, but my friends live in one of these apts and they're actually very nice, clean, and safe. When done right, this can be a useful solution. There are numerous other solutions that have worked for other countries, such as Singapore.
@@SquidCena the landlords aren't greedy. That's what the price is because you idiots vote for Communists again and again. Higher taxes, more regulations. Zoning laws restrict stock, so prices go up
@@MK-ex4pb you're the real idiot... the landlords are greedy stupid taxes might raise but no reason to make a apartment room 100s of millions of dollars dude.
That's a great question. There are provisions in the 1961 zoning code that allow developers to purchase and transfer "air rights" from adjoining lots, allowing supertall skyscrapers like 432 Park to exist without an apparent setback. There's a good explanation of this provision here: www.skyscraper.org/EXHIBITIONS/SKY_HIGH/shearwall_invmonopoly.php
No, not remotely close to that but I'm sure you're going to go with that narrative for the rest of your life and tell everyone that it was actually designed to troll zoning laws. Why are people so stupid? I really would love to know that, not trying to be mean, but why in the world would you actually think that?
The zoning laws were put in place specifically so buildings would look like the Empire State Building. The very point of these zoning laws was so that buildings would taper into the famous NY wedding cake shape that they are. The Empire State Building is textbook 1920s NY Art Deco.
Would love to see a short film on the Equitable Building in New York. I’m sure the process of renovation is fascinating with there’s usually lots of drama around historic statuses and what can be done and how.
Very weird how the thing you learn your first week in architecture school can become a super interesting video to so many. Great video by Bloomberg, editing and graphics were top notch.
Ted Morris People originally thought they were ugly. I guess they were as individual buildings but together they were amazing. Freedom tower dropped the ball.
Indeed, in fact I know several native New Yorkers who hated the original WTC complex, but now you have the freedom tower, which just doesn't have anything close to as powerful an imprint on the skyline. Unfortunately we can never have the twin towers back.
I wish we had zoning laws for large cities that required 60% of all housing to be high-rise apartments or at the least townhomes. This would reduce the carbon footprint immensely in most cities, oh and make sure there are vast parks like what New York City has.
Thanks for the infor Bloomberg. I just came back from NYC and thought it was trying to be unique but you have enlightened me. The setback has accidentally made the city so unique and I find it pleasant looking.
You can see this even in skyscrapers built during the Mad Men era- the 50's into the early 60's. Here's some notable examples- 270 Park Avenue and 1285 6th avenue (1960), 1290 6th Avenue (1963) and 277 Park Avenue (1964). However, architectural fashion had changed- clients wanted sleek, modern towers instead of the "frozen fountain" look popular during the Art Deco era. So architects moved most of the setbacks to the sides and backs of the buildings, giving them the appearance of having tails, after a fashion. People notice the tall and sleek tower fronting the avenue, but often don't see that there's a whole tail section happening too, which often contains a sizeable chunk of floor space. 1290 6th Avenue's got the most complicated arrangement of setbacks of any of these towers.
I think the drawing "Evolution of a City Building Under the Zoning Law" by Hugh Ferris would've been a great addition to this video.Overall, it was a great explanation on the birth of zoning.
Because the top floors of the structure don't take more than 25% of the lot where there were built. And both are in huge lots that are not fully used by the structure.
Because the WTC wasn't built on a block, rather it was built on a huge plaza and thus, even with the setback rule, they were still far enough from the streets to be allowed.
This is incentive for lot mergers because you have to create a larger lot area to allow a building to be taller. It also further concentrates wealth because people with smaller lots face more limitations.
I worked for a few months in that building as an intern in college. I hated being in and around that structure. Even though it was so classic and "iconic", it always felt out-of-place and obtrusive. There were no decent views in the office where I worked, just walls forever.
now those New York architects need to design a waterfall on the side of the Empire State building and be in the world record books for the tallest man made waterfall.
I thought this vid would discuss how differences in the depth and size of the bedrock across Manhattan limits how tall buildings can be because of varying weight-bearing limits.
One could argue the Manhattan Shale depth is a myth because it's actually quite possible to just drill pilings down to meet the bedrock. Rather, it probably makes more sense that NYC's second skyline (midtown) sprung up as a result of the presence of GCT, thus an elated real estate property value.
WTC is on a huge multi-block plaza, so it's kinda a special case, but the super skinny skyscrapers can be straight all the way to the top by purchasing the air rights from neighboring buildings and plots and stacking them on top of their own plot.
I got a Bentley advert. I bet they paid loads for that lol. I'm never going to be able to afford a Bently. They don't need to advertise. The name is enough.
These ratios are not enough. There is a need for a plot ratio. Higher you build, lower percentage of your plot you can build on. Remainder is ground level plaza. Go above forty stories, then 20% of your plot must be plaza and so on.
Hugh Ferriss, an architectural illustrator, did some very cool drawings of how buildings could look with the 1916 zoning not long after the law was passed. An example (google yields a few more): www.skyscraper.org/EXHIBITIONS/FUTURE_CITY/NEW_YORK_MODERN/walkthrough_1916.php
Is there an exception to that rule? I notice the UN building (at 4:00) isn't built in that style.. and it's pretty broad too. Although it's in a less dense area, there's a similar older building (at 3:39) which is also in an open area, but has the stepped design. Any thoughts?
This building looks just like the Magnolia hotel skyscraper in downtown Dallas! I stay there for fun cause I live in Dallas and it's a great admiration:)
Wow... even in 1915, new York's skyline was impressive
Jbog07 socialism?
@Jbog07 you're stupid... NYC looks way better than it did back in the old days.. so you're wrong
These 12 yr olds are like “back then”, YOU WEREN’T ALIVE
New York has always had the biggest skyline in the world.
@Jbog07 Oh you're one of those people who blames everything on "socialism"..
I must be getting old because I found this absolutely fascinating.
I'm fifteen and this is my cup of tea
@@user-xb5bz4fu9o Same, if you're gonna waste your time on the internet you might as well learn something
Same. Videos like these are fascinating
I’m 15 and been obsessed with architecture since I was 13
21yo construction engineer student. Found this super fascinating.
Honestly just always assumed buildings were built that way for stability.
ShadowWhelp same!! Lol
Sure
yeah like a pyramid
i thought it was for wind resistance
such building shapes actually are more stable, so you aren’t entirely wrong
Old days: *complains of how big it is*
Nowadays: *laughs of how little it is*
@C caymer and high speed rail would be a viable option with that density
Just like my dick
@C caymer Except we'd risk having smog from industries and slaughterhouses glued to residential areas, and streets would be pitch black thanks to shadows from buildings. Traffic at rush hour wouldn't get worse, it would become impassable.
Not to mention that half the claims you're making are either random or beyond stretched.
You can invest money into a comprehensive public transit system an achieve the same effect, especially in the current economic climate.
There's 0 guarantee that you'd see a decrease in obesity given American consumerism is at the root of the problem, and the cost of building wouldn't magically go away.
Megalopolises like the one in Japan follows their own building guidelines to accomodate and work their population, and people are in shape because the culture, eatinghabits and socialized healthcare promotes healthy living (your oublic healthcare costs more if your BMO is above a certain threshold).
If anything you'd risk skewing the cost of prime real-estate by a mile because you'd have more markets for "luxury" properties in an effort to escape the sardine-can layout of the city.
You seem to overlook some of the other problems Asian cityscapes have; the sheer density of population in such a small area. It leads to plenty of other issues and hurdles (you wanna see what constitutes "appartments" in some parts of China? It's a large cage with hole covers).
We'd have to completely overhaul road convetions and draft a new set of regulations on roads if we wanted to keep this theoretical city safe and effective, all to offset the change, and we'd just come back to square one.
City planning ain't perfect but this wouldn't be a real workable solution.
Also how is it unconstitutional?
C caymer I don’t know what Asia you’re talking about, but every major Asian country has zoning similar to the US. The difference is Asian cities tend to be denser and more expensive to live in. I really hope that this is bait
C caymer You’re assuming so much here. Let’s add that lions and tigers will cohabitate with people and no longer kill other animals for food. There’s nothing about zoning that is unconstitutional. Cities and states have the right to organize how their cities grow. Telling us that zoning is the obstacle to every problem in the world is just nuts.
why is a building called a building if it is already built?
Bloomberg, answer now please
Go to bed Jayden Smith.
i propose to call it a build't
matt O Because it isn't a gerund.
And a They call paintings paintings when they are already painted. Something funny is going on here...
How did they manage to build that in 1915 and it’s 2019 and I can’t even complete a lego set
Bush did 9/11
How did the Egyptians build the pyramids? 🇰🇵
*just so you know, Ik how they built them. I’m asking this bc of the context of the question. I’m referring to the fact that ancient history is way earlier than 1915 and they still built advanced structures.
@@sarahschmidt4217 Nuked for days
Your an idiot
@@SpankThatUdder you're
Great video bloomberg!
Thanks for watching!
In the 1970s, some art historians mistakenly thought that NYC's characteristic building outlines were due to just to aesthetics and a trend to copy Mayan pyramids, just because they looked good. Nope.
hebneh what! Where did you read this?
Where did this theory come from???
Also , cities such as Buenos Aires with a similar grid and density have this same exact building code
art history is a meme
@@InsaneNuYawka Palacio Barolo and Kavanagh building are really beautiful!
wait this is not vox?
Awesome Me vox is garbage
Ur mom
This is psoe
@@juanmanuelc6644 ahhh... I see un hombre of culture aquí
I have noticed NewYork's buildings went inword as it went up but I never knew it was because of zoning laws.
Also, Some places have laws for having so much ground area wrather it's parks or what ever around a tower.
Dutpur
"Inward" and "rather"
@@Cre8Lounge "peepee" and "poopoo"
@@nahnope8581 lol
@@Cre8Lounge actually 'inward' and 'whether'
I had my first internship in this building, it was definitely beautiful.
JRLOC488 “is”
It’s a beautiful building inside and out. I appreciate the architectural designs and subtleties it has.
I worked in the Equitable Building. Loved it!
this is valuable, insightful and interesting. good job Bloomberg.
0:42 too big? Wonder what they think of Manhattan now 😁
Nacho TV
Actually if you ever get to walk around the area the equitable building and Wall Street area has a distinct feeling to it, like walking in a canyon. If you than compare that to other areas like empire state, grand Central or WTC etc. it feels much less massive.
Nacho TV .i@
Would say*
I'm down there often. I think your observation is based on how narrow the streets are in that part of New York City.
that its filled with bums defecating in the streets, probably.
wow , I visited Manhattan from Australia a few months ago and I looked back at the photos I took from the empire state building roof top and I had always notice how the older sky scrappers were shaped distinctively from the newer sky scrapers and now I found the answer. NYC is such a fascinating place and I look forward to returning there some time soon and I want to see a college marching band too.
The amount of work that has gone into this four minute long video is substantial. So pleasing to watch. You made it look so simple and perhaps, that's the sign of excellent content.
Thanks! Keep going!
So instead of setting fixed height limits, NYC zoning law offered a simple but workable algorithm that helped developers decide where and how tall to build. I love it!
Now New York city is super expensive to live in. I'm sure New Yorkers wouldn't mind more supertalls if it meant lower rent.
We don't mind more supertalls because it makes the city nicer. It's not the super talls its the landlords though... they're greedy and not just that... they turned manhattan into a rich city which isn't bad and but isn't good too... good things? More money goes to MTA... we really need to lower congestion in the subways and we should build more subways under subways... right? I mean we need more trains and space... and now the bad thing? You can't be middle class just to even live in a suoertall...
The only problem is that the apts in 432 Park Avenue and other supertall buildings are multi-million dollar ones. When you build a supertall the immense view is a huge selling point. No way a developer isn't going to tap into that value to hike up their prices. What we need are zoning regulations for income as well as type of building. A lot of apts near where I live are income controlled meaning you can't live there if you make over x amount. This ensures that there are affordable options for people who live on fixed or low incomes. I know people freak out whenever someone mentions public housing, but my friends live in one of these apts and they're actually very nice, clean, and safe. When done right, this can be a useful solution. There are numerous other solutions that have worked for other countries, such as Singapore.
Zoning laws, taxes, and regulations are the causes of high prices
@@SquidCena the landlords aren't greedy. That's what the price is because you idiots vote for Communists again and again. Higher taxes, more regulations. Zoning laws restrict stock, so prices go up
@@MK-ex4pb you're the real idiot... the landlords are greedy stupid taxes might raise but no reason to make a apartment room 100s of millions of dollars dude.
Can someone please explain how 432 Park Avenue happen then?
Illuminati
That's a great question. There are provisions in the 1961 zoning code that allow developers to purchase and transfer "air rights" from adjoining lots, allowing supertall skyscrapers like 432 Park to exist without an apparent setback. There's a good explanation of this provision here: www.skyscraper.org/EXHIBITIONS/SKY_HIGH/shearwall_invmonopoly.php
432 Park Ave doesn't use the entire terrain it's on. That's also a big part of how it was possible.
this woulda been nice to fit in the video...
2:37 "Furthermore, in any district, 25% of the lot had no height limit at all"
I'm a builder and that's one of the coolest things I've learned yet, thanks for that!
Very fascinating -- thanks for doing a video on this!
Crazy how I never ever thought I'd be working here, but I love working in this building
So the empire state building was just an architect's idea of trolling the zoning law
How so?
No, not remotely close to that but I'm sure you're going to go with that narrative for the rest of your life and tell everyone that it was actually designed to troll zoning laws. Why are people so stupid? I really would love to know that, not trying to be mean, but why in the world would you actually think that?
The zoning laws were put in place specifically so buildings would look like the Empire State Building. The very point of these zoning laws was so that buildings would taper into the famous NY wedding cake shape that they are. The Empire State Building is textbook 1920s NY Art Deco.
@@Glorious_Kim_Jong_Un Wow bet you're fun at parties
Not exactly. It states that cutting off part of the building is fine and not a loophole. It was in the video, after all.
In PD 1096 or NBCP of the Philippines, it is called Incremental Setbacks, usually applied on C3 zones.
Great video about the impact of 1916 Zoning Law, still visible nowadays.
Would love to see a short film on the Equitable Building in New York. I’m sure the process of renovation is fascinating with there’s usually lots of drama around historic statuses and what can be done and how.
Damn Bloomberg. More videos like this, please. Maybe about things that aren't obvious in economics.
Very weird how the thing you learn your first week in architecture school can become a super interesting video to so many. Great video by Bloomberg, editing and graphics were top notch.
That was awesome!😄 I truly will see New York skyline differently from now on.
Well produced film! Keep it up!
Such a well-crafted video that finds the sweet spot between informative and engaging.
New York 80s skyline, that was a great skyline 👍👍
And then we got the Twin Towers, jutting upwards and not inwards, long and slender and majestic. Man those were great buildings.
Ted Morris People originally thought they were ugly. I guess they were as individual buildings but together they were amazing. Freedom tower dropped the ball.
Indeed, in fact I know several native New Yorkers who hated the original WTC complex, but now you have the freedom tower, which just doesn't have anything close to as powerful an imprint on the skyline. Unfortunately we can never have the twin towers back.
Kind of makes me feel like building a building.
First you would need to build on your knowledge of building buildings in order to build a building
It's like a Triumph Arch and Greek pillars but functional
I wish we had zoning laws for large cities that required 60% of all housing to be high-rise apartments or at the least townhomes. This would reduce the carbon footprint immensely in most cities, oh and make sure there are vast parks like what New York City has.
I love old buildings that are made with stone. Amazing work.
@@AlvinGuoSubscribe Yes he knows that, Stop trying to be like you think you're smarter than everyone else
@@PickleRicksFATASSCOUSIN Wouldn't be so sure chief. You can't build buildings out of cement, especially not a facade. It is a binding agent.
Thanks for the infor Bloomberg. I just came back from NYC and thought it was trying to be unique but you have enlightened me. The setback has accidentally made the city so unique and I find it pleasant looking.
You can see this even in skyscrapers built during the Mad Men era- the 50's into the early 60's. Here's some notable examples- 270 Park Avenue and 1285 6th avenue (1960), 1290 6th Avenue (1963) and 277 Park Avenue (1964). However, architectural fashion had changed- clients wanted sleek, modern towers instead of the "frozen fountain" look popular during the Art Deco era. So architects moved most of the setbacks to the sides and backs of the buildings, giving them the appearance of having tails, after a fashion. People notice the tall and sleek tower fronting the avenue, but often don't see that there's a whole tail section happening too, which often contains a sizeable chunk of floor space. 1290 6th Avenue's got the most complicated arrangement of setbacks of any of these towers.
Also, air rights are a thing now.
Really interesting stuff Bloomberg thanks!
Nobody:
Professional videos made by companies: It’s
Bloomberg: *its*
Very interesting! Great video!
To be honest i dont care about efficiency.Just make the damn building look good!
Awesome freaking video!
Nice job on this video. Very well laid out, good information.
Very good Bloomberg
Very interesting and informative. Thank you @Bloomberg
I think the drawing "Evolution of a City Building Under the Zoning Law" by Hugh Ferris would've been a great addition to this video.Overall, it was a great explanation on the birth of zoning.
Stunning!
Love learning new things!
I didn't watch the whole video but I worked on this building years ago the lobby is unbelievable
Wow, awesome video!
Mind. Blown.
It is georgous, especially on the inside. I have actually been in it .
thx . this was informative and interesting.
And now I work in this building. Very cool
I pass that building all the time never noticed hot beautiful it is until now
I liked that manual lift at the beginning.
Wow New York in 1960 looks better than my country
*1916
I think
Come to Detroit and get yo ass smoked
Should have covered Air Rights as well. The tug and pull between developers and regulations.
Wow they finished this in 1915 impressive
That was a interesting video, I didn't know that. Now next time I'm in Manhattan I'll be looking for all the buildings built like this. lol
I cant look at them in any different way now... oh boy
That subtle simcity-esque music makes this video
It looks really cool
At 3:57, how come the wide building on the left doesn't have any setbacks?
Is the law still active? Because it seems that old WTC (was not) and Freedom tower (is not) narrower going up.
Because the top floors of the structure don't take more than 25% of the lot where there were built. And both are in huge lots that are not fully used by the structure.
Because the WTC wasn't built on a block, rather it was built on a huge plaza and thus, even with the setback rule, they were still far enough from the streets to be allowed.
Hey! Could you link to the article quoted in the video regarding evil effects? Can’t find it on my own. Thanks!
This is incentive for lot mergers because you have to create a larger lot area to allow a building to be taller. It also further concentrates wealth because people with smaller lots face more limitations.
I worked for a few months in that building as an intern in college. I hated being in and around that structure. Even though it was so classic and "iconic", it always felt out-of-place and obtrusive. There were no decent views in the office where I worked, just walls forever.
I've seen so many fact videos in youtube, it's really rare to see something that's actually never been discussed before 👍🏻
Oh wow, this is actually really fascinating
now those New York architects need to design a waterfall on the side of the Empire State building and be in the world record books for the tallest man made waterfall.
Yeah uh no
Wot
That's great info!!
I thought this vid would discuss how differences in the depth and size of the bedrock across Manhattan limits how tall buildings can be because of varying weight-bearing limits.
One could argue the Manhattan Shale depth is a myth because it's actually quite possible to just drill pilings down to meet the bedrock. Rather, it probably makes more sense that NYC's second skyline (midtown) sprung up as a result of the presence of GCT, thus an elated real estate property value.
Please, enable closed captions!
Hello - closed captions in English are available by clicking the CC button on your player.
Hello - I mean, enable permission for users to contribute. I would be great! :)
i love these essay videos! bloomberg doing awesome shit, now.. 👍👍👍
What about all the all glass and steel more modern skyscrapers that just start and continue in a straight line to the top? Like the WTC for example?
WTC is on a huge multi-block plaza, so it's kinda a special case, but the super skinny skyscrapers can be straight all the way to the top by purchasing the air rights from neighboring buildings and plots and stacking them on top of their own plot.
Born & raised - I did NOT know this.
So many curious things on this channel
I got a Bentley advert. I bet they paid loads for that lol. I'm never going to be able to afford a Bently. They don't need to advertise. The name is enough.
If the name is enough, then why can't you spell it?
Dude it's spelled Bentley
Spelling mistake is a spelling mistake is a spelling mistake
Very interesting!
The Equitable Building made the citizens under its shadow drink from a separate fountain
Awesome vid
Am confused: the Pan Am building appears to have no "steps" of a setback. Is it just that it's built on a plaza that it's legal?
Most of the citis in america have a amazing skyline
Link_ 82 nah
Naw m8
Well we are all entitled to our own opinions. I personally think it looks good.
2:05 nice
3:20 not nice
It's why you don't see the european tradition of having small boutiques and apartments above them.
Celina K what are you talking about there’s apartments above stores and restaurants all over the city
Have you ever been to NYC? lol. There are restaurants on the ground floors of most apartments and office buildings.
These ratios are not enough. There is a need for a plot ratio. Higher you build, lower percentage of your plot you can build on. Remainder is ground level plaza. Go above forty stories, then 20% of your plot must be plaza and so on.
The only ratio should be physics not what some lunkhead bureaucrat thinks
@Patriotis Yes they would...? You've heard of air rights, right? those are what allow modern super skinnies to rise without tapering.
Why is that? The current 25% rule already serves its purpose...
I love videos on NYC buildings!
Hugh Ferriss, an architectural illustrator, did some very cool drawings of how buildings could look with the 1916 zoning not long after the law was passed. An example (google yields a few more): www.skyscraper.org/EXHIBITIONS/FUTURE_CITY/NEW_YORK_MODERN/walkthrough_1916.php
Is there an exception to that rule? I notice the UN building (at 4:00) isn't built in that style.. and it's pretty broad too. Although it's in a less dense area, there's a similar older building (at 3:39) which is also in an open area, but has the stepped design. Any thoughts?
It has a setback
the UN Building is on a fairly large plot and its not very tall. It adheres to these setback rules.
This building looks just like the Magnolia hotel skyscraper in downtown Dallas! I stay there for fun cause I live in Dallas and it's a great admiration:)
I hope the Equitable Building kept the manually controlled elevator!
Only the doors are. It's electric
So its this laws fault I can't work, shop, live, in one mega skyscraper.
Yep
And physics, but ok
Yup
I really like this video, and I’ve shared with my fellow math geeks. Thanks :)
So basically this was a feature on effective land use and urban planning.
The original skyscraper NIMBY's. We've been fighting a hard battle with them ever since.
I wish I could go NYC
2:00 Toronto is a Canadian city